Promoting Public Engagement in Urban Heritage Preservation through Participatory Art Case Studies of Practices and Approaches

Urban heritage includes historical districts, palaces, religious buildings, monuments, and archaeological sites (Chandan & Kumar, 2019). These sites embody the rich history of a city and are a source of pride and uniqueness representing the local communities. As part of national heritage, the inclusion of protected assets holds significant importance for the present and future of a city (Steinberg, 1996). While proactive legislation and financial allocations by the government help oversee and implement protection measures, many heritage sites are still at risk of decay or completely disappear (Najimi, 2011). In comparison to urban economic development and prosperity, urban heritage and cultural landmarks often encounter challenges in preservation (Udeaja et al., 2020).

In some developed countries, the focus of preservation often centered around historically significant buildings such as palaces, castles, and churches (Udeaja et al., 2020). However, in some developing countries or regions, governments and decision-makers tend to shift their focus to new development instead of preserving previously underdeveloped image (Najimi, 2011). They demolish historical buildings to make way for commercial constructions, construct new roads and neighbourhoods, or repurpose historic sites for public entertainment and open spaces, causing irreversible damage in the name of modernization (Liu et al., 2020).

This situation leads to some misconceptions. Heritage structures are perceived as a financial burden for local authorities. Heritage restoration or preservation become a secondary concern. This causes the prioritization on initiatives of protecting and (re)developing buildings or streets with high-profit return (Wang & Aoki, 2019).

Despite the establishment of heritage conservation methods by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) through the Venice Charter in 1964 (ICOMOS, 1964), which has been widely accepted as a universal standard for preserving existing heritage and balancing modern urban structures (Elsorady, 2012), and emphasizes the preservation of the original authenticity and historical legibility of buildings (Byrne, 1991), there are still national governments and authorities prefer ‘modernization’ strategies. This results the demolition of old buildings or the development of new commercial projects and real estate on the heritage sites (Steinberg, 1996). Despite many developing countries signed the UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage in 1972 (UNESCO, 1972), and some countries actively nominate their national heritage sites for inclusion in the World Heritage List, the efforts is primarily driven by economic factors (Huang & Liu, 2023). Some governments exploit the popularity and allure of World Heritage sites to promote tourism development towards gaining economic benefits, but putting many heritage sites at risk (Zhuang et al., 2019).

In addition to issues of demolition and (re)development, some well-preserved buildings are also facing the risk of damage. During restoration projects, contractors may take shortcuts or use inappropriate materials, which can result in damaging the original structure and historical value of the building (Najimi, 2011). Limited number of architectural heritages managed to retained its historical significance after being repurposed by decision-makers (SHIRVANI DASTGERDI & De Luca, 2018). Besides, the funding for the protection and maintenance of heritage sites often raises controversy. Many governing parties are reluctant to increase expenditure on the preservation and restoration of relics (Steinberg, 1996). Some governments and developers consider tourism as an effective approach to balance the investment in heritage preservation and its contribution to regional economic development (Elsorady, 2012; Najimi, 2011). They promote their unique culture and use “cultural tourism” as a commercial promotional strategy (Y. Li et al., 2020; Wang & Bramwell, 2012) However, the rapid expansion of tourism brings a series of problems. The influx of a large number of tourists to heritage sites increases the demand for rented accommodations in city centers, posing a threat to heritage preservation (García-Hernández et al., 2017; Mínguez et al., 2019). Moreover, the development of tourism leads to the homogenization, commercialization, and even branding of heritage development (García-Hernández et al., 2017; Mínguez et al., 2019). Tourists are seen as a consumer group (Richards, 2000), and excessive marketing approaches applied to mainly meet consumers’ demands in order to attract more visitors. In some situations, the government demolished authentic historical districts and allowing developers to construct artificial historical commercial streets (Yi, 2012).

There is a contentious relationship between heritage preservation and economic development (Wang & Bramwell, 2012). The planning of shopping and entertainment facilities promotes revenue generation but may result in physical damage or commercialization of the heritage (Ho* & McKercher, 2004). Even under government intervention, the authenticity of heritage sites can be deliberately fabricated and redefined (Richards, 2000; Wang & Bramwell, 2012). For example, the iconic Leifeng Pagoda in Hangzhou, China has collapsed in 1924 and was reconstructed on its original site in 2001. Despite the loss of the original relic, tourists flocked to visit the reconstructed Leifeng Pagoda due to a popular TV drama that featuring a Chinese legend that totally irrelevant to the relic (Wang & Bramwell, 2012). This has twisted the original cultural and historical background of the pagoda, causing public confusion, especially among younger generations and visitors who have limited knowledge about the local heritage. Visitors passively accepted the created “truth and history,” and distorted “facts” which are constantly reinterpreted or magnified (Nasser, 2003; SHIRVANI DASTGERDI & De Luca, 2018). In some heritage sites, the original indigenous inhabitants were being displaced or forcibly relocated (García-Hernández et al., 2017; Mínguez et al., 2019). Certain local customs are in danger of disappearing, which can lead to a loss of historical identity and value for urban heritage sites. This poses a risk of undermining and eroding their significance (Udeaja et al., 2020). According to Munasinghe (2005), Vilnius, a globally renowned World Heritage city, is facing the risk of transforming from the capital of Lithuania to a city controlled by investors, which could lead to the loss of its unique cultural value. That reflects a case where protection is being replaced by commercial exploitation (Lask & Herold, 2004).

Overall, urban heritage preservation encounters numerous challenges. Significantly, the economic interests and cultural value are contradicted. Commercialization of cultural and heritage for tourism may eventually neglect the authenticity of cultural and heritage value. Nevertheless, there are still alternative heritage preservation measures or strategies.

Despite the proactive measures taken by the initiating stakeholders (i.e., the government, its relevant departments, heritage conservation experts), scholars reported the lack of public awareness and understanding of the importance and value of urban heritage preservation, particularly among residents living near to the heritage sites. Many individuals lack interest and a sense of belonging and appreciation (J. Li et al., 2020b; Yi, 2012). This phenomenon reflects both the cognitive gap and communication breakdown between the initiating stakeholders and the common public. This mainly due to the inadequate public engagement. Elsorady (2012) relates poor public engagement to the “information islands” dilemma, which is referring to the asymmetric and unidirectional flow of spatial information due to objective factors, resulting in its inability to be shared (Bufei, 2019; Du, 2020). Heritage conservation professionals may find themselves trapped in the “information islands” where they are confined to their own professional domain, easily exposed to information or actively engaged in discussions related to heritage preservation. The discussion may only amplified within a small circle, but not effectively outreach the wider audience or the general public. This creates a gap among different groups in terms of information acquisition, dissemination, and consensus (Elsorady, 2012), causing barriers to information acceptance and understanding between the general public and professionals in the field of heritage preservation.

Seeking to establish more effective information linkage towards facilitating effective communication at the societal level is an important task in promoting heritage conservation and implementation. In this regard, active public participation plays a crucial role as a vital link to close the gap of communication across all different groups of stakeholders involved in driving the execution of urban heritage preservation initiatives. Thus, it is necessary to emphasize effective public engagement or participation towards ensuring the successful advancement of urban heritage preservation.

To evidently illustrates the limitations imposed by the government-implemented heritage conservation initiatives as mentioned above, this study conducted a thematic analysis using NVivo 12 software on the literature findings of the challenges and issues stemming from the existing government-led heritage conservation efforts. Table 1 presents the results of the thematic analysis.

Table 1

Challenges & Issues in Urban Heritage Conservation

These thematic findings highlight the government’s assertive authority in heritage conservation, adopting a top-down approach led by economic and development interests. The public occupies a passive and disadvantaged position, exacerbated by the inadequate dissemination of information by conservation bodies or the mistaken belief that the information has been sufficiently communicated. This results in a deficiency of public awareness and understanding concerning conservation. Therefore, further research on more practical implementation strategies is essential, particularly to empower greater public participation, thus enhancing awareness and engagement in conservation efforts.

