Analyzing spatial technology trends in urban heritage preservation: A bibliometrics study

Abstract

This study addresses the notable absence of comprehensive syntheses and bibliometric analyses concerning the utilization of spatial technology within urban heritage preservation contexts. The research aims to elucidate the current status, methodologies, advancements, and future trajectories of spatial technology applications in urban heritage preservation. Employing a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis, the study examines pertinent 157 literature through Scopus, categorizes research applications, analyzes bibliometric data, evaluates influence rankings across multiple dimensions, identifies historical trends, and outlines prospective directions. The study findings unveil the evolving characteristics of spatial technology applications. Firstly, it reveals a gradual development trend, with spatial technologies experiencing an annual growth rate of 7.7% between 2010 and 2020. Nevertheless, a significant disparity persists, with more than 63.2% of countries still fully integrating spatial technology on-site at heritage sites. Furthermore, the study highlights varied collaboration levels between research institutions, with limited international cooperation and exchange, particularly evident between developed and developing nations. Lastly, the increasing demand for interdisciplinary research signals a shift towards fostering innovative approaches and solutions in heritage site preservation and management.

Keywords

Co-occurrence analysis geographic information systems space syntax analysis sustainable development goals systematic literature review

Introduction

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) constitute a worldwide effort to eradicate poverty, protect the environment, and promote universal prosperity.¹ Among the 17 SDGs, SDG 11.4 focuses explicitly on conserving and improving cultural and natural heritage in urban areas.² Unlike world heritage sites, which typically denote places of extraordinary cultural and natural importance recognized by UNESCO, Urban heritage, as distinct from world heritage, encompasses the cultural and historical elements of urban areas, including buildings, social practices, and rituals.³ These sites often serve as focal points for cultural identity, community engagement, and economic development initiatives.^4–6 This heritage is often at risk due to pressures for development and change, and its preservation requires a balance between safeguarding its values and maintaining the quality of life for urban communities.^7–9 Preserving and leveraging urban heritage is crucial for achieving SDG 11.4 objectives, as it contributes to sustainable urban development, social cohesion, and inclusive growth. Spatial technology is critical in meticulously managing and preserving urban heritage.^10–12 These advanced technologies offer a comprehensive approach to collecting, analyzing, and visually representing data that encapsulates both the physical and cultural facets of urban heritage sites.^13–16

The application of spatial technology spans a wide range of fields, resulting in diverse definitions and interpretations depending on stakeholder perspectives. Broadly, spatial technology refers to tools and methodologies used for collecting, analyzing, and visualizing spatial data.^17–19 Core technologies within this domain include Geographic Information Systems (GIS), remote sensing, and LiDAR. GIS integrates and analyzes geographic data to create detailed maps and spatial analyses,²⁰ remote sensing captures data from satellites or aircraft to monitor environmental changes,²¹ and LiDAR provides precise 3D measurements of surfaces.²² Core technologies like GIS, remote sensing, and LiDAR are fundamental for understanding and managing spatial information, while supporting technologies such as GNSS and 3D modeling provide additional capabilities for positioning and visual representation. Spatial computing, including augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), represents a distinct category, offering innovative ways to interact with and visualize spatial data but often falling outside traditional definitions of spatial technology. Thus, this research focuses on core spatial technologies while recognizing that AR and VR play a complementary role in enhancing the documentation and preservation of urban heritage. For understanding spatial configurations and connectivity, space syntax analysis acts as a pivotal tool for analyzing the structural characteristics of urban environments, providing insights into patterns of movement, accessibility, and integration within historical context.^23–25 For the mapping and documentation of urban heritage sites, GIS) emerges as a powerful tool, enabling the creation of intricate maps incorporating topographical, geospatial, and historical data.^26–29 Particularly noteworthy is the impactful role of LiDAR technology, which excels in capturing fine environmental information and texture detail within the urban heritage context.^30–32 Complementing this, integrating remote sensing data and sophisticated 3D visualization technologies enhances the ability to reproduce realistic details, providing a nuanced understanding of the spatial environment.^33,34 Regarding monitoring and assessment, remote sensing proves invaluable in tracking alterations in the built environment.^11,35 Utilizing time series data collected over an extended period and satellite observations covering a wide geographic area, this data becomes instrumental in evaluating the influence of both advancement and preservation initiatives on urban heritage sites.^36,37

Furthermore, spatial technology facilitates planning and decision-making processes related to urban heritage.^38,39 It aids in the analysis of potential impacts stemming from development projects, whether they involve new constructions, renovations, or forecasted land use alterations around heritage sites.^10,40,41 The incorporation of advancing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle technology with satellite observations offers a comprehensive, multi-source perspective, enhancing insights into urban heritage sites and supporting sustainable development initiatives.^42–44

The application of spatial technology to urban heritage presents a tailored and sophisticated approach. This holistic utilization of GIS, remote sensing, and emerging technologies not only elevates the precision of documentation and monitoring processes but also empowers decision-makers with the information needed for sustainable planning and preservation of urban heritage assets.

Although spatial technology is increasingly being embraced for heritage conservation, there persists a significant absence of comprehensive synopses and reviews, particularly concerning its utilization in urban heritage settings, with minimal bibliometric investigations undertaken in this realm.^45–47

Bibliometrics, as a methodological framework, rigorously evaluates and quantifies the influence, trajectories, and efficacy of research efforts using metrics like citation tallies, journal prestige, and cooperation dynamics. This methodology empowers the assessment of scholarly productivity, aids in pinpointing burgeoning trends and possible collaborative prospects, and enables benchmarks of research achievements among various entities and scholars.^48,49 Furthermore, the findings from these analyses provide a thorough guide for researchers, scholars, and students globally, outlining pathways for steering future research agendas and nurturing international partnerships. In addition to advancing scholarly comprehension, this research generates practical insights, driving worldwide involvement and cooperation to guarantee the enduring conservation of urban heritage assets.

The objective of this investigation is to scrutinize research applications concerning the following dimensions:

1. What is the current state of spatial technology in heritage preservation within urban environments?

2. Which tools and methodologies are crucial for effectively managing and conserving urban heritage?

3. What transformations and complexities are anticipated in applying spatial technology for urban heritage preservation?

In this review, the outcomes derived from quantitative research are visually presented, encompassing the systematic summarization of trends and patterns in research applications for urban heritage. The analysis endeavors to delineate challenges, discuss existing research’s prevailing limitations, and forecast future developmental trajectories. Moreover, this article aims to furnish valuable insights and recommendations tailored for policymakers and practitioners in the respective domain. This study follows a structured approach, beginning with a detailed methodology outlining the process of systematic literature review in Methodology. The subsequent analysis and findings in Analysis and Findings present a comprehensive bibliometric review. The discussion in Dicussion critically examines the results, addressing both strengths and limitations while offering insights into the implications of the findings. The conclusion in Conclusion, the key findings are summarized, and implications for future research are discussed, providing a roadmap for further exploration in the field of urban heritage conservation and spatial technology applications.

