CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Cultural Heritage Management and PreservationUrban Development and Cultural HeritageCultural Identity and Heritage

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Rights–Values–Interests: The Conflict between World Cultural Heritage and Community: A Case Study of the West Lake Cultural Landscape Heritage in China

Open access
Lu, Jiancheng, Luo, Xiaolong, Zhang, Peigang·2019·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su11174560
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The conflict between world cultural heritage and local communities is investigated by using the cultural landscape heritage of West Lake in China as a case study, and establishing an analytical framework of “Rights–Values–Interests” based on the property rights theory of the new institutional economics and the value and interest structure characteristics of cultural heritage. The conflict problem in the market environment is analyzed based on a theoretical explanation. An in-depth discussion of the framework and improvement of China’s protection institution is provided. We outline the following key points: First, the Chinese government “plundered” certain behavior rights and legitimate interests of community residents through the enactment of protection laws, leading to a conflict between the protection and community. Second, China’s laws lack a clear definition of the power and responsibility of the central and local governments with regard to protection actions, leading to vague positions of the government and exacerbating conflicts. Third, China’s protection laws are out of touch with the laws of private property rights. The root cause of the conflict is that the protection action only considers the protection law as the core but neglects the residents’ legal behavior rights. Finally, from the perspective of considering the residents’ legitimate interest demands, defining behavior rights boundaries, and strengthening administrative management, we propose to improve the protection institution in order to achieve the harmonious integration of heritage protection and local communities, and we call for a greater focus on the legitimate interests or survival rights of ordinary Chinese community residents.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su11174560

