Objective The integrity-based paradigm in cultural heritage conservation and utilization has achieved disciplinary consensus within the professional domain, where systematic documentation of historical − cultural heritage resources (HCHR) constitutes the foundation for resource integration and subsequent spatial specific planning. However, current research is still in its infancy and faces dual challenges: ambiguous criteria for integrity definition and insufficient methodologies for revealing intra-systemic relationships. While cultural landscape approaches have gained international traction, their application predominantly focuses on protected areas, rarely addressing critical aspects of integrity assessment, resource selection, or boundary delineation, for which a relational network has yet to be established in the sense of a system. Aiming to explore a viable path for the collation and integration of HCHR, this research proposes an innovative framework that shifts from single-entity feature extraction to systemic integrity characterization, investigating how constituent elements functionally interact within integral configurations.
Methods Through inductive − deductive analysis of literature and case studies, the research first deconstructs the operational logic of cultural landscape approach. Subsequently, field theory is introduced to establish a cultural landscape field (CLF) conceptual model via interdisciplinary theoretical synthesis, involving: 1) Systematic review; 2) ontological modeling of CLF; 3) development of an association-based indicator system integrating resource networks, value hierarchies, and historical contexts.
Results This research establishes three pivotal advancements through systematic inquiry. First, critical examination of existing cultural landscape methodologies identifies two fundamental means addressing definitional ambiguities and interpretive enhancement in HCHR research: integrity value evaluation and historical − thematic information correlation. These means respectively resolve the criteria formulation for integral delineation and the methodological reinforcement for systemic relationship revelation. Second, field theory demonstrates significant epistemological and methodological value by its features of the cognitive topology. Specifically, the research showcases the capacity of the field theory to formally describe the aggregate effects and integral characteristics that arise from the interactions among diverse entities, as well as the role played by components within such integral manifestations. Through synthesizing theoretical postulates from multidisciplinary scholarship on spatial interpretation, this research establishes the application logic of field paradigm in spatial cognition and mechanistic explanation: Conceptual demarcation of the spatial field entity coupled with identification of its core driving forces; abstraction of operational logic encompassing participatory actor typologies and their interaction patterns; elucidation of the mechanistic relationships between constituent elements and the integral system through nodal field effects. Moreover, by incorporating the connotations of cultural landscape, this research posits that cultural cohesion is the fundamental rationale for the existence and operation of the CLF in its entirety. The actors involved in the overall operation and their relational network are highly generalized into an ontological model of the CLF, which consists of the subject, object, place, and the three-dimensional relationships among them. Third, in the context of the CLF, the field effect of cultural cohesion, which refers to the associative mechanism between landscape objects and the field (comprising two aspects: strength and mode of association), holds the key to identification and interpretation. It is posited that substituting the identification of relationships with that of indicators represents an effective means of uncovering the intricate associations between elements and the cultural landscape in its entirety. Accordingly, the establishment of indicator types that interconnect resources, values, networks, and historical contexts, based on the three-dimensional relationships within the ontology model, not only offers a integrity value type grounded in the nodal field effect but also provides the basis for constructing an associative system centered around historical and cultural themes. The development of an interpretive framework is enabled by this, in turn enabling a formal portrayal of the organizational structure and operational mechanism of the CLF. Main operating steps of the framework are as follows: 1) Unearthing of potential elements by exploring the scope of cultural cohesion coverage; 2) definition of integrity by identifying associative indicators and comparing the degree of association; 3) analysis of the organizational structure by integrating the associative similarity and spatial proximity of elements; 4) representation of the overall operational mechanism at multiple levels through the combined analysis of associative indicators.
Conclusion The CLF interpretative framework advances HCHR conservation theory by bridging relational analysis and spatial practice. Its core contribution lies in translating abstract integrity concepts into operational planning tools through: 1) An association-driven resource identification system; 2) geospatial mapping of cultural cohesion effects; 3) mechanism representation combining historical narratives with spatial configurations. This paradigm shift from entity-based to relationship-focused conservation provides an actionable methodology for sustainable HCHR management, effectively reconciling theoretical discourse with practical planning implementation.
DownLoad: