Remote Sensing Data to Support Integrated Decision Making in Cultural and Natural Heritage Management. Impasses and opportunities for collaboration in agricultural areas

Remote and near surface sensing data are widely used in archaeology and heritage management for feature discovery, change detection and monitoring, as an input to predictive modelling, and in the planning process. While global and regional datasets are widely used for some purposes, data are regularly acquired specifically for archaeological projects because of the very high spatial resolution required for feature detection and assessments of archaeological significance and the need for data on subsurface features. The sensing data collected for archaeology cover limited areas and only a few types of sensors, known to produce data efficiently, are regularly employed. Precision agriculture is beginning to produce large quantities of varied sensing data across extensive landscape areas. This situation creates an opportunity to adapt and reuse precision agricultural data for archaeology and heritage work, extending covering and enhancing our understanding of archaeology in contemporary agricultural landscapes. Equally, there is potential for coordinated data collection, collecting data once for multiple applications, and to add value through analyses which bring together perspectives from multiple related domains to model long-term processes in anthropogenic soil systems. This article provides a high-level overview of policy and technological developments which create the potential for sensing data reuse, coordinated data collection, and collaborative analyses across archaeological, agricultural, and agri-environmental applications while underscoring the structural barriers which, at present, constrain this potential. It highlights examples where the development of interoperable data and workflows can promote tighter integration of archaeology and cultural heritage management with sustainable agricultural land management and support integrated decision making.

[1]  B. Koetz,et al.  Mowing detection using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 time series for large scale grassland monitoring , 2022, Remote Sensing of Environment.

[2]  K. Todd-Brown,et al.  Reviews and syntheses: The promise of big diverse soil data, moving current practices towards future potential , 2022, Biogeosciences.

[3]  S. Wynne‐Jones,et al.  The politics of the rural and relational values: Contested discourses of rural change and landscape futures in west wales , 2022, Geoforum.

[4]  L. Muñoz,et al.  Challenges to Use Machine Learning in Agricultural Big Data: A Systematic Literature Review , 2022, Agronomy.

[5]  G. Tóth,et al.  A LUCAS‐based mid‐infrared soil spectral library: Its usefulness for soil survey and precision agriculture , 2022, Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science.

[6]  L. Manning,et al.  What are the priority research questions for digital agriculture? , 2022, Land Use Policy.

[7]  Linchao Li,et al.  Developing machine learning models with multi-source environmental data to predict wheat yield in China , 2022, Comput. Electron. Agric..

[8]  P. Dahlhaus,et al.  The Role of FAIR Data towards Sustainable Agricultural Performance: A Systematic Literature Review , 2022, Agriculture.

[9]  Manuel Mora Tavarez,et al.  Building an interoperable space for smart agriculture , 2022, Digit. Commun. Networks.

[10]  P. Burgess,et al.  Spatial modelling approach and accounting method affects soil carbon estimates and derived farm-scale carbon payments. , 2022, Science of the Total Environment.

[11]  L. Petetin,et al.  The Governance of Agriculture in Post-Brexit UK , 2022 .

[12]  B. Hasler,et al.  European Agri-environmental Policy: Evolution, Effectiveness, and Challenges , 2022, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

[13]  Guillermo Sven Reher Heritage as Action Research , 2021, Sustainability.

[14]  B. Maxwell,et al.  Precision Agroecology , 2021, Sustainability.

[15]  Caitlin DeSilvey,et al.  When Loss is More: From Managed Decline to Adaptive Release , 2021, The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice.

[16]  S. Morse,et al.  Earth Observation for Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification within Environmental Land Management Policy , 2021, Sustainability.

[17]  S. Orr,et al.  Climate Change and Cultural Heritage: A Systematic Literature Review (2016–2020) , 2021, The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice.

[18]  Pete Smith,et al.  Sustainable futures over the next decade are rooted in soil science , 2021, European Journal of Soil Science.

[19]  Birgit Kleinschmit,et al.  Large-scale winter catch crop monitoring with Sentinel-2 time series and machine learning-An alternative to on-site controls? , 2021, Comput. Electron. Agric..

[20]  A. Flint,et al.  The role of cultural heritage in visitor narratives of peatlands: analysis of online user-generated reviews from three peatland sites in England , 2021, International Journal of Heritage Studies.

[21]  M. Smith,et al.  The value of cultural ecosystem services in a rural landscape context , 2021 .

[22]  Xiaobing Kang,et al.  Review of Weed Detection Methods Based on Computer Vision , 2021, Sensors.

[23]  George Cusworth,et al.  Using the ‘good farmer’ concept to explore agricultural attitudes to the provision of public goods. A case study of participants in an English agri-environment scheme , 2021, Agriculture and Human Values.

