Analysis of urban vulnerability as a tool for cultural heritage preservation: The cases of the medium-sized historical ensembles in Andalusia

Analysis of urban vulnerability as a tool for cultural heritage preservation. The cases of the medium-sized historical ensembles in Andalusia Daniel Navas-Carrillo, Blanca del Espino Hidalgo, Juan-Andrés Rodríguez-Lora, Teresa Pérez-Cano Abstract: This paper presents the urban vulnerability assessment as a complementary resource in heritage preservation policies, through the analysis of the thirty-nine medium-sized cities that have been listed as Historical Ensemble in Andalusia (Spain). The research seeks to make a sequential approach that addresses, from the general –the conceptual framework on urban vulnerability and the characterization of the analysis sample– to the particular –the analysis of the socio-economic, socio-demographic or residential vulnerability applied to the intermediate scale which has not been in-deep studied yet–. For this, it proposes to adopt the methodology implemented by the Spanish Ministry of Development in the Atlas of Urban Vulnerability, providing a territorial lecture of the results. The study concludes that medium-sized cities do not present a level of vulnerability lower to the largest ones but detecting specific urban weaknesses that should be addressed to improve the response of these cities to heritage preservation. Keywords: Baetica, cultural heritage, heritage conservation, intermediate cities, urban heritage, urban planning, vulnerability indicators Análisis de la vulnerabilidad urbana como herramienta de protección del Patrimonio Cultural. El caso de los Conjuntos Históricos en ciudades medias de Andalucía Resumen: Este artículo proponer evaluar la vulnerabilidad urbana como herramienta complementaria en las políticas de protección patrimonial mediante el análisis de las treinta y nueve ciudades medias declaradas Conjunto Histórico en Andalucía (España). La investigación intenta realizar una aproximación secuencial que aborda desde lo general, el marco conceptual sobre vulnerabilidad urbana y la caracterización de la muestra analizada, hasta lo concreto, el análisis de la vulnerabilidad socioeconómica, sociodemográfica y residencial en la escala intermedia, aún no estudiada en profundidad. Para ello, se propone adoptar la metodología implementada por el Ministerio de Fomento de España en el Atlas de Vulnerabilidad Urbana, proporcionando una lectura territorial de los resultados. El estudio concluye que las ciudades medias presentan un nivel de vulnerabilidad que no es inferior al de las de mayor tamaño, sin embargo, se identifican ciertas debilidades que deberán ser abordadas para mejorar la respuesta de estas ciudades a la conservación de su patrimonio. Palabras clave: Baetica, ciudades intermedias, conservación patrimonial, indicadores de vulnerabilidad, patrimonio histórico, patrimonio urbano, planificación urbana Introduction —Research definition This research proposes the inclusion of urban vulnerability assessment as an additional tool to be considered in the cultural heritage preservation policies. This hypothesis is based on the fact that, just as other external aggressors are taken into account in preventive conservation, the urban weaknesses should also be considered. The social, economic and residential weaknesses could reduce the capacity as a collective that cities have for preserving their heritage. This vision utterly implies an urban approach to the heritage of these cities, beyond the individual assessment of their cultural assets. This vision is also aligned with the change produced on the concept of heritage in recent decades. Attention has shifted from primarily objective considerations to the subject which demands it (Ruiz Castillo 2004: 18). For this purpose, this work has adapted the methodology provided by the Spanish Ministry of Development in Ge-conservación Conservação | Conservation Daniel Navas-Carrillo, Blanca del Espino Hidalgo, Juan-Andrés Rodríguez-Lora, Teresa Pérez-Cano Analysis of urban vulnerability as a tool for cultural heritage preservation. The cases of... pp. 171-185 172 2003). Consequently, the term vulnerability has been widely accepted as the socio-economic risks that could affect society (Bankoff et al., 2004). Since this point of view, it has entered into a variety of disciplines such as disaster risk analysis (Wisner et al., 2004), natural hazard