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 52 · Cited by 11

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Waterton, E., and Watson, S. (2015). Heritage as a Focus of Research: Past, Present and New Directions. The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary Heritage Research, Palgrave Macmillan. · DOI
  2. Gibson, J. (2016). Australian elegy: Landscape and identity. [Ph.D. Thesis, Deakin University].
  3. Nitzky, W. (2013). Community empowerment at the periphery? Participatory approaches to heritage protection in Guizhou, China. Cultural Heritage Politics in China, Springer. · DOI
  4. Smith, L. (2016). Deference and humility: The social values of the country house. Valuing Historic Environments, Routledge.
  5. Watson, 2010, Heritage and Community Engagement, Int. J. Herit. Stud., 16, 1, 10.1080/13527250903441655 · DOI
  6. Lai, 2010, Uneven Opening of China’s Society, Economy, and Politics: Pro-growth authoritarian governance and protests in China, J. Contemp. China, 19, 819, 10.1080/10670564.2010.508581 · DOI
  7. Zhang, 2006, Contesting spatial modernity in late-socialist China, Curr. Anthropol., 47, 461, 10.1086/503063 · DOI
  8. Wu, F. (2015). Planning for Growth: Urban and Regional Planning in China, Routledge. · DOI
  9. Chen, H., Wang, L., and Waley, P. (2019). The Right to Envision the City? The Emerging Vision Conflicts in Redeveloping Historic Nanjing, China. Urban Aff. Rev., 1–33. · DOI
  10. Qian, 2012, Rethinking social power and the right to the city amidst China’s emerging urbanism, Environ. Plan. A, 44, 2801, 10.1068/a44373 · DOI
  11. Shin, 2013, The right to the city and critical reflections on China’s property rights activism, Antipode, 45, 1167, 10.1111/anti.12010 · DOI
  12. Liu, Q., Yang, Z., and Wang, F. (2017). Conservation Policy-Community Conflicts: A Case Study from Bogda Nature Reserve, China. Sustainability, 9. · DOI
  13. Nuryanti, 1996, Heritage and postmodern tourism, Ann. Tour. Res., 23, 249, 10.1016/0160-7383(95)00062-3 · DOI
  14. Aas, 2005, Stakeholder collaboration and heritage management, Ann. Tour. Res., 32, 28, 10.1016/j.annals.2004.04.005 · DOI
  15. Wang, 2019, Paradox between neoliberal urban redevelopment, heritage conservation, and community needs: Case study of a historic neighbourhood in Tianjin, China, Cities, 85, 156, 10.1016/j.cities.2018.09.004 · DOI
  16. Shepherd, 2017, UNESCO’s Tangled Web of Preservation: Community, Heritage and Development in China, J. Contemp. Asia, 47, 557, 10.1080/00472336.2017.1296174 · DOI
  17. Waterton, 2005, Whose sense of place? Reconciling archaeological perspectives with community values: Cultural landscapes in England, Int. J. Herit. Stud., 11, 309, 10.1080/13527250500235591 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Han, F., Yang, Z., Shi, H., Liu, Q., and Wall, G. (2016). How to promote sustainable relationships between heritage conservation and community, based on a survey. Sustainability, 8. · DOI
  19. Timothy, D.J., and Boyd, S.W. (2003). Heritage Tourism, Pearson Education.
  20. Peters, H. (1999, January 29–30). Making tourism work for heritage preservation: Lijiang, a case study. Proceedings of the International Conference on Anthropology, Chinese Society and Tourism, Kunming, China.
  21. Su, 2012, Global–local relationships and governance issues at the Great Wall World Heritage Site, China, J. Sustain. Tour., 20, 1067, 10.1080/09669582.2012.671330 · DOI
  22. Scheyvens, R. (2003). Local involvement in managing 12 Tourism. Tourism in Destination Communities, CABI. · DOI
  23. Su, 2015, Community involvement at great wall world heritage sites, Beijing, China, Curr. Issues Tour., 18, 137, 10.1080/13683500.2013.823917 · DOI
  24. Iorio, 2012, Behind the masks: Tourism and community in Sardinia, Tour. Manag., 33, 1440, 10.1016/j.tourman.2012.01.011 · DOI
  25. Araujo, 1999, Stakeholder assessment and collaborative tourism planning: The case of Brazil’s Costa Dourada project, J. Sustain. Tour., 7, 356, 10.1080/09669589908667344 · DOI
  26. Reed, 1997, Power relations and community-based tourism planning, Ann. Tour. Res., 24, 566, 10.1016/S0160-7383(97)00023-6 · DOI
  27. Tosun, 2000, Limits to community participation in the tourism development process in developing countries, Tour. Manag., 21, 613, 10.1016/S0261-5177(00)00009-1 · DOI
  28. Wang, 2010, Minority community participation in tourism: A case of Kanas Tuva villages in Xinjiang, China, Tour. Manag., 31, 759, 10.1016/j.tourman.2009.08.002 · DOI
  29. Wang, 2012, Heritage protection and tourism development priorities in Hangzhou, China: A political economy and governance perspective, Tour. Manag., 33, 988, 10.1016/j.tourman.2011.10.010 · DOI
  30. Chien, 2010, Economic freedom and political control in post-Mao China: A perspective of upward accountability and asymmetric decentralization, Asian J. Pharm. Sci., 18, 69
  31. Fan, 2014, International influence and local response: Understanding community involvement in urban heritage conservation in China, Int. J. Herit. Stud., 20, 651, 10.1080/13527258.2013.834837 · DOI
  32. Zhang, 2008, Term limits and rotation of Chinese governors: Do they matter to economic growth?, J. Asia Pac. Econ., 13, 274, 10.1080/13547860802131284 · DOI
  33. Nepal, 1997, Sustainable tourism, protected areas and livelihood needs of local communities in developing countries, Int. J. Sustain. Dev World, 4, 123, 10.1080/13504509709469948 · DOI
  34. Dhakal, 2011, Resident well-being in conservation resettlement: The case of Padampur in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal, Soc. Nat. Resour., 24, 597, 10.1080/08941921003709633 · DOI
  35. Krueger, 2009, Protected areas and human displacement: Improving the interface between policy and practice, Conserv. Soc., 7, 21, 10.4103/0972-4923.54793 · DOI
  36. Sirima, 2013, Communities’ displacement from national park and tourism development in the Usangu Plains, Tanzania, Curr. Issues Tour., 16, 719, 10.1080/13683500.2013.785484 · DOI
  37. Rypkema, 2008, Heritage conservation and the local economy, Glob. Urban Dev. Mag., 4, 1
  38. Smith, L. (2006). Uses of Heritage, Routledge. · DOI · Paper page
  39. Vecco, 2010, A definition of cultural heritage: From the tangible to the intangible, J. Cult. Herit., 11, 321, 10.1016/j.culher.2010.01.006 · DOI
  40. Dun, 2012, On the Heritage Conservation, Property Rights and Institutional Buildingin China, Urban Plan. Forum, 6, 14
  41. Duan, 1992, Analysis on the structure of western property right theory, Econ. Res. J., 8, 72
  42. Coase, R.H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, Palgrave Macmillan. · DOI
  43. Furubotn, 1972, Property rights and economic theory: A survey of recent literature, J. Econ. Lit., 10, 1137
  44. Demsetz, 2002, Toward a theory of property rights II: The competition between private and collective ownership, J. Leg. Stud., 31, S653, 10.1086/342028 · DOI
  45. Lichfield, N. (2009). Economics in Urban Conservation, Cambridge University Press.
  46. Moe, 2012, Are there too many house museums?, Forum J., 27, 55, 10.1353/fmj.2012.a494513 · DOI
  47. Zhang, 2004, Tourism development and heritage management research: Public choice and institutional analysis-a study summary of heritage resources management, Tour. Trib., 19, 35
  48. Liu, 2008, The Issue of the Property Rights of the Protection of Historical and Cultural Heritage of Suzhou, Shanghai Urban Plan. Rew., 2, 48
  49. 2017, Cultural heritage and the right of property: Beyond the boundaries of the boundaries?, Rev. Direito Ambient. E Soc., 7, 159
  50. Lin, Q., and Lian, Z. (2018). On Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in China from the Intellectual Property Rights Perspective. Sustainability, 10. · DOI
  51. Owley, 2015, Cultural heritage conservation easements: Heritage protection with property law tools, Land Use Policy, 49, 177, 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.007 · DOI
  52. Snider, R.T. (2012). Land Tenure Ecotourism, and Sustainable Livelihoods:‘Living on the Edge’of the Greater Maasai Mara, Kenya. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Waterloo].
  53. Cohen, N. (2001). Urban Planning, Conservation, and Preservation, McGraw-Hill Professional.
  54. Qian, 2007, China’s Burra Charter: The Formation and Implementation of the China Principles, Int. J. Herit. Stud., 13, 255, 10.1080/13527250701228213 · DOI
  55. Davis, L.E., North, D.C., and Smorodin, C. (1971). Institutional Change and American Economic Growth, Cambridge University Press Archive. · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Lu, J., Luo, X., & Zhang, P.
Affiliations
  • Nanjing University (CN)
  • Jiangsu Provincial Urban Planning and Design Institute (CN)
Corresponding author
Luo, Xiaolong
ORCID
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-08-22
Volume
11
Issue
17
Pages
4560
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/su11174560
OpenAlex
W2969714813
Cited by
11
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
FWCI
3.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant Nos. 2018YFD1100805)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Development and Cultural Heritage
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Cultural Identity and Heritage
Keywords
cultural landscape heritage, world cultural heritage, heritage protection, local community conflict, property rights, residents' rights, legitimate interests, new institutional economics, heritage protection law, central-local government relations, private property rights, China

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review