Social Quality in the Conservation
Process of Living Heritage Sites
Proefschrift
ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Technische Universiteit Delft
op gezag van de Rector Magnificus Prof.dr.ir. J.T. Fokkema voorzitter van het College voor Promoties,
in het openbaar te verdedigen op 19 juni 2008 om 17.30 uur door
Ping KONG
Master of Arts (Architecture), National University of Singapore Master of Urban Planning and Urban Design, Tongji University, Shanghai,
P.R.China
Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotors: Prof. A. Tzonis Prof. Dr.L. Lefaivre Prof. Dip. Ing H.J. Rosemann Samenstelling promotiecommissie: Rector Magnificus voorzitter Prof. A. Tzonis Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor Prof. Dr.L. Lefaivre Universitat fur Angewandte Kunst, Vienna,
Austria, promotor Prof. Dip. Ing H.J. Rosemann Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor Prof. M. Levin Technion Israel Institute of Technology Prof. V. Lykoudis University of Notre Dame, U.S.A. Prof. W. Patijn Technische Universiteit Delft Prof. X. D. Li Tsinghua University, China Published by International Forum on Urbanism (IFoU) Berlageweg 1, 2628 CR Delft The Netherlands Copyright © Ping KONG All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by any electronic or mechanical means without permission in writing from the author
ISBN: 978‐90‐78658‐08‐5
To Mama, Papa and Mark
‐ I ‐
Abstract The ‘UNESCO World Heritage Convention’ was ratificated on November 16,
1972. Since then, both public and private sectors around the world have
attached growing importance to the safeguarding and conservation of
selected cultural and natural ‘objects’, focusing on physical characteristics.
World Heritage sites receive major publicity and as a result become notable
attractions for large numbers of tourists from all over the world. However, in
spite of the clear economic benefits and political prestige, this massive influx
of tourists disrupts and in most cases, in the long run, destroys the social
quality of indigenous community. The deterioration of social quality could
ultimately undermine the application of conservation policy.
The aim of this research is to: 1) identify the negative impact of conservation
policies implemented in living World Heritage sites on the social quality of
traditional communities; 2) develop a design tool constraining spatial
morphology to overcome the negative influences on the social quality The
study leads to a new approach to conservation planning that takes into
account sustaining social quality while enforcing UNESCO World Heritage
conservation program.
Given the complexity and novelty of social problems as new activities and
actors enter into traditional living communities, a comparative case‐study
approach has been adopted, employing on‐site survey and in situ
investigations by the author1. Two cases of UNESCO World Heritage sites
have been chosen: the Dayan town in Lijiang, Yunan province of China, and
the Ogimachi village in the Chubu region of Japan. In both cases, the
conservation program has been applied with respect to physical features of
the sites. However, they have been implemented differently from a planning 1 The Dayan case study was conducted during the compiling of Conservation Plan for Lijiang ancient town, led by Dr. Shao Yong in June 2002. The social survey was carried out by a team of students in Tongji University. Questionnaires were distributed among the local residents in the five main neighborhoods in Dayan town, The Ogimachi case study was conducted solo by the author with the assistance of Japanese colleagues from ACCU (Nara) in Nov 2007
‐ II ‐
and design point of view, and thus have had different impacts on the social
quality of local communities: negative in the case of Dayan and positive in
the case of Ogimachi. In the first instance, the study has been used to
identify the various aspects and parameters of the problem, and to develop
a hypothesis about the role of constrained physical organization in retaining
social quality; in the second instance, the study aims to test the model
derived from the hypothesis and to develop a complementary design
guidelines.
Drawing from literature, the study defines social quality in terms of
observable, measurable social indicators in the context of living heritage
conservation. The data obtained from case studies have been analyzed and
generalized within the MOP (Morphology, Operation, Performance)
framework. Given the above analysis, the conclusion arrives as a new
knowledge‐based design tool in the form of design guidelines. The guidelines
constrain spatial morphology to enable social interactions and enhance
social quality. Extrapolating from this study, the new knowledge‐based
design tool works in parallel with the conservation of physical objects as
applied by current UNESCO policy to safeguard social quality of indigenous
community.
The conclusions of this dissertation are limited by: the number and the type
of cases selected; the methods of data collection and data analysis adopted.
These limitations might affect the generalization of the conclusions and
applicability of the tool. However, they suggest directions for further
investigations towards understanding better the relation between social
quality maintenance and environmental conservation.
Key words:
living heritage sites social quality conservation tourism development spatial morphology design guidelines
‐ III ‐
Preface and Acknowledgement The problems with living heritage conservation have been hovering in my
minds for years since I was involved as a student assistant in compiling
conservation plans and reconstruction designs for historic settlements in
China. The field work experience inspired me with insights into
understanding the conflicts between conservation and tourism development.
Currently working as a program specialist under the umbrella of UNESCO, I
have had the chance to review conservation programs at a number of World
Heritage sites from a more objective and comprehensive point of view. It is
evident that pressures from urbanisation and tourism development not only
exert negative impacts on the physical environment, but more substantially
destroy the social tissue of living heritage sites. The exodus of indigenous
inhabitants and the discontinuity of traditional life shed light on the research
theme. This dissertation integrated the indicators of social quality in the
conservation progress of living heritage sites. It examined the social
influence of new activities and actors introduced by tourism‐related
development, and highlighted the importance and sensitivity of constrained
spatial morphology in retaining the social quality of the traditional
community in the long run.
The research was developed with Prof. A. Tzonis and Prof. L. Lefaivre, who
helped me with expert precision and great guidance towards the best
possible outcome. The progress of this research has been benefited from a
number of people and institutes, without whom, this dissertation could not
have taken its current form, nor have the depths and strengths as it contains
now.
First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my
promoters, Prof. A. Tzonis, Prof. L. Lefaivre and Prof. J. Rosemann for their
continuous support, patience and encouragement throughout the study.
Special thanks go to my committee members, Prof. M. Levin, Prof. V.
Lykoudis, Prof. W. Patijn and Prof. X. D. Li for their valuable comments to
improve the presentation of the dissertation. I am obliged to Prof. Zhiqiang
Wu, who inspired me on the social sensitivity of design and supported me in
various occasions. I would also like to thank Dr. Yong Shao, who offered me
‐ IV ‐
insights and valuable data about the conservation plan in Lijiang ancient
town. My understanding on living heritage conservation broadened by the
research on Living Heritage Sites Program and inspiring discussions with Mr.
M. Bouchenaki, Dr. G. Wijesuriya, Mr. J. King and other colleagues at
ICCROM. I am also pleased to thank ACCU, Nara Office, in particular Ms.
Hokezu and Mr. Yamashita, who provided me kind assistance in translation
and data collection in the investigation of Ogimachi village. I appreciate the
support from Mr. H. Stovel, Mr. J. Feng from UNESCO WHC and colleagues
from Chinese National Commission for UNESCO. I am also indebted to Prof. J.
Zhou and my colleagues, Ms. H. Li, Ms. X.X. Hu in UNESCO WHITR‐AP for
their continuous professional and moral backing. Special thanks also go to
Mr. Surtees for proof‐reading, Mr. F.D. Qian for cover design, staff in Faculty
of Architecture, TU Delft for helping in administrative matters, and seniors in
Design Knowledge System Research Centre, TU Delft for their inspiring
precedent research. Last, but not least, I would like to devote this research
to my parents and my fiancé for being there for me with great faith and
unwavering love, accompanying me through this adventurous yet beautiful
journey.
Ping KONG
Shanghai, 2008
‐ V ‐
Contents
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................ I
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT…………………………………………….……III
CONTENTS…………………………………………………….…………………………………….V
1 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................1
1.1 Objectives ................................................................................... 1 1.2 Key issues ................................................................................... 2
1.2.1 Living heritage site ........................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Conservation .................................................................................... 4 1.2.3 Social quality .................................................................................... 5 1.2.4 Social capital..................................................................................... 6 1.2.5 Cultural diversity .............................................................................. 7
1.3 Brief research background ......................................................... 8 1.3.1 Evolvement of heritage conservation .............................................. 8 1.3.2 Social concerns in conservation ....................................................... 9
1.4 Problem statements ................................................................. 12 1.4.1 Lopsided value assessment of professionals over local populations
13 1.4.2 Absence of social considerations on the daily lives of indigenous
people 14 1.4.3 Lack of applicable guidelines to retain social quality in conservation
practices...................................................................................................... 15 1.5 Methodology ............................................................................ 16
1.5.1 Method of case study..................................................................... 16 1.5.2 Methods in case study ................................................................... 17
1.6 Procedure of the study............................................................. 19
2 CASE STUDY: DAYAN IN LIJIANG ANCIENT TOWN..............................22
2.1 Reasons to choose Lijiang ancient town .................................. 22 2.2 Physical and social features of Lijiang ancient town................ 25
2.2.1 Unique natural landscape, townscape and vernacular architecture
25
‐ VI ‐
2.2.2 Social development ........................................................................28 2.2.3 Conservation interventions ............................................................29
2.3 Brief introduction to Social survey ........................................... 30 2.3.1 General social‐economic status in Dayan town .............................30 2.3.2 Social survey in Dayan town...........................................................32
2.4 Social analysis ........................................................................... 33 2.4.1 The change of demography............................................................33 2.4.2 The change of social structure .......................................................37 2.4.3 The change of land‐use and environmental quality .......................39 2.4.4 The change of social interactions ...................................................46
2.5 Reviews on current management at Lijiang ancient town....... 49 2.6 Summary of social problems in Dayan town............................ 51
3 CRITICAL REVIEWS ON LIVING HERITAGE CONSERVATION ................... 54
3.1 Findings from the Living Heritage Sites Program ..................... 54 3.1.1 Main characteristics of living heritage sites ...................................55 3.1.2 Main problems in current living heritage conservation .................56 3.1.3 Living heritage approach ................................................................58
3.2 Responses to main problems in living heritage conservation.. 59 3.2.1 Arguments on authenticity.............................................................59 3.2.2 Interpretation on functions............................................................61
3.3 Main contributions of the living heritage approach................. 62 3.3.1 Integrated approach through direct community involvement ......62 3.3.2 Highlight of living components.......................................................63 3.3.3 Advantages in comparison with traditional methods ....................64
3.4 Problems regarding the living heritage approach.................... 67 3.5 Some complementary thinking about the Living Heritage Sites
Program................................................................................................ 69 3.6 Summary of social problems .................................................... 70
4 SOCIAL STUDIES IN LIVING HERITAGE CONSERVATION........................ 72
4.1 Growing social concerns on living heritage values................... 72 4.1.1 Extension of heritage values ..........................................................72 4.1.2 Social capital in living heritage conservation..................................73 4.1.3 Development of social concerns ....................................................74
4.2 Social quality in living heritage conservation ........................... 76
‐ VII ‐
4.2.1 Definition of social quality ............................................................. 77 4.2.2 Internal and external social quality................................................ 78 4.2.3 Framework of social quality ........................................................... 78
4.3 Studies on quality of life........................................................... 81 4.3.1 Indicators for QOL.......................................................................... 82 4.3.2 Meeting human needs in living heritage conservation.................. 82
4.4 Studies on quality of society..................................................... 88 4.4.1 Social cohesion and corresponding indicators............................... 88 4.4.2 Social empowerment and corresponding indicators ..................... 89 4.4.3 Social indicators ............................................................................. 90
5 HYPOTHETIC MODEL TOWARDS AN APPLICABLE DESIGN‐TOOL.............93
5.1 Social study of environment..................................................... 93 5.2 Linkage between social performance and spatial morphology96
5.2.1 Selective social indicators .............................................................. 96 5.2.2 MOP model in living heritage conservation................................... 97
5.3 Hypothetic model in response to social performance ........... 101 5.3.1 Evolutionary understanding on spatial morphology.................... 101 5.3.2 Analysis framework of operations ............................................... 102 5.3.3 Model to interpret social quality ................................................. 104
6 SOCIAL CONSERVATION OF OGIMACHI VILLAGE..............................109
6.1 Reason to choose Ogimachi village in Shirakawa‐go area ..... 109 6.2 Comparison with Dayan town................................................ 112 6.3 Distinguished features in Ogimachi village ............................ 116 6.4 Participation of local residents in the process of conservation
and tourism development.................................................................. 118 6.4.1 Local initiation for conservation of Ogimachi village ................... 119 6.4.2 Social associations........................................................................ 121 6.4.3 Participation in tourism development ......................................... 123
6.5 Conservation and social quality in Ogimachi village .............. 127 6.5.1 Contribution of local associations to social quality...................... 127 6.5.2 Responses to other social quality ................................................ 129 6.5.3 Contribution of spatial organizations to social quality................. 131
6.6 Test of the hypothetic model by comparing Dayan and
Ogimachi cases ................................................................................... 133
‐ VIII ‐
6.6.1 Social Performance.......................................................................133 6.6.2 Applied operations .......................................................................134 6.6.3 Morphology responding to social performance...........................135
6.7 Design guidelines for sustaining social quality in living heritage
conservation....................................................................................... 140
7 CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS ................................................ 146
7.1 Summary of research findings................................................ 146 7.2 Evaluations of this research ................................................... 150 7.3 Limitation and extensions ...................................................... 151
7.3.1 In‐depth method of local participation ........................................153 7.3.2 Importance of local guilds ............................................................155
8 REFERENCES .......................................................................... 157
9 ANNEX................................................................................. 167
Annex 1: Photographs of Dayan Town............................................... 167 Annex 2: Questionnaire Analysis of Dayan town in Lijiang Ancient Town
............................................................................................................ 174 Annex 3: Social Indicators developed by the Network Indicators of
Social Quality ...................................................................................... 181 Annex 4: Social indicators proposed by Choi and Sirakaya (2006,
p.1281) ............................................................................................... 189 Annex 5: Interview questions and response analysis in Ogimachi .... 191 Annex 6: Photographs of Ogimachi village......................................... 197 Annex 7: Summary of UNESCO‐ICOMOS Documents on Cultural
Heritage Conservation........................................................................ 203
10 ABOUT THE AUTHOR................................................................ 211
‐ IX ‐
Figures
Figure 2‐1: Urban sprawl of Lijiang .......................................................... 24 Figure 2‐2: (Left) Vernacular architecture attached with water lanes and
townscape; (Right) Satellite typology photo of Lijiang.................... 27 Figure 2‐3: (Left) Naxi minority girls dressed in traditional costumes;
(Right) Dongba Pictographs ............................................................. 29 Figure 2‐4: Race distribution in the survey .............................................. 34 Figure 2‐5: Age analysis in the survey ...................................................... 34 Figure 2‐6: Family structure analysis........................................................ 37 Figure 2‐7: Career analysis ....................................................................... 38 Figure 2‐8: Analysis of main family income.............................................. 38 Figure 2‐9: The occupation of farmland, the change of boundaries (after
the map of land‐use in 2002 and 2007, Conservation Planning, Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute) ................................... 41
Figure 2‐10: Local residents’ reaction to tourism development.............. 42 Figure 2‐11: The traditional use of water system by indigenous residents
in Dayan town.................................................................................. 43 Figure 2‐12: Comparison of the distribution of tourism facilities near
Sifang plaza in Dayan town (above 2007, below 2002)................... 45 Figure 2‐13: Places for socializing with neighbors ................................... 47 Figure 2‐14: Lack of places for socializing and entertainment................. 47 Figure 2‐15: Services you want in the neighborhood (multi‐choice) ....... 48 Figure 4‐1: The relationships among conservation, tourism development
and contemporary life ..................................................................... 76 Figure 4‐2: Social quality at two levels: Individual interactions at the
community level and interactions of collective identities at the society level ..................................................................................... 77
Figure 4‐3: Framework to evaluate social quality .................................... 81 Figure 4‐4: Quality of Life‐interaction between human needs and
subjective well‐being ....................................................................... 84 Figure 5‐1: Conceptual scheme of integrating social and environmental
factors .............................................................................................. 95 Figure 5‐2: Framework for the interpretation of social indicators .......... 97
‐ X ‐
Figure 5‐3: Concept MOP model for high social quality living heritage conservation .................................................................................... 99
Figure 6‐1: Bird view of Ogimachi village (taken from Northern mountain)....................................................................................................... 110
Figure 6‐2: Map of Ogimachi Village ...................................................... 110 Figure 6‐3: Land‐use plan of Dayan and Ogimachi to the same scale.... 113 Figure 6‐4: Bird’s eye‐view of Dayan town and Ogimachi village .......... 115 Figure 6‐5: Gassho‐style Wada house, Nationally Important Cultural
Properties ...................................................................................... 117 Figure 6‐6: Section of Gassho‐style house ............................................. 117 Figure 6‐7: The number of living Gassho‐style houses in Ogimachi village
from 1924 to 1994 ......................................................................... 121 Figure 6‐8: Rethatching work by ‘yui’ system ........................................ 123 Figure 6‐9: Observation in the open‐air museum, fork‐arts centre....... 126 Figure 6‐10: Rope bridge to the village and main streets in the village. 126
‐ XI ‐
Tables
Table 1‐1: Procedure of the study............................................................ 20 Table 3‐1: Difference between conventional approach and living heritage
approach.......................................................................................... 67 Table 4‐1: Indicators on Quality of Life, interpreted based on human
needs ............................................................................................... 88 Table 4‐2: Main social indicators in living heritage conservation ............ 92 Table 5‐1: Logical inference of MOP model ........................................... 101 Table 5‐2: Framework to analyze functions of different spatial
configurations................................................................................ 103 Table 5‐3: Model to interpret social quality in relation to spatial
morphology ................................................................................... 107 Table 6‐1: Comparison of three historic villages in acreage and population
....................................................................................................... 112 Table 6‐2: Comparison of basic status between Dayan town and Ogimachi
village............................................................................................. 114 Table 6‐3: Comparison of three historic villages in the concentration of
historic structures.......................................................................... 119 Table 6‐4: The role of local residents in conservation and tourism
industry.......................................................................................... 126 Table 6‐5: Analysis of family structure, career composition and main
family income ................................................................................ 128 Table 6‐6: Change of population and households in Ogimachi village .. 130 Table 6‐7: Summary of descriptive MOP model in Dayan town and
Ogimachi village (Morphology 1‐8 refers to Table 5‐3)................. 139
Introduction
‐ 1 ‐
1 Introduction This chapter defines the scope of the research, introduces the
background to the research, and describes its methodology and
framework.
1.1 Objectives The dissertation aim to investigate:
1) To identify the negative impacts of conservation policies
implemented in living World Heritage sites, that have taken into
account only the physical aspects of objects, ignoring their effects
on the social quality of traditional living communities
2) To identify design and managerial attributes in the approach to
conservation that could control these negative impacts by taking
into consideration the way the living heritage sites are used by
indigenous inhabitants and tourists
3) To develop a design tool that constrains spatial morphology to
overcome the negative influences on the social quality of
traditional living communities in the process of conservation and
tourism development.
This research extends out of the growing recognition of social quality in
the process of conservation and tourism development of living heritage
sites. It builds upon a critical analysis of the current challenges of living
heritage conservation, particularly those associated with the loss of
social fabric and neighbourhood vitality, due to the influence of
globalization, urbanization and the overwhelming development of
tourism. The conventional top‐down and expert‐based method of
conservation emphasizes the importance of the physical conditions of
heritage sites and gives priority to the development of tourism as well as
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 2 ‐
tourism‐related industries. In particular, as the World Heritage sites
ratified by the UNESCO World Heritage Convention2, they receive large
amounts of publicity and as a result become major attractions for
significant numbers of tourists from all over the world. In spite of the
improvement of physical infrastructures and associated economic
benefits, this massive influx of tourists disrupts and, in most cases, in the
long run, destroys the social quality of daily life of the indigenous
population in living heritage sites. Mass tourism damages the ‘values’ of
the site as a desirable place to live and destroys the traditional
communities living there. This dissertation tries to explore in‐depth the
meanings and interpretations of social quality in traditional communities,
and develops a new knowledge‐based and applicable design‐tool for
maintaining social quality in the conservation of living heritage sites.
1.2 Key issues
1.2.1 Living heritage site Heritage literally means properties or practices inherited from the past.
In the field of conservation, the concept of heritage is undergoing a
profound change. Having at one time referred exclusively to the
monumental remains of culture, heritage conservation as a concept has
gradually come to include broader concepts such as the ‘intangible’ and
‘ethnographic’ heritage (UNESCO, section of culture heritage). The
2 UNESCO is short for United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. UNESCO World Heritage Convention is short for the Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage. It is one of the most widely recognized international conventions ratified by 184 State Parties as of July 2007. It aims to conserve selected sites with ‘Outstanding Universal Value’ based upon ten criteria identified as the common heritage of humanity. As of the end of 2007, a total of 851 sites have been listed as World Heritage sites. More information refers to http://whc.unesco.org
Introduction
‐ 3 ‐
concept of living heritage emerged in the 1990s 3 with increasing
concerns on ‘intangible values’ and the continuity of history, culture,
tradition and life styles. More inclusively, it refers to valuable assets in
use that are usually passed down through generations, such as lifestyle,
traditional music, dance and theatre, social practices, rituals and festivals,
traditional crafts and other cultural expressions. Some of these assets are
preserved as single pieces of heritage without context. However, the
essence of living heritage relies on the continuous involvement of these
assets in people’s daily life.
The term ’living heritage site‘ in this research is defined as a traditional
neighbourhood, community or specific district in the context of historic
settlement, where the ‘Outstanding universal values’4 are demonstrated
by both the physical characteristics and the indigenous inhabitants, who
carry on the living traditions, skills and other cultural practices. It is
different from single monuments, ensembles of historic buildings or pure
natural heritage sites, where fewer social activities are involved. This
paper takes living heritage sites as dynamic and historical places
containing rich intangible ‘values’ while sustaining various types of social
interaction and traditional life, such as historical towns or areas,
preserved districts or communities and the like. In this research, living
heritage sites are limited to those listed as UNESCO World Heritage sites,
which demonstrate significant contributions to cultural diversity and for
which the potential ‘values’ for cultural tourism have been widely
recognized. Great efforts have been made in terms of physical
3ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property) lauched the ITUC (Integrated territorial and Urban Conservation) program, which included living cities and landscapes in 1995 (details in Chapter 3). English Heritage has tried to incorporate heritage conservation into integrated management, spatial planning, quality of life, and landscape since 1990s (Fairclough 1995). 4 “Outstanding universal value’ is a general standard to evaluate property on the “UNESCO World Heritage List”, which means cultural and/or natural significance for all humanity (UNESCO World Heritage Convention, 1972).
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 4 ‐
conservation, thanks to the commitments of state parties to the UNESCO
World Heritage Convention. The selected living heritage sites offer a
good basis to investigate social problems beyond physical conservation.
According to Criteria V5 of UNESCO World Heritage program, a living
heritage site refers. “to be an outstanding example of a traditional
human settlement, land‐use, or sea‐use which is representative of a
culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment
especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of
irreversible change”. There have already been 107 such properties
inscribed as World Heritage sites as of 2007, but 17 of those, which used
to be human settlements have became ‘open museums’ for different
reasons. Living heritage contains priceless and irreplaceable ‘values’ and
contributes to cultural diversity and a sustainable living environment.
These sites are currently becoming increasingly vulnerable due to the
challenges of tourism development and simplistic physical conservation
strategies.
1.2.2 Conservation Conservation means the careful protection and preservation of natural
resources or physical quantities during transformations or reactions to
prevent exploitation, destruction, or neglect. It is much more than the
concept of ‘restoration’ to bring back the past. Conservation encourages
a balanced attitude to the relationship between the old and the new.
Also different from ‘preservation’, conservation implies sustainable use
instead of merely maintaining the present condition. In living heritage
sites, the way of life and social activities in traditional communities are
valuable assets, and the physical environments are endowed with
5 UNESCO World Heritage sites are selected based on Selection Criteria. Until the end of 2004, there were six criteria for cultural heritage and four criteria for natural heritage, and in 2005 it was modified with a set of then criteria together.
Introduction
‐ 5 ‐
dynamic functions. Therefore the corresponding conservation has to deal
with preservation as well as development.
As a living site, heritage conservation requires an interdisciplinary body
of knowledge, not only techniques for restoration of historical buildings
and monuments, but also cultural and social awareness of habits,
activities and other intangible ‘values’, which are vital to protect the
cultural diversity and integrity of the site. This research focuses on the
conservation of the social quality of living heritage, which is the most
vulnerable characteristic to a rapid tourism development. Thus, living
heritage conservation particularly needs to employ an evolutionary
perspective for conservation, taking into consideration the long‐term
development and needs of indigenous communities. However, in most
cases, the social quality falls into neglect in the traditional physical‐
oriented conservation, because of the difficulties to measure as well as
to manage the social performance. This research emphasizes the
importance of social quality in the sustainable conservation of living
heritage sites, and devotes itself to proper measures of social quality in
traditional communities.
1.2.3 Social quality Social quality is a comprehensive concept emerging to complement the
dominating economic performance in evaluating development. It
emphasizes the significance of participation and social interaction in the
self‐realization and sustainability of a society (details in Chapter 4). Social
quality is taken as an essential criterion to sustainable development,
which is defined in the “Brundtland Report” 6(1987), also known as “Our
Common Future” as “the development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
6 The Brundtland Report was published in the World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987. It developed guiding principles for sustainable development based on critical concerns on global environmental problems.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 6 ‐
their own needs”. Sustainable development is understood as a
“systematic, long‐term use of natural resources” and a “socially justice,
ethically acceptable, morally fair and economically sound” development
(Filho, 2000). Social quality indicates the interactions of people in
development and plays a vital role in the decision‐making and
implementation process.
Integrating the fragmental concerns of economics, politics, culture,
sociology and environment to a common goal of sustainability is the
main function of social sustainable development in the present global
transformation process (Becker et al, 1997, 1999). Using social quality as
an intermediate tool, this research aims to preserve the integrity and
continuity of living heritage sites through an in‐depth understanding of
the interrelationship between conservation and tourism development.
Economic viability and efficient maintenance are interactive factors in
the consideration of social quality. The research employs a case study to
explore social problems experienced and to understand the relationship
of social quality with the physical environment in the process of
conservation. It tries to develop a systematic and measurable framework
to preserve the unique social quality at living heritage sites.
1.2.4 Social capital It is the position of this dissertation that social capital could be a key
criterion in the evaluation of social quality at a living heritage site. Social
capital is defined as “social networks or norms” (Putnam, 2000:19) to
build up reciprocal interrelationships among individuals in a certain
district, in assistance to common goals and harmonious development. It
is an important form of capital with potential power, the same as
economic capital, environmental capital and cultural capital. Inspired by
Ignacy Sachs (Sachs, 1996, 2006), who argued that the crucial issue for
social sustainability is to sustain existing social structures, territories, and
identities, social capital is proposed in research to evaluate social quality
of living heritage sites. Social capital strengthens a stable social structure
and collective characteristics by respecting social norms and participating
Introduction
‐ 7 ‐
in social networks. It plays an important role in enhancing the sense of
belonging, and the territory of local communities and sustaining cultural
diversity at a global level. This research refines the definition of social
capital with an integrated perspective, including demographic changes,
socio‐economic activities, social interactions, and community activities.
In addition to management issues and participation, this research looks
at socio‐spatial structure, in order to understand the contribution of
spatial attributes to the shape of a community in a living heritage site.
Literature reviews of social studies are elaborated in Chapter 4.
1.2.5 Cultural diversity Cultural is defined as a “set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual
and emotional features of society or a social group”, and these include
“lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs”
as well as art and literature (UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural
Diversity7, p.12). Cultural diversity is a core subject for debate on
collective identity, social cohesion and a knowledge‐based economy,
which is a fundamental human feature with respect for intellectual
dialogues, creation and innovation as biodiversity is for nature. The
UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity is derived from a
wide acknowledgement of the threat from globalization on preserving
intangible “values”. The declaration emphasizes a proactive approach to
perceive cultural diversity as an asset to protect humanity. Cultural
diversity serves to complement sustainable development, together with
the thriving material and economic development.
7 The declaration was adopted by the 31st Session of the General Conference of UNESCO in Paris, 2nd November 2001. The definition is affirmed in the conclusion of the World Conference on Cultural Policies (MONDIACULT, Mexico City, 1982), World Commission on Culture and Development (Our Creative Diversity, 1995), and Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development (Stockholm, 1998)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 8 ‐
Living heritage conservation in favor of ‘values’ associated with
indigenous people is one of the most important actions in achieving
cultural diversity8. Living heritage sites represent the identities and social
quality of indigenous communities, which personify the global vision of
cultural diversity and enhance social capitals through continuous
interactions between people and environment in specific districts. The
indigenous communities are fragile common treasures for humankind in
the context of globalization, and meanwhile they serve as support
systems to provide material and emotional aids to local populations
(Altman and Wandersman, 1987). This research focuses on how to
maintain social quality at a living heritage site in order to improve
cultural diversity in a more comprehensive method.
1.3 Brief research background
1.3.1 Evolvement of heritage conservation Since the middle of the last century, the domain of heritage conservation
has expanded from individual architecture to the surrounding
environment. In 1943, the French proposed the conception of “Les
Abords Des Monuments Historiques” which demonstrated that not only
the historical buildings, but also the surroundings within a radius of 500
meters of the buildings should be protected. In 1962, after the adoption
of the ‘Malraux Law’, preserved districts (Secteurs Sauvegardés) became
an official term in the field of conservation. In 1964, the Venice Charter9
(Article 1) included the urban and rural settings as the contents of
conservation, where the evidence of civilization was found or historical
8 The UNESCO action in favor of cultural diversity focuses mainly on two parts: to ensure harmonious coexistence and the willingness to living together peacefully and to defend diverse creativity and the multiplicity of cultural expressions (UNESCO online data: http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en) 9 Data source: UNESCO‐ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) Documentation Centre.
Introduction
‐ 9 ‐
events had occurred. During the last decade, ICCROM (International
Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural
Property) has developed the ‘living heritage’ concept as a natural
outgrowth of the integrated approach to urban and territorial
conservation (details in chapter 3).
The expanding scope of conservation reflects a growing concern on the
integrated values of heritage sites, and in particular raises attention to
social issues to balance development and conservation. At the same time,
Conservation requires interdisciplinary studies to integrate historic,
cultural, environmental and social attributes into a common framework,
in order to preserve the overall quality of living heritage sites in the long
run. In particular, living heritage conservation, such as urban
conservation, represents a comprehensive set of themes involving
different perspectives of social life. In most cases, it stipulates
rehabilitation and redevelopment schemes, combining conservation with
urban development in the first place. The dilemma between
conservation and development is reflected by negative impacts from
mass tourism as well as urban sprawl. While most currently preserved
historical towns and urban living heritages have been efficiently and
effectively protected in the short term, and over time, many schemes
have turned out to be failures.
1.3.2 Social concerns in conservation The recognition of living ‘values’ in historic settlements mirrors the social
changes experienced since the industrial revolution, when material
wealth was accumulated and manufacturing techniques changed without
parallel, economic and social structure were transformed at an
unprecedented pace. Modernization was taken as being identical to
improvements in hygiene and mobility. People swarmed into big cities
for a ‘better life’, but little by little realized that metropolises do not
always satisfy their needs for the ‘better life’. ‘Urban Sprawls’, ‘Satellite
Cities’, ‘Garden Cities’, ‘Deterioration of Inner City’, ‘City Beautiful
Movement’, and ‘Revitalization of Urban Centres’ and many other terms,
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 10 ‐
created after the industrial revolution, reflect the cognitive changes of
the ideal living environment. A growing number of people however have
begun to appreciate the unique and familiar atmosphere of historic
sectors.
This is where the work of Jane Jacobs has offered insights and practical
tools. Based on her observations in Boston and New York of U.S.A, Jane
Jacobs (1961) criticized that too much emphasis on picturesque patterns
as well as landmark buildings led to simplified city images, isolated
functions of city life and serious economic and social problems. She also
pointed to the advantages of ‘traditional urbanity’ over ‘modern city
forms’ in social qualities: vitality, safety and diversity. She went beyond
the scope of planners and investigated cities from a micro‐scale, people‐
oriented, grass‐roots and bottom‐up approach.
Social concerns have been drawn in the field of architecture and urban
planning since the middle of last century, with the renaissance of
neighbourhood life. Precedent researchers and designers tried to
incorporate social desires, capacities, and the interests of local users in
the design process in order to create a vibrant living environment and
maintain self‐sustaining mechanisms in the long run, such as
Environment‐Behavior research (Zeisel, 1975, 1981) and Man‐
Environment study (Rapoport, 1976, 1983). A social study carried out by
Herbert J. Gans (1967) about the Levittown reinforced the key role of
residents’ aspirations in a community. Thus, in parallel to the profound
extension of heritage conservation domain, closer attention is given to
the sophisticated social characters of an indigenous community, such as
customs, social structure, territory and social interactions, which in turn
create unique physical characteristics of a site.
A living heritage site as a legacy from the past, still actively contributes to
the cultural diversity and harmony of urban life. It embodies the
architectural, cultural, social and aesthetic importance in the whole
process of urban development. The social concerns in living heritage sites
introduce deep insights in order to appreciate the integrity of its heritage
Introduction
‐ 11 ‐
and inspire the enthusiasm for conservation from local residents. The
Venice Charter (Article 5) noticed that ‘the conservation of monuments
was always facilitated by making use of them for some socially useful
purpose’, which indicates the importance of social functions in terms of
preserving ‘authentic values’. UNESCO World Heritage Convention (1972)
has accentuated the integrated program to endow heritage sites with a
function in the life of local communities (Article 5). Furthermore, the
UNESCO Budapest Declaration10 (2002) stated the pivotal efforts were to
‘ensure an appropriate and equitable balance between conservation,
sustainability and development…contributing to the social and economic
development and quality of life…communities’. Social concerns in the
process of conservation could provoke wide participation in the
maintaining and management system of a site. The importance of
preserving social attributes in living heritage is demonstrated by
ICCROM11 as follows:
‘Heritage sites need to be understood as living places, where efforts to
improve understanding and conservation of the sites must be linked to
the values, interests and capacities of the populations that live within and
around them, and who are the true long‐term custodians of these sites.
Meanwhile, these sites must be seen as the embodiment of significant
values, where effective site management requires that as much attention
be given to the conditions for retaining these values as to those for
preserving the material fabric that contains and supports the site’s
activities’ (ICCROM General Assembly 2005).
It is crucial to develop the full potential of heritage sites and improve the
capability of self‐sustaining mechanisms. With growing concerns on 10 The Budapest Declaration was adopted by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee at its 26th session in 2002. 11ICCROM is short for International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property. It is an advisory organization for culture heritage conservation for UNESCO World Heritage Commitee.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 12 ‐
sustainable development, the traditional attributes and social quality of
living heritage sites are appreciated in a broad sense. They foster identity
and diversity of various cultural groups, which play a fundamental role in
enhancing social capitals, and in turn favor economic growth. The
beneficial social functions of living heritage sites could ameliorate some
of the contributing causes to the unsustainability of metropolitan areas
across the world. Living heritage sites should be considered as valuable
resources and contribute to sustainable development in a dynamic way.
1.4 Problem statements Heritage conservation is a value driven process, from the initial
significance identification to the time‐bound management system. To
understand the significance of heritage sites is the core of conservation,
which determines what to preserve as well as the priorities in the
conservation policy. The value identification is based on a combination of
scientific and subjective value assessments driven by different actors and
exerts a direct influence on the strategy of conservation and
development. In the conservation operations and management, different
requirements from the actors, including tourists, tourism‐related
immigrants and indigenous inhabitants are manifested in relation to the
physical and social environment. The main problems can be drawn from
three perspectives:
• Lopsided value assessment of professionals over local
populations
• Absence of social considerations on the daily lives of indigenous
people
• Lack of applicable guidelines to retain social quality in
conservation practices
Introduction
‐ 13 ‐
1.4.1 Lopsided value assessment of professionals over local populations
The conventional top‐down, expert‐based method of conservation is
commonly applied in the process of living heritage conservation. Experts
from different disciplines, such as Arts History, Architecture, Urban
Planning, and Archaeology have decisive voices in the value assessment,
although they might not even have set foot on the site before. As an
assignment from state parties or authorities, the process of heritage
conservation is often limited to professional cycles. The ‘exclusionary
conservation’ and the top‐down approach of conservation often leave
the future of a living heritage site in architects/urban planners’ offices far
away from the actual sites and totally unattainable to the Indigenous
inhabitants, who are regarded as layman and irrelevant in the process of
conservation. The inhabitants however, are actually the long‐term
custodians of the site. The ‘values’ of these living communities are not
taken equally into consideration as the architectural, environmental and
aesthetic values in the process of decision making and implementation.
This lopsided value assessment of professionals over the voices of an
indigenous population disregards a very important part of the values
underlying the day‐to‐day life experiences at these living sites. For
instance, a street corner may not be important to an arts historian in
terms of aesthetic and historic values, but it may play a crucial role along
the spiritual path of a specific local group. Such tradition and sensitivity
of indigenous inhabitants reflect rich socio‐cultural assets and play an
important role in the continuity of traditional communities, which fall
into neglect from the top‐down process of conservation. Therefore, the
expert‐driven method easily leads to the loss of social support and public
enthusiasm in conservation. The research will investigate alternative
approaches to achieve a more holistic value assessment, for the purpose
of sustainable conservation at living heritage sites.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 14 ‐
1.4.2 Absence of social considerations on the daily lives of indigenous people
A living heritage site represents an integrated image with both ‘tangible
and intangible values’. In spite of significant monuments, ancient remains,
traditional buildings and unique landscapes, intangible characteristics,
such as a unique way of life, traditional practices and knowledge capture
growing attention for conservation as well as tourism development in
living heritage sites. Physical conditions are usually given priority to
exploit the economic interests of tourism and to meet the requirements
of official periodic assessments12. The in‐depth social considerations in
relation to the quality of life of indigenous inhabitants in traditional
communities are absent. For instance, social activities, social structures
and sense of belonging do not gain equal attention to the physical
aspects in the process of value assessment as well as operations. Social
capitals in living heritage sites are essential resources for cultural
diversity and humanity. The absence of proper social considerations in
living heritage conservation leads to the decreasing diversity of life‐
experience and a fundamental failure of its sustainable viability.
Therefore, social considerations deserve more efforts for further
investigation.
Conservation of social quality at living heritage sites involves a deep
understanding of the local communities in terms of temporal and spatial
characteristics, and the involvement of local associations, which indicates
social demands from an evolutionary point of view. Social quality acts as
a hinge to ameliorate the apparent dilemma between conservation and
tourism development of living heritage sites. At the same time, social
12 Upon being inscribed as World Heritage sites, it is the obligation of the State Parties to report regularly to the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of their World Heritage properties (the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, 1972). The committee also designates ICOMOS (International Council on monuments and Sites) to carry out Periodic Report to assess the World Heritage sites in different regions.
Introduction
‐ 15 ‐
quality is extremely vulnerable to the influence of exotic cultural
intrusion and open‐market economic competition. As manifested in
many living heritage sites that social functionality dried up and eventually
the sites turned into ‘open museums’ or ‘new’ towns. Simultaneously,
there was an exodus of indigenous inhabitants, which resulted in the
destruction of traditional communities at the living sites. These effects
have been observed at sites such as Elmina in Ghana, Zabid and Sana’a in
Yemen, and Galle in Sri Lanka13.
1.4.3 Lack of applicable guidelines to retain social quality in conservation practices
The exclusionary top‐down approach of conservation absorbs huge
amounts of limited environmental and economic resources to preserve
the physical aspects of living heritage sites. However, few governments
can today afford the economic costs of imposed conservation with
fences and guards. At the same time, conservation with priority for
tourism development has demonstrated short‐term market gains at
enormous political and social costs. Effects such as negative public
relations and civil disorder lead to indifference or even hostile attitudes
from the local community. In order to "integrate the physical, economic
and social sciences to better understand the impacts of economic and
social behavior on the environment" (the goal of Agenda 2114), an
applicable guideline to interpret social quality in a measurable way is in
great need for living heritage conservation. This research analyzes the
role of social quality in the process of living heritage conservation, and
13 Cor Dijkgraaf in the paper of How World Heritage Sites Disappear: Four Cases, Four Threats presented case studies in Ghana, Sri Lanka and Yemen to demonstrate that more often than not conservation of heritage is not a priority of the local inhabitants if no economic benefits are forthcoming. 14 Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action for the sake of sustainable development at different levels. It was adopted by more than 178 Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 16 ‐
explores its dynamic interactions with spatial morphology through field
case studies. New knowledge‐based guidelines in consistent with a
design‐tool is advanced in this work for practical application in the
process of living heritage conservation.
1.5 Methodology
1.5.1 Method of case study Given the complexity of social problems in living heritage conservation,
case study methods are employed as ‘an empirical inquiry to investigate
a contemporary phenomenon within its real‐life context’ (Yin 1994). It
demonstrates advantages in measuring the causal links of multiple
factors in certain circumstances. In particular, this research is built upon
interdisciplinary knowledge on spatial and social attributes in the process
of living heritage conservation. Precedents on interdisciplinary studies of
conservation shed light on the selection of the methodology in this
research. For instance, Dwyer and Edwards (2000) investigated
relationships between urban growth and heritage conservation via case
studies in Campbell town in the context of an ‘ecotourism paradigm’ set
by Ross and Wall (1999). Case study offers a suitable method to
understand multifaceted problems at living heritage sites, while it
demonstrates limitations for the generalization of research outcomes.
This research takes Dayan town in the centre of Lijiang ancient town as
an exploratory case study to understand the social problems in relation
to conservation approaches and specific spatial characteristics. Drawing
upon the outcomes of the exploratory case study and state‐of‐the‐arts
literatures on precedents of living heritage program and social quality
studies, this work generalizes the social problems in living heritage
conservation and selects key social indicators. Hereby, it develops a
Introduction
‐ 17 ‐
model hypothesis in the framework of MOP15 representing how the
application of spatial morphology and organization within the policy of
living heritage conservation, influences the social quality of indigenous
inhabitants in a living community.
This dissertation employs a test case study: Ogimachi village in the Chubu
region of Japan, as a comparably successful project to examine the
proposed model. The case explains how spatial morphology contributes
to social quality performance at a living site via constraining various
interventions and affirms the hypothetic model towards producing
design guidelines for living heritage conservation. Data are derived from
field studies through general observations, surveys and interviews at the
sites by the author. In addition, the comparable statuses of Dayan town
and Ogimachi village allow further arguments on the impacts of
conservation approaches and spatial morphologies on social quality in
the context of living heritage. The contrast between the two cases helps
to grasp deeper the numerous factors influenced by different actors and
activities from external and indigenous communities. As a pragmatic
outcome, the paper produces a knowledge‐based, applicable design‐tool
in form of design guidelines to maintain social quality for future
conservation and a follow‐up maintenance system.
1.5.2 Methods in case study The methods used to carry out case studies are inspired by the social
research of Jacobs (1961) and Gans (1967) in relation to specific
communities. On‐site surveys, interviews and comprehensive
observations were conducted in the field studies of Dayan town and
Ogimachi village. 15 MOP (Morphology, Operation, and Performance) refers to a framework for representing architectural knowledge, developed by Alexander Tzonis (Tzonis et al. 1987) and applied in several doctorate researches, such as Fang 1993, Jeng 1995, Bay 2001, Zarzar 2002, Vyzoviti 2005, in the Design Knowledge Systems Centre of TU Delft.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 18 ‐
Jacobs emphasized the contributions of sidewalks to the security and
social contacts of community life through her living experiences and
observations in Greenwich Village neighborhood. She made very specific
and comprehensive observations of various activities occurring along
sidewalks, and the interactions among people, traffic and commercial
activities. On the basis of that, she proposed the necessity for clear
demarcation between private and public spaces as well as the
advantages of mixed usage of urban space to promote continuous use
and effective surveillance. Jacobs described the quality of micro urban
space from a social perspective and inspired alternatives to monumental
and scenic special design with focus on neighborhood activities. The
methodologies employed in her work to understand the relationship of
space and human behavior, especially on‐site observations, are widely
used in socio‐spatial research.
Herbert Gans (1967) carried out research on ‘origin of a new community,
the quality of suburban life and the effect of suburbia on the behavior of
residents’ (Gans 1967, p.xxx) in Levittown from Oct 1958 to Sep 1960.
Similar with Jacobs’ study in ‘the Death and Life of Great American Cities’,
he drew upon his living experiences as the very first resident of Levittown
and employed participant‐observations, analysis of mailed
questionnaires (952 sets of questionnaires out of 2100 were analyzed),
and on site interviews (45 households were interviewed twice and in the
Philadelphia sample, 55 people who lived in Levittown for at least two
years were interviewed randomly) to undertake the research questions.
From a sociologist’s point of view, Gans analyzed the quality of social life
via visits between individual neighbors, willingness of mutual assistance
patterns amongst neighbors, and the participation in voluntary
associations (Gans, 1967, p.51‐60). He claimed eight resources, which
had significant impacts on the social life of a community, including the
type of housing and settlement, the community layout and the
community facilities ‐ public and commercial (Gans, 1967, p.277).
Introduction
‐ 19 ‐
These previous social studies offer a practical methodology to deeply
understand the resources and impacts of community life. In addition, my
Masters Dissertation in NUS (Kong, 2005) also employed on‐site
observation and social surveys as the main method to explore the social
influences of gardening in semi‐open space of high‐rise dwellings in
Singapore. It analyzed the impacts of gardening on the residents’
behaviors in verandas and the relationship between neighbors in high‐
rise dwellings. This research builds upon the precedents and conducted
field studies through general observations, surveys and interviews in two
comparable UNESCO World living heritage sites: Dayan town and
Ogimachi village. It aims to understand the social quality of an indigenous
community in the process of conservation and tourism development.
Based on the analysis of emergent social problems in response to the
changes of spatial morphology in Dayan town, this research proposes a
hypothetic design model. Furthermore, comparative analysis conducted
through field study in Ogimachi village tests the model and concludes
with applicable design guidelines to retain high social quality in the
process of conservation and tourism development.
1.6 Procedure of the study Procedure of the study
Chapter Description of the procedure
Introduction 1
Definition of research scope and key words
Brief research background and problem statement
Introduction of methodology and research procedure
Case study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
2 Exploratory case study to elaborate social problems
Preliminary identification of the relationship between social problems and spatial morphology
Critical reviews of living heritage conservation
3
Analyze the Living Heritage Sites programs to understand social problems and conservation approaches in a broad sense
Describe needs for a more holistic social study and a knowledge‐based guideline for living heritage conservation
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 20 ‐
Social studies in living heritage conservation
4 Theoretical study on social quality
Select pertinent social indicators to represent social quality in a living heritage site
Hypothetic model towards an applicable design‐tool
5
Analyze the interrelationship between social quality and spatial organization via MOP model
Propose a model hypothesis to control the social quality in relation to constrained spatial morphology in the process of living heritage conservation
Social conservation of Ogimachi village
6
Evaluate the contributions of conservation policy and spatial morphology on retaining social quality of the living heritage sites
Test the model hypothesis
Propose a new knowledge‐based design guidelines towards retaining high social quality of living heritage sites in conservation and tourism development
Conclusions and Limitation
7
Summarize main findings
Evaluate scientific contributions
Describe the limitations and the general applicability
Extensions for future study
Table 11: Procedure of the study
The dissertation brings forward the question of social quality on the basis
of exploratory field study in Dayan town of Lijiang in Yunnan province of
China and state‐of‐the‐arts literature reviews. It elaborates the negative
impacts of tourism‐related interventions and top‐down conservation
approaches on the indigenous neighboring environment at Dayan
(Chapter 2). Social problems in this research are defined within the
context of indigenous living environment, when new actors and new
activities are brought in along with tourism‐related development
Meanwhile it reviews the precedent study of Living Heritage Sites
program by ICCROM (Chapter 3) and integrates the study carried out by
Introduction
‐ 21 ‐
the European Foundation on Social Quality 16 to select key social
indicators for evaluating social quality at living heritage sites (Chapter 4),
in the interest of cultural diversity and sustainable development. On the
basis of empirical case studies and holistic literatures, this research
advances a model hypothesis through the appropriate articulation of
spatial morphology, specific operations and social quality performance in
a living environment (Chapter 5). In order to test the hypothetic model, a
comparable field study in Ogimachi village in the Chubu region of Japan is
conducted to examine the positive impacts of bottom‐up and
community‐based conservation methods and constrained spatial
morphology on social quality of the living community as a successful
instance. It affirms in key elements with the hypothetic model for
achieving high social quality performance in relation to specific
operations and constrained spatial morphologies in the process of
conservation and tourism development (Chapter 6). As an applicable
result, this research proposes a design‐tool in form of design guidelines
to retain high social quality of indigenous communities. It also suggests
corresponding monitoring and maintenance systems for the sake of
social sustainability in the process of living heritage conservation. The
conclusion summarizes the main findings of the dissertation, evaluates
the scientific contributions and describes limitations for general
applications. Finally it suggests the directions for future research
(Chapter 7).
16 The European Foundation on Social Quality was established in June 1997, during the Dutch presidency of the European Union. It is based on the Amsterdam Declaration, which is supported by more than 1000 scientists and emphasizes the importance of social justice, equity and solidarity in the dominant economic development. After that, a large network was formed in relation to social study. Detailed online information: www.socialquality.org
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 22 ‐
2 Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
As described in the introduction, this chapter aims to explore the social
problems experienced in conservation through a field study at Dayan
town, in the centre of Lijiang ancient town. The field study was
conducted during the compilation of conservation planning of Lijiang
ancient town from June to July 2002. The author participated in the field
study and carried out surveys under the supervision of Dr. Shao Yong (in
total, 99 questionnaires are valid out of 112 sets). This research drew
upon the data collected from on‐site surveys and observations and
analyzed from a social point of view in relation to spatial characteristics.
Social problems have emerged in the field of heritage conservation since
the ‘values’ of indigenous populations were recognized as part of the
heritage values. In the past decade, living heritage has evolved as a
comprehensive and challenging theme involving proactive engagement
of local residents in the process of conservation. It requires
interdisciplinary studies, such as social, cultural, economic and
environmental studies in a living context. Lijiang ancient town is the first
living site in China inscribed as an UNESCO World Heritage site for its
unique historic settlement and minority culture. This research reviews
the changes of social attributes in the process of conservation, the
factors related to the deterioration of social quality in terms of
conservation policy and the modifications made to spatial organization at
the living site. The case study provided an in‐depth record of the process
of living heritage conservation.
2.1 Reasons to choose Lijiang ancient town Lijiang ancient town is one of the best preserved historic settlements in
China in terms of physical attributes. It was inscribed as a World Heritage
site in December 1997, because of its unique townscape, natural
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 23 ‐
landscape, and ethnic cultures. It met criteria17 (ii), (iv) and (v) in the
evaluation by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee and embodied
‘outstanding universal value’. Lijiang ancient town is composed of three
parts, Dayan town, Baisha quarter (8 kilometres to the north of Dayan)
and Shuhe town (4 kilometres north‐west of Dayan). Lijiang ancient town
is scattered on an area of 3.8 square kilometers (including buffer zone at
the time of the UNESCO World Heritage inscription), with a population of
25,000. The Lijiang ancient town is well preserved in terms of the
physical environment in the core areas, i.e. Dayan town, such as
streetscapes, waterways, canals, bridges and dwellings, thanks to the
implementation of governmental commitments to the UNESCO World
Heritage Convention, as well as economic benefits brought from tourism
development. Moreover, as a historic settlement, its socio‐cultural
characteristics by virtue of the indigenous Naxi minority constitute a
significant part of the holistic values. Their traditions and ethnic social life
are valuable assets to the town. Thus the traditional living communities
embodies tangible and intangible characteristics, which offers a full‐scale
background to understand the social attributes of indigenous people in a
living community, and more importantly to explore the social problems
in a real‐life context. This research focuses on Dayan town, located in the
central of Lijiang ancient town, where the survey was conducted in 2002.
However, since more general information was recorded in the scale of
Lijiang ancient town and Dayan is a concentrated reflection of the overall
17 To be included on the World Heritage List, sites must be of outstanding universal value and meet at least one out of ten selection criteria. These criteria are explained in the ‘Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention’. Criteria ii: to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town‐planning or landscape design; Criteria iv: to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history; Criteria v: to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land‐use, or sea‐use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 24 ‐
situation of Lijiang, so the following section employs Lijiang ancient town
as a background to understand the general situation of Dayan town.
Figure 21: Urban sprawl of Lijiang18
Another important reason to choose Lijiang ancient town as the
exploratory case study rests on the fact that it has undergone through
critical economic and social transformation in the last decade, due to
substantial increases in tourism and corresponding commercial
development. The town has been sprawling out with the concurrent
exodus of indigenous inhabitants (Figure 2‐1). The town currently risks
losing the last cultural remnants to the Naxi minority. As criticized by
UNESCO World Heritage Centre in the working document for 31COM 7B:
‘the property is now surrounded by some commercial projects which are
intended to “enhance” the beauty of the old town but actually damage
the property…tourism development projects and rapid commercialization
at the property may have negative impact on the social structure, ethnic
Naxi culture and heritage values.’
18 1994 (left) vs. 2000 (right); Data Resource: Conservation Planning of Lijiang ancient town 2002, Tongji Urban Design & Planning Institute, Shanghai, China.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 25 ‐
The transformation of Lijiang ancient town provides valuable information
in order to understand the social problems in the process of conservation.
It also helps to preliminarily identify the key social attributes and
corresponding spatial features in the process of living heritage
conservation. At the same time, the measures taken by the Lijiang local
authorities and preliminary results offer a good basis for further
arguments on management issues.
2.2 Physical and social features of Lijiang ancient town
2.2.1 Unique natural landscape, townscape and vernacular architecture
The Lijiang prefecture in southwest China has been inhabited since
Palaeolithic times and became a county during the Western Han Dynasty
(206 BC ‐ 220 AD). The ancient town of Lijiang is composed of three parts
as inscribed in UNESCO World Heritage list, respectively named as Baisha,
Shuhe, and Dayan from north to south. It is located in the southeast
corner of the Lijiang Naxi Autonomous County and was originally built
between the end of the Southern Song Dynasty (AD 1127 ‐ 1279) and the
beginning of the Yuan Dynasty (1279 ‐ 1368 AD)19 . It stands in the joint
part of Yungui and Qingzang tableland and lies at the foot of the Yulong
Snow‐capped mountain at an average altitude of 2400 meters. Lijiang
ancient town is screened by Yulong Snow‐capped mountain, which is 15
kilometers away, supports the southernmost marine glacier in the
temperate zone of the northern hemisphere. It serves as a water supply
for the town. Water, by way of rivers and canals forms a vital connection
with indigenous people’s daily life. The ancient town is surrounded by
farmland, which also functions as a natural boundary to separate it from
the other areas.
19 Information from website of Global Heritage Fund
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 26 ‐
Lijiang is an ancient town without city walls, crossed by numerous canals.
It is crisscrossed with ancient streets and lanes paved with colored stones.
The layout of Lijiang ancient town reflects a high respect of local
geographic context over 800 years. The town itself is appropriately
disposed with the riverhead (the Heilongtan water system), and the local
residences are located amongst its network of watercourses and specific
topography. Small streams run parallel with Sifang Market Street in the
centre of the Dayan town and many other lanes. Green trees shade the
houses and lanes. Residential houses feature in courtyards and atriums,
and they either stand next to a stream or are entered by crossing small
front bridges above the streams. In some cases, a stream runs right
beneath the houses. The 354 bridges scattered around the town enrich
the spatial features and contribute to this unique environment (See
Figure 2‐2).
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 27 ‐
Figure 22: (Left) Vernacular architecture attached with water lanes and townscape; (Right) Satellite typology photo of Lijiang20
The vernacular architecture in Dayan town embodies ethnical traditions,
syncretized with Han culture introduced around the 11th century. There is
no uniform style or specific architect for the design of local residences.
Most of the residences are two‐storey (7.5 meters high), with a few
three‐storey constructions. The vernacular architecture represents high
respect to the local material resources and topographic features of the
town. A typical house is built with stone foundations, timber frames,
walled with adobe and rammed earth. There are variant architectural
patterns according to the specific locations. Courtyards and atriums are
the most common architectural features in Dayan town, such as patterns
called ‘San fang Yi Zhao Bi’, consisting of a main structure, two side‐
buildings and a screen wall facing the main structure to form an enclosed
courtyard inside; and ‘Si He Wu Tian Jing’ consisting of a main structures
and three side‐buildings on each of the other directions to form a central
courtyard and four atria, one in each corner. The use of a native wood‐
stone‐rammed earth structure along with appropriate organization with
waterways and streetscapes demonstrate the true sprit of vernacular
architecture. The variants of streetscapes demonstrate unique spatial
characteristics in Dayan town, with a fine blend of traditional residences,
waterways, bridges and topographic features. There are three main types
of streets: commercial‐oriented streets with shops at the front and living
space at the back; residential‐oriented streets and a mixture of the two
types. Sifang plaza is the main open spaces in Dayan town with a
concentration of commercial activities. Based on observation, courtyards
and atria and open spaces along streets are the main places for social
activities of the indigenous inhabitants (visual information in Annex 1).
20 Data Resource: Conservation Planning of Lijiang ancient town 2002, Tongji Urban Design & Planning Institute, Shanghai, China.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 28 ‐
2.2.2 Social development The population of Lijiang ancient town is made up of the Naxi, Bai, Lisu,
Pumi, Yi, Tibetan, Miao, Hui, Han and other ethnic groups. Naxi
Autonomous County is the seat of the administrative commission of
Lijiang Prefecture and more than two thirds of the population is
composed of Naxi people. The ethnic features of the Naxi people
contribute to the ‘Outstanding Universal Value’ of Lijiang ancient town in
both tangible and intangible perspectives: classical Naxi music is
described as the a "living musical fossil", the Dongba script (the
traditional Naxi characters) is the world's only living hieroglyphics, and
the Dongba religion, a primitive religion, is the common belief of most
Naxi people. Ethnic traditions, religion as well as life‐style reflect the
ideology of the Naxi people and have exerted a substantial influence on
their social activities, and environmental configurations, and vice versa.
The unique physical environment is a product of long‐term interactions
between nature and native residents resulting in harmonious living
patterns in Lijiang ancient town.
The Naxi minority is the dominant resource of culture in Lijiang ancient
town, which distinguishes Lijiang from other heritage sites. However,
since the early 18th century, Han culture (mainstream of Chinese culture)
has become increasingly influential in the Lijiang region, and has affected
various aspects of Naxi people’s daily life, including costumes, dialect and
gender status. Noteworthy, although Naxi dialect is the most commonly
used language in the ancient town, mandarin is becoming gradually
popular in daily communication, particularly since the boom of tourism
from 1996 onwards. Alongside the intrusion of outside culture and
business, many basic changes to social structure and communication
have gradually occurred and exposed the fragile nature of the indigenous
community’s social identity in the process of conservation.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 29 ‐
Figure 23: (Left) Naxi minority girls dressed in traditional
costumes; (Right) Dongba Pictographs21
2.2.3 Conservation interventions Vernacular architecture and the townscape in Lijiang ancient town as
well as the natural surrounding landscape represent the fundamental
basis for tourism development (visual information in Annex 1), which are
well preserved in a top‐down and expert‐driven method of conservation.
A series of statutory instruments is promulgated at provincial and
national level. The facades, architectural forms, materials, basic layout of
the town and other unique physical characteristics are strictly protected
by local and national conservation authorities. However, permitted
modifications, subtle changes of spatial functions and organizations, as
well as poorly defined community boundaries have had significant
impacts on the quality of local life. Meanwhile, the indigenous
inhabitants have been passively involved in the process of conservation
without a decisive voice. Thus, driven by the needs of tourism and expert 21 The left picture is taken by QT Luong, available at www.terragalleria.com; The right picture is taken from the Naxi Pictographs Copybook, written by He, Limin, translated by Qinglian ZHAO and Yinghe CHEN, Yunnan ethic Publishing House.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 30 ‐
evaluations, the physical environment is being preserved with the
priorities to tourism development and aesthetic integrity. Those specific
spatial characteristics for accommodating local desires in daily life are
falling into neglect. As a consequence, although a great deal of effort has
been devoted to the improvement of infrastructure and the appearance
of traditional houses, social problems are becoming severe in the process
of conservation, which is leading to the deterioration of overall ‘values’
at the site and a lack of sustainable development in the long run.
The subsequent section focuses on a study in Dayan town, in which the
survey was carried out in 2002 by a team including the author,
supervised by Dr. Shao Yong during the compilation of the conservation
plan for Lijiang ancient town. Questionnaires were distributed among the
local residents in the five main neighborhoods in Dayan town, which is
the central preserved area of Lijiang ancient town and had a high
concentration of indigenous Naxi inhabitants and vernacular dwellings.
The following analysis will stress main social problems of the traditional
community in the process of conservation and tourism development.
2.3 Brief introduction to Social survey
2.3.1 General social-economic status in Dayan town Dayan town is located in the centre of Lijiang ancient town with a core
protected area of 56.8 Ha. The total inhabited area of Dayan town is
143.6 Ha (2002). It has around 14,000 inhabitants with a flow population
of 2,500 and 88% of total inhabitants are indigenous Naxi minority
people22. It is used to be a key commercial and strategic site along the
‘Tea‐Horse Road’, an important road bridging the Chinese hinterland
with the Qinghai‐Tibet Plateau, even further into India. The Dayan town 22 Data from on‐site investigation during the compilation of the Conservation Planning of Lijiang ancient town 2002, carried out by Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute. The investigation was carried out by a team of students from Tongji University, led by Dr. Yong Shao.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 31 ‐
developed while catering to the large demand for lodging and trading
opportunities brought about by these passing merchants. These trade‐
oriented hotels still exist today at the Xinyi Street in Dayan Town. Sifang
market plaza was the main public space for various interactions between
local people and the merchants. The social‐economic development
manifests a harmonious fusion of Naxi ethnic groups with other cultural
groups in history, and indicates the openness of the Naxi minority. This
openness is also reflected in the townscape that Dayan town has no city
walls. The town is surrounded by an agricultural landscape, which serves
as a buffer zone23 and as a de facto boundary of the old town.
Since preparing the nomination to be a UNESCO World Heritage site in
1996, tourism development has been booming in Lijiang ancient town
with Dayan town as the main attraction. The number of tourists has
more than quadrupled since 1996 (0.7 million tourists and 0.16 billion
RMB tourism revenue by 1995) and reached up to 2.9 million visitors per
year in 2001. In 2001, while tourism revenue reached 1.866 billion RMB.
In 2005 revenues reached 3.37 billion RMB24 . Tourism and related
services have become the predominant industries for the town,
accounting for more than 60% GDP in Lijiang25. This overwhelming flood
of tourism has led to profound changes in the social attributes of Dayan
town. The following section analyzes the data obtained from on site
social survey and the continuous study of records about Dayan town. It
23 A buffer zone is defined by Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (2005, paragraph 104) as ‘an area surrounding the nominated property which has complementary legal and/or customary restrictions placed on its use and development to give an added layer of protection to the property. This should include the immediate setting of the nominated property, important views and other areas or attributes that are functionally important as a support to the property and its protection’. 24 Data from Lijiang Year Book 1995, 2001. 2005 (governmental data resource). 25 The proportion of the first, second and third industry in Lijiang transformed from 12:34:54 in 1995 to 8:25:67 in 2005. Data source: www.xinhuanet.com (governmental news resource in China)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 32 ‐
traces the changes of spatial characteristics in order to have a better
understanding of the social problems in relation to the physical
environment in the process of living heritage conservation.
2.3.2 Social survey in Dayan town In 2002, whilst the compiling of the conservation planning for Lijiang
ancient town, a general survey was undertaken. The survey concentrated
in the core protected area of Dayan town by a team in Tongji University
including the author26. 112 sets of questionnaires were distributed in the
five main blocks of Dayan town and finally 99 sets of valid responses
were collected and analyzed (Annex 2). The majority of respondents
(80%) had been living in the old town for more than 20 years and owned
their properties (90% was private property), which ensured the analysis
reflected the situation of indigenous inhabitants in the process of
conservation and development. The survey inspired the author to
undertake a critical review of living heritage conservation in China and a
continuous study on Dayan town via literature reviews and on‐site
observations. This research drew upon five subsections in the
questionnaire, namely demography, living environment and quality,
social interaction, attitude to the living heritage conservation, and the
impacts of tourism development for further analysis. The figures below
were compiled by the author, if the sources were not additionally
clarified. The data are derived from the questionnaires in Dayan town in
2002, The analysis from a social perspective in relation to spatial
organizations is innovative for this research.
The research underlined the changes of social attributes through
comparison of data drawn from the on‐site survey in 2002 with general
information before the onset of mass tourism in 1994. The demographic
26 The social survey was conducted by students in Tongji University supervised by Dr. Shaoyong. Questionnaires were distributed among the local residents in the five main neighborhoods in Dayan town, 2002.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 33 ‐
analysis reflected the general distribution of race, gender, and age, which
constituted the social basis of the living community. Further analyses on
family structure, i.e. the basic unit of a society, and career composition
offered insights to understand the transformation of social structure
alongside with tourism development. The perception of local residents to
the conditions of social communication, living environment and facilities
gave direct references to the social problems created in the process of
conservation. Moreover, the responses provided clues for the
improvement of social environment and corresponding physical features
in the future interventions.
2.4 Social analysis
2.4.1 The change of demography The Naxi minority represented the majority of inhabitants from the
beginning of settlement at Dayan town. The survey in 2002 was
conducted in the residential blocks at the rear of main streets, and
indicated that 87% of respondents were from the Naxi minority group.
The results reflect the general ethnic constitution in Dayan town at that
time. The continuity of indigenous inhabitants reflects a strong
connection of the Naxi people with their living community. However
based upon the on site observations along the streets of Dayan town in
2007 that more than 80% of the shops were run by non‐Naxi people,
which is consistent with the data from Fan and Shao (2005) indicating
that only 390 out of 1647 tourism‐related enterprises in Dayan town
belonged to indigenous inhabitants (more than 75% of the shops were
run by immigrants). Native people played a rather passive role in the
recent tourism development, which demonstrates they have a rather
negative capability as long‐term custodians for preserving their own
traditions and living environment. The survey also showed that 4 out of 5
respondents were male, which also fits well with the Naxi tradition that
women work in the fields to support families, while men spend their lives
on arts and spiritual contemplation. As a matter of fact, matriarchy still
prevails around Lugu Lake, 280km away from Lijiang city.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 34 ‐
Race Distribution in the Survey
87%
7%
5%
1%
Naxi
Han
Bai
Others
Figure 24: Race distribution in the survey
Age Analysis1%
1%
25%
34%
39%Below 2020-3030-4545-60above 60
Figure 25: Age analysis in the survey
However, in light of age analysis in the survey, almost three quarter of
the population was over 45 years old and around 40% of them were over
60 years old. Dayan town had become a significantly aged society27,
which has exposed it to the risk of losing continuity and vitality of its 27 According to international standards, an aged society is one where 10 percent of the population is over 60 years of age. Demographic data base of Lijiang ancient town 2002 shows that overall 26% of population is over 60 years old.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 35 ‐
traditions in the long run. An aged society and its corresponding social
problems are a common phenomenon for living heritage sites. Young
people had abandoned their homes for many different reasons. On one
hand, tourism dominated industries tend to decrease the general living
standards for native residents although it creates financial advantages.
