Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Cultural Resources, Partnerships, and Science

Climate Change Response Program

In 2016 the National Park Service (NPS) celebrated the centennial of its 1916 Organic 

Act and the 50th anniversary of the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act 

(NHPA), which established the framework for the current national preservation program. 

The National Park Service Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy (CRCC Strategy)

responds to the mandates of both Acts. The CRCC Strategy provides guidance for NPS 

managers to anticipate, plan for, and respond to the real and potential effects of a 

changing climate on the cultural resources the 1916 Act commits us to protect unimpaired 

for future generations. Under the NHPA, it further provides guidance to our many partners 

in the national historic preservation program to recognize and respond to a wide range of 

environmental changes that are threatening cultural resources in communities throughout 

the Nation.

In 2014, NPS Director Jonathan Jarvis signed Climate Change and Stewardship of Cultural 

Resources, a policy memorandum outlining the NPS position on responding to climate 

change and its potential effects on cultural resources, emphasizing our stewardship and 

preservation program mandates. The CRCC Strategy represents an important step in 

providing direction for implementing the policies and direction of that memorandum. 

It defines the impacts of a changing climate on different cultural resources and organizes 

methods for evaluating these resources, assessing their vulnerabilities, and prioritizing our 

options to respond. It also recognizes that many of the resources we seek to preserve–from 

archeological sites to traditional structures and knowledge–hold valuable information on 

how earlier cultures responded to changing environments, can be part of a lower energydemand future, and can inform us about the origins of modern climate change. The CRCC 

Strategy underscores the critical importance of preserving the information represented 

in the most vulnerable of these resources, and of taking steps to target our survey and 

documentation programs to capture this information before the resources are lost to rising 

seas, fire, and pests.

The CRCC Strategy joins a family of policy and guidance developed by the NPS as part of its 

Climate Change Response Program (see listing on pg. 1). Working together with colleagues 

across disciplines and boundaries, we can continue to move forward and realize the goals 

of both the Organic Act and the NHPA–to preserve our irreplaceable cultural and natural 

heritage with their educational, aesthetic, inspirational, economic, and energy benefits for 

present and future generations.

Stephanie Toothman

Associate Director, Cultural Resources, Partnerships, and Science

National Park Service

December, 2016

FORWARD
“One of the most precious values of the national parks is their ability to 

teach us about ourselves and how we relate to the natural world. 

This important role may prove invaluable in the near future as we strive 

to understand and adapt to a changing climate.”

– NPS Director Jon Jarvis

Statement to U.S. Senate, October 2009

Recommended citation: 

Rockman, Marcy, Marissa Morgan, Sonya Ziaja, George Hambrecht, and Alison Meadow. 2016. Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy. 

Washington, DC: Cultural Resources, Partnerships, and Science and Climate Change Response Program, National Park Service.

Cover photo: “Weathering the storm in Cliff Palace” by Justin Kern (http://www.thegoldensieve.com/, reprinted with permission). 

Climate projections for the region surrounding Cliff Palace and Mesa Verde National Park in which it is located anticipate higher 

temperatures, with some uncertainty as to whether overall precipitation will increase or decrease. Risks to the remains of the homes of 

the Anasazi, who themselves experienced severe droughts nearly a millennium ago, include the effects of increased heat, wildfires, and 

subsequent erosion during extreme weather events.
CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

STRUCTURE OF THE STRATEGY 3

HOW TO USE THIS STRATEGY 6

GOAL 1: CONNECT IMPACTS AND INFORMATION 8

GRAPHIC 1: CONCEPT FRAMEWORK FOR CULTURAL RESOURCES 

AND CLIMATE CHANGE 9

GOAL 2: UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE 18

GRAPHIC 2: CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS TO CULTURAL RESOURCES 20-25

GOAL 3: INTEGRATE PRACTICE 26

GRAPHIC 3. INTEGRATING CLIMATE CHANGE INTO CULTURAL 

RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 27

GOAL 4: LEARN AND SHARE 40

GRAPHIC 4. CLIMATE CHANGE AND CULTURAL HERITAGE PARTNERS 

AROUND THE WORLD 41

REFERENCES 50

INTRODUCTION

(Opposite) Investment in repairs to Fort Jefferson, Dry Tortugas National 

Park, should consider historical integrity and long-term sustainability of 

the structure and the island, which are both vulnerable to climate change 

impacts (NPS Photo/M. Rockman).

Cultural resources are our record of the human 

experience. Collectively, archeological sites, cultural 

landscapes, ethnographic resources, museum collections, 

and historic buildings and structures connect one 

generation to the next. The National Park Service is 

charged with conserving cultural resources so that they 

may be enjoyed by future generations. Climate change 

is currently adding challenges to this role, and will 

continue to affect cultural resources in diverse ways. 

At the same time, through the tangible and intangible 

qualities they hold, cultural resources are also part of 

the solution to climate change. This Strategy sets out 

a vision and broad approach for managing impacts 

to and learning from cultural resources in this era of 

climate change.

The NPS Role for Cultural Resources

The National Park Service (NPS) is the lead federal agency in 

the United States for the care and management of cultural 

resources. Through the National Park System and national 

cultural resource programs such as the National Register of 

Historic Places and National Historic Landmark Programs, 

National Heritage Areas, American Battlefield Protection 

Program, National Scenic and National Historic Trails, the 

Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program, Technical 

Preservation Services, the National Center for Preservation 

Technology and Training, certification of local governments, 

and partnerships—including collaborations through the 

Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, and with Tribal 

governments, other Federal agencies, States, universities, and 

non-governmental partners—the NPS shapes the national 

framework for historic preservation inside parks and around 

the country.

Climate Change Threat

Modern anthropogenic climate change is the warming of the 

Earth’s atmosphere due to emissions of greenhouse gases, 

deriving largely from the burning of fossil fuels and changes 

in land use. This warming is leading to changes in average 

long-term weather patterns and is being experienced through 

phenomena such as the melting of glaciers, polar ice, and 

permafrost, increases in sea level and extreme temperatures 

(particularly heat), and changes in patterns of precipitation and 

extreme weather events. Ocean acidification also is occurring 

due to absorption of greenhouse gases by the oceans. 

The NPS Response to Climate Change

NPS Director Jon Jarvis has recognized climate change as “the 

greatest threat to the integrity of our national parks that we 

have ever experienced” (NPS 2010). In response, the NPS has 

taken an active role in addressing the issues climate change 

presents to parks and long-term resource stewardship. In 2009, 

the NPS established the Climate Change Response Program. 

Since then, the NPS has developed a family of documents 

that further support coordinated climate change response; 

to date these include: Climate Change Response Strategy

(2010), Climate Change Action Plan 2012-2014 (2012), 

Green Parks Plan (2012), Using Scenarios to Explore Climate 

Change: A Handbook for Practitioners (2013), and Director’s 

policy memoranda addressing management policies (PM12-

02), cultural resources (PM 14-02), and facilities (PM15-01). Climate 

change is being incorporated into park planning documents 

and regional climate change action plans and a range of 

park-level assessments and projects are connecting climate 

science, policy, and practice across the Service. This Strategy 

builds on the foundation of PM14-02 and is intended primarily 

as a companion document to the Climate Change Response 

Strategy (2010). It incorporates approaches and methods from 

other NPS documents throughout.

Purpose of this Strategy

The purpose of this Strategy is to set out the broad scope of 

cultural resources in relation to climate change and identify 

major directions of action in cultural resources and climate 

change for the NPS. These directions in turn will shape and 

help support collaboration with cultural resource partners, 

both nationally and internationally. The Goals of this Strategy 

will be relevant as long as modern climate change persists. As 

knowledge and practice of cultural resources stewardship in 

relation to climate change develop, additional goals may be 

needed and action plans, handbooks, and detailed guidance 

prepared to support ongoing stewardship.

 National Park Service 1
2 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
STRUCTURE OF THE STRATEGY

(Opposite) Rock art in Dominguez-Escalante National Conservation Area 

(BLM Photo/Bob Wick).

The NPS Director’s Policy Memorandum 14-02, Climate 

Change and Stewardship of Cultural Resources (hereafter PM 

14-02), released in 2014, set a foundation for management of 

cultural resources in the modern era of climate change. This 

foundation includes the following major points:

•	There are two primary and equal considerations for 

cultural resources in relation to climate change: 

“(1) cultural resources are primary sources of data 

regarding human interactions with environmental 

change; and (2) changing climates affect the 

preservation and maintenance of cultural resources”;

•	As the material components of cultural resources often 

cannot change with the environment around them, a 

focus for climate change adaptation is our management 

of them;

•	Management decisions for cultural resources should 

integrate diverse sources of information, prioritize 

according to vulnerability and significance, engage a 

broad array of stakeholders, and recognize the potential 

for loss; and

•	Through the stories and understanding they anchor, 

cultural resources hold an essential role in climate 

change communication.

Since PM 14-02 was released, the NPS has moved forward 

through the work of the NPS Climate Change Response 

Program, regions, programs, parks, and partners and gathered 

additional experience and identified new issues. This Strategy 

integrates the foundation of PM14-02 and the scope of 

climate practice across the NPS and its partners to date. Taken 

together, this Strategy is forward looking, but grounded in 

experiences and discoveries of recent years.

Using this background as a starting point, this Strategy sets out 

the following four overarching Goals for cultural resources and 

climate change:

•	 CONNECT IMPACTS AND INFORMATION

•	 UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE

•	 INTEGRATE PRACTICE

•	 LEARN AND SHARE

Building on the NPS 

Climate Change 

Response Strategy

The NPS Climate Change Response Strategy (CCRS, 

2010) established 15 Service-wide goals, ranging 

from use of best available science to reduction of 

carbon footprints to collaboration with diverse 

partners. This Strategy is inspired by these goals 

and has incorporated them throughout. The CCRS 

established Goal 7 explicitly for cultural resources: 

Develop, prioritize, and implement management 

strategies to preserve climate-sensitive cultural 

resources. This Strategy provides a strong and 

comprehensive basis for addressing Goal 7. The four 

objectives of the CCRS under its Goal 7 have been 

directly incorporated into this Strategy as follows:

Objective 7.1: Use the best available science 

to develop and apply a process to prioritize 

cultural resource adaptation projects that combine 

established management tools with newer methods, 

such as vulnerability assessments. 

This objective is incorporated into Goal 3 of this Strategy.

Objective 7.2: Increase the capacity and utility of 

the NPS Museum Program to preserve and protect 

resources. 

Work on this is underway in response to a directive 

in PM14-02. Tools to support this objective are also 

incorporated into Goal 2 of this Strategy.

Objective 7.3: Strengthen partnerships with 

traditionally associated peoples through consultation 

and civic engagement to ensure the preservation of 

ethnographically significant resources and continued 

access to these resources.

This objective incorporated into Goal 1, Goal 3, and 

Goal 4 of this Strategy.

Objective 7.4: Expand the NPS capacity to

conduct inventory and monitoring of archeological 

sites in anticipation of climate change impacts 

and support curation of artifacts and associated 

documentation.

This objective is incorporated into Goal 3 of this Strategy. 

 National Park Service 3
This Goal addresses the need to 

clearly indicate what it means to 

address climate change for cultural 

resources - what does climate change 

response for cultural resources look 

like? What are all of its parts? This 

Goal connects cultural resources 

to all four pillars of climate change 

response defined in the NPS Climate 

Change Response Strategy (2010) 

and responds to the call in PM14-02 

to “help guide our collective actions 

with respect to climate change.”

Work under Goal 1 Connect 

Impacts and Information begins 

with integrating the four pillars of 

climate change response identified 

in the NPS Climate Change Response 

Strategy (2010): science, adaptation, 

mitigation, and communication, 

with the two cultural resource 

management considerations set 

out by PM 14-02: addressing the 

effects of climate change (hereafter 

indicated by the term “Impacts”), 

and engaging with the capacity 

to learn from cultural resources 

(hereafter indicated by the term 

“Information”).This integration yields 

an eight-part concept framework 

that encompasses the full range of 

action needed to address the needs 

and potentials of cultural resources in 

relation to climate change. 

The concept framework developed 

under Goal 1 is a starting point 

for coordination and collaboration 

among and between partners. It is 

anticipated that no one institution 

will be able to work in all areas 

of the framework. However, the 

establishment of this framework 

provides a means to map priorities 

and planning and track diverse 

efforts to research and respond 

to climate change in relation to 

cultural resources. 

Set the broad scope of cultural resources and climate change response 

by connecting the concepts of impacts and information with the four 

pillars of climate change response: science, adaptation, mitigation, 

and communication.

GOALS 1

CONNECT IMPACTS

& INFORMATION

4 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Incorporate climate change into 

ongoing cultural resources research, 

planning, and stewardship.

Goal 3 recognizes that climate change 

data, projections, and responses 

must be an integral part of cultural 

resources management going 

forward. Climate change research, 

planning, and stewardship cannot be 

isolated to a given task, management 

phase, or practitioner, but rather must 

be ongoing and reflexive throughout 

the management cycle.

Goal 3 Integrate Practice sets the 

goal of aligning techniques that have 

been adopted particularly for the 

challenges of climate change, such 

as scenario planning and vulnerability 

assessment, with the processes of 

incorporating new climate information 

and changing climatic conditions into 

ongoing practices of cultural resources 

inventory, monitoring, management, 

education, and interpretation. This 

Goal draws from multiple topics set 

out in PM 14-02 for adaptation and 

decision-making, including:

1.C. Incorporation of Cultural 

 Resources into Sustainability;

2.A. Refocus Inventory 

 Responsibilities;

2.B. Integrate Resource Vulnerability 

 and Significance;

2.D. Consult Broadly;

2.E. Value Information from the Past;

2.F. Recognize Loss; and the 

 recognition that

3. “Every place has a climate story, 

 many have more than one.”

Collaborate with partners 

to grow and use the body of 

knowledge and practice for 

cultural resources and 

climate change.

Goal 4 addresses the urgency of 

global climate change and the 

collective nature of human heritage. 

Science to date is indicating diverse 

environmental changes, some rapid, 

which are or likely are attributable to 

climate change. These changes are 

adding new and variable stresses to 

cultural resources around the world. 

In turn, as cultural resources are 

connected to human experiences in 

specific places, capacity to learn from 

them also extends around the world. 

As set out in Goal 1, collaboration 

from the local to international scale 

to share information and ideas 

is needed to build a robust and 

sustainable climate change response 

for cultural resources. 

Goal 4 Learn and Share builds 

from the charge in PM 14-02 that 

“We must be well-informed and 

creative in our approach to resource 

management given the effects of 

climate change. The paths climate 

change will take remain uncertain so 

we must be open to the unexpected, 

search out new and useful ideas, 

and share the innovations we 

develop. This cannot be a NPS-only 

effort, but instead will require a 

collaborative approach in order to be 

successful. This effort will include our 

international partners, as we learn 

from their work and perspectives, 

and share our own.”

Coordinate science, management, 

and communication to identify 

and improve understanding of 

the effects of climate change on 

cultural resources.

Goal 2 sets directions for initial 

climate change impacts-based 

research. All parts of the framework 

set out in Goal 1 are important. 

However it is difficult to learn from 

cultural resources, develop adaptation 

strategies for them, or incorporate 

them into mitigation plans if they 

have been damaged or destroyed. 

Therefore, work under Goal 2 is 

foundational to undertaking or 

furthering work in other parts of the 

overall framework. 

Goal 2 Understand the Scope

builds from the charge in PM14-02 to

2.C. Understand the Range of 

Climate Change Effects: Cultural 

resources are vulnerable to dramatic 

and well-publicized effects of climate 

change, such as sea level rise or 

storm surge. Evidence from across 

the Service is beginning to indicate 

they are also vulnerable to inland 

and other more subtle effects of 

climate change, such as the impacts 

of more freeze/thaw cycles on stone 

walls or more rapid wetting and 

drying cycles on adobe buildings. 

We must improve our understanding 

of these additional impacts, address 

them in our stewardship practices, 

and be able to communicate them 

to the public.

2 3 4

UNDERSTAND

THE SCOPE

INTEGRATE

PRACTICE

LEARN

AND SHARE

 National Park Service 5
A diver examines the America shipwreck at Isle Royale National Park. 

Effects of climate change on submerged cultural resources are not yet 

well-defined (NPS Submerged Resources Center photo/Brett Seymour).

HOW TO USE THIS STRATEGY

Each Goal in this Strategy is organized with an introduction, 

directions for action, supporting tools, and a major summary 

figure or table (hereafter termed as a central graphic). Relevant 

case studies are included throughout. 

Goal introductions provide the context and basis for each Goal. 

Directions for Action list specific next steps that can be taken 

toward each Goal. These actions are phrased such that they 

speak most directly to NPS cultural resources management, 

although it is anticipated that many of these actions also will be 

relevant for partners.

Supporting tools follow the opening context on pages with 

broad colored sidebars. The supporting tool pages provide 

summaries of existing work or directions and knowledge, or 

definitions of concepts called out in the Goal introduction. 

These pages are not handbooks in the conventional sense, as in 

most cases policy, practice, and guidance for the issues at hand 

are still being developed. However, the tools sections point to 

such information where it is available.

The central graphics summarize the context and supporting 

tools of each Goal. In the case of Goal 2, Understand the 

Scope, the central graphic is the supporting tool for that Goal.

Case studies included within each Goal illustrate work that has 

already been done in a park or by a partner on an aspect of 

that Goal.

Sections of the Strategy can be combined and used in different 

ways. For example, for an overview of the connections between 

cultural resources and climate change, refer to the introductions 

of each Goal, particularly Goals 1 and 4. For practical information 

on how to address climate change within cultural resources 

management, refer to Goals 2 and 3. For examples of what has 

been accomplished to date in cultural resources and climate 

change, review the case studies across Goals 1, 3, and 4 and the 

central graphic of Goal 2.

6 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
 National Park Service 7
1 In cultural resources management, the term mitigation refers to the practice of reducing the adverse 

effects of human actions on cultural resources. This Strategy follows the climate change definition 

of mitigation which refers to reductions of greenhouse gas emissions and related concepts of energy 

efficiency and sustainability.

Melting ice patches, such as this one at Yellowstone National Park, are 

revealing artifacts that provide information on past environments and lifeways 

(NPS photo).

CONNECT IMPACTS 

AND INFORMATION

Set out the broad scope of cultural resources and climate change response by connecting the concepts 

of impacts and information with the four pillars of climate change response: science, adaptation, 

mitigation, and communication.

What does climate change response for cultural resources 

look like? What are its parts? The framework developed 

under Goal 1 sets out a vision of the broad scope of cultural 

resources and climate change and provides a starting point for 

coordination and collaboration within NPS and with partners. 

This framework provides a means to map priorities and plan 

and share diverse efforts to research and respond to climate 

change in relation to cultural resources. 

PM14-02 established two considerations for cultural resources 

management in relation to climate change:

NPS cultural resource management must keep in mind that 

(1) cultural resources are primary sources of data regarding 

human interactions with environmental change; and 

(2) changing climates affect the preservation and maintenance 

of cultural resources.

These two considerations can be summarized as 

(1) Information and (2) Impacts.

Hereafter, Impacts are discussed first, followed by Information. 

While these two considerations are of equal importance, this 

reversal recognizes that Impacts often are more familiar and 

Information can be lost or hard to use if resources are damaged. 

In turn, the NPS Climate Change Response Strategy (2010) set 

out four components, or pillars, for climate change response: 

science, adaptation, mitigation, and communication. Briefly, 

the science pillar encompasses gathering and testing of 

climate and impacts data and models. Adaptation develops 

flexible approaches for managing resources with respect 

to climate change. Mitigation reduces greenhouse gas 

emissions and improves energy efficiency and sustainability1. 

Communication shares information about climate change 

within the NPS and with partners and the public. 

Integrating the two cultural resources considerations, Impacts 

and Information, with the four pillars of NPS climate change 

response yields an eight-part framework, shown in Graphic 1, 

Concept Framework for Cultural Resources and Climate 

Change. In this framework, concepts on the Impacts side of 

each pillar relate to or describe practical resource management 

challenges presented by climate change. Concepts on 

the Information side are the data and meaning cultural 

resources can provide in response to questions raised by the 

phenomenon of climate change for resource management 

and society as a whole.

