Developing a Comprehensive Assessment Model of Social Value with Respect to Heritage Value for Sustainable Heritage Management

Abstract

By the end of the 20th century, the influence of economic globalization had impacted many aspects of society, including in particular cultural heritage. Additionally, economic globalization has brought a ‘compression’ of the cultures of different ethnic groups and regions around the world. Due to the loss of cultural confidence and economic benefits, many historical areas with cultural and social significance are no longer protected and valued. If this deficit is to be addressed, then the evaluation of heritage value is an important step in establishing effective conservation policies. China’s Grand Canal is a case in point. The loss of historical culture in the past 30 years, often due to the increasing numbers of both large and small developments, has given rise to the forfeit and distortion of many historically significant areas of China’s Grand Canal towns and cities. This research proposes a qualitative and quantitative methodology to develop a comprehensive assessment model of social value with respect to heritage value. The methodology selected conceptual framework, and questionnaire surveys as major approaches to the development of the research and is applied to the Grand Canal towns of Nanyang, Wuzhen, Tongli and Nanxun. The conceptual framework is used to establish the indicators and hypotheses for the evaluation of social value in order to develop a comprehensive assessment model for sustainable heritage management.

1. Introduction

Heritage conservation can promote the unity of a country, intensify its self-image, improve the quality of life for its society and community, and enhance the awareness of national spirit [1]. Economic globalization has brought a ‘compression’ of the cultures of ethnic groups and regions around the world. The loss of historical culture in the past 30 years, often due to the increasing numbers of both large and small developments, has given rise to the forfeit and distortion of many historically significant areas of China’s Grand Canal towns and cities. This ‘cultural crisis’ in the era of globalization plays an important role in protecting historical heritages, but it has made it increasingly challengeable to protect diverse local and national cultures [2]. Due to the loss of cultural confidence and economic benefits, many historical areas with cultural and social significance are no longer protected and valued [3]. However, governments are spending large sums of money to build historically styled areas in order to attract tourists, as can be seen in most tourist cities and towns such as Tianjin, Guilin, Xi’an and Fenghuang. The major reason for this investment lies in promoting the value of cultural heritage by attempting to reproduce heritage focused spatial and stylistic qualities, some more genuine than others, in order to enhance visitor attraction. However, the lack of connection with local culture often creates a loss of familiar historical narratives and, therefore, diminishes the diversity and richness of local vernacular culture [4].

The revised conservation principles presented in ICOMOS China 2015, ‘Principles for the conservation of heritage sites in China’, recognize cultural and social value based on theoretical research and practice in heritage conservation both in China and internationally [5]. Cultural value denotes the physical remains of many heritage sites, while social value demonstrates the social benefits generated by a heritage site, such as maintaining knowledge, spiritual continuity and enhancing social coherence [6]. The revised version of the principles retains a large proportion of content emphasizing understanding values and more specifically the need to recognize social value [7]. The social value is closely connected to cultural diversity and intangible cultural heritage. Social value emphasizes the social education benefits of a site and the continuation and social cohesion which it facilitates [7]. “Cultural value comprises cultural diversity, the continuation of traditions and the essential components of intangible cultural heritage” [7]. Historical value comprises the value that a heritage site offers in having been integral to historical events. Because China emphasizes historical value in conservation practice, ”Ignoring or diminishing historical value would cause confusion and might undermine China’s conservation efforts” [8]. A negative consequence of this parallel definition in China is that insufficient attention has been paid to cultural value and social value, which are more intangible attributes of heritage. Five heritage values are adopted by China in order to provide more comprehensive information for heritage conservation [9]. “The heritage values of a site are its historical, artistic and scientific values, as well as its social and cultural values” [10]. The heritage sites link to the past and present information and strengthen the connection of historical information and the emotion of society [11]. In addition, the revised conservation principles recognize canals may also have important heritage values. The important role of social value in the protection of heritage sites has become a focus for both government and academia.

The following paper is divided five parts. Following the introduction, the second section introduces the state of the art in social value with respect to heritage value in China. The third section presents the methodology that focus on the conceptual framework and questionnaire survey. The fourth section elaborates on the case study that applied contrast analysis theory to construct the assessment model of social value. Conclusions are drawn in the fifth section.

2. The State of the Art in Social Value of Cultural Heritage in China

Social value has become an increasingly important topic in heritage conservation in China [12].

To better understand the status of previous research on the social value of cultural heritage, this research selected Web of Science (WoS) to analyse the related literature on social value of cultural heritage. The major reason for choosing WoS is that it provides enough coverage of most research fields and therefore can be utilised for discipline analysis and cross-discipline comparison. “Social value” and “cultural heritage” are treated as two major keywords to search for related records in the core database of WoS from 2005 to 2020. The bibliographic data was collected from WoS at the end of 2020, and 571 records in this research filed were collected. The publications in this search increased over the study period, indicating that the topic of social value is relatively new. A slow increasing trend in the number of articles can be seen at the early stage of the study period from 2005 to 2007. There was a significant growth in the number of publications after 2010. To better understand the major focus of these articles in this field, this research further classifies these 571 publications into 11 categories according to the official classification category of WoS. Figure 1 displays the research category distribution of 571 publications on social values of cultural heritage.

The category of “humanities multidisciplinary” accounts for the largest proportion of the publications on the social value of cultural heritage, followed by “social science”. The categories of “tourism” and “architecture” occupy a significant proportion of previous publications and hence the realization of social value is quickly becoming integral to the development of research in both of these disciplines.

