CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Sorsogon City, situated in the Philippines, boasted numerous cultural

heritage sites, representing invaluable treasures from the nation's past. These

sites not only stood the test of time but also witnessed the evolving

socio-cultural and environmental dynamics of the city (The Rich Cultural

Legacy of Sorsogon, 2023). According to an interview with Ms. Sally Lee,

former Sorsogon Governor and then Sorsogon Provincial Management Office

Executive Director, these geological features that lent charm and uniqueness

to heritage sites also made them vulnerable to several risks.

The escalating frequency and intensity of extreme weather events,

attributable to climate change, brought cultural heritage properties to the

forefront, necessitating the development of comprehensive methodologies for

risk assessment and management tailored to heritage conservation. The

adoption of risk assessment as a preferred methodology for executing planned

maintenance and preventive conservation programs surged due to its ability to

consolidate all available knowledge and streamline operational processes.

Existing vulnerability assessment methods for historical sites

predominantly focused on structural factors and potential impact modeling

(D’Ayala et al. 2006; Lagomarsino 2008; Ortiz and Ortiz 2016; Romao et al.
2016; Sevieri et al. 2020), with limited attention to non-structural determinants

such as socio-economic factors (Phillips 2015; Sesana et al. 2018).

Acknowledging this gap, there was a crucial need for integrated

approaches that encompassed environmental conditions, structural stability

and socio-economic factors which influenced the overall vulnerability of cultural

heritage sites.

This study aimed to contribute to an integrated framework for

vulnerability assessment applicable to cultural heritage sites exposed to

multiple hazards, using the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City as an

illustrative case. A simplified Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index (CHVI) was

used, evaluating environmental conditions, structural stability, and

socio-economic aspects through specific criteria and indicators. The outcomes

of this vulnerability assessment played a crucial role in establishing priorities

and formulating risk mitigation and preparedness measures, particularly

focusing on reducing structural sensitivity and enhancing coping capacities.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Sorsogon City's cultural heritage sites face heightened risk from more

frequent and intense extreme weather events linked to climate change.

Despite its heightened risk of geological hazards, there is a lack of

comprehensive conservation efforts that considers the site’s vulnerability from

multiple factors. Existing methods for assessing risk often concentrate on

either structural or environmental aspects, overlooking crucial socio-economic

2
factors, nor how they affect the vulnerability of a cultural heritage site as a

whole. To safeguard these cultural treasures, there is a clear need for a

thorough approach—a multi-faceted vulnerability assessment framework. This

framework should not only consider various factors influencing vulnerability but

also address the current deficiency in comprehensive conservation efforts.

1.3 Research Questions

The researchers generally aim to know potential risks and apply a vulnerability

assessment approach to evaluate cultural heritage sites in Sorsogon City,

Sorsogon. Below are the specific questions that the researchers of this study

seek to answer.

1. What are the vulnerability levels of the cultural heritage sites in

Sorsogon City in terms of its (a) environmental conditions, (b)

structural stability and (c) socio-economic aspects?

2. Using the Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index, how did the

environmental conditions, structural stability, and socio-economic

factors contribute to the overall weight of cultural heritage sites in

Sorsogon City?

3. What implications does the vulnerability levels on environmental

conditions, structural stability and socioeconomic aspects of each

cultural heritage site propose?

3
1.4 Research Objectives

The primary objective of the study was to employ a comprehensive

vulnerability assessment methodology to evaluate and analyze the

susceptibility of cultural heritage sites within Sorsogon City, situated in the

province of Sorsogon. Below are the specific objectives that the research

needs to obtain:

1. To establish an integrated framework for vulnerability assessment

applicable to cultural heritage sites exposed to multiple hazards which is

shown through a vulnerability level map.

2. To evaluate environmental conditions, structural stability, and

socio-economic aspects through specific criteria and indicators with the

use of a simplified Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index (CHVI).

3. To determine the outcomes of this vulnerability assessment that played

a crucial role in establishing priorities and formulating risk mitigation and

preparedness measures, particularly focusing on assessing the

environmental conditions of the cultural heritage sites, structural

stability, and considering its socio-economic factors.

1.5 Hypothetical Statement

The researchers hypothesized that through the use of an

indicator-based vulnerability assessment framework, the researchers were

able to accurately assess the vulnerability of cultural heritage sites presented

4
in the vulnerability map. By considering the environmental conditions,

structural stability, and socio-economic factors of the identified cultural heritage

site, this research was able to provide a priority setting in identifying and

ranking cultural heritage sites based on their vulnerability, enabling focused

attention on those most in need of conservation efforts and risk reduction

measures. The result of the study was hypothesized to serve as a pivotal tool

for informed decision-making, enabling the implementation of targeted

measures to safeguard these cultural heritage sites.

1.6 Significance of the Study

This research aimed to investigate and understand the potential risks

and threats that these cultural assets may face, with a particular focus on

factors such as environmental, socio-economic, and structural elements. The

results of the study will be of great benefit to the following:

Local Government Unit of Sorsogon. The study provided the Local

Government Unit with valuable insights into the vulnerabilities of cultural

heritage sites, aiding in the formulation of targeted policies and strategies for

risk reduction and conservation. The findings assisted in effective resource

allocation for the protection and maintenance of heritage sites, enhancing the

city's cultural resilience against various hazards.

Tourism and Cultural Heritage Office of Sorsogon. The Tourism and

Cultural Heritage Office could utilize the study's outcomes to enhance tourism

management strategies, ensuring sustainable tourism practices that safeguard

5
cultural heritage sites. It provided a basis for the development of interpretive

programs and educational materials, enriching visitors' experiences and

promoting responsible tourism.

National Commission for Culture and the Arts. The Vulnerability

Assessment of Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City benefits the National

Commission for Culture and the Arts by informing targeted conservation

efforts, aiding resource allocation, enhancing emergency preparedness, and

fostering public awareness for cultural heritage preservation.

Residents. Residents benefited from increased awareness of the

vulnerabilities and risks faced by cultural heritage sites, fostering a sense of

pride and responsibility for their preservation.

Academe. The study enriched academic discourse by providing a

comprehensive framework for vulnerability assessment in the context of

cultural heritage sites exposed to multiple hazards.

Bicol University College of Engineering. The College of Engineering

benefited from insights into the structural stability and environmental conditions

affecting cultural heritage sites. This information guided future engineering and

architectural considerations for heritage conservation projects.

Geodetic Engineers. They can utilize their specialized expertise in

geospatial data analysis to develop targeted risk mitigation strategies,

contribute to preservation planning, and engage in interdisciplinary

collaborations for the sustainable protection of cultural heritage sites.

6
 Future Researcher. The study established a foundation for future

researchers by presenting an integrated framework and methodology for

vulnerability assessment in cultural heritage studies. It identified gaps in

existing research methodologies, encouraging subsequent studies to build

upon the findings and contribute to the continuous improvement of heritage

conservation practices.

1.7 Scope and Delimitation

This study focused on conducting a vulnerability assessment of cultural

heritage sites in Sorsogon City. The geographical scope encompassed all

historical and cultural heritage sites within the boundaries of Sorsogon City,

Philippines. Other historical and cultural heritage sites outside the boundaries

of Sorsogon City were not included.

The primary focus of the study was the conceptualization, development,

and application of a simplified Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index (CHVI)

through a vulnerability level map. This comprehensive tool evaluated the

vulnerability of the chosen cultural heritage sites, emphasizing three key

dimensions: environmental conditions, structural stability, and socio-economic

aspects.

While the study proposed detailed risk mitigation and preparedness

measures, the actual implementation of these recommendations was not

within the study's scope. The emphasis remained on providing robust insights

and suggesting priorities rather than executing on-the-ground interventions.

7
1.8 Definition of Terms

This thesis explores the vulnerability assessment of cultural heritage

sites in Sorsogon City, Sorsogon, emphasizing a detailed evaluation and

prioritization of preservation requirements for these landmarks. To facilitate the

understanding of this study, different terms are defined herein:

Cultural Heritage Sites. It defined the locations and landmarks that

hold historical, cultural and architectural significance to a community or society

such as monuments, historical buildings, museums, artifacts, or natural

features.

Vulnerability. In the context of this study, vulnerability pertained to the

susceptibility of cultural heritage sites to potential risks and hazards,

encompassing environmental, structural, and socio-economic dimensions.

Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index (CHVI). A quantitative tool

developed for this study to assess and quantify the vulnerability of cultural

heritage sites. The index integrated environmental conditions, structural

stability, and socio-economic factors to provide a comprehensive measure of

vulnerability.

Environmental Conditions. It encompassed the climatic, geographic,

and ecological factors that impacted cultural heritage sites, including climate

exposure, proximity to natural hazards, and environmental pollution.

8
 Structural Stability. This referred to the soundness and resilience of

the physical structures and materials comprising cultural heritage sites. It

included considerations such as building material integrity, seismic

vulnerability, and maintenance history.

Socio-economic Factors. This included the human and community

aspects influencing the vulnerability of cultural heritage sites, such as

community engagement, economic support, and accessibility.