Literature review

Several bibliometric studies have explored spatial technology in urban heritage preservation. The paper⁵⁰ highlights the increasing importance of GIS in cultural heritage conservation, noting its role in developing dynamic information management systems and supporting research. The findings reveal steady growth in GIS-based research, marked by significant theoretical and technical advancements. However, the paper also identifies a need for more effective practical applications in conservation efforts. It advocates for the integration of digital technologies into the humanities and emphasizes the need for standardized heritage databases to enhance analytical and display functions.

Similarly, the paper⁵¹ presents a systematic literature review on the state-of-the-art applications of GIS in heritage conservation. This review combines results from two diverse digital databases, offering a comprehensive evaluation method that minimizes bias and is applicable to other studies. The analysis shows a rising interest in GIS applications since 2014, driven by increased multidisciplinary research. However, it reveals a predominant focus on basic data processing and mapping, with limited exploration of GIS for advanced heritage analysis. The paper highlights a significant research gap in the sustainability and accessibility of heritage data and calls for further exploration into data maintenance and reuse policies.

In contrast, the paper⁵² focuses on the evolving needs of heritage site documentation and information representation, particularly through advanced remote sensing technologies. It identifies a gap in effectively translating innovative data acquisition outputs into practical, analyzable deliverables due to limitations imposed by proprietary software and specialized knowledge. The study proposes solutions for enhancing heritage documentation workflows, including methods for converting raw data into usable forms like orthomosaics, web-based viewers, watertight mesh geometry, and serious game content. By providing detailed methodologies and test cases, this paper aims to improve technology accessibility, facilitate data communication among stakeholders, and enhance the overall utility of heritage information.

The paper⁵³ examines the impact of advanced digital technologies on architectural heritage, particularly in building modeling, historical documentation, and touristic promotion. The research emphasizes the robust processing of large datasets, the correlation between construction characteristics and visible anomalies, and the promotion of multidisciplinary collaboration through remote inspection and data management. However, the study identifies several areas for improvement, including the need for standardized acquisition procedures, automated processing pipelines, real-time data integration, and scalable methods for heritage asset networks.

The paper³² discusses the comprehensive application of 3D LiDAR in heritage preservation, highlighting its integration with technologies like 3D printing and digital mapping. It acknowledges challenges such as data fragmentation and collaboration difficulties. In contrast, the paper⁵⁴ explores the use of LiDAR and 3D city models for urban landscape protection, introducing the Visual Protection Surface (VPS) method to manage the visual impact of new developments on historic city views, specifically in Dresden. Meanwhile, the paper⁵⁵ reviews close-range sensing techniques and emphasizes the integration of data from multiple sensors to improve heritage structure monitoring. This paper stresses the need for better data fusion and interpretation methods.

The paper⁵⁶ provides a comprehensive review of urban 3D modeling methods used from 2015 to 2020, addressing the rapid evolution of the urban built environment. It notes a gap in the systematic overview of various 3D modeling methods and categorizes these methods based on characteristics, data requirements, technical aspects, user needs, and ethical considerations. The review highlights the broad range of applications for 3D modeling and the significant development potential in this area.

Similarly, the paper⁵⁷ explores the integration of advanced 3D modeling and information management techniques in built heritage documentation. It focuses on the use of 3D computer graphics, photogrammetry, and laser scanning for geometric data capture, alongside GIS and ontology tools for managing semantic knowledge. The study emphasizes the development and application of Historic/Heritage Building Information Modeling (HBIM), discussing trends in heritage modeling and the increasing use of laser scanning, GIS, and BIM technologies. It highlights how integrating these techniques with HBIM can enhance documentation through accurate parametric modeling, semantic segmentation of 3D point clouds, and advanced spatial information management.

In summary, the research gaps identified across these studies include:

$•$ Lack of Comprehensive Synthesis: There is a need for a holistic overview that integrates various spatial technologies and their applications in urban heritage preservation.

$•$ Fragmented Data Handling: Challenges related to data fragmentation and the integration of multi-source data require further attention.

$•$ Integration of Emerging Technologies: There is a gap in the systematic integration of emerging technologies, such as LiDAR, GIS, and HBIM, for comprehensive heritage documentation and preservation.

Addressing these gaps is crucial for advancing the field of urban heritage preservation. A more integrated approach that synthesizes various spatial technologies and enhances data handling can significantly improve the documentation and preservation of heritage assets. This study aims to fulfill this need by providing a comprehensive synthesis and bibliometric analysis of spatial technology applications in urban heritage preservation. By elucidating the current status, methodologies, advancements, and future trajectories of spatial technology in this context, the study seeks to bridge existing gaps, promote better integration of emerging technologies, and improve the practical applications of spatial data in heritage preservation efforts. Through this detailed examination, the research aspires to offer valuable insights and frameworks that can guide future studies and enhance the overall effectiveness of heritage preservation strategies.

Methodology

The methodology delineates the bibliometric approaches and software tools employed for analysis, aligning with the research objectives. In this study, co-authorship, co-occurrence, citation, and co-citation analyses, alongside aggregation and ranking, are utilized to evaluate academic output comprehensively.⁵⁸ Co-authorship analysis quantitatively examines authors, countries, affiliations, and collaboration patterns, facilitating the visualization of the social structure of a research field through co-authored publications in “Collaboration Networks”.⁵⁸ Co-occurrence analysis quantitatively constructs the conceptual knowledge structure of a research domain and identifies key areas by analyzing term frequency across articles, resulting in visual representations in ”Conceptual Networks”.⁵⁸ Citation analysis utilizes citation counts to assess the similarity between publications, authors, organizations, or sources.⁵⁸ Two articles are considered co-cited if both appear in a third article’s reference list.⁵⁸ In the context of this paper, freely available tools like VOSviewer and Biblioshiny were used. VOSviewer, known for its user-friendly interface and ability to handle extensive datasets, was chosen for clear bibliometric visualizations.⁵⁹ It facilitated co-authorship, co-occurrence, and citation analyses for mapping collaboration, identifying keywords, and highlighting top sources. Biblioshiny, a web-based interface utilizing Bibliometrix R-tool functionalities, mapped thematic evolution and trending topics.⁵⁸

