Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites by Vision Included

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

‐ I ‐

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

‐ II ‐

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

‐ III ‐

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

‐ IV ‐

Contents ABSTRACT ........................................................................................ I PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT…………………………………………….……III CONTENTS…………………………………………………….…………………………………….V

INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................1 1.1 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5

1.3 1.3.1 1.3.2

1.4

Objectives ................................................................................... 1 Key issues ................................................................................... 2 Living heritage site ........................................................................... 2 Conservation .................................................................................... 4 Social quality .................................................................................... 5 Social capital..................................................................................... 6 Cultural diversity .............................................................................. 7

Brief research background ......................................................... 8 Evolvement of heritage conservation .............................................. 8 Social concerns in conservation ....................................................... 9

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 1.5.1 1.5.2

1.6

Methodology ............................................................................ 16 Method of case study..................................................................... 16 Methods in case study ................................................................... 17

Procedure of the study............................................................. 19

CASE STUDY: DAYAN IN LIJIANG ANCIENT TOWN..............................22 2.1 2.2 2.2.1

Reasons to choose Lijiang ancient town .................................. 22 Physical and social features of Lijiang ancient town ................ 25 Unique natural landscape, townscape and vernacular architecture 25

‐ V ‐

2.2.2 2.2.3

2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2

2.4 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4

2.5 2.6

Social development ........................................................................28 Conservation interventions ............................................................29

Brief introduction to Social survey ........................................... 30 General social‐economic status in Dayan town .............................30 Social survey in Dayan town...........................................................32

Social analysis ........................................................................... 33 The change of demography............................................................33 The change of social structure .......................................................37 The change of land‐use and environmental quality .......................39 The change of social interactions ...................................................46

Reviews on current management at Lijiang ancient town....... 49 Summary of social problems in Dayan town............................ 51

CRITICAL REVIEWS ON LIVING HERITAGE CONSERVATION ................... 54 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3

3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2

3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3

Findings from the Living Heritage Sites Program ..................... 54 Main characteristics of living heritage sites ...................................55 Main problems in current living heritage conservation .................56 Living heritage approach ................................................................58

Responses to main problems in living heritage conservation.. 59 Arguments on authenticity.............................................................59 Interpretation on functions............................................................61

Main contributions of the living heritage approach................. 62 Integrated approach through direct community involvement ......62 Highlight of living components.......................................................63 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

SOCIAL STUDIES IN LIVING HERITAGE CONSERVATION........................ 72 4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3

4.2

Growing social concerns on living heritage values................... 72 Extension of heritage values ..........................................................72 Social capital in living heritage conservation..................................73 Development of social concerns ....................................................74

Social quality in living heritage conservation ........................... 76 ‐ VI ‐

4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3

4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2

4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.3

Definition of social quality ............................................................. 77 Internal and external social quality................................................ 78 Framework of social quality ........................................................... 78

Studies on quality of life........................................................... 81 Indicators for QOL .......................................................................... 82 Meeting human needs in living heritage conservation.................. 82

Studies on quality of society..................................................... 88 Social cohesion and corresponding indicators............................... 88 Social empowerment and corresponding indicators ..................... 89 Social indicators ............................................................................. 90

HYPOTHETIC MODEL TOWARDS AN APPLICABLE DESIGN‐TOOL .............93 5.1 5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2

5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3

Social study of environment..................................................... 93 Linkage between social performance and spatial morphology 96 Selective social indicators .............................................................. 96 MOP model in living heritage conservation................................... 97

Hypothetic model in response to social performance ........... 101 Evolutionary understanding on spatial morphology.................... 101 Analysis framework of operations ............................................... 102 Model to interpret social quality ................................................. 104

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 6.4.2 6.4.3

6.5 6.5.1 6.5.2 6.5.3

Local initiation for conservation of Ogimachi village ................... 119 Social associations........................................................................ 121 Participation in tourism development ......................................... 123

Conservation and social quality in Ogimachi village .............. 127 Contribution of local associations to social quality...................... 127 Responses to other social quality ................................................ 129 Contribution of spatial organizations to social quality................. 131

6.6 Test of the hypothetic model by comparing Dayan and Ogimachi cases ................................................................................... 133

‐ VII ‐

6.6.1 6.6.2 6.6.3

Social Performance.......................................................................133 Applied operations .......................................................................134 Morphology responding to social performance...........................135

