This article examines how participatory heritage conservation unfolds within the institutional logic of shequ (official residential communities) in urban China. Drawing on a case study of a housing renovation project in a historic Beijing neighbourhood, this study investigated how various actors, including residents, local officials and experts interpreted and enacted community participation. The study found that while participatory mechanisms were formally embedded in the project, their implementation remained procedural and state-led, constrained by pre-existing governance routines and hierarchical roles. At the same time, the project failed to recognise the diverse cultural meanings residents attached to their everyday environments, thus missing the opportunity to use heritage to foster local identity and shared responsibility. By adopting a contextual and practice-based perspective, this article highlights both the structural constraints and latent opportunities for building more inclusive and sustainable models of participatory heritage governance in China.
UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN. Managing cultural world heritage. Paris: UNESCO, 2013, p.4.
4.
LoganW. Cultural diversity, cultural heritage and human rights: towards heritage management as human rights-based cultural practice. Int J Herit Stud2012; 18: 231–244.
ShiehLFriedmannJ. Restructuring urban governance: community construction in contemporary China. City2008; 12: 183–195.
7.
BrayD. Building ‘community’: new strategies of governance in urban China. Econ Soc2006; 35: 530–549.
8.
ZhangY. Negotiating authenticity in China’s urban historic preservations–the case of the Kuan and Zhai Alleys in Chengdu. Herit Soc2018; 11: 79–104.
9.
KatapidiI. Heritage policy meets community praxis: widening conservation approaches in the traditional villages of central Greece. J Rural Stud2021; 81: 47–58.
10.
YeohBSAHuangS. The conservation-redevelopment dilemma in Singapore: the case of the Kampong Glam historic district. Cities1996; 13: 411–422.
11.
ZhangYWuZ. The reproduction of heritage in a Chinese village: whose heritage, whose pasts?Int J Herit Stud2016; 22: 228–241.
12.
LandorfC. A framework for sustainable heritage management: a study of UK industrial heritage sites. Int J Herit Stud2009; 15: 494–510.
13.
TrelkaM. Negotiating authority: local communities in the world heritage convention. Archaeologies2020; 16: 99–119.
14.
DenW. Community empowerment and heritage conservation: the experience of Beitou district in Taipei City, Taiwan. Hist Environ Policy Pract2014; 5: 258–274.
15.
PerkinC. Beyond the rhetoric: negotiating the politics and realising the potential of community-driven heritage engagement. Int J Herit Stud2010; 16: 107–122.
16.
JokilehtoJ. Engaging conservation: communities, place and capacity building. In: ChittyG (ed) Heritage, conservation and communities: engagement, participation and capacity building. London: Routledge, 2016, pp.17–33.
17.
ChittyG (ed). Heritage, conservation and communities: engagement, participation and capacity building. Abingdon & New York: Routledge, 2017, p.10.
18.
ViolaS. Built heritage repurposing and communities engagement: symbiosis, enabling processes, key challenges. Sustainability2022; 14: 2320.
19.
Van KnippenbergKBoonstraBBoelensL. Communities, heritage and planning: towards a co-evolutionary heritage approach. Plan Theory Pract2022; 23: 26–42.
20.
FredheimLH. Sustaining public agency in caring for heritage: critical perspectives on participation through co-design. PhD Thesis, University of York, York, 2019.
21.
JonesS. Wrestling with the social value of heritage: problems, dilemmas and opportunities. J Community Archaeol Herit2017; 4: 21–37.
22.
OliverJArmstrongJCurtisECurtisNVergunstJ. Exploring co-production in community heritage research: reflections from the Bennachie Landscapes Project. J Community Archaeol Herit2022; 9: 196–215.
23.
WatertonESmithL. The recognition and misrecognition of community heritage. Int J Herit Stud2010; 16: 4–15.
24.
SokkaSBadiaFDonatoF. Governance of cultural heritage: towards participatory approaches. Eur J Cult Manag Policy2021; 11: 4–19.
25.
PouliosI. Discussing strategy in heritage conservation: living heritage approach as an example of strategic innovation. J Cult Herit Manag Sust Dev2014; 4: 16–34.
26.
LiuQ. Public participation and urban planning (excerpts). Urban Plan1991; 01: 40.
27.
GuoHHeP. To protect the urban environment, public participation should be mobilized. Environ Prot1991; 09: 8–10.
28.
AbramsonD. The aesthetics of city-scale preservation policy in Beijing. Plan Perspect2007; 22: 129–166.
29.