Data extraction

In this study, Scopus was chosen as the sole research database for this study due to its extensive coverage of scientific literature across diverse disciplines and its advanced citation analysis features, including detailed author profiles and h-index calculations. Scopus provides a comprehensive and regularly updated dataset, ensuring access to the most recent publications and citations, which is crucial for conducting a thorough bibliometric analysis. The decision to focus exclusively on Scopus, rather than incorporating other databases such as Science Direct, Web of Science, or Google Scholar, was driven by the need for consistency and manageability in the data extraction process. While a systematic review could benefit from a combination of databases to capture a broader spectrum of published articles, including grey literature and other resources, using Scopus as the primary database allows for a streamlined and focused analysis. This approach ensures a high-quality, standardized dataset, minimizing potential variations in indexing practices and coverage across different databases, which could affect the reliability and comparability of the results. The search was conducted in February 2024 with the following keywords:

1. (Sustainable Development Goals OR SDGs) AND (urban heritage preservation OR urban heritage management OR urban heritage conservation)

2. (Spatial technology OR GIS OR remote sensing OR LiDAR OR UAV technology) AND urban heritage

3. (Remote sensing OR LiDAR) AND (land use changes OR urban heritage assessment)

4. (Spatial technology OR GIS OR remote sensing) AND (urban heritage mapping OR urban heritage documentation)

Date range: 2002–2024

The selection of 2002 as the starting point for the review was not an arbitrary choice; rather, it was determined by the availability of data. The oldest document retrieved in the search field from the Scopus database dates back to 2002, establishing this year as the natural starting point for the analysis. The authors aimed to encompass a broad spectrum of relevant literature by incorporating diverse variations and synonyms of keywords, ensuring a comprehensive exploration. In the corpus of literature surveyed, comprising a total of 157 articles, the subclassification reveals a varied distribution across different publication types. Out of the total, 100 articles were identified as original research articles, accounting for approximately 63.7% of the dataset. Additionally, 34 articles were categorized as conference papers, 11 as book chapters, 9 as conference reviews, 6 as reviews, and 2 as books. Notably, review papers represent a relatively smaller proportion of the dataset, comprising only 3.8% of the total articles surveyed. This study shares methodological similarities with⁶⁰ and⁵⁰ while also presenting unique features. Unlike⁶⁰ and,⁵⁰ this study utilizes comprehensive databases—Scopus in this case, as opposed to the Web of Science used in the other investigations. All three studies benefit from the use of VOSviewer for visualizing bibliometric data, underscoring its efficacy in managing extensive datasets and producing detailed visualizations. Each study incorporates co-authorship, co-occurrence, citation, and co-citation analyses to evaluate academic output. However, this study diverges by implementing a more detailed search strategy with a broad range of keywords related to spatial technology and urban heritage, spanning from 2002 to 2024, thereby encompassing a wide array of document types. In contrast, ⁶⁰ focused on GIS-Heritage publications with a specificsearch strategy and document types, while⁵⁰ concentrated on ”cultural heritage” and GIS within a narrower timeframe and document type. Additionally, this study’s use of Web of Science and Biblioshiny, alongside VOSviewer, allows for a more comprehensive and nuanced analysis of thematic evolution and trending topics compared to the more narrowly focused approaches of the other investigations.

Filtering and assessment process

Following the screening process, the filtering and assessment steps were crucial in refining the dataset to ensure the inclusion of relevant and high-quality studies. The inclusion criteria were meticulously defined to align with the research objectives and ensure that only articles meeting specific standards were included in the analysis. These criteria included a focus on publications in English, reflecting the study’s emphasis on accessibility and uniformity in language. After the initial screening based on titles and abstracts, the remaining articles underwent a thorough review to assess their relevance, quality, and contribution to the research topic. This assessment included evaluating the methodological rigor, the significance of the findings, and the relevance of the studies to the research questions. Articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, such as those lacking methodological transparency, presenting outdated information, focusing on tangential topics, or not published in English, were excluded from the final dataset. By adhering to these stringent inclusion criteria, the study aimed to maintain a high level of academic integrity and ensure that the results were both reliable and applicable to the research field. This process not only filtered out irrelevant or low-quality studies but also helped in focusing the analysis on the most significant and impactful research, thereby enhancing the validity and reliability of the systematic review.

Limitations

This research is subject to several limitations that should be acknowledged. The reliance solely on Scopus may introduce database bias, potentially overlooking literature indexed in other databases like Web of Science or Google Scholar. The search strategy’s effectiveness depends on the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the keywords used, which might either miss relevant articles or include irrelevant ones. Excluding grey literature, such as reports or theses, limits the scope of the research to published journal articles, potentially omitting valuable insights. Additionally, the study’s reliance on English-language publications and the potential lack of representation from certain regions could affect the inclusiveness of the analysis. Despite these limitations, the study offers a detailed and structured analysis of the bibliometric landscape within the selected scope, delivering valuable insights into the field of spatial technology and urban heritage. Future research could enhance the comprehensiveness of the findings by incorporating additional databases and document types, thereby providing a broader view of the literature and emerging trends in this domain.

Analysis and findings

The examination of published articles (Figure 1) reveals a dynamic pattern in the number of publications over the past 20 years, showcasing fluctuations in scholarly activity across different periods. In 2023, the highest volume of articles, totaling 35, were published, marking a significant peak in research output within the studied domain. Similarly, both 2022 and 2021 saw notable publication numbers, with 19 articles each. Preceding years, particularly 2020 and 2019, exhibited moderate levels of scholarly activity, yielding 14 and 11 articles, respectively. A slight uptick in publications was noted in 2018 and 2017, with 9 and 12 articles, correspondingly. Conversely, earlier years within the analyzed timeframe, such as 2015, 2014, and 2011, witnessed considerably fewer publications, each recording only two articles. Notably, the absence of publications in 2009, 2005, and 2000 underscores potential gaps in research activity during those periods. This trend signifies an increasing interest and attention towards spatial technology applications in urban heritage preservation in recent years, likely fueled by the growing acknowledgment of heritage conservation’s significance in urban development planning and sustainability agendas. Furthermore, it emphasizes the imperative for ongoing research endeavors to address potential knowledge gaps and advance understanding within this evolving field. The Table 1 presents an analysis of institution influence based on the total number of citations (TC) and the total number of articles (TA) associated with each institution. Notably, the institutions listed represent diverse geographical locations, including Egypt, Italy, Lebanon, the United States, and China. Among these, the School of Engineering at the University of Basilicata in Italy emerges as a significant influencer with the highest TC of 110 and TA of 3, indicating a strong research output and impact in the field. Similarly, the Department of European and Mediterranean Cultures at the University of Basilicata in Italy and the National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences in Egypt demonstrate considerable influence with TCs of 91 each. These findings underscore the importance of international collaboration and highlight key institutions driving research and innovation in the field. Additionally, it is noteworthy that the International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals in China and the Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science at the Chinese Academy of Sciences have relatively lower TCs, suggesting areas for potential growth and collaboration in future research endeavors.

Figure 1.