Priority Setting. This was the process of identifying and ranking

cultural heritage sites based on their vulnerability, enabling focused attention

on those most in need of conservation efforts and risk reduction measures.

QGIS. It is an open-source geographic information system (GIS)

software that enables users to create, edit, visualize, and analyze spatial data.

It supports a wide range of geospatial formats and provides tools for mapping

and geospatial analysis.

9
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the related literature and studies that provide a

valuable foundation for the current study. It also contains state-of-the-art,

theoretical and conceptual frameworks to support the understanding of this

study.

2.1 Review of Related Literature

2.1.1 (Local) The Rich Cultural Legacy of Sorsogon

The article titled "The Rich Cultural Legacy of Sorsogon" is invaluable to

our thesis study, providing essential context for the significance of Sorsogon's

historical and cultural heritage. It underscores the urgency of our Geological

Hazard Map Assessment, emphasizing the need to preserve these sites due to

their deep cultural roots. This article strengthens our rationale and highlights

the unique importance of the sites the researchers are studying, aligning our

research with the rich heritage of Sorsogon City.

2.1.2 (Local) Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management

Plan (2014-2023)

The Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan

(2014-2023) serves as a critical foundation for our study on Geological Hazard

Map Assessment of Historical and Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

Using Remote Sensing and GIS. Firstly, the plan’s acknowledgment of the

devastating impact of two super typhoons in 2006 underscores the urgency of

10
our research. By assessing geological hazards in historical and cultural

heritage sites, our study aligns with the city’s imperative to understand and

mitigate risks associated with climate change-induced disasters.

Moreover, the plan’s emphasis on comprehensive climate change

considerations signifies a proactive approach by the Sorsogon City

government. Our study, employing advanced technologies like Remote

Sensing and GIS, aligns seamlessly with this forward-looking strategy. By

utilizing cutting-edge tools to assess geological vulnerabilities in historical

sites, our research contributes directly to the plan’s objectives, enhancing the

city’s preparedness against future climate-related events.

Furthermore, the focus on the 2006 super typhoons serves as a stark

reminder of the real and immediate threats faced by Sorsogon City. By

incorporating the lessons learned from these disasters, our study gains

relevance and urgency. It becomes not just an academic endeavor but a

practical, timely contribution to the city’s resilience efforts. The plan’s historical

context provides the necessary framework, emphasizing the importance of our

research in safeguarding Sorsogon’s cultural heritage against future climate

change-induced hazards.

2.1.3 (Local) Philippines: Geohazard mapping to save more lives

The article discusses the impact of unpredictable weather patterns and

climate change, leading to natural disasters causing suffering and death

worldwide. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Mines and

Geo-sciences Bureau (DENR-MGB) emphasizes the importance of

11
Geo-hazards Mapping and Assessment Program in disaster management,

helping identify areas vulnerable to floods, landslides, and other instabilities.

Despite completing the geo-hazard assessment in 2010, limited resources

hindered the generation of necessary maps. The DENR urges local

government units to use hazard maps for early warnings and disaster

mitigation. Efforts to integrate environmental and disaster risk reduction issues

into education are underway. DENR-7 Regional Director emphasizes the need

for vigilance and revisiting landslide susceptibility ratings for preparedness.

2.1.4 (Local) Sorsogon City Climate Change Vulnerability and

Adaptation Assessment

Based on the published book, Sorsogon City Climate Change

Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment, it was found that Sorsogon City is

most vulnerable to earthquakes, landslides and floods. Sorsogon is

surrounded by active fault lines which are also potential hazards that are the

cause of most earthquakes. The province is vulnerable to ground movement

because it is surrounded by fault lines. The fault lines are located along the

southeastern part of the province. Typhoons and flooding are the most

frequent hazards that occur in Sorsogon; an average of 9 typhoons annually

hit the province.

Typhoons are usually associated with strong wind and heavy rains

resulting in flooding in low-lying areas especially in the municipalities of Irosin

and Juban; landslide/erosion is common in the province in areas where

forest/mountain covers are already denuded. The hilly and mountainous terrain

12
in and around Sorsogon City makes it prone to landslides, especially during

periods of heavy rainfall or seismic activities. Steep slopes and loose soil

increase the risk of mass movements.

2.1.5 (Local) Sorsogon reinvents itself to be disaster-resilient

Sorsogon City has faced severe damage from natural disasters,

including typhoons like Reming in 2006, Milenyo in 2006, tropical depression

Dante in 2009, and tropical storm Osiang in 2010. These events resulted in

casualties, evacuations, damaged infrastructure, and agricultural losses.

Sorsogon City, in partnership with UN-HABITAT, conducted a climate change

vulnerability assessment. The study revealed that the city is at risk due to its

flood-prone areas, particularly 24 barangays with a population of over 55,000

people. Additionally, nine coastal barangays, home to over 35,000 residents,

are highly vulnerable due to their location, aging structures, and inadequate

drainage facilities. The assessment also predicted an increase in temperature

by up to two degrees Celsius and a 30 percent rise in rainfall volume by 2050,

indicating a higher likelihood of intense typhoons affecting the city.

2.1.6 (Foreign) Indonesia: Launching of cultural heritage risk

mapping project in Prambanan areas

The geological hazard map will serve as a primary tool to raise

awareness of disaster management agencies on heritage, while sensitizing the

heritage stakeholders on potential natural hazards, and the need for

preparedness. Prambanan Temple Compounds area is chosen as the target of

the pilot study, as this World Heritage is located above one of the most active

13
tectonic faults with frequent past records of earthquakes and landslides. This

article supported the need of research studies to focus on creating hazard

maps for cultural heritage sites.

2.1.7 (Foreign) Promoting Disaster Resilient Cultural Heritage

The book emphasizes the significance of cultural heritage for

communities globally, connecting them to their past and shaping identities.

Despite its importance, cultural heritage is often overlooked in disaster risk

management (DRM) strategies, leading to damage and destruction after

disasters. Climate change exacerbates these risks. The lack of maintenance,

loss of traditional knowledge, and urbanization contribute to vulnerability. The

text highlights international frameworks like the Hyogo Framework for Action

and the Sendai Framework, which recognize the link between culture, risk

reduction, and resilience. Several countries, including Japan, Italy, and Turkey,

provide examples of effective cultural heritage preservation. The text

recommends integrating disaster resilience into cultural heritage management,

aligning with the priorities of the Sendai Framework: understanding risk,

strengthening risk governance, investing in risk reduction and preparedness,

and supporting efforts for sustainable recovery.

2.1.8 (Foreign) Cultural Heritage Preservation

Cultural heritage is vital for preserving our identity and connection to the

past. It links us to social values, beliefs, customs, and traditions, fostering

unity, belonging, and national pride. Cultural heritage strengthens our sense of

identity, enabling us to connect with others and feel a deep sense of belonging

14
and pride in our heritage. Thus, the researchers would like to focus on the

preservation of the cultural and historical heritage sites of Sorsogon City as a

way of supporting its cultural identity.

2.1.9 (Foreign) Protect cultural heritage and the environment, and

respect differences, urges U.N. Secretary-General

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon stressed the importance of

protecting cultural heritage and promoting diversity during his speech at Yale

University. He urged people to passionately preserve cultural heritage, which

he described as the thread that unites civilizations and cultures. Ban

expressed concern about the destruction of cultural artifacts by extremist

groups and emphasized the need to safeguard cultural diversity, as it is

essential for human species' well-being. Additionally, he highlighted the

significance of universities as places for dialogue and respect for diverse

opinions, emphasizing the importance of empowering young people and

addressing global challenges such as climate change and gender equality.

Ban also shared leadership advice, encouraging individuals to be flexible and

act like water, symbolizing compromise and harmony in decision-making.

2.1.10 (Foreign) Remote Sensing and GIS for Cultural Heritage

Monitoring and Preservation

The letter invites submissions for a journal focused on the joint use of

remote sensing and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for preserving and

managing cultural heritage. Cultural heritage faces various pressures,

including anthropic factors and natural disasters, making monitoring and

15
management essential. The integration of remote sensing technologies

(satellite recordings, aerial surveys, and UAVs) and GIS allows real-time and

delayed monitoring, facilitating the analysis of cultural heritage, its

surroundings, and the impact of environmental changes. Researchers are

encouraged to submit manuscripts highlighting the contributions of remote

sensing and GIS to cultural heritage preservation and management. The

submissions will undergo a peer-review process and, if accepted, will be

published in the journal "Sustainability."

2.2 Review of Related Studies

2.2.1 (Local) Assessment of the Multi-Hazard Vulnerability of

Priority Cultural Heritage Structures in the Philippines

In late 2013, the Philippines experienced a devastating earthquake in

Bohol and Super Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda). These events underscored the

urgent need for a comprehensive assessment of the vulnerability of heritage

buildings to various hazards. The primary goal of this project was to reduce the

susceptibility of cultural heritage structures to multiple natural threats such as

earthquakes, typhoons, and floods. This was achieved by prioritizing specific

buildings based on hazard maps and historical data, assessing their vulnerability,

and proposing mitigation strategies. The paper outlines the general methodology

used and provides insights into the tailored procedures developed for assessing

the seismic, typhoon, and flood vulnerability of selected historic buildings (Ayala

D., Barruco P., Zerrudo E., Garciano L., et al., 2016).