2.1. Theoretical Research on the Heritage Value for Cultural Heritage

With economic development, problems concerning heritage conservation are constantly emerging and forcing people to discuss how to solve this kind of problem [13]. It would appear that researchers generally believe that the accelerating process of social and economic development has given rise to people’s changing cultural perceptions, often influenced by the effects of economic globalization and market-oriented economies. However, enhanced population mobility and improving technology of heritage protection, are both contributing to people individual and shared understandings of heritage value [14].

Since the 1860s, many old buildings have gradually been deemed worthy of protection, and the underlying meanings of historical buildings have also been recognized under increasingly effective heritage conservation policies. For many countries, the strategy of heritage conservation is mostly determined through legislation developed by governments or policy influenced by local communities and non-government organizations (NGOs). The international congresses of modern architecture released a report to regularize the conservation of historic and building regions for Britain, France, Japan and the US in 1933. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) reported on the concepts, principles and methods of the conservation of historical buildings, and established an international consensus on heritage conservation in 1972 [15]. It is very important to identify the specific values of heritage and making conservation policies aiming to protect these values in order to retain its meaning and intent [16]. As for China, the central government has clarified the concepts and cultural relics and released the report on the policies relating to heritage conservation with respect to different types of heritage. China promulgated two reports to strengthen the protection of historical cultural heritages which addressed both law- and strategy-based perspectives, promoting the awareness for the conservation of heritage sites [8]. Kim and Kim [17] pointed out that the measurement and assessment of heritage sites was the first steps to making conservation policies, and include key aspects such as the integrity, historical value, and influence of sites under review. The issues of the implication of these conservation policies continue to attract attention in both academic circles and governments.

Legislation makes contribution to the conservation of heritage, while the research on heritage value set a new stage for making conservation policies. The heritage values were emphasized in the government document of China, which refers to the historical, artistic and scientific values of the heritage sites [9]. In June 1987, the World Heritage Convention (WHC) presented the value system of architectural heritage and historical environment in detail, which summarized the value composition of historical and cultural heritage, and showed that the value of historical and cultural heritage mainly includes: the authentic, emotional, scientific, aesthetic and cultural value of history. The first three values are inherent in the historical and cultural heritage, and on the basis of the intrinsic value, can be converted into the utility value [18]. Li [19] expounded on the value transformation of cultural heritage conservation ideology in Western countries, arguing that heritage value was seen as a combination of scientific and historical value, artistic value, age value and use value. Based on the above discussion, the value of historical buildings can be divided into two types, spiritual and material.

The improvement of the technology of heritage conservation has changed and expanded the understanding of the heritage value of cultural heritage. Researchers focusing on the heritage value pay more attention to a value-centred approach [20]. Against the backdrop of the increasingly difficult context confronting heritage conservation, more problems have arisen in the research on historical and cultural heritage and has attracted research institutions and researchers from other subjects and disciplines to start paying attention to the subject- the value of heritage. Some scholars have raised the model and countermeasures of cultural heritage conservation on the basis of value concept. Throsby [21] also believed that in addition to the economic value, the heritage value also consists of aesthetic, mental, social, historic and symbolic values, which have a close connection with the environment and landscapes. Ruijgrok [22] considers that the problems arising in cultural heritage and environmental management are similar in relation to the aspects of biodiversity conservation, recovery ability and restoration, so the economic value of historical building heritage can be divided into direct use value, indirect use value, option value and non-use value by reference to environmental economic theory. Li [19] investigated economic factors affecting historical value and the characteristics of historical value and their influence. He proposed that heritage value can be divided into economic value and cultural value, of which cultural value can be transformed into economic value under certain conditions, and economic value can be divided into use value and non-use value. On that basis, he analysed the cultural value and the economic value of historical buildings. After exploring the experience of Western countries in realizing historical and economic value, as well as guidance from relevant economic policies, he pointed out the urgency and importance of economic research into heritage conservation. “Heritage value has been expanded from historical value in the beginning to cultural value and artistic value” [9]. Zhu and Ding [23] held that cultural heritage contains social and historical information, cultural and artistic information, technical information, regional and environmental information, dynamic information about changes and other ancient information. All this information jointly makes up the total information foundation of cultural heritage. Based on preliminary quantitative analysis and equivalent substitution of various elements, they came up with a control model for cultural heritage’s total information, and the concepts of primary historical information and secondary historical information based on their differences. Goodwin et al. [24] proposed that cultural heritage is a combination of history, science, social significance and buildings themselves, and the first three elements play a decisive role in the historical architectural value among these four elements. The proposition of economic value of cultural heritage set a good stage for the further studies in this research field [25].

The increasingly content of heritage value has encouraged scholars to conduct research aiming at the specific aspects of the heritage value of cultural heritage. Gao [26] concluded that the recognition value for cultural heritage visitors includes hedonic value, efficiency value, service value, cost value, quality value and social value. The heritage values can be categorized into historical, technological and cultural values [27]. From the perspective of historical value, different heritage sites provide history information related to social development, and thus the historical value can improve the awareness of historical pride. Zhu and Ding [23] explored how to evaluate historical value and scientific and technological value in cultural heritage at the same time, pointing out that the scientific and technological value of historic buildings is shaped by the long-term accumulation of social practices, demonstrated by the evolution of different architectural materials, constructions and spatial forms. While other researchers focused on the aesthetic and artistic value of cultural heritage there has not yet been adequate research focusing on the social value of cultural heritage.