geographical research (Weichselgarnter, 2001; Cannon, 2008; Ran et al., 2020), climate change impacts (Fussel, 2007; Lankao & Qin, 2011; Singh, 2017) or social-environmental approaches (Krellenberg et al., 2016). Thus, the vulnerability is currently related to resilience, a concept particularly extended in urban and regional planning in recent years (Cardoso, 2018; Faulkner, 2020). Terms that are in opposite sides (Godschalk, 2003), but should not be characterized as antonyms (Patel et al., 2020). The vulnerability has also been applied to topics regarding social inclusion (Levron, 2010), such us, poverty, gender, class, caste, ethnicity, disability or elderly (Twigg, 2015). This perspective can be extended to urban studies. When done, it is inexorably linked to the application of preventive actions towards the inclusion of inhabitants (Ministerio de Fomento, 2012). It should be noted that their study has increased since 2008 due to the consequences of the economic crisis (Matesanz Parellada, 2017:29). Thus, the urban vulnerability can be understood as that process of unrest in cities produced by the combination of multiple dimensions of disadvantage, in which any hope of upward social mobility (to overcome their social condition of exclusion) is seen as extremely difficult to achieve. On the contrary, it carries a perception of insecurity and fear of the possibility of downward social mobility, of worsening of their current living conditions (Aguacil, 2006:161). However, it can be affirmed that the concept of urban vulnerability refers both to the increase of threats and risks that affect society and to the weakening of mechanisms to deal with such problems (Aguacil et al., 2014:18). In that sense, we can relate vulnerability to concepts largely addressed as the right to the city proposed by Henri Lefebvre (1968). Lately, it has been developed and reclaimed by social movements to fight against contemporary urban issues such as commodification and capitalism of the city, the decrease of social interaction and the rise of spatial inequalities and exclusion (Harvey, 2003). As can be seen, urban vulnerability is, in short, directly related to the traditional dimensions of sustainability: economic balance, social equity and environmental resilience. However, a fourth dimension has been proposed as the centre or conceptual framework for the previous triangle: culture (Hawkes 2001). It is understood as to how our ancestors have adapted to the constant changes in environmental conditions throughout the cycles and have thus left a legacy to our times: cultural heritage, which must be understood as a source of inspiration, innovation and creativity the Atlas of Urban Vulnerability. This methodology has been validated through its application in different urban contexts of the Spanish geography (Temes, 2014; Antón-Alonso & Porcel, 2017; Rodríguez Peña, 2017; De Santiago Rodríguez, 2018). However, it has had a more significant impact on the analysis of the largest cities (Hernández Aja, Rodríguez Alonso, Rodríguez Suárez, 2018), finding a gap in the urban vulnerability analysis of the so-called medium-sized cities. In this sense, the research tries to identify the specific vulnerability issues of these intermediate urban scale, which differ from those of large cities. Accurately, the weight of the system of medium-sized cities in the functional organisation is a fundamental characteristic that defines Andalusia; geographical framework analysed in this research. Andalusia is the most populous and the second-largest region in Spain, and approximately 60% of the autonomous territory is under the influence of a medium-sized city representing in population terms close to 15% of the inhabitants in the whole region. Besides, the historical relevance of the Andalusian medium-sized cities has been evidenced in national and international references (Madoz 1846-1850; Braun and Hogenberg 1572-1618). These circumstances have led to propose an analysis taking territorial organisation factors into account, according to the particular geographical characteristics, the historical evolution, the spatial planning or the specific legislation of each territory. In this sense, it seeks to provide a comparative study among different urban scales, which has not been developed yet. On this regard, it is also important to mention that current territorial planning international strategies defend a polycentric model