Taken together, this array of concepts is the broad scope of 

action, investigations, and connections needed to address 

the needs and potentials of cultural resources in relation to 

climate change. The concepts shown in Graphic 1 are not 

exhaustive; the topics listed are illustrative and other concepts 

and topics can be added as they develop. This framework will 

support integration of resource management across cultural 

and natural resources management and facilities management 

by organizing the diversity of cultural resource impacts and 

information topics, many of which overlap with natural 

resources and facilities management. 

The balance of this section of the Strategy provides more 

detail on topics listed in the concept framework. Goal 1 

Directions for Action are developed within each section of 

the framework.

1

8 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
SCIENCE MITIGATION

IMPACTS INFORMATION IMPACTS INFORMATION

•	 Climate science at 

cultural heritagerelevant scales

•	 Cultural resource 

(CR) vulnerability 

assessments

•	 CR inventory/monitoring 

techniques and protocols

•	 Integrated CR databasesgeographic information 

system (GIS)

•	 Preservation science

•	 Documentation science

•	 Paleoclimate/paleoecology

•	 Traditional ecological 

knowledge

•	 Social climatic 

thresholds

•	 Shifting baselines

•	 Past land use and 

human impacts on 

environments

•	 Paleogenetics

•	 Integration of historic 

buildings into energy 

efficiency plans

•	 Resource conservation 

through historic or 

native landscapes

•	 Reduce carbon footprint 

of CR management 

practices

•	 Past architectural and 

landscape techniques 

suited to local 

environments

•	 Cultural heritage to 

conserve/reestablish 

sense of place and 

community stewardship

ADAPTATION COMMUNICATION

IMPACTS INFORMATION IMPACTS INFORMATION

•	 Scenario planning

•	 Adaptation options

•	 Decision frameworks

•	 Disaster risk reduction/

response connections

•	 Policies and standards

•	 Contexts/theme studies 

to support decision 

frameworks

•	 Past social adaptability 

per environmental 

change

•	 Traditional ecological 

knowledge 

•	 Relating past adaptability 

to current issues, methods, 

and decisions 

•	 Cultural resources 

climate change 

(CR-CC) literacy

•	 Dialogue between 

impacts and information 

in all pillars 

•	 Links between CR-CC 

managers (local-tribalintl.)

•	 CR-CC links to public

Every Place has a 

Climate Story: 

•	 Change in material 

culture 

•	 Change in experience 

and lifeways

•	 Insights on change 

from past societies 

•	 Origins of the modern 

climate situation 

Graphic 1: Concept Framework for Cultural Resources and Climate Change. This framework applies two climate considerations 

for cultural resources, the effects of climate change on cultural resources (Impacts) and the capacity to learn about long-term 

human interactions with environmental and climatic change (Information), across the four pillars of the NPS climate change 

response: science, adaptation, mitigation, and communication (NPS 2010). The resulting matrix illustrates the broad scope of 

action needed to address the needs and potentials of cultural resources in relation to climate change.

 National Park Service 9
Case Study: Tumacácori

The Franciscan church of San Jose de Tumacácori is a more 

than 200-year-old adobe church and one of the fundamental resources of Tumacácori National Historical Park 

(TUMA) in southern Arizona. In 2010, following an intense 

early winter rainfall, a hole developed around the west 

sanctuary window and caused the loss of nearly a ton of 

adobe and two lintels. Later the same year, after the summer 

monsoon, a large portion of the north wall of the sacristy 

collapsed. In 2015, a fireplace in the convento collapsed 

following an intense and unusually timed autumn rainfall.

Analysis of historical temperature records since 1900 in the 

TUMA area shows that mean annual temperatures in the 

10-year interval 2003-2012 exceeded more than 90 percent 

of mean annual temperatures from the preceding century. 

Climate projections for the Southwest suggest that, along 

with increased temperatures, there will be less precipitation overall, with increased high intensity rainfalls and 

increased variability (meaning greater potential for heavy 

rainfall events at times of the year when previously they 

didn’t happen).

So can the damage that developed at TUMA in 2010 and 2015 

be linked to climate change? This is actually a difficult and 

complex question. To date, long-term monitoring of cultural 

resources in relation to environmental variables has been 

very limited. As well, assessment of damage such as seen at 

TUMA also must include preservation treatment histories, 

maintenance backlogs, condition of the building or resource, 

as well as the interactions of materials that make up cultural 

resources, such as adobe and gypsum plaster, with stresses 

caused by fluctuations in the local environment.

Therefore, in order to prepare for and better prevent similar 

damage in the future, recommendations out of the TUMA 

experience include cultural resource managers working 

more closely with climate scientists to understand fine-scale 

local climate patterns, increased local monitoring with real 

time weather stations, and working with material scientists 

to understand how changing climates could accelerate the 

breakdown of historic materials. This information should 

then inform the adaptation practice of scenario planning. 

(Sources: communication with TUMA staff 2016, Monahan and Fisichelli 2014, Moss 2010)

Adobe architecture of San Jose de Tumacácori Church is vulnerable to changes in rainfall (NPS photo).

Goal 1 Science-Impacts Directions for Action

•	Identify and monitor cultural resource condition 

assessment “vital signs”

•	Develop systems for indicating and comparing cultural 

resource vulnerability to climate impacts

•	Build and maintain geospatial (GIS) interconnections 

between cultural and other asset and resource databases

•	Identify gaps in resource inventory and documentation

•	Connect preservation and documentation techniques 

to climate impacts; identify gaps and develop new 

techniques as needed

Science of climate impacts to cultural resources encompasses the 

following cultural resource management challenges:

•	Identification of impacts and thresholds

•	Assessment of vulnerabilities

•	Monitoring for change

•	Techniques for preservation and documentation

Science Impacts concepts include:

Climate science at spatial and temporal scales relevant to 

cultural resources

Using spatial and temporal data appropriate to the effects of 

climate change on cultural resources

Vulnerability assessments

Connecting exposure to climate impacts with resource-specific 

sensitivities to determine impact risk at site-specific and regional scales 

Inventory and monitoring techniques and protocols

Integrating climate projections and associated impacts into baseline 

data gathering

Integrated databases and GIS

Using location to link existing descriptive databases and improve 

data consistency, quality, and accuracy

Preservation science

Developing and applying appropriate preservation tools developed 

by and with the historic preservation community to climatevulnerable resources

Documentation science

Developing and applying recording tools and documentation 

standards to climate-vulnerable resources

The Science pillar of climate change response gathers 

and develops climate data, models, and related data 

acquisition, analysis, and response techniques. Work 

in the Impacts area of Science for cultural resources 

SCIENCE

Impacts

10 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Case Study: De Soto National Memorial

Archeological sites in De Soto National Memorial (DESO), 

located on the Gulf Coast of Florida, include a series of 

seven curvilinear shell mounds. Pottery sherds and food 

remains mixed in with the shell confirm the mounds are 

middens (human-derived trash deposits), not natural shell 

deposits. Radiocarbon dating indicates the midden areas 

were occupied between 365 BC and AD 1395, with the inland mound being the oldest and those closest to the coast 

being the youngest. This dating pattern indicates shoreline 

progradation, meaning that when the site was first occupied 

the shoreline was further east than it is now. As the shoreline shifted westward, residents of the site moved with it, 

building new shell mounds along the new shorelines. 

But that is not the only evidence of change. Analysis of 

shell from across the mounds shows that the older ridges 

contain the greatest number of individual specimens of 

fish and the greatest diversity of fish. The decrease in abundance and biodiversity illustrated in these shell middens 

could have been due to climatic or environmental change, 

overexploitation of local resources, habitat degradation, 

or some combination of all three. Therefore, additional 

research is now underway to explore these possibilities.

(Source: Schwadron 2000)

Erosion of shell mounds is removing human and paleoclimatic history along the Florida Gulf Coast (NPS Photo).

Archeological, anthropological, and historical sciences and traditional 

ecological knowledge provide data and models that are part of 

addressing climate change questions such as:

•	How have climate and environments changed over time?

•	How have animal and plant communities changed in relation 

to human use over time?

•	How have humans changed environments and landscapes 

over time?

•	How did past climate and environmental changes translate 

into living conditions for human societies?

Science Information concepts include:

Paleoclimate/paleoecology

Using materials from archeological sites, collections, and other 

resources to identify previous changes in climate/environment

Traditional ecological knowledge

Working with traditional and indigenous communities to better 

understand historical trends, how they are changing, and longterm human interactions with those trends

Social climatic thresholds

Using paleoenvironmental and archeological data, traditional 

ecological knowledge, and ethnographic accounts to assess how 

measurable changes in climate and environment affected living 

conditions for different human groups and economies

Shifting baselines

Assessing what is considered “normal” for animal and plant 

communities and how such communities and perceptions of them 

may have changed over time

Past land use and human impacts on the environment

Assessing how humans have used, managed, and modified 

landscapes and resources over time

Paleogenetics

Using archeozoological and archeobotanical remains as sources 

of genetic material from populations adapted to different climatic 

and/or social conditions

Goal 1 Science-Information Directions for Action

•	Incorporate cultural resource science information 

concepts into collection and other research initiatives

•	Prioritize research applications addressing cultural 

resource science information concepts

•	Coordinate with funding partners to support research 

in cultural resource science information topics

SCIENCE

Information

applies these to the effects of climate change. Work 

in the Information area of Science builds climaterelevant data, models, and analyses from cultural 

resources and related fields of practice.

 National Park Service 11
Case Study: Gateway National 

Recreation Area

Gateway National Recreation Area (GATE), located in 

New York City and New Jersey, is made up of three park 

units. These include a large and diverse array of cultural 

resources, including a National Historic Landmark (Fort 

Hancock and Sandy Proving Ground), nine historic districts (cultural landscapes) and more than 600 historic 

structures, numerous gun batteries, airfields, missile silos, 

and prehistoric archeological sites. To better manage this 

inventory and its maintenance needs, GATE created a 

prioritization process for cultural resources, identifying 

management banding (preserve, stabilize, and ruin) that 

considered characteristics such as resource condition, use 

potential, and uniqueness. 

Unfortunately, the effects of climate change do not wait 

for planning; GATE’s prioritization work was incomplete 

when Hurricane Sandy hit on October 29, 2012, and had 

not yet incorporated climate change vulnerability. The 

experience of Hurricane Sandy made this an imperative. NPS staff used Sandy’s damage patterns to identify 

levels of resource vulnerability, as updated flood maps 

were not yet available. This data reorganized some of 

the resource prioritization orders, and a programmatic 

agreement between GATE and the New York and New 

Jersey Historic Preservation Office outlined a path for 

consultation regarding resources within the ruin band. 

The updated prioritization banding is now part of the 

GATE General Management Plan (GMP). While acknowledging that prioritizing the preservation of certain sites 

over others can be an uncomfortable fit with the ideals 

of the NPS mission, GATE’s experience with Hurricane 

Sandy confirmed that prioritization will help with good 

rapid decisions in the face of future challenges, and 

that planning is an important part of adaptation. Other NPS units, including but not limited to Yellowstone 

and Grand Teton National Parks and the National Capitol Region, are also undertaking prioritization processes for their cultural resources. Coordination of similar 

approaches across the Service, with cultural resource 

subject matter experts, will be an important next step.

(Source: GATE park staff, personal communications, 2013-16)

Goal 1 Adaptation-Impacts Directions for Action

•	Develop guidance to relate historic preservation 

legislation and programs to climate change adaptation 

•	Develop adaptation approaches for long-term climate 

change impacts and acute disasters

•	Build adaptation option case studies and guidance for 

cultural resources

•	Develop methods for prioritization of vulnerable cultural 

resources for adaptive action

•	Practice robust decision-making for cultural resources 

through scenario planning

Adaptation for climate impacts gathers interlinking approaches 

needed to address the diversity, variability, and uncertainty of climate 

change effects in cultural resources management, including:

•	Policy

•	Planning

•	Stewardship

•	Decision-making

Adaptation Impacts concepts include:

Scenario planning

Practice in flexible thinking and identification and testing of robust 

actions for cultural resources under uncertain future conditions

Adaptation options

Developing and testing an array of management options to best 

support cultural resources, given their vulnerability, significance, 

material thresholds, and other management considerations

Planning and decision frameworks

Integrating climate change into ongoing cultural resources research, 

planning, consultation, and stewardship practices

Connecting with disaster planning and response

Integrating cultural resources into disaster preparation and response 

plans and practices; Building consistency between climate change 

adaptation approaches for cultural resources and disaster preparation 

and response plans and practices

Context statements and theme studies

Research and analysis to incorporate capacity to learn about human 

adaptability from cultural resources into significance assessments and 

landscape scale decision-frameworks

Policies and guidelines

Support for adaptive management and decision-making

Adaptation has been defined by the Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change and adopted by the NPS (2010) 

as “an adjustment in natural or human systems that 

moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities in 

response to change.”

ADAPTATION

Impacts

Officer’s Row at Fort Hancock, Gateway National Recreation Area, was damaged during Superstorm Sandy in October 2012 (NPS photo).

12 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
As cultural resources are or may include non-living 

components, they have limited or no capacity to adapt 

to changing conditions. Climate change adaptation for 

cultural resources therefore lies in our use and management 

of them.

Case Study: Chumash, Channel Islands 

The Chumash people of central California, including the 

islands now encompassed within Channel Islands National Park (CHIS), have lived there for a very long time. 

Archeological research has illustrated changes in lifeways 

from earlier hunter-gatherer patterns to later settled villages with stratified society and complex craft traditions and 

trade connections.

Paleoenvironmental studies have added information about 

the world in which these lifeways were set. For instance, the 

period between AD 450 and 1300 was characterized by cold, 

highly unstable marine conditions, high marine productivity, and an inferred dry (low productivity) terrestrial climate. 

The later end of this time period, the Medieval Warm Period, is also known for extended droughts in the American 

Southwest, which contributed to migrations from that area 

and the depopulation of the settlements now preserved as 

ruins in Mesa Verde National Park and Chaco Culture National Historical Park, among others.

But the Chumash stayed in place. Archeological and linguistic evidence indicates social and economic changes, 

including expansion of and changes in the control of trade. 

In turn, bioarcheological evidence shows this time period 

was not without stress, through both malnutrition and an 

increase in violent conflict. 

Stories and ethnographic information shared by the Chumash in historic times includes an annual tradition that 

recognizes the ongoing uncertain balance of good weather 

and drought as a conflict between Coyote and the Sun. It 

is not known if this tradition was part of Chumash society during the Medieval Warm Period or captures their 

experiences during that time. Taken all together, however, the cultural history of the Chumash is an important 

touch point for the modern world in understanding concepts such as resilience, adaptation, change, persistence, 

and how different cultural systems can embody them.

(Source: Rockman 2012)

The Channel Islands were home to the Chumash California Indians for many generations (NPS photo).

The Information side of the Adaptation pillar provides the means 

to assess the pasts of civilizations, societies, social groups, and 

communities and ask: what does it mean to adapt? What do resilience 

and sustainability look like? No past society is a direct stand-in for the 

present. However, research in and information from the past across 

different temporal, geographic, and social scales allow us to explore 

and expand our ideas about what change and adjustment of human 

systems could look like. As such, information from cultural resources 

should be part of responses to the following questions:

•	How do we define adaptation and resilience for individuals, 

communities, and societies?

•	What do successful adaptation and resilience look like, for 

individuals, communities, and societies?

•	How have economies and societies changed through time, 

particularly in response to environmental change and disasters?

Adaptation Information concepts include:

Past social adaptability per environmental change

Assessing and testing models and definitions of adaptability, resilience, 

sustainability, and change with information from the past

Relating past adaptability to current issues, methods, and decisions

Examining the origins of modern environmentally related perspectives 

and behaviors to inform adaptation options going forward and 

finding inspiration for alternatives and the process for change through 

examples of past change 

Traditional ecological knowledge

Incorporating knowledge, traditions, practices, and ethnographic 

accounts/ethnohistory with connections to the local environment into 

adaptation plans and practices

Goal 1 Adaptation-Information Directions for Action

•	 Incorporate cultural resource adaptation information concepts 

into field, collections, and other research initiatives 

•	Prioritize research and workshop/conference applications 

addressing adaptation information concepts

•	Coordinate with funding partners to support research in 

cultural resource adaptation information topics

•	Practice incorporating insights from cultural resources 

adaptation information into adaptation planning

ADAPTATION

Information

 National Park Service 13
Case Study: Saint-Gaudens 

Window Repair

In 2010, Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site, located 

in western New Hampshire, acquired a neighboring 

property, Blow-Me-Down Farm, and incorporated it into 

the park. The farm, located directly on the banks of the 

Connecticut River, has nine historic structures that have 

yet to be restored and opened to the public, including a 

farmhouse, a large barn, and a dance hall. Recently, the 

park carried out a wooden window restoration project 

for the dance hall, which both kicked off stewardship 

of the new properties and provided training in historic 

preservation for NPS staff and members of the public. 

Although intended for preservation purposes, this project also helped mitigate climate change in two ways. First, 

by making the historic windows weathertight again, the 

building will be more energy efficient with minimum input of new materials. Second, by opening the class to the 

public, the park provided a basis for additional similar 

restorations in surrounding communities.1

This follows the recommendations of the NPS Technical 

Preservation Services, which notes that “The common 

misconception that replacing windows will save as much 

as 50% in energy costs is simply not true. The windows 

in many historic buildings have functioned for more 

than 100 years and, with regular maintenance, will usually survive longer and work better than any replacement 

window. A replacement window does not generally pay 

for itself in a reasonable length of time. Unlike historic 

windows, new window assemblies cannot be repaired; 

they can only be replaced once again. The sustainable 

choice is to repair historic windows whenever possible.”2

(Sources: 1. Fishburn 2013; 2. NPS Technical Preservation Services: Weatherization: Windows & Doors, http://www.nps.gov/tps/ sustainability/energy-efficiency/weatherization/

windows-doors.htm )

Goal 1 Mitigation-Impact Directions for Action

•	Maximize the energy efficiency of historic buildings 

through continued maintenance (such as caulking, etc.)

•	Reduce energy needs through use of original energysaving features (shutters, crosswinds, etc) and historic 

landscape management techniques

•	Following The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability 

for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, continue to add 

energy efficiency and renewable energy methods to 

historic buildings, landscapes, and parks

The impacts side of the Mitigation pillar addresses the role of cultural 

resources in achieving the management goals of: 

•	Reducing emissions of greenhouse gases

•	Improving energy efficiency

•	Enabling expanded use of renewable energy

Mitigation Impacts concepts include:

Integration of historic buildings into energy plans 

Continued use of existing buildings

Use of energy efficient technologies in alignment with maintenance 

of historic character

Resource conservation through historic or native landscapes

Use of native plants where appropriate to reduce water use and 

enhance pest control

Reduction of carbon footprint of cultural resource 

management practices

Reducing energy-intensiveness of cultural resources maintenance, 

research, and assessment techniques and practices

Mitigation addresses reduction of greenhouse gas 

emissions and overall environmental footprint. To date, 

both the Impacts and Information sides of this pillar 

focus on historic buildings and structures and cultural 

MITIGATION

Impacts

Historic window repair at Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site improves energy efficiency (NPS photo).

14 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
landscapes sectors of cultural resources, as buildings 

and landscape use and maintenance tend to be energy 

intensive. It is anticipated however, that all sectors of 

cultural resources can and will play a role in Mitigation.

Case Study: Mount Rainier Log Jams 

Roads in Mount Ranier National Park (MORA), in Washington, are an excellent example of rustic and naturalistic 

design. In fact, they are part of the MORA National Historic 

Landmark District, designated to recognize the NPS-wide 

influence of “NPS Rustic” architecture first developed at 

MORA. The roads follow the natural corridors of the mountain as much as possible. And road engineers in the 1910s 

– 1920s, including those who built Nisqually Road, used 

log structures to shore-up embankments, which were then 

revegetated with native species. These log-crib structures 

had several characteristics that made them well-suited to the 

environment around Mount Rainier: they reflected the natural environment of the region, provided habitat for native 

species, and their rough surfaces slowed the flow of river 

water, which helped them stay in place during flood events.

 However, beginning in the 1950s, road repair in MORA and 

elsewhere turned to the use of riprap – large, angular rocks 

placed at an angle of repose to support an embankment. 

These riprap embankments have not withstood the pressures of flooding in MORA. As average global temperatures 

warm and glaciers melt, MORA has experienced an increase in extreme flood events. Increases in glacial melting 

have led to an increase in the amount of sediment flowing 

downstream, which has caused aggradation of streams and 

rivers, leading in turn to higher floods. Even very large boulders in rip rap have washed away during extreme floods, 

taking large sections of road with them.