2.2. Previous Research on the Evaluation of Heritage Value

A growing number of scholars have discussed the benefits of heritage value evaluation from different perspectives. Mason and Avrami [28] held that because the cultural, economic, political and aesthetic values of the cultural heritage interacted with each other and that some values changed with time and the surrounding environment, the assessment method of heritage value was difficult to determine. They also pointed out that the value evaluation of cultural heritage is faced with a triple challenge: (1) to identify all values of cultural heritage, (2) describe the various values of cultural heritage, and (3) comprehensively evaluate and distinguish the value differences of different historical heritage. Venkatachalam [29] believed that historical buildings, an integral part of the environment, do not isolate from other things and can either improve or adversely impact the environment. Therefore, he evaluated the interaction between historic buildings and their surrounding environment. To be specific, the higher harmony between elements of historic buildings and their surrounding environment result in the higher value of historic buildings. Mydland and Grahn [30] discussed the economic value with respect to cultural heritage evaluation in social and cultural development. In particular, Banerjee et al. [31] argued that cultural heritage is faced with the same problems confronting environmental economy, thereby proposing the evaluation of historical and cultural heritage investment behaviours using cost–benefit analysis. Déom and Valois [32] after reviewing previous research findings of cultural heritage’s economic value, examined the value of either tangible products or intangible services provided by cultural customs, concluding that the value of these products and services could be realized under a multi-scale, multi-attribute and multi-value social and economic environment.

Many countries and global communities have been encouraged to evaluate the heritage value due to the obvious benefits. In 1997, some Western countries have established corresponding evaluation principles. The project supported by Southeast University and the Suzhou City Administration of Cultural Heritage selected 5 kinds of values, including environmental, artistic, historical, scientific values, in order to estimate the value of historical sites. In addition, some studies are made on the evaluation of historical buildings. Mogollón et al. [33] investigated the time sequence of historical buildings, and proposed the historical value of historical buildings in different periods when analysing the value of historical building in Singapore. Chen and Hu (2006) studied heritage conservation and employed a complementary methodology from philosophy, proposing the basic idea of establishing a comprehensive value evaluation system considering the following aspects: evaluation of the historic value of heritage, evaluation of the social value of heritage and the evaluation of the feasibility of reuse. The evaluation scores proposed in the study were all evaluated by experts. So far, research results are relatively few. Most of the research is based on qualitative and quantitative analyses using indicator systems. Xu [8] evaluated heritage value including social, aesthetic, scientific, environmental and ecological values of 40 ancient dwellings of Suzhou, and he pointed that the social value is the most important indicator in evaluating heritage value among other indicators. Xu [8] provides the reference for future research to identify the important factors affecting the assessment of the social value of heritage sites. Gao [26] conducted an in-depth analysis of the relationship between archaeological tourism, World Heritage and heritage value in China, and pointed out that the attitudes and perceptions of local communities can affect the conservation of historical heritage.

Although scholars have paid continuous attention to cultural heritage value, difficulties remain in establishing a universality of the standards for the evaluation of cultural heritage value. Most studies employed standards and policies released by various governments. However, these approaches often reflect the value of individual expert opinion. It is necessary to establish a method to evaluate heritage value from both objective and subjective perspectives. Four canal towns along the Grand Canal will be selected as case studies to study their heritage value through analysing their social value. The following section will describe the research methodology.

3. Research Methodology

3.1. Research Framework

The methodology of this research applies a conceptual framework to synthesize concepts related to social value in a theoretical framework. Residents living in and tourists visiting the selected case study towns of Nanyang, Wuzhen, Tongli and Nanxun, and were asked to express their opinions in a questionnaire survey. Through the application of the different research methods, the research has gradually developed an understanding of social value with respect to cultural heritage.

• Conceptual framework

The construction of a conceptual framework is a process of conceptual and qualitative analysis for rebuilding a unified theoretical framework from the multidisciplinary literature [5]. The conceptual framework initially selects relative studies and then identifies key metaphors, ideas, concepts, and relations among each other.

• Questionnaire survey

Questionnaire survey is a research method used for collecting data from a large number of individuals to gain information and insights on various topics of interest. Questionnaires are frequently used in qualitative architecture research and social research.

This research employs four steps, including the literature review, conceptual framework construction, questionnaire survey and data analysis, and the detailed information is given in Figure 2.

• Step 1. Literature was collected from a variety of sources through various methods, and the indicators that influence social value were identified, and their relationships defined as a series of hypotheses. The sources include Principles for the Conservation of Heritage in China and the 13th five-year plan (2016–2020); previous studies on evaluating heritage value; doctoral dissertations on Chinese historical districts; previous studies on heritage tourists applying conceptual frameworks.
• Step 2. A conceptual framework was constructed based on the influencing indicators and the hypotheses.
• Step 3. A questionnaire was developed to test the clarity and application of the proposed theoretical framework on social value, by attempting to understand and correlate people’s cognitions of social value with the different influencing indicators and hypotheses; the questionnaires on the social value evaluation indicators were conducted in the four case study canal towns of Nanyang, Wuzhen, Tongli and Nanxun.
• Step 4. Data was collected from questionnaire surveys distributed to each of the four historical canal town. The results of the questionnaire were analysed and the weights of the influencing factors of social value calculated and tested to verify the relationships between the indicators of social value.

Combining subjective and objective perspectives to explore the social value of the above mentioned four Grand Canal towns the intention of the study is to assist in offering an original contribution to heritage value and sustainable heritage management. Additionally, based on the results of the study, various suggestions and conservation strategies will be proposed for the ‘Nanyang rebuilding project’.