based on medium-sized cities. These cities not only favour a lower consumption of resources but also generate a more immediate relationship with the nearby rural environment. They contribute to avoid depopulation and acquire a key position in mitigating and adapting to climate change. Endowed with practically the same essential urban services as the large cities, they lack environmental problems, which ultimately means the increase of the population’s quality of life (Del Espino Hidalgo & Navas Carrillo, 2018:146). —Urban vulnerability and its repercussion on heritage preservation The term vulnerability applied to urban dimension arises during the cold war linked to the need for intervention in many eastern cities (Bankoff, 2019). In general terms, we can define it as a state of high exposure to certain risks and uncertainties, in combination with a reduced ability to protect or defend oneself against those risks and uncertainties and cope with their negative consequences (United Nations, Ge-conservación nº 17/ 2020. ISSN: 1989-8568 173 to face current challenges. This approach evidences the need of including cultural heritage in sustainable development frameworks (UNESCO 2018), what necessarily must be connected to urban vulnerability assessment of the built cultural heritage, that is, the historical centres of the cities. Consequently, this work aims to evaluate urban vulnerability over a selection of urban areas – the historical centres and, particularly, the protected ones – of an urban category pointed out as an example of sustainability and equilibrium – medium-sized cities. The system of medium-sized cities of Andalusia as a case study — Definition of a medium-sized city Medium-sized cities have been considered from the European directives as to the urban category with the best qualities for urban-territorial sustainability (European Union 2011: VII), what has encouraged the increase of their protagonism in territorial planning and development strategies, as well as to in framework policies. In the second half of the 20th century, many countries of the European Union focused part of their development policies on the dynamization of mediumsized cities. The first attempts derive from the theory of the central places of Walter Christaller (1933), extended by Auguste Lösch (1940) and from the concept of the pole of development in the regional scope used by Perroux (1955). Hirschman (1958) would formulate a theoretical body to be used in territorial planning for the promotion of the later called intermediate cities. Currently, their defence is based on the sustainability of a polycentric territorial model against metropolization processes (Vilagrasa 2000). In this sense, in recent years, this urban category has aroused particular interest in the quality of life it presents, as it lacks many of the environmental problems of large cities, as well as in the very scale of the city that makes it more humane and accessible. On the other hand, medium-sized cities favour a more rational use of resources, guaranteeing access to specialised goods and services in conditions like those carried out in large urban areas (Llop Torné and Hoeflich de Duque 2007: 10). As for their definition, it should not be done exclusively in demographic terms, but understood by their strategic position within the functional organisation of a nearby region or regional scope, and far from the synergies of the principal regional centres, as stated in the Unesco Report on Intermediate Cities (Bellet Sanfeliu and Llop Torné 1999). According to it, the concept of the medium-sized city goes beyond the mere intermediate position between the large metropolitan areas and the rural sphere. It is necessary to consider the socio-economic and cultural conditions of each territory, which will determine the different municipal roles, regardless of the number of inhabitants. For Bellet and Beltrão, (2009: 43), “mediumsized cities articulate the territory and function as reference centres for a more or less immediate territory”. In the case of Andalusia, they are officially recognised by the Regional Spatial Plan (approved by Decree 206/2006, of 28 November), which proposes a hierarchical territorial structure – the System of Cities – distinguishing three categories: Regional Centres, Medium-sized Cities and Rural Areas. This classification has been made based on demographic size, diversity and dynamics of its economic base