6.7 Design guidelines for sustaining social quality in living heritage conservation....................................................................................... 140

CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS ................................................ 146 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.3.1 7.3.2

Summary of research findings................................................ 146 Evaluations of this research ................................................... 150 Limitation and extensions ...................................................... 151 In‐depth method of local participation ........................................153 Importance of local guilds ............................................................155

REFERENCES .......................................................................... 157

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

‐ VIII ‐

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

‐ IX ‐

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

‐ X ‐

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

‐ XI ‐

Introduction

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

‐ 1 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

tourism‐related industries. In particular, as the World Heritage sites 2

ratified by the UNESCO World Heritage Convention , 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

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

‐ 2 ‐

Introduction

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).

‐ 3 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

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.

‐ 4 ‐

Introduction

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.

‐ 5 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 6 ‐

Introduction

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 Diversity 7 , 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)

‐ 7 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 8 ‐

Introduction

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, ‐ 9 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 10 ‐

Introduction

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.

‐ 11 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 12 ‐

Introduction

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.

‐ 13 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

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.

‐ 14 ‐

Introduction

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 21 14 ), 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.

‐ 15 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 16 ‐

Introduction

model hypothesis in the framework of MOP 15 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.

‐ 17 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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).

‐ 18 ‐

Introduction

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 Definition of research scope and key words

Introduction

Brief research background and problem statement Introduction of methodology and research procedure

Case study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town Critical reviews of living heritage conservation

Exploratory case study to elaborate social problems 2

Preliminary identification of the relationship between social problems and spatial morphology 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

‐ 19 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Social studies in living heritage conservation Hypothetic model towards an applicable design‐tool

Social conservation of Ogimachi village

Theoretical study on social quality 4

Select pertinent social indicators to represent social quality in a living heritage site 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 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 Summarize main findings

Conclusions and Limitation

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

‐ 20 ‐

Introduction

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).

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

‐ 21 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 22 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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.

‐ 23 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 24 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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

‐ 25 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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).

‐ 26 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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.

‐ 27 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 28 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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.

‐ 29 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 30 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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 RMB 24 . 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)

‐ 31 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 32 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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. ‐ 33 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Race Distribution in the Survey 1%

5% 7%

Naxi Han Bai Others 87%

Figure 24: Race distribution in the survey Age Analysis 1% 1% 25% 39%

Below 20 20-30 30-45 45-60 above 60

34%

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.

‐ 34 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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

‐ 35 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 36 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

2.4.2 The change of social structure Family Structure 2% 2%

Nuclear Family (A couple with children)

0% 0%

Stem Family ( Grandparents, parents and children)

United Family (Two or more Nuclear families) 38%

Family without children Aged family Living alone Single family

51%

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 ‐ 37 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

orresponding change to community facilities and spatial arrangement in order to serve the emerging needs of more independent families.

Career Analysis Retired

11% 7%

Individual business Jobless

10% 54%

Teacher 18%

Others (worker, student, doctor etc)

Figure 27: Career analysis Main Family Income 30%

26%

25%

22% 19%

18%

20% 15%

10% 5%

4% 1%

0% Working in other cities

Tourism business ow ner

Landlord

Employed in tourism market

Agriculture

Retirement pension

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 ‐ 38 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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 ‐ 39 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

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.

‐ 40 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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)

‐ 41 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Most disturbing fact caused by tourism

Too many tourist

2% 0% 15%

Environmental pollution 6% Too much noise No melon-cutting from tourism benefit 40%

26%

Being forced to leave the old town Being visited and taken photos by visitors Others

10%

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.

‐ 42 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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, ‐ 43 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 44 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

Figure 212: Comparison of the distribution of tourism facilities near Sifang plaza in Dayan town (above 2007, below 2002)32

Data source: Conservation plan of Lijiang ancient town 2002 and 2007, Led by Dr. Shao Yong, Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute.

‐ 45 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 46 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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) 8%

22%

In the courtyards

38%

On the streets In the nearby blooks Other places 63%

Figure 213: Places for socializing with neighbors

Do you think there are short of places for socializing and entertainment 16% 30%

Not at all Yes Very much 54%

Figure 214: Lack of places for socializing and entertainment

‐ 47 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Services wanted (multi-choice)

Open markets Shopping malls

38% 10%

Grain and oil supply stands

24%

Barber shops

28%

25%

26% 21%

40%

13% 18%

Grocers Post offices Repair stalls Entertainment centres Community centres for old people Middle school

75%

72%

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 ‐ 48 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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.

