| |
|
|
Old Beijing in the Eyes of Its Local Residents |
——Survey Report on the “Cultural Heritage Protection” Awareness of Old Beijing Local Residents |
In the past month, with the help of a group of devoted volunteers, CHP has carried out a social survey to better understand the “Cultural Heritage Protection” awareness of the local residents in Beijing’s Old City. Taking a scientific and objective approach, we intended to gather some first-hand data on their attitudes toward their current living style, as well as their understanding of the cultural heritage preservation. Based on these data, we will conduct quantitative and qualitative analysis to pave the way for the successful implementation of the Friends of Old Beijing Phase II.
In this survey, we have selected four historical preservation districts: 1) Shi Cha Hai; 2) Nan Luo Gu Xiang; 3) Xi Si; 4) Jing Shan. Our volunteers have gathered valuable information through interviewing the local residents. A total of 441 valid questionnaires have been collected, and these questionnaires have covered reasonably well all sample groups of local residents taking into account their age, gender, occupation, family history as local residents, and average family income. (Detailed sample distribution can be found in the pie chart attachment at the end of the report)
We would like to give our highest thanks to our volunteers, who have worked very hard in hot summer days in the maze-like hutong neighborhoods. A month’s effort have resulted in the questionnaires, which will be the cornerstone of our analysis.
We would lik to share the initial results of our analysis. Limited by the space of this article, we have only chosen part of the information. We hope to share more information in the future.
Views and Attitudes Towards Current Lifestyle in the Old City
Our survey results show that most of the local residents enjoy the hutong lifestyle. Among all interviewees, 61% of them choose to stay in hutongs instead of moving to high-rise apartments. Only 27% of the local residents choose to move to high-rises, and the remaining 11% surveyed was indifferent. However, we noticed that is the desire to live in the hutongs is gradually disappearing in the younger generation. Compared with the 79% among 60 + year old residents, only 44% of the younger generation aged between 16 to 25 years old choose to stay in hutongs, and 31% of them remained indifferent. (Figure 1) |
|
Figure 1 |
| When asked about the radical changes in hutong communities, local residents showed a mixed feeling. When they were asked the question “Do you think life in the hutongs is better now than it was in the past?”most of the residents over 40 consider hutong life to be better in the past. The younger generation (age 16 to 40), on the otherhand, holds the opposite opinion. (See figure 2) |
|
Figure 2 |
| Local residents took very different approach towards the different forms of changes in the communities. Some are open to changes, while some are not. The same data shows that the attitudes of younger generation are both more positive and indifferent when they were asked about issues on gentrification, commercialization, or hutong tours. (See Figure 3) |
|
Figure 3 |
When we analyze attitudes on current lifestyles, we strongly feel that the “younger generation”, “students”, “immigrant population” are far less concerned about the fate of the old city’s traditional style. We find that this tendency is interesting and worth mentioning.
Understanding of Cultural Heritage Preservation
We have tried to learn the local residents’ understanding about cultural heritage protection using the following four questions: 1) What is worth preserving in the opinion of the local residents; 2) Are local people aware that their own community is located within one of the historical preservation areas; 3) What do local residents know about cultural heritage protection laws or conservation plans; 4) What is the dominating force in determining the fate of a heritage site or area in the mind of the local residents.
In response to one question, most local residents replied that the hutongs and courtyards are of some historical value: About 60% of the local residents believed that their houses are “of some value and worth preserving”, or “very significant and strongly recommend for preservation”. At the same time, 60% of the local residents consider the definition of “cultural heritage”is not limited to monuments like Forbidden City or Temple of Heaven, and should also include courtyards and hutongs, and the daily life of those living in the hutongs. Fortunately, these ratios are also higher than 60% (63% & 66%) among younger generations (16-25 years old).
Although the ratio of those people who consider their houses “very significant and strongly recommend for preservation” is not a dominant majority and there are still 30% of the residents who consider their houses“pathetic and not worth preserving”, we believe the the basic recognition mentioned above can form a very good foundation of our future work. (Figure 4) |
|
Figure 4 |
| For question two, we found that 78% of the residents were aware of the “historical preservation district status” of their community, and 62% of the residents interpreted this to mean that no buildings within the historical preservation district can be torn down as easily.(Figure 5) |
|
Figure 5 |
For the third question, our survey shows that although most residents have a certain level of heritage preservation awareness, very few of them know any details of the conservation plan or laws. Only 15% of the local residents can tell the name of at least one law (Figure 6), and this tells us that the awareness of the local residents remains on a very superficial level, and it is far from enough to understand the guidelines to residents who live in a historical preservation district. (Figure 6) |
|
Figure 6 |
| The fourth question had an almost unanimous consensus with over 84% of the local residents responding that“the government” is responsible for the preservation of cultural heritage, while only 9% of the interviewees felt that “local residents” are also responsible. Even among the younger generations, 69% consider the government to be responsible, and another 22% consider local residents to be responsible. Considering our mission is to mobilize the local communities, we think this is a very big challenge for us. |
|
Figure 7 |
Support Needed by the Local Residents on Cultural Heritage Preservation
To carry out phase two of our “Friends of Old Beijing” program more effectively, we intentionally asked the local residents what kind of help and support they will need in carrying out cultural heritage preservation work in their communities Among the 441 questionnaires, 44% replied with “renovation or rebuilding skills and techniques”, and the other 32% mentioned “legal knowledge”. This has definitely set forth a clear guideline for our future work.
This is only part of the information we have gathered from the survey. We hope that through sharing this with everyone, we will be able to get more positive feedbacks from you and improve the effectiveness of our work.
In doing this analysis, we also found that some of the personal information, like the age, occupation, history living in Beijing, ownership, as well as average living space of the interviewees has very strong correlation with their heritage protection awareness. For example, the willingness to protect the old houses is stronger among private property owners; those who have better living conditions are normally more active in taking actions to protect the traditional neighborhood.
In the future we will continue to analyze these results and we hope that we will be able to provide clear guidelines for our work in the future. |
| |
| Acknowledgements: |
| Once again, we would like to express our sincere gratitude for the following volunteers: |
| Jing Shan Team: Zhao Jing (Ms.), Wen Weiquan (Mr.), Li Yifeng (Mr.) |
| Nan Luo Gu Xiang: Sun Xuejuan (Ms.), Huang Yinjie (Mr.), Zhou Tongtong (Ms.) |
| Shi Cha Hai Team: Wang Yue (Ms.), Zhang Wei (Mr.), Fang Zhongda (Mr.), Shao Yuwei (Mr.), Sun Wenjiao (Ms.), Tian He (Ms.), Yang Bin (Mr.) |
| Xi Si Team: Li Jing Yi (Ms.), Chen Huirong (Ms.), Zhao Xiwei (Ms.) |
| |
| Appendix: Sample Distribution |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