In response, MORA has begun repairing roads and constructing erosion control structures using log structures 

and engineered log-jams, techniques reminiscent of historic 

construction methods that preserve the naturalistic features 

of the park, are more resistant to flood damage, and provide 

habitat for fish and other aquatic species, including the 

threatened species Bull Trout. These log structures show 

how components of older technology, which had been 

designed with the immediate environment in mind, can 

increase the resiliency of infrastructure to the hazards, such 

as flooding, most common in that environment.

(Sources: Catton 1996, Dolan and Gilbert 2004, Walkinshaw and Dolan 2013)

Engineered logjam under construction at Mount Rainier National Park (NPS photo).

The information side of the Mitigation pillar engages with lower 

energy and resource use practices from the past and the broad 

scope of historical and present relationships between energy, 

lifeways, and place. 

As such, information from cultural resources can contribute to 

answering such questions as:

•	What are the many possible ways to live and build in a place 

that are energy and resource efficient?

•	How can the history of a place support environmental 

stewardship?

Mitigation Information concepts include:

Preserve and learn from past architectural and 

landscape techniques

Showcasing innovations and adaptations from the past and 

indigenous and traditional communities that used or use lower inputs 

of energy

Conserve or re-establish sense of place, which can support 

improved community and environmental stewardship 

Expanding and engaging historic preservation and public archeology 

at the community level

Goal 1 Mitigation-Information Directions for Action

•	Incorporate historic energy saving features into NPS 

Climate Friendly Parks training and other NPS Green Parks 

Plan programs

•	Share historic and landscape energy-saving features as a 

part of communication and interpretation plans

MITIGATION

Information

 National Park Service 15
Case Study: Climate Change 

Interpretation Training

Interpreting Climate Change is an NPS course developed 

by the Climate Change Response Program and the Stephen 

T. Mather Training Center to build skills in sharing climate 

change information with park audiences. Pre-course work 

includes basic training in the theory and methods of interpretation. The course then builds out practical knowledge 

and skills for interpreters to develop effective, engaging 

climate change programming for both natural and cultural sites. Participants work with a range of engagement 

techniques such as facilitated dialogue, skills for dealing 

with controversy, and presenting multiple perspectives. 

These and other techniques are applied to an overview of 

climate science and audience research. Participants share 

best practices and–through collaboration and group discussion–build confidence and identify meaningful climate 

change connection at their work sites. While the focus of 

this course is on personal interpretation, many of the best 

practices also apply to media development.

Cultural resources are integrated throughout the course 

through explorations of climate impacts to cultural resources, the historical development of climate change, and 

how cultures past and present have dealt with large-scale 

environmental change. The course is offered on a virtual 

platform – which saves travel costs and carbon! – and as a 

self-study module. Additional information can be found at: 

http://idp.eppley.org/icc.

Goal 1 Communication-Impacts Directions for Action

•	Incorporate cultural resources into climate change 

training and academies

•	Incorporate climate change topics/issues into cultural 

resources management training

•	Form and participate in formal and informal cultural 

resources and climate change networks and communities 

of practice

•	Develop and maintain cultural resources content in 

climate change communication platforms

•	Build or expand climate change components of 

community engagement, public archeology, and citizen 

science programs

The Impacts side of the Communication pillar addresses practical and 

coordination considerations for cultural resources climate change 

communication, such as:

•	Training programs

•	Publication, web, and social media platforms

•	Networks between practitioners

•	Community, volunteer, and youth connections

•	Tribal consultation

Communication Impacts concepts include:

Cultural resources climate change literacy 

Incorporating cultural resources topics and issues as part of climate 

change training

Dialogue between impacts and information across all pillars of 

climate change response

Establishing and maintaining connections between managers 

and researchers in science, adaptation, mitigation, and 

communications fields

Links between cultural resources-climate change managers 

(local-international)

Creating and participating in opportunities to share issues, approaches, 

and action across scales of management (local-international) practices

Cultural resources-climate change links to public

Creating and maintaining methods for sharing information about 

cultural resources and climate change with multiple audiences, 

including youth

Listening and partnering

Building and maintaining means of hearing from communities 

and providing opportunities for participation, volunteers, and 

collective action

Communication connects all of the pillars of climate change 

response and enables sharing of climate change information 

effectively within the NPS and with partners and the public. 

While there are strong connections between Impacts and 

Information for all cultural resource climate change pillars, 

these connections are particularly strong for Communication. 

COMMUNICATION

Impacts

Interpretation in action at Colonial National Historical Park (NPS photo).

16 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
In fact, for Communication, the Impacts side can be seen as 

establishing the pathways for communication, while the 

Information side helps with content for communication.

Case Study: Sample Climate Story,

Insights from the Past Theme,

Wupatki National Monument

As discussed further in Goal 3, climate change stories are 

vehicles for communicating best available sound science 

while connecting climate change, cultural resources, and 

an experience of place. Climate stories are not fiction, but 

research organized as a narrative. One approach to preparing climate stories is the AND, BUT, THEREFORE (ABT) 

method. For example:

Circa AD 1064, Sunset Crater in northern Arizona erupted. The area now known as Wupatki National Monument 

(WUPA), 15 miles north of Sunset Crater, received 2-4 

inches of ash and corn cobs encased in lava are evidence of 

the damage from the eruption. AND tree rings show that 

weather patterns in the area that had been wet turned dry 

at about this time and continued predominantly dry for 

several decades.

BUT despite the stresses of the eruption and change in 

climate, the local Sinagua people remained nearby. They 

moved to the plains below the crater, and began to farm 

again, with the addition of cinder mulch.

Stones and lithic material have been used to improve soil 

conditions in many places around the world in prehistory, 

but had not previously been used in northern Arizona. The 

cinders helped the dry soils retain moisture and may have 

improved farm yields beyond pre-eruption levels. Protection of the cinders may have waned after several decades, 

possibly alongside the continuing drought, but this innovation helped the Sinagua reestablish their lives after the 

volcanic disaster.

THEREFORE, the history and archeology of this area provide an example of traditional agriculture and innovation 

using local materials that may be useful in some places in the 

future as the climate becomes hotter and drier.

(Sources: for story content, N. Arendt (WUPA), personal communications, 2015; for 

And-But-Therefore storytelling method, see Olson (2015). For more about climate stories, 

see Goal 3.)

View of Sunset Crater from Wupatki National Monument (NPS photo).

The Information side of the Communication pillar is about the 

essential data and profound meanings of cultural resources for 

climate change shared well. These help us answer questions such as:

•	How can we connect the broad patterns of climate change 

with individual places?

•	How do we find meaning in cultural resources for the 

challenges climate change presents to contemporary societies?

•	How is climate change felt and understood at a human scale?

•	How can sound climate science be merged with narratives 

and storytelling?

Communication Information concepts are founded on the idea that 

every place has a climate story. It is possible to connect climate change 

and human heritage in any place that has been a home to people at 

some point in time through at least one of the following themes:

Change in the material world

How do we see change happening in the material world (houses, 

artifacts, monuments, landscapes) around us?

Change in experience and lifeways

How are traditional and indigenous communities experiencing change 

in their practices, lifeways, and in relation to traditional knowledge? 

How are modern communities experiencing change? How do 

memories of and expectations for local climate and environments 

connect with current climatic conditions?

Insights on change from past societies

How have past societies interacted with and responded to past 

climatic variability and environmental change?

Origins of modern climate change situation

How has the modern climate change situation come to be?

Goal 1 Communication-Information Directions for Action

•	Research and write climate stories of each park

•	Incorporate climate stories in park interpretation 

programming and other outreach and education materials

COMMUNICATION

Information

 National Park Service 17
UNDERSTAND 

THE SCOPE

Coordinate science, management, and communication to identify and improve understanding of the 

effects of climate change on cultural resources.

Cultural resources have always been subject to environmental 

forces. The risks of climate change for cultural resources lie 

in the alteration and recombination of these forces, which 

together are increasing the diversity and intensity of impacts 

on cultural resources.

According to the best available climate assessments, by the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the 

third U.S. National Climate Assessment, some global climatic 

changes are already underway and cannot be avoided. With 

continued greenhouse gas emissions, projections predict a 

hotter Earth with larger and more unpredictable swings in 

precipitation and increases in sea level.

Cultural resources, given their diversity of types (see next page), 

materials and locations, living and non-living components, 

and tangible and intangible elements, interact with climatic 

changes in diverse ways. Some climate change impacts on 

cultural resources are being observed across the NPS, both 

in coastal zones and in the interior. These include visible and 

sometimes dramatic effects of climate change, such as sea 

level rise, storm surges, and wildfires.

Evidence from across the NPS is also beginning to indicate 

cultural resources are vulnerable to other, more subtle 

processes as well, such as the impacts of more freeze/thaw 

cycles on stone materials or more rapid wetting and drying 

cycles on adobe buildings, and the loss of human knowledge 

traditionally associated with material culture.

All parts of the concept framework for cultural resources 

and climate change set out in Goal 1 (see Graphic 1, p.9) are 

important. However it is difficult to learn from cultural resources, 

develop adaptation strategies for them, or incorporate them 

into mitigation plans if they have been damaged or destroyed. 

Therefore, work under Goal 2 is foundational to undertaking 

or furthering work in other parts of the framework. 

Following from this, Goal 2 Directions for Action include: 

•	Continue research to identify the full range of effects of 

climate change on cultural resources. This may include 

citizen science.

•	Gather and further develop research to assess tipping 

points and thresholds of cultural resources with respect 

to climate change impacts

Graphic 2, Climate Change Impacts to Cultural Resources, 

provides a starting point for this work.

2

18 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy

Taos Pueblo threatened by the 2003 Encebado Fire (U.S. Forest Service photo/Ignacio Peralta, permission requested).
The following table, Graphic 2, is a first step in identifying 

the broad range of climate impacts to cultural resources, 

subtle to dramatic and coastal to interior, so that they can 

be included in stewardship practices. Given the diversity 

and uncertainty of climate change, this table cannot be 

exhaustive; other impacts to cultural resources likely will be 

identified as climatic changes develop.

However, it can be used as a guide for identified impacts 

and motivation for continued research, monitoring and 

understanding of all effects of climate change. While Graphic 2 

is designed to support resource managers and planners 

within the NPS, the resource types and associated impacts reach 

beyond the boundaries of parks and information throughout the 

table is applicable to much cultural heritage around the world. 

The table is organized according to the major trends of climate 

change: Temperature Change, Precipitation Change, Sea Level 

Rise, Combined Stressors, and Increased Greenhouse Gas 

(GHG) Emissions. Left hand columns in the table list the major 

observable phenomena of these climate trends, in other words 

– how these changing trends are being and will be experienced. 

These observable phenomena are how cultural resources are 

and will be exposed to climate change. The impacts listed 

within the table are examples of the sensitivities of cultural 

resources to climatic changes. Taken together, exposure and 

sensitivity are the primary components of cultural resources 

climate change vulnerability.

The impacts in this table were identified through a 

combination of literature review and consultation with cultural 

resource management specialists from across the NPS. An 

initial draft table was compiled from literature review which 

the specialists reviewed and expanded based on their field 

of expertise, including Archeology, Museum Collections, 

Cultural Landscapes, Ethnographic Resources, and Buildings 

and Structures. Subsequent peer review of the full table also 

included representatives from each cultural resource field.

Overall, Graphic 2 shows a diverse range of climate change 

impacts on cultural resources. Impacts include a combination 

of events and changing trends, which are occurring and 

will occur on coasts and throughout the interior. Given this 

diversity, it is likely that cultural resources in all park units are 

or will be affected by climate change in some way. 

Climate Change Impacts on 

Cultural Resources

Cultural Resources

Archeological Sites

Physical evidence of past human occupation or 

activity (prehistoric and historic archeological sites).

Cultural Landscapes

Geographic areas associated with a historic 

event, activity, or person; or that exhibits 

other cultural or aesthetic values (this category 

includes designed, vernacular, and ethnographic 

landscapes). Cultural landscapes encompass 

both cultural and natural resources as well as 

wildlife or domestic animals that have historic 

associations with the landscape.

Ethnographic Resources

Sites, structures, objects, landscapes, and natural 

resources or features of traditional importance 

to a contemporary cultural group through 

associations three generations or more in length. 

Museum Collections

Material things that possess scientific, historical, 

cultural, or aesthetic values (usually movable by 

nature or design).

Buildings and Structures 

Constructed works created to serve human activity 

(usually immovable by nature or design- buildings, 

bridges, earthworks, roads, rock cairns, etc.).

 National Park Service 19
3

Impact on Cultural Resources

Archeological Resources Cultural Landscapes Ethnographic Resources Museum Collections Buildings & Structures

Increased Global Temperature

• Microcracking of site contexts 

from thermal stress1

• Faster deterioration of newly 

exposed artifacts and sites2

• Deterioration of newly 

exposed materials from 

melting alpine snow patches3

• Accelerated rusting in 

submerged and littoral 

resources from warmer ocean 

temperatures1

• More rapid decay of organic 

materials1

• Damage from increased 

biological activity at shallow 

(~<100m) underwater sites61

• Increased risk of damage due 

to decline/loss of protective 

sea grass or nearby coral 

reefs61,62

• Decline/disappearance of 

some vegetation species, 

other species favored4

• Heat stress on culturally 

significant vegetation4

• Increased stress (e.g. 

desiccation, warping, 

cracking, etc.) on 

constructed landscape 

features4

• Loss of necessary habitat for 

culturally significant species4

• Potential loss of culturally 

significant species due to 

increased disease threat5

• Changes in prevalence of 

culturally relevant plant and 

animal species60

• Changes to crop yields and 

food security6

• Limited winter hunting from 

increased winter snows5

• Limited access to hunting 

areas due to reduced sea ice7

• Altered place meaning due to 

loss of snow pack7

Facilities

• Increased stresses on HVAC 

systems in storage facilities8

• Increased space constraints 

due to more items requiring 

protection in storage facilities8

• Increased need for 

environmental controls in 

facilities/house collections9

Collections (without 

appropriate climate controls)

• Increased rate of chemical 

decay11

• Increased stress due to 

fluctuations in environmental 

conditions10

• Increased crystallization 

of efflorescent salts due 

to increased evaporation 

rates, leading to increased 

rates of structural cracking, 

deterioration1

• Increased demand for complex 

air conditioning systems that 

can add stress to the building 

envelope and often requires 

significant alterations to a 

structure (including insulation, 

routing of extensive ducts and 

pipes, etc.)12

Increase Freeze/Thaw Cycles

• More rapid decay of organic 

materials1

• Disruption of soil structure, 

especially in permafrost26

• Destruction of archeological 

deposits due to increased 

solifluction (downhill flow of 

saturated soil) activity3

• Increased rates of 

deterioration in metals from 

thermal stress27

• Decline/disappearance of 

some vegetation species 

due to recurrent freezing4

• More rapid deterioration 

of constructed materials 

of landscape features 

(e.g. corrosion, decay, 

desiccation)4

• Food stress or starvation of 

foraging animals (horse, 

caribou) from impenetrable 

ice layers more likely to form 

on grazing fields5

Facilities

• Surface cracking, flaking, 

and sugaring building stone 

and spalling of brick due to 

increase in wet-frost1,10, 16

• Greater structural damage due 

to fluctuating environment, 

causing cracks in building 

that allow more access for 

pests to invade and damage 

collections10

• Surface cracking, flaking, and 

sugaring of building stone and 

spalling of brick due to increase 

in wet-frost1,10,16

• Damage to foundations due to 

increased frost heave action1

• Spalling and collapse of caves 

and bedrock alcoves onto 

structures inside them22

• Increased absorption of salts 

from road and sidewalk 

treatments which can lead to 

efflorescence, cracking, and 

spalling, etc.12

Permafrost Melt

• Loss of artifacts and contexts 

from increased erosion6

• More rapid decay of organic 

materials26

• Disruption of stratigraphy 

from changed soil structure, 

solifluction52

• Decline/disappearance of 

some vegetation species4

• More rapid decay, 

dessication of constructed 

materials of landscape 

features4

• Destruction of land and 

buildings due to increased 

coastal erosion6

• Forced relocation of 

communities5

• Loss of access to wildlife 

corridors due to terrain that 

can no longer be traversed by 

foot or vehicle15

Facilities 

• Destabilization of buildings 

from cracks in foundations 

and other infrastructure10

• Destabilization of buildings; 

settlement into the ground6,16

• More rapid decay of organic 

building materials16,48

• Change in use or abandonment 

due to changes in access as the 

surrounding ground becomes 

boggy22

Higher Relative Humidity

• More rapid decay of organic 

materials16

• Increased corrosion of 

vulnerable/less stable metals2

• Increased mold, especially 

in enclosed sites (e.g. vaults, 

tumuli, and caves)2

• Decline/disappearance of 

critical vegetation species, 

other species favored4

• Increased desiccation, 

warping, and cracking 

of constructed landscape 

features4

• Decline/disappearance of 

important vegetation species, 

other species favored4

• Increase/spread of some 

vegetation species4

Facilities

• Increased wear on HVAC 

systems, and energy use to 

stabilize drastic changes in 

humidity28

Collections (without 

appropriate climate controls)

• Increased rusting/corrosion of 

metals16

• Damage to paintings8

• Warping, cracking of wood16

• Damage to archival, paper, 

book, and photo collections10

• Increased risk of mold, 

especially organic collections10

• Increased salt damage to 

ceramics with humidity 

fluctuations11

• Increase in pest populations29

• Accelerated deterioration 

of museum items exhibited 

outside19

• For brick and porous stone, 

increased moisture absorption, 

leading to increased risk of frost 

damage, mold growth, and 

stress from salt crystalization16

• Decrease in crystallization and 

dissolution of salts within stone 

and masonry16

• Sulfur dioxide deposits on wet/

damp surfaces, corroding stone, 

metal, and glass16

• Swelling and cracking of 

wooden building materials and 

architectural features16

• Increased growth of destructive 

organisms (e.g. mold, algae) for 

wood, stone, and masonry16,22

• Increased potential for rot 

in wood and other organic 

material16

Temperature Change Climate Change Related Impacts by Cultural Resource Increased Wind

• Increased moisture 

penetration into porous 

materials20

• Burial through redistribution 

of soil14

• Abrasion of petroglyph and 

pictoglyphs14

• Erosion and deflation of 

archeological deposits2

• Damage or loss of 

culturally significant 

plants4

• Change in historic/

culturally significant 

vegetation patterns4

• Increase in need for 

protective structures that 

shelter landscapes4

• Reduced access to marine 

hunting grounds due to 

stronger/unusual wind 

patterns and shifting sea ice7

• Reduced access to animals in 

open spaces due to wind chills 

that drop temperatures15

Collections

• Damage to wooden, paper, 

textile and organic objects 

from decreased relative 

humidity10

• Direct wind damage16

• Scouring/abrasion of exterior 

surfaces1

• Increased cracking, spalling, 

splintering, weathering of 

buildings due to accelerated 

drying1

• Damage from wind borne 

debris2

20 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
4

Impact on Cultural Resources

Archeological Resources Cultural Landscapes Ethnographic Resources Museum Collections Buildings & Structures