Recent statistics 28 showed that Dayan received 12,600 tourists per day
averagely in 2006 and in peak season, tourists could reach up to 25,000
per day. As shown in Figure 2‐10, too many tourists, too much noise and
environmental pollution account for 56% among the ‘most disturbing
facts’ in the survey. Mass tourism exerts a negative influence on the
security and privacy of local residents. Furthermore, environmental
problems and one dimensional development caused by a dominant
tourism industry destroy the diversity of living environment. On the
other hand, young people are driven away by the limited opportunities
for employment and higher education, and thus move to bigger cities in
order to pursue their ‘dreams’.
The change of demography also reflected and influx of in a large number
of immigrants, which is recognized as another serious challenge for
conserving and continuing the ‘authentic values’ of Dayan. As indicated
through the field survey, there were 13,960 permanent residents in
Dayan town and 8200 of them were living in the core protected area in
2002 with a floating population of 2500 excluding tourists. Data from
Laza Wozniak29 showed that the number of native families plunged from
4,000 to under 2,500 in the decade to 2000 in Dayan town. The exodus
was due to the fast transformation from an agricultural to a tourism‐lead
industry. Although in the survey, 61% of respondents regarded the old
28 Statistics from Lijiang Tourism Bureau 2006: Lijiang received 4.6 million tourists and tourism revenue reached up to 4.63 billion RMB in 2006. In peak season, such as during spring festival (February) 2007, Lijiang received 174,800 tourists in seven days, i.e. around 25,000 tourists per day. 29 Data source: Laza Wozniak, 2003 of Far Eastern Economic Review, www.feer.com
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 36 ‐
town as an ideal living place, in contrast to 13% that considered the
newly developed districts as an ideal living place (26% were indifferent),
the response to the question on ‘what if the tourism extended to your
neighborhood’, was very different: only half of respondents said they
would continue normal life in the neighborhood, and the rest said they
would either move away or join the tourism business (Annex 2, IV). This
confirms with the on‐site investigation that found many native families
were requested to or spontaneously moved to the new town by renting
or selling their properties in Dayan town to local authorities or tourism‐
related immigrants. Thus, the internal land‐use patterns and spatial
characteristics of the traditional settlement have been transformed
gradually in line with the demographic changes and tourism
development, which has exerted a significant influence on the quality of
the living community. The original social networks are at the risk of
breaking down from the intrusion of immigrants and tourism‐related
activities in community spaces (detailed analysis in 2.4.3). Moreover, the
changes impair the sense of security in a traditional community. As
claimed by respondents to the survey, there were growing incidents of
theft and robbery in the ancient town, due to increasing numbers of
tourists, immigrants and floating population.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 37 ‐
2.4.2 The change of social structure
Family Structure
38%
51%
1%
0% 6%
0%
2%
2%
Nuclear Family (A couplewith children) Stem Family ( Grandparents,parents and children)United Family (Two or moreNuclear families)Family without children
Aged family
Living alone
Single family
Others
Figure 26: Family structure analysis
The Naxi were originally a nomadic minority and went through a long
period of half‐nomadic, half‐agricultural history. A nomadic culture has a
great impact on the development of the Naxi minority, in which harmony
and cooperation are the basic philosophies. Meanwhile, matriarchy and
patriarchy have coexisted for a long time, which makes the united family
as an advantageous family structure, for the sake of security and farming.
Based on statistics from the 1950s, 35‐50% of all families were united
families with an average of 7‐8 members. Nowadays, nuclear families and
stem families are predominant (in the survey, 89% respondents are from
nuclear or stem families, only 1% of them were from united families). At
one hand, it is probably due to the economic independence coming with
development; at the other hand, it may reflect fewer bonds between
family members. Family is the basic unit of a society. Thus the changes in
the family structure have a significant influence on the overall social
structure. It is noteworthy that an aged society, depopulation of young
people and changes in community life are connected to the
transformations of social structure to a certain extent. This requires ca
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 38 ‐
orresponding change to community facilities and spatial arrangement in
order to serve the emerging needs of more independent families.
Career Analysis
54%
18%
10%
7%
11% Retired
Individual business
Jobless
Teacher
Others (worker, student,doctor etc)
Figure 27: Career analysis
Main Family Income
4%
18%
9%
19%
1%
26%22%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Working inother cities
Tourismbusinessow ner
Landlord Employed intourism market
Agriculture Retirementpension
Others
Figure 28: Analysis of main family income
Career composition is another important indicator on social structure. In
the survey, 54% of responders were retired, which is consistent with the
analysis of age. For people in employment, their careers were limited
mainly to either tourism‐related business or civil servants. Traditional
businesses such as bronze, silver vessel and leather crafts, cotton
spinning, brewing and so on are being marginalized, due to inferior
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 39 ‐
economical competence. Many traditional businesses are preserved for
the purpose of tourism only, without any real devotion. As carriers of
traditional skills and culture, the decline of thesetraditional business puts
these ‘intangible values’ at risk of losing viability, and leads to a decrease
on the diversity of lifestyle. As seen in Figure 2‐8, besides 26% of
respondents living on pensions, 46% of them were working for tourism
directly (18% owners of tourism‐related businesses) or indirectly (9%
landlords, and 19% local employees in the tourism market). Only 1% of
local residents were part‐time or full‐time farmers. It demonstrates the
significant impact of tourism on the living community. The high level of
dependence on tourism lowered the socio‐economic security of local
residents, while it unconsciously reinforces the priority of tourism
development rather than conserving their traditional quality of life.
Tourism and related businesses redistribute the social wealth and
magnify the gaps between rich and poor, which also arouse further social
problems.
2.4.3 The change of land-use and environmental quality
The change of demography exerts a significant impact on land‐use and
environmental quality in a living community, including spatial patterns
and functions. Dayan town has been experiencing a dramatic urban
sprawl since 1996 after being nominated as an UNESCO World Heritage
site. The exodus of indigenous inhabitants and a large number of
immigrants associated with the fast transformation from an agriculture‐
based to a tourism‐based economy led to substantial changes in land‐use.
Because of the limitation of natural boundaries, such as Lion Mountain in
the west and Jinhong Mountain in the north, the town has extended
mainly to southeast and replaced the farmland. Meanwhile, the
decreasing number of farmers as indicated in Figure 2‐8 is also a
reflection of the reduction of surrounding farmland, which serves as a
buffer zone of the core protected district. The definition of the buffer
zone for heritage conservation is always a central dispute between
UNESCO and local authorities, eagerly for tourism and economic
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 40 ‐
development. In the case of Dayan, the buffer zone is defined by UNESCO
to be 3.8 square kilometers (380 Ha), but by local authorities to be 172.6
Ha30. Along with the urban sprawling, traffic systems extended from the
ancient town in different directions, crossing farmland and connecting up
the new districts. Farmland alongside the traffic networks, which used to
be the natural and cognitive boundaries of the ancient town, has mostly
been replaced by commercial real estate and tourism‐based
infrastructure (Figure 2‐9). Boundaries play an essential role in the
integrated ‘values’ of living heritage sites. They centrally manifest the
relationship between indigenous inhabitants and their natural
environment. Meanwhile, boundaries usually compose one of the most
distinguishing features of a site. The merging of historic settlements with
modern districts without clear demarcation, not only brings about
negative impacts on the environmental quality of the site, but also leads
to the dissolving identity of the indigenous community, due to the
indeterminate nature of the territorial boundaries of the ancient town.
30 The buffer zone of 3.8 square kilometers is derived from UNESCO document at the time of its inscription in 1997; and the 172.6 Ha is derived from Lijiang “Historical and Cultural Importance City Master Plan” adopted in 1994. The difference is the main critiques of UNESCO World Heritage Committee concerning the growth of undesirable construction in the buffer zone defined in the inscription in 1997.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 41 ‐
Figure 29: The occupation of farmland, the change of boundaries (after the map of landuse in 2002 and 2007, Conservation Planning,
Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 42 ‐
Most disturbing fact caused by tourism
6%
40%
10%
26%
15%
0%
2%Too many tourist
Environmental pollution
Too much noise
No melon-cutting fromtourism benefitBeing forced to leave theold townBeing visited and takenphotos by visitorsOthers
Figure 210: Local residents’ reaction to tourism development
The change of land‐use leads to a change in environmental quality. As
shown in Figure 2‐10, environmental pollution was the biggest negative
factor experienced by local residents associated with the tourism
development (40%). Taking the problems of noise and massive tourists
into account, more than half of the concerns were related with the
quality of physical environment. The Naxi minority cherished very much
their harmony with nature, and they were very sensitive to the changes
of environmental quality in their daily life. Many indigenous residents,
who were interviewed on site, complained that the immigrants engaged
in tourism businesses, merely cared for monetary benefits and did not
respect the natural environment, especially their traditional way of using
water systems 31(see Figure 2‐11). Meanwhile, the litter from the large
31 According to the tradition of Dayan town, there is a ‘three wells’ water management system. Local people usually dig three wells from one mouth of a spring and name them according to the distance to the source. The first well is used for drinking, the second one for washing food and vegetables, and the third for washing clothes and other hygienic purposes. The tradition also regulates that before 8:00am and after 22:00pm, the water in the rivers should be only used for drinking purposes, while washing and drainage is forbidden. It helps to control the quality of water for different purposes and creates the primary water recycling system.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 43 ‐
number of tourists and the pollution from increased traffic also
contributed to the deterioration of environmental quality in Dayan,
which tangibly affected various aspects of social interactions in the local
community. Analysis and on‐site investigation showed that a decrease in
farmland and pollution of water systems were the main concerns among
the indigenous inhabitants on environmental quality in relation to
tourism development. It reflects the different consciousness and
sensitivity of indigenous inhabitants from tourists as well as immigrants
to native resources, which influence their behaviors and relationship with
the environment. Therefore, it reveals the importance of maintaining
local population, who are the long‐term custodians of the integrated
‘values’ at the site, and manifests the close interaction between changes
in the environment and changes of demography at the site.
Figure 211: The traditional use of water system by indigenous residents in Dayan town
The change of land‐use also obviously reflects in the changes of spatial
functions in the indigenous community. As surveys and observations at
the site showed, although the visual appearane remains the same, spatial
patterns and functions have been dramatically changed around a
booming tourism industry. Many residences along the streets in Dayan
town turned into shop‐houses. As seen from Figure 2‐12, the main
streets radiating from Sifang plaza were full of souvenir shops,
restaurants, bars and many other types of tourism facilities. In particular,
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 44 ‐
a bars‐street has sprung up driven by the tourists’ demands for night life,
which has dramatically changed the living atmosphere of Dayan town.
More substantially, if comparing the distribution of tourism facilities
between 2002 and 2007 (Figure 2‐12), it indicates that the tourism
facilities have expanded into the side streets and living neighborhoods.
These commercial developments have been established without proper
considerations for the ancient cultural environment, have assimilated the
ancient living streets into other commercial districts as a whole and have
dissolved the identity of Dayan town as a World Heritage site.
Furthermore, those businesses penetrated into the courtyards and semi‐
public and semi‐private community spaces, which have violated the
privacy and security of local residents’ daily life. The Tourism‐related
facilities and shops replaced the local facilities and conveniences, and
consequently have increased the living expenses of indigenous residents.
As a result, many indigenous inhabitants abandoned their homes
voluntarily for the sake of a more convenient and comfortable living
environment. Additionally an overwhelming development of tourism has
driven the indigenous population out of the ancient town to maximize
the commercial benefits. As seen in Figure 2‐9 that, the fact of ‘being
forced to leave the old town’ is the third ‘most disturbing facts’ of
tourism development experienced by indigenous inhabitants. It refers to
various forces from local authorities or development agencies in the
name of conservation or development of certain areas. Indigenous
inhabitants have gradually lost control with their environment, since the
ancient town opens up to tourism in an open‐market economy
mechanism. The exodus of indigenous residents leads to the destruction
of social networks in the local community as well as of living quality in
the long run.
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 45 ‐
Figure 212: Comparison of the distribution of tourism facilities near Sifang plaza in Dayan town (above 2007, below 2002)32
32 Data source: Conservation plan of Lijiang ancient town 2002 and 2007, Led by Dr. Shao Yong, Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 46 ‐
2.4.4 The change of social interactions In the survey, 73% of the respondents thought they had a good
relationship with their neighbors, but only 46% of them acknowledged
that they often met with their neighbors. This may be due to the
introduction of telecommunication and the proliferation of home
computers and internet, but seen from Figure 2‐13 and Figure 2‐14,
limited places for socialization of local residents also accounted for the
declining social interaction. 84% of the respondents thought there were
not enough places for socializing and entertainment in the ancient town.
Among them, 30% of the informants viewed that the problem of missing
social places was serious and restricted their social communication with
neighbors, especially the elder residents. Based on the analysis in Figure
2‐13, streets played a central role in social communication. 63% of social
activities happened along the streets, followed by open spaces in the
nearby blocks (38%) and courtyards (22%). However, as explained above,
the original plazas and streets, which used to be social places for local
residents have became tourism attractions.
More substantially, since the streetscape is strictly protected by laws, the
spatial change occurred in an introverted way. By comparison of the
tourism facility distribution in year 2002 and 2007 (Figure 2‐12),
evidences were clearly that the tourism‐related facilities, such as bars,
food grocery shops and family hostels have penetrated more into the
residential blocks. Some semi‐public places and private courtyards within
the residential blocks have been occupied by commercial activities,
driven by financial benefits. The change of spatial functions leads directly
to the fundamental change of spatial features and flow of people within
a living community. This severely interrupts social activities of indigenous
inhabitants. It is evident from the comparison in Figure 2‐12 that
commercial and tourism activities have encroached into the living places,
and the corresponding tourist flows have broken down ordinary social
contacts amongst the residents. In the long run, the loss of privacy and
sense of community has driven local people out of their home heritage
sites to look for a better social life. Therefore, how to preserve the
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 47 ‐
sensitive places in relation to the social quality of an indigenous
community is vital for retaining traditional social interactions and
community life of indigenous inhabitants.
Where do you usually socialize with neighbors (multi-choice)
22%
63%
38%
8%
In the courtyardsOn the streetsIn the nearby blooksOther places
Figure 213: Places for socializing with neighbors
Do you think there are short of places for socializing and entertainment
16%
54%
30%
Not at allYesVery much
Figure 214: Lack of places for socializing and entertainment
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 48 ‐
Services wanted (multi-choice)
24%28%
26%
21%
13%
18%
72%75%
40%
25%
10%
38%
Open markets
Shopping malls
Grain and oil supply stands
Barber shops
Grocers
Post off ices
Repair stalls
Entertainment centres
Community centres for old people
Middle school
Primary school
Hospital
Figure 215: Services you want in the neighborhood (multichoice)
While tourism facilities flourished, as shown in Figure 2‐15, many kinds of
neighborhood services for local residents disappeared in Dayan town.
Among them, everyday conveniences, such as repair stalls, barber shops,
grain and oil supply stands as well as grocers were wanted by indigenous
inhabitants. The on‐site interviews showed that three quarters of
respondents preferred shopping in open‐market (Annex 2, III). The open
spaces to accommodate these daily services were used as meeting points
among neighbors, which have been replaced by souvenir shops,
restaurants, and other services exclusively for the benefit of tourists and
growing tourism‐related industry. Seen in Figure 2‐15, the majority of
respondents indicated the lack of entertainment centers and repair stalls
in Dayan town; more than one third of them asked for more community
centers for old people and hospitals and clinics in the neighborhoods.
Open markets, shopping malls, grain and oil supply stands, barber shops
and middle schools were amongst the needs of local residents. It clearly
shows that the desires and convenience of the indigenous inhabitants
have not been given enough consideration in the process of conservation
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 49 ‐
and tourism development. At the same time, booming tourism has
boosted real estate development nearby and an increased retail prices in
the town. Indigenous inhabitants are losing their control over spaces for
traditional practices and social interactions, while facing economic
pressure from tourism development. In the long run, the destruction of
social interaction in the local community will lead to the discontinuity of
social networks amongst the indigenous inhabitants. It amplifies the
exodus of indigenous inhabitants through the undermining the sense of
communication and the willingness to carry on their way of life and
traditions in the living community.
2.5 Reviews on current management at Lijiang ancient town
In order to understand the above mentioned social changes in the
process of conservation and tourism development, it is essential to know
how the town is managed. Lijiang ancient town was registered on the
“World Heritage List” in 1997. Henceforth, attention to this conservation
has been drawn from the international organizations, national
government and local authorities, while tourism and related industries
exploded and became the central themes in development. As reviewed
by the People’s Daily33, from 1994 to 1999, tourism‐related facilities and
businesses swarmed into the ancient town as encouraged by local
authorities for the purposes of regional economic development. These
changes aroused social chaos and environmental disorders in a short
time period at the living town, and since the businessmen had a totally
different ideology and cognition of the living environment compared to
the local residents, it was hard for them to be integrated into the local
society. Water pollution and destruction of built environment brought
33 The national press, online resource: www.people.com.cn 23rd June 2003. The data showed that there were more than 1,000 shops crowded in the ancient town by year 2000. Most of them located in Dayan town and occupied the main public space and streets.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 50 ‐
negative images for tourism and the related development.
Correspondingly, the Management Committee and Cultural Heritage
Protection Bureau were established in 2002 and 2005 respectively in
response to the deterioration of the physical environment. Millions of US
dollars have been invested to improve the infrastructures and facilities;
while a certain amount was appropriated for the restoration of historical
residences and the development of new sightseeing locations. However,
the social environment and local desires did not receive equal attention
from the government and local authorities, and meanwhile local
residents’ involvement in the process of conservation and tourism
development was very limited. Therefore, even through the physical
environment has been under control at an enormous cost, the mass
tourism and commercialized atmosphere in Dayan town has led to it’s
the degradation of overall ‘values’. As surveyed by Fan and Shao (2005),
artistic and cultural industries related to the previous unique social
identity and atmosphere of Lijiang ancient town are remarkably
decreasing.
Besides Dayan, the World Heritage properties of Lijiang ancient town also
includes Shuhe and Baisha, which are located to the north of Dayan,
around four and eight kilometers away. Based on the critiques and
experiences of conservation at Dayan, new conservation approaches
have been applied experimentally. Shuhe sold its conservation and
development rights to a company. Thus, all the local residents either
moved out of the village or have been employed as performers of
traditional folk arts or farmers to take care of the surrounding rice fields.
The whole of Shuhe turned into a well organized tourist attraction but
there was no basis to talk about social quality of local residents. It is an
extreme intervention of a living heritage site, and aroused bitter criticism
from the international society, since it turned a living site into an open
museum. Baisha, which is a bit further from Dayan town in comparison
to Shuhe, tried to engage local villagers in the initiative of conservation.
In order to protect their home environment and ownership rights, local
villagers set up Village Charters to constrain litter and other types of
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 51 ‐
pollution, and to maintain their social lives. Because of its vibrant living
atmosphere, Baisha is becoming more and more attractive for tourists
and other cultural activities. A wide and active participation of local
residents in the process of conservation and development contributed
not only to an efficient management system, but also to a high social
cohesion and a more desirable living environment.
2.6 Summary of social problems in Dayan town As explicitly explored via the on site social survey and observations at
Dayan town, the solely preservation of the physical environment could
not fulfill the requirements to retain ‘Outstanding Universal Values’ at
the living heritage site. A living site should represent comprehensive
‘values’ as a viable community. Foremost, Indigenous inhabitants and the
associated traditions, life‐styles and other cultural expressions are
essential part of the integrated ‘values’ of Dayan town. As stated by
Western et al. (1994) in consistent with their numerous case studies on
biodiversity conservation in relation to local people, a focus on livelihood
needs of indigenous inhabitants and community is a prerequisite to solve
the problems between conservation and development. In the case of
Dayan, social problems in the living community are becoming severe,
which are centrally reflected in the conflicts between local desires and
the outside demands from tourists as well as immigrants in relation to
the tourism industry. It is evident that an exodus of native Naxi people
with centuries‐old families, and a swarm of tourists and immigrants have
changed the nature of this historic settlement from a unique habitable
place to a tourism‐dominated, commercial centre. The main social
problems derived from the Dayan case study include:
1) Destruction of community social structure, in relation to the
exodus of indigenous inhabitants and mass influx of tourists and
immigrants in the rapid socio‐economic transformation. It is
reflected on the change of demography, family structure, career
composition and spatial functions.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 52 ‐
2) Monotonous job opportunities and insecure employment status
for indigenous residents, in the passive engagement of a
dominant tourism industry, resulting in less labour market
security and life chance of the traditional community.
3) Loss of privacy in the living community, in relation to the change
of visible and invisible boundaries of the traditional community,
reflecting on the increasing crime rates
4) Decreasing diversity in daily life, related to the lack of everyday
conveniences and entertainment along with the change of land‐
use, leading to less satisfaction and life chance over the living
community
5) Decline of social associations, reflecting on the decreasing of
traditional business and activities, leading to less control on the
living environment
6) Reduction of social interactions, consistent with the lack of
social space, replaced by mass tourism‐oriented services and
facilities, leading to less cohesion of the indigenous community
7) Aged‐society phenomenon, when young generations moved out
for better education, employment opportunities, or better
quality of life, leading to the discontinuity of traditions, practices
and knowledge.
The social problems caused by mass tourism with the neglect of local
demands have aroused growing concerns in the process of conservation
and development. They have exerted negative influence on the quality of
life in a living heritage site. The reduction in availability and accessibility
to social services for local residents along with subtle changes of spatial
functions and patterns in the neighborhoods, and the indeterminate
nature of public, semi‐public and semi‐private spaces in the community
Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town
‐ 53 ‐
lead to the decline of sense of belonging and social intercommunication.
In the long term, these social problems decrease the security and
satisfaction of indigenous inhabitants and result in a vicious circle of
deterioration of living quality and depopulation. Indigenous inhabitants
are the carriers and representatives of living ‘values’, while acting as
long‐time custodians for the genuine values of a living heritage site. It is
of great importance to maintain the continuity of a social environment
and to cultivate a sense of belonging and communication in the local
residents for the sake of social sustainable development.
Through on‐site surveys and observations at Dayan town, this chapter
explores social problems with reflections on the changes of spatial
organizations in the process of conservation and tourism development. It
offers a better understanding on the social concerns in living heritage
conservation and indicates the negative influences of change of spatial
organizations on social life of indigenous people. Meanwhile, some
experimental interventions applied at different parts of Lijiang ancient
town inspire further thinking on proper approaches for living heritage
conservation. The next chapter will review in general the development of
living heritage conservation to understand what has been studied and
what remains as serious challenges in relation to the social problems of
living heritage conservation. The existing applied methods will be
compared and analyzed to understand the influences of conservation
policy on achieving long‐term balanced conservation and development in
these traditional living communities.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 54 ‐
3 Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
Given the social problems identified in chapter two through the field case
study in Dayan town, this chapter investigates the social concerns and
challenges in living heritage conservation in a broad context, for the
purpose of a more holistic understanding on the current status of living
heritage conservation under the framework of the UNESCO World
Heritage program. Critical reviews on applied methods help to find out
what had been addressed and what remained to be solved in terms of
social problems in conservation. It helps to generalize social problems
and the influences of different conservation approaches, and leads to an
introspective quest for a more pragmatic design tool.
3.1 Findings from the Living Heritage Sites Program
UNESCO World Heritage program is derived from an international
safeguarding campaign to safeguard the Abu Simbel temples from the
construction of Aswan High Dam in Egypt, followed by safeguarding
campaigns in Venice (Italy) and Moenjodaro (Pakistan) etc. It was built
upon a series of international charters and conventions to set up an
intergovernmental cooperation system to conserve the sites or objects
with ‘Outstanding Universal Values’ for human kind through
communication and evaluation. The living heritage program was a
reflection of needs emerging from comprehensive and interdisciplinary
studies in the area of conservation. The Living Heritage Sites Program
(LHSP) is a widely recognized program organized by ICCROM
collaborating with SPAFA34 under the framework of the UNESCO World
34 SPAFA refers to SEAMEO Regional Centre for Archaeology and Fine Art, which is supported by the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization. The Living Heritage Sites Program has been prepared by Herb Stovel (at that time, Unit Director of ICCROM) during the process of development of ICCROM Programme and Budget 2004‐2005. The paper includes earlier inputs by Nobuko Inaba. (Nov. 4, 2002). The
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 55 ‐
Heritage program, focusing on the living dimensions of heritage
conservation in Asia. The program is based upon the fruits of the ITUC
(Integrated Territorial and Urban Conservation) program devoted to the
management of living cities and landscapes in the past two decades.
Thus, the program involves a wide participation and pilot studies in Asian
countries, such as Luang Prabang (Lao PDR), Ta Nei in Angkor (Cambodia),
Phrae (Thailand), and the Mekong River project (including five countries
in Southeast Asia). It well represented the real status and concerns in
living heritage conservation with the aim to build connections between
the local population and heritage sites via community involvement at
various stages. The program has clearly defined the main characteristics
of living heritage sites and reviewed the main problems in the process of
conservation. On basis of that, it proposed a living heritage approach as a
promising solution to these problems.
3.1.1 Main characteristics of living heritage sites According to the Operational Guidelines35 ratified by UNESCO, the living
heritage sites in the program and in this research are defined as ‘historic
towns’ which are still inhabited and which, by their very nature, have
developed and will continue to develop under the influence of socio‐
economic and cultural transformation, a situation that renders the
program involved participants from Cambodia, China (Hong Kong SAR), India, Japan, New Zealand, Thailand and Vietnam. 35 The Operational Guidelines is short for the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, ratified by UNESCO World Heritage Centre in 1972 and modified periodically. Online revised version: http://unesco.org/archive/opguide08‐en.pdf. It classifies the groups of buildings into three categories, except for living heritage sites, the other two types are: towns which are no longer inhabited but which provide unchanged archaeological evidence of the past; these generally satisfy the criterion of authenticity and their state of conservation can be relatively easily controlled; and new towns of the twentieth century which paradoxically have something in common with both the aforementioned categories: which their original urban organization is clearly recognizable and their authenticity is undeniable, their future is unclear because their development is largely uncontrollable.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 56 ‐
assessment of their authenticity more difficult and any conservation
policy more problematical. The main characteristics of a living heritage
site rely on the fact that its' cultural and natural resources closely
interact with indigenous inhabitants’ daily life, which embodies assets of
great values in social performance and quests for an evolutionary
evaluation. Therefore, the preservation of living heritage sites
emphasized the importance of ‘authenticity’ and ‘function’ in a
‘continuous’ and ‘diverse’ environment. The term ‘living’ referred to
‘both the living aspects of heritage (continuity), and the heritage
components in a living environment’ (ICCROM LHSP first strategy
meeting in Bangkok, 2003).
3.1.2 Main problems in current living heritage conservation
Since the living heritage sites have two intrinsic faces in both
conservation and development – one to local residents and the other to
outsiders – the main problems lies in the interrelationship between them:
Value identification: A living heritage site represents both heritage
values inherited from historic, cultural and artistic development as a
common property, and contemporary economic and social values to local
residents. Its preservation is a continuous evolutionary process and thus
it is problematic to identify what the authentic values for the collective
identity of a living site are and what people value more through their
engagements?
Interventions: Based on the value orientations, physical elements
including constructions, paths, spaces, boundaries and so on, imply
different functions to different users. Which function deserves priority
and how to achieve an appropriate equilibrium still remain a dilemma in
the process of development and conservation.
At present, most applied living heritage conservation is characterized by
expert‐based value identification and top‐down interventions, like, for
instance Melaka city in Malaysia, Bhaktapur in Nepal, Vigan Heritage
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 57 ‐
village in Philippines etc. The process appeals for more concerns to be
placed on the continuity of living features and sustainable management.
Therefore, a community‐based approach was introduced and became an
efficient complement to the previous method of conservation. However,
the role of local residents in the process of conservation is quite limited
and passive in most cases. Local residents are respected as part of
heritage values, but they are not properly integrated in the operations of
conservation and tourism development.
These problems are closely related to the social quality of living heritage
sites, especially those listed as World Heritage sites, which have aroused
overwhelming attention in tourism development and led to biased
measures in the above two perspectives. The indigenous people are
often regarded as layman in the process of value identification. Strict
provisions of governmental regulations do not offer a dynamic way of
preserving the physical environment, while the internal social quality,
which plays the vital drive for creation and evolution of collective
identities (as explained in Chapter 4) fall into neglect. On one hand,
governmental authorities restrict modifications in favour of
environmental ‘authenticity’ and ‘integrity’, which impedes the
improvement of living quality in line with the needs and conveniences of
local residents; on the other hand, negative impacts from mass tourism
development disturb the basic social life in the community. This leads to
the deterioration of social quality and as a reciprocal consequence, local
residents become indifferent or even hostile to the conservation, and
some abandon their homes for a better life. For instance, it was reported
that some local residents refused to inscribe their properties on the
preservation list as they did not want their properties to be governed by
restrictive terms of renovation or constructions; some sold their
properties because they did not like a bustled environment.
Depopulation and changes of land‐use driven by short‐term economic
profits put living heritage sites at high risk of losing their vitality and
outstanding universal values. The linkage between indigenous
community and heritage becomes fragile in the conventional method of
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 58 ‐
top‐down conservation, which turns heritage sites into inanimate and
socially‐unviable projects.
3.1.3 Living heritage approach In light of the above‐mentioned problems, the LHSP program developed
a living heritage approach, identified as a community‐based, bottom‐up
method to preserve and manage heritage sites. It aims to promote the
public awareness of the living heritage concept and to integrate views
and interests from different stakeholders. The community‐based
approach reflects the cognitions and connections of native people to the
environment. It helps to identify important physical settings related to
traditional and ethnic features, such as places for traditional events and
festivals, religious affairs and landmarks with symbolic or tribal meanings.
In the course of living heritage conservation, some appropriate
interventions have been introduced to involve local communities in a
broader sense. Among them, stakeholder meetings, collections of folk
tales and culture mapping are the most commonly adopted methods to
understand various meanings of heritage resources at the sites and to
achieve consensus for further decision‐making. As stated in the program,
there are two premises to apply to the living heritage approach, including
(ICCROM LHSP, 2005):
heritage sites need to be understood as living places, where efforts
to improve the understanding and conservation of the sites must be
linked to the values, interests and capacities of the populations that
live within and around them, and who are the true long‐term
custodians of these sites;
these sites must be seen as the embodiment of significant values,
where effective site management requires that as much attention
be given to the conditions for retaining these values as to those for
preserving the material fabric that contains and supports the site’s
activities.
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 59 ‐
3.2 Responses to main problems in living heritage conservation
In response to the summery of main problems above, concerning value
identification and interventions, there are two concepts that need to be
clarified in the context of living heritage conservation, i.e. authenticity
and function. They are determinant factors in the process of
conservation and tourism development. An explicit discussion may well
help a better understanding on the social problems in living heritage
conservation and contributed to further discussion on corresponding
solutions.
3.2.1 Arguments on authenticity In terms of value identification, authenticity is a common criterion.
However, there are continuous arguments on the definition of
authenticity. In the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, authentic refers to
‘original, first hand (as opposed to copied), or real, actual, genuine (as
opposed to pretended)’. In the context of heritage conservation, Feilden
and Jokilehto (1998, p. 16‐17) understood ‘authenticity’ as an intrinsic
ascription to a heritage resource ‘that is materially original or genuine as
it was constructed and as it has aged and weathered in time’. They
underlined the difference between ‘authentic’ and ‘identical’, in the
perspective that ‘authentic’ is a genuine product of the time as an
evolving concept, but ‘identical’ is a pure form reproduction. The Nara
Document on Authenticity (1994) underlined credible or truthful
information sources for the assessment of authenticity. It also stressed
the importance of authenticity to culture and heritage diversity as
irreplaceable spiritual and intellectual resources for all humankind.
Accordingly, the judgment about heritage values should be based in the
respective cultural/social context instead of fixed criteria. Feilden and
Jokilehto (1998, p. 17) asserted that: ‘In the case of a heritage resource,
its historical authenticity should generally reflect the significant phases of
construction and utilization in different phases of its historical time line’.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 60 ‐
However, these interpretations of authenticity focus on the physical
elements and neglect the social environment in a living community. As
explained in the field of existentialist philosophy, authenticity refers to
the degree to which one is true to one's own personality, spirit, or
character, despite any external forces, pressures and influences from the
materialized world. It is often "at the limits" of language, but could
simply be interpreted as ‘meaning’. It is crucial to identify the meanings
of living heritage sites with in‐depth engagement of local communities.
Mason et al. (2000) proposed that a value typology could help to identify
meanings of physical elements, including historical and artistic values,
social or civic values, spiritual or religious values, symbolic or identity
values, research values, natural values and economic values. The
common methods of collecting meanings include documentary evidence
(correspondence, reports, sketches, watercolours, ground photographs,
air photographs, ground photogrammetry, maps, plans, published
materials etc.) surveys, oral information and physical evidence. In a living
heritage site, more evidence and information from different perspectives
can be obtained through a community‐based approach to understand
better the meanings behind physical expressions. Therefore, proper
measures could be deduced not only to preserve the physical character,
but also to maintain the authentic quality. It is necessary to analyze and
access the values with professional knowledge from a holistic view.
