Capacity of the U.S. federal system for cultural heritage to meet challenges of climate change.

The U.S. federal government is unbalanced in its capacity to recognize, manage, and engage cultural heritage as part of its response to climate change. Legislation from the 1906 Antiquities Act to Executive Order (EO) 13990 signed in 2021 has set an overarching approach in which heritage is understood to be primarily tangible places and things that should be conserved, foremost through monument and park boundaries and significance designations. Such conservation, however, does not protect heritage from impacts of climate change and how to manage these components of heritage is nearly invisible in recent climate-focused publications of the two agencies assigned by legislation to serve as leads for cultural heritage in the U.S. government. Yet further, the long-standing tangible approach to heritage does not incorporate emerging understandings of its intangible components and the diverse connections of all forms of heritage to place, meaning, identity, and global change goals of sustainability and equity. In contrast, analysis of 27 federal agency climate adaptation plans prepared in response to 2021 EO 14008 shows that multiple agencies not assigned lead roles for heritage recognize a range of responsibilities that include heritage as part of climate adaptation, mitigation, equity, and coordination with Indigenous communities. This paper explores U.S. heritage legislative history, the definition it helped create for heritage, more recent understandings of heritage, and relationships of these to climate change and how these are represented in climate work and plans across U.S. federal agencies. On these bases, recommendations are provided for research and policy steps.

Integration of urban science and urban climate adaptation research: opportunities to advance climate action.

There is a growing recognition that responding to climate change necessitates urban adaptation. We sketch a transdisciplinary research effort, arguing that actionable research on urban adaptation needs to recognize the nature of cities as social networks embedded in physical space. Given the pace, scale and socioeconomic outcomes of urbanization in the Global South, the specificities and history of its cities must be central to the study of how well-known agglomeration effects can facilitate adaptation. The proposed effort calls for the co-creation of knowledge involving scientists and stakeholders, especially those historically excluded from the design and implementation of urban development policies.

Expanding use of archaeology in climate change response by changing its social environment.

Climate science has outlined targets for reductions of greenhouse gas emissions necessary to provide a substantial chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change on both natural and human systems. How to reach those targets, however, requires balancing physical realities of the natural environment with the complexity of the human social environment, including histories, cultures, and values. Archaeology is the study of interactions of natural and social environments through time and across space. As well, the field of cultural resources management, which includes archaeology, regularly engages with values such as site significance and allocation of funding that the modern social environment ascribes to its own history. Through these two approaches, archaeology has potential to provide both data for and methods of addressing challenges the global community faces through climate change. To date, however, archaeology and related areas of cultural heritage have had relatively little role in the global climate response. Here, we assess the social environment of archaeology and climate change and resulting structural barriers that have limited use of archaeology in and for climate change with a case study of the US federal government. On this basis, we provide recommendations to the fields of archaeology and climate response about how to more fully realize the multiple potential uses of archaeology for the challenges of climate change.

Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review.

The varied effects of recent extreme weather events around the world exemplify the uneven impacts of climate change on populations, even within relatively small geographic regions. Differential human vulnerability to environmental hazards results from a range of social, economic, historical, and political factors, all of which operate at multiple scales. While adaptation to climate change has been the dominant focus of policy and research agendas, it is essential to ask as well why some communities and peoples are disproportionately exposed to and affected by climate threats. The cases and synthesis presented here are organized around four key themes (resource access, governance, culture, and knowledge), which we approach from four social science fields (cultural anthropology, archaeology, human geography, and sociology). Social scientific approaches to human vulnerability draw vital attention to the root causes of climate change threats and the reasons that people are forced to adapt to them. Because vulnerability is a multidimensional process rather than an unchanging state, a dynamic social approach to vulnerability is most likely to improve mitigation and adaptation planning efforts. This article is categorized under:Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Values-Based Approach to Vulnerability and Adaptation.