‐ 49 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 50 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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. ‐ 51 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 52 ‐

Case Study: Dayan in Lijiang Ancient Town

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.

‐ 53 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 54 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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.

‐ 55 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 56 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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 ‐ 57 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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): z

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.

‐ 58 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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’.

‐ 59 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 60 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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 ‐ 61 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 62 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

of heritage’ (Wijesuriya et al, 2006 37 ), 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.

‐ 63 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 64 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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 ‐ 65 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

are still dominated by governmental interventions, which leads to the discontinuity in applications. Conventional approach 1 Top‐down 2 Linear

Living heritage approach Bottom‐up Inter‐active

Dependence on legal frameworks for protection

Dependence on community awareness leading to political commitment for protection

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.

Significance based on expert values 5 (therefore, often limited to art‐ historical perceptions) Arguments for conservation usually limited to contribution of cultural 6 understanding to meaningful development of society Conservation and management decision‐making carried out in professional frameworks, hence much concern for the professional “body of doctrine”, and included 7 principles (concerned primarily with intervention); Significant consideration given to limiting use to ensure heritage protection (e.g., Australian “conservation plan”)

Significance also includes community values and associations; Community participates in definition of values. Arguments for conservation usually more concerned with quality of life (always a goal issue), integrating concern for social and economic impacts 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.

Usually involves efforts to implement defined policy or 8 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

‐ 66 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

significant scientific cultural/natural those affected by decisions resources is limited. (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.

‐ 67 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 68 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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 ‐ 69 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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;

‐ 70 ‐

Critical Reviews on Living Heritage Conservation

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;

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;

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;

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.

‐ 71 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 72 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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 ‐ 73 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 74 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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.

‐ 75 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Physical Environment/values Natural environment

Tourists

Built environment

Conservation

Local residents

Strong interactions

Living elements/values

Normal interactions

Traditions, life styles

Weak interactions

Cultural expressions

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.

‐ 76 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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

‐ 77 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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, ‐ 78 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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. ‐ 79 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

•

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.

‐ 80 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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)

‐ 81 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 82 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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).

‐ 83 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 84 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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.

‐ 85 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 Food, water, shelter, and other vital Subsistence ecological capitals Stable native population, continuity of family Reproduction structure and traditions

Indicators Sufficient and equal access to necessary resources and services 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.

‐ 86 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

Security

Privacy

Communication

Participation

Leisure

Identity

Spirituality Creativity

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 Clear division of Boundaries of households boundaries and Territories of neighborhoods territories Sense of privacy Number of community centres and places for local use Sociable places, Quality of community places cultural/traditional (access, noise, pollution, bonds, neighborhood comfortableness etc.) relationship Relationship with neighbors Sense of trust Number of local associations Percentage of involvement of local residents in decision‐ Social networks, local making process associations Range of duties and rights of membership Feeling of inclusion Quality of public/semi‐public Appealing places, places (access, noise, pollution, relaxed environment, comfortableness etc.) limited noise, Number of leisure choices pollutions, activity Feeling of an easy and relaxed of environment Number of remaing traditional/cultural practices Quality of traditional places, Unique nature, important cultural places and culture or traditions monuments Continuity of Land‐use Sense of identity Sense of spirituality Sense of creativity Financial resources, house and environment, health and care, work and education opportunities, safety from violence and criminals

‐ 87 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 88 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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

‐ 89 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 90 ‐

Social Studies in Living Heritage Conservation

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), ‐ 91 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

• Crime rate Socio‐economic security

• Job diversity • Service diversity and accessibility • Public surveillance

Privacy

• Boundary of household and in‐between space • Boundary of communities

neighborhoods

and

• Relationship with neighbors Communication

• Social interactions • Social mobility • Memberships

Participation

• Social associations • Collective empowerment on environmental control • Social networks and relations

Social Identity

• 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. ‐ 92 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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. ‐ 93 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 94 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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.

‐ 95 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

‘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, ‐ 96 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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 ‐ 97 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 98 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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 ‐ 99 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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: ‐ 100 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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 ‐ 101 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 102 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

eliminated, which has been widely addressed in studies on interior renovation of heritage buildings.