16
 2.2.2 (Local) Cultural Mapping of Some Built Heritages in San Pablo

City

This study mainly focused on the cultural mapping of the built heritage in

San Pablo City of Laguna. The objective of the cultural map is to improve cultural

preservation, management, and tourism promotion in San Pablo, and it sets out

to collect data on the city's tangible assets, including landmarks and areas of

interest with cultural and historical significance. Findings revealed sites like local

hero shrines were impressive, and most are situated on the majority of San

Pablo City-built heritages that are more historical in origin. Methods of cultural

inventory and interview guide were implied. Document analysis was done as a

follow-up to the interviews to help validate information from narratives. As well as

visiting nearby museums was also made to gather more about the history and

background of the study. (Religioso, M., 2019)

2.2.3 (Local) Vulnerability Assessment Using Time Series Mapping: A

Case Study of Typhoon Haiyan in Tacloban City, Philippines

Coastal communities in Tacloban City are affected by the typhoon's impact

mainly because of informational gaps, inability to recover from natural disasters,

and vulnerable houses. This study contains an assessment of the changes in

vulnerability to typhoons in Tacloban City, by charting and contrasting the

patterns of vulnerability before Typhoon Haiyan. The paper outlines the

components used in creating the index of the evaluated components of

vulnerability, the findings indicate that vulnerability was lowered to achieve a low

17
vulnerability grade. (Rojas, A., 2019)

2.2.4 (Local) Hazard Mapping of Cultural Heritage Sites in Camalig,

Albay

Camalig, Albay is known for its rich cultural heritage comprising of

significant structures including churches, monuments, and ancestral houses.

These historical sites are located near a natural hazard-prone environment,

primarily due to the proximity of the Mayon Volcano, which can deposit sand and

gravel during heavy rains and typhoons. This study aims to map historical sites in

Camalig, Albay using GIS, as well as assess their susceptibility to natural

hazards, particularly floods and debris flows, and formulate conservation plans.

The findings indicate that sites near rivers and waterways are more prone to

flooding, while those closest to the Mayon Volcano experience debris flows.

However, ten identified cultural heritage sites are not at risk from these hazards.

Thus, conservation and protection efforts for these valuable historical sites are

recommended by the Camalig Municipal Tourism and Cultural Heritage (Naag J.,

Napay M., 2022).

2.2.5 (Local) Mapping the Cultural Heritage and the Relevance of

Mayon Volcano to the Locals of Santo Domingo, Albay, Philippines

The study aimed to map both tangible and intangible cultural heritage

within the communities surrounding the Mayon Volcano Natural Park (MVNP) in

Sto. Domingo, Albay. The research utilized a qualitative approach, including

descriptive surveys and focus group discussions following the standard

processes of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA). The

18
findings revealed that MVNP holds great significance for the people of Sto.

Domingo, Albay. Despite its risks, the park's fertile soil supports agriculture, and

the volcanic materials contribute significantly to their livelihood (Arao, C., 2022).

2.2.6 (Foreign) Development of Liquefaction Hazard Map Using a

Geostatistical Method

This study consists of comparing a liquefaction hazard map developed

by liquefaction potential index (LPI) values with observed liquefaction cases at

very well-documented sites to give more insight into the accuracy of these

systems. Procedures from this study can be used to develop a more accurate

geological hazard map for cultural heritage sites where traditional contouring

methods are currently used with the given data. It would also allow users to

focus efforts on municipalities or cities that are low on importance in the

existing maps, also reducing costs for areas that want to develop more

accurate hazard maps. (Demshar, P., 2020)

2.2.7 (Foreign) Risk Mapping for the Sustainable Protection of

Cultural Heritage in Extreme-Changing Environments

Cultural heritage faces increasing risks from climate change including

heavy rain, flooding, and drought. To address this, user-driven solutions are

crucial for protecting monuments and collections. Maps of high-risk areas in

Europe and the Mediterranean have been created using climate data and

indices, accessible through an interactive Web GIS tool which is based on

historical data and climate projections. This tool aids public authorities and

private organizations in making informed decisions to safeguard cultural

19
heritage at risk. This paper focuses on risk-prone areas for heavy rain in

Central Europe, highlighting areas like the Adriatic Coast, Northern Italy, and

the Alps facing significant climate variations (Sardella, A., Palazzi, E., Von

Hardenberg, J., et al., 2020).

2.2.8 (Foreign) Flood Reduction through Flood Risk and

Vulnerability Assessment and Mapping in Hadeija River Basin, Nigeria

Histories of strong typhoons have already passed through Sorsogon

City and one of the most frequent and devastating natural catastrophes are

floods and it has a terrible influence on people's lives, economy, and

infrastructure across low-level land in the said area. The study finds that

indicators of flood risk and vulnerability have various influences on the

probability of flooding. Additionally, the outcomes are confirmed and

determined to be in accord with the research area's flood distribution in

historical data. This proves the reliability and applicability of the proposed

methodology. This study is significant in creating strategic strategies and

measures that the government and relief organizations will have on the

detrimental effects of flood risk and socioeconomic vulnerability. (Shuaibu, A.,

2020)

2.2.9 (Foreign) Coastal Erosion of Arctic Cultural Heritage in Danger: A

Case Study from Svalbard, Norway

This study focused on analyzing changes in the Hiorthhamn shoreline in

Svalbard, Norway over a period of 93 years (1927–2020) as well as their

impact on coastal cultural heritage sites. The research employed various

methods including maps, orthophotos, drone images to investigate

20
shoreline-landscape interaction and to indicate changes from 2019 to 2020,

topographic surveys to map shoreline changes, and terrestrial laser scanning

(TLS) to create 3D documentation of endangered coastal cultural heritage

sites. The study revealed both short-term (2019–2020) and long-term

(1927–2020) shoreline erosion and accretion patterns which resulted in the

classification of three sectors based on change patterns. The shoreline

forecast analysis projected that half of the protected cultural heritage objects

would likely disappear within the next decade, and nearly all the analyzed

cultural heritage objects would vanish in approximately two decades. This

underscores the significant threat facing Arctic cultural heritage sites unless

local authorities undertake effective mitigation measures. (Nicu, I. C.,

Rubensdotter, L., Stalsberg, K., & Nau, E., 2021).

2.2.10 (Foreign) Cultural Heritage Sites Risk Assessment Based on

RS and GIS—takes the Fortified Manors of Yongtai as an Example

This study addresses a significant gap in research by focusing on the

multi-disaster risk assessment of cultural heritage sites in China and proposes

an integrated approach utilizing Remote Sensing (RS) and Geographic

Information System (GIS) technology for its protection and development. Six

primary threats to cultural heritage sites were identified including landslides,

floods, erosion, urban expansion, fires, and modern road networks. Using the

Fortified Manors of Yongtai in Fujian Province as a study area, the research

collected historical satellite imagery and relevant remote sensing and thematic

data. GIS technology was applied to establish a foundational spatial database,

21
and a risk assessment system was developed for the study area using the

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Certainty Factor (CF) model. The

findings indicate that a significant portion of the Fortified Manors face high or

greater risks, totaling 69.28%, emphasizing the urgent need for monitoring and

protective measures for these endangered cultural heritage sites. (Yang, J.,

You, Y., Ye, X., & Jiang, L., 2023).

2.3 Synthesis of the State of the Art

This review of existing knowledge on cultural heritage vulnerability

assessment unveiled a complex landscape shaped by environmental,

structural, and socio-economic factors. The consensus in the literature

emphasized the impact of environmental changes like climate shifts and

natural disasters on cultural heritage sites. Scholars stressed the need for a

comprehensive approach that considered these environmental factors

alongside the historical context.

A noticeable trend was the increased attention to the structural aspects,

bringing engineering insights into vulnerability assessments. Researchers

highlighted the importance of factors like building materials and seismic

resilience in determining how well heritage sites could withstand physical

stressors. This shift reflected an effort to develop more detailed methods

considering the engineering aspects influencing vulnerability.

In tandem with structural concerns was a growing understanding of the

social and economic aspects influencing vulnerability. Community involvement,

financial support, and accessibility were recognized as crucial factors affecting

22
how vulnerable cultural heritage sites were. This broader perspective

acknowledged the close link between heritage preservation and the well-being

of local communities.

However, a gap remained in understanding non-structural aspects such

as coping strategies and institutional factors. Despite progress, more in-depth

investigations into these elements were needed to fully grasp the social and

cultural dynamics influencing vulnerability.

The importance of considering specific locations was emphasized, with

case studies, like those focused on Sorsogon City, providing insights into the

unique challenges faced by cultural heritage sites in different regions. This

tailored approach contributed to a better understanding of the diverse threats

and opportunities for conservation.

2.4 Gap Bridged by the Study

This research addressed a key gap in the then-current understanding of

cultural heritage vulnerability. While previous studies had made progress in

considering environmental and structural, there was a significant omission in

understanding non-structural elements like socio-economic factors. These

aspects, crucial in shaping the social and cultural dimensions of vulnerability,

had not been thoroughly explored.