Participatory art is an art form that aims to break the boundaries of traditional art by encouraging active audience participation and interaction (Mulligan & Smith, 2010). It emphasizes the crucial role of audience involvement, transforming them from passive observers or spectators into active creators or collaborators (Gultekin, 2016; Helguera, 2011; Matarasso, 2019). Participatory art provides a space and mechanism for innovation and exploration; stimulating and provoking related thoughts through tangible images or forms; and facilitating dialogue, practice, and reflection (Yang, 2015). By encouraging broad participation, it embraces diverse perspectives and concerns, ensuring that lasting resonances can be generated (Spaniol, 2004).

Matarasso (2019) puts forward certain conditions and limitations for participatory art. Firstly, participatory art must involve artistic activities or creative projects. Additionally, it should include the participation of both artists and non-artists, with non-artists encompassing the general public, residents, ordinary individuals, community members, and so on. Therefore, in participatory art, artists are no longer the sole creators; they become motivators, facilitators, and collective collaborators of the activities or practices (Bishop, 2023; Helguera, 2011; Matarasso, 2019). Thus, in participatory art activities, non-artists play an important role in terms of ownership or aspirations. They can become central participants in the activities, directly engaging in the artistic creation process.

Participatory art goes beyond focusing on interpersonal relationships among participants and considers the broader social, political, and cultural contexts in which art exists (Bishop, 2004). By using art to address or explore social issues, it prioritizes social dialogue as the primary mode of creation, resulting in profound impacts and reflections within the public domain through participatory collaborative art (Bishop, 2023; Helguera, 2011). Within a specific timeframe, people come together to engage in collective activities using art as a medium, rather than merely aiming to produce an artistic product or artwork (Olsen, 2019). Participatory art allows individuals or groups with diverse backgrounds, knowledge, skills, and interests to come together to address a social or local problem using art forms (Basualdo & Laddaga, 2009). Therefore, participatory art breaks down disciplinary boundaries and connects art with philosophy, aesthetics, politics, community development, social work, and various other fields (Matarasso, 2019), engaging interdisciplinary practices and related domains amongst society (Wong, 2019).

Unlike the community art that focuses solely on artistic actions (Matarasso, 2019), participatory art requires participants to engage in a series of processes and experiences, from observation, analysis, communication, understanding, practice, reflection, to engaging in dialogue with the community and public sectors towards addressing practical issues (Badham, 2010). The purpose of participatory art is to actively empower the public with the rights and opportunities for democratic participation; to promote social change; to stimulate individual thinking and resonance; to actively engage in and foster regional cultural identity; and to enhance well-being and democratic consciousness (Badham, 2010; Yang, 2015).

Urban heritage represents the important values and significance of a place, encompassing the narratives of the community, residents, and the city itself while carrying the cohesion and collective memory of the locality (Wang & Aoki, 2019). These legacies represent local memories, beliefs, values, personal identities and attachments (Díaz-Andreu, 2017; Wang & Aoki, 2019). Local residents are the beneficiaries of urban heritage and play a crucial role as the primary audience and advocates. Their participation in the preservation and recognition of heritage is essential for driving the development of local culture (Dian & Abdullah, 2013; Lask & Herold, 2004). Furthermore, art projects are regarded as significant engines for promoting regional cultural development and providing the necessary impetus for local progress (Purcell, 2009). Therefore, art projects and urban heritage are closely intertwined, working together to foster the prosperity and development of local culture. However, the crucial concern is the methods or approaches how public can participate in urban heritage preservation.

Tosun (1999) argues that public participation should be an adaptive and flexible model, allowing various forms of genuine participation that are legitimized and adjusted according to specific site conditions. Suarez‐Balcazar (2020) proposed that meaningful participation should be grounded in tangible engagement processes and collaborative knowledge creation. Askins and Pain (2011) highlight that when dismantling dominant discourses and social hierarchies, it can be achieved through methods such as participatory diagramming, community mapping, art, video, and drama. In meeting these scholars concern, participatory art, as an art form or artistic practice, provides opportunities for ordinary citizens to participate and be respected (Love & Mattern, 2013). It encourages broader active engagement (Johnson et al., 2011). Les Têtes de l’Art (TDA), a participatory art organization in Marseille, France, founded in 1996, is rooted in the local context and establishes connections with local stakeholders. It reconsiders social relationships and reshapes the vision of local communities and life through artistic mediation mechanisms (Eynaud et al., 2018; Purcell, 2009). This includes coordinating collaboration between communities and local government, promoting inclusiveness among stakeholders, and organizing opportunities for more effective cooperation among artists, community groups, and residents (Mulligan & Smith, 2010). Therefore, participatory practices have the potential to change the power dynamics (Askins & Pain, 2011).