Increased Wildfire

During Fire

• Damage or destruction of 

associated structures30

• Heat alteration of artifacts30

• Heat fracturing of stone 

artifacts30

• Paint oxidation, color 

change30

• Physical damage from 

firefighting efforts (fire 

lines)30

• Decreased accuracy of 

carbon-14 dating due to 

carbon contamination30

Post-Fire

• Damage from fire-killed tree 

fall30

• Increased susceptibility to 

erosion and flooding31

• Increased looting after fire 

exposure31

• Loss or damage of 

associated structures23

• Change in vegetation 

density and composition4

• Bedrock and border 

spalls23

• Increased susceptibility to 

erosion and flooding23

• Loss of soil fertility due to 

high heat23

• Damage to structure and/

or associated cultural 

landscape from fire 

retardants22

During Fire

• Discoloration, exfoliation, 

spalling, and smudging of 

culturally significant rock 

images, geoglyphs30

• Change in subsistence 

resources over large areas15

• Loss of traditional 

knowledge due to change/

loss of culturally significant 

resources15

• Loss of critical and/or 

culturally significant species 

due to decreased soil fertility 

from high heat30

Post-Fire

• Altered migratory patterns of 

traditionally hunted animals6

• Significant alteration of 

landscape features critical for 

navigating during foraging, 

hunting, or other necessary 

movements30

Facilities

• Damage to storage facilities 

and contents8

• Increased strain on existing 

museum facility and staff 

due to increased advance 

preparation and salvage 

operations32

• Smoke damage, strain on 

HVAC systems29

Collections

• Damage to items and 

disassociation of materials 

and records during emergency 

evacuations11

During Fire

• Damage or loss of whole 

structures, or combustible 

components22

• Cracking, physical damage of 

masonry components from 

extreme thermal stress30

• Discoloration caused by smoke 

and/or heat30

• Damage from fire-killed tree 

fall30

• Damage to structure and/or 

associated cultural landscape 

from fire retardants22

Post-Fire

• Buildings may shift or settle due 

to associated erosion33,22

• Pressure to change character 

defining features such as wood 

shake roofing to fire resistant 

alternatives34

Changes in Seasonality and Phenology

• Site disruption from longer 

growing seasons and/or 

changing land use (irrigation 

use, harvest times)13

• Changes in site or regional 

accessibility14

• Reductions or alterations 

in length and timing of 

archeological field seasons, 

affecting capacity for 

identification or mitigation 

of climate and other 

impacts14

• Possible reductions in site 

visibility14

• Loss of synchronicity 

between species54

• Altered landscapes due to 

shifts in blooming times54

• Loss of pollinators reduces 

plant fertility in historic 

agricultural landscapes4

• Loss of synchronicity between 

species54

• Potential loss or reduction 

of plants used for medicine 

and ceremonies performed at 

particular times of the year15

• Loss of plants used for 

ceremonies, medicine, and 

food due to early frosts15

• Shifts in migratory patterns 

of significant marine animals 

due to changes in sea ice7

• Limited access to winter 

marine hunting areas due to 

longer summers7

• Food sources threatened by 

shifts in harvest time (esp. 

feed for herd animals)5

Facilities, Collections

• Increased stress on buildings 

and materials due to increased 

range of temperature swings 

during seasonal transitions 

(particularly collections 

without appropriate climate 

controls)9

• Longer growing seasons lead 

to increased growth of invasive 

vegetation12

Species Shift

• Physical damage, loss 

of integrity, and spatial 

coherence from new/

increased plant growth16

• Physical impacts from 

associated adaptive behavior 

of animals following plant 

species movements2

• Disruption from new 

foraging or nesting animals, 

including insects2

• Changes in soil chemistry due 

to root penetration of new 

vegetation17

• Increased shrub growth on 

former tundra, may obscure 

features and artifacts3

• Possible reductions in site 

visibility14

• Changes in historic/

culturally significant 

vegetation patterns4

• Emigration and/or local 

extinction of culturally 

significant species5

• Changes in landscape 

appearance from altered 

growth patterns of 

lichen16

• Loss of major food sources42

• Loss of culturally significant 

plant and animal species5

• Altered appearance of 

important ceremonial sites42

• Breaks in memory, traditions, 

and context due to loss 

of species, species access, 

resource predictibility18

Collections

• Increased need to expand 

voucher specimens (used for 

reference) in collection19

• Increased need to identify 

existing voucher specimens, 

many uncatalogued in nonfederal repositories, to serve 

as baselines19

• Increased growth of destructive 

organisms as temperatures 

warm (e.g. mold, algae)1

• New threats to historic 

structures as incoming/

colonizing species use them as 

habitat22

• Spread of destructive vegetative 

species (like kudzu) farther 

north into new areas12

• Loss of species that are 

necessary for historically 

appropriate repairs20

• New/different micro-organisms 

cover surfaces of stone buildings 

- may reduce deterioration 

(possible benefit)21

Temperature Change, cont’d Climate Change Related Impacts by Cultural Resource Invasive Species/Pests

• Physical damage, loss 

of integrity and spatial 

coherence from altered 

habitat structure16

• Data loss, subsidence, feature 

collapse, structural damage 

from invasive consuming 

organics2

• Damage from new and 

increased number of 

burrowing animals23

• Possible reductions in site 

visibility14

• Potential loss of 

significant plants due to 

introduction of new pests4

• Potential biological 

selection pressure for 

incompatible vegetation 

or other biotic species 4

• Changes in viewsheds 

(e.g. battlefield parks)24

• Damage to distribution of 

subsistence crops, culturally 

significant plants5

• Loss of culturally important 

animals due to changes in 

habitat from invasive plant 

species15

Facilities

• Need for updated integrated 

pest management plans to 

account for new pest risks11

• Invasion of pests via new 

routes created by thermal 

stress on facility11

Collections

• Increase in pest populations 

that damage organic materials 

(animal skins, wool)11

• New threats to wood structures 

and wooden architectural 

features as termites and other 

pests expand territory due to 

warmer, longer summers25

• Spread of destructive vegetative 

species (like kudzu) farther 

north into new areas12

 National Park Service 21
5

Impact on Cultural Resources

Archeological 

Resources Cultural Landscapes Ethnographic Resources Museum Collections Buildings & Structures

Less Precipitation/Drought

• Loss of stratigraphic 

integrity due to crack/

heave damage in 

drier soils17

• Destabilization 

of wetland or 

waterlogged sites13

• Exposure of 

submerged sites due 

to lower water levels 

in lakes14

• Sites more vulnerable 

to fire and wind14

• Increased exposure 

from vegetation loss 

and erosion14

• Water stress may 

inhibit growth of 

some species4

• Decline/disappearance 

of some vegetation 

species; other species 

favored4

• Soil infertility due to 

decreased microbial 

activity4

• Limited water supply 

inhibits established 

maintenance 

practices17

• Increased soil erosion4

• Challenges to current 

irrigation practices4

• Stress on culturally significant 

species impacts subsistence 

practices6

• Indirect effects to ceremonial 

cycles and religious practices 

involving weather control15

• Decline/disappearance of 

important vegetation species, 

other species favored23

• Loss of some harvestable 

animals15

• Disruption of social networks 

dependent upon regular water 

supplies (transportation)15

• Loss of regular sources of 

water for drinking, medicine, 

ceremony, paints, etc.15

• Loss of culturally relevant 

plants and animals15

• Limitation on travel due to 

loss of water sources15

Facilities

• Limited water supply for 

cooling, landscaping, other 

equipment8

• Reduced humidity stress on 

building (possible benefit)23

Collections (without appropriate 

climate controls)

• Damage to wooden, paper, 

textile and organic objects from 

drying due to lower relative 

humidity10

• Increase in dry salt deposits near 

masonry and porous stone which 

hydrate and infiltrate during 

infrequent rain events causing spalls 

and fractures12,1

• Reduced humidity stress on buildings 

(possible benefit)23

• Cracking and splitting of wooden/

organic features due to complete 

drying12

More Precipitation and/or Heavier Precipitation

• Site erosion from 

overflow and new 

flood channels17

• Soil destabilization/

shifting (ground 

heave, landslide, 

subsidence)14

• Damage to 

unexcavated artifact 

and site integrity 

from direct force of 

water35

• Increased tree fall due 

to waterlogging17

• Limited ability to 

plant in waterlogged 

soil4

• Loss of historical 

integrity with 

improved drainage 

systems17

• Decline/disappearance 

of some vegetation 

species4

• Decreased soil 

fertility from erosion, 

waterlogging, 

leaching4

• Loss of landscape 

features4

• Increased 

susceptibility to 

destructive fungi36

• Erosion of 

earthworks24

• Disruption or delay 

of traditional 

maintenance practices 

(e.g. burning)24

• Altered harvest times, 

especially haying in herd 

cultures due to changes in 

precipitation patterns5

• Delays in planting cycles, 

shifting whole agricultural 

calendar6

• Increasing difficulty in 

predicting storms37

• Indirect effects to ceremonial 

cycles and religious practices 

involving weather control15

Facilities

• Added strain on existing 

museum facilities and staff due 

to salvage operations32

• Potential leaks in collection 

storage areas and potential 

wetting of museum objects10

• Increased cracking associated 

with ground heave and 

subsidence; destabilization of 

buildings and pipes10

Collections (without appropriate 

climate controls)

• Increase risk of mold, especially 

organic collections10

• Increase rusting/corrosion of 

metals10

• Humidity damage to paintings10

• Warp, crack, damage wood10

• Humidity damage to archival, 

paper, book, and photo 

collections10

• Swelling/distortion of wooden building 

materials and architecture features 

due to wetness and damp38

• Increased risk of rot and fungal/insect 

attack38

• Historic building drainage systems 

unable to cope with downpours17

• Erosion of supporting ground around 

structure38

• Sewage backup and overflow leading 

to saturation and related flooding, 

contamination and damage22

• Increased rates of deterioration due 

to increase frost events in cold regions 

that were formerly dry21

• Accelerated decay of masonry units 

and mortars due to increased extremes 

of wetting and drying39

• Cracks in building infrastructure and 

associated destabilization of buildings 

and pipes due to ground heave and 

subsidence/ shrink swell soils10

• Severe damage and loss of historic 

structures made of adobe12

• Spalling, weathering of wood, brick, 

and stone materials due to salt 

infiltration during drying1

• Corrosion of external masonry from 

agricultural runoff40

• Increased pressure to relocate or 

elevate structures, and/or surrounding 

structures23

Increase of Flooding Events

During Flood

• Direct physical 

damage to site, from 

floating materials 

during floods14

• Destruction/loss 

of artifacts during 

flooding16

• Site erosion from 

overflow and new 

flood channels17

Post-Flood

• Increased risk of postflood subsidence17

• Impacts from postflood mitigation 

(clean up, 

construction)14

• Wash out or damage 

to roads, trails, and 

landscape features 

throughout parks4

• Decline/disappearance 

of important 

vegetation species, 

other species favored4

• Loss of landscape 

features4

• Loss of cultural places due to 

inundation/saturation5

• Loss/disruption of the use of 

foraging grounds5

• Loss of both plant and animal 

species for subsistence, 

medicine, ceremony, etc15

• Degradation of vital coral 

reef habitats from increased 

sediment discharge42

Facilities

• Added strain on existing 

museum facilities and staff due 

to salvage operations32

• Damage to items and 

disassociation of materials 

and records during emergency 

evacuations19

• Structural collapse from 

moving force of floodwaters, 

particularly from flash floods41

• Sewage backup and overflow 

leading to saturation and 

related flooding, contamination 

and damage22

• Walls "implode" from 

hydrostatic force of standing 

water41

• Damage to utilities, generators, 

and electrical systems51

Collections

• Increased rusting/corrosion of 

metals10

• Increased risk of rot/insect 

attack, mold and mildew10,16

• Swelling/distortion of absorbent 

objects (such as wood) due to 

wetting10,38

• Widespread, unpredictable 

direct damage and destruction 

from flood waters10

During Flood

• Structural collapse from moving force 

of floodwaters particularly during flash 

floods41

• Sewage backup and overflow leading 

to saturation and related flooding , 

contamination and damage22

• Walls “implode” from hydrostatic 

force of standing water41

• Damage to utilities, generators and 

electrical systems51

Post-Flood

• Increased risk of rot, fungal/insect 

attack, mold and mildew38

• Swelling/distortion of wooden building 

materials and architecture features 

due to inundation38

• Spalling, weathering of wood, brick, 

and stone materials due to salt 

infiltration during drying1

• Corrosion of external masonry from 

agricultural runoff40

• Increased pressure to relocate or 

elevate structures, and/or surrounding 

structures (may also be pre-flood)23

Precipitation Change Climate Change Related Impacts by Cultural Resource

22 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
6

Impact on Cultural Resources

Archeological Resources Cultural Landscapes Ethnographic Resources Museum Collections Buildings & Structures

Inundation and 

Increased flooding events 

• Total submersion of 

coastal sites20

• Downstream movement 

of items due to 

undercut shoreline 

sediments4

• Changes in pH of 

buried artifacts and/or 

buried environments20

• Reduced site integrity 

due to ground heave 

and subsidence14

• Increased risk of looting 

from exposure14

• Increased erosion 

of sites due to 

encroaching water 

levels, wave action 

exposure, and increased 

exposure to wet/dry 

cycles36

• Variable damage/

loss of organic and 

inorganic materials 

and landscape 

features20

• Decline/

disappearance of 

some vegetation 

species, other 

species favored4

• Soil erosion4

• Soil infertility due 

to waterlogged, 

anaerobic 

conditions4

• Loss of or limited 

access to traditional 

places43 and culturally 

important sites (e.g. 

burial grounds, 

subsistence areas)48

• Loss of plant and 

animal species for 

subsistence, medicine, 

ceremony, etc15,20

• Submersion of 

homelands in 

island and coastal 

communities42 and 

corresponding stresses 

to and loss of social 

connections and 

interactions 20

Facilities

• Added strain on existing museum 

facilities and staff due to salvage 

operations32

• Increased cracking associated with 

ground heave and subsidence10

• Potential leaks in collection storage 

areas and potential wetting of 

museum objects10

Collections

• Increase risk of mold10

• Increase rusting/corrosion of metals10

• Damage and destruction post-flood 

from humidity and moisture28

During Flood

• Submersion of coastal sites22

• Increase in nuisance flooding leading to 

problems of access and higher likelihood of 

range of flood damage53

• Damage to or overwhelming of drainage 

systems, leading to associated building 

damage53

Post-Flood

• Deterioration/corrosion of infrastructure 

not designed for inundation or salt water 

exposure53

• Increased cracking due to associated ground 

heave and subsidence10

• Crystallization of salts introduced to 

buildings by seawater22

• Disassociation of historic districts, settings 

due to increased pressure to relocate or 

elevate structures or surrounding structures23

• Loss of access leading to loss of use60

(See also: Precipitation: More Rainfall/Heavier 

Downpours, Increased Flooding Events; Sea 

Level Rise: Storm Surge)

Increased Frequency and/or Severity of Storm Surges

During Surge:

• Destruction - total site 

loss17

• Erosion from wave 

action17

Post-Surge

• Disturbance or removal 

during response and 

clean-up14

(See also: Precipitation: 

Increased Flooding 

Events)

• Immediate 

alteration/

destruction of 

historic landscape44

• Decline/

disappearance of 

some vegetation 

species, other 

species favored4

• Soil infertility from 

soil erosion, loss of 

topsoil4

• Loss of landscape 

features4

• Increased risk of 

inundation of homes 

and towns, esp. during 

unpredictable and 

extreme weather42

• Increased risk of loss 

of natural and cultural 

resources15

• Increased risk of loss of 

traditional knowledge 

associated with natural 

and cultural resources15

Facilities

• Added strain on existing museum 

facilities and staff due to emergency 

operations22,54

• Damage to utilities, generators and 

electrical systems51

• Structural collapse from moving 

force of storm surge41

• Changes to surrounding landforms or 

vegetation, which may affect future 

drainage38

Collections

• Damage to items and disassociation 

of materials and records during 

emergency evacuations19

• Increase risk of rot, fungal/insect 

attack, mold and mildew10

• Increase rusting/corrosion of metals10

• Widespread damage and 

disassociation from flood waters10

(See also: Precipitation: Increased 

Flooding Events)

During Surge

• Structural damage or collapse from moving 

force of storm surge41

• Damage to utilities, generators and electrical 

systems51

Post-Surge

• Cracks in building and associated 

destabilization of buildings and pipes due to 

ground heave and subsidence/shrink-swell 

soils10

• Erosion of supporting ground around 

structure38

• Changes to surrounding landforms, which 

may affect future drainage38

• Increased pressure to relocate or elevate 

structures, and/or surrounding structures 

(may also be pre-flood)23

(See also: Precipitation: More Rainfall/Heavier 

Downpours, Increased Flooding Events)

Increased Coastal Erosion

• Full loss of coastal sites 

and artifacts17

• Partial loss of sites and 

artifacts14

• Exposure of new and 

known archeological 

sites16

• Altered erosion 

patterns from 

reduction/changes in 

Arctic sea ice3

• Increased risk of looting 

from exposure14

• Decline/

disappearance of 

some vegetation 

species, other 

species favored4

• Soil infertility from 

loss of topsoil4

• Loss or compromise 

of associated 

structures23

• Loss of cultural 

memory and 

connections to 

homeland due to 

increased migration 

and splitting 

of traditional 

communities42

• Loss of culturally 

significant symbols, 

plants, and animals6

• Increased risk of loss of 

traditional knowledge 

associated with both 

natural and cultural 

resources15

Facilities

• Limited storage capacity to protect 

growing numbers of at-risk artifacts54

• Added strain on existing museum 

facilities and staff due to salvage 

operations32

• Loss or compromise of structure23

• Increased pressure to relocate or elevate 

structures, and/or surrounding structures23

• Increased rusting, corrosion, and salt 

deposits due to increased salt in the 

environment as the coastline encroaches12

Higher Water Table

• Damage to artifacts, 

stratigraphy, soil 

features from 

saturation of site from 

below14

• Decline 

disappearance 

of important 

vegetation species, 

other species 

favored4

• Soil infertility due 

to waterlogged, 

anaerobic 

conditions4

• Loss of or limited 

access to culturally 

important sites (eg 

burial grounds)18

• Decrease in 

productivity of arable 

land15

Facilities

• Potential for higher relative humidity 

levels in collections storage areas10

• Increased risk of rising damp/rot 

from higher water tables17

• Rising damp, often marked by efflorescence/

salt deposits12

• Rot of subsurface components from higher 

water table17

• Flooding damage in basements and other 

below grade features22

• Structural damage due to buoyant forces12

Sea Level Rise Climate Change Related Impacts by Cultural Resource

 National Park Service 23
7

Impact on Cultural Resources

Archeological Resources Cultural Landscapes Ethnographic Resources Museum Collections Buildings & Structures

Salt Water Intrusion

• Deterioration of some 

artifacts due to change 

in surrounding soil and 

water chemistry14,20

• Compromise of the site 

due to changes in soil 

and water chemistry14,22

• Decline/disappearance of 

important vegetation species4

• Soil infertility4

• Reduction in or loss of habitat for 

culturally significant plants and 

animals6

• Loss of drinking water supplies6

• Loss of arable land for growing 

crops15

• Loss of some harvestable animals15

Collections

• Increased risk of corrosion/

rusting10

• Increased risk of 

corrosion/rusting16

• Introduction of additional 

salts into the ground and 

into building materials22

Extreme Weather Events

• Erosion of coastal sites 

due to higher, stronger 

storm surges17

• Disturbance/exposure/

burial due to stronger 

wave action45

• Deflation or abrasion 

due to stronger 

winds2,14

• Disturbance or removal 

during response and 

clean-up14

• Destabilization/damage 

to underwater sites 

through movement 

of sediment and/or 

protective vegetation62

(See also: Temperature 

Change: Increased Wind; 

Precipitation: Heavier 

Downpours; Sea Level 

Rise: Increased Storm 

Surge)

• Immediate alteration/

destruction of historic 

landscape44, particularly trees57

• Decline/dissappearance of 

some vegetation species, other 

species favored4, particularly 

colonizing species in disturbed 

areas57

• Reduction in or loss of access 

due to washing out or damage 

to roads, trails, and landscape 

features4

(See also: Temperature Change: 

Increased Wind; Precipitation: 

Heavier Downpours; Sea Level 

Rise: Increased Storm Surge)

• Potential straining of connections 

between traditional knowledge and 

extreme events37,47

• Limited access to cultural sites due to 

increased closures of parks and other 

areas13

• Need for new emergency response 

plans due to changes in hurricane 

strengths and tracks9, and 

surrounding land use practices49

(See also: Temperature Change: 

Increased Wind; Precipitation: Heavier 

Downpours, Increased Flooding 

Events; Sea Level Rise: Increased Storm 

Surge)

Facilities

• Direct damage from wind and 

wind-blown rain8,54 

• Damage from wind-borne 

debris2

• Limited relocation 

opportunities due to growing 

demands for storage 

facilities51

• Added strain on existing 

museum facilities and staff 

due to salvage operations32 

• Cracked pipes and swelling 

due to large and rapid 

temperature swings54

•

(See also: Temperature Change: 

Increased Wind; Precipitation: 

Heavier Downpours; Sea Level 

Rise: Increased Storm Surge)