The existing literature predominantly focused on tangible aspects, such

as the physical condition of heritage sites, leaving a gap in our knowledge

regarding the social and institutional aspects of vulnerability. This study aimed

23
to fill this gap by examining the often-overlooked non-structural factors,

contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of the influences on

cultural heritage vulnerability.

Furthermore, while some studies considered specific geographic

locations, there was a need for more region-specific insights. The inclusion of

a case study on Sorsogon City, Philippines, in this research addressed this

gap by providing context-specific information on the challenges faced by

cultural heritage sites. This tailored approach ensured that the findings were

more directly applicable to the unique dynamics of the region.

2.5 Theoretical Framework

The vulnerability of cultural heritage sites is intricately influenced by

environmental conditions, structural stability, and socio-economic factors.

Environmental conditions, encompassing climate exposure, proximity to natural

hazards, and pollution, directly impact the physical integrity of these sites.

Extreme weather events and climatic variations accelerate material decay and

erosion, compromising structural elements. Proximity to geological risks

increases vulnerability to sudden events such as earthquakes or floods,

potentially leading to structural damage or collapse. Additionally, pollution,

whether from industrial activities or environmental sources, contributes to

material degradation, further compromising the overall stability of cultural

heritage sites.

24
 Structural stability plays a pivotal role in determining a site's vulnerability.

The quality of building materials, seismic resistance, and maintenance practices

collectively contribute to the site's resilience. Deterioration in material integrity,

inadequate seismic design, or a lack of regular maintenance diminish structural

stability, increasing the risk of vulnerability. In regions prone to seismic activity,

the absence of proper retrofitting measures can magnify the susceptibility of

heritage structures to earthquake-related damage.

Socio-economic factors, including community engagement, economic

support, and accessibility, also exert significant influence. Active community

involvement and awareness enhance site protection, as engaged communities

are more likely to prioritize conservation efforts. Adequate economic support

ensures consistent funding for preservation initiatives, enabling proper

maintenance and reducing vulnerability. Additionally, the socio-economic context

affects site accessibility and security, with economically deprived areas

potentially facing challenges in implementing protective measures.

Figure 2.1. Theoretical Paradigm

25
2.6 Conceptual Framework

The vulnerability of cultural heritage sites was assessed by considering

their environmental conditions, structural stability, and socio-economic factors

using the Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index Assessment Form. Based on the

overall scores, a Vulnerability Level Map was created, categorizing sites into

high, moderate, and low vulnerability levels. This map guided the formulation of

recommendations and priorities for conserving and protecting cultural heritage

sites, ensuring focused efforts and resources where they are needed the most.

Figure 2.2. Conceptual Paradigm

26
2.7 Definition of Terms

Remote Sensing. The process of detecting and observing patterns about

the physical features of the Earth’s surface to provide reliable information.

Exposure. Defined as “the people, property, systems, or other elements

present in hazard zones that are thereby subject to potential losses'' (UN-ISDR

2009).

Vulnerability. It is the characteristics or circumstances of a community to

be exposed to possible harm or danger (UN-ISDR 2009).

27
 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter details the systematic approach adopted to achieve the

research objectives, emphasizing the integration of various data sources and

analytical techniques. The variables of the study and data collection

procedures will be discussed to provide a comprehensive understanding of this

study.

3.1 Research Design

This study adapted the vulnerability index method to assess the

vulnerability of the identified cultural heritage sites. The strength of this method

was that it allowed multiple components and factors that might have influenced

the vulnerability level (and subsequent risk level) to be integrated into a

numerical scoring system (ISO 2009). Accordingly, applying vulnerability indices

to heritage sites provided a ground for the prioritization of different factors

influencing vulnerability and, further, for the prioritization of risk treatment

strategies in decision-making processes, especially considering resource

limitations. Vulnerability or risk index approaches were applied in the context of

cultural heritage (Forino et al. 2016; Ortiz and Ortiz 2016); however, the

component of vulnerability and risk and their related indicators were differently

defined depending on the objectives of projects, the type of elements at risk, and

fields of study.

28
 This study proposed a simplified Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index

(CHVI) that encompassed three main components:

(a) Environmental conditions, in this context, refer to the geological

hazards that predominantly impact cultural heritage sites.

Understanding and assessing how these hazards affect the cultural

heritage sites are crucial for evaluating its overall vulnerability.

(b) Structural Stability: Structural stability involved assessing the

physical integrity and robustness of the buildings or structures

comprising cultural heritage sites. Analyzing structural stability

helped determine how well a heritage site could withstand various

physical stressors and potential risks (building material integrity,

seismic vulnerability, maintenance history).

(c) Socio-economic factors: Socio-economic factors encompassed the

social and economic aspects influencing the vulnerability of cultural

heritage sites. Recognizing the role of local communities, financial

resources, and ease of access contributed to a comprehensive

understanding of how these factors impacted the overall

vulnerability of cultural heritage sites (community engagement,

economic support, accessibility) in determining the overall

vulnerability of the cultural heritage sites in Sorsogon City.

3.1.1. Developing Indicators for the Vulnerability Components

Vulnerability analysis is divided into three factors that define the

component. For each component of vulnerability, a set of indicators has been

29
developed, according to the literature review presented, while considering the

specific characteristics of the study area and similar heritage assets.

Subsequently, a set of ranking criteria specific to the component has been

defined for each indicator to score their respective sensitivity.

The environmental condition of the cultural heritage sites was assessed

through its level of exposure of geological hazards present in the area. Each

cultural heritage site was assessed on its level of exposure on flood, storm surge

and liquefaction. See Appendices for Table 3.1. Environmental Condition

indicators and ranking criteria.

Structural Stability analysis of the cultural heritage sites was assessed

through quality of construction (robustness), current structural damage and

deterioration patterns, and age of building. See Appendices for Table 3.2.

Structural Stability indicators and ranking criteria.

Socio-economic aspects were assessed according to its accessibility,

maintenance & monitoring plans and economic support using a structured

interview. The researchers interviewed custodians or representatives from the

cultural heritage sites in answering the set of indicators. See Appendices for

Table 3.3. Socio-economic aspects indicators and ranking criteria.

3.1.2 Weighing the Parameters

The above-mentioned parameters were not considered equally significant

in the overall vulnerability; therefore, they will be weighted by applying the

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The AHP, which was originally developed by

Saaty and Kearns (1985), is a tool for weighting the assessment criteria in a

30
decision-making process. See Appendices for Table 3.4. Pairwise comparison of

the significance of the parameters.

After a consultation with the CDRRMO of Sorsogon City and review of

related studies and literature, the researchers led to the following consensus.

● Environmental Conditions: 0.4

● Structural Stability: 0.3

● Socio-economic Factors: 0.3

These weights, summing up to 1.0, reflect the perceived importance of

each parameter that influences the vulnerability of cultural heritage sites in

Sorsogon City. The Table 3.4. Pairwise comparison of the significance of the

parameters in Appendices show the computation on how the researchers

arrive on the respective weights.

In this consensus, Environmental Conditions were accorded a weight of

0.4, indicating a perceived higher importance. This signifies that the researchers,

in collaboration with local authorities and guided by existing knowledge, consider

the environmental context to be a pivotal factor influencing its vulnerability.

Structural Stability was assigned a weight of 0.3, suggesting a

considerable yet slightly lesser significance compared to environmental

conditions. Simultaneously, Socio-economic Factors were also attributed a

weight of 0.3, indicating a parallel importance to structural stability.

31
Figure 3.1 Flowchart of Methodology

32
3.2 Sources of Data

The data for this research study was sourced from a variety of reliable

and administrative outlets to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and

comprehensiveness of the findings. The following sources of data were

utilized:

3.2.1 Environmental Conditions Data

The assessment of environmental conditions at cultural heritage

sites employed a thorough examination through key indicators:

exposure to flood, storm surge and liquefaction. To enhance the

accuracy and dependability of the data, the research team generated an

updated geological hazard map for these sites. The flood and storm

surge data came from reputable sources such as Project NOAH and

City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office

(CDRRMO)-Sorsogon while the liquefaction came from

DOST-PHIVOLCS. Google Earth served as the foundational base map

for this purpose. For the indicators and ranking criteria see Table 3.1.

Environmental Condition indicators and ranking criteria in appendices.

3.2.2 Structural Stability Data:

The evaluation of structural stability of the cultural heritage sites

involved a thorough examination. Researchers conducted on-site visual

inspections at each cultural heritage site, documenting important

indicators appearing on Table 3.2. Structural Stability indicators and

ranking criteria (see appendices). The structure of each cultural heritage

33
 site was photographed and geotagged using GPS Map Camera. See

photos in appendices.

3.2.3 Socio-Economic Data:

The evaluation of socio-economic factors of cultural heritage

sites involved a structured interview based on indicators appearing on

Table 3.3. Socio-economic aspects indicators and ranking criteria (see

appendices). In a structured interview with a representative from the

Tourism Office of Sorsogon City and respective custodians of the

cultural heritage site, the researchers asked the representative to

indicate the level of vulnerability in terms of the socio-economic factors.