3.2. Construction of Conceptual Framework on the Evaluation of Social Value

3.2.1. Identification of Indicators Affecting Social Value

The definition of social value from ICOMOS China has been recognized officially and favoured in previous research in this field. Emotion, memory and education are the three major elements of social value. This research has selected previous studies on heritage value and focused on social value to discover detailed information on its evaluation. Based on the literature review, the spatial characteristics of a heritage site can reflect the major element of emotion. Most of the indirect indicators are derived from previous research. For example, collective memory is a type of memory as suggested by Pandit and Mishra [34] who reviewed studies on the heritage value of cultural heritage and proposed that national memory for cultural heritage is a kind of collective memory.

3.2.2. Theoretical Hypotheses for Conceptual Framework

Social value

Social value is affected by emotion, memory and education. By considering these attributes as indicators, their relationship can be ascertained from previous research [7] and therefor their impact on social value can be described in the following three hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

There is a positive relationship between emotion and social value.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

There is a positive relationship between memory and social value.

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

There is a positive relationship between education and social value.

Emotion

The emotion of participants in a given space is largely determined by spatial characteristics. Different types of cultural heritage provide different emotional experience for people, and the spatial characteristics of various locations can reflect differences in perception and experience between various cultural heritage sites. The emotion related to heritage value cannot be understood in isolation from the social contexts [35]. In addition, Lopez and Nance [36] pointed out that the social context of cultural heritage can affect people emotions. Saito et al. [37] examined the relationship between the social context of events and emotional experience. Brunyé et al. [38] investigated emotional effects on spatial memory, and its implications on spatial cognition. Christopher et al. [39] suggest that positive emotion may have a distinct effect on memory, and may lead to enhanced association-memory. The hypotheses related to the element of emotion are proposed as follows:

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

There is a positive relationship between social contexts and emotion.

Hypothesis 5 (H5).

There is a positive relationship between spatial characteristics and emotion.

Memory

Individual and collective memory are two parts of memory, and the spatial image plays an important role in both collective and individual memory [40]. As mentioned in Xu et al. [9]’s paper that:

“Spatial memory is one part of the memory responsible for the recording of information about one’s environment and spatial orientation” [38]. Kalakoski and Saariluoma explored 200 taxi drivers’ exceptional memories for street names and showed that individual memory and local memory are affected by spatial cognition [9].

Local memory is a memory of a specific place which can activate memories about related things that have occurred in specific location [41]. Finding one’s way in familiar or unacquainted environment and remembering where things are within it are crucial everyday processes that rely on spatial memory [42]. In addition, a previous study has shown that local memory can help to build collective memory [43]. Chris et al. [44] found the potential links between autonomic changes and cognitive processing in memory. Juan [45] found that national memory is a common and social memory for people. Therefore, the following six hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 6 (H6).

There is a positive relationship between individual memory and memory.

Hypothesis 7 (H7).

There is a positive relationship between collective memory and memory.

Hypothesis 8 (H8).

There is a positive relationship between spatial characteristics and individual memory.

Hypothesis 9 (H9).

There is a positive relationship between local memory and collective memory.

Hypothesis 10 (H10).

There is a positive relationship between national memory and collective memory.

Hypothesis 11 (H11).

There is a positive relationship between spatial characteristics and local memory.

Education

Previous studies have demonstrated the urgent need to integrate heritage education in schools in order to enhance and enrich students’ understanding and appreciation of cultural heritage [46]. Cultural heritage is considered to be an important aspect of intercultural communication and social cohesion for education. Sirpa and Anna [47] mentioned that attention has turned to the importance of conserving and developing traditional knowledge and techniques. Urban education and awareness can help people discover more about their local environment [42]. Cultural heritage education includes knowledge, creativity, artistic sense, and critical judgement [48]. Therefore, the following six hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 12 (H12).

There is a positive relationship between urban awareness and education.

Hypothesis 13 (H13).

There is a positive relationship between knowledge and education.

Hypothesis 14 (H14).

There is a positive relationship between creativity and education.

Hypothesis 15 (H15).

There is a positive relationship between artistic sense and education.

Hypothesis 16 (H16).

There is a positive relationship between critical judgement and education.

Hypothesis 17 (H17).

There is a positive relationship between teaching approaches and education.

National memory is an integral part to national identity, and it represents one specific form of cultural memory, which makes an essential contribution to national education [42]. Cultural memory is an integral aspect of education and can play an important role in political transition and identity formation [49]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 18 (H18).

There is a positive relationship between national memory and education.

As Xu et al. [9] referred to ICOMOS China’s document that:

“Social value is that which society derives from the educational benefit that comes from dissemination of information about a heritage site, the continuation of intangible associations and the social cohesion it may create”.

[7]

Therefore, the following two hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 19 (H19).

There is a positive relationship between continuation of intangible associations and national memory.

Hypothesis 20 (H20).

There is a positive relationship between social cohesion and national memory.

Corbishley [50] considered that awareness is an important component of education in heritage value. Previous studies have indicated that urban awareness for the cultural heritage is affected by spatial characteristics [51,52]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 21 (H21).

There is a positive relationship between spatial characteristics and urban awareness.

According to the indicators and hypotheses derived from previous studies, this research constructs a conceptual framework on evaluating the social value of cultural heritage. The conceptual framework of social value is presented in Figure 3, which summarizes the hypotheses previously mentioned.

