| Id | 2175 | |
| Author | Lam-Knott S. | |
| Title | Contested Meanings of Urban Heritage in Hong Kong | |
| Reference | Lam-Knott S. Contested Meanings of Urban Heritage in Hong Kong,City and Society 34 1 |
|
| Link to article | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85124888400&doi=10.1111%2fciso.12420&partnerID=40&md5=1a4a95c8aa68b0f48a26cf22857d84c0 |
|
| Abstract | Confrontations between the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government and civil society regarding the demolition of historical sites across the city have been occurring since the mid-2000s. These clashes have been interpreted as the consequence of exclusionary heritage governance practices; postcolonial identity anxieties; and popular dissatisfaction toward economic injustices in the city. This essay argues that heritage mobilizations also arise from the competing meanings and expectations the SAR government and civil society have attached to notions of “urban heritage,” especially in relation to urban liveability discourses. Using documentary and ethnographic data, this essay provides an overview of Hong Kong’s heritage landscape before examining approaches by both government and civil society toward heritage conservation—reflecting their respective understandings as to what urban heritage entails for urban life. This essay finds the SAR government position heritage as being secondary to urban redevelopment, a means of establishing urban liveability in economic terms. In contrast, civil society actors frame heritage as integral to redevelopment, producing a liveable city through enriching social conviviality. By delineating the disparate ways urban heritage is valued in Hong Kong, this essay offers broader insights on the conflict regarding how present and future urban life is envisioned in Asian cities. © (2022) by the American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. |
|
Results:
Smaller Distance better similarity
| Id | View | Author | Title | Distance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2176 |  |
Law A.M. | Historical imaginaries, historic urban branding, and the local state in China: rejuvenation discourse, manufactured heritage and simulacrascapes | 98.5611 |
| 2171 | |
Liu Y.; Jin X.; Dupre K. | Engaging stakeholders in contested urban heritage planning and management | 106.011 |
| 2078 | |
Burgum S. | This City Is An Archive: Squatting History and Urban Authority | 108.119 |
| 2208 | |
Anelli D.; Tajani F. | Valorization of cultural heritage and land take reduction: an urban compensation model for the replacement of unsuitable buildings in an Italian UNESCO site | 112.726 |
| 2181 | |
Li J.; Dai T.; Yin S.; Zhao Y.; Ikiz Kaya D.; Yang L. | Promoting conservation or change? The UNESCO label of world heritage (re)shaping urban morphology in the Old Town of Lijiang, China | 113.731 |
| 2825 | |
Elshater A.; Abusaada H. | Effects of nightlife activities on urban spaces and design: a case study of Cairo, Egypt | 115.109 |
| 3014 | |
Nogueira A.; Wallig J.F. | The post-industrial legacy in Brazil: where circular economy principles meet collective urban practices by design | 116.564 |
| 2141 | |
Manfredo Manfredini M. | Affirmatively reading deterritorialisation in urban space: An Aotearoa/New Zealand perspective | 120.221 |
| 2227 | |
Wei R. | Tyrannical participation approaches in China’s regeneration of Urban heritage areas: a case study of baitasi historic district, Beijing | 122.052 |
| 2190 | |
Cermeño H.; Mielke K. | Endangered Urban Commons: Lahore’s Violent Heritage Management and Prospects for Reconciliation | 122.108 |
MESOC has received funding
from Horizon 2020 - the EU Framework Programme
for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) -
under Grant Agreement n°870935.
We take your privacy seriously and WE DO NOT process any personal data or any information that reveals personal identity or information that can be linked to such information to identify directly or indirectly.
2021 © CD