3.3 Study Area

Sorsogon City lay from 123° 53’ to 124° 09’ east longitude and from 12°

55’ to 13° 08’ north latitude, and was situated in the Philippines Bicol Region. It

was 600 kilometers southeast of Manila and was located at the southernmost tip

of Luzon. As part of the geographical chain linking Luzon to the rest of the

Philippines, it was a transshipment corridor and served as the gateway to the

Visayas and Mindanao Islands. Its geographical location was such that it opened

into the Pacific Ocean to the West and East, through Albay Gulf and Sugod Bay,

and the China Sea through Sorsogon Bay. With 14,500 hectares of land area, it

was home to 792,949 Sorsogueños. Composed of 1 city and 14 municipalities, it

was located at the southern tip of the island of Luzon and surrounded by Albay

34
Gulf, Ticao and Burias Pass on the west. San Bernardino Strait and Northern

Samar on the Southeast and Pacific Ocean on the East. Shown below is the

boundary map of Sorsogon City from the Sorsogon Provincial Government

official website.

Source: https://sorsogon.gov.ph/tourism/interactive-map/

Figure 3.3. Study Area

Sorsogon City is politically subdivided into 64 barangays. The

researchers focused on assessing the vulnerability of 15 cultural heritage sites

gathered from the Tourism Office of Sorsogon City, namely:

35
 Museo De Sorsogon (Architectural Landmark). This artistic heritage

was a cultural treasure in the heart of Sorsogon City; the museum showcased

the rich traditions and histories of the region.

Sorsogon State University Library (Educational Institution). One of

the oldest trade schools in the Philippines established in 1907.

Sorsogon Provincial Capitol (Architectural Landmark). It was an

architectural masterpiece and an iconic landmark in the city built in 1916.

Old Sorsogon Municipal Hall (Architectural Landmark). This was the

old Sorsogon Town Hall circa 2007. It became the city jail; eventually, it housed

a local Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) until today.

St. Louise De Marillac College of Sorsogon (Educational Institution).

Began in 1973, when the founder became aware of the province’s lack of

Catholic Schools.

Rompeolas, Sorsogon City Baywalk (Architectural Landmark). It was

a kilometer-long bay walk with a picturesque view of the sea and Mt. Bulusan.

Alice Bridge (Architectural Landmark). Became the replacement for the

footbridge that connected the banks of Salog River. It was named after the

daughter of US Pres. Roosevelt, in her visit with Howard Taft during the

Imperial Cruise.

Camp Salvador Escudero Sr. (Architectural Landmark). The oldest

establishment in the city, named after the late Gurang, Salvador Escudero Sr.,

who is one of the Sorsogon’s Governors and local guerilla leader.

36
 Sorsogon National High School (Educational Institution). It was

established in 1903. The cornerstone was laid by Alice Roosevelt in 1905

during her visit with Howard Taft.

Sorsogon East Central School (Educational Institution). It was

founded in 1917 during the early American occupation.

Sorsogon Sports Complex (Architectural Landmark). The sports

venue was originally built for Sorsogon Province’s hosting of the Palarong

Pambansa in 2022 which was later postponed to 2023.

Sorsogon Cathedral (Spiritual Center). It was a significant religious

site in Sorsogon City. This centuries-old church boasted impressive

architecture and served as a spiritual center for the local community.

Jose Rizal Monument (Monument). Built in front of the capitol under

supervision of Architect Juan Arrelano under the administration of Governor

Bernebe- Flores Palma, 1923.

Our Lady of Peñafrancia Seminary (Educational Institution). The

Diocesan Seminary of Dioces Sorsogon was established on October 17, 1975.

The seminary produced hundreds of priests, and at least five bishops which

have served and are serving the local and global Roman Catholic Church.

Our Lady of Fatima Parish (Spiritual Center). Our Lady of Fatima

Parish of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Sorsogon was established on 1987.

It is located at Sorsogon City, Province of Sorsogon.

37
3.4 Research Instrument

The research instrument for this study encompassed a variety of tools and

technologies, each tailored to specific data collection and analysis needs,

ensuring a comprehensive and accurate exploration of the research objectives.

Primarily, the main instrument used in rating the vulnerability levels of

cultural heritage sites are the rating criteria indicators (see appendices Table 3.1,

Table 3.2, Table 3.3).

The researchers had also utilized the following instruments and

technologies in answering the research objectives:

QGIS. QGIS was utilized for advanced spatial analysis of the geological

hazards in Sorsogon City. It enables the researchers to input queries, view maps,

and perform sophisticated spatial analysis, allowing for a comprehensive

understanding of the environmental conditions of the cultural and heritage sites.

GeoCam. GeoCam is a specialized application installed on smartphones.

It utilized the device's built-in camera to capture images of heritage structures,

embedding geographical information into the photographs. It was used to capture

geographic coordinates of cultural heritage structures and geotag-identified

locations.

Google Earth. Google Earth is an application used for digital mapping

and geospatial analysis. It enabled researchers to search for specific locations

and accurately digitize the x and y coordinates of cultural heritage sites. The

application provides a visual interface for data validation, ensuring accuracy in

the location data collected.

38
 Project NOAH: The researchers used the available geological data of

Project NOAH (2017) in creating an updated flood and storm surge hazard map

of the cultural and heritage sites in Sorsogon City.

DOST-PHIVOLCS. The researchers utilized the liquefaction hazard data

from the Department of Science and Technology - Philippine Institute of

Volcanology and Seismology dated from 2017-2018.

GIS Tools: Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software can be

instrumental in quantitative data collection. Utilize GIS tools to map geological

hazard data, heritage site locations, and susceptibility levels. GIS allows for

spatial analysis and visualization of quantitative data.

Structured Interviews. The researchers conducted structured interviews

with officials from the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management

Council-Sorsogon and concerned heritage site custodians and historians. The

concerned individuals helped the researchers in evaluating the level of

vulnerability of each cultural heritage site in terms of its socio-economic aspects.

3.5 Data Gathering Procedure

3.5.1 Documentation of Cultural Heritage Sites.

The full description and relevant information on cultural and

heritage sites at Sorsogon City was obtained from the City Tourism and

Cultural Heritage Office of Sorsogon City, Sorsogon, Albay. Using

GeoCam, the cultural heritage sites location were documented.

39
 3.5.2 Environmental Conditions Data

Using the generated geological hazard map, the researchers

evaluated the environmental conditions of cultural heritage sites using the

rating criteria indicators (see appendices Table 3.1). The geological

hazard map shows the exposure level, Low (1), Moderate (2), High (3), of

the cultural heritage sites in terms of the predominant geological hazards

in the area: flood, storm surge, and liquefaction. The factor scores based

on the level of exposure of the cultural heritage sites were listed.

3.5.3 Structure Stability Data

Researchers conducted on-site visual inspections at each

cultural heritage site, documenting important rating criteria indicators

(see appendices Table 3.2). The factor scores of each cultural heritage

site based on the rating criteria indicators were listed.

3.5.4. Socio-economic Aspects Data

In a structured interview with a representative from the Tourism

Office of Sorsogon City and respective custodians of the cultural

heritage site, the researchers asked the representative to indicate the

level of vulnerability in terms of socio-economic factors using the rating

criteria indicators (see appendices Table 3.3).

3.6 Data Analysis

After the data gathering, the factors scores of environmental condition,

structure stability and socio-economic aspects of each cultural heritage site will

40
be calculated and analyzed using the following:

3.6.1. Vulnerability Calculation: Cultural Heritage Vulnerability

Index (CHVI)

Formula for Weighted Score (for each factor within a parameter):

Weighted Score=Weight×Factor Score

Formula for Overall Weighted Score (for each parameter):

Overall Weighted Score=∑Weighted Scores

Formula for CHVI Score (combining all categories):

CHVI Score=∑Overall Weighted Scores/No. Of Items

These formulas allow you to calculate the weighted scores for individual

factors within each parameter and then aggregate them to obtain the overall

CHVI score for a cultural heritage site. The weights assigned to each factor

and category are determined based on expert judgment, stakeholder

consultation, and the significance of each factor in influencing vulnerability.

See Appendices for Table 3.4. Pairwise comparison of the significance of the

parameters.

The cultural heritage vulnerability index (CHVI) score obtained carries

significant implications for heritage conservation, management, and

policy-making. The score provides a quantitative representation of the site's

susceptibility to various threats and challenges. Here are some implications

and potential interpretations based on different vulnerability index scores:

41
Low CHVI Score (e.g., 0-1.4):

● Interpretation: The site has a low vulnerability, suggesting that it is

relatively resilient to environmental, structural, and socio-economic

challenges.

● Implications: The site may require routine maintenance and

monitoring, with a focus on preventive measures. Conservation

efforts should aim to maintain the current state of the site.

​ Moderate CHVI Score (e.g., 1.5-1.9):

● Interpretation: The site has a moderate level of vulnerability,

indicating specific challenges that may require targeted

interventions.

● Implications: Detailed assessments are recommended to identify

and address vulnerabilities within specific categories. Conservation

projects should aim to strengthen the site's resilience.

​ High CHVI Score (e.g., 2.0-2.2 and above):

● Interpretation: The site is highly vulnerable and may require urgent

attention to prevent further deterioration.