The application of art aligns with the goals of participatory research. It offers the potential for cross-cultural communication towards deepening cultural understanding, while fostering social cohesion (Askins & Pain, 2011). Participatory art, through the collaborative efforts of artists and non-artists, injects new life into heritage sites by utilizing mural projects, cultural activities, and other means to accurately showcase and narrate their meaning and value (Cheung, 2015). For instance, the Shiosai region in Japan organizes participatory art festivals that embrace and promote local culture while raising public awareness of heritage preservation (Qu & Cheer, 2022). According to Luostarinen and Schrag (2021), collective action and co-creation by diverse actors on a shared territory are critical to generate sense of responsibility, and a sense of place towards achieving common goals. In this regard, Singapore’s cultural policy emphasizes the involvement of art in heritage, fostering a strong sense of national identity through showcasing of the local culture (Kong, 2000). Participatory art is utilized as a means to revitalize abandoned or underutilized heritage sites and architecture (Colella, 2019). It enables creative expression that transcends linguistic and cultural boundaries while directly or indirectly influencing community or societal issues (Askins & Pain, 2011; Dunphy, 2012). At the same time, it provides participants with knowledge and education beyond traditional educational models (McKay, 2017). Hickey-Moody (2017) explicitly states that participatory art practices can serve as a cultural pedagogical approach, making complex issues visible through images, icons, sensations, colors, textures, and sounds (Hickey-Moody, 2017).

Urban heritage carries the public culture and values of a place. Failure to recognize and appreciate them may result in missed opportunities to connect and build social cohesion, in which may undermine the local residents’ sense of place, identity and belonging (Udeaja et al., 2020). Thus, participatory art relevantly provides an opportunity and facilitates interaction between the community, the public, the government, and heritage sites, through sensory experiences, hands-on practices, and relaxed communication, thereby enhancing the value and importance placed on architectural heritage (Hickey-Moody, 2017; Najimi, 2011). Through participatory artistic activities, the collective individual engagements and experiences can foster the establishment of social relationships and exert influence on their thinking and actions through the mechanisms of memory and embodied perception (Askins & Pain, 2011).

According to Azman et al. (2010), public participation in heritage preservation is guided by five core values: knowledge and understanding, shared values, benefits and opportunities, roles and responsibilities, and power. These values align closely with the practice of participatory art. Participatory art, through experiential learning, and interactive discussions, provides the public with specific insights (Helguera, 2011). It establishes shared values and ideologies through interactive engagement in artistic practices, fostering a sense of collective purpose amongst the local communities and public (Hickey-Moody, 2017). Moreover, it offers the opportunities for public participation through collective expression, enabling them to become co-creators of art (Matarasso, 2019). Additionally, participatory art empowers the public with a greater voice and the right to express themselves. It emphasizes dialogue and collaboration among diverse groups throughout the process, encouraging the sharing of ideas and perspectives (Bishop, 2023; Helguera, 2011; Kester, 2004).

To clearly validate the issues related to public involvement in heritage preservation through participatory art, the followings discuss case studies retrieved from various sources, including both Western countries (Poland, Ireland) and Asian countries (Japan, Indonesia).

