Historic towns and villages face growing conservation pressures as globalization exposes tensions between universal standards and culturally specific practices. We compare Western frameworks associated with UNESCO and ICOMOS with China’s national regulations for historic settlement conservation, focusing on differing assumptions about heritage value, authenticity, and preservation–development trade-offs. Systematic text analysis of 17 foundational policy and doctrinal documents shows that the Venice Charter tradition prioritizes material authenticity and expert-led minimal intervention, whereas Chinese regulations operationalize spatial–visual integrity (traditional pattern and historic townscape) and explicit socio-economic integration. Building on this complementarity, we propose a provisional dual-track decision-support framework as a proof of concept. Track 1 safeguards material-authenticity cores for exceptional sites; Track 2 supports living-heritage cores for inhabited settlements; and hybrid designations accommodate mixed cases. Framework application unfolds in two stages: designation screening, followed by implementation-feasibility assessment, with a phased Track 2-Lite pathway for contexts in which binding participatory governance is not yet viable. Illustrated through four UNESCO World Heritage Sites using secondary data, the framework links cultural preservation with economic viability, climate adaptation, and community stewardship, while acknowledging that its thresholds and governance templates remain heuristic and require broader empirical validation. The approach supports SDG target 11.4 and SDG 13 and advances methodological and authenticity pluralism beyond simple preservation–development binaries.
Dayoub et al. (2026) studied this question.