● Implications: Immediate action is needed, including structural

assessments, risk mitigation measures, and comprehensive

conservation projects. Collaboration with local and national

stakeholders is crucial for effective preservation

42
3.7 Target Output

The research aimed to assess the vulnerability levels of the cultural

heritage sites in Sorsogon City by utilizing a Cultural Heritage Vulnerability

Assessment Framework.

The researchers generated a Vulnerability Level Map which highlighted

the vulnerability levels of the heritage cases that need specific considerations in

vulnerability reduction. The vulnerability scores per parameter further contributed

to the prioritization of the site’s areas for risk treatment strategies.

43
 CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Presented in this section, is the culmination of data gathered through

Results and Discussion. The Results disclose the empirical findings obtained

from rigorous analysis, while the Discussion provides a critical examination and

interpretation of these results.

4.1 Presentation of Data

4.1.1 Environmental Conditions

The following data are the geological hazard maps of flood, liquefaction

and storm surge, which were created in QGIS to assess the environmental

conditions of the cultural heritage sites.

The flood hazard map below showed that some areas in the Sorsogon

CIty proper are moderately vulnerable, while the rest are low vulnerable to flood

considering the elevation of each location of the cultural heritage sites.

Taking into account the distance from the shoreline, the succeeding storm

surge hazard map displayed that Rompeolas Baywalk was the most vulnerable.

Heritage sites within 100-500 meters from the shoreline namely, SLMCS, Camp

Salvador Escudero SrCathedral and SECs are moderately vulnerable to the

hazard. While those that are above 500 meters away from the shoreline are the

least vulnerable to Storm Surge.

The liquefaction hazard map was based on geology, presence of active

faults, historical accounts of liquefaction, geomorphology and hydrology of the

area. Evidently, only Camp Salvador Escudero Sr., and Sorsogon Cathedral are

moderately vulnerable to liquefaction. On the other hand, the rest of the heritage

sites are low vulnerable.

45
Figure 4.1.1 Flood Hazard Map of Sorsogon City

46
Figure 4.1.2 Storm Surge Hazard Map

47
Figure 4.1.3 Liquefaction Hazard Map

48
 The environmental conditions were assessed depending on the levels of

exposure of cultural heritage sites to prominent geological hazards which are

flood, liquefaction and storm surge (see appendices for Table 4.1 Summary of

Results and Computations). Factor scores of Low (1), Medium (2), or High (3)

are assigned. Considering the weight of environmental conditions which is 0.4,

the overall weighted score was computed by using the formula SUM of (Weight x

Factor Score), to determine the levels of vulnerability of the sites.

Table 4.1.1 Summary of the Overall Weight Score of the Environmental

Conditions of the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

The table above shows the overall weighted score of the cultural and

heritage sites in terms of its environmental conditions. Using the class ranges,

0-1.4, 1.-4-1.8, 2.0-2.2, the researchers have interpreted the sites as having low

vulnerability level, moderate vulnerability level, and high vulnerability,

respectively. .

49
 Figure 4.1.5 Summary of the Overall Weight Score of the Structural Stability of
the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

The graph shows that only 20% of the identified cultural heritage sites had

high levels of vulnerability in terms of its environmental condition. Forty six

percent of the sites have low levels of vulnerability and 33% have moderate

levels of vulnerability.

This implies that the identified geological hazards pose minimal threats to

the cultural heritage sites. The environmental conditions surrounding the cultural

heritage sites are resilient to potential flood, liquefaction, and storm surge risks.

50
 4.1.2 Structural Stability

To assess the Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index in terms of structural

stability, each heritage site was rated according to the quality of construction,

current structural damage and deterioration patterns and the age of the building

(see appendices for Table 4.1 Summary of Results and Computations). The

overall weighted score of each cultural heritage site was calculated as a result.

Table 4.1.2 Summary of the Overall Weight Score of the Structural Stability of
the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

The table above shows the overall weighted score of the cultural and

heritage sites in terms of its structural stability. Using the class ranges, 0-1.4,

1.-4-1.8, 2.0-2.2, the researchers have interpreted the sites as having low

vulnerability level, moderate vulnerability level, and high vulnerability,

respectively.

51
 Fgure 4.1.5 Summary of the Overall Weight Score of the Structural Stability of
the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

The graph shows that only 20% of the cultural heritage sites have high

vulnerability levels in terms of its structural stability. This implies that most of the

cultural heritage sites have robust structural stability, high-quality construction,

minimal current damage, and have relatively young age. The site is resilient and

has a low risk of structural issues.

Our Lady of Penafrancia Seminary, Alice Bridge, and the Old Sorsogon

Municipal Hall has high levels of vulnerability in terms of its structural stability due

to the age of the building and evident cracks on its exterior. Sorsogon East

Central School, Sorsogon National High School, Sorsogon Cathedral St. Louise

De Marilac and Jose Rizal Monument were found to have moderate levels of

52
vulnerability. The remaining cultural heritage sites were assessed as having low

levels of vulnerability in terms of its structural stability.

4.1.3 Socio-Economic Aspects

To assess the vulnerability of the cultural heritage sites in terms of

socio-economic aspects, each heritage site was evaluated according to its

accessibility, monitoring and maintenance plans and economic support (see

appendices for Table 4.1 Summary of Results and Computations). Weighted

mean was calculated as a result.

Table 4.1.3 Summary of the Overall Weight Score of the Socio-economic

Aspects of the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

53
 Figure 4.1.7 Summary of the Overall Weight Score of the Socio-Economic
Aspects of the Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City

The graph represents the vulnerability levels of identified cultural heritage

sites based on socio-economic aspects. The vulnerability levels are categorized

into three classes or ranges: 0-1.4, 1.5-1.8, and 2.0-2.2. Each range is assigned

an interpretation: low vulnerability level, moderate vulnerability level, and high

vulnerability level, respectively. According to the graph, 47% of the identified

cultural heritage sites fall within the high vulnerability level range in terms of their

socio-economic aspects. This implies that nearly half of the assessed sites are

considered highly vulnerable when it comes to factors related to social and

economic considerations.

54
4.2 Interpretation of Data

4.2.1 Overall Vulnerability Index

The overall vulnerability index score of each cultural heritage site was

calculated using the overall weighted score of each parameter. Below are the

sites’ CHVI Scores.

Table 4.2.1 Summary of Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index Scores

By getting the average of the overall weighted scores of the cultural

heritage sites, the CHVI was computed. Using the class ranges, 0-1.4, 1.-4-1.8,

2.0-2.2, the researchers have interpreted the sites as having low vulnerability

level, moderate vulnerability level, and high vulnerability, respectively.

55
 Figure 4.2.1 Summary of Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index Scores

The graph below shows the Cultural Heritage Vulnerability Index Scores of

the cultural heritage sites in Sorsogon City. According to the ranking criteria, only

the Alice Bridge had high levels of vulnerability with a 2.2 CHVI. 53.33% of the

cultural heritage sites have moderate level of vulnerability while 40% of them

have low levels of vulnerability.

4.2.3 Vulnerability Assessment Map

After the CHVI evaluation for fifteen cultural heritage sites in Sorsogon

City, a vulnerability assessment map was created with QGIS for creative

visualization. Based on the output, Alice Bridge was found to have high levels of

vulnerability overall. Additionally, the remaining eight cultural heritage sites were

assessed as moderately vulnerable and the remaining six as low vulnerable after

the CHVI computation, as indicated below the map.

56
Figure 4.2.2 Vulnerability Assessment Map of Cultural Heritage Sites in
Sorsogon City

57
4.3 Implications of Result

Environmental Conditions Structural Stability Socio-Economic Aspects CHVI Score

Cultural Heritage Low Moderate High Low Moderate High Low Moderate High

Site
1. Museo De
Sorsogon
2. Sorsogon
Capitol
3. Jose Rizal
Monument
4. Old Sorsogon
Municipal Hall
5. St. Louise De
Marillac
6. Rompeolas
Baywalk
7. Sorsogon
Cathedral
8. Alice
Bridge
9. Camp Salvador
Escudero Sr.
10. Sorsogon
National HS
11. Sorsogon SU
Library
12. Sorsogon EC
School
13. Sorsogon Sports
Complex
14. Our Lady of
Penafrancia
15. Our Lady of
Fatima Parish

Table 4.3.1 Vulnerability Levels of Cultural Heritage Sites in terms of the three
parameters vs its overall CHVI Scores

The table above shows the side-by-side comparison of the vulnerability

levels of the cultural heritage sites in terms of its environmental conditions,

structural stability and socio-economic aspects. The vulnerability levels in each

parameter was compared with its CHVI Score which determines its overall

vulnerability.

58
 The results implied that the cultural heritage sites assessed as low

vulnerability are less susceptible to potential threats. This suggests that these

sites are relatively well-preserved, adequately protected, or less exposed to the

factors that could harm or degrade them. It's a positive indication that these sites

are in a better condition and may require less immediate attention for

preservation efforts.