Besides the meanings of physical elements, authenticity is closely related
to self‐fulfillment. In living heritage sites, authenticity is reflected by
collective behaviors and memories to represent the social identity
(explained in chapter 4). It emphasizes the continuity of traditions, life‐
styles and community lives in a dynamic way and contributes to the
cultural diversity. This research deals with living heritage sites in current
circumstances instead of historic arguments, which focuses the
intentions of the creation of various objects in the site. It requires
maintaining the functions beyond pure forms and retaining the
interactions between users and objects. The current conservation
methods on physical authenticity, as indicated in the ‘Operational
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 61 ‐
Guidelines’ like authenticity in design, in materials, in workmanship or in
settings, set limits to the further exploration of social meanings beyond
the physical morphology.
3.2.2 Interpretation on functions Functionality is valid only if it is explicitly affiliated with a particular
person or group. In living heritage sites, there are mainly three groups of
people, i.e. local residents, tourists and immigrants mainly associated
with tourism development. Each group has different requirements and
ideologies on the living environment, and vice versa. Physical
environment is endowed with different functions in relation to different
groups of users. In a living heritage environment, local residents are the
creators as well as carriers of authentic values at the site and thus,
functions to fulfill their social demands should be given priority in various
interventions. Although the requirements of tourists and other
immigrants usually relate to short‐sighted development, the
corresponding functions required should be integrated into the social
considerations of a living community. Proper interpretations of the
different functions of the physical environment encourage beneficial
interactions of different groups by integrating similar activities. The social
activities promote the social vitality and ‘continuity’ by developing
contextual strategies with priority for the social‐demands of the local
population.
Interventions should be developed in virtue of a holistic understanding of
the authenticity and functions of various factors in a living heritage site.
For instance, an open space demonstrates its significance as a historic
witness of certain historic events, currently functioning as a piazza for
gatherings of local residents. In the process of conservation, its
characteristics relate to historic events, such as a monumental statue,
and a piece of stele should be preserved. More importantly, the
elements which are attributed to its gathering function, such as a
landmark structure, spatial scale or relationship with other places should
be given priority for preservation. Mason et al. (2000) argued that ‘the
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 62 ‐
real usefulness of values concept for planning resides precisely in this
connection between the characteristics of sites and the process through
which different stakeholders express and act on those values’36. It allows
present communities to leave marks in the process of conservation, and
reinforce positive social dialogues through tracing the roots of the
common past experiences and sharing a vision for enhancing the quality
of life in the future. Activities of indigenous people in the corresponding
physical environment offer complementary clues to explore the insights
of meanings and functions of a living heritage.
3.3 Main contributions of the living heritage approach
3.3.1 Integrated approach through direct community involvement
Previous experiences in the discussion of historical towns have shown
the significance of combining community goals with conservation
processes. It is an essential way to stimulate the enthusiasm of
community involvement, and thus to ensures the continuity in heritage
sites. The Living Heritage program, which succeeds the fruits of the
pervious program of Integrated Territorial and Urban Conservation
(ITUC), highlights the involvement of local communities in the heritage
conservation and management process. It aims to establish close
connections between people and heritage and encourages a continuous
function of heritage sites. As stated by the director of the living heritage
program in ICCROM, ‘Conservation should not prevent pre‐existing uses
36Article ‘Heritage Values and Challenges of Conservation Planning’ page 21 by Mason, Randall and Erica Avrami. 2000. In the proceedings of Management Planning for Archaeological Sites, edited by Jeanne Marie Teutonico and Gaetano Palumbo in an international workshop organized by the Getty Conservation Institute and Loyola Marymount University 19‐22 May 2000, Corinth, Greece.
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 63 ‐
of heritage’ (Wijesuriya et al, 200637), with regard to the spiritual,
economic or social functions. It arouses a wider and deeper insight of
various values of heritage sites and emphasizes the necessity of an
integrated approach for heritage conservation.
In order to integrate views from different stakeholders, community
involvement in the living heritage program is adopted at various stages of
the conservation procedure. From the very beginning of identifying the
significance of a site, to the decision making process, the living heritage
approach aims to offer a platform and system to listen to the voice of the
public. By doing so, a comprehensive evaluation of the site can be
achieved and at the same time, the public enthusiasm for conservation
could be stimulated for the sake of long‐term custodians. Direct
community involvement in conservation is essential to understand
tangible and intangible, as well as cultural and social values of a heritage
site from different points of view. In other words, the living heritage
approach attaches a strong attention to the holistic picture of heritage
conservation and fosters public participation.
3.3.2 Highlight of living components The living heritage approach is proposed as an interactive and bottom‐up
method to reflect local voices from the grass‐roots. Moreover, it respects
sustainability and flexibility in a specific cultural context by underlining
the function of living components in sustainable conservation. The living
components include the ongoing traditions, life styles and activities,
which contribute tangibly and intangibly to the social and cultural
identity of a heritage site. They are not static and stable as objects in
museums, and therefore, represent a challenge for proper conservation
methods.
37 Wijesuriya, Gamini, Kazuhiko Nishi and Joe King. 2006. ICCROM Newsletter 32. p. 18
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 64 ‐
The living components in heritage sites require an evolving method of
conservation with a deep and holistic understanding of historic and
aesthetic values and current social demands for every single spot. They
inspire the interdisciplinary and interactive research as an effort to
preserve the heritage site as a whole. The sense of ‘continuity’ and
‘participation’ inherent in the living components throw light on the long‐
term maintenance. Furthermore, they contribute not only to the site, but
also to much broader areas for sustainable social development while
keeping the socio‐cultural diversity. As argued by Low (2001), social
sustainability refers to ‘maintaining and enhancing the diverse histories,
values, and relationships of contemporary populations’ and cultural
diversity is a critical indicator. The continuity of human groups in heritage
sites is an essential factor for cultural diversity. It helps to understand
‘the cultural dynamics of a place so that specific individuals and their
histories and values are sustained at or near the heritage site, across
generations, over time’ (Low 2001:51).
3.3.3 Advantages in comparison with traditional methods
Heritage places are given relevant significance in the way people
recognize them. The living heritage approach respects the local
communities and consults with them in the first instance. As compared
below (table 3‐1), conventional conservation depends on expertise
knowledge, legal, and institutional framework to secure recourses and
apply conservation management, which is initiated by the government or
authorities and implemented from top‐down. As an essential part of
conservation, an expert‐based approach is dominating in practices with a
focus on the historic, aesthetic and artistic values of a heritage site. The
values are identified and discussed in a circle of experts from different
backgrounds, such as architecture, history, arts, economics etc. These
experts are outsiders to the heritage site and their judgments are usually
made based on an academic point of view, with comparative case
analysis at a global level. On one hand, this approach offers a pragmatic
way of preservation through the clear identification of key features for
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 65 ‐
conservation, which also sets decisive indicators for the decision‐making
process; however, on the other hand, this approach results in a lack of
deep insights into the life at a living heritage site, in respect that the
experts are often short of long‐term life experience at the site. Therefore,
the values identified by the experts seem less relevant to the local
population. The corresponding applied management is also based on
governmental interventions and restricts adequate use of living
resources.
The living heritage approach, distinguished by a community‐based
method, emerged from the requirement of a renaissance of living
heritage sites, through reviving social functions at sites. It encourages a
wide involvement from local communities at the stage of value
identification in order to have a comprehensive understanding of the site.
The approach encourages enthusiasm for conservation from the local
population by respecting their values and incorporating dialogue, such as
consensus building, voting, and other governing procedures, in order to
reflect the needs of local people. During the value identification period,
different opinions of local communities are collected and documented,
which includes not only tangible features but also intangible values, such
as legends, languages, religions, festivals and so on. These intangible
settings go beyond values in the eyes of experts and enrich the meanings
of the physical environment. Furthermore, they offer rich connections
between tangible and intangible characteristics to represent the
authenticity and integrity of a living heritage site. However, the
community‐based approach is declared to contain a mass of data without
decisive indicators for decision‐making, while its performance has been
well below expectations (Kellert et al. 2000; Barrett et al. 2001). As
argued by Songorwa (1999) and Murphree (2002), the community‐based
conservation devolved the authority and responsibility, which led to
improper implementation in practices. Furthermore, the current living
approach is limited to the stage of identification and the decision‐making
process. The implementation of conservation and tourism development
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 66 ‐
are still dominated by governmental interventions, which leads to the
discontinuity in applications.
Conventional approach Living heritage approach
1 Top‐down Bottom‐up
2 Linear Inter‐active
3 Dependence on legal frameworks for protection
Dependence on community awareness leading to political commitment for protection
4 Dependence on state provision of resources for conservation
Necessary resources may need to be raised by the community, or supplied by the community in kind.
5 Significance based on expert values (therefore, often limited to art‐historical perceptions)
Significance also includes community values and associations;
Community participates in definition of values.
6
Arguments for conservation usually limited to contribution of cultural understanding to meaningful development of society
Arguments for conservation usually more concerned with quality of life (always a goal issue), integrating concern for social and economic impacts
7
Conservation and management decision‐making carried out in professional frameworks, hence much concern for the professional “body of doctrine”, and included principles (concerned primarily with intervention);
Significant consideration given to limiting use to ensure heritage protection (e.g., Australian “conservation plan”)
Conservation and management decision‐making includes local voices and local concerns;
Conservation principles used will have more to do with preventive approaches, risk management, sustainability;
More often, appropriate equilibrium sought between use and heritage protection.
8
Usually involves efforts to implement defined policy or strategy adopted in one sector at national level, the heritage sector
Is “integrated” in nature, bringing together views and interests of all stakeholders
9 Sustainability achieved when consumption of recognized
Sustainability achieved when decisions are moved closest to
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 67 ‐
significant scientific cultural/natural resources is limited.
those affected by decisions (Agenda 21)
Table 31: Difference between conventional approach and living heritage approach38
There are continuous arguments between the above two approaches.
The statement of Ludwig (2001) denied the expert‐based conventional
approach for conservation by indicating that the objective, disinterested
experts’ notions do not work in a diverse, mutually contradictory
situation. The expert‐based approach depends on centralized institutes
and command‐and‐control resource management, leading to a linear
mechanism and the lack of resilience in a system. However, the living
heritage approach does not solve all the problems and it indicates
difficulties in practical application.
3.4 Problems regarding the living heritage approach
First, so far, the living heritage approach with focus on community
involvement has been centred on understanding and defining the
significance of sites, instead of being incorporated in an applied system.
For instance, stakeholder meetings, cultural mapping and interviews are
effective ways of involving local residents and communities, in order to
understand the tangible and intangible values of heritage sites more
profoundly. As argued by Saouma‐Forero, in 200139, heritage and values
are synonymous and one cannot conserve or preserve what local
38 Resource: The first strategy meeting of living heritage sites program in SPAFA Headquarters, Bangkok. 17‐19 September 2003, prepared by Kumiko Shimotsuma, Herb Stovel, and Simon Warrack ICCROM. 39 Quoted by Dawson Munjer in “Anchoring African Cultural and Natural Heritage: The Significance of Local Community Awareness in the Context of Capacity Building” in World Heritage Papers 13, “Linking Universal and Local Values: Managing a Sustainable Future for World Heritage” – A conference organized by the Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO, in collaboration with the Netherlands Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 22‐24 May 2003.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 68 ‐
communities do not acknowledge. Understanding and defining values
from multi‐faceted perspectives are crucial at the first stage of
conservation. But from the understanding of the historical, aesthetic,
social, economic and cultural meaning of heritage sites to the
implementation of proper actions for conservation, there is a big gap for
further investigation. Most discussions regarding living heritage stop at
the first stage of identification, although the whole idea of the living
heritage approach aims to involve local communities in the full process of
conservation. At the moment, no clear clue for a systematic
implementation has been established in living heritage conservation.
Secondly, the method and level of community engagement needs to be
more applicable and objective in relation to their daily life experience
and tourism development. Based upon the pilot case studies of the living
heritage program in Phrae (Thailand), consultation of indigenous
inhabitants on conservation issues cannot always be productive, because
of less relevance to individual interests and lack of proper leadership. The
discrete community involvement easily leads to discussions without clear
objectives or disoriented activities, which implies that professional
involvement is necessary. Nevertheless, professionals appointed by
authorities usually have limited information in terms of life‐experienced
recognition of tangible and intangible interests of the living community
Sole decision made by professionals might be influenced by their
personal favors or biases in conservation. There are many concrete cases
to make us believe that misleading professional guidance could damage
the cultural diversity. Therefore, the question of how to balance the
community engagement and professional interventions in living heritage
conservation requires further investigation. More attention needs to be
devoted in developing an applicable design‐tool controlling physical
characteristics to retain social ‘values’ of the indigenous living
community in practice The living heritage approach promotes public
awareness of the living heritage concept and encourages local
participation for long‐term management. However, it offers more
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 69 ‐
comprehensive but less selective information with limited resources in
an applicable method to focus on key issues.
3.5 Some complementary thinking about the Living Heritage Sites Program
The Living Heritage Sites Program initiated by ICCROM together with the
Integrated Territorial and Urban Conservation (ITUC) program in the past
two decades has conducted a broad range of investigation at many living
heritage sites in Asia. The program shed light on the importance of
‘living’ components and active involvement of local residents at the sites.
As discussed above, the living heritage approach offers an alternative
method of conservation, a community‐based, bottom‐up approach,
which provides a very good basis to build connections between heritage
and the local population and thus is liable to achieve sustainable
management and efficient maintenance. The fundamental ethic of the
living heritage approach is to maintain the continuity of the place and
involve local residents in the process of conservation. It places more
attention to the interests and demands of local communities and throws
light on the social quality in living heritage conservation. As Fairclough
(2001) argued conservation is no longer an ‘outside’ activity as it used to
be in the past. Being part of a sustainable development, the historic
environment is socially embedded and thus, a dynamic and a living set of
systems with room for change (Fairclough, Lambrick, and McNab, 1999)
is needed for conservation. Fairclough stated that sustainability of a
historic environment meant ‘controlling change and choosing directions
that capitalize most effectively on the inheritance from the past’
(Fairclough, 2001, p.24).
But so far, living heritage approach is still in the knowledge‐based
building process, especially in the sense of implementation. Some explicit
regulations have been established to control the physical environment.
For instance, UK law has set that 10 percent of a heritage site is proposed
to be permanently preserved, arresting change as a core of continuity
(United Kingdom’s first Ancient Monuments Act, 1882). However, few
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 70 ‐
legal frameworks or methods have been developed in relation to the
conservation of social ‘values’ of a local community. Living heritage
conservation fails if the physical forms remains but the social attributes
with corresponding activities, diverse life‐styles as well as unique living
atmosphere are disappearing. As commented by Wijesuriya
(unpublished), social functions, community connections and continuity
were three main cultural factors for the identity of living heritage sites,
which also led to their destiny. Mason et al. (2000) criticized that
conservation always fails because the assessment of values and other
contextual issues have not got corresponding professional tools and
analysis methods for implementation.
3.6 Summary of social problems As discussed above on the Living Heritage Sites Program and its living
heritage approach, the importance of living ‘values’ and involvement of
local residents in the process of conservation has been widely addressed.
In the program, many investigations and pilot case studies in the last two
decades have demonstrated that in general the social ‘values’ with
relation to local residents’ daily experiences were key factors in
preserving the authenticity and integrity of living heritage sites.
Especially, the explicit arguments about the living heritage approach
have been proposed based on general social problems and their negative
impacts on the sustainable conservation of living heritage sites. However,
there is no panacea in living heritage conservation. The existing living
heritage approaches indicate potential to appreciate social values and
ameliorate certain social problems, but in general certain social problems
in living heritage sites remains:
1. The fast transformation of life‐style, influenced by the mass tourism
development, in relation to the change of dominant industries and
job opportunities, and the corresponding changes to transportation
systems, services and spatial functions;
Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 71 ‐
2. The breakdown of neighborhoods, in relation to a overwhelming
number of tourist and immigrant and their related services as well
as businesses encroaching in the territory of traditional
neighborhoods. The loss of neighborhood territories leads to less
security and privacy of the living community and the exodus of
indigenous inhabitants;
3. The decrease of social interactions and social networks, in relation
to the reduction of social places and social services for indigenous
inhabitants, resulting in the less social cohesion and collaborative
empowerment on the control of their living environment;
4. The discontinuity of traditions and traditional knowledge, in
relation to the financial inferiority of traditional business compared
with the tourism industry, overwhelming exotic cultural and
communication technology, leading to a decrease in the life chance
diversity and an aged‐society phenomenon;
5. The loss of social identity in relation to the fast socio‐economic
transformation and destruction of social networks, including the
destruction of social associations and a change of traditional land‐
use.
In order to develop an applicable guideline to preserve social quality at a
living heritage site, it is necessary to understand precisely the definition
of social quality and select key social indicators in relation to social
problems summarized above. The next chapter reviews the concept and
composition of social quality in the stream of sociology development. On
the basis of that, it proposes pertinent indicators in response to the
social problems in the process of living heritage conservation and tourism
development.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 72 ‐
4 Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
Based on the in‐depth analysis of the Living Heritage Sites Program,
chapter 3 investigated social problems and related conservation
approaches in a general context. It emphasized the importance of
indigenous inhabitants and communities in terms of maintaining social
‘values’ of living heritage sites. This chapter defines social quality in
precise and selects key social indicators in the context of living heritage
conservation, through a state‐of‐the‐arts literature review and a
comprehensive social study on heritage conservation. It offers a
knowledge base to develop an applicable guideline for living heritage
conservation.
4.1 Growing social concerns on living heritage values
4.1.1 Extension of heritage values The most commonly adopted view of conservation is proposed by Sir
Bernard Fielden: “The object of conservation is to prolong the life of
cultural property and, if possible, to clarify the historic and artistic
messages therein without loss of authenticity”. Other definitions
emerged from it put emphasis on the importance of defining values, in
particular historic and aesthetic values of a heritage site. Thus, cultural,
historic and artistic values have attracted most concerns in heritage
conservation in the last decades. Accordingly, the physical conditions,
which contain these values, became the focus for conservation. More
attention was therefore given to the monumental functions, historic
importance and artistic pleasure of the sites. Meanwhile, less attention
on the linkage between heritage sites and indigenous residents was
perceived.
A broader effort in heritage conservation has been developed since
urban conservation appeared in 1964, when ICOMOS (the International
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 73 ‐
Council on Monuments and Sites) and the Venice Charter was created at
the 2nd International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic
Monuments. The concept and content of conservation have been
extended dramatically through the ratification of a series of international
documents, such as UNESCO’s Convention for Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972) and its Operational Guidelines,
Recommendations concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role
of Historic Areas (UNESCO 1976, Nairobi), and Charter for the
Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas (ICOMOS, 1987) etc.
Applied conservation of the living environment sheds light on the
comprehensive values of heritage sites and plays an important role in the
process of city revitalization. Economists taking the values of a heritage
site as a scarce commodity, the recent boom in cultural tourism confirms
with its socio‐economic merits. The preserved cities and districts
demonstrate special attractions to both citizens and tourists through
vivid socio‐cultural and natural expressions. The living values, such as
traditions, life‐styles and community atmosphere are becoming an
important part of the overall merits of a living heritage site. However,
conflicts arise in the process of conservation and tourism development,
some of which are becoming alarming with focus on these living values. It
inspires growing attention on the improvement of social quality for the
interest of maximizing heritage values and maintaining a more
harmonious and continuous living environment. Much attention is
required.
4.1.2 Social capital in living heritage conservation Social capital was first proposed by Lyda Judson Hanifan (1916 p130) to
describe ‘those tangible substances that count for most in the daily lives
of people’. The work of Putnam (1993, 2000) brought the notion of
‘social capital’ up to the front of recent research. He defined social
capital as connections among individuals, i.e. social networks and norms
of reciprocity and trustworthiness. He believed that social networks of
reciprocal relations enhance ‘civic virtue’. There is much evidence
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 74 ‐
showing that social capital contributes to lower crime rates, better health,
higher educational achievement and more tolerance and trust in a
community (Jacobs, 1961; Bourdieu, 1983; Coleman, 1988; Putnam, 1993,
2000; Beem, 1999; Field, 2003). Furthermore, the World Bank claimed
that social cohesion, produced from social capital is essential for
economic prosperity in a sustainable way. Social capital helps to bring
institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity
of a society's social interactions together (The World Bank, 1999). The
wide recognition of social capital encourages a growing concern on social
studies in various domains, in particular living heritage conservation.
Taking the spirit of Robert Costanza and Brendan Fisher et al40, social
capital is a significant resource for the development of a society. It refers
to networks and social norms to facilitate cooperative action (Putnam
1995), and it is social‐policy oriented with emphasis on community
shared values and norms. As stated by Smith (2007), social capital helps
citizens to resolve collective problems more easily by empowering
institutional mechanisms to ensure compliance with collectively desirable
behavior; it also advances the community more smoothly when residents
are trusting and trustworthy; and allows a better sharing of information.
Therefore, social capital reinforces the living values as mentioned above
in the process of living heritage conservation.
4.1.3 Development of social concerns With the support of technological development, the spectrum of human
activities has been expanding without precedent. This arouses growing
attention on social studies in a wide range of research. The recent socio‐
40 In the conference of University of Vermont, researchers representing multiple social and natural science and humanities disciplines, Robert Costanza and Brendan Fisher et al. proposed four capitals to offer opportunities in order to satisfy human needs, i.e. social capital, human capital, built capital and natural capital. (detailed explanation refers to the article: Quality of life: An approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well‐being, in Ecological Economics 61(2007), p.271.
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 75 ‐
cultural, socio‐economic and socio‐ecological studies reflect the close
interrelationship of social studies with other domains. Heritage
conservation is one of the most significant discussions in the socio‐
cultural movement. It is based on the interdisciplinary knowledge of
natural and social science, and has exerted great influence on the quality
of life (QOL) as well as the built environment. As widely recognized,
conservation of heritage sites contributes to the cultural diversity and
traditional continuity at the global level. However, ‘it lagged behind in its
involvement in the larger debate on the quality of life and environment’
(Frank Matero41). The discussion on conservation of Lijiang ancient town
and other living heritage sites has demonstrated the serious social
problems in line with dominating tourism and economic drivers, which
has led to the abandonment of living values in the long run.
In particular, living heritage characterized with active involvement of
local residents, demonstrates unprecedented ties of heritage resources
with contemporary social life. Not only because the unique values are
born with the characteristics of the local life, but because its commodity
merits also fundamentally rely on the living images. However, due to the
sluggish force of substance‐oriented conservation and the overlook of
social desires of local people, depopulation and transformation of land‐
use become the most critical challenges for sustainable conservation,
which leads to the irreversible destruction of overall values at a living
heritage site. Thus, it is a prerequisite to integrate concerns on QOL and
social quality in the process of conservation.
41 Published in the preface for the 4th Annual US/ICOMOS International Symposium proceedings, p.vii.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 76 ‐
Physical Environment/values
Natural environment
Built environment
Living elements/values
Traditions, life styles
Cultural expressions
Tourists
Conservation Local residents
Strong interactions
Normal interactions
Weak interactions
Figure 41: The relationships among conservation, tourism development and contemporary life
4.2 Social quality in living heritage conservation In order to have a better understanding of the social problems faced in
the conservation of living heritage sites, a comprehensive study on social
quality is necessary. The in‐depth debate on social quality began with the
recognition of an imbalanced development of economic and social policy
in Europe. The social problems related to inadequate social services and
participation, and dominance of economic and monetary policy arouses
growing concerns from a wide range of social scientists, economists and
politicians. The ‘Amsterdam Declaration on Social Quality’ (1997) and
continuous studies carried out by the European Foundation on Social
Quality (EFSQ) have shown consensus on the important measures of
social quality in four perspectives: socio‐economic security, social
cohesion, social inclusion and social empowerment. The following
chapter will interpret the measures of social quality in the context of
living heritage conservation and propose a practical framework of social
indicators for future conservation policy.
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 77 ‐
4.2.1 Definition of social quality Social quality is defined as ‘the extent to which citizens are able to
participate in the social and economic life of their communities
under conditions which enhance their well being and individual
potential’ (Beck et al., 1997, p. 3). It is also interpreted as ‘the extent to
which the quality of social relations promotes both participation
and personal development’ (Walker et al., 2003, p. 6). Given the
complexity of social systems, it is widely accepted that the essence of
social quality is realized via interactions at a cross‐scale approach
(Habermas, 1968; Lockwood, 1999; Levin, 1999; Walker et al., 2003).
Philips and Berman (2003) further addressed social quality at two levels:
social quality at the community/group level, represented by self‐
realizations of community members; and social quality at the society
level, manifested through relationship between communities with
collective identities and the nation state (see Figure 4‐2). They are also
defined in this research as introverted and extroverted social quality.
Figure 42: Social quality at two levels: Individual interactions at the community level and interactions of collective identities at the
society level
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 78 ‐
4.2.2 Internal and external social quality Living heritage sites, as special communities or groups with ‘Outstanding
Universal Values’ (UNESCO criteria for World Heritage sites, 1972),
represent unique collective identities and contribute to the cultural
diversity and traditional continuity of the world. These unique collective
identities with corresponding physical features and heritage values are
analyzed and recognized at the global level, and therefore have become
prime objectives in the process of conservation. For instance, in Lijiang
ancient town, the unique townscape, architecture, and natural features
are priorities in conservation, and so are the Gassho‐style houses and
farming landscape in Ogimachi village (see Chapter 5). They are
appreciated and shared as common treasures of human beings, and thus
open accessibility is the main concern in realizing their social quality at
the society level (Ostrom 1990). With increasing tourism development,
the external social quality of a living heritage site in relation to promoting
regional economic security and enhancing community identities has been
attached with great importance in the process of conservation. On the
contrary, the internal social quality, demonstrated by the interactions of
local residents and heritage resources, is falling into neglect in
conservation. It is vital for both self‐realization of local residents and the
formation of collective identities to realize extroverted social quality.
Therefore, this paper will focus on the characteristics linked with internal
social quality in a context of living heritage conservation. It reflects a
deep interrelationship between heritage resources and local population
in a dynamic way and plays an essential role in the sustainable
development.
4.2.3 Framework of social quality Based on the collaborative explorations in 14 European countries under
the framework of the European Foundation on Social Quality and the
involvement of over one hundred scientists and policy makers, four
conditional factors are proposed to evaluate social quality (Beck, 1997;
Maesen et al. 2000; Walker et al. 2003), i.e. socio‐economic security,
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 79 ‐
social inclusion, social cohesion and social empowerment (see Figure 4‐3).
Philips and Berman (2003) further interpreted them in the context of
ethno community. And in 2005, the Network Indicators of Social Quality
published its final report, in which 95 social indicators were listed (see
Annex 2) to measure social quality via elaborating the above four
conditional factors with 18 domains and 49 sub‐domains (Maesen and
Walker 2006). The big number of indicators is European‐standard
oriented and they require refinement and reduction for policy making in
the future. However, they offer good reference to interpret social quality
in the context of a living heritage site.
This research adopts four dimensions of social quality mentioned above
to create policy‐oriented social indicators in the conservation process of
living heritage sites. They can be described as follows:
• Socio‐economic security is the threshold of material
requirements in a community. It is directly related to the
substantial environment of people’s daily existence, such as
housing, employment, health care, social services and so on to
prevent from material deprivation.
• Social cohesion refers to the processes and infrastructures used
to support social networks, which strengthen solidarity and
identity in a community. It is related to both social capital (World
Bank, 1998) and social integration (Klitgaarde and Fedderke,
1995). In a living heritage site, the traditions and cultural and
spiritual bonds play a significant role in underpinning solidarity.
However, social cohesion should be addressed alongside the
evolution of social structures. It is necessary to create and
support new networks and infrastructures to fit with
contemporary social‐economic conditions, and this is vital for
both social development and individual self‐realization.
Moreover, social cohesion promotes the foundation of social
networks.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 80 ‐
• Social inclusion focuses on the belonging and membership of
community residents to the above networks. In a living heritage
site, the social inclusion of indigenous residents is particularly
important for the continuity of their intangible heritage. As
stated by Delanty (1998), a community with only weak
community inclusion will not have the resources to be
meaningfully included in society in its own right.
• Empowerment is defined as the capacity of participation in social,
economic, political and cultural processes. Empowerment
enables residents to control their own lives and to make choices
equally. The empowerment could come from normative
structures and associational networks (Woolcock, 1998:172) and
the positive sense of stakeholder.
As summarized above, the framework of social quality actually
represents two dimensions: the individual‐based realization, including
socio‐economic security and social inclusion, which has been discussed in
the research on quality of life; the formation of collective identities,
including the recognition of social cohesion and empowerment, which is
related to the quality of society (Walker and Maesen, 2003). The quality
of society is determined by the interaction of individuals within social
systems, and quality of life is represented by the living conditions of local
residents, which is also the basis to achieve good social quality. In a living
heritage site, local residents represent, carry and maintain the genuine
values of the site, meanwhile they are social beings with desires to be
met along with development. The improvement of social quality allows
conservation and development to exist in long term harmony. The
following reviews previous study on quality of society and QOL, and their
corresponding indicators, in order to select meaningful social indicators
to develop a social‐oriented design‐tool for living heritage conservation.
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 81 ‐
Figure 43: Framework to evaluate social quality42
4.3 Studies on quality of life Quality of life (QOL) is an important concept in social science dealing with
individual self‐realization and it is measured by the extent to which
human needs are met. The improvement of long‐term QOL is taken as
the primary social policy for sustainable development (Layard, 2005). In
contrast with internal social quality, which relies on interactions in a
living heritage site, QOL refers to the overall assessment of human
experience as individuals. It has been developed as a sound methodology
to measure diverse areas in the living world. QOL approaches, as 42 after Walker et al. (2003, p.29)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 82 ‐
developed recently for example by ZUMA of the University of Mannheim
(Berger‐Schmitt, 2001) and the European Foundation on the
Improvement of Working and Living Conditions in Dublin (Fahey et al.,
2002), represent a large series of indicators and domains, which tried to
cover all aspects of life. It offers a well‐defined basis to develop social
indicators in living heritage conservation.
4.3.1 Indicators for QOL The concept of QOL was widely adopted by US in the middle of 1940s to
describe a good material life using indicators like the ownership of
houses, cars and so on. Walker and Maesen (2003) stated that in the
early research of QOL, the US and UK took the lead and focused on
satisfaction, happiness and well‐being and health as well as health‐
related issues respectively. The later research of the World Health
Organization (WHO) expanded the indicators of QOL with physical,
emotional and social well‐being. Recent research encompassed both
objective and subjective dimensions, and thus the primary issues in QOL
are narrowed down to their measurements. As proposed by Robert
Costanza and Brendan Fisher et al (2007), there are two basic approaches
to measuring QOL: one is ‘quantifiable social or economic indicators
which reflect the extent to which human needs are met’, and the other is
termed as ‘subjective well‐being (SWB)’ which is based on individual
sensations, such as identity, security, happiness, and fulfillment.
However, the distinction between objective indicators and SWB is an
illusory (Robert Costanza and Brendan Fisher et al, 2007), because the
SWB is highly dependant on the extent, to which objective indicators of
human needs are satisfied (see Figure 4‐4).
4.3.2 Meeting human needs in living heritage conservation
Based on literature reviews of “Hierarchy of needs” by Maslow (1943),
the “Matrix of Human Needs” by Max‐Neef (1991), “Need Hierarchy
Measure of Life Satisfaction” by Sirgy et al. (1995), “Quality of Life
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 83 ‐
Inventory” by Frisch (1998), the basic hierarchy of human needs could be
interpreted at ten different categories. These range from primary
subsistence, reproduction, security, to the needs for communication,
leisure, participation, identity, spirituality and creativity up to the highest
level of needs for self‐fulfillment. Alderfer's Hierarchy of Motivational
Needs (1972) and revised version of Maslow’s theory by Mathes (1981);
Huitt (2004) proposed to divide human needs into three groups
according to their requirements to the living environment, i.e. the
achievements of substance, reproduction and security which are
dependant on the provisions of material environment; communication,
participation, leisure and identity are related to both material and social
environment; and the sense of spirituality, creativity and self‐fulfillment
belongs to SWB and contributes to the growth of human nature. This
paper attempts to interpret various human needs in a living heritage
context, and based on that proposes a comprehensive series of social
indicators for QOL (see Figure 4‐4).
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 84 ‐
Figure 44: Quality of Lifeinteraction between human needs and subjective wellbeing43
To meet these substantial needs, the physical environment plays a vital
role in providing clean air, water and sufficient food, shelter and other
ecological capitals. It requires a livable environment without severe
pollution but with accessibility to substantial services in a living heritage
site. Reproduction reflects the desires for continuity from both tangible
and intangible points of view. In a living heritage site, it includes the
maintenance of stable population, environment, family structures, and
unique traditional expressions. Security is composed of basic
achievements of social and economic needs. In line with the socio‐
security domains proposed by Keizer et al. (2003), financial resources,
housing and environment, health and care, work and education
opportunities contribute to the sense of security in a broad sense. In
43 Robert Costanza and Brendan Fisher et al, 2007 p.269 in the Journal of Ecological Economics, 61.
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 85 ‐
particular at a living heritage site, Feilden and Jokilehto (1998) proposed
four pillars of financial revenue from heritage resources and conservation
process, i.e. tourism, commerce, use and amenities. It is the status of
being ‘in use’ and having amenities for local residents that distinguishes a
living heritage site from archaeological sites and monuments. The various
heritage recourses at a living site are still actively involved in the people’s
daily circumstance and constitute a livable place. Tourism and
commercial resources offer better finance and employment
opportunities, which are essential to local development and economic
security. Besides, sufficient doctors and access to qualified hospitals and
schools contribute to the social security of local residents. The above‐
mentioned needs – substance, reproduction and security – are basic
requirements for a livable environment. On the basis of these, higher
level of needs, such as communication, leisure, participation and identity
could be developed. Their fulfillment relies on the interactions among
local residents and the extent to which residents have access to
resources and services. It requires proper places and events to
accommodate leisure or communication activities and the willingness to
share and participate as a member in local associations. At a living
heritage site, the unique spatial characters and traditions developed in
long‐term interactions between the environment and local residents
demonstrate special advantages in fulfilling the aforementioned needs.