The scholarly output of the literature spanning from 2002 to 2024.

Table 1.

Institutional impact analysis.

Institution	Country	TC	TA
Alexandria University	Egypt	87	2
University of Basilicata	Italy	91	2
Beirut Arab University	Lebanon	87	2
International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals	China	0	2
Italian Space Agency (ASI)	Italy	54	2
California Institute of Technology (Caltech)	United States	14	3
Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences	China	5	3
Jiangxi Normal University	China	0	2
National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences	Egypt	91	2
University of Basilicata	Italy	110	3
Nanjing Normal University	China	2	2

The co-occurrence analysis technique is utilized to construct and visualize a network of emerging themes, revealing connections within a text by linguistically analyzing associations among words to identify patterns.⁶¹ Nodes represent significant terms with weights and positions, serving as representations within the network.⁶² This study employs co-occurrence networks as an additional tool to uncover patterns, which are subsequently discussed. To enhance clarity in the depiction, solely the co-occurrences with notable frequency were integrated into this analysis. Each thematic aspect is visually represented by the size of the label circle and its font size, reflecting its relative importance, with their proximity denoting clustering patterns. These delineated clusters have unveiled four discernible thematic relationships, providing a framework for the qualitative scrutiny of the core literature.

The analysis involved a dataset comprising 93 unique terms extracted from the literature (Figure 2). Each term was represented in the analysis with its respective label, cluster assignment, and several weighted metrics, including the number of links, total link strength, occurrences, average publication year, average citations, and average normalized citations. The results of the co-occurrence analysis revealed clusters of keywords frequently appearing together in the literature, indicating potential thematic associations or research trends. For example, the term “urban heritage” was found to co-occur with terms such as “cultural heritage site,” “architecture,” “heritage site,” and “cultural landscape,” suggesting a focus on the architectural and cultural aspects of urban heritage preservation. Similarly, terms like “remote sensing,” “GIS,” “monitoring,” and “assessment” formed another cluster, highlighting the importance of geospatial technologies in monitoring and assessing urban heritage sites. Furthermore, the analysis identified keywords with high occurrences and strong linkages, indicating their significance in the literature. For instance, ”heritage” emerged as a central keyword with a high number of occurrences and strong connections to various related terms, underscoring its importance in the discourse on urban heritage preservation. Similarly, terms like “assessment,” “monitoring,” “sustainability,” and “tourism” were identified as key themes in the literature, reflecting the multidisciplinary nature of research in this field.

Figure 2.

Co-occurrence map of evolving topics.

The scientific production of countries in the field of urban heritage preservation reflects their engagement and contribution to research efforts in this domain. Analyzing the relationship between the number of publications and the presence of urban heritage sites across different countries provides insights into the global distribution of research activity and its alignment with cultural heritage priorities (Figure 3). Among the countries with the highest scientific production, China and Italy stand out as leaders, with 100 and 95 publications, respectively. This observation suggests a strong emphasis on research and scholarly output in these nations, possibly driven by the significant cultural heritage assets they possess and the associated challenges in their preservation and management. Following closely are the USA, Egypt, and Spain, with 29, 23, and 23 publications, respectively. These countries also boast rich cultural landscapes and historical urban centers, indicating a global interest and investment in understanding and addressing the complexities of urban heritage conservation. India, Cyprus, Belgium, and Romania further contribute significantly to the body of literature on urban heritage, underscoring the diversity of perspectives and approaches adopted by countries with varying cultural contexts and heritage management practices. The presence of countries like Iran, Malaysia, and Lebanon in the list highlights the growing interest and participation of regions with emerging urban heritage conservation agendas, signaling a broader global commitment to preserving cultural identities and historical legacies within urban landscapes.

Figure 3.

Scientific production of countries in urban heritage preservation research.

The Figure 4 illustrates the scholarly influence wielded by various nations within the domain under investigation, offering nuanced insights into their respective contributions and significance. Belgium, while presenting a comparatively moderate presence, notably showcases a discernible impact with a Total Citations (TC) count of 115, coupled with 11 Total Articles (TA), thus suggesting a noteworthy influence per publication. Conversely, China emerges as a dominant force, exhibiting a substantial TC of 197 alongside an impressive 27.72 citations per article, indicative of both prolificacy and substantive impact within the scholarly discourse. Egypt, too, commands attention with a robust TC of 254, despite a comparatively lower TA count of 12, highlighting its ability to garner a high average citation count of 15.99 per article. Similarly, Iran showcases a formidable presence with a TC of 112 and an average citation count of 9.03 per article, underscoring its notable scholarly contribution. Noteworthy is the performance of the United States, which, with a striking TC of 825 and an average citation count of 18.36 per article, underscores its preeminent position and profound impact within the academic landscape. These findings offer invaluable insights into the multifaceted global distribution of scholarly contributions, illuminating the diverse and dynamic nature of academic influence across different nations. Such insights are pivotal for scholars, policymakers, and stakeholders alike, fostering a deeper understanding of the global scholarly landscape and informing strategic decisions in research collaboration, funding allocation, and academic exchange programs.

Figure 4.

Analysis of National scholarly influence.

The analysis of thematic evolution (Figure 5) across multiple years provides a comprehensive overview of the shifting research interests within the domain under investigation. From 2002 to 2016, remote sensing consistently emerged as a dominant theme, with a particular focus on applications such as land use,^63,64 GIS,^65,66 and satellite imagery.⁶⁷ This sustained focus underscores the enduring significance of remote sensing technologies across various scientific endeavors, ranging from environmental monitoring to urban planning during this period.

Figure 5.

Thematic evolution.

The period from 2017 to 2019 continued to emphasize remote sensing, while also highlighting an increased focus on themes like sustainable development,^64,68 environmental protection,^69–71 and GIS.⁷² This shift suggests a growing recognition of the interconnectedness between human activities and ecosystem health, indicating a maturation of research efforts aimed at addressing pressing global sustainability challenges.

In the years 2020 to 2021, remote sensing remained a prominent theme, with continued exploration of topics such as satellite imagery and sustainable development. Notably, cultural heritage emerged as a more focused theme during this period, reflecting an evolving understanding of the complexities surrounding cultural heritage preservation, urbanization, and economic dynamics.^73–75 In the years 2022 to 2023, remote sensing continued to hold significant importance, particularly in relation to land cover analysis.^76,77 The thematic evolution during this period also demonstrated sustained attention to cultural heritages,⁷⁸ satellite imagery,⁷⁹ and sustainable development goals,⁸⁰ reflecting a continuous exploration of interdisciplinary approaches to tackle complex global challenges.

By 2024, the analysis reveals a continued focus on thematic elements such as heritage conservation, urban development, and sustainable development goals.^81,82 The persistence of these themes underscores their enduring relevance and the crucial role of ongoing research efforts in addressing the multifaceted challenges within the domain.

