A Framework for Heritage-Led Regeneration in Chinese Traditional Villages: Systematic Literature Review and Experts’ Interview

Abstract

With rapid urbanization and modernization, the deterioration of historical areas has become an increasing concern. While heritage-led regeneration has proven effective, most studies have focused on urban contexts. Rural traditional villages, particularly in developing countries such as China, face even greater challenges and remain understudied. This study addresses this gap by developing a framework for heritage-led rural regeneration, grounded in community-building theory and highlighting heritage capacity as a key driver of village revitalization. Using a two-round systematic literature review, 64 papers from Web of Science and Scopus were analyzed to construct the framework. It consists of two levels: a preliminary framework identifying five key dimensions—public participation, media platform construction, adaptive reuse, heritage industry development, and landscape maintenance—and an integrated framework further detailing 13 sub-dimensions within these areas. Expert interviews were then conducted to validate the framework and examine its practical implementation challenges and future development directions. This framework integrates community-building theory with heritage-led regeneration, offering both theoretical insights and practical guidance for revitalizing traditional villages in China and beyond.

1. Introduction

1.1. Heritage-Led Regeneration

Heritage-led regeneration is an innovative approach to prevent the decay and degradation of cultural heritage in historically significant areas [1,2]. Proven effective in urban settings, this strategy leverages cultural and historical assets to drive urban renewal and revitalization [3,4,5]. Preserving and repurposing heritage sites, buildings, and landscapes not only safeguards cultural identity but also stimulates economic growth, tourism, and community development [6,7,8].

However, current research shows that heritage-led regeneration has mainly focused on urban areas, with limited exploration in rural regions [3,6,8,9,10]. Rural areas face greater challenges, such as limited talent and resources, making rural heritage-led regeneration underexplored. The only several studies on rural areas primarily focus on the RURITAGE project in Europe, leaving a significant research gap in developing countries [11,12]. Rapid urbanization in developing countries has led to rural depopulation, which creates significant challenges, including abandoned buildings, deteriorating cultural heritage, a shrinking labor force, rising poverty, and overall socioeconomic decline [13,14,15,16]. Based on the above discussion, China, a large developing country and a nation deeply rooted in agricultural civilization, faces a crucial and urgent need for research on heritage-led rural regeneration.

1.2. Traditional Village in China

China, with its vast rural population and over 7000 years of agricultural civilization, possesses a rich reservoir of rural cultural heritage. Traditional villages represent this heritage’s most concentrated and visible embodiment [16,17]. In the Chinese context, the term “traditional village” is officially defined by the government as villages that were formed in earlier historical periods, have remained relatively intact, and demonstrate rich cultural heritage, traditional customs, and abundant natural resources [18,19]. These villages serve as valuable carriers of traditional lifestyles, vernacular architecture, agricultural practices, and community-based social structures.

Despite their cultural significance, traditional villages in China are under increasing threat from urbanization, rural depopulation, and environmental degradation. Common challenges include [20,21,22,23]:

• Declining populations and aging residents due to rural-urban migration.
• Degradation or abandonment of historical buildings and landscapes.
• Weak economic foundations and limited access to infrastructure.
• Disruption of intangible cultural heritage and community cohesion.

Although awareness of rural heritage protection has grown, many villages remain fragile, with sustainability dependent on external support and insufficient internal capacity. In response, various development models have been explored:

• Tourism-Led Model: This model focuses on transforming heritage resources into tourist attractions to boost the local economy [24,25]. However, relying solely on tourism is overly simplistic and often leads to over-commercialization and loss of authenticity.
• Conservation-Oriented Model: This model treats traditional villages as heritage sites, emphasizing preservation through initiatives like the National Catalogue of Traditional Villages, development plans, and relevant laws [26,27]. While effective in safeguarding heritage, it often lacks mechanisms for fostering endogenous development and long-term vitality.
• Industry-Integrated Model: Attempts to align traditional villages with modern rural industries (agriculture, cultural products, and eco-tourism) under a broader rural revitalization strategy [28,29]. However, it remains conceptually fragmented and lacks systematic industrial linkages.
• Community-Driven Model: Prioritizes resident participation, local knowledge, and bottom-up governance [30,31]. Though promising, it is mainly limited to pilot projects and lacks scalability.

Parallel to these practical explorations, China’s approach to traditional villages has evolved through four major phases:

• Initial Exploration (Before 2000): During this period, traditional villages lacked systematic protection policies, leaving them vulnerable to neglect and deterioration.
• Policy Initiation (2000–2012): The 2002 Cultural Relics Protection Law introduced the concept of “traditional settlements”, laying the groundwork for preservation, though efforts remained limited and fragmented [32].
• Institutional Development (2012–2023): In 2011, China launched the “Protection of Traditional Chinese Villages” initiative, and by the end of 2023, 8155 villages had been listed [33], marking a shift toward institutionalized preservation and revitalization.
• Integrated Development (2017–Present): Under the Rural Revitalization Strategy, traditional village protection is increasingly integrated with rural development, emphasizing both heritage preservation and rural revitalization [34].