(1) Case Studies in Western Countries

Case 1-Poland, The Cut

In 2014, the POLIN, a Jewish history museum in Warsaw launched an artist-in-residence program (Dembek, 2021). It called for reinterpretation of the Polish Jewish cultural heritage through various themes and projects. Under this program, “The Cut” is a participatory art project held in 2015. The artists created a temporary archaeological excavation site at 2B Karmelicka Street (Figure 1). This site holds historical significance as it was the location of the Evangelical Church from 1769 to 1944. Inspired by the post-World War II idea of rebuilding Warsaw using ruins and rubble proposed by architects and urban planners, the artists applied the concept of artificial soil made from these ruins and rubble, with attempt to stimulate reflections on history, and trauma, and initiate discussions about reconstruction and development (Museum, 2015). The project invited local residents to participate and share their perspectives through artistic interventions.

Figure 1

Image sourced from the Artistic Residencies 'Warsaw, Muranow: Archeological Cut', by Polin Museum of the History of Polish Jews.

This art project involved a week of artistic interventions in which community residents participated in excavating, retrieving, and displaying unearthed artefacts such as dinnerware, kitchen utensils, metal door plates, pins, and other items. These artifacts were closely linked with the history and residents of the area prior to the war. Although there are no systematic records of communications with residents, Dembek (2021) notes that participants demonstrated great eagerness and enthusiasm for these activities. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the initiative attracted about 200 visitors to the site.

Matyjaszek (2016) concludes that the heritage sites serve at least two important roles. First, the ruins act as a memorial space, reflecting various aspects of history and modernity. Second, they represent a pivotal node for historical nostalgia. The said initiatives utilised a situational narrative approach and is regarded as an educational model, that significantly enhances the emotional engagement of community members while also striving to maintain an objective portrayal of history. Collective participation in public art projects, centered on themes of remembrance, nostalgia, and memory, has sparked public discussions about the historical context of the city. Importantly, this initiative encouraged participants to collaboratively interpret and share their understanding and feelings about these archaeological finds, prompting further public reflection on the spatial, social, and cultural dimensions from a historical perspective (Dembek, 2021).

Case 2-Ireland, Big Wash Up

The Shandon area in Cork, Ireland, holds significant historical and cultural importance (Grant-Smith & Matthews, 2015). CCAL (Cork Community Art Link), the city’s most important nonprofit community arts organization launched “Big Wash Up” project as an interactive art initiative by the community, aiming to collect information related to the cultural history of Shandon and represent the stories and memories of the area once again (Grant-Smith & Matthews, 2015). The project collects information on the cultural history of Shandon through community surveys, oral history interviews, archival research, and other methods. These collected materials are then transformed into artistic works that showcasing the rich heritage and memories of the area, emphasizing the local uniqueness towards evoking pride and community identity. Participants collectively transformed outdoor spaces into public art galleries using a technique known as reverse graffiti (Matthews & Grant-Smith, 2017). This involves applying a layer of black mortar on the wall, placing a stencil on top, and then power-washing the area to reveal the monochromatic mural underneath (Figure 2). This community mural project become a means for urban residents to express and engage in urban memory, serving as tools for revitalization of urban vitality and fostering collaboration between artists and communities to reestablish connections with the past and support the reemergence of community-led and public-engaged urban charm.

Figure 2

Image sourced from 'The Big Wash Up, Cork', posted by Irish Street Art in Ireland on 28 August 2009.

(2) Case Studies in Asian Countries

Case 1-Japan, Setouchi “ ” Archive

The Setouchi “ ” Archive project is the result of collaboration between artist Shitamichi and the residents of the island (McCormick, 2022). They created a map of the metallurgical slag blocks, roof tiles, and other materials found on Naoshima. These materials were produced from the copper smelting plant on the island in the 1950s and possess characteristics of industrial heritage from that time period (McCormick, 2022). The participating team documented every piece of slag found on the island and created a printed map as part of an exhibition (Figure 3). The artists recorded the geographical diversity and uniqueness of Naoshima, as well as its industrial heritage, through this project, which helps the locals to explore the island (McCormick, 2022).

Figure 3

Image sourced from McCormick AD (2022), Augmenting Small-Island Heritage through Site-Specific Art: A View from Naoshima'. PhD Thesis, University of the Ryukyus.

