Adaptive reuse of architectural heritage is increasingly becoming a bridge between heritage conservation and sustainable development. However, how authenticity is evidenced in this process remains insufficiently discussed. This systematic review follows the PRISMA guidelines and analyses 176 studies published between 2015 and 2025. Through full-text coding, we identify five interrelated evidence dimensions: Culture, Environment, Society, Technology, and Policy. The findings show that authenticity is most often evidenced through technical, environmental, and cultural evidence, while social and policy evidence is less frequently translated into decision-relevant criteria. Configuration analysis further indicates that authenticity is commonly addressed through cross-dimensional evidence rather than a single criterion, with environmental and technical evidence more frequently represented. Existing studies mainly focus on performance-oriented intervention pathways, with less attention to legitimacy, inclusion, and institutional accountability. Future research should develop traceable decision-evidence chains linking cultural meaning, environmental performance, social continuity, technical feasibility, and institutional responsibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ma et al. (2026) studied this question.