• Added stress from sudden 

thermal expansion/shock16

• Direct damage from 

wind-blown rain54

• Damage from wind-borne 

debris2

• Cracked pipes and 

swelling due to large 

temperature swings54

(See also: Temperature 

Change: Increased Wind; 

Precipitation: Heavier 

Downpours; Sea Level Rise: 

Increased Storm Surge)

Pollution

• Rusting due to 

increased CO2 

exposure16

• Artifacts threatened 

by pesticides used 

to combat invasive 

species59

• Dissolution of stone due 

to increases in acid rain, 

particulate matter, and groundlevel ozone26

• Decline/disappearance of some 

vegetation species inc. favored4

• Soil infertility due to toxicity 

and depletion of nutrients4

• Loss of landscape features, 

especially plantings, buildings4

• Bleaching/damage to coral reefs42

• Reduction or loss of culturally 

significant view sheds4

• Increased difficulty for young and 

elderly people to perform outdoor 

harvesting tasks15

• Potential erosion or deterioration 

of pictographs still visited by 

contemporary peoples for prayer or 

ceremony15

Facilities

• Increased need for special air 

filtration for repositories19

Collections

• Corrosion of metal objects 

and films: pitting and 

perforation, deterioration/

loss of coating48

• Erosion of carbonate 

stones due to acidic 

precipitation1

• Continued stone 

blackening1

• Increased chemical 

weathering of stone 

materials due to 

altered atmospheric 

composition21

• Cracked walls and 

increased water 

penetration due to 

corrosion48

Development

• Disruption/damage 

from fire management 

(eg fire lines)30

• Disruption/damage 

from changing land 

use30

• Degraded site integrity 

due to climate 

change mitigation (eg 

construction of levees 

and dams, dredging)35

• Increased risk of looting 

or vandalism23

• Heightened 

vulnerability to 

landslides due to 

land use changes and 

increased rainfall and 

runoff pressures50

• Increased abundance of 

invasive species along 

roadways4

• Degraded integrity of historic 

viewsheds4

• Loss of undeveloped buffer 

areas around cultural 

landscapes4

• Loss of culturally significant 

plants from soil compaction, 

limited root zones, 

temperature stress from heat 

island effect, high urban soil 

contaminant levels36

• Loss of adjacent natural habitat 

for native species36

• Increased development in Arctic due 

to warmer conditions6

• Loss of food sources due to 

habitat loss, fragmentation, 

over-exploitation46

• Reduction or loss of adaptive 

flexibility due to development 

encroachment6

• Loss of access to traditional cultural 

places, including landscapes15

• Loss of coral reefs critical for tropical 

fish habitats needed for local 

subsistence and marine tourism42

• Loss of ancestral homelands that are 

considered sacred15

• Loss of traditional knowledge 

associated with natural and cultural 

features on the landscape15

Facilities

• Added strain on existing 

museum facilities and staff 

due to environmental 

research compliance and 

salvage operations32,23

• Potential for fracking-induced 

earthquake damage29

• Increased conflicts of 

land-use needs due to 

population growth/

urbanization58

• Loss of historic character 

due to changes to the site 

or setting63

Combined Stressors Climate Change Related Impacts by Cultural Resource

Impact on Cultural Resources

Archeological Resources Cultural Landscapes Ethnographic Resources Museum 

Collections Buildings & Structures

Ocean Acidification 

• Metal corrosion in submerged 

resources45

• Degradation of stonework, 

especially limestone and 

mortar in coastal areas2

• Possible acceleration in cliff 

erosion where cliffs have lime 

or shell components55

• Increased risk of damage to 

shipwrecks due to loss/decline 

of protective concretions and/

or nearby coral reefs61,62

• Coastal soil erosion/

infertility4

• Loss or deterioration 

of culturally significant 

landscape features4

• Decline in reefs, vital to subsistence cultures, from coral 

bleaching56

• Physical abnormalities, including weakened shells, in 

traditional food sources42

• Weakened/destroyed local economies dependent on 

shellfish supplies51

• Possible increased degradation of rock art along shores 

that is sacred to and visited by contemporary peoples15

Impacts not 

identified

Impacts not identified

Increased GHG Emissions

24 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
8

Citations Climate Change Related Impacts by Cultural Resource

Reviewers included: Overall: George Hambrecht. Archeology: David Gadsby, Kristie Haertel, Teresa Moyer, Jay Sturdevant, Jeff Rasic. Cultural Landscapes: Kristen Allen, Susan Dolan, 

Bob Page. Ethnographic Resources: Mark Calamia, Mike Evans, Rachel Mason, Joe Watkins. Museum Collections: Brynn Bender, Linda Blaser, Christopher Houlette, Stephanie Stephens, 

Samantha Richert, Ron Wilson. Buildings and Structures: Brian Goeken, Rick Kendall, Jenny Parker, Randall Skierik. 

Acknowledgments:

1. Stein, Eric and Kendall, Rick. 2013. "Historic Structures and 

Climate Change: How Long is Perpetuity?" Saint-Gaudens 

National Historical Site, National Park Service.

2. David Gadsby, Archeologist, National Park Service. Personal 

communication, March 19, 2014.

3. Jeffrey Rasic, Chief of Resources, Gates of the Arctic National 

Park & Preserve, National Park Service. Personal communication, 

March 13, 2014.

4. Susan Dolan, Program Manager, Park Cultural Landscapes, 

National Park Service. Personal communication, December 12, 

2013.

5. Crate, Susan A. 2008. "Gone the Bull of Winter? Grappling with 

Cultural Implications of and Anthropology's Role(s) in Global 

Climate Change." Current Anthropology 49(4):569-95.

6. Nakashima, D. J., K. Galloway McLean, H. D. Thulstrup, A. 

Ramos Castillo, and J. T. Rubis. 2012. Weathering Uncertainty: 

Traditional Knowledge for Climate Change Assessment and 

Adaptation. Paris: UNESCO and Darwin: UNU.

7. Ford, James D., Barry Smith, Johanna Wandel, Allurut Mishak, 

Kik Shappa, Harry Ittursarjuat, and Kevin Qrunnut. 2008. "Climate 

Change in the Arctic: Current and Future Vulnerability in Two Inuit 

Communities in Canada." The Geographic Journal 174(1):55.

8. Ron Wilson, Chief Curator, National Park Service. Personal 

communication, November 21, 2013.

9. Stephanie Stephens, Senior Curator, Alaska Regional Office, 

National Park Service. Personal Communication, March 26, 2014.

10. Linda A. Blaser, Associate Manager, Museum Conservation 

Services, Harpers Ferry Center, National Park Service. Personal 

communication, December 10, 2013.

11. Brynn Bender, Senior Conservator, Conservation Laboratory, 

National Park Service. Personal communication, April 18, 2014.

12. Jenny Parker, Architectural Historian, National Park Service. 

Personal communication, March 3, 2015.

13. Hyslop, Ewan. 2013. "Climate Change and Cultural Heritage: 

The Challenge Facing Historic Scotland." Lecture at Centre for 

Sustainable Heritage, University College London, March 21.

14. Teresa Moyer, Archeologist, National Park Service. Personal 

communication. February 17, 2015.

15. Mark Calamia, Cultural Resources Program Manager & Tribal 

Liaison, Pipestone National Monument, National Park Service. 

Personal communication, February 27, 2015.

16. Sabbioni, C, Peter Brimblecombe, May Cassar, and Noah's Ark 

(Project). The Atlas of Climate Change Impact on European Cultural 

Heritage: Scientific Analysis and Management Strategies. London; 

New York: Anthem 2010: 22.

17. Cassar, May. 2005. Climate Change and the Historic 

Environment. London: Centre for Sustainable Heritage, University 

College London.

18. Rachel Mason, Senior Cultural Anthropologist, Alaska Regional 

Office, National Park Service. Personal communication, March 

25, 2014.

19. Tef Rodeffer, Program Manager, Museum Services, Western 

Archeological Conservation Center, National Park Service. 

Personal communication, February 27, 2015.

20. Colette, Augustin (editor). 2007. Climate Change and World 

Heritage: Report on Predicting and Managing the Impacts of Climate 

Change on World Heritage and Strategy to Assist State Parties to 

Implement Appropriate Management Response. Paris: UNESCO 

World Heritage Centre.

21. Viles, Heather A. 2002. Implications of Future Climate Change 

for Stone Deterioration. In Natural Stone, Weathering Phenomena, 

Conservation Strategies and Case Studies, Special Publication 205, 

edited by S. Siegesmund, S. A. Vollbrecht and T. Weiss, 407-18. 

London: Geological Society of London. 

22. Randy Skeirik, Historical Architect, Vanishing Treasures 

Program, National Park Service. Personal communication, 

February 23, 2015.

23. Marcy Rockman, Climate Change Adaptation Coordinator 

for Cultural Resources, National Park Service. Personal 

communication, April 29, 2014.

24. Kristen Allen, Resource Manager, Richmond National 

Battlefield Park, National Park Service. Personal communication, 

February 28, 2014.

25. Lang, Sang Hee and Tae Soon Chon. 2011. "Effects of Climate 

Change on Subterranean Termite Territory Size: A Simulation 

Study." Journal of Insect Science 11(80):1-14.

26. Grossi, C. M. and P. Brimblecombe. 2007. "Effect of Long-Term 

Changes in Air Pollution and Climate on the Decay and Blackening 

of European Stone Buildings." Special Publications 127:117-130. 

London: Geological Society. 

27. Jay Sturdevant, Archeologist, Midwest Archeological Center, 

National Park Service. Personal communication, March 19, 2014.

28. Samantha Richert, Curator, North Cascades National Park, 

National Park Service. Personal communication, March 27, 2014.

29. Stephen Damm, Museum Specialist, National Park Service. 

Personal communication, February 23, 2015.

30. Ryan, Kevin C., Ann Trinkle Jones, Cassandra L. Koerner, 

Kristine M. Lee (eds). 2012. Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects 

of Fire on Cultural Resources and Archeology. General Technical 

Report RMRS-GTR-42 volume 3. Fort Collins: Forest Service.

31. Yosemite National Park. 2015. "Cultural Resources and 

Fire."Accessed November 12. http://www.nps.gov/yose/

historyculture/cultural-fire.htm

32. Christopher Houlette, Museum Curator, Yukon-Charley 

Rivers National Preserve, National Park Service. Personal 

communication, March 26, 2014.

33. Mesa Verde: Archeology and Fire. 2007. National Park Service. 

Available at: https://www.nps.gov/meve/learn/management/

upload/arch_fire_effects.pdf.

34. Sueann Brown, Historical Architect, Pacific West Region, 

National Park Service. Personal communication, February 24, 

2015.

35. Howard, A. J., K. Challis, J. Holden, M. Kincey, and D. G. 

Passmore. 2008. "The Impact of Climate Change on Archeological 

Resources in Britain: A Catchment Scale Assessment." Climactic 

Change 91(3-4):414

36. Barrett, Shannon Taylor. 2013. Climate Change and Historic 

Trees: Adaptive Strategies for Land Managers. Master's thesis, 

Middle State Tennessee University.

37. Berkes, Fikret and Dyanna Jolly. 2001. "Conservation Ecology: 

Adapting to Climate Change: Social-Ecological Resilience in a 

Canadian Western Arctic Community." Conservation Ecology

5(2):18.

38. Pickles, David. 2010. Flooding and Historic Buildings. London: 

English Heritage.

39. Historic Scotland. 2012. A Climate Action Plan for Historic 

Scotland 2012-2017. Edinburgh

40. Sanders, C. H. and M. C. Phillipson. 2003. "UK Adaptation 

Strategy and Technical Measures: The Impacts of Climate Change 

on Buildings." Building Research & Information 31(3-4):213.

41. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2008. 

Floodplain Management Bulletin. FEMA P-467-2.

42. Lefthand-Begay, Clarita, Kalei Nu'uhiwa, Ted Herrera, and 

Nelson Kanuk. 2012. Witnesses to Climate Change: Our Reflections 

on the 2012 First Stewards Symposium. Available at www.

firststewards.org.

43. Holz, Debra, Adam Markham, Kate Cell, and Brenda Ekwurzel. 

2014. National Landmarks at Risk: How Rising Seas, Floods, and 

Wildfires are Threatening the United States' Most Cherished Historic 

Sites. Washington, DC: Union of Concerned Scientists. 

44. Caffrey, Maria and Rebecca Beavers. 2013. "Planning for the 

Impact of Sea Level Rise on U.S. National Parks." Park Science

30(1):6-13.

45. Dunkley, Mark. 2013. "Oceanic Climate Change and 

Underwater Archeology." September 12. Heritage Calling: An 

Historic England Blog. https://heritagecalling.com/2013/09/12/

oceanic-climate-change-and-underwater-archeology/. 

46. National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate

Adaptation Partnership. 2012. National Fish, Wildlife and Plants 

Climate Adaptation Strategy. Washington, DC: Association of Fish 

and Wildlife Agencies, Council on Environmental Quality, Great 

Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

47. Shaw, Rajib, Noralene Uy, and Jennifer Baumwoll. 2008. 

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction: Good Practices 

and Lessons Learned from Experiences in the Asia Pacific Region. 

United Nations, Bangkok: International Strategy for Disaster Risk 

Reduction.

48. Watt, John, Johan Tidbald, and Vladimir Kucera. 2009. The 

Effects of Air Pollution on Cultural Heritage. New York: Springer

49. Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, 

(eds). 2014. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third 

National Climate Assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Global Change 

Research Program.

50. National Geographic. 2014. "Surveying Landslides in the U.S." 

Accessed May 27, 2014. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/

news/2014/04/140422-surveying-american-landslides-interactive/. 

51. Jennifer Nersesian, Superintendent, Gateway National 

Recreation Area, National Park Service. Personal communication, 

August 19, 2014.

52. Brimblecombe, Peter and Carlota M. Grossi. 2007. "Damage 

to Buildings from Future Climate and Pollution." APT Bulletin

38(2-3):16.

53. Sweet, William, Joseph Park, John Marra, Chris Zervas, 

Stephen Gill. 2014. Sea Level Rise and Nuisance Flood Frequency 

Changes around the United States. NOAA Technical Report NOS 

CO-OPS 073. Silver Spring: National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. 

54. Rick Kendall, Superintendent, Saint-Gaudens National Historic 

Site, National Park Service. Personal communication, August 12, 

2012.

55. Newland, Michael. 2013. The Potential Effects of Climate Change 

on Cultural Resources with Point Reyes National Seashore, Marin 

County, California. Rohnert Park: Archeological Services Center, 

Sonoma State University.

56.Nature Conservancy. 2015. "Reef Resiliency: Bleaching 

Impacts." Accessed July 9. http://www.reefresilience.org/coralreefs/ stressors/bleaching/bleaching-impacts/.

57. Britt, Tad. 2013. "Archeology Sites After Disasters." National 

Center for Preservation Technology and Training. Accessed August 

27. https://ncptt.nps.gov/blog/archaeological-sites-after-disaters/. 

 58. Hsiang, Solomon M., Marshall Burke, and Edward Miguel. 

2013. Quantifying the Influence of Climate on Human Conflict. 

Science 341: 1235367.

59. National Center for Preservation Technology and Training. 

1998. Archaeological Site Revegetation, Organochloride-Based 

Pesticides, PCBs and Their Relationships to Resource Preservation 

and Protection. Natchitoches: National Park Service

60. Living on Earth. 2014. "Tangier: The Shrinking Island in 

the Chesapeake." Aired July 11. http://loe.org/shows/segments.

html?programID=14-P13-00028&segmentID=6.

61. Jeneva Wright. in review. Maritime Archeology and Climate 

Change: An Invitation. Journal of Maritime Archeology.

62. Dave Conlin, Chief, Submerged Resources Center, National 

Park Service. Personal communication, April 27, 2016.

63. Weeks, Kay G. and Anne E. Grimmer. 1995. The Secretary of 

the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with 

Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, & Reconstructing 

Historic Buildings. Washington, DC: National Park Service, Heritage 

Preservation Services.

Recommended Citation:

Morgan, Marissa, Marcy Rockman, Caitlin Smith, and Alison Meadow. 2016. Climate Change Impacts on Cultural Resources. Cultural Resources Partnerships and Science. Washington, DC: 

National Park Service.

 National Park Service 25
Detailed preservation work on adobe at Tumacácori National Historical 

Park (NPS photo).

Under current projections, even with the most effective global 

mitigation, development of and impacts from climate change 

are anticipated to continue for decades to come. Therefore, 

climate change data, projections, and responses must be 

an integral part of cultural resources management going 

forward. Climate change should not be isolated to a given 

task, management phase, or program, but rather should be 

ongoing and reflexive throughout the management cycle.

Integrating climate change into cultural resources 

management is a merging process. On the one hand, climate 

change response has developed data and adopted techniques 

to characterize risk from changing climatic conditions and 

respond to long-term uncertainty, such as climatic projections, 

vulnerability assessment, scenario planning, and climate change 

communication. Cultural resource managers must determine 

how best to employ these climate data and techniques so that 

they address the specific considerations of cultural resources, 

including tangible and intangible components, integrity and 

significance, and connections to place and communities.

On the other hand, it also is necessary to incorporate new 

climate data and changing climatic conditions into ongoing 

cultural resource management practice, including mandates 

of National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Sections 106 and 

110, such as inventory, significance evaluation, treatment, 

and consultation.

Overarching these processes are the ongoing needs to 

continue to improve sustainability and reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions and connect climate change practice with disaster 

preparedness and response plans. 

Goal 3 sets the broad objective of climate change-cultural 

resource integration. Many NPS programs, regions, and 

parks have already or are developing detailed climate change 

guidance, action, and stewardship plans which include cultural 

resources in a variety of ways. Goal 3 supports these diverse 

efforts by organizing and illustrating points of intersection 

between developing approaches for climate change and 

established cultural resources management practice. 

Therefore, the Goal 3 Directions for Action include: 

• Merge cultural resources with major climate change 

 approaches, 

- Sustainability and mitigation 

- Disaster risk reduction and response

- Scenario planning

- Climate change communication

• Integrate climate change into ongoing cultural resource

 management practices, 

- Research

- Planning

- Stewardship

Graphic 3 Cultural Resources-Climate Change Integration 

Flow Chart, provides a schematic for both of these broad 

Directions for Action. Climate data and actions (drawn from 

Goal 1, Science pillar) are integrated with major categories of 

cultural resources management to outline practices of climate 

adaptive management. Relative positions of approaches from 

Adaptation, Mitigation, and Communication pillars (from Goal 1) 

and groupings of actions according to NPS Management 

Policies 2006 are shown alongside. Complexity of the resulting 

graphic reflects the current state of the art in integrating 

climate change with resource management. Further work on 

topics throughout Goal 3 is needed to develop best practices 

for the steps involved and clarify connections between them.

Incorporate climate change approaches with ongoing cultural resources research, planning, 

and stewardship practices

INTEGRATE 3 PRACTICE

26 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Graphic 3. Cultural Resources Management- Climate Change Integration Flow Chart. This chart outlines major touchpoints between climate change and 

research, planning, and stewardship stages of cultural resources management. Scenario Planning: Explore Diverse Futures

Climate

Projections Prioritization of Areas

to be Inventoried

For Baseline Inventory

Landscape

Scale

Vulnerability

Assesment 

For Resource-Specific Vulnerability Information

Climate

Projection

& Impacts 

Known

Resources

Resource Vulnerability Assessment 

For Vulnerable Resources

Significance

Evaluation Resource Vulnerability 

Prioritization of Resources for Action

Management Stage: Research

LEGEND

Climate change data & techniques (Science Pillar)

Ongoing cultural resources management

Climate change response technique (Adaptation Pillar)

Integrated Climate and Cultural Resources Mangement

SP: Scenario Planning

MS: Management Stage

Scenario Planning: Robust Options

Develop Goal for Vulnerable Resources

Identify Range of Adaptation Options

Filter Options with Constraints 

and Opportunities 

Adopt and Implement Actions MS: Stewardship

Monitor Resource and/or Adjust Condition Assessment Cycle

If condition changes, 

return to Planning Stage

If climate projections change, return to Research Stage 

SP: Wind Tunnel

SUSTAINABILITY, DISASTERS, COMMUNICATION

Management Stage: Planning

 National Park Service 27
Integration of climate change with cultural resource 

management has several overarching considerations. These 

include: sustainability and mitigation, disaster preparedness 

and response, scenario planning, and communication.