The color coding in Figure 5 is deliberate, representing the evolution and shifting focus of research themes over time. For example, the term “remote sensing” appears in different colors across various periods, signifying its changing role and application within different contexts. In certain periods, “remote sensing” may have been predominantly associated with urban planning, while in others, it became more closely linked with cultural heritage or sustainability initiatives. Similarly, the color variations for “sustainable development” reflect its multifaceted nature, with its significance evolving as it intersects with other themes such as heritage conservation and biodiversity. The use of different colors serves to visually distinguish these nuanced changes, highlighting that while the term itself remains constant, its context and relevance are dynamic and continuously evolving. The flow lines connecting the different blocks in the diagram illustrate the continuity and transformation of research themes over time. The thickness of these lines reflects the relative prominence of each theme during a particular period. For instance, the robust flow of “remote sensing” from 2002-2016 into subsequent periods demonstrates its sustained importance, whereas the intermittent appearance of “biodiversity” highlights its fluctuating relevance within the research landscape.

Terms like “biodiversity” that disappear and later reappear reflect the cyclical nature of research interests. Such terms may temporarily fade from prominence as other topics emerge, only to resurface when new developments or external factors, such as policy changes or global events, rekindle interest in them. This pattern underscores the non-linear progression of research, where certain themes resurface with renewed importance as the field evolves.

Figure 5 offers a detailed visualization of how research themes within the domain have evolved, intersected, and transformed over time. The use of color coding, flow lines, and distinct timeframes provides a nuanced understanding of the dynamic nature of the research landscape, illustrating how foundational themes have given rise to new areas of inquiry and how certain topics have persisted or reemerged as the field has progressed.

While significant progress has been made in understanding and addressing various thematic aspects, there remain areas where further research is necessary to deepen our understanding and develop more comprehensive solutions to the challenges within the domain. Specifically, further investigation into the integration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning with thematic areas like remote sensing and sustainable development could yield valuable insights and innovative solutions. Additionally, exploring the socio-economic implications of these thematic trends and interventions could provide a more holistic understanding of their impact on communities and ecosystems. This deeper understanding would, in turn, guide more effective policy formulation and implementation strategies, ensuring that the benefits of technological advancements and thematic developments are equitably distributed and sustainably managed.

Discussion

Spatial technologies play a crucial role in the conservation and development of heritage sites. Analyzing these technologies through bibliometric analysis provides valuable insights into current trends, revealing that remote sensing and GIS are fundamental tools for heritage site conservation. From 2002 to 2024, the application of satellite imagery has exemplified the continuous contribution of spatial technologies to site development. The study of remote sensing applications, in particular, offers profound insights into the spatial characteristics of heritage sites.

Over time, remote sensing has emerged as the most widely used tool in this domain, evolving from the initial application of GIS to the sophisticated use of satellite imagery, which has significantly enhanced the precision and efficiency of spatial observation in heritage sites. Recent technological advancements have further expanded the capabilities of GIS and remote sensing tools in heritage conservation.

Notably, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) with these spatial technologies has revolutionized the monitoring and management of heritage sites. AI algorithms now have the ability to analyze vast amounts of satellite imagery and remote sensing data, enabling the detection of changes, identification of potential threats, and prediction of future conditions with unprecedented accuracy. For instance, machine learning models are increasingly used to automate land cover classification and to recognize patterns in historical data that may indicate degradation or other issues. These innovations are transforming the field, providing heritage conservation efforts with powerful tools to ensure the protection and sustainability of these invaluable sites. Additionally, AR and VR are emerging as valuable tools for visualizing heritage sites in a digital context, offering immersive experiences that significantly enhance public engagement and educational outreach. These technologies allow for a more interactive and engaging exploration of heritage sites, bringing history and culture to life in ways that traditional methods cannot.

To maximize the effectiveness of these technologies, it is crucial to improve data integration and interoperability across platforms. Ensuring seamless interaction between AI systems, GIS platforms, and remote sensing tools can result in more cohesive and actionable insights. This integration would enable a more comprehensive understanding of heritage sites, facilitating more informed decision-making in conservation efforts.

Moreover, the adoption of standardized protocols for data sharing and improving accessibility to these advanced technologies are essential steps in bridging the gap between research and practical application. By ensuring that researchers, practitioners, and policymakers have access to and can effectively utilize these tools, heritage conservation efforts can be more unified and strategic.

By leveraging these cutting-edge technologies within a unified framework, heritage conservation initiatives can become more proactive, precise, and impactful. This approach will ultimately aid in the preservation and management of our cultural and historical assets, ensuring that they are protected for future generations while also being more accessible and engaging for the public today.

The evolution of research focus in this domain is noteworthy, progressing from fundamental mapping to more sophisticated stages such as monitoring, assessment, and ultimately, conservation and management of heritage sites. This progression has resulted in a research landscape that is increasingly diverse, multidisciplinary, and comprehensive. However, this evolution has also surfaced specific research challenges.

Firstly, there is a significant disparity in research output among the top 10 countries, with 63.2% of these nations failing to meet the ideal article ratio of 1:1 for heritage sites. This suggests an uneven distribution in the conduct of spatial studies related to heritage sites, with varying levels of attention and emphasis across different regions. Secondly, international cooperation and exchange in heritage site research remain limited, as most studies are predominantly focused on individual countries. Enhanced collaboration among international organizations is imperative to expedite the attainment of SDG 11.4 objectives. The advent of remote sensing has introduced a wealth of opportunities for heritage sites, encompassing mapping, monitoring, assessment, conservation, and management. This transformative technology enables the precise mapping of historical structures, the monitoring of environmental changes, and the protection of cultural heritage sites. By leveraging data from remote sensing, including parameters such as elevation, land cover, and vegetation indices, heritage site managers can effectively track and respond to changes. Furthermore, GIS, with its spatial data analysis capabilities, aids in identifying trends and assessing potential risks within heritage sites, thereby informing conservation and management strategies.

Collectively, spatial technologies offer invaluable data for evidence-based conservation practices, supporting the documentation of heritage, the monitoring of changes, and the efficient management of resources. These advancements ultimately facilitate well-informed decision-making. However, while the integration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, and big data analytics is crucial for the development of spatial technology, it is equally important to acknowledge and address the associated challenges and limitations. Adopting a comprehensive approach to addressing these challenges enhances our understanding of the complexities associated with integrating spatial technology for heritage conservation. Key issues include concerns about data privacy and security, which highlight the necessity of protecting sensitive information. The integration of remote sensing and GIS involves extensive data collection, making robust encryption and cybersecurity measures essential to maintaining the integrity and confidentiality of heritage data.