3.3. Questionnaire Development

3.3.1. The Process of the Questionnaire Survey

Survey data collection and analysis began with the development of the questionnaire and sample size. The questionnaire survey was developed with clarity in order to test the proposed theoretical framework, with respect to understanding people’s cognitions of social value.

The structure of the questionnaire was designed to test and verify the relationships between the twenty-one indicators of social value which were presented as the hypotheses discussed previously. The results of the questionnaire survey were analysed by calculating the weights of the influencing factors of social value with respect to the various linkages between the array of indicators. Data was collected from the questionnaire surveys which were distributed to the four case study canal towns, Nanyang Wuzhen, Tongli, and Nanxun.

The questionnaire was designed to test the relevance of social value, from people’s perceptions with respect to three aspects: (1) their background information, (2) how they thought about the social value based on the indicators, and (3) their impressions of the spatial characteristics of the case study, such as the street pattern, built form and sense of place of the respective town.

The reliability of the questionnaire data was tested using Cronbach’s alpha in Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS). “The resulting α coefficient of reliability ranges from 0 to 1 in providing this overall assessment of a measure’s reliability” [53]. If the α coefficient of reliability is between 0.5 and 1, the result can be accepted; α coefficients that are “less than 0.5 are usually unacceptable, especially for scales purporting to be unidimensional” [53]. A Likert-type scale was used to assign 1 point (strongly disagree), 2 points (disagree), 3 points (neutral), 4 points (agree) and 5 points (strongly agree) for quantitative analysis.

3.3.2. Developing Questions to Theoretical Hypotheses

Table 1. Questionnaire questions of theoretical hypotheses.

Hypotheses	Questions for the Hypotheses	Question Code
H5	Do you agree that emotion is affected by the street pattern building form and sense of place of the town?	Q1
H8	Do you agree that individual memory is affected by the street pattern and built form of the town?	Q2
H11	Do you agree that local memory is affected by the street pattern and built form of the town?	Q3
H21	Do you agree that street pattern and built form contributes to a sense of place of the town?	Q4
H6	Do you agree that individual memory influences memory?	Q5
H7	Do you agree that collective memory influences memory?	Q6
H9	Do you agree that local memory influences collective memory?	Q7
H12	Do you agree that cultural heritage can develop a sense of a sense of place?	Q8
H4	Do you agree that emotion is affected by social context?	Q9
H10	Do you agree that national memory influences collective memory?	Q10
H13	Do you agree that an awareness of cultural heritage can inspire and develop knowledge?	Q11
H14	Do you agree that an awareness of cultural heritage can inspire and develop creativity?	Q12
H15	Do you agree that cultural heritage can inspire and develop artistic awareness?	Q13
H16	Do you agree that cultural heritage can support and develop critical judgement?	Q14
H17	Do you agree that cultural heritage can enhance and develop teaching approaches?	Q15
H18	Do you agree that national memory influences education?	Q16
H19	Do you agree that national memory creates the continuation of intangible associations?	Q17
H20	Do you agree that national memory creates social cohesion?	Q18
H1	Do you agree that emotion influences social value?	Q19
H2	Do you agree that memory influences social value?	Q20
H3	Do you agree that education influences social value?	Q21

displays the questions of theoretical hypotheses. The Four questions in the questionnaire survey in Table 1 relate directly to spatial characteristics and include hypotheses (H5, H8, H11, H21) which have been colour coded light red so that the participants can understand the relationship between spatial characteristics, emotion, individual memory, local memory and urban awareness.

The first four questions and respective hypotheses have a series of intermediary links to survey questions 5–8 which correspond to hypotheses (H6, H7, H9, H12) and are colour coded purple. They combine individual memory and collective memory and link urban awareness to education.

Ten additional hypotheses are related to questions 9–18 and are colour coded blue. They address the theoretical proposed hypotheses (H4, H10, H13, H14, H15, H16, H17, H18, H19, H20) which connect 8 additional intermediate links to education (including intangible associations and social cohesion), one further link to collective memory from National memory, and an additional link from social contexts with emotion.

Finally, the conceptual framework is completed with the confirmation of the three main indicators of social value (emotion, memory and education) and are tested with (H1, H2, H3). These are related to questions 19–21, and are colour coded yellow.

3.4. The Selection of Case Study

There are two types of case studies, the first is a goal case study, and the second is a comparative case studies. The case study of Nanyang ancient town is the goal case study, it is a developing canal town in Shandong Province of China. The comparative case studies are Wuzhen ancient town, Tongli ancient town, and Nanxun ancient town, they are three developed canal towns in Jiangnan region of China. Figure 4 displays the selection method of case study.

According to the research questions and objectives, two criterial are set for the selection of the comparative case studies. First, the canal towns selected should be well developed and considered to be excellent examples of heritage value. Second, they should not only be a similar scale with the goal case study city of Nanyang town, but they should also be located on the Grand canal. Among hundreds of canal towns listed by SACH of the People’s Republic of China [54], six famous ancient water towns (Zhouzhuang, Luzhi, Xitang, Wuzhen Tongli and Nanxun) conformed with the two selection criteria mentioned above. of which the towns of Wuzhen, Tongli and Nanxun were finally chosen to be surveyed. These three comparative cases were therefore able to assist in establishing a body of urban parameters which subsequentially supported the determinants of social value to help inform the rebuilding and extension of the Goal Case study town of Nanyang. The three ancient canal towns are National Scenic and Historic Interest Areas. Scenic and Historic Interest Areas in China are outstanding representatives of heritage value.