These features should be further enhanced instead of being degraded
with contemporary tourism development. The preservation of the spatial
qualities and the continuity of traditions, neighborhoods and religions
are of importance in fulfilling the higher level of human needs. Likewise,
the sense of identity, self‐fulfillment and other types of subjective well
being are derived from proper conservation of the physical environment
and the promotion of social inclusion. On basis of proper interpretations
of required resources in a living heritage context, indicators of QOL are
developed to qualify and quantify the requirements for various human
needs.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 86 ‐
In the process of living heritage conservation, tourism development has
exerted great influence in QOL at various perspectives. It is important to
include both the positive and negative aspects of tourism in the process
of conservation. Choi and Sirakaya (2006) proposed some indicators
through their survey in the interest of sustainable community tourism.
They employed the Delphi method44, which is a well‐known qualitative
and structured technique for predicting future events by reaching
consensus (Poulsen, 1920, Woudenberg, 1991, Ramirez and Hoehner et
al., 2006) and concluded that ‘satisfaction and attitude of hosts and
guests’ and ‘community health and safety’ are the most important social
dimensions for sustainable tourism. Corresponding issues were claimed
in their research, among which the most agreeable social concerns are
(based on ‘soundness’ in Annex 4) ‘host community satisfaction/attitude
toward tourism development’, ‘stress in visitors/host relationship’,
‘Resident/non‐resident ownership of homes’, ‘degradation/erosion of
natural and cultural resource’, ‘litter/pollution (air, water, etc.)’, ‘overcrowding’, ‘congestion’ and ‘loss of traditional lifestyle and
knowledge via modernization’ etc (see Table 4‐1). These factors should
be integrated in a comprehensive framework for conservation policy‐
making.
Human Needs Required Resources Indicators
Subsistence Food, water, shelter, and other vital ecological capitals
Sufficient and equal access to necessary resources and services
Reproduction
Stable native population, continuity of family structure and traditions
Number of native people Proportion of female and male, young and old population Average number of people per family
44 The Delphi process allows investigators to engage experts in a systematic method of consensus development. Dependent on the specific purpose, it enrolls experts from different backgrounds, narrows and refines the scope of agreed‐upon information to reach consensus. The Delphi method was widely employed in defining indicators.
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 87 ‐
Security
Financial resources, house and environment, health and care, work and education opportunities, safety from violence and criminals
Average GDP Percentage of unemployment Percentage of houses ownership Crime rates Public surveillance Number of doctors/clinic per person Number of kindergarten/school per proper‐aged child
Privacy Clear division of boundaries and territories
Boundaries of households Territories of neighborhoods Sense of privacy
Communication
Sociable places, cultural/traditional bonds, neighborhood relationship
Number of community centres and places for local use Quality of community places (access, noise, pollution, comfortableness etc.) Relationship with neighbors Sense of trust
Participation Social networks, local associations
Number of local associations Percentage of involvement of local residents in decision‐making process Range of duties and rights of membership Feeling of inclusion
Leisure
Appealing places, relaxed environment, limited noise, pollutions, activity
Quality of public/semi‐public places (access, noise, pollution, comfortableness etc.) Number of leisure choices Feeling of an easy and relaxed of environment
Identity Unique nature, culture or traditions
Number of remaing traditional/cultural practices Quality of traditional places, important cultural places and monuments Continuity of Land‐use Sense of identity
Spirituality Sense of spirituality
Creativity Sense of creativity
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 88 ‐
Self‐Fulfillment Sense of self‐fulfillment
Table 41: Indicators on Quality of Life, interpreted based on human needs
4.4 Studies on quality of society As explained above, QOL reflects the quality of individual living
conditions, which is the basis for social quality. However, improvement
of QOL alone cannot fully fulfill the sustainable conservation in a living
heritage site, since the values of living heritage are mainly reflected by
collective identities formed by the interactions of individuals, instead of
the individuals themselves. Quality of society indicates the quality of a
group, a community or a society, embracing social solidarity, collective
social welfare and egalitarian aspirations (Phillips, 2003). A high level of
quality of society contributes to the fulfillment of human needs
experienced by individuals, such as the needs for participation and
identity. Walker et al. (2003) claimed that social cohesion and
empowerment are two important dimensions constituting quality of
society.
4.4.1 Social cohesion and corresponding indicators Social cohesion is a long‐established concept in sociology, inherited from
the notion of ‘Gemeinschaft’ and ‘Gesellschaft’ by Tönnes. Berger‐
Schmitt (2002:406) set out a high agreeable definition of social cohesion
in which included ‘the strength of social relations, networks and
associations; a sense of belonging to the same community and ties
that bind with shared values, a common identity and trust among
members; equal opportunities; the extent of disparities, social
cleavages and social exclusion in a society’.
Social cohesion is closely related to the concept of social identity, which
is derived from a perceived membership of social groups (Hogg &
Vaughan, 2002). Tajfel and Turner (1986) discussed three central
indicators in social identity, i.e. categorization, identification and
comparison. Categorization refers to the fact that people can be divided
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 89 ‐
into different groups, based on certain characteristics. However, various
categorizations are not paralleled; instead, they are interwoven and
sometimes overlaid, which depends on the criteria for categorization. In
living heritage sites, indigenous inhabitants, tourists and immigrants are
the basic categorizations in demographic analysis, in order to understand
their use of facilities and behavioral influences with respect to the
environment. Identification includes personal and social identity,
functioning at the same time as two sides of sense of identity. In the
research of social quality of Indigenous community, social identity is
taken as the focal criterion instead of personal identity. Social
interactions play a key role in identification of a living heritage site. As
argued by Jane Jacobs (1961), the social interactions not only fulfill
people’s instant needs, but also help people to understand new
phenomena, to create knowledge and to accustom with new
environments. Comparison is a mechanism to distinguish one group
through comparing with others. They are performing as a dynamic
process to reinforce social cohesion, which helps to maintain a stable
social environment as well as natural surroundings. Moreover, social
cohesion functions like a ‘social glue’ to enhance economic growth and
political stability.
4.4.2 Social empowerment and corresponding indicators
Empowerment emphasizes equality, openness and supportiveness of
institutions to enable people to participate in the decision‐making.
Institutions are humanly devised constrains to structure human
interactions. As Berkes (2003) stated in a broad sense, they are
composed of formal constrains, such as rules, laws, regulations and
constitutions; informal constraints, such as norms of behavior,
conventions and self‐imposed codes of conduct; and their enforcement
features. In a living heritage site, as defined by Lockwood (1999) as
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 90 ‐
meso‐social and micro‐social45 level, the political democracy and right of
citizenship at macro‐social level are out of this research scope. This paper
focuses on the local associations and memberships in relation to be part
of the conservation decision‐making process and to share risks and
benefits. Their manifestations include voluntary associations, mutual
help systems, public surveillance, and wide range of duties and rights in
membership to local population. Therefore, it assumes that the high level
of social cohesion and empowerment lead to a high quality of society at a
living heritage site, which plays an important part in achieving
sustainable development and conservation.
4.4.3 Social indicators Indicators need to be easy to manage, representative and responsive to
changes. Schomaker (1997) implied the features of indicator as SMART:
Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time‐bound. They are
expressed as a relative and nested concept, including different levels of
abstract groups, such as data, parameters, criteria and quality (Turnhout
et al. 2007). Since the early 20th century, William Ogburn has developed
statistical measurements to monitor social trends and changes. The real
social indicator movement dates back to 1960s and aimed to incorporate
the issues of QOL and quality of society into the political decision‐making.
In the last decade, the original function of social indicators as a
monitoring tool was toned down and the focus shifted to the promotion
of general enlightenment, as stated by Joachim Vogel (1997). Meanwhile,
they played an important role as a complement of the dominant
economic indicators, such as GDP in the evaluation system of social
quality. Recently, under the influence of globalization and a new shift of
45 In the book ‘Capitalism and Social Cohesion’ (edited by Gough and Olofsson, 1999), Lockwood distinguished social integration at three levels: macro‐, meso‐ and micro‐ social level. Macro‐ refers to the national institutes with relation to citizenship, meso‐ and micro‐ emphasizes the networks in a region, a community or a neighborhood, with relation to membership.
Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation
‐ 91 ‐
political systems, there is a need for the reconstruction of social
indicators to evaluate the overall social quality in the fast pace of
development.
As discussed above about the social quality, there have been a large
number of indicators developed to represent social quality. This research
selects the key social indicators to measure social quality in response to
the social problems identified in previous chapters. They offer a selective
basis to develop an efficient model in order to evaluate and control social
quality in the context of living heritage conservation. Socio‐economic
security is the basic dimension in social quality, and in living heritage
conservation with mass tourism development, the corresponding
problems are represented by a fast transformation of life‐styles. Local
residents face the challenges in competing with immigrants oriented in
tourism development. At the same time, their security is tampered in the
process of rapid adjustment of social services and social networks, driven
by mass tourism and related industries. Accordingly, the public
surveillance, as an efficient security mechanism actualized by frequent
presence of neighbors (Jacobs, 1961), is damaged. The Privacy of local
residents is threatened in both the household and neighborhood
environment, caused by the loss of visible and invisible boundaries when
a large number of tourists gather in a limited setting. Most substantial
problems are the decline of social interactions in the process of living
heritage conservation, which influence the sense of Communication and
Social Identity. Besides, the identity of a living heritage site is closely
related to their traditions, traditional knowledge and the characteristics
of land‐use, which are developed in the long‐term interactions between
local residents and the natural environment. As the living heritage
approach indicated (discussed in chapter 3), participation is essential in
solving certain social problems in living heritage conservation. The
strength of social associations and memberships represent an organized
participation of local residents in the process of living heritage
conservation. The selected social indicators are listed below (Table 4‐2),
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 92 ‐
which offer an observable, manageable method to develop an efficient
design‐tool to maintain social quality in a living heritage site.
Social quality Social indicators
Socio‐economic
security
• Crime rate
• Job diversity • Service diversity and accessibility • Public surveillance
Privacy
• Boundary of household and in‐between
space
• Boundary of neighborhoods and
communities
Communication
• Relationship with neighbors • Social interactions • Social mobility
Participation
• Memberships
• Social associations • Collective empowerment on environmental
control
Social Identity
• Social networks and relations • Continuity of traditional practice and
knowledge
• Continuity of land‐use
Table 42: Main social indicators in living heritage conservation
The following chapter proposes a model hypothesis, built upon the
analysis of exploratory case study in Lijiang ancient town, generalized
problems by literature study on existed living heritage programs and
approaches, and social quality study in the context of living heritage
conservation. The hypothetic model draws upon the MOP framework
and generalizes the necessary conditions of spatial morphology to foster
high social performance in the process of living heritage conservation. It
will function as an applicable design‐tool in consistent with conservation
guidelines to retain social quality in traditional communities.
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 93 ‐
5 Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Design-tool
Based on the outcomes of the field study in Dayan town (chapter 2),
general problems in existing living heritage projects and approaches
(chapter 3), and selective social indicators in response to the key social
quality in living heritage conservation (chapter 4), this chapter proposes a
model hypothesis aiming to ameliorate the social problems by defining
the social importance of different spatial morphologies within the MOP
framework. It tries to develop an applicable design‐tool for the purpose
of maintaining social quality in the process of living heritage conservation
and tourism development.
5.1 Social study of environment There has been a vast body of socio‐environmental study (Barker, 1951;
Jacobs, 1961; Gans, 1968; Chermayeff and Alexander, 1963; Chermayeff
and Tzonis, 1971; Alexander et al. 1977, Zeisel, 1975; Rapoport, 1976,
1983) By way of field observations, Roger Barker (1951) proposed the
concept of ‘ecological psychology’ to understand the influence of social
settings on behaviors and to identify behavior settings. Later in the
middle 1950s, Hall (1969) defined ‘proxemics’ to describe the
subconscious microspace in human interactions, which is culturally
determined. Jane Jacobs (1961) and Jan Gehl (1987) drew social
attention into the design of street‐life and public space. Gans (1968)
proposed the priority of social planning on the basis of critiques to
‘physical determinism’ in urban planning. He believed that the social and
economic environment is more important than the physical environment.
On this basis, he proposed the concept of a ‘user‐oriented’ approach to
satisfy the needs of local communities. It was supported by Alexander
Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre (1978) and Christopher Alexander (1977). Choi
and Sirakaya (2006) claimed that, socio‐cultural sustainability should
draw upon social capitals with respect to social identity, community
cultural assets, and social cohesiveness in order to allow the indigenous
inhabitants to control their own environment.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 94 ‐
As stated before, conservation of living heritage sites should neither be
static preservation, nor mere restoration of physical features. It should
take serious consideration of the social needs of the indigenous
population, because the nature of a living heritage site defines itself as
more valuable than the accumulation of historic objects or antiques in
the repertoire, as it is a unique and desirable place to live, which
contributes to culture diversity. The ‘values’ of the site are reflected by
both the physical features and its close interaction with indigenous
inhabitants in an evolutionary process. Thus, it is important to conserve
living heritage sites in an integrated approach with social and
environmental studies. Rapoport (1983) stated in a case study in Sudan
that superficial imitation of purely physical form and geometry (round
and conical roofs) without deep appreciation of spatial arrangement
implies less satisfaction for indigenous people. Similarly he highlighted
the failure of Fathy’s village due to the destructive image of traditional
form and material by violating people’s desire for modernity.
The subtle interrelationship between traditional forms and evolving
socio‐environmental requirements need to be understood in a dynamic
context with respect to local desires. As studied by Grimm et al. (2000),
based on the US Long‐Term Ecological Research (LTER)46, and by Yli‐
Pelkonen and Niemela (2005) derived from a Finnish case study, ‘land
use’ is identified as the key to link social and environmental processes.
The changes of ‘land use’ over time are driven by the demands of
conservation and development. They are constrained by environmental
context and influences ecological patterns and processes. Meanwhile the
driving forces and changes of ‘land‐use’ play in a chain reaction with
social activities and attitudes to forward further changes (as seen in
Figure 5‐1). ‘Land‐use’ is analyzed by spatial patterns and spatial
46 LTER is US government supported program to study ‘human‐dominated ecosystems’. It took Central Arizona‐Phoenix and Baltimore as case studies to implement the conceptual framework of urban ecology.
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 95 ‐
functions. Spatial pattern refers to morphology, related to the physical
characteristics and organizations of artifacts. Spatial function denotes the
usage and target audience of a place, which reflects the potential
activities and interactions occurring in the spatial patterns. Thus, ‘Land‐
use’ implies physical morphology and potential operation of living
heritage sites. It is a very sensitive issue in response to time and social
norms, while it accommodates and constrains social activities.
Figure 51: Conceptual scheme of integrating social and environmental factors47
The following section focuses on the spatial patterns and functions of
land‐use in response to social quality in the process of conservation and
development of living heritage sites. In order to understand the
relationship between social requirements of indigenous inhabitants and
physical environment, the research employs the MOP model, i.e.
47 Adapted after Grimm et al. 2000, and Yli‐Pelkonen et al. 2004.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 96 ‐
‘Morphology, Operation, Performance’ developed at Design Knowledge
Systems of TU Delft by Alexander Tzonis (Tzonis et al. 1987) to generalize
a hypothetical model. The model has been applied in several doctorate
researches, such as Fang 1993, Jeng 1995, Bay 2001, Zarzar 2002,
Vyzoviti 2005. It defines relationships between environmental artefacts
and social quality indicators at living heritage sites with the aim to
develop a hypothetic model towards an applicable design tool in the
process of living heritage conservation.
5.2 Linkage between social performance and spatial morphology
5.2.1 Selective social indicators As seen in Dayan town and many other living heritage conservations in
the Living Heritage Sites Program, social problems have widely emerged
in the conservation process in combination with tourism development.
The decline of social quality of a local community results in the exodus of
indigenous inhabitants and the loss of living identity at the sites in the
long run. In order to articulate social quality in traditional communities,
the research selected pertinent social indicators in response to the
existing social problems based on state‐of‐the‐arts reviews (Figure 5‐2).
They offer a measurable basis to evaluate social quality. Moreover, they
illustrate the closely relationship with spatial features, and lead to a
design tool in conservation practices.
The selected social indicators help to understand the social transition of
traditional communities in the process of conservation and tourism
development. Some of the indicators denote certain requirements on the
physical characteristics of living environment. For instance, the
accessibility of daily services indicate the distance and allocation of these
services in relation to local residences; public surveillance requires
connected space with limited access to local neighbourhoods;
boundaries denote clear spatial demarcation; social communication and
association need corresponding places to accommodate certain activities,
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 97 ‐
etc. These social indicators interpret social quality in a measurable
method and give clues to designers or planners to understand the
relationship between physical characteristics and the social requirements
of indigenous inhabitants, which leads to design guidelines for social
sustainability in living communities.
Figure 52: Framework for the interpretation of social indicators
5.2.2 MOP model in living heritage conservation Morphology, Operation and Performance is a model used to represent
architectural knowledge in a given context. In the MOP model, reality is
abstracted into ‘Morphology’ referring to the physical configuration of an
artefact; ‘Operation’ meaning the events and interactions occurring
within the artefact; and ‘Performance’ referring to how the events or
interactions occurring in the artefact affect people. In the context of
living heritage sites, the MOP framework represents as (1) Morphology:
the spatial organization of the built tissue of the given case, (2) Operation:
the patterns of activities, uses and processes that take place within this
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 98 ‐
tissue as constrained by its Morphology, and (3) Performance: the
beneficial or detrimental output ‐ in this case social quality ‐ as
constrained by its Morphology and Operation. In the context of living
heritage conservation, MOP could be interpreted in a conceptual model
as Figure 5‐3.
It is important to identify the logical relationship between morphology,
operation and performance before further analysis. Different from
environmental‐determinism, the environmental configurations and
spatial morphologies preserved or changed for different purposes, do not
sufficiently lead to certain operations in the process of conservation and
development, such as ritual ceremony or social interactions of local
residents. However they offer necessary conditions to accommodate the
potential activities. Likewise, it is not a causal relationship between
operations and performances. The fulfilment of the antecedent helps or
encourages the realization of the consequent, but it is not sufficient to
guarantee the achievement of the consequent. The antecedent provides
necessary, instead of sufficient conditions for the realization of the
consequent.
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 99 ‐
Figure 53: Concept MOP model for high social quality living heritage conservation
‘Performance’ in this research is defined as social performance, i.e. social
quality of a traditional community. It is interpreted with social indicators
as stated above and represents social norms among indigenous
inhabitants. ‘Operation’ refers to various activities occurring in the
process of conservation as well as tourism development. In particular,
tourism development introduces new actors and activities, interacting
with those from indigenous neighbourhoods. ‘Operation’ is closely
related to ‘values’ and interventions at a living heritage site. Value
identification defines potential functions in relation to physical
environment of the living site. Interventions are driven by the benefits of
different actors to reinforce, degrade or change the corresponding
‘values’ and functions of the living heritage site. Traditional rituals and
festivals are the unique ‘operations’ of the traditional community, which
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 100 ‐
links to the establishment of social norms among indigenous inhabitants
and plays an essential role in social cohesion. However, this research is
more interested in the informal ‘operations’ of local residents, which
represent the social quality from an evolutionary point of view and
contribute to the sustainable development of the living site.
‘Morphology’ in the living heritage conservation denotes spatial patterns
and functions. Single construction, path and open space are used as basic
categories to analyze spatial morphology. They and their combinations
offer necessary spatial conditions to accommodate different target users
and their respective activities, which are represented in various spatial
functions and exert great influence on the social quality performance of a
living community.
As summarized in Figure 5‐3, the following research tries to develop a
design tool in the form of guidelines through the MOP model. The
relationship among Morphology, Operation and Performance can be
interpreted in the ‘if –then’ form, as argued by Sophia Vyzoviti (2005) in
either descriptive or prescriptive models. The descriptive model is based
on environmental observations as conducted in Dayan case through field
study. If certain spatial morphology is given, then corresponding
activities occur, and then certain social quality will be achieved
consequently, as studied through questionnaires in Dayan case. The
other way around, in order to produce reliable design guidelines with
aims to retain social quality, this research employs the prescriptive model
as follow:
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 101 ‐
Logical inference MOP model Descriptions
If want to achieve ‘Performance’ Social norms – social
quality
Then it is necessary to
have
‘Operation’ Activities or
interactions
Then it is necessary to
have/forbid
‘Morphology’ Spatial functions and
patterns
Table 51: Logical inference of MOP model
5.3 Hypothetic model in response to social performance
5.3.1 Evolutionary understanding on spatial morphology
As stated above, spatial morphology denotes physical characteristics and
spatial organizations of the site. In order to understand the morphology
of the space in the transition of a traditional living community, it is
essential to study their evolving functions. Spatial functions serve as the
intrinsic driver of physical characteristics and organizations of different
places, which accommodate various activities. The traditional functions
of different environmental configurations leave idiographic marks during
their long‐term interactions with the socio‐cultural environment.
Nevertheless, their contemporary functions indicate the emerging
desires of local population along with the socio‐economic transformation,
such as tourism‐related functions. As stated by Feilden and Jokilehto
(1998) that functions are relative social attributions of the qualities of
objects, which are deeply rooted in social setting and change over time.
The spatial functions in a living heritage site have undergone various
kinds of modifications aligned with different historic periods. ‘Such
accumulated changes have themselves become part of its historical
character and material substance’, which endures ‘the artistic or
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 102 ‐
aesthetic conception of the builders, and of historical testimonies and
associated cultural values, both past and present’ (Feilden and Jokilehto,
1998:14). It confirms with the conservation concept of Camillo Boito (in
the Italian Charter of Restoration, 1893), who has foreseen the necessity
of indispensable modern interventions and respected the
superimposition of multiple layers.
5.3.2 Analysis framework of operations As defined in the MOP model, operation refers to various activities and
usages occurring in different space. This research proposed a framework
to analyze the operations of spatial configurations according to target
users in the process of conservation and tourism development (see Table
1‐1). It helps to understand the mutual influences of local residents and
tourists, and further identifies the requirements for promoting social
interactions among the local residents. The framework suggests
classifying spatial configurations into single constructions, paths, and
open spaces, which constrain activities in certain morphology, i.e. point,
linear and patch types of space. The three types of spatial configurations
are analyzed in two categories, for local residents and for tourists. Each
spatial configuration consists of various functions and potential activities.
The concept of ‘paths’ is borrowed from Kevin Lynch (1960), which ’are
the channels along which the observer customarily, occasionally, or
potentially moves. They may be streets, walkways, transit lines,
canals, railroads‘. Single construction constrains activities within a limited and static place. Whereas, open space refers to plotted space
defined by constructions or pathways, which allows more dynamic
interactions and flows, such as plazas in different shapes and scales, as
well as extended places along pathways. Since this research is devoted to
the social quality of a living community, thus, this research mainly
concerns the exterior environment, where various activities of
indigenous inhabitants and tourists interact and influence each other.
Discussions on interior environment of single constructions are
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 103 ‐
eliminated, which has been widely addressed in studies on interior
renovation of heritage buildings.
For Local residents ‐ community‐based identification
For Tourists ‐ Expert‐based identification
Single constructions
Residents
Religious buildings
Community centres
Facilities: grocery shops, clinics, restaurants, laundry shops, schools, hardware stores, post offices, etc.
Traditional residents/houses
Historic monuments
Constructions with specific aesthetic or archaeological values
Facilities: information centre, post offices, restaurants, souvenir shops, hospitals etc.
Paths
Main roads linking with other towns for the purposes of working and regional services, such as hospitals, schools, etc.
Streets/walkways linking with work or daily necessary services, such as shopping for food, laundry, reparation, etc.
Walkways/canals for sports, entertainment, communications, etc.
Main roads linking with public transportation terminals and other towns
Streets/walkways/canals linking between tourism attractions
Walkways/canals for exploration, entertainment, and relaxation, etc.
Open spaces
Community plaza/park
Enlarged places along streets, river bank
Private/community parking lots
Natural surroundings
Plaza/parks/enlarged places with distinguished aesthetic, historic, archaeological or artistic values
Public parking lots
Natural surroundings
Table 52: Framework to analyze functions of different spatial configurations
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 104 ‐
Table 5‐2 indicates the potential operations, i.e. various activities and
usages in relation to different spatial configurations. The overlapped
usages are demonstrated in each type of spatial configuration, which
implies that interactions between indigenous inhabitants and tourists
occur widely in traditional living communities in the process of
conservation and development. The interactions are inevitable under the
circumstances that tourism development is an important economic
support for living heritage sites. However, some of the interactions may
not be desirable for indigenous inhabitants and in the long run, some
may lead to severe social problems of traditional living communities,
which results in the loss of ‘Universal Outstanding Values’ and the failure
of living heritage conservation. Thus, a model to understand the
relationship between spatial morphology and social quality in the living
community is essential to its sustainable development.
5.3.3 Model to interpret social quality Drawing from the evidences in Dayan case study as well as other living
heritage conservation programs in chapter 2 and 3, and referring to key
social indicators, abstracted through existing literatures on social quality
studies in chapter 4, a model is proposed below with aims to generalize
the spatial morphology in relation to their contributions to social quality
of indigenous inhabitants in living heritage sites. It brings in the
descriptive inference of a MOP model, which offers a framework to
analyze diverse operations and potential social capitals of different
spatial morphology in a living environment from an evolutionary point of
view (Table 5‐3).
Based upon the analysis of basic spatial operations, spatial morphology in
the model is drawn from the different combinations of the three types of
physical configurations for different target users. This dissertation is
interested in the interactions between indigenous inhabitants and
tourists in a living community, thus spatial morphologies of pure tourist
attractions are eliminated in this discussion. Accessibility is introduced as
a key factor related to potential operations through constraining
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 105 ‐
activities of different actors, in particular the interactions between local
residents and tourists in living heritage sites. This model indicates the
heterogeneity of spatial morphology in response to various operations,
and helps to understand the contributions of spatial morphologies to the
social quality of indigenous inhabitants at living heritage sites. At the
same time, the model suggests constraints of various interventions in
order to retain the social quality in the process of conservation and
tourism development.
Legends
Tolerance: 1 stands for the lowest level of tolerance for functional changes
1, 2, ..., 9
SL: single construction for local use
ST: single construction for tourism use
PL: path for local use PT: path for tourism use
OL: open space for local use (private to semi‐private space)
OT: open space for tourism use (semi‐public to public space)
Accepted Tolerance to
function changes
Morphology description
IllustrationsAccessibilit
y Contributions to social quality
1 SL and its visible or invisible territory
Limited to the owners
Security and boundary of household
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 106 ‐
2 SLs, its access‐PL and semi‐private space in‐between
Limited to residents in the neighborhood
public surveillance,
meeting neighbors
3
SLs with its access‐PL and OL (courtyards) defined by SLs or PLs
Limited to residents in the neighborhood
public surveillance, social communications,
boundary of neighborhoods
neighborhood accessible service
4
neighborhoods and OL shared by different neighborhoods, connected with PLs
Limited to residents in the blocks
Public surveillance, boundary of blocks,
social activities, community accessible services
5 STs mixed with SLs connected by PT
Open to limited number of tourists
Broaden social interactions, Loss of privacy
6 STs mixed in SLs connected by PLs, with OL‐OTs
Open to limited number of tourists
Broaden social interactions, loss of privacy and security
7 STs with access‐PTs and OTs
Open to the public
Service accessibility,
Public gathering
Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool
‐ 107 ‐
8 Living community with access PT
Open to the public
Service Accessibility
Territory Identity
Table 53: Model to interpret social quality in relation to spatial morphology
The above model indicates how tolerant different spatial morphologies
are to functional changes in terms of maintaining social quality at a living
heritage site. The places with target users of indigenous inhabitants
exclusively, such as residential buildings, neighborhood paths and semi‐
public open spaces in neighborhoods and blocks (spatial morphology 1 to
4) play an important role in terms of enhancing social privacy, security
and communications in a living community. With respect to social quality,
these places with less tolerance for non‐local uses should be given
priority in conservation. Corresponding changes of spatial functions and
accessibility should be limited. For instance, facilities in traditional
neighbourhood territories should be limited to the use of local residents.
The tolerance to changes needs to be studied in the specific context. In
addition, the spatial quality in terms of noise level, visual intrusion, and
overcrowding should be managed by careful organization of tourist paths
and corresponding facilities to avoid as much as possible the disturbance
to the daily life of local residents. If priority is given to tourism and
tourism‐related development in these spatial morphologies, it will
decrease their potential as sociable places for local interactions, which
may lead to the degradation of overall social quality.
The interactions between local residents and tourists are inevitable.
Besides the spatial constraints, social activities are bonded within a
certain temporal frame. For instance, some places are used for
traditional festivals once a year but other places are used for daily
communication; some paths are taken as morning exercise by local
residents; some street corners are gathering places for afternoon
chitchat. It is essential to understand the functions and related schedules
of activities in a living environment, in order to balance local
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 108 ‐
requirements for social life and needs from tourism development. Most
current conservation programs merely focus on isolated environmental
configurations: historic constructions, scenic paths or plazas. Residential
buildings and blocks are taken as background tissues in the process of
conservation and tourism development. Little attention is given to the
social functions of these places in relation to indigenous inhabitants.
Based on the general observations and literature on social studies, spatial
morphology 1‐4, especially 3 and 4 are essential for retaining social
quality of indigenous inhabitants in the traditional community.
In addition, a good mix of expert‐based and community‐based
approaches for value identification helps to define physical settings from
both spatial and temporal dimensions and offers a critical basis for
implying proper interventions to maximize positive interactions and
minimize disturbances. Traditional activities and customs, such as
festivals and daily rituals, should be included in the running schedule of
facilities and businesses on sites. Meanwhile, according to different
functions for different target users, the spatial patterns require certain
environmental parameters to maximize their social performances. The
standard of environmental requirements is outside the scope of this
research. The research suggests that more case studies could be
undertaken with on‐site measurements and subjective surveys in relation
to ASHRAE Standard (1992).
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 109 ‐
6 Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village A field study at Ogimachi village48 is employed in this chapter to test the
above hypothetic model. It examines the positive impacts of bottom‐up
and community‐driven conservation methods and constrained spatial
morphology on social quality of the living community as a successful
instance. This chapter affirms with the model in key spatial
characteristics contributing to the social quality in comparison with
Lijiang ancient town. The embodiment of social indicators is highlighted
and suggestions are put forward as to the current conservation policies
and planning for better social quality in the process of living heritage
conservation.
6.1 Reason to choose Ogimachi village in Shirakawa-go area
‘The historic villages of Shriakawa‐go and Gokayama ‐ Traditional houses
in Gassho Style’ were inscribed as a World Heritage site in December
1995. The Shirakawa‐go and Gokayama areas are surrounded by the
steep mountains of the Chubu region in the central of Japan, with
average height of 1500 meters. They are confined to narrow valleys
connected by the Sho River. Their geographic location made them quite
isolated to the outside world with limited access until the 1950s.
Therefore, they are referred as ‘the last unexplored area’ remaining in
Japan and have developed unique culture and social lifestyles, derived
from the religion, Jodo Shinshu.
48 The figures and tables in this chapter are drawn from data obtained in field surveys and observations. Those not otherwise indicated belong to the author.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 110 ‐
Figure 61: Bird view of Ogimachi village (taken from Northern mountain)
Figure 62: Map of Ogimachi Village49
49 Source: Saito and Inaba, 1996, Appendix‐3b‐1
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 111 ‐
The World Heritage site is composed of three historic villages, i.e.
Ogimachi, Ainokura and Suganuma villages, which are physically
separated but hold similar features as living historic settlements, a
harmonious blend of Gassho‐style houses and farming landscape. Among
them, Ogimachi village is the largest in terms of population and acreage,
consisting of 148 households, with a population of 608, and an inhabited
area of 45.6 ha50. It has been chosen because it shares similarities with
Lijiang ancient town in four main aspects: they are both listed as UNESCO
World Heritage sites in 1997 and 1995 respectively; they are located in
comparably isolated environments with defined communities; they have
been populated by indigenous people with unique traditional cultures;
and they have developed a tourism‐based economy in relation to
traditional living environment.
Differing from Lijiang, the preservation of Ogimachi village was initiated
spontaneously by the indigenous residents and remains still in the
control of local community so far. ‘Kumi’ as a special mutual help
organization in Ogimachi village plays a significant role in carrying on
folk‐arts and preservation activities, which offers a deep insight on the
impact of the community‐based approach in conservation policy. The
balance between the stable development of traditional social life and a
booming tourism industry makes Ogimachi village very interesting for
this research to test the hypothetic model proposed in chapter 5, as a
successful case in maintaining high social quality in relation to specific
spatial organizations.
50 Data resource: Dec, 2003
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 112 ‐
Inhabited Area (Ha)
Population (1994)
Households (1994)
Households (1870s)
Ogimachi 45.6 634 152 99 Ainokura 18.0 90 27 47 Suganuma 4.4 40 8 13
Table 61: Comparison of three historic villages in acreage and population51
6.2 Comparison with Dayan town Dayan town and Ogimachi village are both inscribed as UNESCO World
Heritage sites by the virtue of traditional human settlements with
outstanding architectural ensembles and landscape, representing
harmonious human interaction with the environment. They are located
in comparably remote districts within a scenic environment, screened by
mountain ranges and crossed by waterways. Their core protected areas
are comparable in geographic scale. However Dayan town has been
experiencing dramatic urban sprawl compared with Ogimachi village
because of the fact that Ogimachi village is strictly limited by its natural
boundaries (Hakusan mountain range and Sho river), while Dayan town
has big expansion potential especially to the southeast. As required for
protection as World Heritage sites, the concept of a buffer zone has been
applied in both Dayan town and Ogimachi village. However, the
definition of buffer zone for Dayan town differs between the local
authorities i.e. 172.6 Ha and the UNESCO World Heritage inscription i.e.