[24]  R. Gaulton,et al.  Capturing hedgerow structure and flowering abundance with UAV remote sensing , 2021, Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation.

[25]  Benedict Dempsey Understanding conflicting views in conservation: An analysis of England , 2021 .

[26]  M. Harrison,et al.  An Integrated Economic, Environmental and Social Approach to Agricultural Land-Use Planning , 2021 .

[27]  Ricardo Silva Peres,et al.  Characterising the Agriculture 4.0 Landscape—Emerging Trends, Challenges and Opportunities , 2021, Agronomy.

[28]  M. Cerf,et al.  Exchanges among farmers’ collectives in support of sustainable agriculture: From review to reconceptualization , 2021 .

[29]  Sadie Watson Public Benefit: the challenge for development-led archaeology in the UK , 2021 .

[30]  C. Pray,et al.  Who drives the digital revolution in agriculture? A review of supply‐side trends, players and challenges , 2021, Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy.

[31]  A. Daccache,et al.  Soil Properties Prediction for Precision Agriculture Using Visible and Near-Infrared Spectroscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2021, Agronomy.

[32]  H. Vereecken,et al.  Toward high‐resolution agronomic soil information and management zones delineated by ground‐based electromagnetic induction and aerial drone data , 2021, Vadose Zone Journal.

[33]  Ananth Chiravuri,et al.  Digital Transformation and Environmental Sustainability: A Review and Research Agenda , 2021, Sustainability.

[34]  R. Huber,et al.  Agricultural policy in the era of digitalisation , 2021 .

[35]  W. Silver,et al.  Soil organic carbon is not just for soil scientists: measurement recommendations for diverse practitioners. , 2021, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[36]  F. Moreira,et al.  A farming systems approach to linking agricultural policies with biodiversity and ecosystem services , 2020, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

[37]  Yi Shen Transdisciplinary Convergence: Intelligent Infrastructure for Sustainable Development , 2020, Data Intelligence.

[38]  G. Singh,et al.  Portable Raman leaf-clip sensor for rapid detection of plant stress , 2020, Scientific Reports.

[39]  Telmo Morato,et al.  Environmental Protection Requires Accurate Application of Scientific Evidence. , 2020, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[40]  Calum Brown,et al.  Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy , 2020, Land Use Policy.

[41]  O. El-Gayar,et al.  Drivers and challenges of precision agriculture: a social media perspective , 2020, Precision Agriculture.

[42]  Nora Fagerholm,et al.  Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management , 2020 .

[43]  Ram L. Ray,et al.  Applications of Remote Sensing in Precision Agriculture: A Review , 2020, Remote. Sens..

[44]  Angelos Amditis,et al.  An integrated service-based solution addressing the modernised common agriculture policy regulations and environmental perspectives , 2020, Remote Sensing.

[45]  Lukáš Herman,et al.  Visualizations of Uncertainties in Precision Agriculture: Lessons Learned from Farm Machinery , 2020, Applied Sciences.

[46]  P. Chapman,et al.  Improving the evidence base for delivery of public goods from public money in agri-environment schemes , 2020, Emerald Open Research.

[47]  R. Naresh,et al.  Impact of agricultural management practices on soil carbon sequestration and its monitoring through simulation models and remote sensing techniques: A review , 2020, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology.

[48]  D. Reay Land Use and Agriculture: Pitfalls and Precautions on the Road to Net Zero , 2020, Frontiers in Climate.

[49]  S. Macdonald,et al.  Heritage Futures , 2020 .

[50]  T. Döring,et al.  The Common Agricultural Policy beyond 2020: A critical review in light of global environmental goals , 2020 .

[51]  George Cusworth Falling short of being the ‘good farmer’: Losses of social and cultural capital incurred through environmental mismanagement, and the long-term impacts agri-environment scheme participation , 2020 .

[52]  F. Moreira,et al.  Action needed for the EU Common Agricultural Policy to address sustainability challenges , 2020, People and nature.

[53]  Bruce Grieve,et al.  High Speed Crop and Weed Identification in Lettuce Fields for Precision Weeding , 2020, Sensors.

[54]  W. R. Whalley,et al.  Time‐lapse geophysical assessment of agricultural practices on soil moisture dynamics , 2020, Vadose Zone Journal.

[55]  Athos Agapiou,et al.  Optimal Spatial Resolution for the Detection and Discrimination of Archaeological Proxies in Areas with Spectral Heterogeneity , 2020, Remote. Sens..

[56]  K. Cordemans,et al.  Impact of the CAP on Archaeological Heritage. Cause & Remedy? , 2019, Ex Novo: Journal of Archaeology.

[57]  Narcisa G. Pricope,et al.  Remote Sensing of Human-Environment Interactions in Global Change Research: A Review of Advances, Challenges and Future Directions , 2019, Remote. Sens..