HeSWuF. Socio-spatial impacts of property-led redevelopment on China’s urban neighbourhoods. Cities2007; 24: 194–208.
30.
ZhangYFangK. Politics of housing redevelopment in China: the rise and fall of the Ju’er Hutong project in inner-city Beijing. J Hous Built Environ2017; 18: 75–87.
31.
LiJKrishnamurthySRodersAPWesemaelVP. Community participation in cultural heritage management: a systematic literature review comparing Chinese and international practices. Cities2020; 96: 102476.
32.
GuCWeiYDCookIG. Planning Beijing: socialist city, transitional city, and global city. Urban Geogr2015; 36: 905–926.
33.
QianZ. World Heritage Site inscription and waterfront heritage conservation: evidence from the Grand Canal historic districts in Hangzhou, China. J Herit Tour2021; 16: 684–704.
34.
WeiR. Tyrannical participation approaches in China’s regeneration of urban heritage areas: a case study of Baitasi historic district, Beijing. Int J Herit Stud2022; 28: 279–296.
35.
LiJKrishnamurthySRodersAPWesemaelVP. Informing or consulting? Exploring community participation within urban heritage management in China. Habitat Int2020; 105: 102268.
36.
WuJChenYShiRXiongJ. How does social mobilization shape the collective coproduction of urban community regeneration in China?Land (Basel)2025; 14: 1–20.
37.
HuBHeFHuL. Community empowerment under powerful government: a sustainable tourism development path for cultural heritage sites. Front Psychol2022; 13: 752051.
38.
SuMWallG. Community participation in tourism at a World Heritage Site: Mutianyu Great Wall, Beijing, China. Int J Tour Res2014; 16: 146–156.
39.
FanL. International influence and local response: understanding community involvement in urban heritage conservation in China. Int J Herit Stud2014; 20: 651–662.
40.
LiJKrishnamurthySRodersAPWesemaelVP. State-of-the-practice: assessing community participation within Chinese cultural World Heritage properties. Habitat Int2020; 96: 102107.
41.
WangXAokiN. Paradox between neoliberal urban redevelopment, heritage conservation, and community needs: case study of a historic neighbourhood in Tianjin, China. Cities2019; 85: 156–169.
42.
WuF. Creating Chinese urbanism: urban revolution and governance change. London: UCL Press, 2022, p.23.
43.
FeuchtwangS. Between state and local residents: heritage perspectives and their combination in Quanzhou, Southern Fujian. In: EvansHRowlandsMJ (eds) Grassroots values and local cultural heritage in China. Lanham: Lexington Books, 2021, pp.115–132.
44.
ZhangLZhaoSX. City branding and the Olympic effect: a case study of Beijing. Cities2009; 26: 245–254.
45.
ZhangY. Steering towards growth: symbolic urban preservation in Beijing, 1990-2005. Town Plan Rev2008; 79: 187–208.
46.
ShinHB. Urban conservation and revalorisation of dilapidated historic quarters: the case of Nanluoguxiang in Beijing. Cities2010; 27: S43–S54.
TombaL. The government next door: neighborhood politics in urban China. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2014, p.9.
50.
BrayD. Social space and governance in urban China: the Danwei system from origins to reform. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005, p.192.
51.
BolandAZhuJ. Public participation in China’s green communities: mobilizing memories and structuring incentives. Geoforum2012; 43: 147–157.
52.
WanX. Governmentalities in everyday practices: the dynamic of urban neighbourhood governance in China. Urban Stud2016; 53: 2330–2346.
53.
HebererT. Evolvement of citizenship in urban China or authoritarian communitarianism? Neighborhood development, community participation, and autonomy. J Contemp China2009; 18: 491–515.
54.
QinXOwenC. Social forces and street-level governance in Shanghai: from compliance to participation in recycling regulations. China Q2021; 248: 1081–1102.
55.
YangM. Citizen participation, mass participation and community participation. Society2005; 5: 78–95.
56.
GiombiniL. Everyday heritage and place-making. Espes2020; 9: 50–61.
57.
MoslerS. Everyday heritage concept as an approach to place-making process in the urban landscape. J Urban Des (Abingdon)2019; 24: 778–793.
58.
TunbridgeJEAshworthGJ. Dissonant heritage: the management of the past as a resource in conflict. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1996, pp.20–21.
59.
WatsonKJEvansJKarvonenAWhitleyT. Re-conceiving building design quality: a review of building users in their social context. Indoor Built Environment2016; 25: 509–523.
60.
LindbladJ. Planning context: flexible plans and mayoral authority in French urban planning. Environ Plan D2023; 41: 615–636.