4. Case Studies: The Ancient Canal Towns

4.1. Overview of Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal and the Canal Towns

4.1.1. Overview of Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal

The Beijing–Hangzhou Grand Canal is a recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site (WHS), To better understand the location of Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal, this paper presents the map in Figure 5, which has been sourced from ‘The Grand Canal Volume I’, State Administration of Cultural Heritage of People’s Republic of China, 2010.

The Grand Canal mainly links the coastal and inland cities. It starts from Beijing in the north and goes through Tianjin, Hebei, Shandong, Jiangsu and Zhejiang, to finally end at Hangzhou in the south. In addition, the Yellow river and Yangtze River are connected with each other by the Grand Canal, indicting its important connectivity role across China. An extensive body of literature recounts its history, development and the significant role it continues to play in both the socio/economic well-being and national identity of the People’s Republic of China [55].

4.1.2. Overview of the Canal Towns

Tongli, Wuzhen and Nanxun are the most representative ancient towns of the waterscape regions south of the Yangtze River in China and have won fame both at home and abroad owing to their historical and cultural attributes, the beautiful and graceful waterscapes and ancient town styles which typify their spatial characteristics, and their Suzhou dialect and folk customs [56]. The layout of ‘bridge, stream and folk house’ and architectural art of ‘whitewashed wall, black tiles and Ma Tau wall (fire division wall)’ developed into a school of their own and have created harmony between man and nature [57,58,59].

The three towns are located in the east Taihu Lake Basin, and the Grand Canal crosses the three towns. In this way, they are similar to Nanyang ancient town. The three canal towns have formed a special canal culture, and have also become popular tourist attractions.

Table 2. Information of the three water towns (Source: China Statistical Yearbook, 2020).

Town Name	Wuzhen	Tongli	Nanxun
Location	Located in Tongxiang County, Jiaxing City of Zhejiang Province, 140 km from Shanghai	Located in Suzhou City of Jiangsu Province, 80 km from Shanghai	Located in Huzhou City of Zhejiang Province, 120 km from Shanghai
Population	60,000	94,000	58,000
Area	6.8 square kilometres	8.3 square kilometres	4.18 square kilometres
Architecture features	Waterfront residence, White wall and black roof	Garden house with Chinese classical private garden	Ming and Qing dynasties building style
Heritage reputation	A national 5A scenic area	A national 5A scenic area	A national 4A scenic area
Heritage features	1 national heritage unit; 2 provincial heritage units	1 national heritage unit; 5 provincial heritage units; 4 city-level heritage units	1 national heritage unit; 3 provincial heritage units
Planning features	The ancient town centre is dotted with buildings, and the water-network is relatively dense.	There are five lakes in the town.	The streets and rivers ‘branch’ in the town, and the ancient town centre is dotted with buildings.
Planning pictures

displays the information of the three water towns.

Wuzhen, Tongli, and Nanxun canal towns are popular and well-regarded tourist attractions. In addition, this table indicates that well-developed canal towns should have a complete traditional pattern, concentrated historical buildings, good architectural qualities and characteristics. They should not be allowed to change their original state, appearance, or their environment at random. Any repair to existing structures should be made under the guidance of an expert and in strict accordance with the regulated procedures.

4.2. Basic Analysis on the Questionnaire Survey Data

4.2.1. The Distribution of Surveyed Participants

In the process of the investigation, 340 questionnaires were sent out in the four canal towns. Out of all questionnaires distributed, 324 are valid (157 questionnaires for local residents and 167 questionnaires for tourists) with an effective returning rate of 95.3%. To investigate whether the case studies are historically conserved successfully or not, the local resident views and narratives of the conservation work are considered to be of significant importance. The Burra Charter [60] suggested that residents and visitors should be welcomed in planning, respecting, protecting and evaluating the heritage sites in any conservation process. Visitors were interviewed as participants to express their impressions of the current situation of the case studies. The question format was applied with closed questions offering participants five choices: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree. The participants residents and visitors could answer questions by marking their response using a tick, cross or circle.

Table 3. The quantity of questionnaires in four canal towns.

Town	Residents	Tourists	Total
Nanyang	40	35	75
Wuzhen	45	42	87
Tongli	33	45	78
Nanxun	39	45	84
Total	157	167	324

displays the number of questionnaires completed in the four canal towns with Wuzhen returning the highest number of validated responses.

The questionnaires were distributed to different streets each of the canal towns.

Table 4. Demographic profile of sample (N = 324).

Demographic Characteristics	Options	Residents	Tourists	Total	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	75	90	165	50.9
	Female	82	77	159	49.1
Age	18–19	2	19	21	6.5
	20–29	7	58	65	20.0
	30–39	31	47	78	24.1
	40–49	39	32	71	21.9
	Above 50	78	11	89	27.5
Occupation	Office white collar	9	48	57	17.6
	Blue collar	33	28	61	18.9
	Academic	2	11	13	4.0
	Government official	18	20	38	11.7
	University student	0	38	38	11.7
	Other	95	22	117	36.1
Education level	Less than a high school diploma	37	4	41	12.6
	High school degree or equivalent	88	41	129	39.8
	Some college, no degree	29	25	54	16.7
	Bachelor’s degree (e.g., BA, BS)	3	76	79	24.4
	Master’s degree (e.g., MA, MS, MArch)	0	19	19	5.9
	Doctorate (e.g., PhD)	0	2	2	0.6

presents the demographic profile of the survey respondents.