Access and affordability may pose barriers to technology adoption, particularly in developing regions, underscoring the need to balance technological advancements with equitable access. Ensuring the accuracy and reliability of results is crucial, requiring rigorous quality assurance and validation processes to maintain the credibility of data used for decision-making. Additionally, the intricate nature of remote sensing and GIS underscores the importance of seamless interoperability among systems and platforms, requiring careful consideration to fully realize the potential of these technologies. Addressing the multifaceted challenges of data privacy, accessibility, accuracy, and technical complexity is crucial for the responsible and effective integration of spatial technology in heritage conservation initiatives worldwide. Each challenge underscores the importance of adopting a comprehensive and strategic approach to implementing technology in this context.

Obstacles such as data privacy concerns, limited accessibility, and affordability issues collectively hinder the widespread use of spatial technology in heritage conservation. Many countries, particularly those with limited resources, face difficulties in allocating funds for technology adoption due to the significant investments required for data acquisition and infrastructure development. Additionally, limited technical expertise, including a shortage of trained personnel and specialized equipment, further complicates integration efforts.

Striking a balance between technological advancement and cultural preservation is essential, especially in the face of potential resistance from heritage communities and stakeholders regarding the introduction of new technologies. Bureaucratic processes and regulatory constraints can also impede swift adoption, delaying the achievement of conservation goals. Furthermore, digital divides related to internet access and digital literacy present barriers that must be addressed through targeted efforts to bridge access disparities and enhance digital inclusion. Addressing these challenges is a critical imperative for fostering effective use of spatial technology in heritage conservation.

Conclusion

This study delivers a detailed bibliometric analysis of spatial technologies in heritage conservation, analyzing 157 documents from the Scopus database spanning from 2002 to 2024. The research findings offer both specific results and broader insights into the field, underscoring the evolving role of spatial technologies in the preservation of cultural heritage.

The analysis reveals a consistent annual growth rate of 7.7% in the application of spatial technologies for urban heritage preservation. This indicates a robust interest and expansion within the field. However, the integration of these technologies into heritage conservation practices began relatively late. Notably, 63.2% of the top 10 countries by publication volume have not achieved a balanced author-document ratio of 1:1. This discrepancy suggests that while there is considerable research activity, the practical application and implementation of spatial technologies are unevenly distributed across different regions.

Additionally, the study identifies significant disparities in research output and influence among authors and institutions. For example, countries such as China and Italy exhibit notable differences in citation counts and publication volumes. These disparities highlight the need for more balanced research collaboration and resource sharing to enhance the collective impact of spatial technology applications in heritage conservation. The research also shows that while international collaboration exists, it is often limited in both scope and depth. This limitation underscores the necessity for more extensive and meaningful cooperative efforts among countries to maximize the overall impact of research outcomes and develop a more integrated approach to heritage preservation.

The study’s broader observations emphasize several key policy implications. First, the uneven distribution of spatial technology applications points to a need for targeted initiatives to support regions that are currently underrepresented in the research landscape. Policymakers should focus on creating programs that promote equitable access to technology and expertise, ensuring that all regions can benefit from advancements in spatial technology.

Second, the limitations observed in international collaboration highlight the need for policies that encourage more extensive and effective cooperative efforts. Strengthening international partnerships can facilitate knowledge sharing, resource pooling, and the development of integrated solutions for heritage conservation. Enhanced collaboration is crucial for addressing global challenges and leveraging collective expertise to improve conservation practices.

Third, the study underscores the importance of addressing technological disparities. There is a need for policy interventions to facilitate equitable access to spatial technologies, particularly in developing regions where access to funding, technical expertise, and infrastructure may be limited. By addressing these disparities, policymakers can help ensure that all regions can effectively participate in and benefit from advancements in heritage conservation technology.

The study outlines several directions for future research. One key area is the exploration of innovative technological applications. Future research should investigate emerging technologies such as advanced remote sensing techniques, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to assess their potential contributions to heritage conservation. These innovations could offer new opportunities for enhancing conservation practices and addressing complex preservation challenges.

Another important area for future research is strengthening international collaboration. Developing strategies to foster deeper and more effective cooperative relationships between countries, institutions, and researchers is essential. Enhanced collaboration can facilitate the sharing of knowledge and resources, leading to more integrated and impactful solutions for heritage preservation.

Finally, addressing emerging challenges in the field is crucial. Future research should focus on how spatial technologies can address contemporary issues such as the impacts of climate change, urbanization, and the integration of new technological advancements. By investigating these challenges, researchers can contribute to the development of more effective and sustainable heritage conservation practices.

The insights gained from this study provide a foundational understanding of the current state and future potential of spatial technologies in heritage conservation. By identifying key trends, research gaps, and opportunities, the study offers valuable guidance for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners. The suggested research directions and policy implications are intended to inform future research agendas, guide policy development, and enhance practical applications. Ultimately, the study aims to contribute to the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage for future generations by advancing the field of spatial technology in heritage conservation.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Shilpi Chakraborty

References

United Nations, U . UN SDG summit 2023, 2023. https://www.un.org/en/conferences/SDGSummit2023

United Nations . Addis ababa action agenda of the third international conference on financing for development. New York, 2015. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2051AAAA_Outcome.pdf

Geddes

. Cities in evolution: an introduction to the town planning movement and to the study of civics. London: Williams, 1915.

Guzmán

Roders

Colenbrander

. Measuring links between cultural heritage management and sustainable urban development: an overview of global monitoring tools. Cities 2017; 60: 192–201.

Wang

Zhang

Wang

, et al. How to achieve a balance between functional improvement and heritage conservation? A case study on the renewal of old Beijing city. Sustain Cities Soc 2023; 98: 104790.

Kinoshita

Chen

, et al. What promotes residents’ donation behavior for adaptive reuse of cultural heritage projects? An application of the extended theory of planned behavior. Sustain Cities Soc 2024; 102: 105213.

Ripp

Rodwell

. The geography of urban heritage. Hist Environ: Policy & Practice 2015; 6(3): 240–276.

Vecco

Srakar

. The unbearable sustainability of cultural heritage: an attempt to create an index of cultural heritage sustainability in conflict and war regions. J Cult Herit 2018; 33: 293–302.

Falk

Hagsten

. Factors with ambiguous qualities for cultural world heritage sites. J Cult Herit 2024; 66: 384–391.

10.

Janssen

Luiten

Renes

, et al. Heritage planning and spatial development in The Netherlands: changing policies and perspectives. Int J Herit Stud 2014; 20(1): 1–21.

11.

Luo

Wang

Guo

, et al. Airborne and spaceborne remote sensing for archaeological and cultural heritage applications: a review of the century (1907–2017). Remote Sens Environ 2019; 232: 111280.

12.

Kitchley

Kumari

RM.