As McCormick (2022) described, through communication and dialogue with island residents, team members unexpectedly discovered a strong interest in these neglected materials and tiles. This interest arises not only from the historical significance of the materials but also from their potential role in local culture. Permanent residents of the island had previously not noticed these black bricks, and were unaware of the special value of the slag tiles found on a few old heritage houses. As the project progressed, these materials gained new meanings and usages. They were transformed into a medium that could reflect and narrate the community’s history. At the same time, residents became more actively involved, enthusiastically pointing out previously undiscovered locations. Some residents who owned these materials were even willing to donate them to the project, demonstrating the active community’s support and recognition of the participatory art initiative.

Additionally, this project has exceeded everyone’s expectations, especially for the local residents of Naoshima. The engagement and co-creation among residents demonstrated how community participation in intangible manner could facilitate the revitalization and mobilization of innovative capabilities on the island (McCormick, 2022). This participatory art project has injected new cultural vitality into the grassroots community and demonstrated a successful example of how art-based initiatives can foster community and resident engagement and active participation in a local initiative. This confirms the practicality of participatory art as a viable strategy for community engagement in local implementation.

Case 2-Indonesia, Kampung Pelangi

Kampung Pelangi in Semarang City, Central Java, Indonesia, is renowned as the “place with the colors of the iris”. Through the initiative of a high school teacher and the local community, 232 village houses have been transformed into breathtaking works of art (MyBestPlace, n.d.) (see Figure 4). The project has received widespread recognition and acclaim, being regarded as a successful endeavor achieved with limited funds but yet an effective approach in rejuvenating the entire community (MyBestPlace, n.d.). Later, Irwandi et al. (2023) embarked a mural project in Kampung Pelangi, to explore the history of Semarang and enhance local identity through participatory art. The project crew were collaborating closely with the local residents and young individuals. Through series of dialogues, reflections, and co-creation activities, they painted local history and significant events on walls (Figure 5). Irwandi et al. (2023) convinced that participatory art played a pivotal role in reviving local identity and highlighting the importance of historical and cultural heritage.

Figure 4

Image sourced from 'Kampung Pelangi, the Rainbow Village in Indonesia', MyBestPlace.

Figure 5

Image adapted from Irwandi, E. et al., 'Shaping Place Identity in Urban Village through R-V-S-T Participatory Art model', Arts and Design Studies,2021.

(3) Overall Findings from Case Studies

The above cases demonstrate the significant role of participatory art projects in urban heritage conservation and community development at different sites. As the collective efforts by artists and local residents, participatory art promoted active community participation and engagement; raised public awareness; captured local interest and appreciation for local culture and history; reclaimed and revitalized forgotten or neglected cultural heritage; and consequently fostered social cohesion and promoted cultural diversity. Through communication, dialogue, sharing, co-creation, and a series of hands-on practices, participatory art transforms urban heritage into the collective memory amongst communities, shaping the city’s identity and making significant contributions to its sustainable development. Table 2 summarises the key findings from the above case studies.

Table 2

Key Findings from Case Studies (Own work).

Table 3 presents the results of a further thematic analysis of the above cases, identifying the main factors contributing to their successful implementation. A crucial factor is community participation, which underscores that active involvement from residents is essential for the success of the projects in any cultural or community context. Additionally, cultural presentation is another important factor, highlighting the journey from community involvement to the final artistic display. This process emphasises the potential value of the artistic endeavours in education and in strengthening local community identity.

Table 3

Thematic Analysis of Success Factors from Case Studies (Own work).

Despite the possibilities of participatory art as an alternative approach to promote urban heritage preservation, it has not much written or researched. The boundaries of participatory art can be expanded to explore its expected functions as a tool for addressing social issues, promoting development, and cultivating the potential for broader social interaction (Hall & Robertson, 2001). Its success lies in creating an inclusive and participatory environment that encourages community residents to actively engage in art creation and decision-making processes, thereby enhancing their sense of involvement and responsibility. Nevertheless, participatory art initiatives encounter challenges in ensuring the inclusivity and breadth of participation, given the unequal power relations and resource distribution among different community members. Additionally, participatory art projects need to seriously consider community needs and interests to avoid becoming mainly artist-led endeavors.