Sustainability and Mitigation

The NPS established the Green Parks Plan (2012) to further 

sustainability and mitigation. The Green Parks Plan applies to 

all parks, including those with a primarily historical or cultural 

focus. NPS has developed guidance to assist with sustainability 

specifically in relation to cultural resources, including Secretary of 

the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Illustrated Guidelines 

on Sustainability for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and Technical 

Preservation Brief 3, Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic 

Buildings (Hensley and Aguilar 2011). The Energy Saving Features 

of Older Buildings (Burns 1982) helps identify sustainability 

features already inherent in the historic built environment.

Climate Change Practice 

and Disaster Preparedness 

and Response

Climate change will unfold as a long string of disasters of varying 

rates and intensities. Climate impacts listed in Graphic 2 include 

impacts that will occur as a result of events and impacts that will 

develop due to changing trends. The processes outlined in Graphic 3 

are organized as a long term management approach.

Good planning can assist in disaster recovery when such events and 

impacts occur. In turn, disasters often demand rapid management 

decisions and provide opportunities to implement new approaches. 

It is important to ensure that all types of cultural resources are 

incorporated into disaster response plans.

Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations 

into Hazard Mitigation Planning: State and Local Mitigation Planning 

How-To Guide (FEMA 2005) currently is the primary reference in 

this field. As well, the NPS State, Tribal and Local Plans and Grants 

program has begun to incorporate disaster planning and resiliency 

into the operation of the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) grants-inaid program authorized by the NHPA, as amended. 

Case Study: San Juan National 

Historic Site Water Capture

As part of the efforts for conserving water and natural 

resources, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and 

decreasing water utility costs, the San Juan National 

Historic Site (SAJU) in Puerto Rico decided to restore 

the historical water cisterns located in two of the major 

fortifications. With design work that began in 2010, 

modern technology has been combined with 18th century 

engineering to restore seven cisterns with a storage capacity 

of over 932,000 gallons of rainwater. These cisterns are 

now supplying non-potable water for all the utilities in the 

park. Subsequent work through the Climate Friendly Parks 

program has focused on connecting additional buildings 

and treatment systems to produce potable water. SAJU has 

documented this work in multiple publications and a movie. 

(Source: N. Medina, personal communication, 2016)

San Juan National Historic Site combines old and new technology to conserve water (NPS photo).

28 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Scenario Planning

Scenario planning has been adopted by the NPS as part of climate 

change response. Scenario planning is “a vehicle for developing 

multivariate climate change responses and strategies, and test 

decisions in a context of uncontrollable and uncertain environmental, 

social, political, economic, or technical factors.” Therefore, this 

technique can be applied in multiple places for multiple different 

purposes throughout the integration and decision process. 

Guidance on conducting climate change scenario planning is provided 

in Using Scenarios to Explore Climate Change: A Handbook for 

Practitioners (Rose and Star 2013) and Addendum I: Using Scenarios 

to Explore Climate Change: A Handbook for Practitioners (NPS 2014). 

Guidance on integrating multiple scenarios into resource planning is 

being developed in Planning for a Changing Climate (NPS forthcoming).

While the overall process of scenario planning is similar regardless of 

resource type, implications of different scenarios for cultural resources 

requires information about known and anticipated effects of climate 

variability on cultural resources, such as compiled in Graphic 2. 

Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) also is an important source 

of information and insight into how different climate scenarios may 

be experienced in different areas; for instance, TEK may describe 

historical weather patterns and help identify the nature and scope of 

impacts when such weather patterns change or are disrupted.

Types and Uses of Scenario Planning 

(from Graphic 3)

Explore Diverse Futures 

This type of scenario planning focuses on large scale thinking and identifying multiple major forces, or drivers, that 

govern how we live and work. These drivers include both 

climate change and trends in social, cultural, political, and 

economic spheres. Listing these drivers and envisioning 

how they might develop and combine provides a solid 

basis for creating potential plausible futures. This form of 

scenario planning provides training in flexible thinking 

and considering the drivers that affect cultural heritage and 

preservation most.

Robust Options

This type of scenario planning is used to develop and compare response strategies across different possible futures. 

Actions or strategies that work well across all scenarios are 

“no regrets” or robust strategies. Other strategies may be 

appropriate only in one or a few scenarios. Outcomes of this 

type of scenario planning should help in identifying actions 

that (1) do well in all scenarios and should be implemented; 

(2) are successful and should continue; or (3) that will be 

irrelevant or maladaptive in potential futures.

Wind Tunnel

Once a certain management option is selected, this type of 

scenario planning can be used to test it against potential 

future scenarios. As described in the NPS Scenario Planning 

Handbook, “Think of scenarios as a wind tunnel, similar to 

the wind tunnels that engineers use to test aircraft. Consider actions, policies or strategies as a model aircraft. As you 

run the models through the wind tunnel, you may see that 

under certain conditions they perform well, while in others, 

the wings come off.”

Scenario planning at Catoctin Mountain Park in 2012 looked at robust options for both natural and cultural resources (NPS photo).

 National Park Service 29
Integration of climate change and cultural resources communication 

involves an array of connections between people and programs. 

Some of these connections already exist, others need to be 

developed. A current challenge for cultural resources climate change 

communication is awareness–of the links between cultural resources 

impacts and information across climate change science, adaptation, 

and mitigation (Goal 1) and of the diversity of observed and projected 

climate change impacts to cultural resources (Goal 2).

Climate change communication for cultural resources includes 

literacy and training for all involved in the care, maintenance, and 

interpretation of cultural resources, connections between colleagues 

working in climate science, adaptation, mitigation, and in fields 

on either side of “Impacts” and “Information” within each pillar 

of climate change response (Graphic 1). Within cultural resources 

management, communication also encompasses the process of 

consultation, including the processes required by NHPA Section 106. 

Climate change does not alter these requirements and consultation 

will be needed through planning and decision-making processes. 

Communication

Writing a Climate Story

Climate stories are called stories, but they are not fiction. Rather, they are vehicles for best available sound 

science. Following the AND, BUT, THEREFORE (or 

ABT) method of storytelling (Olson 2015), information 

is organized so that something happens. A climate story 

is not necessarily about an individual, but it has a beginning, a middle, and an end:

AND is where the story starts

BUT creates the tension

THEREFORE provides the resolution

The writing process also may use the WORD, SENTENCE, PARAGRAPH (or WSP) technique (Olson 

2015). The WORD conveys the overall concept of what 

the story is about, and can be linked to previously 

identified park interpretive themes. The SENTENCE 

is phrased as an ABT. It can be a long sentence, but 

it should have all three parts. The PARAGRAPHS, as 

many as needed, expand on all the parts of the ABT to 

create a full-fledged story. They may include citation 

and quotations as appropriate.

Hohokam petroglyphs tell old stories at Saguaro National Park (Thinkstock photo, used with permission).

30 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Finding a Climate Story

One of the challenges climate change presents for communication 

is sharing best available sound science and other information clearly 

and in ways that support meaningful discussion. NPS has multiple 

programs and tools for interpretation, education, and outreach in 

relation to climate change. Many of these are captured in the NPS 

National Climate Change Interpretation and Education Plan and Toolkit

(NPS 2016). As noted in PM14-02, “every place has a climate story.” 

The “Every Place has a Climate Story” approach is an additional tool 

designed to support the NPS interpretation and communication in 

connecting cultural resources and climate change information in ways 

that are engaging and meaningful. While to date this approach has 

been used primarily to create supporting information for interpretation 

in parks, this approach and its framework of topics may be used to 

connect cultural resources impacts and information and stewardship 

and science activities in other communication settings.

Four themes for communication of cultural resources information are 

developed under Goal 1:

1. Change in the material world

How do we see change happening in the material world (houses, 

artifacts, monuments, landscapes) around us?

2. Change in experience and lifeways

How are traditional and indigenous communities experiencing 

change in their practices, lifeways, and in relation to traditional 

knowledge? How are modern communities experiencing change? 

How do memories of and expectations for local climates and 

environments connect with current climatic experiences?

3. Insights on change from past societies

How have past societies interacted with and responded to past 

climatic variability and environmental change?

4. Origins of modern climate change

How has the modern climate change situation come to be? 

Finding a climate story is a process of working iteratively with these 

story themes and park resources, staff, and associated communities, 

to identify place-based story topics. It is likely that in any give place 

at least one story theme will apply. Likely, several will.

Story Theme 3: Insights from Past

Word: Innovation 

Sentence:

Sunset Crater erupted in circa AD 1064 AND covered 

an area already affected by drought with ash AND 

made agriculture difficult to impossible for several 

years, BUT the local Sinagua population stayed and 

developed the technique of cinder mulching, which 

helps retain soil moisture, THEREFORE providing an 

example of traditional agriculture that may be useful 

in the future as the climate becomes hotter and drier.

Sample ABT sentences include:

Story Theme 1: Material Change

Word: Stewardship

The Catoctin cabins were built as the first recreational 

camp for disabled children in the 1930s AND are still in 

use today as nature retreats, BUT projections indicate 

increasing temperatures will lead to structural damage 

from more intense rainfall events, THEREFORE NPS 

is researching ways to preserve historic mortar.

Cabin at Catoctin Mountain Park (NPS photo). Interpretive garden at Wupatki National Monument preserves native plants (NPS photo).

 National Park Service 31
Climate projections

Climate projections derive from global climate models and outline 

anticipated trajectories in temperature and precipitation. Uncertainty 

in future greenhouse gas emission pathways and global climate 

system responses frame the potential climate futures incorporated 

into scenario planning (see previous). Currently, downscaled climate 

projections are being prepared for each unit in the NPS system. They 

are available through the NPS Integrated Resource Management 

Applications System (IRMA).

Climate change impacts

Changes in global temperatures and precipitation are and will 

be manifested in a range of observable phenomena. As detailed 

in Graphic 2, it is through these phenomena (sea level rise, storm 

surges, changes in ecosystems, and others) that climate change will 

impact cultural resources. Some impacts are and will be dramatic and 

sudden, others the result of long-term changing trends. 

Vulnerability assessments

Vulnerability “encompasses a variety of concepts and elements including 

sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and 

adapt” (IPCC AR5). Within resource management, vulnerability with 

respect to climate change is often expressed in the following formula: 

vulnerability = exposure + sensitivity – adaptive capacity. 

As outlined in Goal 1, Adaptation, cultural resources are, or often 

include, components that are non-living and as such they have limited 

capacity to adapt to changing conditions. As a result, climate change 

adaptation for cultural resources lies in our use and management of 

them. Adaptive use and management can draw from a wide range 

of options (see Goal 3, Planning). Therefore, for cultural resources, a 

variation of the vulnerability formula that separates adaptive capacity 

from exposure and sensitivity is more appropriate:

Vulnerability = Exposure + Sensitivity

This formula has been developed and adopted by the NPS Sustainable 

Operations and Climate Change Branch for its management of 

park facilities and infrastructure in the Coastal Hazards & Climate 

Change Asset Vulnerability Assessment Protocol (Western Carolina 

University 2016).

Inventory and Climate Change

As set out in PM14-02, areas most at risk for an impact or combination 

of impacts that have not yet been inventoried should be prioritized 

for inventory. Factors to consider in prioritization include the time 

frame of the risk (acute or catastrophic impact vs. gradual trend) and 

results of modeling of areas most likely to have cultural resources.

Integration of climate change with cultural resource 

management also includes multiple touchpoints with 

established practices. As shown in Graphic 3, these 

connections can be organized according to management 

phases outlined in NPS Management Policies 2006: research, 

planning, and stewardship. Research incorporates actions 

to gather substantive information and data in order to 

make informed decisions.

Case Study: Bering Land Bridge, 

Cape Krusenstern Prioritization of 

Areas for Inventory

Rapid temperature increases, loss of sea ice, rising sea levels, and changes in storm patterns and the severity of their 

effects are exposing and removing archeological resources 

along the coast of Bering Land Bridge National Preserve and 

Cape Krusenstern National Monument. Much of this coast 

line has not yet been surveyed. To improve management of 

this situation, the Alaska Regional Office is creating a GISbased vulnerability assessment to determine which areas of 

the park coasts are most vulnerable to erosion and which of 

those areas are most likely to contain archeological sites. The 

model combines predictive local climate scenarios, a coastal 

erosion model, and a predictive archeological model based 

on physical site characteristics.

(Source: Devenport and Hays 2015)

Landscape-scale Vulnerability 

Assessments

Using climate change projections, and with vulnerability defined as the relationship between exposure and sensitivity, it 

may be possible to identify geographic areas most at risk for 

particular types or combinations of climate change impacts. 

These findings can then inform planning for inventory and/

or condition assessment and reassessment.

Map of coastal erosion probability of a section of Cape Krusenstern National Monument (NPS photo).

32 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Point Reyes National Seashore has analyzed climate vulnerability of archeology in different microenvironments (NPS photo).

Resource Vulnerability Assessments

The vulnerability of individual cultural resources to climate 

impacts is developed through climate projections for the 

area in which a resource is located (exposure) that may lead 

to specific climate impacts (see Graphic 2) which can then 

be related to the materials and relationships of the resource 

(sensitivity).

Case Study: Point Reyes 

National Seashore

The first detailed NPS climate change vulnerability assessment for coastal archaeological resources was conducted 

for Point Reyes National Seashore. This study examined 

exposure of different ecozones across the park to chemical 

weathering, coastal erosion and sea level rise, temperature 

changes, vegetation changes, and fire, and the sensitivities of 

different site types to these impacts. 

(Source: Newland 2013)

Baseline Cultural Resource Data

Baseline data for cultural resources includes (1) location; 

(2) condition; (3) significance; (4) national, regional, and local 

contexts. Locational data is critical for determining potential exposure 

of cultural resources to climate change phenomena. Condition 

information can help identify sensitivities of cultural resources to 

climate impacts, monitor effectiveness of management actions, and 

detect change (see return arrows at the base of Graphic 3).

As outlined in PM14-02, significance and national, regional, and local 

contexts should be combined with vulnerability to prioritize resources 

for adaptation attention. 

Significance Evaluation 

Significance evaluation is part of the baseline information developed 

for cultural resources identified during inventory. As noted in PM14-02, 

the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility criteria provide 

a sound framework for assessing significance. As well, contemporary 

significance indicated during consultation with diverse stakeholders 

may add to previous evaluations of significance. How a resource’s 

significance is conveyed (such as through spatial relationships or 

architectural and artistic components) should be a focus in assessments 

of a resource’s sensitivity to projected climate impacts.

Capacity to learn about the past from cultural resources is recognized 

in NRHP eligibility Criterion D. Climate change adds new questions 

to which such information needs to be addressed. The Information 

concepts in Goal 1 (see Graphic 1) list many of these, ranging from 

paleoclimatic data and lower energy practices to examples of past 

adaptation to past environmental variability.

Connecting Significance and Vulnerability

For parks and regions in which there are multiple resources at risk 

from climate impacts, it may be necessary to prioritize them with 

respect to the planning and implementation of management action. 

PM 14-02 set out that significance combined with vulnerability is 

the recommended basis for such prioritization. 

Prioritization for Action

Prioritization is the process of assessing resource characteristics 

to develop an order for management attention. These should 

include resource vulnerability and significance; many parks are also 

incorporating capacity to reuse a resource, resource condition, 

visibility/accessibility for visitors, and uniqueness of the resource 

within the park. 

 National Park Service 33
Planning for a Changing Climate

NPS planning guidance for climate change, Planning for a Changing 

Climate (NPS forthcoming), outlines the processes and considerations 

for incorporating multiple climate scenarios into resource management 

from the point of establishing resource management goals forward. 

Review Management Goals for Vulnerable Resources

Current management goals for cultural resources include preservation, 

rehabilitation, and restoration. With the compilation of resource 

condition, significance, and climate risk information, the goal for 

a resource or sets of resources can be reviewed and assessed for 

appropriateness and sustainability. Management approaches to achieve 

those goals are then developed. Wherever possible, maintenance 

should be recognized as a primary approach, as a well-maintained built 

environment or healthy natural environment is generally better able 

to withstand new stresses presented by climate change. Subsequent 

management approaches may be developed in an iterative process 

through consideration of cultural resource Adaptation Options 

(below). Alternative climate and other futures should be considered 

in this process, such as through scenario planning (robust options) 

or structured decision making. Consultation processes, as for other 

resource stewardship decisions, should continue throughout.

Addition of Loss to Management Goals

Current primary NPS cultural resource management goals anticipate 

preservation in perpetuity. In growing recognition of climate 

projections and impacts, PM14-02 stated that:

“Responsible stewardship requires making choices that promote 

resilience and taking sustainable management actions. Funding 

temporary repairs for resources that cannot, because of their 

location or fragility, be saved for the long term, demands 

careful thought. Managers should consider choices such as 

documenting some resources and allowing them to fall into 

ruin rather than rebuilding after major storms.”

Toward this, approaches for responsible preparation for unavoidable 

impacts and potential loss are incorporated into the Adaptation 

Options below. As with all management goals, decisions for loss must 

be made with appropriate consultation and compliance.

Planning encompasses the analysis and development 

of the decision-making component of resource 

management. Within cultural resources, Planning 

documents include Cultural Landscape Reports, Historic 

Structure Reports, Museum Collection Management 

Reports, and Archeological Assessments, and resourceCommunity members at the 2010 biannual homecoming at Portsmouth Village, Cape Lookout National Seashore (NPS photo).

Case Study: Structured Decision 

Making at Cape Lookout National 

Seashore 

In 2015-2016, Cape Lookout National Seashore (CALO) 

piloted a structured decision-making process (SDM) to 

help develop management approaches for its two historic 

villages. The park is set on a series of barrier islands in 

coastal eastern North Carolina. Both historic damage patterns and climate projections indicate rising water is and 

will be a major ongoing stress for the villages, and sea level 

rise/storm surge were chosen as the focus for this project. 

Working with researchers from North Carolina State University, coastal researchers at Western Carolina University, the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, 

members of the local community, and with support of the 

U.S. Geological Survey Southeast Climate Science Center, 

NPS park, regional, and other program staff crafted a draft 

decision-support tool. This tool characterizes buildings 

within each village according to significance and climate 

vulnerability, and models allocation of potential available 

budgets across various adaptation options (see list of options on pages 36-37).

(Source: Fatorić and Seekamp 2016)

34 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Identify Range of Adaptation Options

Adaptation options are management approaches to address identified 

climate vulnerability of cultural resources and provide a means of 

adaptive capacity. Many of the practices that support these options 

are already in use in the NPS; this listing provides a common language 

for the options to promote coordination about them across the 

Service. As organized below, they range from responses to minimally 

disruptive change (1) to destructive change (5-7). These options may 

be used individually or combined with others in a sequence. 

Relation of Adaptation Options and the 

Compliance Process

Ideally, analysis and selection of adaptation options and the 

environmental and historic preservation compliance process, such 

as NHPA Section 106, should happen in parallel with the analysis 

identifying climate risk to cultural resources. For example, in preparing 

alternatives, different options may be developed as Section 106 

alternatives, or multiple alternatives may be developed within one 

option. If a more conceptual vulnerability assessment or planning 

process has taken place resulting in management recommendations 

to be implemented at a future time, these assessments and planning 

documents should be used as starting points for the Section 106 

compliance process.

Difficulties are most likely when it appears a management decision 

has been reached before the compliance process starts. In scoping 

participants for consultation about vulnerability assessment, 

management options, or selection of adaptation options, these 

participants should be considered as possible stakeholders for 

consultation during Section 106 compliance.

Filter of Constraints and Opportunities

While prioritization of resources for action should be based primarily 

on vulnerability and significance, selection of adaptation option(s) 

requires consideration of both the resource(s) and the context within 

which management decisions are being made. This context includes 

financial, technological, time-frame/urgency and constraints and 

opportunities that may derive from technology, tribal consultation, 

public engagement and participation, and cost-sharing, among others.

Case Study: Preserving Coastal 

Heritage Workshop 

The National Park Service hosted the Preserving Coastal 

Heritage workshop at Federal Hall National Memorial in 

April 2014 to bring together a diverse range of partners to 

develop a draft decision framework for managing cultural 

resources vulnerable to climate change impacts. Using 

parks in the New Jersey and New York area that had been 

affected by Hurricane Sandy as case examples, the participants clarified a series of adaptation options and identified 

components of an overall cultural resources climate change 

planning process.