Furthermore, cultural heritage sites assessed as moderately vulnerable

are at a higher risk compared to those with low vulnerability. This may imply that

these sites face certain threats or challenges that could impact their integrity or

condition. Preservation efforts may need to be focused on these sites to mitigate

potential risks and ensure their long-term sustainability.

Lastly, cultural heritage sites with high vulnerability suggests the site is

highly vulnerable and may require urgent attention to prevent further

deterioration. Immediate action is needed, including structural assessments, risk

mitigation measures, and comprehensive conservation projects. Collaboration

with local and national stakeholders is crucial for effective preservation

59
 CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter serves as the culmination of the study, providing a

comprehensive overview of the key findings, summary, conclusions, and

recommendations derived from the research conducted.

5.1 Summary and Conclusion

The assessment of cultural heritage sites, based on varying levels of

vulnerability across specific parameters such as environmental conditions,

structural stability, and socio-economic aspects, revealed noteworthy distinctions

when compared to vulnerability levels determined by the Cultural Heritage

Vulnerability Index (CHVI) Scores. This indicates that a site's vulnerability can

vary significantly depending on the specific factor under consideration.

For instance, take the Sorsogon Cathedral, which exhibits high

vulnerability in terms of its environmental conditions. However, when evaluating

its structural stability and socio-economic factors, the vulnerability levels may be

moderate or low, contributing to an overall low CHVI. This observation

underscores a critical point—cultural heritage sites that face potential geological

hazards may still boast lower vulnerability if they possess a robust structural

foundation and consistent financial support from various sectors.

This variability in vulnerability highlights the multifaceted nature of risk.

While a site may be exposed to certain environmental challenges, its resilience

and ability to withstand those challenges are equally crucial. The presence of

60
strong structural foundations and sustained financial backing can mitigate overall

vulnerability, showcasing the intricate interplay between natural and

human-induced threats and a site's inherent capacity to withstand them.

The significance of considering multiple parameters—such as

environmental conditions, structural stability, and socio-economic factors—during

vulnerability assessments cannot be overstated. Such a comprehensive

approach provides a more holistic understanding of a cultural heritage site's

vulnerability. It goes beyond merely identifying environmental risks and extends

to evaluating the site's structural integrity and its socio-economic context. This

nuanced perspective allows for a more informed and well-rounded assessment,

contributing to the development of effective conservation strategies and risk

mitigation measures.

In conclusion, the study emphasizes the need to move beyond singular

assessments and adopt a holistic framework that considers the diverse factors

influencing vulnerability. By doing so, researchers and conservationists can

better comprehend the complex dynamics of cultural heritage sites, enabling the

implementation of targeted measures to safeguard these invaluable assets for

future generations.

5.2 Recommendations

The researchers recognize the importance of continuous improvement in

vulnerability assessments for cultural heritage sites and offer valuable

recommendations for future research endeavors. These suggestions aim to

61
enhance the comprehensiveness, reliability, and depth of understanding in

assessing a site's vulnerability.

The researchers suggest expanding the scope of vulnerability

assessments by incorporating more parameters. While the study focused on key

factors such as environmental conditions, structural stability, and socio-economic

aspects, recognizing the intricate nature of cultural heritage sites implies that

additional parameters could further enrich the analysis. These might include

considerations like study area’s condition on earthquake, typhoon and volcanic

activity, cultural significance, historical context, community engagement, and

technological resilience, among others. By broadening the range of parameters,

researchers can capture a more nuanced and complete picture of a site's

vulnerability.

The study also utilized a simplified ranking criteria, restricting the

assessment to three factors per parameter due to time constraints. The

researchers acknowledge the inherent limitations of this simplified approach and

recommend a more detailed examination by incorporating a greater number of

factors. This would involve a more exhaustive evaluation of each parameter,

offering a more granular understanding of the site's vulnerability. By delving

deeper into the intricacies of environmental conditions, structural stability, and

socio-economic factors, researchers can uncover subtleties that might be

overlooked in a simplified framework.

A richer dataset, encompassing a broader array of factors, not only refines

the assessment process but also enhances the reliability of the findings. The

62
researchers emphasize that a more comprehensive approach allows for a more

robust and well-supported analysis, ultimately contributing to the development of

resilient conservation strategies.

63
 REFERENCES

Naag, J., Napay, M.,(2022). Hazard Mapping of Cultural Heritage Sites in

Camalig, Albay.[Review of Hazard Mapping of Cultural Heritage Sites in

Camalig, Albay].

Nicu, I. C., Rubensdotter, L., Stalsberg, K., & Nau, E. (2021c). Coastal Erosion of

Arctic Cultural Heritage in Danger: A Case Study from Svalbard, Norway.

Water, 13(6), 784. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13060784

Noah. (n.d.). Project NOAH (Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards).

Retrieved from

https://noahcenter.up.edu.ph/project-noah-nationwide-operational-assess

ment-of-hazards/

Yang, J., You, Y., Ye, X., & Jiang, L. (2023). Cultural heritage sites risk

assessment based on RS and GIS—takes the Fortified Manors of yongtai

as an example. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 88,

103593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103593

Manila, U. E. (2022, March 21). Cultural Heritage Preservation - U.S. Embassy in

the Philippines. U.S. Embassy in The Philippines.

https://ph.usembassy.gov/cultural-heritage-preservation/#:~:text=Cultural

%20heritage%20is%20central%20to,unity%2C%20belonging%20and%20

national%20pride.

Philippines: Geohazard mapping to save more lives. (2011, January 18).

PreventionWeb.

https://www.preventionweb.net/news/philippines-geohazard-mapping-save

64
 -more-lives

Protect cultural heritage and the environment, and respect. (2016, April 14).

YaleNews.

https://news.yale.edu/2016/04/13/protect-cultural-heritage-and-environme

nt-and-respect-differences-urges-un-secretary-gene

Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council-Sorsogon.

Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan Provincial

Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council-Sorsogon. 2014.

Ravan, M., Revez, M. J., Pinto, I. V., Brum, P., & Birkmann, J. (2023). A

vulnerability assessment framework for cultural heritage sites: the case of

the Roman Ruins of Tróia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science,

14(1), 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-023-00463-4

Religioso, M. A. (2019). Cultural mapping of some built heritages of San Pablo

City. ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36021.09447

Sardella, A., Palazzi, E., Von Hardenberg, J., Del Grande, C., De Nuntiis, P.,

Sabbioni, C., & Bonazza, A. (2020). Risk mapping for the sustainable

protection of cultural heritage in extreme changing environments.

Atmosphere, 11(7), 700. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11070700

Sorsogoncity. (n.d.). Geo-Hazard Maps – Sorsogon City. Retrieved from

https://sorsogoncity.wordpress.com/tag/geo-hazard-maps/?fbclid=IwAR2x

y5KqG4PLLfHCNfCCqqA6Z-0ML0o3BbuRWH4OYRJ-Eh4m3DmgrAQ-ir0

Sorsogon Provincial Government. (2023, December 20). Attraction Map -

Sorsogon Provincial Government. Retrieved from

65
 https://sorsogon.gov.ph/tourism/interactive-map/

Sustainability. (n.d.).

https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/RSGCHMP

The Rich Cultural Legacy of Sorsogon. (2023, April 20). Let’s Do Agribusiness

https://jobellemercadolariosa.wordpress.com/2023/04/20/discover-the-rich

-cultural-legacy-of-sorsogon/

United Nations World Food Programme (WFP). “WFP Scales up Support in

Disaster-Prone Sorsogon Province - Philippines | ReliefWeb.”

Reliefweb.int, 12 Sept. 2012,

reliefweb.int/report/philippines/wfp-scales-support-disaster-prone-sorsogo

n-province. Accessed 4 Oct. 2023.

Von Einsiedel, N. (2021, August 29). Sorsogon reinvents itself to be

disaster-resilient. BluPrint.

https://bluprint-onemega.com/disaster-resilient-city-sorsogon/

66
APPENDIX A

67
 Distance of Cultural Heritage Sites from the Terminal

1.Museo Sorsogon - 2.3 km

2. Sorsogon Capitol - 2.4 km
3. Jose Rizal Monument - 2.4 km
4. Old Sorsogon Municipal Hall - 2.5 km
5. St. Louise De Marillac College of Sorsogon - 2.7 km
6.Rompeolas Baywalk - 2.8 km
7. Sorsogon Cathedral - 2.5 km
8. Alice Bridge - 2.1 km
9. Camp Salvador Escudero Sr. - 2.0 km
10. Sorsogon National High School - 1.6 km
11.Sorsogon State University - Library - 1.7 km
12. Sorsogon East Central School – 2.1 km
13. Sorsogon Sports Complex - 0.9 km
14. Our Lady of Penafrancia Seminary - 2.9 km
15. Our Lady of Fatima Parish - 1.8 km
Table 2.1 Distance of Cultural Heritage Sites from the Terminal

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION INDICATORS & RANKING CRITERIA

Indicators Ranking Criteria Sensitivity
Score
1 (low)
1. Exposure to Flood 0-0.5 meter flood water level
2 (moderate)
0.5 -1.5 meter flood water level
3 (high)
over 1.5 meter flood water level

2. Exposure to Storm Surge 1 (low)

2-meter storm surge height
2 (moderate)
3-meter storm surge height
3 (high)
4-meter storm surge height