and functional weight. Although the size of a medium-sized city should not be measured in absolute terms, in Andalusian, it would correspond to populations between 100,000 and 15,000 inhabitants, coinciding with the hypothesis of Merinero and Lara (2010: 2). — Cultural heritage characterization of the Medium-sized cities of Andalusia This study follows the Andalusian Regional Spatial Plan, in Spanish Plan de Ordenación Territorial de Andalucía (Junta de Andalucía, 2006). This document includes a total of sixty-one medium-sized cities in the Andalusian geography [figure 1]. The research has selected those that have been or are in the process of being listed as Historical Ensemble. This classification means public recognition and legal protection of their heritage values as a whole. In the past, this responsibility exclusively corresponded to the Government of Spain. Currently, the Regional Government is also in charge to classify a city as Historical Ensemble. The selected cities have been analysed according to their position in the territory. It has been necessary to distinguish between interior and coastal geographic domain due to the different evolution they have experienced during the 20th century. Special mention requires coastal cities since their development has been mainly boosted by mass tourism since the 60s. Out of the forty medium-sized cities in inner Andalusia (Del Espino Hidalgo 2015: 62), twenty-six (65%) have been listed as Historical Ensembles or are in process [table 1]. Besides, out of the twenty-one medium-sized cities located on the Andalusian coast (Navas-Carrillo et al., 2019: 250-251), thirteen (61.9%) have been listed or are under study. In addition to the individual built heritage assets, this classification assesses the urban, spatial and landscape configuration of these thirty-nine cities analysed as a whole. International agencies as UNESCO also has recognised the heritage value of several of these medium-sized cities. For instance, Úbeda and Baeza (Jaen) are listed on the World Heritage List as “Renaissance Monumental Ensembles of Úbeda and Baeza” (UNESCO 2003: 121), or the “Antequera Dolmens Site” (UNESCO 2016: 223), located in the Province of Málaga. Daniel Navas-Carrillo, Blanca del Espino Hidalgo, Juan-Andrés Rodríguez-Lora, Teresa Pérez-Cano Analysis of urban vulnerability as a tool for cultural heritage preservation. The cases of... pp. 171-185 174 Figure 1.- Andalusian Urban System. Source: Compiled by the authors based on the Spatial Plan of Andalusia (Junta de Andalucía, 2006). Table 1.- Geographic Domain, Territorial Unit and Medium-sized Cities listed as Historical Ensemble in Andalusia. Source: Compiled by authors based on data from the Spatial Plan of Andalusia (Junta de Andalucía, 2006) and the Institute of Statistics and Cartography of Andalusia (IECA, 2019). Geographic Domain Territorial Unit Medium-sized cities according to the Spatial Plan of Andalusia Inner Guadalquivir Valley Aljarafe-Condado-Marismas La Palma del Condado (10,761 inhabitants) Bajo Guadalquivir Lebrija (27,524 inhabitants) Utrera (50,728 inhabitants) Campiña y Sierra Sur de Sevilla Arahal (19,526 inhabitants) Carmona (28,531 inhabitants) Écija (39,873 inhabitants) Estepa (12,505 inhabitants) Marchena (19,457 inhabitants) Osuna (17,560 inhabitants) Guadalquivir Valley Palma del Río (21,064 inhabitants) Campiña y Subbético de Córdoba y Jaén Lucena (42,605 inihabitants) Priego de Córdoba (22,408 inhabitants) Alcalá la Real (21,605 inhabitants) Centro Norte de Jaén Andújar (36,793inhabitants) Baeza (15,841 inhabitants) La Carolina (15,261 inhabitants) Úbeda (34,345 inhabitants) Ge-conservación nº 17/ 2020. ISSN: 1989-8568 175 Geographic Domain Territorial Unit Medium-sized cities according to the Spatial Plan of Andalusia Inner Baetic Mountains and Valleys Serranías de Cádiz y Ronda Arcos de la Frontera (30,700 inhabitants) Ubrique (16,597 inhabitants) Ronda (33,877 inhabitants) Depresiones de Antequera y Granada Loja (20,342 inhabitants) Antequera (41,239 inhabitants) Regional Centre of Jaén Martos (24,215 inhabitants) Regional Centre of Granada Santa Fe (15,157 inhabitants) Altiplanicies Orientales Baza (20,412 inhabitants) Guadix (18,422 inhabitants) Coastal Regional Centre of Huelva Moguer (22,088 inhabitants) Costa Noroeste de Cádiz Rota (29,109 inhabitants) Sanlúcar de Barrameda (68,684 inhabitants) Regional Centre of Bahía de Cádiz-Jérez Chiclana de la Frontera (84,489 inhabitants) Puerto de Santa María (88,405 inhabitants) Puerto Real (41,627 inhabitants) San Fernando (95,979 inhabitants) La Janda Conil de la Frontera (22,529 inhabitants) Regional Centre of Bahía de Algeciras San Roque (31,218 inhabitants) Tarifa (18,162 inhabitants) Costa del Sol Mijas (82,742 inhabitants) Vélez-Málaga y Axarquía Vélez-Málaga (81,643 inhabitants) Costa Tropical Almuñécar (26,514 inhabitants) Methodology — Criteria for its application to the study sample To meet the defined objectives, a system of mediumsized cities of heritage character has been chosen as a case study: those officially recognised in Andalusia purposing their preservation. That is, listed as Historical Ensembles according to what is indicated by Law 14/2007 on the Historical Heritage of Andalusia (Junta de Andalucía 2007). For this purpose, it has been necessary to determinate the criteria based on what urban vulnerability needs to be addressed. In the case of the Spanish official framework, the Ministry of Development has developed a methodology to try to objectively analyse Urban Vulnerability through twenty urban indicators and from four perspectives (socio-demographic, socio-economic, residential and subjective). The resulting product can be checked on a web application, namely Atlas of Urban Vulnerability, firstly published in 2011. The methodology was reviewed to become part of the Urban Vulnerability Observatory in 2015, thanks to the approval of the Land and Urban Rehabilitation Law (Ministerio de Fomento 2015). This digital tool is playing a key role in the development of urban regeneration policies, including the Integrated Sustainable Urban Development Strategies (SUDS) as the result of implementing the Europe 2020 strategy to the field of urban development (Matesanz Parellada, 2018: 92). This work adopts the methodology provided by the aforementioned Atlas using the data supplied by the Spanish National Statistics Institute in the most recent Population and Housing Census (2011). Although it is a statistical study based on 9% of regular residents, it is the last unified analysis for the set of Spanish municipalities and, therefore, with the same criteria for sampling, data collection and result interpretation. The next update is scheduled for release in 2021. Meanwhile, the National Statistics Institute elaborates the Continuous Household Survey annually since 2013. However, its data are grouped by provinces, and, consequently, it is not possible to use them in this research. Besides, the latest version of the Spanish Census does not provide the information needed for Subjective indicators; whose Table 1.- (continuation) Daniel Navas-Carrillo, Blanca del Espino Hidalgo, Juan-Andrés Rodríguez-Lora, Teresa Pérez-Cano Analysis of urban vulnerability as a tool for cultural heritage preservation. The cases of... pp. 171-185 176 3. Results — Urban heritage protection. Urban planning as a preservation tool Before evaluating the degree of heritage preservation that characterizes the analysed cities, it is necessary to expose the legal framework that currently regulates it. In Spain, the heritage preservation is carried out by different public administrations in various development levels: Central, Regional and Local Governments. The Government of Spain, through the Heritage Law, in force since 1985, can list heritage elements as Bien de Interés Cultural –hereafter BIC- (Cultural Interest Asset), the highest level of protection in the country. These elements can be listed as Monuments, Historical Gardens, Historical Ensembles, Historical Sites or Archaeological Areas. Furthermore, heritage preservation can also be articulated since the regional level. Thus, in the case of Andalusia and after the transfer of competences in heritage matters in 1984, the first Andalusian Heritage Law was approved in 1991 (Junta de Andalucía 1991), updated in 2007 (Junta de Andalucía 2007). According to this law, the Cultural Interest Assets also be listed as Places of Ethnological Interest, Places of Industrial Interest, or Heritage Areas. Besides, it introduces a second level of heritage protection called Bien de Catalogación General –hereafter BCG- (General Cataloguing Asset). Both of them, and those Andalusian movable assets listed in the Inventario General de Bienes Muebles del Patrimonio Histórico Español (General Inventory of Movable Property of the Spanish Historical Heritage), are included in