LogIn / RegistrationArticles for sale
- Head office address: Moscow, 123317, Moscow City, 8th Floor, Presnenskaya Embankment, 6, bldg. 2
- article@123mi.ru
- Сортировка:
- по горящим
- по цене
- по дате
#12772. Tyrannical participation approaches in China’s regeneration of Urban heritage areas: a case study of baitasi historic district, Beijing
| September 2026 | publication date |
| Proposal available till | 13-05-2025 |
| 4 total number of authors per manuscript | 0 $ |
| The title of the journal is available only for the authors who have already paid for |
| Journal’s subject area: |
| History; Museology; Cultural Studies; Conservation; Geography, Planning and Development; Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management; |
| place 1 | place 2 | place 3 | place 4 |
| Free | Free | Free | Free |
| 2510 $ | 1340 $ | 1170 $ | 1000 $ |
Contract №12772.1   | Contract №12772.2 | Contract №12772.3 | Contract №12772.4 |
1 place - free (for sale)
2 place - free (for sale)
3 place - free (for sale)
4 place - free (for sale)
More details about the manuscript: Arts & Humanities Citation Index or/and Social Sciences Citation Index
Abstract:
In China’s new model of heritage area regeneration, a series of approaches have been undertaken to promote community participation. Using Baitasi Historic District in Beijing as a case study, this research examines such new participation approaches. By analysing how the government has failed to meet the communities’ demands as well as to engage the communities in the decision-making process but only in the implementation stage, I argue that the government has misused the concept of participation by equating attendance and notification to higher levels of participation. The participation approaches are ‘the tyranny of participation’ which de facto helps to justify the official agenda, exploit the communities for their financial contribution, and target the already privileged group while continuing to marginalise the underprivileged. These approaches make the new regeneration model no different from previous ones in terms of widening the socioeconomic gaps between the lower-class and the middle- and upper-classes. This research reflects on the flawed motivation, strategy, and subsequent negative consequences of such community participation and calls for more attempts in heritage practices to solve the issues.
Keywords:
Community participation; heritage areas; regeneration; relocation; tyranny of participation
Contacts :
2 place - free (for sale)
3 place - free (for sale)
4 place - free (for sale)
More details about the manuscript: Arts & Humanities Citation Index or/and Social Sciences Citation Index
Abstract:
In China’s new model of heritage area regeneration, a series of approaches have been undertaken to promote community participation. Using Baitasi Historic District in Beijing as a case study, this research examines such new participation approaches. By analysing how the government has failed to meet the communities’ demands as well as to engage the communities in the decision-making process but only in the implementation stage, I argue that the government has misused the concept of participation by equating attendance and notification to higher levels of participation. The participation approaches are ‘the tyranny of participation’ which de facto helps to justify the official agenda, exploit the communities for their financial contribution, and target the already privileged group while continuing to marginalise the underprivileged. These approaches make the new regeneration model no different from previous ones in terms of widening the socioeconomic gaps between the lower-class and the middle- and upper-classes. This research reflects on the flawed motivation, strategy, and subsequent negative consequences of such community participation and calls for more attempts in heritage practices to solve the issues.
Keywords:
Community participation; heritage areas; regeneration; relocation; tyranny of participation
Contacts :