A framework to assess the contextual composite heat vulnerability index for a heritage city in India-A case study of Madurai. Sustain Cities Soc 2024; 101: 105119.

13.

Günaydin

Yücekaya

. Evaluation of the history of cities in the context of spatial configuration to preview their future. Sustain Cities Soc 2020; 59: 102202.

14.

Laugier

Abdullatif

Glatz

. Embedding the remote sensing monitoring of archaeological site damage at the local level: results from the “Archaeological practice and heritage protection in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq” project. PLoS One 2022; 17(6): e0269796.

15.

Zhang

Brandt

Tong

, et al. A large but transient carbon sink from urbanization and rural depopulation in China. Nat Sustain 2022; 5(4): 321–328.

16.

Nguyen

D-MT

T-N

Van Nghiem

, et al. Flood inundation assessment of UNESCO World Heritage Sites using remote sensing and spatial metrics in Hoi an City, Vietnam. Ecol Inf 2024; 79: 102427.

17.

Anselin

Interactive techniques and exploratory spatial data analysis.

18.

Fischer

Wang

. Spatial data analysis: models, methods and techniques. Heidelberg; Dordrecht; London; New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2011.

19.

Kwakkel

Carley

Chase

, et al. Visualizing geo-spatial data in science, technology and innovation. Technol Forecast Soc Change 2014; 81: 67–81.

20.

Ding

Fotheringham

. The integration of spatial analysis and GIS. Comput Environ Urban Syst 1992; 16(1): 3–19.

21.

Chuvieco

. Fundamentals of satellite remote sensing: an environmental approach. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2020.

22.

James

Robson

. Straightforward reconstruction of 3D surfaces and topography with a camera: accuracy and geoscience application. J Geophys Res 2012; 117: F03017.

23.

Kubat

Rab

Guney

, et al. Application of space syntax in developing a regeneration framework for Sharjah’s heritage area. In: Proceedings of the 8th international space syntax symposium. Santiago, Chile, 3–6 January 2012, pp. 3–6.

24.

Xiao

, et al. Understanding tourist space at a historic site through space syntax analysis: the case of Gulangyu, China. Tourism Manag 2016; 52: 30–43.

25.

Hegazi

Tahoon

Abdel-Fattah

, et al. Socio-spatial vulnerability assessment of heritage buildings through using space syntax. Heliyon 2022; 8(3): e09133.

26.

Kraak

M-J

Ormeling

. Cartography: visualization of geospatial data. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2020.

27.

Hochschild

Braun

Sommer

, et al. Visualizing landscapes by geospatial techniques. Modern approaches to the visualization of landscapes. Wiesbaden: RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft. Springer VS, 2020, pp. 47–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30956-5_4

28.

Pepe

Costantino

Alfio

, et al. Scan to BIM for the digital management and representation in 3D GIS environment of cultural heritage site. J Cult Herit 2021; 50: 115–125.

29.

McHaffie

Hwang

Follett

. GIS: an introduction to mapping technologies. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2023.

30.

Nettley

Anderson

De Silvey

, et al. Using terrestrial laser scanning and LiDAR data for photo-realistic visualisation of climate impacts at heritage sites. Int Arch Photogram Rem Sens Spatial Inf Sci 2012; 38: 223–229.

31.

Singh

Evans

Tan

, et al. Mapping and characterizing selected canopy tree species at the Angkor world heritage site in Cambodia using aerial data. PLoS One 2015; 10(4): e0121558.

32.

Zhao

Chen

, et al. 3D LiDAR and multi-technology collaboration for preservation of built heritage in China: a review. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2023; 116: 103156.

33.

Karantzalos

. Recent advances on 2D and 3D change detection in urban environments from remote sensing data. Computational approaches for urban environments. Switzerland: Springer, 2015, pp. 237–272.

34.

. Creating historical building models by deep fusion of multi-source heterogeneous data using residual 3D convolutional neural network. Int J Architect Herit 2023; 18: 1377–1393.

35.

Agapiou

Lysandrou

Alexakis

, et al. Cultural heritage management and monitoring using remote sensing data and GIS: the case study of Paphos area, Cyprus. Comput Environ Urban Syst 2015; 54: 230–239.

36.

Khan

Zaina

Abedin

, et al. Evaluation of risks to UNESCO World Heritage (WH) sites in Taxila, Pakistan using ground-based and satellite remote sensing techniques. J Cult Herit 2022; 55: 195–209.

37.

Wan

Guo

Luo

, et al. Different remote sensing indicators reveal the transitions of two states along elevation gradients within the Xinjiang Tianshan Bogda Natural World Heritage Site. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2022; 111: 102842.

38.

Palaiologou

Griffiths

. The uses of space syntax historical research for policy development in heritage urbanism. Cultural urban heritage: development, learning and landscape strategies. Switzerland: Springer, 2019, pp. 19–34.

39.

Panagiotopoulou

Somarakis

Stratigea

. Smartening up participatory cultural tourism planning in historical city centers. J Urban Technol 2020; 27(4): 3–26.

40.

Eldiasty

Sabry Hegazi

El-Khouly

. Using space syntax and TOPSIS to evaluate the conservation of urban heritage sites for possible UNESCO listing the case study of the historic centre of Rosetta, Egypt. Ain Shams Eng J 2021; 12(4): 4233–4245.

41.

Taherkhani

Hashempour

Lotfi

. Sustainable-resilient urban revitalization framework: residential buildings renovation in a historic district. J Clean Prod 2021; 286: 124952.

42.

Bagnolo

Paba

. UAV-based photogrammetry for archaeological heritage site survey and 3D modeling of the sardus pater temple (Italy). Int Arch Photogram Rem Sens Spatial Inf Sci 2019; 42: 45–51.

43.

Bakirman

Bayram

Akpinar

, et al. Implementation of ultra-light UAV systems for cultural heritage documentation. J Cult Herit 2020; 44: 174–184.

44.

Zhu

Chen

, et al. Earthquake-induced risk assessment of cultural heritage based on InSAR and seismic intensity: a case study of Zhalang temple affected by the 2021 Mw 7.4 Maduo (China) earthquake. Int J Disaster Risk Reduc 2023; 84: 103482.

45.

Richards

Brimblecombe

. The transfer of heritage modelling from research to practice. Herit Sci 2022; 10(1): 17.

46.

Chen

Yang

Zhao

, et al. Bibliometric analysis of spatial technology for world heritage: application, trend and potential paths. Rem Sens 2023; 15(19): 4695.

47.

Zhang

, et al. Basic types and evolutionary characteristics of the socialist built heritage in China, 1949–1978: bibliometrics analysis of the People’s Daily. Herit Sci 2024; 12(1): 19.

48.