Single constructions

Paths

For Local residents ‐ community‐based identification Residents Religious buildings Community centres Facilities: grocery shops, clinics, restaurants, laundry shops, schools, hardware stores, post offices, etc. 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. Community plaza/park

Open spaces

Enlarged places along streets, river bank Private/community parking lots Natural surroundings

For Tourists ‐ Expert‐based identification Traditional residents/houses Historic monuments Constructions with specific aesthetic or archaeological values Facilities: information centre, post offices, restaurants, souvenir shops, hospitals 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.

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

‐ 103 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 104 ‐

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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 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)

1, 2, ..., 9

Accepted Toleranc e to function changes

Morphology description

Illustrations

SL and its visible or invisible territory

‐ 105 ‐

Accessibilit y

Contributions to social quality

Limited to the owners

Security and boundary of household

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Limited to residents in the neighborhoo d

SLs, its access‐ PL and semi‐ private space in‐between

SLs with its access‐PL and OL (courtyards) defined by SLs or PLs

Limited to residents in the neighborhoo d

public surveillance, meeting neighbors public surveillance, social communications, boundary of neighborhoods neighborhood accessible service Public surveillance, boundary of blocks,

neighborhood s and OL shared by different neighborhood s, connected with PLs

Limited to residents in the blocks

STs mixed with SLs connected by PT

Open to limited number of tourists

Broaden social interactions, Loss of privacy

STs mixed in SLs connected by PLs, with OL‐OTs

Open to limited number of tourists

Broaden social interactions, loss of privacy and security

STs with access‐PTs and OTs

Open to the public

‐ 106 ‐

social activities, community accessible services

Service accessibility, Public gathering

Hypothetic Model towards an Applicable Designtool

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 ‐ 107 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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).

‐ 108 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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.

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.

‐ 109 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 110 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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

‐ 111 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Ogimachi Ainokura Suganuma

Inhabited Area (Ha) 45.6 18.0 4.4

Population (1994) 634 90 40

Households (1994) 152 27 8

Households (1870s) 99 47 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).

‐ 112 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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

‐ 113 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Dayan town in Lijiang Ogimachi village in ancient town (2002) 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,

Inscribed in 1995,

fitting criteria ii, iv and v52

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

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.

‐ 114 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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

‐ 115 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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). ‐ 116 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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.

‐ 117 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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. ‐ 118 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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 Number/ratio Number/ratio Oldest properties (number/ha) (number/ha) construction of (Ha) of historic of Gassho Gassho houses structures houses Latter half of Ogimachi 45.6 124/2.72 60/1.32 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).

‐ 119 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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).

‐ 120 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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.

‐ 121 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 122 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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.

‐ 123 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 124 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

style houses and farmland, curiosity often drives tourists to across the line. Tourism development Resource Activities The biggest Gassho-style houses

Walk-in visits

Negative Impacts

Conservation Concerns Legislations

Local Actions

Loss of privacy More maintenance

Listed as nationally Important Cultural Properties

Open to the public and charge entrance fees ‘Do not sell, do not rent, do not destruction’ ‘HinobanMawari’58

Gassho-style settlement

Walking tours and sightseeing

Litter, Fire, privacy, other disturbances

Strict protection of land-use and facades

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

‘HinobanMawari’

Products from farmland and forests

Restaurant, organic products, souvenirs

Litter, Functional changes,

Hygiene standards

Associations of village commerce and industry society

Souvenir Shops

Functional changes Abandonment of farmland

Protect intangible heritage

Association of village commerce and industrial society

Local handcraft

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.

‐ 125 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 126 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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 ‐ 127 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 Officers at the Local Preservation Committee

Main family income

Husband, wife and a child, 3 members

Housewife,

Wife, husband, children and grandparents, 7 members all together

Parents and a brother, 4 members all together

Buddhist monk, looking after religious Gassho‐ style houses

Tourism, entrance fees and government sponsorship

Wife and husband, 2 members

Farmer, looking after the Gassho‐ style houses

Retired with pension, cultivating wild vegetables, tourism entrance fees

Parents and siblings, 5 members all together

Working at the Onsen (hot spring) hotel and restaurant

Salary related to tourism industry

Husband works for the Village commerce and industrial society

Salary from the committee

Running Minshuku, Salary from local association, cultivating vegetables

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.