1 (low)
3. Exposure to Liquefaction 0 < LPI ≤ 5
2 (moderate)
5 < LPI ≤ 15,
3 (high)
LPI > 15
Table 3.1 Environmental Condition indicators and ranking criteria

68
 STRUCTURAL STABILITY INDICATORS & RANKING CRITERIA
Indicators Ranking Criteria Sensitivity
Score
Good quality masonry (with well-dressed 1 (low)
blocks)
1. Quality of construction (robustness) Medium quality masonry (with irregularly 2 (moderate)
shaped blocks)
Rubble masonry 3 (high)

2. Current structural damage and Rare or no signs; Appropriately 1 (low)

deterioration patterns (structural repaired/retrofitted
imbalance): Current structural damage and Some signs present; Poorly 2 (moderate)
deterioration patterns (structural repaired/retrofitted
imbalance): Many signs present across large areas 3 (high)
- Open or degraded joints; Cracks; Material
losses; Structural
deformations;Biological/vegetation-related
structural damages

Recently Constructed/Renovated (0-10 1 (low)

3. Age of Building (From the day it has years)
been constructed/renovated) Seasoned (11-50 years) 2 (moderate)
Historic (51+ years) 3 (high)
Table 3.2 Structural Stability indicators and ranking criteria.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS INDICATORS & RANKING CRITERIA

Indicators Ranking Criteria Sensitivity
Score
Near Transportation Terminal (0-3 km); Very 1 (low)
Accessible
1. Accessibility In Proximity to Transportation Terminal 2 (moderate)
(3.1-5 km); Limited Accessibility
Far from Transportation Terminal (5.1+ km), 3 (high)
Inaccessible

2. Monitoring and Maintenance Plans 3-4 monitoring and maintenance plans 1 (low)
Regular and frequent monitoring present
activities; 2 monitoring plans present 2 (moderate)
Clear and effective maintenance 3 (high)
protocols; 0-1 maintenance plans
Has highly qualified and trained
personnel;
Well-defined and effective emergency
response plans.

3. Economic Support Has several sources of funding (4-5 1 (low)

-Includes (a) government allocations, (b) sources)
private donations, (c)grants, (d) Has moderate sources of funding (2-3 2 (moderate)
sponsorships, and (e) tourism-related sources)
revenue received by the cultural heritage Has little to no sources of funding (0-1 3 (high)
site) source)
Table 3.3 Socio-economic aspects indicators and ranking criteria

69
 A (Environmental B (Structural Stability) C (Socio-economic
Conditions) Factors)
A (Environmental 1 3 2
Conditions)
B (Structural Stability) 1/3 1 1/2
C (Socio-economic 1/2 2 1
Factors)
Calculating the Column Sum:
· Sum each column to get the total importance for each criterion.
Column Sum (CS):
CS(a) = 1 + 1/3 + 1/2 = 11/6
CS(b) = 3 + 1 + 2 = 6
CS(c) = 2 + 1/2 + 1 = 11/2
Normalizing the Matrix (Divide Each Element by Column Sum):
A (Environmental A (Environmental B (Structural Stability) C (Socio-economic
Conditions) Conditions) Factors)
B (Structural Stability) 1 / 11/6 3 / 6 2 / 11/2
C (Socio-economic 1/3 / 11/6 1 / 6 1/2 / 11/2
Factors)
A (Environmental ½ / 11/6 2 / 6 1 / 11/2
Conditions)
Calculating Row Average:
· Calculate the average of each row to get the normalized weights.
Row Average (RA):
RA(a) = (1 / 11/6 + 3 / 6 + 2 / 11/2) / 3 ≈ 0.43
RA(b) = (1/3 / 11/6 + 1 / 6 + 1/2 / 11/2) / 3 ≈ 0.25
RA(c) = (1/2 / 11/6 + 2 / 6 + 1 / 11/2) / 3 ≈ 0.32
Normalizing the Weights:
· Normalize the row averages to make sure they sum up to 1.
Normalized Weights:
W(a) ≈ 0.43 / (0.43 + 0.25 + 0.32) ≈ 0.44
W(b) ≈ 0.25 / (0.43 + 0.25 + 0.32) ≈ 0.25
W(c) ≈ 0.32 / (0.43 + 0.25 + 0.32) ≈ 0.31
The researchers wanted to make sure the weights add up to 1.0. In our case, we chose weights that,
when added up, give a total importance of 1.0.
Final Weights:
Environmental Conditions: 0.4
Structural Stability: 0.3
Socio-economic Factors: 0.3
Table 3.4 Pairwise comparison of the significance of the parameters.

Factor Scores Weig Weighted Score (Weight x Overall

ht Factor Score) Weighted
Score
Environmental 2 1 1 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.4 1.6
Conditions
1. Museo De Structural 1 1 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9
Sorsogon Stability

70
 Socio-economi 3 1 1 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.3 1.5
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.3
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 2 1 1 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.4 1.6
Conditions
2. Sorsogon Structural 1 1 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9
Capitol Stability
Socio-economi 3 2 1 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.3 1.8
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.4
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 2 1 1 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.4 1.6
Conditions
3. Jose Rizal Structural 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
Monument Stability
Socio-economi 3 2 2 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 2.1
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.8
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
4. Old Sorsogon Structural 3 2 3 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.9 2.4
Municipal Hall Stability
Socio-economi 3 1 3 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.9 2.1
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.9
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 2 1 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.4 1.6
Conditions
5. St. Louise De Structural 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
Marillac Stability
Socio-economi 3 2 2 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 2.1
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.8
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
6. Rompeolas Structural 1 2 1 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.3 1.2
Baywalk Stability
Socio-economi 3 2 2 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 2.1
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.5
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 2 2 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.8 2
Conditions
7. Sorsogon Structural 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
Cathedral Stability

71
 Socio-economi 3 2 1 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.3 1.8
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.9
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 2 2 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.8 2
Conditions
8. Alice Bridge Structural 3 2 3 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.9 2.4
Stability
Socio-economi 2 2 3 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.9 2.1
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 2.2
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 2 2 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.8 2
Conditions
9. Camp
Salvador
Escudero Sr. Structural 1 1 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9
Stability
Socio-economi 2 1 1 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.3 1.2
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.4
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
10. Sorsogon
National High
School Structural 2 2 1 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.3 1.5
Stability
Socio-economi 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.5
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
11. Sorsogon
State University
Library Structural 1 1 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9
Stability
Socio-economi 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.3
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 2 1 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.4 1.6
Conditions
12. Sorsogon
East Central
School Structural 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
Stability
Socio-economi 3 2 2 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 2.1
c Factors

72
 CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.8
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
13. Sorsogon Structural 1 1 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9
Sports Complex Stability
Socio-economi 1 3 1 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.3 1.5
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.2
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
14. Our Lady of
Penafrancia
Seminary Structural 3 2 2 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 2.1
Stability
Socio-economi 3 2 2 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 2.1
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.8
Weight Score/3) =
Environmental 1 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2
Conditions
15. Our Lady of Structural 1 1 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9
Fatima Parish Stability
Socio-economi 2 2 2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.8
c Factors
CHVI Score (SUM of Overall 1.3
Weight Score/3) =
Table 4.1 Summary of Results and Computations

73
Cultural Heritage Sites

Museo Sorsogon

Sorsogon Capitol

74
 Jose Rizal Monument

Old Sorsogon Municipal Hall

75
St. Louise De Marillac College of Sorsogon

Rompeolas Baywalk

76
Sorsogon Cathedral

Alice Bridge

77
 Camp Salvador Escudero Sr.

Sorsogon National High School

78
Sorsogon State University - Library

Sorsogon East Central School

79
 Sorsogon Sports Complex

Our Lady of Penafrancia Seminary

80
Our Lady of Fatima Parish

81
 APPENDIX B

BICOL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Geodetic Engineering Department, Legazpi City, Albay

November 07, 2023

_________________________
_________________________
_________________________

Greetings of peace!

We, the bonafide student of Bachelor of Science in Geodetic Engineering at

Bicol University College of Engineering, are conducting a study titled “Geological
Hazard Map Assessment of Historical and Cultural Heritage Sites in Sorsogon City
Using Remote Sensing and GIS”.

In connection with the development of the study, we cordially ask your good
office for permission to access the needed information such as the hazard map of
Sorsogon City. We intend to use the data collected to guide in creating a geological
hazard map. For this purpose, we also request for your help in getting responses to
relevant person from your office.

Thank you for your kind consideration regarding this matter. God bless!

Researchers,

MARC JUSTIN E. LAROSA

0995139231
marcjustinenesio.larosa@bicol-u,edu.ph

JAYNIE P. MATIBAG
09469822033
jaynieperez.matibag@bicol-u.edu.ph

ROCHELLE P. RUELAN
0935174923
rochellepetrache.ruelan@bicol-u.edu.ph

Noted by:

ENGR. EDMUNDO O. ESTOR

Course Adviser, GE 240
eoestor@bicol-u.edu.ph

82
APPENDIX C

83
84
85
86
87
88
APPENDIX D

89
90