3.8 Square kilometers (380 Ha). This is probably due to the desire for
development and different approaches of value assessments. Dayan
town is well limited to the northwest by mountains; therefore the urban
sprawl spreads mainly towards the southeast directions and as a matter
of fact, the new town has merged with the old Dayan town without
clearly demarcation. On the other hand, Ogimachi village is well limited
51 Data adopted from Saito and Inaba (1996). Conservation plan in attachment 5‐1 (Saito and Inaba, 1996).
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 113 ‐
by natural boundaries and maintain a consistent buffer zone. The new
constructions on the other side of the river or mountains limits their
impacts on the heritage site (see Figure 6‐3).
Figure 63: Landuse plan of Dayan and Ogimachi to the same scale
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 114 ‐
Dayan town in Lijiang
ancient town (2002)
Ogimachi village in
Shirakawa‐go (1996)
Core protected area 56.8 Ha 45.6 Ha
Occupied Land area 143.6 Ha (2002) 45.6 Ha (2003)
Population 8250 (data in 2002) in the core protected area
608 (data in 2003)
Inscribed as UNESCO World Heritage site
Inscribed in 1997,
fitting criteria ii, iv and v52
Inscribed in 1995,
fitting criteria iv and v
Number of tourists 3 million per year (2001)
1.5 million per year (2006)
Indigenous inhabitants Naxi Minority people Local descendants
Dominating religion Dongba Religion Jodo Shinshu Religion
Dominating economy Tourism Tourism
Table 62: Comparison of basic status between Dayan town and Ogimachi village
Being historic settlements, Dayan town and Ogimachi village are both
populated with indigenous inhabitants, who share a single religion over a
long history. They are both evolved with one dominant culture,
represented by unique traditions, life‐styles and ideology in response to
52 To be included on the World Heritage List, sites must be of outstanding universal value and meet at least one out of ten selection criteria. These criteria are explained in the ‘Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention’. Criteria ii: to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town‐planning or landscape design; Criteria iv: to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history; Criteria v: to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land‐use, or sea‐use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change.
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 115 ‐
their living environments. Their exclusive community life and traditions
are valuable assets and endow the living heritage sites with special
charms. Since being inscribed as World Heritage sites, they have become
remarkable tourist attractions. As a consequence, tourism as well as
tourism‐related industries turned to be dominant economy of the sites.
The overwhelming number of tourists in contrast to that of indigenous
inhabitants brought enormous economic benefits as well as negative
impacts. It has led to the indigenous communities going through fast
economic and social transformations. The similar cultural and economic
features of Dayan town and Ogimiachi village offer a comparable basis
for further investigation. In terms of average population density, Dayan
town (156 persons/ha) is much higher than that of Ogimachi village (13
persons/ha). This is also reflected in the density of residences and spatial
organizations (Figure 6‐3). In particular, different conservation
approaches were applied to the two sites, immigrants swarmed into the
Dayan town along with the booming tourism development; while in
Ogimachi village, the population was kept stable through controlling the
ownership of properties during the transformation and development.
Overview of Dayan town Overview of Ogimachi village
Figure 64: Bird’s eyeview of Dayan town and Ogimachi village
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 116 ‐
6.3 Distinguished features in Ogimachi village Ogimachi village is designated to be a World Heritage site, according to
criteria iv: ‘an outstanding example of a type of building or architectural
ensemble’; and criteria v: ‘an outstanding example of a traditional
human settlement’ (UNESCO WHC, 1995). It demonstrates both tangible
and intangible outstanding values, such as unique Gassho‐style houses,
farming landscape, scenic environment and living folk‐arts as well as
vibrant traditional social lifestyles, which are vulnerable and irreversible
‘values’, contributing to the cultural diversity at a global scale.
The ensemble of traditional Gassho‐style houses is the most
distinguished character in Ogimachi village. There are 114 Gassho‐style
houses (109 designated as historic Buildings), including 59 living
residences, 46 accessory buildings and 9 religious buildings. Gassho
houses are wooden thatched‐roof farmhouses, different from common
Japanese farmhouses. The Gassho‐style of house‐building is created
based on the specific climatic conditions and industrial requirements in
this district. It is one of the most advanced methods of wooden house
construction in Japan. The Gassho‐style house is composed of two
independent parts: a truss‐like body frame, made by professional
carpenters; and a steep‐sloped roof structure, made by local residents
working together under a traditional cooperative system ‘yui’, which also
organizes mutual labor exchange for roof rethatching. The roof slope
reaches over 60 degrees to contend with heavy winter snowfall.
Meanwhile, the steep roof offers a larger volume of interior space
suitable for the sericulture industry, which has been the supporting
industry for Ogimachi village since the 17th century throughout the whole
Edo period. Constructed by local residents in the ‘yui’ system with local
materials, problems of economic and labor shortage could be overcome
in this remote area. Besides this, the adoption of two independent
frames with foliage‐made joints creates a very flexible structure to
protect them from earthquake (more architectonic information referring
to Saito and Inaba, 1996).
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 117 ‐
Figure 65: Gasshostyle Wada house, Nationally Important
Cultural Properties
Figure 66: Section of Gasshostyle house53
The farming landscape attached to Gassho‐style houses and the network
of canals going across the village form an indispensable part of the
natural environment of Ogimachi village. They are set in a harmonious
relationship with local topographic features and a surrounding scenic
forest. Meanwhile, they indicate the agricultural history of Ogimachi
village through 10 centuries and imply a cooperative lifestyle as well as a
close relationship between local residents and nature. From the aesthetic,
historic and social points of view, the farming landscape as well as scenic
surroundings enhance the overall value of Ogimachi village and create a
unique settlement. So far, this farmland is still in use. Some of the land is
cultivated with wild vegetables, instead of rice field as before. This is
because the farmland is not very productive when planted with rice,
while the plantation of wild vegetables and organic plants bring in better
incomes the households.
53 Source: Saito and Inaba, 1996 page 74, quoting from the report on the conservation work on the former Nohara House, Kawasaki City, 1968.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 118 ‐
6.4 Participation of local residents in the process of conservation and tourism development
In Japan, nationally important properties are under the protection of the
‘Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties’ (1950). For cultural sites,
the ‘Cultural Promotion Master Plan’, and ‘Basic Principles regarding the
promotion of Culture & the Arts’ are formulated to integrate tangible
and intangible heritage. They have put special attention on community
participation in managing, monitoring and patrolling of a heritage site.
The preservation of historical buildings and structures is the obligation of
owners, who must submit official notification and obtain approval for any
alteration to the existing state. In general, new constructions and
remodeling are prohibited; any harmful actions to the historic values of
Gassho‐style buildings will be prosecuted; any exceptional new
construction must conform to the historic environment. According to the
conservation policy, financial subsidies are available from local
government in the interest of necessary construction, restoration,
modification and improvement works for a harmonious historical image.
Ogimachi village has existed since the 11th century (Saito and Inaba, 1996)
and has retained its geographical location and boundaries since then,
except for the construction of a central roadway at the end of 19th
century. The conservation of Shirakawa‐go and Gokayama areas started
from the value recognition of Gassho‐style houses, of which the number
decreased dramatically after World War II due to rapid economic growth
and social changes in Japan and demolishment due to dam construction.
Comparing the data in the 1890s and in 1994 (Saito 1996), the number of
Gassho‐style houses in Japan dropped from 1800 to 144. Gassho‐style
houses have completely disappeared in 60 out of 93 villages in
Shirakawa‐go and Gokayama areas, and of these 17 villages of those have
been abandoned entirely. Ogimachi village is the only one in Shirakawa‐
go area that retains its Gassho‐style houses, where before there used to
be 23 villages.
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 119 ‐
Given the serious rate of demolition of Gassho‐style houses, Japanese
national government designated two houses in Ogimachi (in 1956 and
1971), two houses in Ainokura (1958) and one house in Suganuma (1958)
as Important Cultural Properties. Afterwards, in 1970, the whole villages
of Ainokura and Suganuma and their immediate surroundings gained the
status of Historic Sites, because of the concentration of historic
structures (shown in Table 6‐3). The Ogimachi village was not on the
governmental agenda of conservation, except for single historic buildings.
Area of properties
(Ha)
Number/ratio (number/ha) of historic structures
Number/ratio (number/ha) of Gassho houses
Oldest construction of Gassho houses
Ogimachi 45.6 124/2.72 60/1.32 Latter half of 18th C
Ainokura 18.0 72/4.00 20/1.11 17th C Suganuma 4.4 30/6.82 9/2.05 Early 19th C
Table 63: Comparison of three historic villages in the concentration of historic structures54
6.4.1 Local initiation for conservation of Ogimachi village
However, from the 1960s to 1970s, with the fast transformation of
economic and social conditions, forest, farmland and Gassho‐style
houses became hot targets for outside investments. People in the
traditional villages began to sell their properties and moved out to bigger
cities. The local residents of Ogimachi village recognized the crisis of
losing their homes and living environment, and thus initiated actions to
preserve the village in both its physical environment and cultural bonds.
Based on interviews, all local responses reflected a positive cognition of
the crisis at that time and showed high degree of pride and appreciation
for heritage values in their home village. On one hand, the consensus
54 Data adopted from Saito (1996).
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 120 ‐
cognition reflects a high level of cultural identity such that conservation
is given priority to economic profits; on the other hand, the sense of
pride and responsibility encourages participation to conservation actions
in the living community. In 1971, local people organized the ‘Association
for the Protection of the Natural Environment of Shirakawa‐go Ogimachi
Village’, and established the ‘Charter of Village Residents’, which
demonstrated three principles: ‘Do not sell, Do not rent and Do not
demolish’ in preserving Gassho‐style houses. The spontaneously
established village charter offered a very effective way to stop the
demolition of common Gassho‐style houses (see Figure 6‐7). Meanwhile,
they initiated protective actions in Ogimachi village, including both
historic structures and natural environment, such as fields, canals, forests,
etc. After the revision of the ‘Law for Protection of Cultural Properties’ in
1975, to include intangible folk‐cultural properties, traditional
conservation techniques, and preservation districts for groups of historic
buildings, Ogimachi village became a nationally ‘Important Preservation
District for groups of Historic Buildings’ in 1976. The importance of
Ogimachi is stated by Saito and Inaba (1996) that ‘subsequently, in spite
of the fact that in most other villages the Gassho‐style houses were
nearing the point of extinction, with the population and the number of
households noticeably on the decline, Ogimachi village remained
stable during this period without any significant change’ (p57).
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 121 ‐
Figure 67: The number of living Gasshostyle houses in Ogimachi village from 1924 to 199455
6.4.2 Social associations The participation of local residents in the conservation of Ogimachi
village relies on its unique social system composed of various cooperative
social associations, and an extended family system. They helped the
village to survive severe living conditions in the past. The extended family
structure was led by the first son and his wife, and included members
from multi‐generations and siblings’ families. The number of family
members in one Gassho‐style house was normally 10 to 30, but the
extended family structure was only present in this area where the living
conditions were most severe (similar historic background with Lijiang). At
present, the extended families have disappeared completely, but the
55 Data source: the survey report of a Mr. Wada on Ogimachi out of interest in understanding home culture. Mr. Wada is the first grandson of Wada family, who owns the Wada House, listed as National Important Cultural Property. The living Gassho‐style house refers to those functioning as residences, excluding those abandoned and those used for storage, business and other purposes.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 122 ‐
special mutual‐support system is still functioning and plays an important
role in the process of conservation from initiation to daily supervision.
Without doubt, the creation and maintenance of the unique social
system are bonded with Jodo Shinshu – the local religion.
Ogimachi village is located in a remote area with limited natural and
labour resources in the past. In order to survive from these severe
conditions, local people initiated special cooperative associations called
‘Kumi’ to organize neighborhood households for seasonal or daily tasks in
an efficient and economic method. Therefore, local residents developed
close relationships by sharing their workload, offering mutual help and
participating in religious and traditional ceremonies and festivals. This
social system derived from previous economic and technological
conditions is maintained and still active at present. Examples of this
social system are the above‐mentioned ‘yui’, as a traditional labor
custom to work together for house construction and roof rethatching,
‘kumi’ in organizing traditional festivals and folk‐arts, and ‘koryaku’ to
perform roles in religious functions and participate in the ‘spring
ceremony’ as well as marriages and funerals. Nowadays, local residents
are still involved in different social associations to share responsibilities
for common benefits, such as grass‐cutting along the mountain roadways,
clearing the canal and calling out fire alarm warnings etc.
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 123 ‐
Figure 68: Rethatching work by ‘yui’ system56
6.4.3 Participation in tourism development Being a World Heritage site, Ogimachi village welcomes 1.4 ‐1.5 million
visitors per year (2007) within a district of 45.6 ha. According to the local
administration, prior to being listed as a World Heritage site, about
500,000 tourists visited the area. The local residents coped with the
pressure from mass tourism by organizing and participating with tourism
development as well as conservation within a high level autonomous
system from the very beginning. Since 1971 when the local residents set
up the ‘Charter of Village Residents’, two objectives have been clearly
stated: protecting the natural and cultural environment of the homes
and promoting a tourism‐based industry to revitalize the regional
economy. Local residents recognized that conservation and tourism
56 Source: Saito and Inaba, (1996 page 40). For big Gassho‐style house, the roof rethatching has to be done every 30‐40 years. It requires around 200 people working together for two days. Every year, there are 2 to 3 houses to be rethatched.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 124 ‐
development of their village are highly interrelated with each other.
Therefore, they developed various associations to organize and supervise
different tourism‐related businesses and make decisions together by
representatives at the ‘Association for the Protection of the Natural
Environment of Shirakawa‐go Ogimachi Village’.
The main problems caused by mass tourism in Ogimachi village include
litters, risk of fire, traffic and parking, leading to a deterioration of the
physical environment, and disturbance of residents’ privacy, abandoning
farmland and commercial industries, resulting in the degradation of
social quality. The village shares common problems with Lijiang ancient
town in relation to booming tourism and self‐development. However,
Ogimachi village achieved a certain balance between tourists’
requirements and social quality through higher levels of autonomous
engagement of local residents, who play an essential role and take
different actions in line with the governmental legal framework (see
table 6‐4). For instance, in response to problem of littering, dustbins
were not installed in the area of the Gassho‐style settlement, requiring
tourists to take away rubbish to specific points. This action does not
sacrifice the residential atmosphere for tourists’ conveniences (strict
regulations and fines are set for littering). In fact, the insistence on an
individual living sphere fortifies attractions for tourism development in a
long run, because it differentiates living heritage from open‐air museums.
According to on‐site observations, tourists much preferred living Gassho‐
style residences to uninhabited tourist facilities, including open‐air
museums and folk‐arts centers57. However, some problems, such as the
loss of privacy, pollutions from the highway construction and operation,
and the abandonment of farmland, are still waiting to be solved.
Although ‘private property’ signs are clearly visible in front of Gassho‐
57 There is an open museum near the main entrance of Ogimachi village composed of a group of abandoned houses, which are managed by local communities and serve as an open‐air exhibition of Gassho‐style houses and traditional folk arts at present.
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 125 ‐
style houses and farmland, curiosity often drives tourists to across the
line.
Tourism development Conservation Concerns Resource
Activities Negative Impacts Legislations Local
Actions
The biggest Gassho-style houses
Walk-in visits
Loss of privacy More maintenance
Listed as nationally Important Cultural Properties
Open to the public and charge entrance fees
Gassho-style settlement
Walking tours and sightseeing
Litter, Fire, privacy, other disturbances
Strict protection of land-use and facades
‘Do not sell, do not rent, do not destruction’ ‘Hinoban-Mawari’58
Common Gassho-style houses
Minshuku (family-run traditional hostel)
Loss of privacy Risk of destruction
Limitation to changes on façade and structure
‘Yui’ labor exchange for rethatching
Hakusan National Park
Walking tours and sightseeing
Litter, Fire
Strict protection of land use and trees
‘Hinoban-Mawari’
Products from farmland and forests
Restaurant, organic products, souvenirs
Litter, Functional changes,
Hygiene standards
Associations of village commerce and industry society
Local handcraft
Souvenir Shops
Functional changes Abandonment of farmland
Protect intangible heritage
Association of village commerce and industrial society
58 ‘Hinoban‐Mawari’ is a shifting fire monitoring association, performed by neighborhood villagers to carry out fire‐inspection duties four times a day. Two people from a neighborhood work together to check over the village by beating wooden clappers.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 126 ‐
Traditional events Performances
Sudden increase of tourists
Protect intangible heritage
‘koryaku’, organizing traditional festivals and religious ceremonies
Table 64: The role of local residents in conservation and tourism industry
Figure 69: Observation in the openair museum, forkarts centre
Figure 610: Rope bridge to the village and main streets in the village
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 127 ‐
6.5 Conservation and social quality in Ogimachi village
As designated as ‘Important Preservation Districts for Cultural Properties’,
traditional residences, historic structures and the surrounding landscape
are regarded as one valuable entity for preservation (Article 142 of the
Law for Protection of Cultural Properties, enacted in August, 1950 and
revised in July 1975, hereinafter referred as ‘the Law’). The applied Law
sets very strict regulations with regards to changes and modifications of
the façade, form, and land‐use as well as other tangible components
attached to the settlement in order to present its complete and
harmonious values, such as trees, fences, gardens, yards, routes, walls
and stairs. Meanwhile subsidies are available for restoration and repairs
of the mentioned elements and corresponding punishment for any
violations. The national law implemented by the Board of Education laid
down a firm basis for the preservation of physical environment.
Social quality was investigated from social surveys and on‐site
observations. The social surveys were conducted by the author from
November 17 to 18, 2007 in Ogimachi village. Five people were
interviewed, based on the framework of the attached questions (see
Annex 5). Most questions were open‐ended and each interview took
around one hour with in‐depth communication, in order to collect as
much information as possible on their opinions. The social quality was
analyzed according to the social indicators proposed in chapter 4.
6.5.1 Contribution of local associations to social quality
In the conservation of Ogimachi village, local associations play an
essential role in preserving the physical environment as explained in
Table 6‐4, and their contributions to maintaining social quality are
saliently reflected in the surveys. In ‘Association for the Protection of the
Natural Environment of Shirakawa‐go Ogimachi Village’, there are 25
representatives, 4 to 5 are from the national government, local
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 128 ‐
authorities and companies, the rest are local residents. They represent
residents living in different neighborhoods, the women’s association, the
young men’s association, association of Gassho‐style houses’ owners, the
association of local products and souvenir shops, and the association of
Minshuku59.
No. Age Family
structure Career Main family income
1 39 Husband, wife and a child, 3 members
Officers at the Local Preservation Committee
Salary from the committee
2 42
Wife, husband, children and grandparents, 7 members all together
Housewife,
Husband works for the Village commerce and industrial society
Running Minshuku, Salary from local association, cultivating vegetables
3 46
Parents and a brother, 4 members all together
Buddhist monk, looking after religious Gassho‐style houses
Tourism, entrance fees and government sponsorship
4 66 Wife and husband, 2 members
Farmer, looking after the Gassho‐style houses
Retired with pension, cultivating wild vegetables, tourism entrance fees
5 29
Parents and siblings, 5 members all together
Working at the Onsen (hot spring) hotel and restaurant
Salary related to tourism industry
Table 65: Analysis of family structure, career composition and main family income
59 Information source: NESO, a local newsletter published by the ‘Association for the Protection of the Natural Environment of Shirakawa‐go Ogimachi Village’ monthly. It discusses the renovation projects, development issues and conservation interventions. The members of the association are elected every year by local residents and some are recommended by the national and local agencies.
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 129 ‐
The various associations improve the sense of participation and control
of their home environment. As indicated in Table 6‐5, the local
associations offered diverse job opportunities and responsibilities for
residents, who could participate in the conservation as well as tourism
development in an active way and achieve high economic security
(Governmental Statistics 2006 showed that GDP of Shirakawa‐go ranked
No. 3 in Gifu Prefecture). At the same time, the activities of local
associations, such as ‘Hinoban‐Mawari’ (see Table 6‐4) provide public
surveillance for social security and opportunities for social interactions.
In the survey, four out of five responses indicated that they
communicated with neighbors most often in activities organized by local
associations (open‐ended question No.7); two responses mentioned
public services, such as restaurant, Onsen (hot spring), school and
religious places.
6.5.2 Responses to other social quality The concerns on the social quality of Ogimachi village derived from the
initiation of local interventions in the process of conservation. The
respondents in the survey were selected from different age and career
groups in order to represent the general situation in Ogimachi village.
Their responses reflected a high level of identity by indicating the
importance of the cooperative system (open‐ended question No.3) and
sense of responsibility in conservation. At the same time, the responses
showed that the attraction of a traditional life‐style, warm neighborly
relationship and the unique culture (question No.2, open‐ended question
No.8 and No.9) of Ogimachi village compared to modern cities. The
village maintains rich traditional ceremonies and festivals, such as the
Doburoku festival to appreciate harvest‐time and peaceful life,
Harugoma dance for celebrating spring etc., which endow the living
community with special charms. Furthermore, these traditional events
inspire socialization and communication among residents. All responses
reflected a very close relationship with neighbors; even immigrants felt
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 130 ‐
integrated in the living environment (question No.6). In general, they
expressed a high level of satisfaction with living in Ogimachi village
(question No.4). However, the respondents also complained about the
disturbances to privacy along with the tourism development (question
No.2) and restrictions on extending living spaces in line with conservation
regulations; at the same time, they indicated requirements for the
improvement of interior space in traditional houses, such as day‐lighting
and insulation system (some residents renovated the original accessory
buildings as a main living space and ran the traditional Gassho‐style
houses as hostels). Based on open‐ended question No.5, local residents
preferred to have a hospital, school and drug stores in the village,
although they could easily share them with neighboring towns thanks to
a convenient transportation system. The on‐site observation showed that
most local residents owned cars and private parking lots allowing them
to easily reach necessary services and facilities. As a consequence,
Ogimachi village maintained a stable social environment, including
demographic composition and social networks, as well as consistent
land‐use. It achieved certain level of balance between the process of
conservation and flourishing tourism development.
Population (2003)
Population (1994)
Households (2003)
Households (1994)
Households (1870s)
Ogimachi 608 634 148 152 99
Table 66: Change of population and households in Ogimachi village
In the conservation of Ogimachi village, priority is given to the indigenous
inhabitants. Visitors are strictly requested to follow six ethical codes of
behavior during their stay in Ogimachi village: do not litter or bring trash
into the village; take extra caution to prevent fire; protect the natural
environment; respect the privacy of residents; use public restrooms and
lavatories; and finally desist from camping (brochure of ‘Shirakawa‐go
Walking Guide’, 2003). It advanced community‐based conservation by
giving priority to the rights of local residents and to the social quality of
the living environment. It went beyond the simple involvement of local
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 131 ‐
residents, such as soliciting for opinions, cooperation and promoting
public awareness by institutionalizing the local participation in the
process of conservation. This in turn inspired the enthusiasm, sense of
responsibility and pride in conservation and thus, reinforced the bonds
between local resident and the living environment.
6.5.3 Contribution of spatial organizations to social quality
Besides the wide and active engagements of local associations in the
process of conservation and tourism development, the specific spatial
organization and the allocation of tourism facilities contributed to the
high level of social quality in Ogimachi village. Based on on‐site
observations, the main spatial characteristics are summarized as below:
1. Natural boundaries of the living community (refer to photo 1 in Annex
6). Ogimachi village was segmented from the outside world by the
Hakusan Mountains Range and the Sho River, which clearly defined the
living community and endowed it with a unique territory identity. At the
same time, they help to minimize disturbance from tourists by limiting
the access routes60
2. Control of arrival points by concentrated parking lots separated from
the living territory (refer to photo 2 in Annex 6). All outside vehicles
were restricted to certain areas outside the living community. A large
paid car park connected with the Information Centre and Heritage
museums outside Deai Bridge; another small paid car park was situated
along the main road. A large free car park and bus stop were located a bit
further from the living site and one paid bus stop was situated near the
observation point in the mountain. This helped to control the flow of
60 There are two ways of entering in the village: from north through the 6‐meter wide main road; from west through the rope bridge called Deai Bridge.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 132 ‐
traffic and corresponding pollution, and additionally offered a
comparatively quiet and safe environment for local residents.
3. Concentration of tourism facilities (refer to photo 3 in Annex 6). The
Information Centre, Jin Homura Museum, Heritage Museum, Gassho‐
style House Structure Museum, Gassho‐style House Living Museum and
locally produced vegetable market etc. were gathered near the main
entrance of Deai Bridge, separated away from the living territory. Most
souvenir shops, local products shops and tourist‐oriented restaurants
were located along the main road. This minimized the disturbance
related to tourists on the daily life of local residents by confining their
activities.
4. Differentiating pavement and routes width according to various
functions (refer to photo 2, 4 in Annex 6). The main road was 6‐meters
wide (completed in 1890), and the side motor road was 2‐4 meters for
private access to residences. The pedestrian routes were paved with
scree, and routes between the rice fields were left as mud tracks. This
maintained the original appearance and, more importantly, indicated the
territories of local residents in order to prevent them from intrusion and
unwelcome visits.
5. No special lighting or dustbins in the living community (refer to photo
4 in Annex 6). There were few street lamps even along the main road
compared to most other tourist sites. There were only lighting boxes in
front of the Onsens (public baths with hot springs) and clinics. After 6
o’clock in the winter, visitors were given flashlights to make their way
around. There were no dustbins in the living community for the tourists’
convenience. This required respect from tourists for the living
environment and thus created an authentic atmosphere and experience
for visitors.
6. Allocation of semi‐private space and local facilities (refer to photo 3,
4 in Annex 6). Amongst the residential areas were the usual allocations of
cemeteries, play yards, gardens and so on to serve as an extension of
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 133 ‐
family life. Meanwhile, rice fields, often used for cultivating wild
vegetables at present also functioned as semi‐private territories for local
residents. They reinforced the living atmosphere in the community.
Locally used facilities, such as a hardware store, grocery shops and car
and bicycle repair stores were located within walking distance. Besides
this, there was a special community centre for socializing and meetings
for local residents.
6.6 Test of the hypothetic model by comparing Dayan and Ogimachi cases
6.6.1 Social Performance Based on the general surveys and on the spot observations, indigenous
residents in Ogimachi village expressed a higher level of satisfaction with
their living conditions and stronger sense of responsibility as well as
identity associated with their living community, compared with people in
Dayan town. The observation and survey data in Ogimachi village
reflected a comparably higher diversity of working as well as living
conditions. Local inhabitants demonstrated a higher level of participation
by virtue of active engagement in both conservation and development
through taking part in various local associations. The close social
networks in Ogimachi village allowed indigenous inhabitants to control
their living environment via confining the allocations of tourist‐facilities
and land‐use. At the same time, they could enjoy convenient daily
services, such as repair stores, hardware stores, mini markets, and
community centres and so on in the heritage sites. In addition, social
interactions and public surveillance in Ogimachi village were enhanced
through providing sufficient meeting places and active engagement in
social associations in the site. On the other hand, data in Dayan town
showed a more tourism‐dominated career composition, because of
passive involvement of local populations in the process of conservation
and development. The lack of daily services for indigenous inhabitants
was evident in the analysis, which counted as an important factor to
drive people away from the ancient town for better living conditions. The
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 134 ‐
social interactions and public surveillance were badly disturbed, in that
tourists and tourist‐related facilities replaced the social places of
indigenous inhabitants at the living site.
In general, based on the in situ observations and social surveys, the
Ogimachi village portrayed a viable community with high social
performance, associated with vibrant social interactions among local
inhabitants and the continuity of traditional practices for the last three
decades. While the Dayan town left an impression of less cohesion and
social vigor among indigenous inhabitants. It demonstrated an
overwhelming commercialized atmosphere instead of a peaceful
traditional community, whose liveability and social quality have been
seriously tampered with in the past decade.
6.6.2 Applied operations The operations according to social performance in the process of living
heritage conservation mainly refer to the social interactions and
participation among local residents. Tzonis (2006) stated that
contemporary socio‐economic case studies and historical research have
indicated that social interactions could stimulate new knowledge and
creativity, and in turn, new knowledge and creativity helped sustaining a
social‐cultural quality and community in the process of transformation.
Different from static preservation of natural and built environment,
these living heritage sites are still functioning in daily life experience, and
thus require a dynamic conservation with consideration of their
continuous contributions to the quality of local life. As the above case
studies showed, local residents in Ogimachi village had more social
interactions with neighbours compared to those of Dayan town. Local
residents demonstrated more opportunity and frequency to
communicate with each other in Ogimachi village, because of different
activities organized by local associations and adequate places to meet.
The wide participation of indigenous inhabitants reinforced collective
control over the living environment and improved cohesion and social
identity of the Ogimachi village. However, local residents in Dayan
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 135 ‐
indicated a lack of places for socializing and entertainment, which limited
social interactions amongst indigenous inhabitants. Meanwhile, the
inhabitants played a passive role in the process of conservation and
tourism development, in virtue of depending on rather than participating
in tourism industry.
In addition, the flows of inhabitants and tourists have great influence on
the security and privacy of a traditional community. The flows of these
different groups are closely related to the allocation of circulation paths
and service facilities. The study in Ogimachi village showed fewer
overlapping flows between indigenous inhabitants and tourists,
compared to Dayan town. In particular, the flows inside neighbourhoods
and at night time were better controlled in Ogimachi village. There are
good reasons to believe that the improvement of social interactions,
participation and flows of people in both spatial and temporal scale could
contribute to the social performance of traditional communities.
6.6.3 Morphology responding to social performance Dayan town and Ogimachi village are both located in scenic
environments with rivers and mountains. The case studies demonstrated
a close relationships between physical morphology and social
performance in the process of living heritage conservation, which was
centrally reflected in the change of land‐use, including the spatial
operation and morphology. Although most distinguished natural and
built characters were well preserved with fundamental ‘historic and
aesthetic values’ as the main tourist attractions, such as topographic and
landscape features, townscape, vernacular architecture, and historic
monuments etc., the subtle changes of marginal land‐use, accessibility of
different places, and spatial morphology in relation to certain territories
exerted significant impacts on the social activities of local residents.
As observed in Dayan town, the replacement of surrounding farmland by
mock traditional constructions led to ambiguity of the community
identity. The surrounding farms functioned as a buffer zone to demarcate
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 136 ‐
the ancient town from the newly developed districts, whose replacement
indicated that indigenous inhabitants were losing control over their living
environment. On the other hand, the salient natural boundaries of
Ogimachi village limited its extension and reinforced the living identity of
the local community. In terms of spatial morphology in the living
community, Dayan town has reflected evident changes of spatial
functions and patterns. With the commercial businesses and tourist
services booming and invading residential blocks from street ways, the
characteristics of semi‐private space and the flows of people in
neighbourhoods have been greatly affected (transform from morphology
2‐4 to morphology 5‐8), which has affected the social interactions and
living atmosphere in the historic settlement. Moreover, overcrowded
semi‐public and open spaces have exerted negative impacts on the social
activities and traditional practices of local inhabitants in Dayan town. On
the other side, certain segregation measures between tourist circulation
and local life by way of concentrating tourist facilities and
compartmentalizing functional territories in Ogimachi village have helped
to maintain social interactions and traditional life of the local residents.
In Ogimachi village, the neighbourhoods and residential blocks do not
present themselves in an enclosed form, and thus private and semi‐
private open spaces are not totally defined by buildings as the courtyards
in Dayan town (morphology 3‐4). Instead, various pedestrian paths and
the proper allocation of facilities define the space in‐between
households as private and semi‐private territory, in order to retain social
interactions among indigenous inhabitants (morphology 1‐3). The spatial
demarcation and organization created a secure and homely environment
in Ogimachi village. Based on in situ observations and social surveys,
Table 6‐7 compares the spatial morphology, operation and
corresponding social performance in Dayan town and Ogimachi village to
validate the hypothetic model above.