‐ 128 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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 ‐ 129 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 Population Households Households Households (2003) (1994) (2003) (1994) (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 ‐ 130 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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.

‐ 131 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 132 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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 ‐ 133 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 134 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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 ‐ 135 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 136 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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 repair Convenient access Ogimach Retain morphology shops, groceries, to diverse daily etc. for local‐use in i 2‐4 services neighbourhoods Morphology 1 without clear boundary and more unconstrained morphology 5‐8

Overcrowded population and free flows of people

High crime rate

Dayan

Low crime rate

Ogimach i

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

Ogimach i

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

Retain morphology Controlled flows of 1‐3 in people in neighbourhoods neighbourhoods

‐ 137 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

neighbourhoods

Constrained morphology 1‐3 in neighbourhoods

Fewer disturbing activities and actors

Clear boundaries result in retained privacy of households and neighbourhoods

Ogimach i

Lack of constrained morphology 2‐4 and community/entert ainment 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

Ogimach i

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 Ogimach empowerment on i environmental control, active participation

Lack of constrained morphology 3‐4, lack of community centres

Discourage social interactions and social associations

Lack of community centres and proper places to accommodate local associated activities, like morphology 3‐4

‐ 138 ‐

Weak social networks

Dayan

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

Retain morphology 2‐3 and sufficient community centres

Encourage social interactions and active social associations

Strong social networks

Ogimach i

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

Ogimach i

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

Ogimach i

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 ‐ 139 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 140 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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. ‐ 141 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

※※※ 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 ※※※ ‐ 142 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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

‐ 143 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 144 ‐

Social Conservation of Ogimachi Village

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.

‐ 145 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 146 ‐

Conclusions and limitations

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.

‐ 147 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 148 ‐

Conclusions and limitations

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 ‐ 149 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 150 ‐

Conclusions and limitations

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: ‐ 151 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 152 ‐

Conclusions and limitations

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 ‐ 153 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 ‐ 154 ‐

Conclusions and limitations

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 ‐ 155 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 156 ‐

References

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).

‐ 157 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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).

‐ 158 ‐

References

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.

‐ 159 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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).

‐ 160 ‐

References

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).

‐ 161 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 162 ‐

References

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.

‐ 163 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 164 ‐

References

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.

‐ 165 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

‐ 166 ‐

Annex

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)

‐ 167 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Figure A 2: Architectural patterns in Dayan town (Data source: Conservation planning of Lijiang ancient town, 2002, Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute)

‐ 168 ‐

Annex

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)

‐ 169 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Figure A 4: Distribution of tourismrelated facilities (2002 vs. 2007)

‐ 170 ‐

Annex

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

‐ 171 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 172 ‐

Annex

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

‐ 173 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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: Questionnaire

multiple‐choice & open question

Number of valid questionnaires:

Appendix I: Demography Race Naxi Han Bai Others Total

Percentage 87% 7% 5% 1% 100%

Age Composition Below 20 20‐30 30‐45 45‐60 above 60 Total

Percentage 1% 1% 25% 34% 38% 100%

Family Composition Nuclear Family (A couple with children) Stem Family ( Grandparents, parents and children) United Family (Two or more Nuclear families) Family without children Aged family Living alone Single family Others Total

‐ 174 ‐

Percentage 38% 51% 1% 0% 6% 0% 2% 2% 100%

Annex

Appendix II: Living Environment and Quality Main Family Income Working in other cities Tourism related business(retail, restaurant, lodge, etc.) Property landlord Local employee at tourism market Agriculture Retirement pension Others Total

Percentage 4% 18% 9% 19% 1% 26% 22% 100%

Career Analysis Retired Individual business Jobless Teacher Others (worker, student, doctor etc) Total

Percentage 54% 18% 10% 7% 11% 100%

Average living areas per capita (SqM) 0‐20 20‐50 above 50 Total

Percentage 24% 58% 18% 100%

Years lived in Dayan town below 5 5‐10 10‐20 20‐50 above 50 Total

Percentage 5% 3% 11% 38% 42% 100%

‐ 175 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Property Public Private Rented Total