(Source: NPS 2014)

Facilitators at Preserving Coastal Heritage gathered many ideas from participants (NPS photo).

to-park level planning documents such as Foundation 

documents, Resource Stewardship Strategies and 

General Management Plans. Integration of climate 

change into planning requires incorporation of 

uncertain projected environmental change and related 

observed or anticipated impacts into management 

goals and plans for vulnerable regions and resources.

 National Park Service 35
1. No Active Intervention

Taking no action is a decision. This may be an appropriate decision in 

situations of low vulnerability (no action warranted) or when, due to 

one or more of a range of constraints, including lack of technological 

or economic feasibility, no action can be taken. This decision may 

include assessment of the need for monitoring of resource condition, 

with a plan to revisit a no-action decision at a future point in time.

2. Offset Stress

Removing or deflecting stress is one or more actions taken at some 

distance from the resource to reduce or remove the environmental 

or other force(s) acting on the resource. The goal of this option is 

to enhance survival while minimizing physical or material changes 

to the resource. Constraints on this option are likely to include 

impacts of actions to surrounding resources, such as natural habitat 

or infrastructure.

Examples include: temporary measures such as sandbags or levee 

plugs; an offsite retaining wall, living shoreline, or engineered 

logjam to reduce shore erosion; upstream re-vegetation to reduce 

flood hazards, or changes in adjacent forest management to reduce 

wildfire risk.

3. Improve Resilience/Resistance

Improving resilience/resistance consists of one or more actions that 

change the nature and/or setting of a resource that are designed 

to make a resource better able to withstand or be recovered from 

environmental or other forces. The goal of this option is survival 

of the resource, despite possible impacts of actions on integrity of 

the resource, although this option does not necessarily mean the 

resource will be impaired.

Examples include: treatment of structural materials to better 

withstand increased moisture, wind, or an invasive species; elevation 

of a building to raise it above projected flood levels; addition of a 

cap over an archeological site; changes in landscape plantings or soil 

treatments; and alternate storage arrangement of museum materials.

4. Manage Change

Managing change is an action or set of actions that incorporate 

change into the form of the resource and/or into its management 

plan. The goal of this option is to maintain character-defining features 

of a resource, even if original specific materials or individual species 

are no longer part of the resource.

Examples include: change in tree species on cultural landscapes by 

removing an original species that has died and replacing it with a 

species that is healthy in that environment and will provide similar 

visual characteristics including shade and foliage conditions.

5. Relocate/ Facilitate Movement

Relocating/facilitating movement includes two types of action: 

(a) moving a resource, and (b) allowing movement to happen.

(a) Moving a resource is an action or set of actions to relocate all 

or a portion of a resource that cannot move on its own to a less 

vulnerable location.

Adaptation Options

Documentation of the E.C. Waters shipwreck at Yellowstone National Park 

(NPS Submerged Resources Center photo/Brett Seymour).

36 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Examples include: moving the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse inland from 

the coast. Another example is the temporary relocation of the NPS 

collections from Ellis Island following Hurricane Sandy to a facility in 

Maryland. Assisting with relocation of a human community to a safer 

location and assisted migration of a culturally important species to a 

refugium it would not have been able to reach on its own (for instance, 

salmon species to a new watershed) are also examples of this option. 

Movement is not feasible for some cultural resources such as cultural 

landscapes; in such instances movement may be an appropriate choice 

for components of a landscape once a decision has been made that the 

whole can no longer be saved. 

(b) Allowing movement to happen involves action(s) either to enable 

movement or otherwise remove impediments to movement of living 

portions of resources to less vulnerable or more stable locations. 

Examples include: allowing ecosystems such as a marsh or barrier 

island with cultural significance or which contains culturally significant 

species to migrate inland, or a given species with cultural significance 

to shift ranges. Such shifts may move all or components of a resource 

outside of documented resource or park boundaries.

6. Document and Prepare for Loss

Any action modifying a resource includes appropriate documentation. 

“Document and Prepare for Loss” is a set of actions to record a 

resource and then subsequently allow the geographic location of the 

resource to undergo full effects of environmental or other forces that 

are likely to destroy or remove all or portions of the resource. 

Documentation may be exhaustive, such as data recovery (full excavation) 

of an archeological site, or detailed recording of a building or structure or 

cultural landscape (such as HABS/HAER/HALS photographic, drawing, 

and laser scanning documentation, or a Cultural Landscape Inventory). 

Documentation also may be done at a less than exhaustive level. This 

may be appropriate when exhaustive approaches are infeasible (due 

to limitations in access, time, or financial constraints), not warranted 

(due to nature and scale of impacts), or there is merit in not recovering 

or preserving the whole of the resource (such as an archeological site 

may become inaccessible, but is not anticipated to be destroyed). This 

option differs from the data recovery in that it requires consideration 

and documentation of the sampling and preservation approach. Other 

examples of documentation techniques that may be used in either 

approach include collection of pollen and seeds or plant cuttings, and 

oral histories and video.

7. Interpret the Change

Climate change is the heritage of the future. Interpreting the Change 

is an action or set of actions that acknowledges and then serves to 

engage people in the future with the effects of climate change on a 

resource. This option may be used on its own or in combination with 

any of the other options. 

Examples include: dramatic approaches such as preservation of a 

coastal resource such that its location and form remains either intact 

or otherwise visible from the coast once it is offshore or partially 

submerged. A hypothetical example would be Dry Tortugas National 

Park’s Fort Jefferson encased in a large dome to protect it from 

rising seas and storm damage. Other examples include interpretive 

signage of freeze-thaw cracking in historic bricks, or photo series 

of changes in garden phenology or vegetation across a landscape. 

While interpretation may be developed across any of the adaptation 

options on this list, for this option, interpretation addresses not only 

preservation issues and history of the cultural resource, but also 

climate change itself, and seeks to tell the story of the place and 

climate change and how they are interacting.

Although not designed explicitly as a climate change adaptation option, the 

1999 decision to move the Cape Hatteras Light Station inland is an iconic 

example of relocation of a valued cultural resource (NPS photo).

 National Park Service 37
Adopt and implement actions; Monitor resource and/or adjust 

condition assessment

Once a management approach for a vulnerable resource has been 

selected, it should be adopted and implemented. Monitoring and 

condition assessment schedules to identify and track changing 

conditions are integral parts of the integration of climate change 

response and stewardship. Stewardship for cultural resources under 

climate change will be dynamic and need to respond to changing and 

unanticipated conditions. If resource condition changes unexpectedly, 

management approaches should return to the planning stages. If 

climate projections change, management approaches should return 

to the research stage (see Graphic 3).

If resource condition changes, return to Planning stage

Condition assessment is an established component of cultural 

resources management. Following cultural resources climate change 

impacts listed in Graphic 2 and vulnerability assessment developed 

in Research stages above, condition assessment should look for cues 

of environmental stress. Intervals between condition assessment also 

may be revised to better respond to the resource’s sensitivity to change 

and/or exposure to changing environmental stresses (vulnerability). 

Other sources of information about potential changes in resource 

condition and exposure include the NPS Inventory and Monitoring 

Network Vital Signs program. If unexpected changes are identified in 

resource conditions, management approaches should return to the 

Planning stages to reassess resource goals and selected adaptation 

option(s) and implementation plan.

If climate projections change, return to Research stage

Climate projections may change as climate models are further 

developed, mitigation decisions are made at many levels, and 

greenhouse gas trajectories are better understood. As new climate 

data are received, previous assessments of resource exposure and 

sensitivity should be reviewed. If landscape or resource vulnerability 

changes with the new information, research, planning, and 

stewardship steps should be undertaken accordingly.

Case Study: Cultural Landscape 

Management Cycle Condition 

Reassessment

The NPS Parks Cultural Landscape Program has recently 

developed criteria for determining the appropriate condition assessment interval cycle, taking into consideration 

factors such as the condition, management category (including: Must be preserved, Should be preserved, May 

be preserved, May be released), landscape sensitivity, and 

facility management type. A resource is assigned points 

based on its priority within each of these categories; the 

points are tallied to determine the condition reassessment 

interval—1-3 years for high priority; 4-6 years for medium 

priority; and 7-10 years for low priority.

The Cultural Landscape Report for Rapidan Camp, Shenandoah National Park, has a multi-decade plan for managing disease-affected trees (NPS photo/Knepley).

Stewardship encompasses using the most effective 

concepts, techniques, and equipment to protect and 

preserve cultural resources from environmental and 

other threats that may affect them.

(Opposite) Wreck of the George L. Olson floats in the water after being cut 

loose to drift to the North Spit along the Oregon coast (Photo courtesy of 

the Coos Historical and Maritime Museum).

38 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
 National Park Service 39
Goal 4 addresses the urgency of global climate change and 

the collective nature of human heritage. Science to date is 

indicating diverse environmental changes, some rapid, which 

are or likely are attributable to climate change. These changes 

are adding new and variable stresses to cultural resources 

around the world. In turn, as cultural resources are connected 

to human experiences in specific places, the capacity and 

need to learn from them also extends around the world. As 

set out in Goal 1, collaboration from the local to international 

scale to share information and ideas is necessary to build a 

robust and sustainable climate change response with and for 

cultural resources.

Threats to cultural resources from climate change are many 

and diverse (Graphic 2). Impacts are already identified in many 

parks, and uncertainty in timing and severity of future impacts 

adds urgency to the need to develop and implement programs 

and techniques to address them. As discussed throughout 

Goal 3, management of cultural resources in relation to climate 

change includes prioritization. The intent of prioritization is 

to use available resources wisely, including knowledge and 

research resources. Coordinating with partners and learning 

from the array of knowledge and practice they have developed 

is an important component of this. 

National partners of the NPS in cultural resources management 

and historic preservation throughout the U.S. include other Federal 

agencies, collaborations through the Landscape Conservation 

Cooperatives, Tribal governments, State governments, 

Certified Local governments, academic institutions, and nongovernmental organizations. The cultural resources managed 

and held by these partners are being challenged by climate 

change in the same diverse ways at the same time as those 

of the NPS (Graphic 2). These partners work under the same 

national cultural resources and environmental legislation as the 

NPS, but due to differences in scale and agency or institutional 

mission they have developed other types of approaches with 

different emphases. 

There is great diversity of existing and potential international 

partners. International organizations such as UNESCO’s World 

Heritage Organization, International Council on Monuments 

and Sites (ICOMOS) and the International Centre for the 

Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property 

(ICCROM) have and continue to produce white papers and 

practical workshops that address the threats climate change 

presents for cultural resources. National and regional-scale 

organizations, governmental and non-governmental, are 

mobilizing strategic plans and programs as well. These are 

concentrated in Western Europe and Japan, though there are 

many projects going on around the world that are addressing 

specific regional and site situations.

In turn, the NPS has much to share with the global cultural 

heritage and historic preservation community from its work on 

climate change. From the joint cultural and natural resource 

management across the diverse histories and ecosystems 

of the National Park System, to the millions of one-to-one 

personal interactions of visitors each year with interpretive 

rangers that build meaning and foster learning, the NPS has 

innovations that are not yet replicated widely elsewhere in 

the world. Working together, this collective global community 

can not only help each other address impacts from climate on 

cultural resources, but also build practice for and awareness 

of the roles of cultural resources information in addressing the 

challenges of climate change.

Following this, Goal 4 Directions for Action include:

•	Coordinate with partners to learn from and adapt 

approaches to managing cultural resources in relation to 

climate change 

•	Coordinate with partners to share the NPS approaches to 

managing cultural resources in relation to climate change. 

In support of the Direction for Action regarding sharing, this 

Strategy, including case studies and approaches and data 

incorporated throughout Goals 1-3, is a starting summary of 

the contributions of the NPS for partners in cultural resources 

and climate change both in the U.S. and around the world. 

Graphic 4, Four Pillars of Cultural Resources Climate Change 

Response around the World, and the following descriptions and 

case studies provide a starting point for building connections 

toward learning from colleagues in the U.S. and around the 

world. Programs included in Goal 4 were selected through 

a joint project with the University of Maryland to highlight 

the variety of activity around the issue of climate change 

and cultural resources at different scales, and each one has 

a clear presence online with readily accessible data, tools, or 

program and policy documents. Activities of some programs 

are relevant to more than one pillar, particularly in the areas of 

Science and Communication. For this reason, the category of 

Citizen Science is added to describe these programs.

Connect with partners to grow the body of knowledge for cultural resources and climate change.

LEARN 4 AND SHARE

40 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Graphic 4. Four Pillars of Cultural Resources Climate Change Response Around the World. This map shows a distribution of 

major programs that have developed transferrable tools and techniques for cultural resources and climate change.

North

Sea

Celtic

Sea

Irish

Sea

English

Channel

Climate Response Pillar

 Science

 Adaptation

 Mitigation

 Communication

 Citizen Science

Map by VectorWorldmap.com. Version 2.2©2009, Graphics Factory CC

 National Park Service 41
Case Study: The Oxford Rock 

Breakdown Laboratory

The Oxford Rock Breakdown Laboratory (OxRBL) at 

Oxford University in the UK studies the impacts of 

changing environmental conditions on stone, especially 

in relation to cultural heritage sites. Methods such as 

tomography are used to study effects of climate phenomena such as increasing moisture. While stone is commonly held to be among the most resistant of building 

materials, studies by OxRBL are showing that increasing 

moisture can have rapid and destructive effects. Given 

that so many cultural heritage properties are made of or 

include stone, these findings indicate there are alarming 

vulnerabilities in what seem to be the most robust cultural heritage sites. 

(Source: Oxford Rock Breakdown Laboratory website, http://www.oxrbl.com/)

ArcBurn (Southwest US)

ArcBurn is an experimental collaboration between the U.S. Forest 

Service, the NPS, and the Forest Stewards Guild. The core of this 

program is measuring and quantifying the types and extent of damage 

that can happen to cultural resources as a result of wildfires. Damage 

includes both direct damage (from fires themselves) and indirect (i.e. 

from the firefighting process). Research includes field and laboratory 

work. Results of this project will be integrated into fire management 

plans, which will allow better protection of cultural resources at risk 

from fire threats.

The Climate for Culture (European Union [EU])

This EU Commission-funded project, which ran 2009-2014, developed 

multiple products about impacts of climate change on cultural 

heritage. These included a series of case studies modeled according to 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) climate scenarios.

Firesense (EU)

The Firesense project is creating monitoring and modeling technology 

focused on predicting frequency and power of wildfires in the 

Mediterranean region, with particular attention to threats to cultural 

heritage sites.

Noah’s Ark Project (University College London [UCL], UK)

Noah’s Ark Project leads research into the impacts of changing 

climates on cultural heritage, with the goal of determining which 

climate factors will be the most destructive to cultural heritage 

over the next century. The project includes research on the impacts 

of climate change on a variety of materials and sites. The Atlas of 

Climate Change Impact on European Cultural Heritage: Scientific 

Analysis and Management Strategies (Sabbioni et al. 2012) is a 

product of Noah’s Ark.

Oxford Rock Breakdown Laboratory (Oxford University, UK)

The Oxford Rock Breakdown Laboratory is leading research into 

the response of rock (emphasis on historic stonework) to various 

environmental conditions, such as increasing humidity, increased 

biotic activity, changing precipitation patterns.

World Heritage Institute for Training and Research Asia Pacific 

Region (WHITR-AP) (Shanghai, China)

Under the auspices of UNESCO, WHITR-AP is a nongovernmental 

institute working to increase the resources dedicated to cultural 

heritage at the scientific level in the Asia Pacific region. It has 

recently published on the dangers of anthropogenic climate change 

to cultural heritage in Asia.

Science for cultural resources in relation to climate 

change identified around the world covers both Impacts 

(techniques for identifying and measuring effects of 

SCIENCE

Impacts

Research at the Oxford Rock Breakdown Laboratory aids preservationists in protecting stone buildings (Oxford University photo used with permission).

42 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Case Study: North Atlantic 

Biocultural Organization (NABO) 

Research on Sustainability at a 

Millennial Scale

NABO research in the Myvatn region of northern Iceland 

has revealed a compelling counterpoint to the many stories of human mismanagement of natural resources from 

the past and present. Lake Myvatn is a major breeding 

ground for both North American and Eurasian waterfowl. 

Lake Myvatn hosts huge numbers of waterfowl and one 

of the widest assortments of species of waterfowl found 

anywhere on the planet. Archeological sites in the region 

routinely produce significant numbers of waterfowl eggshell. Bones from the waterfowl themselves are however 

largely absent though bones from terrestrial full-time residents such as grouse are evident. Current egg collecting 

practices on the lake limit any collector from taking more 

than half the eggs in any one nest. The taking of the ducks 

themselves also is prohibited. This system has allowed for 

a stable waterfowl population and a sustainable harvest 

of their eggs for a very long time. Historic documents 

describe such management practices as dating back into 

the 18th century. Archeological evidence suggests that 

these practices go back even further, to the first settlement 

of the region in the early 10th century. This combined 

evidence strongly suggests that human exploitation of 

the Myvatn bird populations is an example a sustainable 

harvesting system operating at a millennial scale.

(Source: Hicks et al 2015)

Future Earth (hubs located in Colorado, Montreal, Paris, 

Stockholm and Tokyo)

Future Earth is sponsored by the Science and Technology Alliance for 

Global Sustainability, which represents the International Council for 

Science (ICSU), International Social Science Council (ISSC), the Belmont 

Forum, UNESCO, and UN Environment Program (UNEP) among 

others, and is an international research hub for the coordination of 

interdisciplinary research focused on global sustainable development 

and sustainability. Future Earth projects include Past Global Changes 

(PAGES), a program supporting understanding of past environments 

in order to predict future conditions, and Integrated History and Future 

of People on Earth (IHOPE, see below), both of which are specifically 

focused on learning from cultural resources in order to facilitate 

present day adaptation and mitigation.

Integrated History and Future of People on Earth (IHOPE, 

Future Earth)

IHOPE is a global network of researchers with the goal of using 

our understanding of the past as a way to ensure a robust 

and equitable future. All of the projects under this umbrella 

organization focus on the idea of learning from the past in order 

to assist current and future management issues. The projects cover 

many different environmental and cultural contexts and are a 

source of case studies in how to integrate learning from the past 

into various modern situations. 

North Atlantic Biocultural Organization (NABO, internationally 

distributed research network)

NABO is an international research cooperative focused on the North 

Atlantic. This group has developed multiple and diverse research 

projects centered on learning from cultural resources. These range 

from from historic maritime resource use to historic animal husbandry 

and landscape change. 

Ritsumeikan University Institute of Disaster Mitigation for 

Urban Cultural Heritage (Kyoto, Japan)

Ritsumeikan University’s Institute of Disaster Mitigation provides 

vulnerability assessments, urban planning, workshops on specific 

mitigation techniques. The Institute hosts an annual workshop on 

Disaster Risk Management of Urban Cultural Heritage in partnership 

with UNESCO, ICOMOS and ICCROM.

SCIENCE

Information

climate change on cultural resources) and Information 

(learning from cultural resources to support adaptive 

response to climate change).

Archeological research at Lake Myvantn shows a millenium of sustainable egg harvesting (M.Rockman photo, used with permission)

 National Park Service 43
Case Study: BLM Pilot Project for 

Coastal Impacts on Cultural 

Resources

BLM manages the California Coastal National Monument 

(CCNM). The CCNM has a small land base but extends 

the entire length of the state. A partnership of BLM, 

Sonoma State University, and the Society for California 

Archeology has established a pilot project along CCNM 

to identify and study climate impacts on coastal cultural 

resources. This project combines volunteer field surveys 

and preparation of a general workplan that can be used 

by other institutions for research grant proposals about 

coastal-climate impacts.

Cultural resources along the California coast are vulnerable to diverse climate impacts (BLM photo).

(Source: K. Winthrop, P. Capron [BLM], personal communication 2016) 

U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM, U.S. nationwide)

The BLM’s cultural heritage program is developing a management 

framework that incorporates climate change impacts into BLM’s 

overall multi-use land management stewardship goals. The program 

includes identifying and evaluating cultural resources during land use 

planning; assessing vulnerability, risk, and resilience across different 

types of resources and impacts; identifying practical approaches to 

enhance resilience for high priority sites and representative samples 

of different site types; mitigating on-going impacts and building 

resilience where possible; and integrating this work into emergency 

and disaster planning.