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 137 ‐
Morphology Operation Performance
Morphology 2‐4 are replaced by
various combinations of morphology 5‐8
Tourist‐related services replace daily services in neighbourhoods
and the community
Increasing daily expense, decreasing
diversity of daily services
Dayan
Retain morphology 2‐4
Retain repair shops, groceries, etc. for local‐use in neighbourhoods
Convenient access to diverse daily
services
Ogimachi
Morphology 1 without clear boundary and
more unconstrained morphology 5‐8
Overcrowded population and free flows of
people
High crime rate Dayan
Retain morphology 1‐3 in
neighbourhoods
Controlled flows of people in
neighbourhoods Low crime rate
Ogimachi
More morphology 5‐8 in
neighbourhoods, lack of community
centres
Discourage local activities, free flows of people and decrease intimate
relationships in neighbourhoods
Weak public surveillance
Dayan
Strengthen morphology 2‐3 in neighbourhoods and community
centres
Encourage local activities,
constrain flows, and promote intimate
relationships in neighbourhoods
Strong public surveillance
Ogimachi
Morphology 1 without clear
boundary, more morphology 5‐6 in
More disturbing activities and
actors
Ambiguous boundaries result in less privacy of households and
Dayan
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 138 ‐
neighbourhoods neighbourhoods
Constrained
morphology 1‐3 in neighbourhoods
Fewer disturbing activities and
actors
Clear boundaries result in retained
privacy of households and neighbourhoods
Ogimachi
Lack of constrained
morphology 2‐4 and
community/entertainment services in community
More undesired encounters
between local residents and
tourists
Fewer social interactions
Dayan
Retain morphology 2‐3 in
neighbourhoods and offer community centres
Fewer undesired encounters
between local residents and
tourists
More social interactions
Ogimachi
Lack of community centres and proper
places to accommodate local associated activities, like morphology 3‐4
Discourage initiatives from local inhabitants
Fewer social associations with less collective
empowerment on environmental control, passive participation
Dayan
Community centres and semi‐public places to support local associated
activities, like morphology 3
Encourage initiatives from local inhabitants
More social associations with more collective
empowerment on environmental control, active participation
Ogimachi
Lack of constrained
morphology 3‐4, lack of community
centres
Discourage social interactions and social associations
Weak social networks
Dayan
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 139 ‐
Retain morphology 2‐3 and sufficient
community centres
Encourage social interactions and active social associations
Strong social networks
Ogimachi
Proper open spaces for
collective activities changed from
morphology 3‐4 to 7‐8
Open to tourists and free flows of
poeple
Less frequent traditional practices
Dayan
Retain constrained morphology 3 for collective activities
Controlled environment and restricted flows of
people
More frequent traditional practices
Ogimachi
Morphology 2‐4 change to 5‐8
Change of spatial‐functions and
patterns
Discontinuity of land‐use
Dayan
Retain constrained morphology 1‐3
Maintain spatial functions and
patterns
Continuity of land‐use
Ogimachi
Table 67: Summary of descriptive MOP model in Dayan town and Ogimachi village (Morphology 18 refers to Table 53)
The model (Table 5‐3) generalizes spatial morphology in a conceptual
framework with relation to its functional territory and potential social
contributions to a living heritage site. However, given each living heritage
site is unique, in particular those listed as World Heritage sites, the eight
spatial morphologies might not necessarily be present at one site, and
the forms and organizations might not be precisely the same. For
instance, morphology 3 and 4 represent private and semi‐private space,
which are defined by single constructions and paths for local use. These
may not necessarily to be in an enclosed form as the illustration shows,
and instead may have one or two open sides. The essential concept of
the model reflects the extent, to which the spatial morphology is
constrained: spatial morphology 1‐4 indicates constrained organization
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 140 ‐
with restricted access and function, in order to retain certain social
quality; spatial morphology 5‐8 indicates fewer constraints to allow the
interventions of tourist‐related facilities and functions, while bring free
flows of people into the space. The model highlights the importance of
constrained morphology in terms of retaining social quality of indigenous
communities in the process of conservation and development.
As analyzed above, the constrained spatial morphology in Ogimachi
village contributed to the high performance of social quality in the
traditional community. It affirms with the proposed model hypothesis
(Table 5‐3) in that the constrained space in the territory of the traditional
neighbourhoods and residential blocks are very sensitive in response to
social performance. These places should be given prior considerations to
their social functions for indigenous inhabitants, as new actors and
activities are introduced by tourism development. On the basis of that, a
set of new knowledge‐based design guidelines for living heritage
conservation will be developed below with the aim of achieving high
social quality of an indigenous community. The guidelines should be
applied with careful considerations of specific contexts and conservation
policies.
6.7 Design guidelines for sustaining social quality in living heritage conservation
Conservation and tourism development of a living heritage site are very
much intertwined. For the reasons presented in the previous chapters
and, to quote remarks of Mr. Uneo in the expert meeting on the
conservation of Ogimachi village (1996), concerns for the quality of living
of indigenous inhabitants should be given priority in conservation and
development. In this research, social quality is proposed to be taken as a
complement to economic development in terms of evaluating the living
quality of an indigenous community. Further on, the research has
developed an evident‐based model in the framework of MOP, to explain
the interrelationships between performance of social quality, operation
of interacting actors: indigenous people and tourists, and spatial
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 141 ‐
morphology of the living heritage sites. Subsequently, drawing from the
above model, a prescriptive model was developed suggesting what kind
of morphology characteristics a living heritage site ought to have in order
to retain high social quality for its indigenous inhabitants.
As an applicable result, this research developed a set of knowledge‐
based guidelines for designers and decision makers to put into practice
as a design tool to steer social quality in future conservation programs.
The guidelines are derived from the prescriptive MOP model as described
in 5.2.2, and expressed in terms of ‘If‐then’ design rules: “If conditions >>
Then consequences”, where the condition and consequence pairs link
the statements on normative conditions with those on normative actions.
Designers or decision makers bring about normative conditions, and
execute corresponding normative actions to produce these conditions.
Design guidelines can be in the form of single ‘If‐Then’ pair or
overlapping interlinked chains.
In order to encourage the innovation and creativity of decision‐makers
and designers in their practice, it is preferable that the design guidelines
structure “Then’ in proscriptive recommendations, stating ‘what one
should not to do’ rather than obligatory directives, stating ‘what one
should do’. Prescriptive guidelines restrict designers and decision makers
in terms of what people should do, frustrating initiatives in
implementation; Proscriptive guidelines only prohibit certain things that
can lead to detrimental results, giving people the freedom to apply,
invent and explore in the context. It has been observed in general that
the form of ‘what one should not do’ encourages the bottom‐up
approach of implementation; on the other hand, the regulations in the
form of ‘what one should do’ facilitate top‐down approach to
implementation. The following examples of basic design guidelines
combine the two approaches, supplying both proscriptions and
prescriptions.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 142 ‐
※※※
If, required performance: strengthen the security and privacy of
residential neighborhoods and blocks
Then, recommended operation: spatial functions and corresponding
activities are restricted to indigenous inhabitants, for the provision of
daily conveniences and to enhance frequent contacts and familiarity
among neighbors
If, required operation: spatial functions and corresponding activities are
restricted to indigenous inhabitants, for the provision of daily
conveniences and to enhance frequent contacts and familiarity among
neighbors
Then, recommended morphology:
Prescription:
Create clear demarcations between different territories in the
hierarchy of: private residence, neighborhood and residential
block
Control flows of people in residential neighborhoods and blocks
via confining entrances and exits
Differentiate paths for local circulation and tourist circulation via
width, pavement and form etc.
Differentiate paths for pedestrians and vehicles via width,
pavement and form etc.
Proscription:
Do not allocate tourism‐oriented facilities and businesses in the
residential districts
※※※
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 143 ‐
If, required performance: encourage communication and participation in
the traditional community
Then, recommended operation: promote social interactions among
indigenous inhabitants and activities of social associations
If, required operation: promote social interactions among indigenous
inhabitants and activities of social associations
Then, recommended morphology:
Prescription:
Retain semi‐private and semi‐public open spaces in association
with local circulations
Concentrate local car parking lots in different residential blocks
Create community centers for aged groups of local population
and local associations
Allocate daily facilities and services with convenient access in the
residential blocks
Proscription:
Do not connect semi‐private space in residential neighborhoods
with tourist circulations
※※※
If, required performance: promote social identity of the traditional
community
Then, recommended operation: promote social networks and continue
tradition practices and land‐use features
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 144 ‐
If, required operation: promote social networks and continue tradition
practices and land‐use features
Then, recommended morphology:
Prescription:
Create buffer zones to identify the boundaries of traditional
community
Limit entrances and exits to the living heritage sites
Concentrate tourist facilities and services in connection with
main roads
Concentrate car parking lots for tourists near main entrances
Reserve open spaces for local festivals and traditional events
Proscription:
Do not add new trans‐boundary roads in the traditional
community
Do not connect places for daily ritual and cemeteries with tourist
circulations
※※※
The guidelines above have been derived from the on site observations
and social surveys in two case studies: Dayan town and Ogimachi village,
which somewhat limit their general application. Meanwhile this indicates
the direction for future research to generalize the guidelines on a much
broader scale. As implied in table 6‐7, the semi‐private and semi‐public
space (morphology 2‐4) in residential neighborhoods and blocks play an
essential role in maintaining social interactions of indigenous inhabitants,
and thus contribute to the social quality of a living community. However,
these places are very fragile environments and highly sensitive to the
Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village
‐ 145 ‐
process of tourism development. The new actors and activities
introduced by tourism‐related businesses may easily disrupt these places
and change the spatial operations gradually (changing to morphology 5‐
8). The proposed guidelines aim to build up a resistant spatial
morphology to control the corresponding operations and strengthen the
ties between local inhabitants and places. This enables the community to
have collective control over their living environment and retains the
intrinsic nature of the living heritage site in the long run. In addition, as
explained above, the specific morphology of semi‐private and semi‐
public places varies in each living heritage site. To identify these socially
sensitive places, a bottom‐up, community‐based approach is suggested
in the process of conservation and tourism development.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 146 ‐
7 Conclusions and limitations This chapter summarizes the main findings of this research, derived from
field studies and interdisciplinary state‐of‐the–arts literature reviews. It
evaluates the findings in relation to the initial claims stated in the
introduction, points out the limitations of these findings and suggests
further directions of research to overcome these limitations. Lastly, it
puts forward research proposals extending from the research and
discusses possible applications of the scientific findings.
7.1 Summary of research findings As pointed out in the introduction, the aims of this research were:
1) To identify the negative impacts of conservation policies
implemented in living World Heritage sites, that have taken into
account only the physical aspects of objects, ignoring their effects
on the social quality of traditional living communities
2) To identify design and managerial attributes in the approach to
conservation that could control these negative impacts by taking
into consideration the way the living heritage sites are used by
indigenous inhabitants and tourists
3) To develop a design tool that constrains spatial morphology to
overcome the negative influences on the social quality of
traditional living communities in the process of conservation and
tourism development.
This research commenced with the social problems in precedent living
heritage conservation along with tourism development in the framework
of the UNESCO World Heritage program. The conventional top‐down,
expert‐driven conservation approach merely focused on the physical
aspects of heritage sites without paying proper attention to the social life
of an indigenous community. In order to gain a better understanding of
the numerous factors involved when new tourist‐related activities and
Conclusions and limitations
‐ 147 ‐
actors were introduced to traditional living communities as World
Heritage sites, the research employed a comparative case‐study method
through on site social surveys and investigations.
The research employed Dayan town as an exploratory case (Chapter 2). A
field study of the town was carried out to identity the way heritage
conservation and tourism development, as was applied, influenced
everyday life and social quality of the indigenous community, by studying
the patterns of land‐use and social interactions embedded in the specific
spatial morphology of the living site. To understand the social problems
of an indigenous community and the limitations of the current
conservation policy, the Dayan case studied interactions between new
actors and activities and those of the traditional community in different
land‐use patterns. The field study showed that the conservation of Dayan
town focused on the physical environment of the living heritage site in a
top‐down and expert‐driven approach. The site left spatial morphology
unconstrained to external interventions, which consequently led to a less
desirable environment to live in, the exodus of indigenous inhabitants
and a loss of vigor of the living community.
Drawing from recent studies on the community‐based approach of Living
Heritage Sites Program, covering a number of case studies in Asia in
Chapter 3, this dissertation evaluated recent living heritage conservation
and the experimental living heritage approach. It generalized the key
social problems and the impacts of applied conservation approaches in
current living heritage sites. On that basis, critical reviews on social
quality studies carried out by the European Foundation on Social Quality
through the joint efforts of sociologists and economists in Chapter 4
enabled a prudent selection of social indicators in response to the social
problems identified in living heritage conservation. This offered a
profound knowledge to understand the importance of social quality, as a
capital in the process of sustainable development, and interpreted social
quality in terms of social indicators.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 148 ‐
Chapters 5 adopted the MOP (Morphology, Operation, Performance)
framework to structure and generalize the evidences obtained from
previous case studies and literatures. The MOP framework employs the
categories of (1) Morphology: the spatial organization of the built tissue
of the given case, (2) Operation: the patterns of activities, uses and
processes that take place within this tissue as constrained by its
Morphology, and (3) Performance: the beneficial or detrimental output ‐
in this case social quality ‐ as constrained by its Morphology and
Operation. An evidence‐based model hypothesis was proposed to
identify the influence of spatial morphology on the social quality of
traditional communities experiencing intense pressure from tourism in
the process of conservation.
Subsequently, the case study of Ogimachi village was introduced in
Chapter 6 to test the above model. It examined the positive impacts of
bottom‐up, community‐based conservation method and constrained
spatial morphology on the social quality of the living community as a
successful instance. The case study conformed in key elements with the
hypothetic model for achieving high social quality performance in
relation to specific operations and morphological characteristics. As an
applicable result, this dissertation proposed design guidelines for future
implementation, with aims to retain high social quality in the process of
living heritage conservation. The main findings of the dissertation
included:
1) Current conservation approaches to living heritage sites merely
focused on their physical characteristics, of which the
improvements were driven by the obligations of national and
local authorities and the interests of tourism development. The
top‐down, expert‐based conservation approach did not gain
insights into traditional practices and networks, which has led to
the serious degradation of social quality in indigenous
communities. This reflected on the destruction of social
networks and interactions, loss of socio‐economic security and
Conclusions and limitations
‐ 149 ‐
privacy and dissolving social identity. This in turn led to the
exodus of indigenous inhabitants and aged society problems in
most living heritage sites. Additionally, the bottom‐up,
community‐based approach applied in pilot projects remained
only a passive engagement of local population in the practice of
conservation and tourism development.
2) In response to the main social problems generalized above, this
research selected five social dimensions, i.e. socio‐economic
security, privacy, communication, participation, and social
identity, with a set of observable and measurable social
indicators to evaluate social quality in the context of living
heritage conservation. The findings offered a manageable and
explicit base to develop an appropriate design‐tool in
conservation practices.
3) This research identified that the social quality of living heritage
sites is sensitive to various changes in land‐use: spatial
morphology and spatial operation. Adopting the MOP
framework, this research developed a model to generalize the
relationships between spatial morphology and social
performance in a traditional living community. The model
highlighted the importance of constrained spatial morphologies
in retaining high social quality of an indigenous community,
which was tested and confirmed through field study in Ogimachi
village.
4) As an applicable product, this research proposed a new
knowledge‐based design tool in the form of design guidelines to
retain social quality of the indigenous community by means of
constrained spatial morphology. The guidelines consisted of
prescriptions and proscriptions to constrain new actors and
activities introduced by tourism‐related development with those
of the indigenous community. These indicated the necessity of
bottom‐up, community‐based approach in the implementation
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 150 ‐
of the guidelines to retain high social quality of the living
heritage sites in the long run.
The study leads to a new approach to conservation planning that takes
into account sustaining the needs of local populations in the process of
living heritage conservation and proposes a new knowledge‐based design
tool to put this into practice.
7.2 Evaluations of this research This research fulfilled the proposed objectives in the initial claims. It
brought forward social problems and drew special attention to the social
quality in the process of living heritage conservation and tourism
development. The research offered an important complement to
mainstream conservation, which merely focused on the preservation of
physical environment and resulted in failure in most cases in the long run.
This research employed comparative case studies in Dayan town and in
Ogimachi village to understand and diagnose the impacts of different
conservation policies and spatial morphologies on the social quality of
indigenous communities and generalized the relationship between
spatial morphology and social performance in the MOP (Morphology‐
Operation‐Performance) framework.
The innovative contribution of this research was that it created an
applicable, knowledge‐based design‐tool in the form of design guidelines
to retain social quality of living heritage sites. The research was built
upon interdisciplinary knowledge and articulated the relationships
among spatial morphology, pattern of activities in relation to different
actors and social quality at living heritage sites in an evolutionary point of
view. It offered explicit design guidelines for retaining key social quality
performance in virtue of constraining certain spatial morphology. This
research highlighted the inconspicuous deterioration of social quality
compared to the retention of physical characteristics in the practice of
Conclusions and limitations
‐ 151 ‐
living heritage conservation and tourism development. Furthermore, the
research proposed an applicable approach to diagnose and overcome the
social problems by means of controlling various interventions via
constrained spatial morphology.
In addition, this research contrasted the top‐down, expert‐driven
approach with the bottom‐up, community‐based approach through the
review of applied conservation programs in Dayan town and Ogimachi
village. It analyzed their respective advantages and disadvantages in
relation to retaining social quality of indigenous communities. The
research offered valuable arguments for the policy‐making and
management in the process of conservation and tourism development of
living heritage sites. The research inspired interdisciplinary studies in this
domain and shed light on the integrated approach in the interest of
sustainable living heritage conservation.
7.3 Limitation and extensions The findings of this research and the application of design guidelines
were built upon three major assumptions:
1) that the living heritage sites should be viable and desirable places to
live for indigenous inhabitants
2) that it is possible to find a consensus on living ‘values’ of the site
between indigenous people, public authorities and tourists, which
makes possible a compromise between economic, entertainment,
educational and social objectives
3) that the way of traditional life and practice carried out by the
indigenous inhabitants of the heritage site represent universal value
as a social capital and as an expression of cultural diversity
As stated above, the evidence in support of this research hypothesis and
its findings was grounded upon two field case studies. Therefore the
findings are limited by:
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 152 ‐
1) the number and the type of cases selected to develop and examine
the hypothesis empirically (only two case studies from an Asian
context)
2) the methods to obtain data, such as the ways of observations and
surveys carried out at the site, and sample sizes in the surveys
3) the methods of data aggregation and analysis applied in the research
in the framework of MOP
Future investigation is called for to expand the conclusions and the
applicability of the knowledge‐based design tool, in order to develop the
knowledge between social quality maintenance and environmental
conservation at living heritage sites in the long run. Such investigations
might involve a larger number of sample cases and extend all over the
world.
In addition, social indicators to evaluate the social quality of indigenous
communities in this research were abstracted from social problems in
relation to tourism development. However, there might be other factors
that caused social problems and conflicts, such as the deterioration of
environmental performance, discrimination against the minorities,
unequal distribution of economic benefits and so on, which were out of
the scope of this research.
The conservation of living heritage sites is much more complicated than
that of an artifact, involving economic, environmental, managerial and
political considerations. This research limited its findings and applications
in dealing with the deterioration of social quality in relation to just
tourism‐related development at living heritage sites. Future study could
be advised to deal with different subjects with relation to social quality of
a living heritage site. For instance, study on the relationship between
environmental performance and social quality in a living community,
where noise level (dB) and thermal comfort indicators (daylight, wind
speed, MRT and so on) could be measured and compared to understand
Conclusions and limitations
‐ 153 ‐
the relationship between social quality and spatial quality in the process
of conservation and restoration. Given the heterogeneous nature of
these indicators, special techniques of multidimensional scaling might be
necessary to apply. Meanwhile this work would require tremendous time
and financial resources to collect data from a large number of field
studies.
The limitations of this research might have affected the generalization of
the conclusions and applicability of the design tool. However, the
conclusions suggested new directions for future research, which could
expand the knowledge of the relationship between social quality
maintenance and environmental conservation, in order to achieve a
more comprehensive strategy for sustainable development of living
heritage sites.
The present study focused on the development of a knowledge‐based
design tool. However, such a tool to be applied requires an efficient
policy and management of implementation. Based on the case studies in
Dayan town and Ogimachi village, the following section elaborates on the
measures to complement the bottom‐up, community‐based approach of
implementation, which has been widely debated in recent programs of
Living Heritage conservation. It suggests the future managerial study on
in depth bottom‐up, community‐based approach through inspiring
indigenous inhabitants actively engaged in both conservation and
tourism development.
7.3.1 In-depth method of local participation In order to retain social quality via constrained spatial morphology
mentioned above, an effective management system with the active
involvement of indigenous inhabitants needs to be developed at the
same time. The engagement of local residents should go beyond the
stage of value identification, as previous community‐based approaches
applied in most cases. Local residents should play a leading role in the
development and management of tourism as well as conservation. As
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 154 ‐
showed in the conservation of Ogimachi village, local associations
involved in different tourism industries and traditional activities
demonstrated very positive effects in controlling the collective identities
of the living heritage site. For instance, the local associations of
restaurants and commercial businesses reached agreement on opening
hours. This regulated working schedules under the principle of equal
competition on one hand; on the other hand, it controlled the
environmental quality via restricting tourism activities and potential
disturbances, and thus reserved a peaceful country environment at night
time. Based on the observations and conversations with tourists, they
enjoyed the quiet nights here with local people, because they had not
come for night life, but for appreciating the unique culture in the
mountainous countryside. Moreover, the local associations created
plenty of employment related to preservation and tourism industries,
which played a significant role in the economic security of local society.
In general, for the conservation and tourism development of a living
heritage site, interactions between tourists and local residents are
necessary and inevitable. Local associations as traditional mutual help
forums represent the interests of local residents and maintain the
standards of living quality. There are two important forms of local
associations deserving further promotion: associations carrying
traditional knowledge, skills and responsibilities; and associations acting
in a similar manner to guilds in traditional and modern business fields.
These could be either inherited from the past as part of local tradition, or
developed corresponding to current needs. The first type of associations
is receiving growing attention with wide recognition of ‘intangible’
heritage. They are usually bound with nostalgia, similar interests or a
sense of responsibility. The second type of associations does not receive
enough attention in current living heritage conservation, because in most
living heritage sites, local residents have lost their control and the
initiative in the development due to the fast speed of transformation.
Even though there have been some traditional guilds in the past, they
declined as the traditional businesses vanished, and became ornaments
Conclusions and limitations
‐ 155 ‐
to some extent. However, in some living heritage sites, it is the local
associations that initiate conservation and development, like Ogimachi
village, and therefore, they continue performing these key roles in the
future. In other sites, the local community realized the necessity of
regaining control of their living environment, like Baisha district in Lijiang
ancient town, and thus they reorganized different groups to take
responsibilities for both conservation and development issues. Baisha
district is not the only living heritage site with such self‐motivated
conservation of living environment. There is growing interest in
developing high autonomy in living heritage conservation from different
sectors.
7.3.2 Importance of local guilds Guilds are defined as ‘associations of persons of the same trade or
pursuits, formed to protect mutual interests and maintain standards’. The local guilds emphasize the active involvement of local residents in
traditional and modern business, which hand the initiative of
development back to the local community. They play a key role in
maintaining social quality at a living site in the process of conservation as
well as tourism development. On one hand, they offer part‐time/full‐
time working opportunities in the field of management, which encourage
local people to share benefits as well as responsibilities. Local guilds help
to develop the full potential resources with reference to local life, and
thus enhance socio‐economic security in a living community; on the
other hand, decision‐making is based on agreement among indigenous
residents, and therefore the social preferences and corresponding
environmental quality are taken into consideration in the process. In
particular, the temporal characteristics of the operation at the living site
could be respected in developing tourism‐related activities and facilities.
To achieve sustainable development of living heritage sites, solely
conservation of physical objects and environment proved to be
insufficient. Social quality of indigenous community studied in this
research brought an important complementary perspective in the
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 156 ‐
conservation process of living heritage sites. More interdisciplinary study
is needed and a more cooperative approach is encouraged for future
implementation of living heritage conservation.
References
‐ 157 ‐
8 References Alderfer, C. 1972. Existence, relatedness and growth. New York: Free Press.
Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, and Ingrid Fiksdahl‐King Murray Silverstein with Max Jacobson, Shlomo Angel. 1977. A pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Altman, Irwin, and Abraham Wandersman, eds. 1987. Neighborhood and community environment: Plenum Press.
ASHRAE STANDARDE. 1992. Thermal Environmental Conditions for human Occupancy. Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.
Barker, Roger Garlock, Herbert F. Wright, and et. al. Louise S. Barker. 1951. One boy's day: A specimen record of behavior. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers.
Beck, Wolfgang, Laurent van der Maesen, Alan Walker, ed. 1997. The Social Quality of Europe. The Hague/London/Boston: Kluwer Law International.
Becker, Egon, Thomas Jahn, and Immanuel Stiess. 1999. Sustainability and the Social Sciences. A crossing disciplinary approach to integrating environmental considerations into theoretical reorientation. London: ZED Books.
Becker, Egon, Thomas Jahn, Immanuel Stiess, and Peter Wehling. 1997. Sustainability: A Cross‐Disciplinary Concept for Social Transformations: UNESCO Management of Social Transformations Program.
Beem, Christopher. 1999. The necessity of politics: Reclaiming American public life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Berger‐Schmitt, Regina. 2001. Dimensions, indicators and time series in a European system of social indicators by example. Mannheim: Centre for Survey Research and Methodology (ZUMA).
Berger‐Schmitt, Regina. 2002. Considering social cohesion in quality of life assessments: concept and measurement. Social Indicators Research 50 (403‐428).
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 158 ‐
Berkes, Fikret. 2003. Rethinking community‐based conservation, Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2, Canada.
Berman, Y., and David Phillips. 2004. Social Quality and the Conditional Factor of Social Cohesion: 3rd draft
Boito, Camillo. 1983. Questioni pratiche di Belle Arti. Milano: Hoepli.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice, translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chermayeff, Serge, and Christopher Alexander. 1963. Community and privacy: toward a new architecture of humanism. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.
Chermayeff, Serge, and Alexander Tzonis. 1971. Shape of community: realization of human potential: Penguin.
Choi, HwanSuk Chris, and Ercan Sirakaya. 2006. Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism. Tourism management 27:1274‐1289.
Coccossis, H., and P. Nijkamp. 1995. Urban Conservation and Planning. In Planning for Our Cultural Heritage, edited by H. Coccossis, and P. Nijkamp. Aldershot: Avebury.
Coleman, J.C. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94:95‐120.
Costanza, Rober, Brendan Fisher et al. 2007. Quality of life: An approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well‐being. Ecological Economics 61:267‐276.
Costanza, Rober, and H. E. Daly. 1992. Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology 6:37‐46.
Dijkgraaf, Cor. 2003. How world heritage sites disappear: Four cases, four threats. Paper read at Linking universal and local values: Managing a sustainable future for World Heritage, at Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Dwyer, Larry, and Deborah Edwards. 2000. Nature‐based tourism on the edge of urban development. Sustainable Tourism 8 (4).
References
‐ 159 ‐
Edensor, Tim. 1998. Tourist at the Taj: Performance and Meaning at a sybolic Site. London and New York: Routledge.
Fahey, T., B. Nolan, and C.T. Whelan. 2002. A proposal for the future activities on living conditions and quality of life. Paper read at European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, at Dublin.
Fairclough, Graham. 2001. Cultural landscape, sustainability and living with change? Paper read at Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conservation of the Built Environment‐4th Annual US/ICOMOS International Symposium, at Philadelphia.
Fairclough, G.J., G. Lambrick, and A. McNab. 1999. Yesterday's World, Tomorrow's Landscape. The English Heritage Historic Landscape Project, 1992‐1994. London: English Heritage.
Fan, Li, and Shao Yong. 2005. The impact of tourism on core area and buffer zone: Heritage management in the old town of Lijiang, China. Paper read at Monuments and sites in their setting‐Conserving cultural heritage in changing townscapes and landscapes, at Xi'an.
Feilden, Bernard M. and Jukka Jokilehto. 1998. Management Guidelines for World Cultural Heritage Sites. second ed. Rome: ICCROM.
Festinger, Leon. 1954. A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations 7 (2):117‐140.
Filho, Walter Leal. 2000. Dealing with misconceptions on the concept of sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 1 (1):9‐19.
Frisch, Michael B. 1998. Quality of life therapy and assessment in health care. Clinical psychology: Science and Practice 5 (1):19‐40.
Gans, Herbert J. 1967. The Levittowners: Ways of life and politics in a new suburban community. Morningside ed 1982. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gans, Herbert J. 1968. People and plans: Essays on urban problems and solutions. New York: Basic Books.
Gehl, Jan. 1987. Life between buildings: Using public space. New York: Van nostrand reinhold company.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 160 ‐
Grimm, N.B., Grove J.M., Pickett S.T.A., and Redman C.L. 2000. Integrated approaches to long‐term studies of urban ecological systems. BioScience 50:571‐584.
Hall, Eeward T. 1969. The Hidden Dimension, Man's use of space in public and private. London: The Bodley Head.
Haslam, Alexander S. 2001. Psychology in Organizations ‐ The Social Identitty Approach. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Haslam, S. A., C. McGarty, and J. C. Turner. 1996. Salient group memberships and persuasion: The structuring of consensus through identity‐based social influence. In What's so social about social cognition? Social cognition research in small groups, edited by J. L. Nye and A. M. Brower. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Herrmann, P. 2003. Social Quality and the Conditional Factor of Social
Empowerment, 3rd draft. Amsterdam: EFSQ (October 2003).
Historic Environment Review. 2000. Power of Place: A future for the historic environment. London: English Heritage.
Hogg, M.A., and G.M. Vaughan. 2002. Social psychology. 3rd ed. London: Prentice Hall.
Huangb, Peggy Teo and Shirlena. 1995. Tourism and heritage conservation in Singapore. Annals of Tourism Research 22 (3):589‐615.
Huitt, W. 2004. Maslow's hierarchy of needs: Educational psychology interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University.
The Getty Conservation Institute. 2001. Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conservation of the Built Environment. Paper read at 4th Annual US/ICOMOS International Symposium, at Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Jacobs, Jane. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities: the failure of town planning: Panguin Books in association with Jonathan Cape.
Keizer, M., and L.J.G. van der Maesen. 2003. Social Quality and the Conditional Factor of Socio‐Economic Security: 3rd draft Working Paper. Amsterdam: EFSQ (September 2003).
References
‐ 161 ‐
Kellert, S.R., J.N.Mehta, S.A. Ebbin, and L.L.Lichenfeld. 2000. Community natural resource management: promise, rhetoric and reality. Society & Natural Resources 13:705‐715.
Kenkyuukai, Tobikoe Gasshou Bunka. 1996. Seikai Isan no Gasshouzukuriteki Shuuraku: Sainou Insatu Kabushikigaisha.
Klitgaarde, R., and J. Fedderke. 1995. Social integration and disintegration: An exploratory analysis of cross‐country data. World Development 23:357‐369.
Kong, ping. 2005. Gardening in semi‐open spaces in tropical high‐rise housing: Environmental and social benefits. M.A. Research Dissertation, Architecture Dept, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Kugel, Seth. 2006. Preservation: Sure, It's a Good Thing, but.. New York Time, Jan 15th.
Layard, R. 2005. Happiness: Lessons from a new science. New York: Penguin.
Levin, S.A. 1999. Fragile dominion: complexity and the commons. New York: Perseus.
Lockwood, D. 1999. Civic integration and social cohesion. In Capitalism and social cohesion, edited by I. G. a. G. Olofsson. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Low, Setha M. 2001. Social Sustainability: People, History, and Values. Paper read at Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conservation of the Built Environment‐4th Annual US/ICOMOS International Symposium, at Philadelphia.
Low, Setha M. and I. Altman. 1992. Place Attachment. New York: Plenum.
Lynch, Kevin. 1960. The image of the city: The MIT Press.
Maesen, Laurent J.G. van der, Alan C. Walker and W.A. Beck. 2000. Indicators of social quality: Proposal to DG‐Research of the European Commission. Amsterdam: EFSQ.
Maesen, Laurent J.G. van der and Alan C. Walker. 2006. Indicators of social quality: Outcomes of the European Scientific Network. European Journal of Social Quality 5 (1/2).
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 162 ‐
Mason, Randall and Erica Avrami. 2000. Heritage Values and Challenges of Conservation Planning. Paper read at Management Planning for Archaeological Sites, at Corinth, Greece.
Mathes, E. 1981. Maslow's hierarchy of needs as a guide for living. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 21:69‐72.
McGarty, C., J. C. Turner, P. J. Oakes, and S. A. Haslam. 1993. The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology 23:17‐38.
Mendoza, G.A. and Macoun, P. with Prabhu, R., Sukadri, D., Purnomo, H., and H. and Hartanto. 1999. Guidelines for applying Multi‐Criteria analysis to the assessment of criteria and indicators. Vol. 9, The criteria & indicators toolbox seriers. Jakarta, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Motani, Kosuke. 2007. 'Life style and pop culture? Strategic featuring points of tourism in Japan' in Report of the research committee on "Industry measures to enhance the competitiveness of Japanese tourism industry": Global industrial and social progress research institute.
Murphree, M.W. 2002. Protected areas and the commons. Common Property Resource Digest, 1‐3.
Newman, Oscar. 1972. Defensible Space: People and Design in the violent city. London: Architectural Press.
Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University press.
Otsuki, Youji. 2006. Outline and Specification of Preservation Districts for Groups of Historic Buildings System in Japan: As management system of Historic Environment for Living. Paper read at 3rd International conference of protection and development of Chinese ancient village, at Wuyuan, Jianxi province, China.
Phillips, David. 2003. Social cohesion, social exclusion and social quality. Paper read at Social quality in Europe stream, at Copenhagen.
References
‐ 163 ‐
Phillips, David and Yitzhak Berman. 2003. Social quality and ethnos communities: Concepts and indicators. Community Development Journal 38 (4):344‐357.
Poulsen, F. 1920. Delphi. London, UK: Gyldendal.
Putnam, Robert D. 1993. The prosperous community: social captial and public life. American Prospect 4.
Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Ramirez, Laura K. Brennan, Christine M. Hoehner et al. 2006. Indicators of activity‐friendly communities: An evidence‐based consensus process. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31:515‐524.
Rapoport, Amos. 1976. Sociocultural aspects of Man‐Environment Studies. In The mutual interaction of people and their built environment: A cross‐cultural perspective, edited by A. Rapoport. The Hague, Paris: Mouton Publishers.
Rapoport, Amos. 1983. Development, cultural change and supportive design. Habitatinti 7 (5/6):249‐268.
Ragin, Charles. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Sable, Karin A. and Robert W. Kling. 2001. The double public good: A conceptual framework for "Shared Experience" values associated with heritage conservation. Journal of Cultural Economics 25:77‐89.
Sachs, Ignacy. 1996. What state, what markets, for what development? Social Indicators Research 39 (3):311‐320.
Sachs, Ignacy. 2006. New opportunities for community driven rural development. Sao Paulo: Institute of Advanced Studies of the University of Sao Paulo.