Percentage 6% 90% 4% 100%

Sanitation With Without Total

Percentage 34% 66% 100%

Services wanted (multi‐choice) Open markets Shopping malls Grain and oil supply stands Barber shops Grocers Post offices Repair stalls Entertainment centres Community centres for old people Middle school Primary school Hospital

Percentage 24% 28% 26% 21% 13% 18% 72% 75% 40% 25% 10% 38%

Distance with potable water systems (Meter) Within 10 Around 50 Around 100 Far away Total

‐ 176 ‐

Percentage 58% 32% 7% 3% 100%

Annex

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 Good Ok Not good Total

Percentage 73% 26% 1% 100%

Socializing with neighbors Often Sometimes Seldom Total

Percentage 46% 48% 5% 100%

‐ 177 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

With whom you often socialize (multi‐choice) Neighbors Colleagues Relatives Others Where do you socialize with neighbors (multi‐choice) In the courtyards On the streets In the nearby blocks Other places

Percentage 62% 51% 53% 15% Percentage 22% 63% 38% 8%

Where do you often go shopping (multi‐choice) Open markets Shopping malls Supermarkets in the new district

Percentage 75% 35% 14%

Time needed for daily shopping Within 10 mins 10‐30 mins 30‐60 mins more than 60 mins Total

Percentage 11% 35% 53% 1% 100%

Do you think there are short of places for socializing and entertainment? Not at all Yes Very much Total

‐ 178 ‐

Percentage 16% 54% 30% 100%

Annex

Appendix IV: Attitude to conservation and tourism development How will you maintain the preserved residence? Will maintain with government subsidy Maintain by own accord Already maintained recently Won't maintain Total

Percentage 9% 75% 15% 1% 100%

Ideal living place Old town New developed district Both are ok Total

Percentage 61% 13% 26% 100%

What if the tourism extended to your neighborhood? Move away Open a shop or a hostel Indifferent, continue normal life Total Most disturbing factor caused by tourism Too many tourist Environmental pollution Too much noise No melon‐cutting from tourism benefit Being forced to leave the old town Being visited and taken photos by visitors Others Total

Percentage 10% 35% 55% 100%

Percentage 6% 40% 10% 26% 15% 0% 2% 100%

Do you welcome tourists to visit your house Welcome Indifferent Don't like Total

‐ 179 ‐

Percentage 62% 35% 3% 100%

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

How do you participate tourism development Opening a shop or a hostel Renting out houses along the street Renting out houses and move away Being a cicerone Others Total

Percentage 58% 18% 9% 7% 7% 99%

Economic Benefit from tourism Quite good Only good in holiday season Not good Total

Percentage 19% 49% 31% 100%

‐ 180 ‐

Annex

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

Financial resources

Income sufficiency

Part of household income spent on health, clothing, food and housing (in the lower and median household incomes).

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 and Housing environment 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).

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.

‐ 181 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Health

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.

Work

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.

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.

‐ 182 ‐

Annex

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

Extent to which ‘most people can be trusted’.

Generalised trust Specific trust

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.

Other integrativ e forms and values

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.

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.

‐ 183 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

Identity

National/ European identity

Sense of national pride. Identification with national symbols and European symbols.

Regional/ community/loca l identity

Sense of regional/community/local identity.

Interpersonal identity

Sense of belonging to family and kinship network.

‐ 184 ‐

Annex

Appendix III: Indicators of Social Inclusion63 Domains

Sub‐domains

Citizenship Constitutional/ rights political rights

Indicators

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.

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).

Services

Health services

Proportions with entitlement to and using public primary health care

Housing

Proportion homeless, sleeping rough.

Involuntary part‐time or temporary employment.

Average waiting time for social housing. Education

School participation rates and higher education participation rates.

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.

‐ 185 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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.

Social networks

Neighbourhood Proportion in regular contact with neighbours. participation Friendships

Proportion in regular contact with friends.

Family life

Duration of contact with relatives (cohabiting and non‐cohabiting). Informal (non‐monetary) assistance received by different types of family.

‐ 186 ‐

Annex

Appendix IV: Indicators of social empowerment64 Domains

Sub‐domains

Indicators

Knowledge base

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.

Labour market

User friendliness of information

Provision of information in multiple languages on social services.

Control over employment contract

Percent of labour force that is member of a trades union (differentiated to public and private employees).

Availability of free advocacy, advice and guidance centres.