World Monuments Fund (WMF, based in New York City, NY)

The WMF funds projects across the world for preservation of 

cultural heritage. The WMF program “Climate Change Threats to 

Cultural Heritage” is one of its special initiatives and funds efforts 

towards adaptive preservation of cultural heritage sites threatened 

by climate change.

Noah’s Ark (UCL, UK)

The Noah’s Ark project, hosted by the UCL Sustainable Heritage 

Centre, is producing tools at a Europe-wide scale intended to be 

used in support of adaptation for cultural heritage threatened by 

climate change. The Atlas of Climate Change Impact on European 

Cultural Heritage: Scientific Analysis and Management Strategies 

(Sabbioni et al. 2012) is a product of Noah’s Ark.

Ritsumeikan University Program in Disaster Management 

(Kyoto, Japan)

Developed in partnership with UNESCO until 2014, this program is 

now part of the Ritsumeikan University Institute of Disaster Mitigation 

for Urban Cultural Heritage. This program offers an annual training 

course as well as a variety of symposiums and literature about 

disaster and cultural heritage. The Institute is also a research facility 

focusing on catastrophic impacts on cultural heritage. This institute 

focuses on all disasters, natural and otherwise; much of its work is 

relevant to hazards linked to climate change.

Information

Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN)-Ano Nuevo

State Park Collaboration (Kyoto, Japan-California)

The RIHN is running a comparative project to examine huntergatherer landscapes in Japan and Northern California. This project is 

a collaboration between RIHN and Ano Nuevo State Park, California. 

One result of this collaboration has been testing of traditional 

resource and environment management (TREM) methods shared by 

local tribal stakeholders and identified through archeology.

Adaptation includes research and approaches for 

resource management actions that address conditions 

developing from or related to climate change. 

ADAPTATION

Impacts

(Opposite) Arena Cove as seen from the Cypress Abbey Public Lands, CA 

(BLM photo/Jeff Fontana).

44 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
 National Park Service 45
National Trust Historic Preservation Green Lab research demonstrates energy efficiency of reusing historic buildings (NTHP photo, used with permission).

Building Resilience (The Federal Provincial Territorial 

Collaboration on Historic Places in Canada, Canada) 

This collaboration has produced a series of guidelines to help 

developers and property owners through the process of sustainable 

renovation and rehabilitation. The ‘inherent sustainability’ of historic 

buildings is used as much as any technological solutions to greener 

structures. The guidelines go into detail by building material (such 

guidelines for roofs, materials, interior features etc.). 

The Climate of Culture Project (EU) 

This EU Commission-funded project, which ran 2009-2014, 

developed multiple products about impacts of climate change on 

cultural heritage. Case studies from this project include mitigation in 

historic structures and museum contexts.

Historic England (UK)

Historic England is the heritage management organization in England 

and has a large number of publicly available documents that describe

many aspects of the relationship between climate change and cultural 

heritage. These include Energy Efficiency and Historic Buildings (2011) 

and others listed in their 2016 Climate Change Adaptation Report.

Historic Scotland (UK)

Historic Scotland, the primary cultural resource management entity in 

Scotland, has made reducing the carbon footprint of the properties 

under their control a priority. Reducing energy use in buildings under 

their management as well as improving energy efficiency in traditional 

building are among the strategic themes of the Climate Change 

Action Plan for Historic Scotland, 2012-2017.

Reduced Footprint of Monumental Structures, 

Landscapes and Buildings (ReFoMo, Utrecht, The Netherlands) 

The goal of ReFoMo is to assess the demand for carbon footprint 

reduction in historic structures and landscapes and then develop 

products that will meet this demand. This project has been centered 

on three case studies focusing on a historic fortification, a historic 

public building and an example of industrial heritage. The project 

makes available their case studies and related materials. 

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, 

Preservation Green Lab (US)

The NTHP’s Preservation Green Lab investigates the dynamics between 

older structures and the creation of greener cities. Their research into the 

carbon footprint of older buildings is used to create energy saving and 

carbon footprint reduction strategies for individual structures. On a larger 

scale, they also have examined relationships between older buildings and 

small businesses and present strategies and policy recommendations for 

the revitalization and greening of decayed urban centers. 

Relatively few organizations appear to be working 

to incorporate cultural resources into climate change 

mitigation. As mitigation is commonly understood in 

cultural resource terms as reduction of impacts on 

cultural resources from projects and other undertakings 

(in this Strategy, these fall under adaptation), cultural 

resource links to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 

and environmental footprints can be difficult to identify.

MITIGATION

Impacts-Information

Case Study: The National Trust for 

Historic Preservation - Preservation 

Green Lab 

One of the central ideas around the work of the Preservation Green Lab can be expressed as ‘the greenest 

building is the one that already exists.’ Further, the greenest building might be the smaller building constructed 

in the past when passive climate control was a necessity 

rather than an innovation. Two Preservation Green Lab 

projects illustrate this well. The ‘Older, Smaller, Better’ 

project analyzed a number of cities and looked at the relationship between the age of buildings and sustainability 

as measured by economic, social and environmental variables. The results show the key role older buildings play 

in preserving and building sustainable communities. The 

‘America Saves!’ project offers energy saving strategies to 

small business owners in the US. This project focuses on 

‘no hassle’ energy efficiency methods, including efforts 

to decrease the carbon footprint of small businesses and 

create savings for these small businesses that will benefit 

them as well as the community in which they are based.

(Source: National Trust for Historic Preservation 2016)

46 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
U.S. Cultural Landscape Practice Knowledge Community 

(US/CLICK)

US/CLICK is a collaboration between US/ICOMOS and the University 

of Massachusetts, Amherst, supported in part by the NPS. It serves 

as a forum for the online exchange of news and research relevant to 

cultural landscape research throughout the world. Climate change, 

particularly impacts from climate change, is one of a range of 

cultural landscapes issues covered by this forum. 

Historic England (UK)

Historic England has developed multiple products to share cultural 

heritage-climate change information with the UK government and 

public. These include: 

• The Heritage Counts survey, an annual survey developed to

explore the social and economic role of heritage in the context

of select themes. Climate change was the theme in 2008.

• The Heritage at Risk Register, an annual registry of historic

buildings at risk to climate change impacts, among other threats.

• The Climate Change and Your Home program (now

completed) provided a toolkit to homeowners of historic

buildings for reducing energy consumption and impacts from

climate change.

RIHN (Kyoto, Japan)

The work of RIHN in reaching out to affiliated tribes in order to test 

and use TREM techniques in the management of the Ano Nuevo 

State Park in California is an example of communication between 

cultural resource managers and public stakeholders in relation to 

climate change adaptation.

International Organizations and Policy Statements 

(UNESCO-ICOMOS-ICROM-WHC-WMF)

International cultural heritage organizations have prepared multiple 

major and useful policies and guidance documents addressing 

climate change, alongside their local and site-specific activities (see 

case study). 

Effective communication extends in multiple directions, 

including efforts by organizations to educate different 

stakeholders through the dissemination of information 

about climate change threats to cultural heritage and 

innovative ways to facilitate connections between 

local communities and management agencies to care 

for cultural heritage at risk.

COMMUNICATION

Impacts

Case Study: 

Key International Documents

2006 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Heritage Center 

(WHC) Predicting and Managing the Effects of climate 

change on World Heritage (Vilnius Declaration):

Source: whc.unesco.org/document/6670

2007 UNESCO-WHC: Case Studies on Climate Change 

and World Heritage 

Source: whc.unesco.org/document/106621

2008 UNESCO-WHC: Policy Document on the Impacts 

of Climate Change on World Heritage Properties

Source: whc.unesco.org/document/10046

2010 UNESCO-WHC-International Centre for the Study 

of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property 

(ICCROM)-International Council on Monuments and 

Sites (ICOMOS): Managing Disaster Risk for World 

Heritage-World Heritage Resource Manual 

Source: whc.unesco.org/document/104522

2010 Sabbioni, C., P. Brimblecombe, and M. Cassar: The 

Atlas of Climate Change Impact on European Cultural 

Heritage: Scientific Analysis and Management Strategies. 

London, New York: Anthem.

2012 A Climate Change Action Plan for Historic Scotland 

2012-2017 

Source: https://www.historicenvironment.scot/

media/2611/climate-change-plan-2012.pdf

2012 Historic England: Climate Change and the 

Historic Environment 

Source: https://content.historicengland.org.uk/

images-books/publications/climate-change-and-thehistoric-environment/climate-change.pdf/

2015 Historic England: Historic England Action Plan 

2015-2018 (2.2.1)

Source: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/

publications/he-action-plan-2015-18/

International work on cultural heritage-climate change has produced much fundamental research and policy (World Heritage Magazine cover, permission requested).

 National Park Service 47
Citizen science is the collection and analysis of data 

relating to the natural world by members of the 

public in collaboration with professional scientists, a 

combination of Science and Communication. 

CITIZEN SCIENCE

Climate Change and California Archeology Volunteer Surveys 

(Society for California Archeology [SCA])

To address the risk coastal processes exacerbated by climate change 

pose to coastal archeological sites, SCA has organized a major effort 

to survey the full coastline of California. SCA members work with 

volunteers to conduct surveys and prepare survey reports. Teams 

include students and members of local Tribes. University departments, 

cultural resource management companies, state and federal agencies, 

and heritage non-profit organizations provide resources and logistical 

support. The first report on this work begins with climate change, 

its likely impacts to archeological resources, and the overall strategy 

for the SCA volunteer program. Subsequent reports cover results of 

surveys in different parts of the state (SCA 2016).

Exchange for Local Observations and Knowledge of the Arctic 

(ELOKA, National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of 

Colorado, Boulder)

ELOKA is a gathering place and facilitator of ‘local observations and 

knowledge’ for the Arctic. The ELOKA project is organized around archiving 

and dissemination of observations and research by local communities in 

the Arctic. It also provides technical support and networking between 

researchers.The ELOKA website hosts many different products focusing 

on local traditional knowledge (LTK) and climate monitoring. The Atlas of 

Community-Based Monitoring in a Changing Arctic, for example, is one 

such collaborative project that serves as a central database for projects 

centered on local community based monitoring of climate impacts on 

both cultural and natural resources.

Case Study: 

Exchange for Local Observations 

and Knowledge of the Arctic

As the effects of climate change become more apparent, 

Arctic residents and indigenous peoples have been increasingly involved in observations of environmental responses 

to changing weather patterns. Through local and traditional knowledge research and community-based monitoring, 

Arctic communities make significant contributions to understanding the nature of climate-driven environmental 

changes.

A key challenge is access to appropriate means to record, 

store, manage and share data and information from these 

monitoring efforts. Funded by the National Science Foundation, the Exchange for Local Observations and Knowledge of the Arctic (ELOKA) is a response to this challenge 

and provides multiple pathways for sharing of knowledge 

between Arctic residents, scientists, educators, policy makers, and the general public.

ELOKA is currently collaborating with Indigenous community members of the Hudson Bay region, Baffin Island, 

and Greenland. These community members are observing 

and reporting changes in their environments and sharing 

wisdom from generations of living in Arctic environments.

(Source: ELOKA website, https://eloka-arctic.org/)

View from edge of shore-fast ice at Barrow, AK (Photo by Matt Drunkenmiller via ELOKA).

48 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
CITIZEN SCIENCE

Scottish Coastal Archeology and the Problem of Erosion Trust 

(SCAPE, University of St. Andrews, Scotland)

SCAPE has developed multiple citizen science projects to address 

the challenges of long coastlines, large numbers of diverse cultural 

heritage sites at risk from coastal erosion, and limited staff and other 

resources. These projects include:

• Scottish Coastal Heritage at Risk (SCHARP): engages citizen 

volunteers to identify and monitor at-risk coastal heritage sites 

and gather data on the rate and scale of coastal erosion. Citizen 

monitoring is carried out through a smartphone app. The app includes 

a map of at-risk coastal cultural heritage prioritized by vulnerability 

and significance and encourages volunteers to submit photos and 

complete short site forms. These data are used to update site records 

and support research initiatives on erosion impacts and loss of coastal 

cultural heritage.

• ShoreDigs: works with selected communities associated with atrisk heritage to consider different preservation options and choose 

an approach that is most effective and meaningful for them. These 

include options such as community excavations, oral histories, films, 

and 3D models incorporated into museum exhibits. 

Adaptations of the SCHARP model in other countries include:

• Archéologie Littorale et Réchauffement Terrestre 

 (ALeRT, France)

Focuses on Brittany and works through a network of archeology 

departments, volunteers, regional societies, and museums. Volunteers 

are linked to specific areas of study and are alerted when weather 

conditions indicate a need for monitoring. 

• Arfordir Coastal Heritage (Wales)

Pan-Wales project to identify and monitor condition of archeological 

sites under threat of erosion in the coastal zone.

• Coastal and Intertidal Zone Archaeological Network 

 (CITiZAN, England)

Three-year project covering all coasts of England with teams in 

Portsmouth, London, and York. Engages trained citizens (“citizans”) 

and other members of the public. Training includes introduction to 

the intertidal zone, specialist skills and onsite training, and research 

and dissemination. 

• Monitoring the Archeology of Sligo’s Coastline Project 

 (MASC, Ireland)

Pilot project in County Sligo. It began with no funding and is organized 

to address private land access restrictions, which in Ireland begin at 

the high tide line. The project engages members of the public who 

use the coastline regularly, such as bird watchers, divers, sunbathers, 

and dog walkers, encourage them to report eroding cultural heritage. 

Reports are reviewed, acknowledged, and written up in news stories 

for the local media.

Screenshot of the SCHARP mobile app, which supports a citizen science approach for cultural heritage 

at risk from climate change 

(NPS photo/M. Rockman).

Citizen science for cultural resources in relation 

to climate change to date is often organized 

primarily around impacts, although the community 

engagement it fosters brings in the information and 

meaning components of cultural resources. 

 National Park Service 49
Catton, T. 1996. Wonderland: An Administrative History of Mount Rainier National Park. Seattle: Cultural Resources Program, National 

Park Service.

Devenport, Dael and Frank Hays. 2015. Case Study 4: Cultural Resources Inventory and Vulnerability Assessment, Bering Land Bridge 

National Preserve, Alaska Cape Krusenstern National Monument, Alaska. In Coastal Adaptation Strategies: Case Studies, edited by C. A. 

Schupp, R.L. Beavers, and M.A. Caffrey, 9-11.NPS 999/129700. Fort Collins, CO: National Park Service.

Dolan, S. and C. Gilbert, 2004. Road to Paradise: Cultural Landscape Inventory, Mount Rainier National Park, National Park Service. Cultural 

Landscape Inventories. 400002. NPS Pacific West Regional Office. Pacific West Regional Office/CLI Database. 

Fatorić, Sandra and Erin Seekamp. 2016. Connecting Landscape Adaptation and National Cultural Resource Policy to Climate Change and 

Cultural Resource Adaptation Decisions. Draft project report. Raleigh, North Carolina: Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism 

Management, North Carolina State University.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2005. Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations Into Hazard 

Mitigation Planning: State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To Guide. FEMA 386-6. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security.

Fishburn, Sally. 2013. Wooden Window Repair Methods (Saint-Gaudens National Historical Site, Blow Me Down Farm). Video published 23 

September. https://youtu.be/XVoc9HnHtCA.

Hicks, M., Á. Einarsson, A. Anamthawat-Jónsson, Á. Edwald, A. Friðriksson, Æ. Þ. Þórsson, and T. H. McGovern. 2015. Community and 

Conservation: Documenting Millennial Scale Sustainable Resource Use at Lake Mývatn, Iceland. In Oxford Manual of Historical Ecology, 

edited by Christian Isendahl and Daryl Stump. New York: Oxford University Press.

Monahan, W.B. and N.A. Fisichelli. 2014. Recent Climate Change Exposure of Tumacácori National Historical Park. Fort Collins, CO: National 

Park Service.

Moss, Jeremy M. 2010. Climate Change and Historic Structures: The Curious Case of the West Sanctuary Window. In Vanishing Treasures 

2010 Year-End Report, edited by Virginia Salazar-Halfmoon and Randy Skeirik, 12-16. Santa Fe, NM: U.S. National Park Service, Vanishing 

Treasures Program.

National Park Service (NPS). 2010. National Park Service Climate Change Response Strategy. Fort Collins, CO: Climate Change Response 

Program, National Park Service

NPS. 2012. Green Parks Plan. Washington, DC: Sustainable Operations and Climate Change, Park Planning Facilities and Lands, National 

Park Service.

NPS. 2012. Climate Change Action Plan 2012-2014. ort Collins, CO: Climate Change Response Program, National Park Service.

NPS. 2014. Preserving Coastal Heritage: Summary Report. Online at https://sites.google.com/site/democlimcult/file-cabinet.

NPS. 2016. National Climate Change Interpretation and Education Strategy. Washington, DC: National Park Service.

National Trust for Historic Preservation. 2016. Preservation Green Lab. http://forum.savingplaces.org/act/pgl. Accessed August 2016.

Newland, Michael. 2013. The Potential Effects of Climate Change on Cultural Resources within Point Reyes National Seashore, Marin County, 

California. Prepared for National Park Service Point Reyes National Seashore. ASC Project QC103 70-10. Rohnert Park, California: 

Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University. http://www.sonoma.edu/asc/publications/pdfs/climate_change_pt_reyes_natl_

seashore_draft.pdf

Olson, Randy. 2015. Houston We Have a Narrative: Why Science Needs Story. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rockman, Marcy. 2012. The Necessary Roles of Archeology in Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation. In Archeology in Society: Its 

Relevance in the Modern World, edited by Marcy Rockman and Joe Flatman, 193-215. New York: Springer.

REFERENCES

50 Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy
Rose, Matthew and Jonathan Star. 2013. Using Scenarios to Explore Climate Change: A Handbook for Pactioners. Denver: Natural Resource 

Stewardship and Science, National Park Service.

Schwadron, Margo. 2000. Archaeological Investigations at De Soto National Memorial: Perspectives on the Site Formation and Cultural 

History of the Shaw’s Point Site (8MA7), Manatee County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 53 (2-3):168-188.

Society for California Archeology (SCA). 2016. Society for California Archeology Climate Change and California + Studies. https://scahome.org/

sca-climate-change-and-california-archeology-studies/. Accessed August 22, 2016.

Western Carolina University. 2016. Coastal Hazards & Climate Change Asset Vulnerability Assessment Protocol: Project Description & 

Methodology. Prepared by the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines for NPS Sustainable Operations and Climate Change,, 

Washington, DC. Cullowhee, NC: Western Carolina University.

Walkinshaw, Eric and Susan Dolan. 2013. At the Water’s Edge: Using Log Structures to Protect Historic Road Embankments at Mount Rainier 

National Park. PowerPoint Presentation. Seattle: Park Cultural Landscapes Program, National Park Service.

 National Park Service 51
The NPS Cultural Resources Climate Change Strategy is the work of many hands. Issues and approaches for cultural resources 

were identified through multiple NPS-lead climate change-focused workshops, climate change projects in Cultural Resources, 

Partnerships, and Science Directorate programs, development of planning documents and handbooks through the Climate 

Change Response Program, on-site discussions with NPS park, regional, and program staff, technical assistance requests, 

park and regional funding proposals, and discussions of the Climate and Culture community of practice from 2011-2016. 

Architecture, case studies, and primary text of this Strategy were developed through partnerships with the University of 

Arizona and University of Maryland, College Park. In addition to the lead writers listed here, writing assistance for the case 

studies is credited in the individual case studies.

Lead writers: Marcy Rockman, Marissa Morgan, Sonya Ziaja, George Hambrecht, and Alison Meadow.

Student and intern assistants: Ennis Barbery, Kevin Gibbons, Jeff McGovern, Caitlin Smith, Elizabeth Van Dolah

Overall layout design: Gina Zangla, Creative Communications Services, Department of the Interior.

Early design support: Marissa Morgan and Joshua Wilks. Graphic 2 layout and design: Ryan Stubblebine and Amanda Sweeney

For additional information on the NPS response to climate change, visit www.nps.gov/climatechange.

Back cover photo: Portion of a Native Alaskan fishing camp near the edge of Bering Land Bridge National Preserve. The Alaska region has been experiencing notably warmer temperatures, resulting in loss of sea ice, melting permafrost, increases in coastal erosion, and concurrent damage to Native Alaskan 

villages and lifeways and diverse cultural resources (NPS photo/M. Rockman).

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Cultural Resources, Partnerships, and Science

Climate Change Response Program