[58]  P. Belford Ensuring Archaeology in the Planning System Delivers Public Benefit , 2019, Public Archaeology.

[59]  Z. Venter,et al.  Rotational grazing management has little effect on remotely-sensed vegetation characteristics across farm fence-line contrasts , 2019, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment.

[60]  Paolo Barsocchi,et al.  The Digitisation of Agriculture: a Survey of Research Activities on Smart Farming , 2019, Array.

[61]  Guy Pe'er,et al.  A greener path for the EU Common Agricultural Policy , 2019, Science.

[62]  René van Bavel,et al.  Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review , 2019, European Review of Agricultural Economics.

[63]  Bruce Erickson,et al.  Setting the Record Straight on Precision Agriculture Adoption , 2019, Agronomy Journal.

[64]  Teresa Pinto-Correia,et al.  Landscape concepts and approaches foster learning about ecosystem services , 2019, Landscape Ecology.

[65]  R. Vogt,et al.  Archaeology and agriculture: conflicts and solutions , 2019, E&G Quaternary Science Journal.

[66]  Deodato Tapete,et al.  Earth Observation, Remote Sensing, and Geoscientific Ground Investigations for Archaeological and Heritage Research , 2019, Geosciences.

[67]  Christopher N. Rodgers Delivering a better natural environment? The Agriculture Bill and future agri-environment policy , 2019, Environmental Law Review.

[68]  W. Sutherland,et al.  Integrated farm management for sustainable agriculture: Lessons for knowledge exchange and policy , 2019, Land Use Policy.

[69]  M. Horton,et al.  Precision farming and archaeology , 2019, Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences.

[70]  G. Levin,et al.  Digital transdisciplinarity in land change science – integrating multiple types of digital data , 2019, Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography.

[71]  Tatjana Veljanovski,et al.  Sentinel-2 Based Temporal Detection of Agricultural Land Use Anomalies in Support of Common Agricultural Policy Monitoring , 2018, ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf..

[72]  S. Clay,et al.  Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities in the Precision Agriculture Workforce: An Industry Survey , 2018, Natural Sciences Education.

[73]  G. Leucci,et al.  New Perspectives on Geophysics for Archaeology: A Special Issue , 2018, Surveys in Geophysics.

[74]  L. Weihermüller,et al.  Calibration, inversion, and applications of multiconfiguration electromagnetic induction for agricultural top- and subsoil characterization , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[75]  Keith H. Coble,et al.  Big Data in Agriculture: A Challenge for the Future , 2018 .

[76]  E. Brevik,et al.  Soil ecosystem services, sustainability, valuation and management , 2017, Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health.

[77]  Joar Skrede,et al.  Cultural Heritage and Ecosystem Services: A Literature Review , 2017 .

[78]  I. Jansen,et al.  It's all in the Pixels: high-resolution remote-sensing data and the mapping and analysis of the archaeological and historical landscape , 2017 .

[79]  Eve-Lyn S. Hinckley,et al.  Introduction to the sampling designs of the National Ecological Observatory Network Terrestrial Observation System , 2016 .

[80]  Mark D. Schwartz,et al.  The Plant Phenology Monitoring Design for the National Ecological Observatory Network , 2016 .

[81]  P. Crombé,et al.  Exploring Integrated Geophysics and Geotechnics as a Paleolandscape Reconstruction Tool: Archaeological Prospection of (Prehistoric) Sites Buried Deeply below the Scheldt Polders (NW Belgium) , 2016 .

[82]  I. Rotherham Bio-cultural heritage and biodiversity: emerging paradigms in conservation and planning , 2015, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[83]  D. Mulla Twenty five years of remote sensing in precision agriculture: Key advances and remaining knowledge gaps , 2013 .

[84]  A. Georgopoulos,et al.  Optimum temporal and spectral window for monitoring crop marks over archaeological remains in the Mediterranean region , 2013 .

[85]  R. D. Groot,et al.  The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy , 2012 .

[86]  Thomas Weith,et al.  Sustainable Land Management in a European Context , 2021 .

[87]  L. Veldpaus,et al.  A Research Agenda for Heritage Planning , 2021 .

[88]  Laurent Deschodt,et al.  Exploration archéologique de 170 hectares de plaine maritime (Bourbourg, Saint-Georges-sur-l’Aa, Craywick, Nord de la France) : restitution de la fermeture d’un estuaire au Moyen Âge et mise en évidence de mares endiguées , 2021 .

[89]  Sensing Approaches for Precision Agriculture , 2021, Progress in Precision Agriculture.

[90]  S. Fountas,et al.  Exploring the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: A cross regional study of EU farmers , 2019, Land Use Policy.

[91]  M. Krom Farmer participation in agri-environmental schemes : regionalisation and the role of bridging social capital , 2017 .