There were 165 (accounting for 50.9%) males and 159 (accounting for 49.1%) female. Most of the residents (nearly 50%) were above 50 years old. A total of 30.9.% of respondents had obtained a college or university degree (the participants who had a Bachelor’s degree were 24.4% a Master’s degree 5.9% and Doctoral degree 0.6%). The participants whose education backgrounds are less than a high school diploma account for 12.6%. Most of tourists worked as office white collar (27.3%). As for the residents’ occupations, a noted proportion, 22.6%, of the respondents were blue collar, while the category of ‘Other’ returned the highest proportion of responses at 60.5% and comprised shop owners, housewives and retirees. The age distribution is an important factor in affecting the results of questionnaires. Figure 6 displays the age distributions of the residents in the canal towns. The people over the age of 50 form the major group in the four case study towns, followed by the 40–49 age bracket. Therefor when considering the age distribution of the residents in the canal towns, it is quite evident that the aging population’s preferences influenced the survey results.

Figure 6 clearly indicates that Wuzhen presents the highest aging population profile of the four case study towns, with considerably fewer young people The next section tests the reliability and validity of the questionnaire collected data.

4.2.2. Reliability and Validity Test of Questionnaire Survey Data

SPSS was applied to the data analysis of the survey responses. The reliability analysis applied Cronbach’s Alpha in SPSS with the results displayed in

Table 5. Reliability test of questionnaire data.

Cronbach’s Alpha	N of Items
0.818	39

.

“The resulting Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of reliability ranges from 0 to 1 in providing this overall assessment of a measure’s reliability. If alpha coefficient of reliability between 0.5 to 1, the result could be accepted; alpha coefficients that are less than 0.5 are usually unacceptable, especially for scales purporting to be unidimensional” [53]. As shown in Table 5, the reliability statistics result for the 324 questionnaires is 0.818, indicating that the data has high reliability.

Table 6. Validity test of questionnaires data.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy		0.796
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square	1822.150
	df	496
	Sig.	0.000

presents the validity test results.

Table 6 shows two tests that indicate the suitability of the questionnaire data for structure detection. Gliem and Gliem (2003)’s paper mentioned that:

“The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy is a statistic that indicates the proportion of variance in the variables that might be caused by underlying factors. High values (close to 1.0) generally indicate that a factor analysis may be useful with the data. If the value is less than 0.50, the results of the factor analysis probably won’t be very useful. Bartlett’s test of sphericity tests the hypotheses that the correlation matrix is an identity matrix, which would indicate that the variables are unrelated and therefore unsuitable for structure detection [53].” KMO result for the 324 questionnaires is 0.796, which indicates that the collected data can be used.

4.3. Questionnaire Data Analysis of Theoretical Hypotheses

As discussed in section ‘3.3.2 Developing questions to theoretical hypotheses’ social values comprised three factors: emotion, memory, and education [9], which were presented in a conceptual framework of 21 hypotheses and mirrored in a questionnaire survey of 21 questions. For questions Q1–Q21, 324 questionnaires were completed and subsequentially validated. The participants gave their answers from the five default options, strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree, which denotes points 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively.

Table 7. Average score of questions for theoretical hypotheses of four canal towns.

Question Code	Average Value of Four Towns				Total Average
	Nanyang	Wuzhen	Tongli	Nanxun
Q1	4.9	4.93	4.9	4.96	4.92
Q2	4.87	4.92	4.91	4.88	4.9
Q3	4.92	4.92	4.9	4.89	4.91
Q4	4.89	4.91	4.92	4.93	4.91
Q5	4.87	4.88	4.87	4.91	4.88
Q6	4.88	4.86	4.87	4.85	4.86
Q7	4.91	4.89	4.89	4.88	4.89
Q8	4.92	4.88	4.87	4.88	4.89
Q9	4.9	4.89	4.91	4.93	4.91
Q10	4.89	4.89	4.91	4.91	4.9
Q11	4.94	4.93	4.92	4.94	4.93
Q12	4.89	4.9	4.9	4.93	4.91
Q13	4.92	4.91	4.91	4.9	4.91
Q14	4.93	4.95	4.95	4.94	4.94
Q15	4.95	4.97	4.96	4.93	4.95
Q16	4.96	4.93	4.96	4.96	4.95
Q17	4.91	4.9	4.92	4.9	4.91
Q18	4.9	4.87	4.88	4.89	4.88
Q19	4.92	4.94	4.9	4.93	4.92
Q20	4.95	4.93	4.94	4.95	4.94
Q21	4.91	4.92	4.93	4.92	4.92

presents the average score of questions for the theoretical hypotheses presented to the four canal towns.

As shown in Table 7, most people in the canal towns strongly agree that street pattern and built form contributes to a sense of place of the canal towns. Cultural heritage can inspire and develop knowledge, creativity, artistic sense, and critical judgement, as well as urban awareness. The participants’ memory is relevant with local identity and experiences, and was affected by the street pattern built from [60]. In addition, the participants think that the canal towns’ local identity and experiences can enhance the memories of a group of people who have collected them through shared travel experiences. Because “national memory typically consists of a shared interpretation of a nation’s past” [10], the grand canal towns can enhance Intangible associations which are “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills, as well as the instruments, objects, artifacts and cultural spaces associated therewith—that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of the cultural heritage in the canal towns” [18]. The participants in Nanxun canal town gave a relatively higher score on Q1, they consider that the street pattern and built form contributes to a sense of place within the town. The participants in Wuzhen canal town provided a lower score to Q6 “Do you agree that individual memory influences memory?” which contrast with their view of Collective Memory in Q7 which would appear to have the greater influence on memory as an indicator of social value with respect to cultural heritage.