the Catálogo General del Patrimonio Histórico Andaluz –hereafter CGPHA- (General Catalogue of the Andalusian Historical Heritage). Nonetheless, Local Governments has also a significant role in the safeguarding of heritage due to their proximity to the asset to be preserved. According to the Ley de Ordenación Urbanística de Andalucía –hereafter LOUA- (Andalusian Urban Planning Law), each municipality is obliged to include heritage preservation measures in the different urban planning instruments approved. In this sense, it is relevant to clarify that the Spanish legislation considers several urban development levels, whose impact on heritage preservation -given the scope of the measuresis consequently uneven. The first instrument to be considered is the Plan General de Ordenación Urbana -hereafter PGOU- (General Urban Development Plan). In some cases, general urban planning is regulated by the so-called Normas Subsidiarias -hereafter NNSS- (Urban Subsidiary Rules). They are repealed instruments, but which are still used in small towns after being updated according to the LOUA’s requirements. On a second level, the Planes Especial de Protección – hereafter PEP- (Preservation Urban Plans) should be mentioned. According to Article 14 of the LOUA, these plans have, among other purposes, to conserve, protect analysis would require a qualitative approach based on social perception (Ruiz, 2019:34). For this reason, the research has focused on the socio-demographic, socioeconomic and residential dimensions. Specifically, the following fifteen indicators have been analysed: - Socio-demographic vulnerability: Percentage of seniors aged 75 or more (I1), Percentage of families with only a person aged 64 or more (I2), Percentage of families with only an adult and a child (I3), Percentage of foreign population (I4), Percentage of foreign children (I5). -Socio-economic vulnerability: Percentage of unemployed population (I6), Percentage of unemployed young population (I7), Percentage of contingent workers (I8), Percentage of workers without qualification (I9), Percentage of people without primary education (I10). - Residential vulnerability: Percentage of dwellings with less than 30 m² (I11), Average adequate living area by inhabitant (I12), Percentage of population in dwellings without a toilet or WC (I13), Percentage of dwellings in ruined or deficient buildings (I14), Percentage of dwellings in buildings built before 1940 (I15). Based on these considerations, the fifteen indicators mentioned above have been applied to the twentysix medium-sized interior cities and thirteen coastal ones that have been listed as Heritage Ensembles. The numerical and percentage indicator values have been provided for the whole sample using the data supplied by the Population and Housing Census. This study includes a comparative analysis with the eight provincial capitals, which have the role of regional centres within the territorial organization of Andalusia. In order to properly analyse the results, two different general territorial domains should be identified within the set of Andalusian medium-sized cities. The geographical position, the substantial economic and demographic development or the particular dynamics of urban growth makes the coastal territorial structure differs significantly from the inner one, mostly traditionally characterised as agrocities. Besides, the territorial structure of inner Andalusia is marked by the presence of two structuring elements of the Andalusian territory: the Guadalquivir River and the Baetic System. In the first phase, the complete information has been represented using a sequential colour scheme (the lowest levels in green and the highest ones in red), as shown in Tables 2 and 3. Subsequently, transforming the absolute values into quintiles, the general urban vulnerability index has been calculated, as well as the one corresponding to each of the three dimensions analysed: Socio-demographic, Socio-economic and Residential. The territorial distribution of these values has been represented through Geographic Information Systems, which has allowed to provide a territorial lecture of the urban vulnerability in Andalusia [figure 2]. Ge-conservación nº 17/ 2020. ISSN: 1989-8568 177 and improve the urban environment and, primarily, the bearer or expressive heritage of urban, architectural, historical or cultural values. In both instruments, the heritage preservation is mainly