Residents’ Perception on the Cultural Heritage Conservation and Incentives Programme in the...

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


• 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.


• 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.


• 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.


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)


• 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


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.


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.


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 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


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

Ainokura Village


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

Kokiriko dance

Kawagoe Historic District


• 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 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).


• 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).



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


*Equivalent to US$10,750 per ¥ 1,000,000 (Currency exchange based on March 2013 rate).



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




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.


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


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


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 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


Awareness on the importance of preserving intangible heritage

Ainokura Kawagoe

67%

8%

25%

Yes No Uncertain

98%

2%

Yes No Uncertain


• 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).


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


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.

Terima kasih Thank you

Residents’ Perception on the Cultural Heritage Conservation and Incentives Programme in the...

Documents

Transcript of Residents’ Perception on the Cultural Heritage Conservation and Incentives Programme in the...