In addition, the participants in Nanyang and Nanxun canal towns gave a relatively higher score on Q20, than with respect to Q19 and Q21 and hence marginally consider memory as possibly being greater influences on social value with respect to cultural heritage than education and emotion.

As shown in Table 7, most people strongly agree with the questions based on the theoretical hypotheses. The 50+ age group and the university student category participants relatively have the highest scores on the questions. The blue collar category of participants strongly agreed that street pattern and built form contributed to a sense of place of the canal towns. The participants from all age groups felt that the canal towns’ local identity is an integral part to national identity. The participants who have higher degree and academics appeared to support that national group cohesion can create the continuation of intangible associations, and that education was a significant indicator of social value. Inclosing this section, the results of this study clearly indicate that emotion, memory and education are primary influences of social value with respect to cultural heritage.

4.4. Hypotheses Test Results

Section 4.3 has analysed the collected data of 21 questions which corresponded to the 21 hypotheses. The analysis results are performed by SPSS independent samples to test whether the hypotheses are supported. The feedback from participants is quite similar: most of them agree with the 21 correlations listed below, as shown in

Table 8. Test results of theoretical hypotheses.

Questionnaire Survey Results		Test Results of Theoretical Hypotheses
Question	Attitude of Participants	Hypotheses Code and Path	Hypothesis Supported
Q19	Positive	H1: Emotion → Social value	Yes
Q20	positive	H2: Memory → Social value	Yes
Q21	positive	H3: Education → Social value	Yes
Q9	positive	H4: Social contexts → Emotion	Yes
Q1	positive	H5: Spatial characteristics → Emotion	Yes
Q5	positive	H6: Individual memory → Memory	Yes
Q6	positive	H7: Collective memory → Memory	Yes
Q2	positive	H8: Spatial characteristics → Individual memory	Yes
Q7	positive	H9: Local memory → Collective memory	Yes
Q10	positive	H10: National memory → Collective memory	Yes
Q3	positive	H11: Spatial characteristics → Local memory	Yes
Q8	positive	H12: Urban awareness → Education	Yes
Q11	positive	H13: Knowledge → Education	Yes
Q12	positive	H14: Creativity → Education	Yes
Q13	positive	H15: Artistic sense → Education	Yes
Q14	positive	H16: Critical judgement → Education	Yes
Q15	positive	H17: Teaching approaches → Education	Yes
Q16	positive	H18: National memory → Education	Yes
Q17	positive	H19: The continuation of intangible associations → National memory	Yes
Q18	positive	H20: Social cohesion → National memory	Yes
Q4	positive	H21: Spatial characteristics → Urban awareness	Yes

. If the average score of questions responding to the hypothesis is higher than 3 (neutral), the hypothesis is supported.

It is evident that the responses have validated all the hypotheses. It should be pointed that most of the hypotheses seem to confirm the general knowledge and common-held beliefs of a cross-section of the communities, both residents and visitors, for each of the four case study towns, as validated by a wide acceptance of the survey questions by the participants. Thus, the hypotheses proposed are supported, and hence the indicators provide an empirical basis for helping to develop a comprehensive assessment model of social value with respect to heritage value for sustainable heritage management.

5. Conclusions

The research results illustrated that emotion, memory and education are major factors in directly affecting the social value of cultural heritage. This research analysed the questionnaire collected data from 21 questions for the validation of 21 theoretical hypotheses. Most hypotheses are supported by the participants since these average scores of these questions relating to the theoretical hypotheses are close to 5 points. This paper has tried to understand the relevance of social value in historical districts with respect to cultural heritage. The findings suggest that the evaluated indicators were accurate and comprehensive in evaluating the relevance of social value in historical districts with respect to cultural heritage. Thus, indicators developed in this research might begin to provide an empirical basis for assisting sustainable heritage management. Figure 7 displays the conceptual framework contained all supported hypotheses.

Further context analysis, and the development of a significantly larger corpus of case study canal towns, is required in order to make a more comprehensive assessment model.

The assessment of any variations should occur in context in order to determine more detail about the application of the methodology. The scope of this paper did not allow for this in-depth analysis. The development of a more comprehensive assessment model, including a comparative analysis of a series of different canal towns, could assist in understanding the range of other indicators and their relative impacts on the social value of these places.

Although this study makes an important contribution to the evaluation of the social value of canal towns, it also has various limitations which future research could focus on.

First of all, the conceptual framework on the evaluation of social value was established based on indicators and hypotheses derived from previous related literature, which to some extent limits the scope of social value. To be more comprehensive, the selection of social value evaluation indicators and corresponding hypotheses should be more diverse then considered in this study. For example, a more accurate and comprehensive impact analysis of social value would also consider aspects such as social, cultural, political, regulatory and economic constraints, and therefore lead to the development of a more rigorous evaluation model. Secondly, the number of case studies could be considerably expanded. While the four canal towns, Nanyang, in the province of Shandong, and three developed historical canal towns in the Jiangnan region of China, Tongli, Nanxun and Wuzhen, are characterized by different locations, historical backgrounds and economic levels, their selection was chosen largely to test the validation of the conceptual framework, indicating that the practice implications of this study have significant limitations. Future research could review a much larger and diverse corpus of canal towns, to summarize their characteristics and categorize these in relation to a certain number of typologies in order to develop a more comprehensive and unified conceptual framework.