Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Proposes a new framework for identifying and conserving traditional village heritage in mountainous areas, suggesting effective inter-village connections.
Conservation units for traditional village clusters are often delineated by administrative boundaries or spatial proximity. Yet rural built heritage is shaped by historical routes, terrain conditions, cultural homology, settlement morphology, and rural landscape settings. This mismatch is especially evident in mountainous regions, where conservation relevance does not necessarily follow planar distance. To address this issue, this study proposes relational contiguity as an operational concept for cluster-based conservation of traditional village heritage. Using 61 nationally recognized traditional villages in Gaoping City, Shanxi Province, China, as a case, we develop a socio-spatial network framework. The framework integrates composite node quality, cultural homology, MCR-based cost distance, inter-village association strength, and node-role differentiation into a modified spatial interaction model. This allows conservation relations to be identified as culturally meaningful, spatially plausible, and governance-relevant. The results show that only 167 of 1830 village pairs form effective links. This selective heritage conservation network is structured by the Dan River corridor, historical trade routes, high-value heritage nodes, and culturally homologous village groups. Four differentiated conservation units are identified: the fortified landscape conservation unit, the Dan River trade-corridor coordination unit, the landscape-ritual continuity unit, and the peripheral authenticity conservation unit. The study provides a planning support framework for translating inter-village heritage relations into coordinated conservation units for rural built heritage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: