Post on 19-Jan-2023
ASSOC. PROF. DR. YAHAYA AHMAD
Dept. of Architecture
Faculty of Built Environment
University of Malaya
50603 Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia.
MR. INDERA SYAHRUL MAT RADZUAN
PhD Candidate
Residents Perception on the Cultural Heritage
Conservation and Incentives Programme in the
Traditional Settlements: A Case of Japan
International Conference on Tourism and the Shifting Values of Cultural Heritage
Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, Taipei, Taiwan
5-9 April 2013
PROF. DR. NAOKO FUKAMI
Organization for Islamic Area Studies
Waseda University
9 Bldg., 906, 1-6-1 Nishiwaseda
Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-8050
Japan.
University of Malaya
CONTENTS
Introduction: Issue and Problems
Research Methodology
Case Studies
Types of Heritage Incentives System in Japan
Incentives Programme: How it Works?
Residents Perception
Conclusion
Introduction: Issue and Problems
• A wide variety of incentives programmes have been created in national or
local government levels in Japan.
• These programmes are predictably far-ranging and dissimilar between
properties, areas and sites.
• Traditional settlements reflect the unique combinations of natural, cultural
and social characteristic.
• The traditional settlement has barely been neglected by the modernisation
phenomena.
• There is a mismatch between the effectiveness of the current incentives
policy with residents need on the actual site.
Introduction: Issue and Problems
• According to Stern et al. (1986), the financial aspects of a conservation
incentive program are not the only important ones.
• The success of a program may depend on its ability to get the attention of
its intended audience; communicate in a way that is understandable and
credible and address itself to the users’ needs.
• Success may depend not only on the size of the incentives offered but on the
form of the incentives and on the way the programs are organized,
marketed, and implemented.
• A policy formulation of cultural heritage conservation and incentives
program has to look at the needs of the residents or local communities.
Introduction: Issue and Problems
• Japan have changed drastically with many historic buildings and
neighbourhoods are torn down.
• In Japan, preservation movements started in the early 1970s.
• According to Scott (2006) Japan possesses one of the most complete systems
for the promotion of cultural heritage.
• Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties, was enacted on 1950 to protect
Japan's cultural heritage.
• As of 1 February 2012, there were approximately sixteen thousand
nationally-designated, twenty-one thousand prefectural-designated, and
eighty-six thousand municipally-designated properties (one property may
include more than one item).
• Besides the designation system there also exists a "registration system" which
guarantees a lower level of protection and support.
Introduction: Issue and Problems
Designation
Important Cultural Properties (National Treasures) 12,761 (1,082) *1
Buildings and other structures 2,374 (216)
Works of Fine Arts and Crafts 10,387 (866)
Important Intangible Cultural Property (Number of Holders and Groups)
Performing Arts Individuals recognition 39 (56 people)
Collective recognition 12 (12 groups)
Craft Techniques Individuals recognition 43 (59 people) *2
Collective recognition 14 (14 groups)
Important Tangible Folk Cultural Properties 211
Important Intangible Folk Cultural Properties 272
Special Historic Sites, Places of Scenic Beauty, Natural Monuments 2,921 (162) *3
Historic Sites 1,655 (60)
Places of Scenic Beauty 322 (30)
Natural Monuments 944 (72)
Selection
Important Cultural Landscape 24
Important Preservation Districts for Groups of Traditional Buildings 88
Registration
Registered Tangible Cultural Properties (buildings) 8,331
Registered Tangible Cultural Properties (works of fine arts and crafts) 11
Registered Tangible Folk Cultural Properties 21
Registered Monuments 55
Object of conservation that are not Cultural Properties
Selected Conservation Techniques (Number of Holders and Groups)
Holders 45 (51 people)
Preservation Groups 29 (31 groups) *4
Number of Cultural Properties Designated by the National Government (As of April 1, 2011)
Source: Agency for Cultural Affairs (2012)
Introduction: Issue and Problems
• This study analyses the residents’ perceptions and outcomes of the
implementation of cultural heritage conservation and incentives programmes
of two Japan’s traditional settlements namely Ainokura Village and Kawagoe
Historic District.
JAPAN
Tokyo
Kawagoe Ainokura
Research Methodology
Documents Review
• Two fundamental issues - the cultural heritage conservation and
incentives programme.
• Variety of literature sources such as government reports, journals, books,
guidelines, archieves as well as other secondary sources.
Interviews
• Interviews were carried out with the officials of Agency for Cultural
Affairs, Nanto Educational Board and Kawagoe City Office.
• Cultural reference group such as village leader, curators, heritage
managers, residents committee etc.
• Specialist such as academicians, public and private officials, NGOs, etc.
Research Methodology
Questionnaire Survey
• Stratified sampling.
• Assisted by groups of Japanese interpreter to conduct the bilingual
interviews with the respondents.
• Respondents were asked about types of incentives they have received,
their evaluation on the existing incentives programme, perception and
awareness of the cultural heritage conservation and their needs on the
cultural heritage conservation.
• Respondents were selected based on the following criteria:
(i) residents who received the heritage incentives from the authorities
(ii) should be residing permanently at the settlements.
Research Methodology
Observation
• Observation was used as a way of gathering data by watching behavior,
events, or noting physical characteristics in their social and natural
setting.
• Three methods are used for this study:
(i) Recording sheets and checklists
(ii) Observation guides
(iii) Field notes
Research Methodology
Research Questions
1. What are the current packages of the
incentive schemes provided by the
authorities for the cultural heritage
protection?
2. What are the significant
characteristics of the tangible and
intangible cultural heritage to the
study areas?
3. In what way does conservation of
cultural heritage and incentives
provision on portraying sustainable
communities?
4. How effective does the planning and
funding policies in tackling issues
relating to local communities needs?
Documents review
Interview
Questionnaires survey
Observation
Incentives programme
evaluations
Perception and awareness
among residents
Residents need
Research Methodology
Data Collection Methods & Strategy
Data results compared
Interview
Document review
Observati-on
Survey
+ QUAL +
QUAN
QUAN
Data analysis
QUAL
Data analysis
Concurrent Triangulation
Design
The concurrent
triangulation approach is
where the researcher
collect both quantitative
and qualitative data
concurrently and compares
the two databases to
determine if there is
convergence, differences,
or some combination.
Kawagoe,
Saitama Prefecture
Ainokura Village,
Toyama Prefecture
Tokyo
JAPAN
SOUTH
KOREA
NORTH
KOREA
CHINA
RUSSIA
Case Studies
Case Studies
Ainokura Village, Toyama Prefecture
Parameters Ainokura Kawagoe
Number of populations 55 495
Number of households 27 123
Total areas 18 ha 80 ha
Number of incentive recipients 27 109
Number of samples 12 87
Major occupations Agriculture
and tourism
Business
and tourism
Kawagoe, Saitama Prefecture
Research Methodology
Research Questions
1. What are the current packages of the
incentive schemes provided by the
authorities for the cultural heritage
protection?
2. What are the significant
characteristics of the tangible and
intangible cultural heritage to the
study areas?
3. In what way does conservation of
cultural heritage and incentives
provision on portraying sustainable
communities?
4. How effective does the planning and
funding policies in tackling issues
relating to local communities needs?
Documents review
Interview
Questionnaires survey
Observation
Incentives programme
evaluations
Perception and awareness
among residents
Residents need
Types of Heritage Incentives System in Japan
• Municipalities are taking the opinions of the communities in designating the
preservation districts.
• Municipalities are the central figures in promoting a preservation project, in
terms of giving permission for the alteration of the present state, repairs and
enhancement within preservation districts.
• Conservation repair work is carried out by the owners of Important Cultural
Properties or their custodial bodies for historical structures that are made of
wood while financial support is available to cover large expenses.
• The Agency for Cultural Affairs provides necessary subsidies for the owners
or custodial bodies to install or repair fire-preservation facilities and other
necessary disaster prevention system.
Types of Heritage Incentives System in Japan
Types Descriptions
Tax Incentives National tax
30% of inheritance tax deduction for accessed values within preservation districts for
groups of historic buildings.
No land value tax is imposed on land within important preservation districts for groups
of historic buildings.
Municipality tax
No fixed assets tax is imposed on listed historic buildings within important preservation
districts for groups of historic buildings.
The fixed assets tax for land on which are located listed historic buildings that are
within important preservation districts for groups of historic buildings is reduced to
within one half of the property’s taxable value. The fixed assets tax for land, for
buildings, other than listed historic buildings are also reduced in accordance with the
particular conditions within the muncipalities.
Long term
preservation for the
rebirth of towns and
villages
After enduring wind and snow, many of the buildings which comprise preservation districts
for groups of historic buildings are dilapidated and are in need of immediate repairs. Such
buildings that are not in harmony with the characteristics of the preservation districts should
be enhanced so that they become harmonious with the historic landscape.
Disaster prevention
faciltities
The preservation districts which are mostly composed of wooden buildings need disaster
prevention measures. Many preservation districts are improving disaster prevention device,
such as improvement of fire prevention facilites and the reinforcement of stone walls which
are in need of repair, while at the same time considering the historic landscape. They also
practice disaster prevention training periodically.
Source: Agency for Cultural Affairs (2012).
Incentives Programme: How it Works?
• In Japan, numerous incentives programme has been created either financial
or non-financial for cultural heritage conservation.
• At both the places, 92% of respondents in Ainokura and 78% of respondents
in Kawagoe respectively received the financial incentives from their local
authorities.
Preservation aids for repairment of buildings and roof
in Ainokura Village for fiscal year 2004 to 2011
Year Number of Cases Total (¥ thousand)
2004 8 29,501
2005 6 24,633
2006 7 21,193
2007 2 8,929
2008 4 23,187
2009 5 20,120
2010 4 17,375
2011 3 18,893
Source: Nanto Educational Board (2012).
Incentives Programme: How it Works?
Year Number of Cases Total (¥ thousand)
2004 27 4,960
2005 27 4,782
2006 27 4,344
2007 27 5,617
2008 27 5,605
2009 27 5,685
2010 27 5,655
2011 27 5,580
Preservation aids for maintenance of nominated historic building (allocated to owner of building) in Ainokura Village for fiscal year 2004 to 2011
Source: Nanto Educational Board (2012).
*Equivalent to US$10,750 per ¥ 1,000,000 (Currency exchange based on March 2013 rate).
Incentives Programme: How it Works?
Year Number of Cases Total (¥ thousand)
2004 3 2,000
2005 1 2,000
2006 0 0
2007 2 1,804
2008 2 1,089
2009 2 4,000
2010 10 7,515
2011 7 3,810
Preservation aids for small repairment (for buildings and natural
landscape) in Ainokura Village for fiscal year 2004 to 2011
Source: Nanto Educational Board (2012).
*Equivalent to US$10,750 per ¥ 1,000,000 (Currency exchange based on March 2013 rate).
Incentives Programme: How it Works?
Preservation subsidies and support system for the conservation
area of Kawagoe Historic District
Source: Kawagoe City Hall (2012).
Category Types Details of Support Proportion of
support
Maximum
Subsidies
(Japanese Yen*)
Repair Repair of a particular
traditional store houses
(include emergent
repair)
Costs of the exterior
preservation and reinforcement
of buildings structure
Within
4/5
16,000,000
Exterior
repair
Newly built houses or
renovation based on the
construction of traditional
building
Costs of the exterior
maintenance
Within
3/5
6,000,000
Landscape Newly build houses or
renovation in harmony with a
historical landscape
Costs of maintenance the
exterior which can easily be
seen from the public places
such as streets, parks and
squares
Within
3/5
3,000,000
Recovery Costs for recovering traditional buildings and sightseeing spots which destroyed
by disaster; cost expected for this should be permitted by mayor.
Depends on
Mayor’s decision Maintenance Expenses for equipment fire alarms with buildings or maintenance of other
buildings; expenses expect for this should be permitted by mayor.
Incentives Programme: How it Works?
Preservation funds for tangible and intangible heritage
allocated by Kawagoe Historic District in fiscal year 2008 to 2012
Source: Kawagoe City Hall (2012).
Year Total (Japanese Yen*)
Tangible heritage Intangible
heritage
2008 38,486,000 6,565,000
2009 39,005,000 7,960,000
2010 45,984,000 8,400,000
2011 45,833,000 13,348,000
2012 44,000,000 29,137,000
*Equivalent to US$10,750 per ¥ 1,000,000 (Currency exchange based on March 2013 rate).