articulated through the socalled Protection Catalogues, which contain the detailed list and the precise identification of the assets and spaces that, due to their value, must be subject to particular conservation. Its formulation and approval can also be carried out independently. According to the aforementioned urban and heritage preservation policies, the set of case studies have been analysed distinguishing again between interior and coastal geographic domain. As table 2 shows, 9 out of 26 (34.62%) cities studied in inner Andalusia are still regulated with NNSS, 5 of them have initiated the drafting of their PGOU, but they have not been approved definitely. 15 out of 26 (57.69%) of the General Plans had been approved before the LOUA’s enactment, but all of them have been adapted MEDIUM-SIZED INTERIOR CITY CURRENT URBAN PLAN PROTECTION CATALOGUE ADAPTATION TO LOUA PROTECTION URBAN PLAN ADDITIONAL REGISTER Arcos de la Frontera (Cádiz) PGOU 1994 PGOU 2014 (1) Yes 2010 2007 - Ubrique (Cádiz) NNSS 1987 PGOU 2015 (1) Yes 2010 No - Lucena (Córdoba) PGOU 1999 Yes 2008 No - Palma del Río (Córdoba) PGOU 2005 Yes - No - Priego de Córdoba (Córdoba) PGOU 2015 Yes - No - Baza (Granada) PGOU 2010 Yes - No - Guadix (Granada) PGOU 2002 Yes 2010 No - Loja (Granada) NNSS 1993 Yes 2009 No - Santa Fe (Granada) NNSS 1998 Yes(2) 2009 No - La Palma del Condado (Huelva) PGOU 2005 Yes - No - Alcalá la Real (Jaén) PGOU 2005 Yes - No - Andújar (Jaén) PGOU 2010 Yes - No - Baeza (Jaén) PGOU 2011 Yes - 1990 - La Carolina (Jaén) NNSS 1993 Yes 2011 No - Martos (Jaén) PGOU 2013 Yes - No - Úbeda (Jaén) PGOU 1996 Yes(2) 2009 1989(3) - Antequera (Málaga) PGOU 2010 Yes (2) - 1993 - Ronda (Málaga) PGOU 1991 Yes (2) 2010 - - Arahal (Sevilla) NNSS 1994 PGOU 2019 (1) Yes 2009 2014 - Carmona (Sevilla) NNSS 1983 PGOU 2012 (1) Yes 2009 2009 - Écija (Sevilla) PGOU 2009 Yes - 2002 - Estepa (Sevilla) NNSS 1988 Yes 2011 - - Lebrija (Sevilla) PGOU 2016 Yes - 2018 - Marchena (Sevilla) NNSS 1995 PGOU 2007(1) Yes 2009 1994 - Osuna (Sevilla) NNSS 1985 PGOU 2017 (1) Yes(2) 2009 - - Utrera (Sevilla) PGOU 2001 PGOU 2015 (1) Yes 2008 2009(4) - NNSS = Urban Subsidiary Rules | PGOU = General Urban Development Plan | LOUA = Andalusian Urban Planning Law (2002) ( 1) provisional approval | (2) incomplete | (3) updated in 2000 | (4) updated in 2018 Table 2.- Heritage protection by urban planning in medium-sized interior cities. Source: Compiled by authors based on the Regional Government’s Planning Database (Junta de Andalucía, 2019). to its articulate. Consequently, all the PGOU and NNSS include heritage preservation measures, although only 21 of them include a protection catalogue. In parallel, 10 out of 26 (38.46%) cities have approved a Preservation Plan for their Historical Ensembles. In the cities analysed in the coast, as table 3 shows, only 1 out of 13 (7.69%) is still regulated by NNSS which were adapted to the current legal framework in 2010. 8 out of 13 (61.54%) General Plans had been approved before the LOUA’s enactment, but all of them have been already updated. Consequently, all the PGOU and NNSS include heritage preservation measures, although only 11 of them include a protection catalogue. One of them, the Puerto de Santa María, has approved an additional heritage register. About Preservation Planning for their Historical Ensembles, 10 out of 13 (76.92%) cities have initiated its formulation; nevertheless, only 6 of them (46.15%) have definitely approved it. Daniel Navas-Carrillo, Blanca del Espino Hidalgo, Juan-Andrés Rodríguez-Lora, Teresa Pérez-Cano Analysis of urban vulnerability as a tool for cultural heritage preservation. The cases of... pp. 171-185 178 slightly higher (I6-I10). The residential vulnerability can be considered equivalent in both cases since half of the indicators are slightly higher in medium-sized cities and the other half in the regional centres [figure 2]. In inner Andalusia [table 3], two particular situations can be recognised based on the intensity and level of consolidation of these territories: Guadalquivir Valley (high intensity) and Baetic Mountains and Valleys (moderate intensity). In the first case, the territorial unities of the Campiña de Sevilla and the Bajo Guadalquivir should be highlighted. As table 3 shows, cities such as Arahal, Carmona, Écija, Lebrija, Marchena, Osuna or Utrera stand out for higher values in socio-economic vulnerability (I6-I10) compared to the rest of the