Van Raan

. Advances in bibliometric analysis: research performance assessment and science mapping. In: Bibliometrics use and abuse in the review of research performance. London: Portland Press Ltd, 2014, pp. 17–28.

49.

Baas

Schotten

Plume

, et al. Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quant sci stud 2020; 1(1): 377–386.

50.

Liu

, et al. Emerging trends in GIS application on cultural heritage conservation: a review. Herit Sci 2024; 12(1): 139.

51.

Ferreira-Lopes

. Achieving the state of research pertaining to gis applications for cultural heritage by a systematic literature review. Int Arch Photogram Rem Sens Spatial Inf Sci 2018; 42: 169–175.

52.

Bassier

Vincke

de Lima Hernandez

, et al. An overview of innovative heritage deliverables based on remote sensing techniques. Rem Sens 2018; 10(10): 1607.

53.

De Fino

Galantucci

Fatiguso

. Condition assessment of heritage buildings via photogrammetry: a scoping review from the perspective of decision makers. Heritage 2023; 6(11): 7031–7067.

54.

Rubinowicz

Czyńska

. Study of city landscape heritage using LiDAR data and 3D-city models. Int Arch Photogram Rem Sens Spatial Inf Sci 2015; 40: 1395–1402.

55.

Adamopoulos

Rinaudo

. Close-range sensing and data fusion for built heritage inspection and monitoring—a review. Rem Sens 2021; 13(19): 3936.

56.

Ying

Koeva

Kuffer

, et al. Urban 3d modelling methods: a state-of-the-art review. In: XXIVth ISPRS congress. Germany: International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ISPRS), 2020, pp. 699–706.

57.

Yang

Grussenmeyer

Koehl

, et al. Review of built heritage modelling: integration of HBIM and other information techniques. J Cult Herit 2020; 46: 350–360.

58.

Aria

bibliometrix

. An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J informetr 2017; 11(4): 959–975.

59.

Van Eck

Waltman

. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010; 84(2): 523–538.

60.

Huang

. Bibliometric analysis of GIS applications in heritage studies based on Web of Science from 1994 to 2023. Herit Sci 2024; 12(1): 57.

61.

Godwin

. Visualizing systematic literature reviews to identify new areas of research. In: 2016 IEEE Frontiers in education conference (FIE), Eire, PA, 12–15 October 2016. IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–8.

62.

Van Eck

Waltman

. Visualizing bibliometric networks. In: Measuring scholarly impact: methods and practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 285–320.

63.

Loures

Vargues

Horta

. Landscape aesthetic and visual analysis facing the challenge of development of sustainable landscapes–A case study of the post-industrial area to the left margin of the Arade River. Int J DNE 2008; 3(1): 65–74.

64.

Elfadaly

Lasaponara

Murgante

, et al. Cultural heritage management using analysis of satellite images and advanced GIS techniques at East Luxor, Egypt and Kangavar, Iran (a comparison case study). In: Computational science and its applications–ICCSA 2017: 17th international conference, Trieste, Italy, 3–6 July 2017, Proceedings, Part IV. Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 152–168.

65.

Vermote

El Saleous

Justice

. Atmospheric correction of MODIS data in the visible to middle infrared: first results. Remote Sens Environ 2002; 83(1–2): 97–111.

66.

Wondie

Schneider

Melesse

, et al. Spatial and temporal land cover changes in the Simen Mountains National Park, a world heritage site in Northwestern Ethiopia. Rem Sens 2011; 3(4): 752–766.

67.

Hendrickx

De Laet

Stal

, et al. The use of high resolution digital surface models for change detection and viewshed analysis in the urban area around the pyramids of Giza, Egypt. In: Joint urban remote sensing event 2013, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 21–23 April 2013. IEEE, pp. 021–024.

68.

Bonafoni

Baldinelli

Verducci

. Sustainable strategies for smart cities: analysis of the town development effect on surface urban heat island through remote sensing methodologies. Sustain Cities Soc 2017; 29: 211–218.

69.

Appendino

. Balancing heritage conservation and sustainable development–the case of bordeaux. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering. Bristol, England: IOP Publishing, 2017.

70.

Mohamed

El-Raey

. Land cover classification and change detection analysis of Qaroun and Wadi El-Rayyan lakes using multi-temporal remotely sensed imagery. Environ Monit Assess 2019; 191: 1–19.

71.

T-C

. Environmental risk mapping of physical cultural heritage using an unmanned aerial remote sensing system: a case study of the Huang-Wei monument in Kinmen, Taiwan. J Cult Herit 2019; 39: 140–151.

72.

Chowdhury

Hasan

Abdullah-Al-Mamun

. Land use/land cover change assessment of Halda watershed using remote sensing and GIS. Egypt J Remote Sens Space Sci 2020; 23(1): 63–75.

73.

Foster

. Circular economy strategies for adaptive reuse of cultural heritage buildings to reduce environmental impacts. Resour Conserv Recycl 2020; 152: 104507.

74.

Chen

Ren

Zhang

. Cultural heritage as rural economic development: batik production amongst China’s Miao population. J Rural Stud 2021; 81: 182–193.

75.

Nebbia

Cilio

Bobomulloev

. Spatial risk assessment and the protection of cultural heritage in southern Tajikistan. J Cult Herit 2021; 49: 183–196.

76.

Ochungo

Khalaf

Merlo

, et al. Remote sensing for biocultural heritage preservation in an African semi-arid region: a case study of indigenous wells in northern Kenya and Southern Ethiopia. Rem Sens 2022; 14(2): 314.

77.

Chen

Guo

, et al. Sustainable development of World Cultural Heritage sites in China estimated from optical and SAR remotely sensed data. Remote Sens Environ 2023; 298: 113838.

78.

Aureli

Del Baldo

. Stakeholders’ consciousness of cultural heritage and the reconciliation of different needs for sustainable development. J Cult Herit Manag Sustain Dev 2023; 13(4): 964–982.

79.

Wang

Hei

Peng

, et al. Development of “air-ground data fusion” based LiDAR method: towards sustainable preservation and utilization of multiple-scaled historical blocks and buildings. Sustain Cities Soc 2023; 91: 104414.

80.

Ragheb

Aly

Ahmed

. Toward sustainable urban development of historical cities: case study of Fouh City, Egypt. Ain Shams Eng J 2022; 13(1): 101520.

81.

Bagwan

Gavali

. Does spatial resolution matter in the estimation of average annual soil loss by using RUSLE? A study of the Urmodi River Watershed (Maharashtra), India. Environ Monit Assess 2024; 196(2): 167. DOI: 10.1007/s10661-024-12341-7.

82.

Meskell

. Teardrops at the Taj: wicked problems of World Heritage preservation, pollution and politics. Int J Herit Stud 2024; 30: 438–453. DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2024.2315233.