Dear Colleagues,

Disasters resulting from natural events, war or other human-induced actions are surprisingly common; and climate change increases the likelihood of more, and more severe, catastrophes resulting from, among other causes, more severe weather events.  Many organisations, disciplines and professions have focused on disaster prevention, planning, relief and reconstruction. All of these activities carry a strong, though often under-acknowledged, link with sustainability.

The use of heritage in post-disaster reconstruction is often evident, although often not explicitly acknowledged.  As in other contexts, ‘heritage’ is a multi-dimensional concept and its use in the particularly problematic cases of post-disaster reconstruction can raise critical issues.  What remains of the pre-disaster physical heritage - from the scale of urban layouts to individual buildings or smaller cultural artifacts?  Whose heritage is being re-used or reconstructed - particularly if an original population is killed or displaced by the catastrophe - and for whose benefit?  What processes or agencies select heritage and how it is dealt with, and does this process impose external cultural values, practices and economic power?  Over what period of time does such heritage appropriation bear results, and with what sort of results - indeed is there ever any meaningful post-implementation evaluation?  And is the heritage being considered actually the heritage of the pre-disaster situation, or of the disaster itself?  If the disaster becomes heritage, it is often a particularly difficult heritage - complex, often contested and divisive.

Examples of these heritage issues are well covered.  Yet many relate to the catastrophe of war rather than to other forms of disaster.  The post-Second World War near-facsimile reconstruction of parts of the medieval old town of Warsaw is much discussed, for example, although it served as much as a sanitised heritage for a new national identity as a reminder of an actual pre-war urban heritage.  Similarly, facsimile reconstruction served symbolic purposes in post-First World War Ypres, whereas in other places and countries, facsimiles were very little used and reconstruction took other forms.  For more localised, city-wide disasters, the variety of plans proposed for the City of London after the 1666 fire are well known, with some keeping closely to the pre-fire heritage of street and plot alignments, although this is likely to be more for reasons of established landownership interests and inertia than considered heritage.  The post-1755 earthquake reconstruction of central Lisbon has likewise created a new urban form, which itself serves as the longest-lasting and largest-scale commemoration of the tragedy.

This Special Issue seeks to generate debate widely across the relevant disciplines and professions.  We seek to identify and evaluate different practices, and suggest lessons for dealing with heritage in and of future post-disaster reconstructions.  This is particularly relevant in the light of recent moves to provide official guidance from national and international organisations such as the Council of Europe and Historic England.  We encourage contributions covering a wide range of disaster types and scales, and historic periods.  Large-scale comparisons and individual case studies at the city or project scale are equally welcome.  We are particularly interested in under-represented issues such as landscape fires, social and intangible heritages, and natural heritages.

We invite researchers to submit original papers that include theoretical/conceptual, analytical, or design/practice- based approaches related to the interplay between disaster, heritage and reconstruction.  Comparative studies and case studies are welcome.  Topics of interest include, but are not restricted to:

• Replanning / redesign / reconstruction / rebuilding
• Replication
• Originality and authenticity
• The nature and heritage impact of disaster
• Selecting the heritage for the reconstruction
• Whose heritage?
• Complex, contested and dissonant heritages
• The use of heritage in the post-disaster period
• Longer -term perspectives and evaluations
• Theoretical approaches
• Policy approaches
• Public and user perspectives
• Changing perspectives and interpretations of post-disaster heritage use
• Sustainability and the long-term use of heritage

Prof. Dr. Peter J. Larkham
Dr. David Adams
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.