dimensions except for Estepa. This city also has high levels of socio-economic vulnerability, but exclusivately in The medium-sized coastal cities present average levels of vulnerability in the three dimensions that have been analysed. All the indicators are comprised between the second and fourth quintile. It should be noted that their socio-demographic vulnerability is lower to the regional centres. This fact is especially significative in the percentage of the elderly population (I1-I2) and the percentage of single-parent families (I3). By the contrary, their socioeconomic vulnerability is slightly higher (I6-I10). Although they are characterised for certain uniformity, some general conclusions can be drawn. In average, they also present medium levels of vulnerability in the three dimensions. The results are similar to the coastal cities; being the indicators comprised between the second and fourth quintile. The socio-demographic vulnerability (I1-I5) is lower to the regional centres and the socio-economic vulnerability MEDIUM-SIZED COASTAL CITY CURRENT URBAN PLAN PROTECTION CATALOGUE ADAPTATION TO LOUA PROTECTION URBAN PLAN ADDITIONAL REGISTER Chiclana de la Frontera (Cádiz) PGOU 2016 Yes --- Conil de la Frontera (Cádiz) PGOU 2005 No 2013 2003(1) - El Puerto de Santa María (Cádiz) PGOU 2012 Yes 2009 (1) 2015 Puerto Real (Cádiz) PGOU 2009 Yes - 1997 - Rota (Cádiz) PGOU 1994 Yes 2009 2019(1) - San Fernando (Cádiz) PGOU 2011 Yes - 2008 - San Roque (Cádiz) PGOU 2000 Yes 2009 2009 - Sanlúcar de Barrameda (Cádiz) PGOU 1996 Yes 2011 - - Tarifa (Cádiz) PGOU 1989 Yes 2010 2012 - Almuñécar (Granada) PGOU 1987 Yes(2) 2009 2013 - Moguer (Huelva) NNSS 1992 Yes 2010 - - Mijas (Málaga) PGOU 1999 Yes (2) 2010 2019 (1) - Vélez-Málaga (Málaga) PGOU 1996 No 2009 2008 (3) - NNSS = Urban Subsidiary Rules | PGOU = General Urban Development Plan | LOUA = Andalusian Urban Planning Law (2002) (1) provisional approval | (2) incomplete | (3) updated in 2014 Table 3.- Heritage protection by urban planning in medium-sized interior cities. Source: Compiled by authors based on the Regional Government’s Planning Database (Junta de Andalucía, 2019). Figure 2.- Average levels of urban vulnerability in medium-sized cities (blue) and regional centres (black) in inner and coastal Andalusia. Source: Compiled by the authors based on data from Spanish Statistical Office (INE, 2011). Ge-conservación nº 17/ 2020. ISSN: 1989-8568 179 indicators I7 to I8. These data do not mean that the other values are in minimum positions. Thus, cities as Estepa, Lebrija, Marchena or Osuna show high levels of residential vulnerability, specially I15. Besides, for the cases of Estepa and Lebrija, high levels are observed in indicators I12, I13 and I14. In the North-Centre of Jaén, the principal characteristic is the vulnerability levels of La Carolina. In this case, most of the indicators are at low levels. 9 out of 18 (50%) are under the first percentile except for indicators I6 and I13 which levels are close to the maximum. Furthermore, Priego de Córdoba stands out among the group of cities that constitute the Campiña and Subbética de Córdoba-Jaén. This medium-sized city has almost non-existent levels of residential vulnerability, on the contrary, has maximum levels in I4, I5, I8, I9 and I10 indicators. La Palma del Condado and Palma del Río, the only example analysed in their related territorial unit, are characterized by having most of their values at minimum levels. In the Baetic Mountains and Valleys, five territorial units have been analysed. Among the case studies, Baza highlights as the city that presents the highest number of indicators at maximum levels at the axis drawn by the cities inserted in the Altiplanicies Orientales and the Depresiones de Antequera y Granada. Mainly those related to residential issues, although some indicators of socio-economic and socio-demographic vulnerabilities also have maximum values. Antequera presents the lowest Table 3.- Urban vulnerability in medium-sized cities (blue) and regional centres (black) in inner Andalusia (percentage figures). Data has been represented using a sequential colour scheme (the lowest levels in green and the highest ones in red). Observations: (1) no foreign children registered; (2) no dwellings with less than 30 m2 registered; (3) no dwellings without a toilet or WC registered. Source: Compiled by the authors based on data from Spanish Statistical Office (INE, 2011)