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’

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 Openness and Existence of processes of consultation and supportiveness supportiveness direct democracy (e.g., referenda).

64 Herrmann (2003). Cit. in Maesen and Walker (2006), p. 21‐22.

‐ 187 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites of institutions

Public space

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).

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).

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.

‐ 188 ‐

Annex

Annex 4: Social indicators proposed by Choi and Sirakaya (2006, p.1281) Indicators for the social dimension Key themes Indicators/issues Host community satisfaction toward tourism development

Mean Soundness

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

Host Stress in visitors/host community/residents relationship and stakeholders Resident/non‐resident ownership of homes (2nd homes/part time residents)

3.60

0.92

3.60

1.00

Level of congruency among stakeholders

3.50

0.75

Resident involvement in tourism industry

4.10

1.00

Change in social cohesion

3.70

0.67

Change in community structure 3.50 evident of a community breakdown and alienation

0.67

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 3.60 local sex tourism industry

0.67

Community attitude toward sex 3.60 tourism

0.83

Social cohesion

Sex tourism

Tourist satisfaction Community resource

Tourist satisfaction/attitude toward tourism development Degradation/erosion of natural and cultural resource

‐ 189 ‐

4.00

1.00

4.00

0.92

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Distribution of resources/power

Community health and safety

Quality of life in general

Shift in social structure (e.g. power shift and its socio‐ economic implications)

3.80

0.67

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

Loss of traditional lifestyle and knowledge via modernization

3.50

0.92

Levels of satisfaction with 3.56 community life in general (QOL)

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.

‐ 190 ‐

Annex

Annex 5: Interview questions and response analysis in Ogimachi Date:

17‐18 November, 2007

Place: Japan

Ogimachi, Shirakawa‐Go, Gifu Prefecture,

Method of data collection:

Structured interview

Number of interviewees:

# Age Family structure 1 39

Husband, wife and a child, 3 members

2 42

Wife, husband, children and grandparents, 7 members all together

Career Officers at the Local Preservation Committee Housewife, Husband works for the Village commerce and industry society

Main family income Salary from the committee 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

Farmer, looking Wife and husband, 2 after the Gassho‐ members 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

‐ 191 ‐

Salary related to tourism industry

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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: z

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: z

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 ‐ 192 ‐

Annex

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

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

1 response (complain to limitation of new constructions)

Not satisfied

0 response

Very unsatisfied

0 response

‐ 193 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 z

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. z

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

How’s your relationship with neighbors?

very close

(visit more than twice a week)

2 responses

(visit around twice a month)

3 responses

normal

(visit several times a year)

1 response

not close

(only meet in special occasions, 0 response such as yui or ceremonies)

no personal contact

0 response

‐ 194 ‐

Annex

All responses reflected a close or very close relationship with neighbors, even the new comer felt being included 7. z

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. z

Club for aged people, school, festivals, Buddhist memorial service – 2 responses

Public spaces, like restaurant, theater, Onsen and places near home ‐ 2 responses

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

‐ 195 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

‐ 196 ‐

Annex

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

‐ 197 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Figure A‐ 7: Routes and Parking system in Ogimachi village, after the tourism map on bus routes, 2007

‐ 198 ‐

Annex

Figure A‐ 8: Facility distribution in Ogimachi village (after tourism map 2007)

‐ 199 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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 besides residences

‐ 200 ‐

Annex

Pavement around the house and Pavement in open space near the temple rice field

Pavement across canals to link Pavement across canals around main road and private access private house

‐ 201 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

Private garden in front of the Private play yard in front of the residence residence

Cemeteries around residential area Shrine among the residences

Figure A‐ 9: On‐site pictures

‐ 202 ‐

Annex

Annex 7: Summary of UNESCO-ICOMOS Documents on Cultural Heritage Conservation

Resource

Year

Name of the Document

UNESCO

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

2005

Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions

1956

Recommendation on International Principles Applicable to Archaeological Excavations

Conventions

UNESCO Recommendations and Declarations

Recommendation Concerning International Competitions in Architecture and Town Planning

‐ 203 ‐

Social Quality in the Conservation Process of Living Heritage Sites

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

1964

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 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

1976

Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic Areas

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

‐ 204 ‐

Annex

Heritage 1996

Declaration of Valencia

1997

Declaration of Quebec

1998

Declaration of Melbourne

1999

Cairo Decision