Guidance Open for Consultation
Your chance to have a say on advice and guidance documents we've published in draft. Your feedback will help us make our advice and guidance useful.
Assessing Opportunity and Sensitivity using Historic Landscape Characterisation
This guidance is for all those considering, planning or responsible for large-scale change in the British landscape and seascape. It helps them identify the types of places, rural, urban or marine, where specific types of change might best occur, where historic fabric, patterns and character suggest there are most likely to be opportunities for it. It also enables them to better understand historic landscape’s vulnerability or sensitivity to types of change, and thus the types of place that might be best avoided.
Users are expected to include government, industry, planners, agencies, landowners and land managers, or representatives of communities and those campaigning for urgently needed change, as well as heritage professionals responding to proposals for large-scale change.
The method has been developed by Historic England in consultation with other agencies and bodies with an interest in change in the British landscape, including the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers (ALGAO), the Environment Agency, Natural England, National Trust, Chartered Institute for Archaeology.
It uses the comprehensive and systematic map-based datasets of Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) as a proxy for our historic landscape. The method would be used early in the development of strategies or the design of large-scale change, to help in filtering out places that are more likely to have high sensitivity to the change under consideration or drawing attention to places that offer opportunities for it. The simple three-stage method is adaptable, and its results are easily understood.
It starts with examination of the needs and effects of the type of change under consideration. Then HLC Types are assessed to establish the affordances they offer for the type of change, their vulnerabilities to it (modelling opportunity and sensitivity, respectively), before considering how the change would be expected to affect the values we typically apply to them (modelling significance).
Download the draft document
Questions to consider for your response
- Would you agree that earlier more strategic assessment of the sensitivity of the historic landscape to forms of large-scale change should ‘minimise conflict and cost further downstream for all parties, including developers and authorities’? (see 1.3)
- Would you also agree that sensitivity cannot be regarded as an absolute or inherent quality of a place, but instead varies according to the type of change being considered? Nor that it has identical capacity to accommodate or benefit from, and thus present opportunities for any type of change? (see 2.1)
- Can you suggest other beneficiaries of opportunity and sensitivity assessment? (see section 3)
- And can you suggest other major types of change scenario? (see 4.1)
- Do you agree that the four Heritage Values, Aesthetic, Communal, Evidential and Historical (set out in Conservation Principles), derived from the Values introduced in the internationally recognised Burra Charter (ICOMOS), are more helpful when considering significance in relation to landscape and very large areas of land or sea than the narrower Heritage Interests that we deploy when considering individual heritage assets? (see 4.2)
- It is suggested that Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) and its stablemates in Historic Characterisation enable the historic environment sector to present understandable material alongside other base mappings of large parts of our country, like geology, soils, topography and land use. Do you agree? (see 1.6)
- Do you agree that the method of opportunity and sensitivity assessment using HLC supports the UK’s meeting of its obligations (as a signatory of the European Landscape Convention) to protect and manage all landscape. The ELC conception of landscape includes ‘natural, rural, urban and peri-urban areas, and inland water and marine areas,’ and ‘landscapes that might be considered outstanding as well as everyday or degraded landscapes’ (Council of Europe 2000, Article 2). (see 1.7)
- Do you agree that a minimum scale should be adopted for sensitivity and opportunity assessment using HLC? Would 1:25,000 be a reasonable minimum? Or 1:50,000? (see 4.1)
- Is it reasonable to expect the resourcing for sensitivity and opportunity assessment to be provided by those either planning change or with an interest in certain types of change, given that they will benefit from a closer understanding of opportunities and risks? (see 5.3)
- Do you agree that the results of opportunity and sensitivity assessment should not be left purely as traffic-light mappings, but always also require a clear and proportionate narrative, that sets out variables and limitations, as well as recommendations for action? (see 5.10)
- And do you agree that simplification and combination of results also neutralises the useful highlights within them and so undermines their usefulness? (see 5.6)
- Do you have experience of using HSC (Historic Seascape Characterisation) in strategic assessment or decision making?
- Would you be interested in an update of guidance on making use of Historic Characterisations, including HLC, HSC and urban characterisation? (see 1.6)
- Do you find the Glossary helpful? Should it include any other terms?
- If you have undertaken sensitivity or opportunity assessment using HLC or HSC, would you be interested in sharing a summary of your work as a case study?
Responses and questions can be sent to Pete Herring, email: [email protected]
Closing date for consultation: 1 August 2025
Guidance Team
-
Email
[email protected]
Also of interest