Incentive programme evaluation
Programme’s Input
Programme’s Activities
Programme’s Participation
Programme’s Reactions
Programme’s Learning
Programme’s Actions
Programme’s Impacts
Residents Perception: Incentives Programme
Residents Perception: Incentives Programme
Mean for the incentive programme evaluation between
Ainokura and Kawagoe
Incentive Programmes’
Evaluation
Case Study
Ainokura
(Mean)
Kawagoe
(Mean) Programme’s Inputs
Programme’s Activities
Programme’s Participation
Programme’s Reactions
Programme’s Learning
Programme’s Actions
Programme’s Impacts
3.7778
3.3667
3.4722
3.0556
3.4167
3.3333
3.1667
3.4253
3.5770
3.6322
3.3640
3.5096
3.5326
3.6437
Total Mean 3.3698 3.5263
Residents Perception: Incentives Programme
Residents’ perception on the justification of the incentives distribution
50%
25%
25%
Yes No Uncertain
46%
6%
48%
Yes No Uncertain
Ainokura Kawagoe
Residents Perception: Cultural Heritage & Tourism
Awareness on the importance of preserving tangible heritage
Ainokura Kawagoe
75%
8%
17%
Yes No Uncertain
98%
2%
Yes No Uncertain
Residents Perception: Cultural Heritage & Tourism
Awareness on the importance of preserving intangible heritage
Ainokura Kawagoe
67%
8%
25%
Yes No Uncertain
98%
2%
Yes No Uncertain
Residents Perception: Cultural Heritage & Tourism
• Perceptions towards the tourism impacts:
– It gives a little bit inconvenience to us when tourists are walking
around and taking pictures of our homes and village every day. Some
of them are trying to step-in without permission. We can feel that our
privacy has been interrupted” (Personal communication with
Ainokura’s respondent, March 19, 2012).
– Due to the growing concern towards the tourism oriented business,
people in Kawagoe tend to be more materialistic. Everything is seen
from the profit angle. That is why you can see very few local products
can be found here and many handcraft stores selling merchandise
items from all over the country and imported from China. Definitely
cheap but not authentic” (Personal communication with Kawagoe’s
respondent, April 30, 2012).
Residents Perception: Cultural Heritage & Tourism
Parameters on the needs for educational training focused in
safeguarding the tangible heritage and intangible heritage
Tangible heritage Intangible Heritage
i. Maintenance and preservation works
ii. Repair and restoration of structure
iii. Alteration and new work
iv. Planning and management of heritage areas
v. Policy and legal issues
vi. Work of fine arts and crafts techniques
vii. Paintings
viii. Documentation and assessment
ix. Cultural landscape
x. Entrepreneurship
i. Cultural and intangible heritage policy
ii. Identify and delineate the intangible
heritage
iii. Heritage policy and legal instruments
iv. Cultural and historical traditions
v. Cultural and arts management
vi. Drama, music and festivals
vii. Language and a work of art
viii.Manners and customs
ix. Folk performing arts
x. Religious faith
Residents Perception: Cultural Heritage & Tourism
Summary of Levene’s Test and t-Test between Ainokura and Kawagoe
Needs p-value
(Levene’s
Test)
Equal
Variances
Assumed
p-value
(t-Test)
Significance
Status
Tangible 0.861 Yes 0.052 No
Intangible 0.120 Yes 0.000 Yes
Mean for the tangible and intangible heritage needs between
Ainokura and Kawagoe
Resident’s Needs
Case Study
Ainokura
(Mean)
Kawagoe
(Mean)
Tangible Heritage 1.9083 1.6949
Intangible Heritage 2.1500 1.5831
Conclusion
• This study confirmed that the concerns about cultural heritage importance
among residents are the top barriers for the adoption of sustainable
communities.
• The financial incentives tool does not conform the effectiveness of the
programme, however the educational training focus should be promoted to
the local public.
• Consequently, any efforts to preserve the cultural heritage should be aimed
not merely at conserving its architectural and natural forms, but mainly at
safeguarding the intangible heritage as well.