Saito, Hidetoshi and Nobuko Inaba. 1996. The historic villages of Shirakawa‐go and Gokayama ‐ Traditional houses in the Gassho style: The committee of the Commenmoration of the Inscription of "The historic villages of Shirakawa‐go and Gokayama ‐ Traditional houses in the Gassho style" on the World Heirage List.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 164 ‐
Schomaker, M. 1997. Development of environmental indicators in UNEP. Paper read at Land quality indicators and their use in sustainable agriculture and rural development, at Rome.
Shao, Yong. 2004. Research and Conservation of Urban Heritage Sites. Ideal Space.
Shao, Yong , Sun Meng, Zhang Lan, Gu Mingming, Fan Li, and Kong Ping. 2002. Conservation Plan for Lijiang Ancient Town, World Heritage Site. Shanghai: Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute.
Sirgy, M. Joseph, Dennis Cole, Rustan Kosenko, H. Lee Meadow, Don Rahtz, Muris Cicic, Guang Xi Jin, Duygun Yarsuvat, David L. Blenkhom, and Natasha Nagpal. 1995. Measures and methods in QOL/Marketing research. In New dimensions in marketing/quality‐of‐life research, edited by M. J. Sirgy and A. C. Samli: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Smith, M.K. 2007. Social capital [www,infed.org/biblio/social‐capital.htm]. the encyclopedia of informal education, 04 December 2007 2007 [cited 04 December 2007].
Songorwa, A.N. 1999. Community‐based wildlife management (CWM) in Tanzania: are the communities interested?: World Development.
Stovel, Herb. 1991. Safeguarding historic uran ensembles in a time of change: a management guide. Paper read at International Symposium on World Heritage Towns, at Quebec, Canada.
Tajfel, H., and J. C. Turner. 1986. The social identity theory of inter‐group behavior. In Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by S. Worchel and L. W. Austin. Chigago: Nelson‐Hall.
Throsby, David. 2002. Culture Capital and Sustainability Conceptions in the Economics of Cultural Heritage. In Assessing the Values of Culture Heritage, edited by M. d. l. Torre. Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute.
Toyoshima, Hisano. 2007. Water Environment in Ogimachi, Shirakawa, the World Heritage Site. Paper read at Series on the Management and Conservation of World Heritage Sites: Workshop on World Heritage management over time ‐ maintaining values and significance, at Hiroshima, Japan.
References
‐ 165 ‐
Turnhout, Esther, Matthijs Hisschemoller, and Herman Eijsackers. 2007. Ecological indicators: Between the two fires of science and policy. Ecological Indicators 7:215‐228.
Tzonis, Alexander. 1987. Frames, Plans, Representation: Introductory course to programmatic and functional analysis of buildings. Delft: T.U. Delft publication.
Tzonis, Alexander. 2006. Rethinking design methodology for sustainable social quality. In Tropical sustainable architecture: Social and environmental dimensions, edited by J.‐H. B. a. B. L. Ong: Architectural Press and Elsevier.
Tzonis, Alexander, and Liane Lefaivre. 1978. Development of the populist movement in architecture. Harvard Publication Series.
Vogel, Joachim. 1997. The future direction of social indicator research. Social Indicators Research 42:103‐116.
Vyzoviti, Sophia. 2005. Emergent places for urban groups without a place: Representation, Explanation, Prescription. Doctorate dissertation in Technology University of Delft, the Netherlands. ISBN 90‐9019141‐0
Walker, Alan, and Laurent van der Maesen. 2003. Social quality and quality of life. Paper read at ESPA‐NET Conference, 13‐15 Nov, 2003, at Copenhagen.
Western, David, R. Michael Wright, and Shirley Carol Strum. 1994. Natural connections: Perspectives in community‐based conservation. Island Press.
Wijesuriya, Gamini, Kazuhiko Nishi, and Joe King. 2006. Living Heritage Sites Workshop: Empowering the Community. ICCROM Newsletter.
Woolcock, M. 1998. Social capital and economic development: towards a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society 27:151‐208.
World Bank. 1998. The initiative on defining, monitoring and measuring social capital: Overview and program description. New York: World Bank.
Woudenberg, F. 1991. An evaluation of Delphi. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 40:131‐150.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 166 ‐
Yin, Robert K. 1994. Case study research: Design and methods (second editon). Vol. 5, Applied social research methods series. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Yli‐Pelkonen, Vesa, and Jari Niemela. 2005. Linking ecological and social systems in cities: urban planning in Finland as a case. Biodiversity and Conservation 14:1947‐1967.
Yoshida, Sei, ed. Nihon no minka vol.1. Tokyo: Gakushukenkyusha, 1981
Yu, Li. 1994. A framework for comparing and controlling: Number‐based design reasoning systems: Delft.
Zeisel, John. 1975. Sociology and architectural design. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Zeisel, John. 1981, 1984. Inquiry by design: Tools for Environment ‐ Behavior research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Annex
‐ 167 ‐
9 Annex
Annex 1: Photographs of Dayan Town
Figure A 1: Landuse plan of the core protected area of Dayan town (Data source: Conservation planning of Lijiang ancient town, 2002,
Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 168 ‐
Figure A 2: Architectural patterns in Dayan town (Data source: Conservation planning of Lijiang ancient town, 2002, Tongji Urban
Planning and Design Institute)
Annex
‐ 169 ‐
Figure A 3: Traffic systems and car parks of Dayan town (after
Conservation planning of Lijiang ancient town, 2002, Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 170 ‐
Figure A 4: Distribution of tourismrelated facilities (2002 vs. 2007)
Annex
‐ 171 ‐
Traditional residence: made of wood, stone, adobe and rammed earth
Traditional residence: made of timber framework with stone foundation (Section of Xian Wen Lane, after the drawing in Conceptual Plan of Lijiang ancient town, 2002)
Courtyards in the traditional residences
An atrium in the traditional residence
Streets along the canals
Streets along the canals
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 172 ‐
Shopping street for tourists Fruit/vegetable market for locals
Residential streets Streets along the topography
Open space in a neighborhood ‘Three‐wells’ in a neighborhood
Annex
‐ 173 ‐
Plaza in Dayan
Entrance plaza in Dayan
Family hostels in a neighborhood Family hostels, tea‐house and craft‐shops in a neighborhood
Figure A 5: Onsite photos in Dayan town
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 174 ‐
Annex 2: Questionnaire Analysis of Dayan town in Lijiang Ancient Town Date: June, 2002
Place: Dayan – Lijiang Ancient Town, China (CN)
Method of data collection: multiple‐choice & open question Questionnaire
Number of valid questionnaires: 99
Appendix I: Demography
Race Percentage Naxi 87% Han 7% Bai 5% Others 1%
Total 100%
Age Composition Percentage Below 20 1% 20‐30 1% 30‐45 25% 45‐60 34% above 60 38%
Total 100%
Family Composition Percentage Nuclear Family (A couple with children) 38% Stem Family ( Grandparents, parents and children) 51% United Family (Two or more Nuclear families) 1% Family without children 0% Aged family 6% Living alone 0% Single family 2% Others 2%
Total 100%
Annex
‐ 175 ‐
Appendix II: Living Environment and Quality
Main Family Income Percentage Working in other cities 4% Tourism related business(retail, restaurant, lodge, etc.) 18% Property landlord 9% Local employee at tourism market 19% Agriculture 1% Retirement pension 26% Others 22%
Total 100%
Career Analysis Percentage Retired 54% Individual business 18% Jobless 10% Teacher 7% Others (worker, student, doctor etc) 11%
Total 100%
Average living areas per capita (SqM) Percentage 0‐20 24% 20‐50 58% above 50 18%
Total 100%
Years lived in Dayan town Percentage below 5 5% 5‐10 3% 10‐20 11% 20‐50 38% above 50 42%
Total 100%
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 176 ‐
Property Percentage Public 6% Private 90% Rented 4%
Total 100%
Sanitation Percentage With 34% Without 66%
Total 100%
Services wanted (multi‐choice) Percentage Open markets 24% Shopping malls 28% Grain and oil supply stands 26% Barber shops 21% Grocers 13% Post offices 18% Repair stalls 72% Entertainment centres 75% Community centres for old people 40% Middle school 25% Primary school 10% Hospital 38%
Distance with potable water systems (Meter) Percentage Within 10 58% Around 50 32% Around 100 7% Far away 3%
Total 100%
Annex
‐ 177 ‐
Appendix II: Summary of open questions on the opinions relating to current living conditions in Dayan
Most satisfying factors:
Open air; tradition; unique identity; good neighborhood relationship;
vernacular residences in relation to bridges and canals; natural environment;
etc.
Least satisfying factors:
Lack of sanitary services in houses/neighborhoods and lack of drainage
system in neighborhoods; lack of community centers for old people and
other daily services; lack of job opportunities and melon‐cutting from
tourism industry; mass immigrants without respects to the traditions of the
ancient town; insecure environment in the ancient town with growing
incident of theft and robbery; inefficient traffic system; potential dangers of
fire, flood and earthquake; etc.
Appendix III: Social Interaction
Relationship with neighbors Percentage Good 73% Ok 26% Not good 1%
Total 100%
Socializing with neighbors Percentage Often 46% Sometimes 48% Seldom 5%
Total 100%
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 178 ‐
With whom you often socialize (multi‐choice) Percentage Neighbors 62% Colleagues 51% Relatives 53% Others 15% Where do you socialize with neighbors (multi‐choice) Percentage In the courtyards 22% On the streets 63% In the nearby blocks 38% Other places 8%
Where do you often go shopping (multi‐choice) Percentage Open markets 75% Shopping malls 35% Supermarkets in the new district 14%
Time needed for daily shopping Percentage Within 10 mins 11% 10‐30 mins 35% 30‐60 mins 53% more than 60 mins 1%
Total 100%
Do you think there are short of places for socializing and entertainment?
Percentage
Not at all 16% Yes 54% Very much 30%
Total 100%
Annex
‐ 179 ‐
Appendix IV: Attitude to conservation and tourism development
How will you maintain the preserved residence? Percentage Will maintain with government subsidy 9% Maintain by own accord 75% Already maintained recently 15% Won't maintain 1%
Total 100%
Ideal living place Percentage Old town 61% New developed district 13% Both are ok 26%
Total 100%
Most disturbing factor caused by tourism Percentage Too many tourist 6% Environmental pollution 40% Too much noise 10% No melon‐cutting from tourism benefit 26% Being forced to leave the old town 15% Being visited and taken photos by visitors 0% Others 2%
Total 100%
Do you welcome tourists to visit your house Percentage Welcome 62% Indifferent 35% Don't like 3%
Total 100%
What if the tourism extended to your neighborhood? Percentage Move away 10% Open a shop or a hostel 35% Indifferent, continue normal life 55%
Total 100%
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 180 ‐
How do you participate tourism development Percentage Opening a shop or a hostel 58% Renting out houses along the street 18% Renting out houses and move away 9% Being a cicerone 7% Others 7%
Total 99%
Economic Benefit from tourism Percentage Quite good 19% Only good in holiday season 49% Not good 31%
Total 100%
Annex
‐ 181 ‐
Annex 3: Social Indicators developed by the Network Indicators of Social Quality Final list of social indicators developed by Network Indicators of Social
Quality in April 2005, under the framework of European Foundation of
Social Quality (Maesen and Walker, 2006).
Appendix I: Indicators of socioeconomic security61
Domains Sub‐domains Indicators
Income sufficiency
Part of household income spent on health, clothing, food and housing (in the lower and median household incomes).
Financial resources
Income security
How certain biographical events affect the risk of poverty on household level. Proportion of total population living in households receiving entitlement transfers (means‐tested, cash and in‐kind transfers) that allow them to live above EU poverty level.
Housing security
Proportion of people who have certainty of keeping their home.
Proportion of hidden families (i.e., several families within the same household).
Housing conditions
Number of square meters per household member
Proportion of population living in houses with lack of functioning basic amenities (water, sanitation and energy).
Housing and environment
Environmental conditions (social and natural)
People affected by criminal offences per 10,000 inhabitants
Proportion living in households that are situated in neighbourhoods with above average pollution rate (water, air and noise).
61 Keizer et al. (2003). Cit. in Maesen and Walker (2006), p. 17‐18.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 182 ‐
Security of health provisions
Proportion of people covered by compulsory/ voluntary health insurance (including qualitative exploration of what is and what is not covered by insurance system).
Health services
Number of medical doctors per 10,000 inhabitants.
Average distance to hospital, measured in minutes, not in metres.
Average response time of medical ambulance.
Health
Care services Average number of hours spent on care differentiated by paid and unpaid.
Employment security
Length of notice before employer can change terms and conditions of labour relation/contract.
Length of notice before termination of labour contract.
Proportion employed workforce with temporary, non permanent, job contract.
Proportion of workforce that is illegal.
Work
Working conditions
Number of employees that reduced work time because of interruption (parental leave, medical assistance of relative, palliative leave) as a proportion of the employees who are entitled to these kinds of work time reductions.
Number of accidents (fatal/non‐fatal) at work per 100,000 employed persons (if possible: per sector)
Number of hours a full‐time employee typically works a week (actual working week).
Education Security of education
Proportion of pupils leaving education without finishing compulsory education (early school leavers).
Study fees as proportion of national mean net wage.
Annex
‐ 183 ‐
Quality of education
Proportion of students who, within a year of leaving school with or without certificate, are able to find employment.
Appendix II: Indicators of social cohesion62
Domains Sub‐domains Indicators
Trust Generalised trust
Specific trust
Extent to which ‘most people can be trusted’.
Trust in: government; elected representatives; political parties; armed forces; legal system; the media; trade unions, police; religious institutions; civil service; economic transactions.
Number of cases being referred to European Court of law.
Importance of: family; friends; leisure; politics; respecting parents. parents’ duty to children.
Altruism Volunteering: number of hours per week.
Blood donation.
Tolerance Views on immigration, pluralism and multiculturalism.
Tolerance of other people’s self‐identity, beliefs, behaviour and lifestyle preferences.
Other integrative forms and values
Social contract Beliefs on causes of poverty: individual or structural.
Willingness to pay more taxes if you were sure that it would improve the situation of the poor.
Intergenerational: willingness to pay 1 percent more taxes in order to improve the
62 Berman et al. (2004). Cit. in Maesen and Walker (2006), p. 19.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 184 ‐
situation of elderly people in your country.
Willingness to actually do something practical for the people in your community/ neighbourhood, such as: picking up litter, doing some shopping for elderly/disabled/sick people in your neighbourhood, assisting neighbours/community members with filling out (fax/municipal/etc.) forms, cleaning the street/porch/doorway.
Division of household tasks between men and women: Do you have an understanding with your husband/spouse about the division of household tasks, raising of the children, and gaining household income?
Social networks
Networks Membership (active or inactive) of political, voluntary, charitable organisations or sport clubs.
Support received from family, neighbours and friends.
Frequency of contact with friends and colleagues.
National/ European identity
Sense of national pride.
Identification with national symbols and European symbols.
Regional/ community/local identity
Sense of regional/community/local identity.
Identity
Interpersonal identity
Sense of belonging to family and kinship network.
Annex
‐ 185 ‐
Appendix III: Indicators of Social Inclusion63
Domains Sub‐domains Indicators
Constitutional/ political rights
Proportion of residents with citizenship.
Proportion having right to vote in local elections and proportion exercising it.
Social right Proportion with right to a public pension (i.e., a pension organised or regulated by the government).
Women’s pay as a proportion of men’s.
Civil rights Proportion with right to free legal advice.
Proportion experiencing discrimination.
Citizenship rights
Economic and political networks
Proportion of ethnic minority groups elected or appointed to parliament, boards of private companies and foundations.
Proportion of women elected or appointed to parliament, boards of private companies and foundations.
Labour market
Access to paid employment
Long‐term unemployment (12+ months).
Involuntary part‐time or temporary employment.
Health services Proportions with entitlement to and using public primary health care
Housing Proportion homeless, sleeping rough.
Average waiting time for social housing.
Education School participation rates and higher education participation rates.
Services
Social care Proportion of people in need receiving care services.
Average waiting time for care services (including child care).
63 Walker et al. (2003). Cit. in Maesen and Walker (2006), p. 20.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 186 ‐
Financial services
Proportion denied credit differentiated by income groups
Access to financial assistance/advice in case of need.
Transport Proportion of population who has access to public transport system.
Density of public transport system and road density.
Civic/cultural services
Number of public sport facilities per 10,000 inhabitants
Number of public and private civic & cultural
facilities (e.g., cinema, theatre, concerts) per 10,000 inhabitants.
Neighbourhood participation
Proportion in regular contact with neighbours.
Friendships Proportion in regular contact with friends.
Social networks
Family life Duration of contact with relatives (cohabiting and non‐cohabiting).
Informal (non‐monetary) assistance received by different types of family.
Annex
‐ 187 ‐
Appendix IV: Indicators of social empowerment64
Domains Sub‐domains Indicators
Application of knowledge
Extent to which social mobility is knowledge‐based (formal qualifications).
Availability of information
Per cent of population literate and numerate.
Availability of free media. Access to the Internet.
Knowledge base
User friendliness of information
Provision of information in multiple languages on social services.
Availability of free advocacy, advice and guidance centres.
Control over employment contract
Percent of labour force that is member of a trades union (differentiated to public and private employees).
Percent of labour force covered by a collective agreement (differentiated by public and private employees).
Prospects of job mobility
Percent of employed labour force receiving work‐based training.
Percent of labour force availing of publicly provided training (not only skills based). (Please outline costs of such training if any.)
Percent of labour force participating in any ‘back to work scheme’
Labour market
Reconciliation of work and family life (work/life balance)
Percent of organisations operating work life balance policies.
Percent of employed labour force actually making use of work/life balance measures (see indicator above).
Openness and supportiveness
Openness and supportiveness
Existence of processes of consultation and direct democracy (e.g., referenda).
64 Herrmann (2003). Cit. in Maesen and Walker (2006), p. 21‐22.
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 188 ‐
of political system
Openness of economic system
Number of instances of public involvement in major economic decision making (e.g., public hearings about company relocation, inward investment and plant closure).
of institutions
Openness of organisations
Percent of organisations/institutions with work councils.
Support for collective action
Percent of the national and local public budget that is reserved for voluntary, not‐for‐profit citizenship initiatives.
Marches and demonstrations banned in the past 12 months as proportion of total marched and demonstrations (held and banned).
Public space
Cultural
enrichment
Proportion of local and national budget allocated to all cultural activities.
Number of self‐organised cultural groups and events. Proportion of people experiencing different forms of personal enrichment on a regular basis.
Annex
‐ 189 ‐
Annex 4: Social indicators proposed by Choi and Sirakaya (2006, p.1281) Indicators for the social dimension Key themes Indicators/issues Mean Soundness
Host community satisfaction toward tourism development
4.30 0.83
Host community attitude toward tourism development
4.20 1.00
Continuance of traditional activities by local residents
3.70 0.50
Stress in visitors/host relationship
3.60 0.92
Resident/non‐resident ownership of homes (2nd homes/part time residents)
3.60 1.00
Level of congruency among stakeholders
3.50 0.75
Host community/residents and stakeholders
Resident involvement in tourism industry
4.10 1.00
Change in social cohesion 3.70 0.67
Change in community structure evident of a community breakdown and alienation
3.50 0.67 Social cohesion
Change in family cohesion 3.50 0.50
Sex tourism 3.60 0.75
Percent employed in sex tourism
3.60 0.42
Prostitution number and rate in local sex tourism industry
3.60 0.67 Sex tourism
Community attitude toward sex tourism
3.60 0.83
Tourist satisfaction Tourist satisfaction/attitude toward tourism development
4.00 1.00
Community resource Degradation/erosion of natural and cultural resource
4.00 0.92
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 190 ‐
Shift in social structure (e.g. power shift and its socio‐economic implications)
3.80 0.67 Distribution of resources/power
Percent of managerial employment from local residents
3.80 0.83
Litter/pollution (air, water, etc.) 4.20 1.00
Overcrowding 4.00 0.92
Congestion (road) 3.90 0.92
Crime rate 3.60 0.67
Public awareness toward value of tourism
3.70 0.75
Number of incidents of vandalism reported
3.50 0.67
Community health (availability of health policy related to tourism)
3.50 0.75
Community health and safety
Loss of traditional lifestyle and knowledge via modernization
3.50 0.92
Quality of life in general
Levels of satisfaction with community life in general (QOL)
3.56 0.67
Note: Mean: each itemized indicator of each category has been rated by panel members from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1). Cutoff point: 3.5.
Annex
‐ 191 ‐
Annex 5: Interview questions and response analysis in Ogimachi
Date: 17‐18 November, 2007
Place: Ogimachi, Shirakawa‐Go, Gifu Prefecture, Japan
Method of data collection: Structured interview
Number of interviewees: 5
# Age Family structure Career Main family income
1 39 Husband, wife and a child, 3 members
Officers at the Local Preservation Committee
Salary from the committee
2 42
Wife, husband, children and grandparents, 7 members all together
Housewife,
Husband works for the Village commerce and industry society
Running Minshuku, Salary from local association, cultivating vegetables
3 46 Parents and a brother, 4 members all together
Buddhism monk, looking after religious Gassho‐style houses
Tourism, entrance fee and government sponsor
4 66 Wife and husband, 2 members
Farmer, looking after the Gassho‐style houses,
Retired with pension, cultivating wild vegetables, tourism entrance fee
5 29 Parents and siblings, 5 members all together
Working at the Onsen (hot spring) hotel and restaurant
Salary related to tourism industry
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 192 ‐
1. Why do you think it is important to preserve your village (Ogimachi village)? (what are the motivations)
4 respondents (except the respondent, who is 29 years‐old, an outsider,
working in the restaurant) recalled the crisis in 1970s that because of the
construction of dams, selling or renting out local properties and
abandonment of their homes, Ogimachi village was at the risk of
disappearance. The initiative preservation initiative came from the
recognition of importance of Gassho‐style houses, life styles in the fast
transformation of economic and social conditions in Japan.
2. What happened after your village being listed as ‘Important Preservation District for groups of Historic Buildings’ since 1976?
Good facts include:
Acts and regulations to protect the Gassho‐style houses and village
environment; 5 responses
Improvement of material life via tourism and governmental subsidy;
3 responses
Technical assistance from outside to restore historic buildings; 1
response
Sharing the cultural and unique features with outside people; 1
response
Bad facts include:
Limitation to change their own houses at their convenience –
forbidden or severely restricted new constructions; 4 responses
The gap (living condition) between the people who changed their
houses before the law and people living in the traditional houses
who cannot changed their houses after the law; 1 response
Not as relaxed and easy to live as before; 1 response
Annex
‐ 193 ‐
3. What do you think is important to preserve in your village?
Responsibility of preservation among local residents; 2 responses
Cooperative system (adoption of Village Chater for no sell, no rent,
and no destruction) ; 3 responses
Harmonious relationship between the local people and environment;
2 responses
Enlightenment and education for tourists in order to respect privacy
and cooperate in conservation; 3 responses
4. How do you describe your current living conditions?
Very satisfied 2 responses (one respondent is 66, who felt very
satisfied with familiar and natural environment; the
other is 29, because she loves nature: ‘so I go to
gather edible wild plants in spring and pick Japanese
horse chestnut in fall. I also like to feel the clear
changes of the seasons’)
Satisfied 2 responses especially for raising children
Ok 1 response (complain to limitation of new
constructions)
Not satisfied 0 response
Very unsatisfied 0 response
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 194 ‐
5. What do you think is necessary to have in order to make your life more convenient and comfortable?
Space, such as public space, place for games, social life, and other
activities
Interior spaces, convenient and comfortable house, not so cold or
hot – 2 responses
Provide place for tourists gathering – 1 response
Facilities, such as hospital, kindergarten, primary/middle/high school,
grocery, drug store, etc.
Hospital – 4 responses,
School – 2 responses,
Drug store (Japanese style grocery store) – 2 responses
But all responses showed that because of cars and better
transportation system, it was not a problem to reach the facilities in
neighbor villages or some place near
6. How’s your relationship with neighbors?
very close (visit more than twice a week) 2 responses
close (visit around twice a month) 3 responses
normal (visit several times a year) 1 response
not close (only meet in special occasions,
such as yui or ceremonies)
0 response
no personal
contact
0 response
Annex
‐ 195 ‐
All responses reflected a close or very close relationship with neighbors,
even the new comer felt being included
7. Where do you usually associate with neighbors?
Community places, where activities are organized by local
associations – 4 responses
The activities in this district are very vibrant, so local residents have many
chances to meet neighbors. People participate in different social
associations, such as volunteer fire brigade (group), cooperative group to
remove the snow from the roof, group to clean the irrigation channels,
and association to preserve the natural environment of Hagi Machi
(district), they could always meet neighbors in the group activities and
meetings of each association.
Club for aged people, school, festivals, Buddhist memorial service –
2 responses
Public spaces, like restaurant, theater, Onsen and places near home
‐ 2 responses
8. What attract or make you to live in the village, instead of going to live in big town or cities?
Bonds of family and job ‐ 1 response
Nature and agriculture – 3 responses
Warm heart of local people ‐ 1 response
Pride of culture – 2 responses
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 196 ‐
9. What do you want more from the preservation program?
More education to enhance the sense of conservation of both local
residents and tourists ‐1 response
Life style, such as traditions and cultural events and environment
preservation to hand over to next generations ‐ 1 response
Sense of nostalgia and making Ogimachi a livable place for all
residents ‐ 2 responses (not giving priorities to tourists)
Communications with foreign culture – 1 response
Annex
‐ 197 ‐
Annex 6: Photographs of Ogimachi village
Figure A‐ 6: Natural boundaries and current land‐use patterns of Ogimiachi village, after Appendix 3b, Saito et al., 1996
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 198 ‐
Figure A‐ 7: Routes and Parking system in Ogimachi village, after the tourism map on bus routes, 2007
Annex
‐ 199 ‐
Figure A‐ 8: Facility distribution in Ogimachi village (after tourism map 2007)
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 200 ‐
Night view of Gassho‐style house Night view of Ogimachi village
Street light along main road Street light in front of the temple
Main road
Canals and pavements besidesresidences
Annex
‐ 201 ‐
Pavement around the house and rice field
Pavement in open space near the temple
Pavement across canals to link main road and private access
Pavement across canals around private house
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 202 ‐
Private garden in front of the residence
Private play yard in front of the residence
Cemeteries around residential area Shrine among the residences
Figure A‐ 9: On‐site pictures
Annex
‐ 203 ‐
Annex 7: Summary of UNESCO-ICOMOS Documents on Cultural Heritage Conservation
Resource Year Name of the Document
1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention
1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property
1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage
1994 Buenos Aires Draft Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage
1995 Unidroit Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects
1999 Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict
2001 Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage
2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
UNESCO
Conventions
2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions
Recommendation on International Principles Applicable to Archaeological Excavations
UNESCO
Recommendations
and Declarations
1956
Recommendation Concerning International Competitions in Architecture and Town Planning
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 204 ‐
1960 Recommendation concerning the Most Effective Means of Rendering Museums Accessible to Everyone
1962 Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding of Beauty and Character of Landscapes and Sites
Recommendation on the means of prohibiting and preventing the illicit export, import and transfer of wonershiop of cultural property
Recommendation on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property
1964
Declaration of Principles of International Cultural Co‐operation
1968 Recommendation concerning the Preservation of Cultural Property Endangered by Public or Private works
1972 Recommendation concerning the Protection, at National Level, of the Cultural and Natural Heritage
Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic Areas
1976
Recommendation concerning the International Exchange of Cultural Property
1978 Recommendation for the Protection of Movable Cultural Property
1980 Recommendation for the Safeguarding and Preservation of Moving Images
1989 Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore
1993 Declaration of Oaxaca
1994 Resolution on Information as an Instrument for Protection against War Damages to the Cultural
Annex
‐ 205 ‐
Heritage
1996 Declaration of Valencia
1997 Declaration of Quebec
1998 Declaration of Melbourne
1999 Cairo Decision
1992 Charter of Courmayeur
1997 Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of world Heritage Convention
2001 UNESCO Universal declaration on cultural diversity
2001 Hoi’an Agreement
2002 World Heritage in Africa and sustainable development
Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage 2003
Declaration concerning the Interntional Destruction of Cultural Heritage
Other UNESCO
Documents
2005 Vienna Memorandum
1931 General Conclusions of the Athens Conference
1964 The Venice Charter: International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites
1976 Cultural Tourism
1981 The Florence Charter: Historic Gardens
ICOMOS Charters
and Documents
Adopted at the
General
Conferences
1987 The Washington Charter: Charter on the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 206 ‐
1990 Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage
1996 Charter for the Protection and Management of the Underwater Cultural Heritage
International Wood Committee Charter: Principles for the Preservation of Historic Timber Buildings
International Cultural Tourism Charter: Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage Significance
1999
Charter on the Built Vermacular Heritage
ICOMOS PRINCIPLES FOR THE PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION/RESTORATION OF WALL PAINTINGS
2003
ICOMOS Charter: Principles for the Analysis
Charter for the explanation of cultural Heritage sites
2004
Ename Charter (2nd Draft)
Beijing Document on the Conservation and Restoration of Historic Buildings in East Asia
1967 Norms of Quito: Final Report of the Meeting on the Preservation and Utilization of Monuments and Sites of Artistic and Historical Value
1972 Resolutions of the Symposium on the Introduction of Contemporary Architecture into Ancient Groups of Buildings
1975 Resolution on the Conservation of Smaller Historic Towns
Tlaxcala Declaration on the Revitalization of Small Settlements
ICOMOS
Declaration and
Resolutions
Adopted at
Symposiums
1982
Declaration of Dresden
Annex
‐ 207 ‐
1983 Declaration of Rome
1993 Guidelines for Education and Training in the Conservation of Monuments, Ensembles and Sites
1994 The Nara Document on Authenticity
Declaration of San Antonio 1996
Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites
1998 The Stockholm Declaration : Declaration of ICOMOS marking the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2005 Xi'an Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas
1976 Convention on the Protection of the Archeological, Historical, and Artistic Heritage of the American Nations, Convention of San Salvador
1982 Charter for the Preservation of Quebec's Heritage (Deschambault Declaration)
1983 Appleton Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built Environment
1987 First Brazilian Seminar About the Preservation and Revitalization of Historic Centers
1992 Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value
A Preservation Charter for the Historic Towns and Areas of the United States of America
1999 The Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance
ICOMOS Charters
Adopted at
National Level
2000 Statement on Vernacular Cultural Heritage in
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 208 ‐
Australia)
1877 The SPAB Manifesto: The Principals of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings as Set Forth upon its Foundation
1904 Recommendations of the Madrid Conference
1931 Carta Di Atene
1933 Charter of Athens
1935 Roerich Pact: Protection of Artistic and Scientific Institutions and Historic Monuments
1954 European Cultural Convention
1969 European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage
European Charter of the Architectural Heritage 1975
Declaration of Amsterdam
1976 The Vancouver Declaration On Human Settlements
1977 CHARTER OF MIACHU PICCHU
European Convention on Offences Relating to Cultural Property
1985
Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe
1989 The Vermillion Accord on Archaeological Ethics and the Treatment of the Dead
1990 The Eindhoven Statement
1991 Charter for the Protection and Management
of the Archaeological Heritage
Other Related
International
Documents
1992 European Convention for the Protection of the
Annex
‐ 209 ‐
Archaeological Heritage of Europe (Revised)
New Orleans Charter for the Joint Preservation of Historic Structures and Artifacts
Agenda 21
Declaration of Rio
The Fez Charter 1993
UN General Assembly Resolution (A/RES/48/15) on the Return or Restitution of Cultural Property to the Countries of Origin
Bergen Protocol on Communications and Relations among Cities of the Organization of World Heritage Cities
Diversity of the Creation
Charter for Sustainable Tourism
1995
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
Istanbul Declaration on Human Settlements 1996
Final Communiqué of the NATO‐Partnership for Peace Conference on Cultural Heritage Protection in Wartime and in State of Emergency
Document of Pavia 1997
Evora Appeal
1998 Recommendation on Measures to Promote the
Integrated Conservation of Historic Complexes
Composed of Immovable and Moveable Property
Convention on Biological Diversity 2000
ASEAN Announcement on the Protection of
Cultural Heritage
Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites
‐ 210 ‐
European Convention on Landscape
2003 The NizhnyTagil Charter for the Industrial
Heritage(TICCIH)
2005 Vienna Memorandum
About the author
‐ 211 ‐
10 About the author
Ms. Ping KONG was born in Jinan on December 02, 1979. She received
her Bachelor and Master degrees in Urban Planning and Urban Design at
the College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University in
Shanghai, and M.A. (Arch) at the Department of Architecture, National
University of Singapore. She worked at the Chinese National Commission
for UNESCO in 2005‐2006 as a coordinator to set up the World Heritage
Training and Research Institute for the Asia and the Pacific Region
(WHITR‐AP) in China, as a category II centre under the auspices of
UNESCO. Supported by UNESCO Beijing Office and Tongji University, she
edited and published a book entitled World Heritage in China in 2006.
From Oct 2006 to Jan 2007, she conducted a research on the Living
Heritage Site Program at the International Centre for the Study of the
Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM). Afterwards,
she has been working in WHITR‐AP as the director of projects unit and
program specialist. She joined the Chinese delegation in the 30th and 31st
Session of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee and was actively
involved in discussions and evaluations on a number of conservation
programs of World Heritage sites. She presented papers at several
international conferences and seminars on heritage conservation in Italy
and Japan, and was invited to give lectures at the Department of Urban
Studies, Università degli Studi ROMA TRE and the College of Architecture
and Urban Planning, Tongji University. Since May 2005, she had the
opportunity to conduct a PhD research at the Design Knowledge System
Research Centre at the Faculty of Architecture, Delft University of
Technology, the Netherlands.
Top Related