While these stages and models reflect progress, a core issue remains unresolved: how to transition from externally driven preservation to an internally sustainable regeneration mechanism. Current efforts largely treat traditional villages as passive recipients of top-down intervention or commercial investment [24,26,35,36,37]. This static view of heritage fails to account for the dynamic potential of villages to regenerate themselves.

To address this gap, this study proposes a shift in focus: viewing heritage not merely as an object to be preserved, but as a core driver of regeneration. This perspective aligns with the concept of heritage-led regeneration—an approach that leverages the intrinsic value and capacity of heritage resources to foster holistic, sustainable village development.

However, heritage-led regeneration in China remains in its early stages, with the absence of a systematic implementation framework as a key challenge. To clarify the concept, this study defines two interrelated dimensions:

• Heritage Capacity: the ability of traditional villages to understand, manage, and leverage their heritage resources, encompassing knowledge systems, preservation methods, adaptive reuse strategies, and community participation [38,39,40].
• Village Regeneration: the outcome-driven revitalization process that integrates cultural, economic, social, and environmental sustainability [41].

In summary, this research centers on a key question: What heritage capacities can drive the regeneration of traditional villages? In other words, what kind of framework can effectively guide heritage-led regeneration in China’s traditional villages?

1.3. Theoretical Foundations

As mentioned above, this paper aims to address the question: What heritage capacities can drive the regeneration of traditional villages? Therefore, it is essential to clearly define the scope of both heritage capacity and village regeneration. The concept of village regeneration is relatively straightforward—it refers to strengthening a village’s sustainability to ensure long-term benefits for future generations.

However, the concept of heritage capacity is relatively complex. To better identify its key elements, this study draws on the five dimensions of community-building theory, which provides a structured framework that aligns closely with the goals of heritage-led regeneration in traditional villages. The concept of community building originated in Japan during the 1960s through the community transformation movement known as まちづくり (Machizukuri) [42]. It later spread to Taiwan, sparking a significant community building movement, and by the 2000s, mainland China had also begun incorporating this approach into rural development policies [43,44].

Community-building theory emerged in response to challenges such as environmental degradation, weakened community cohesion, and the erosion of local traditions. It emphasizes resident self-awareness, cultural preservation, and the cultivation of a warm, connected, and sustainable community. These objectives closely correspond with the goals of heritage capacity building in traditional villages, which also aim to foster resilient and thriving communities. The key distinction lies in the focus: while community-building theory centers on general social revitalization, heritage capacity in traditional villages specifically leverages heritage resources to support regeneration and sustainable development.

Among the various interpretations of community building, Professor Kiyoshi Miyazaki offers one of the most comprehensive frameworks. He categorizes community-building concerns into five interrelated dimensions: people, culture, land, industry, and landscape [45,46,47]. The core elements are defined as follows:

• People: Foster public participation to enhance well-being and quality of life.
• Culture: Preserve local history while exploring new ways to promote it.
• Land: Maintain and develop geographic features, emphasizing local uniqueness.
• Industry: Develop and market local products to boost the economy.
• Landscape: Preserve the distinct characteristics of the local environment.

Guided by the above five dimensions, this study first extracts keywords for each aspect, then filters and analyzes relevant frontier literature to develop a preliminary framework for heritage-led regeneration.

2. Materials and Methods

This study adopts a two-step qualitative methodology to develop a framework for heritage-led regeneration in Chinese traditional villages, comprising two rounds of systematic literature review (SLR) and expert interviews, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Systematic Literature Review (PRISMA)—In the first step, a systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. This process facilitated the development of both a preliminary and an integrated framework for heritage-led regeneration in the context of Chinese traditional villages.

Expert Interviews—In the second step, semi-structured interviews with domain experts were conducted to validate and refine the proposed framework. This ensured the framework’s relevance, theoretical soundness, and practical applicability.

2.1. Systematic Review and PRISMA

2.1.1. Identify the Keywords

SLR is a valuable tool for constructing state-of-the-art research. It enables the development of comprehensive frameworks that serve as a foundation for future research, ensuring that the work is grounded in a thorough and methodical analysis of existing studies [48,49].

Heritage-led regeneration has gained increasing attention in recent years. This study reviews literature published from 1 January 2020 to 1 January 2025, ensuring a timely and relevant analysis. Data were sourced from Scopus and Web of Science, focusing on English-language articles in engineering, social sciences, arts and humanities, environmental science, and energy, as these fields relate directly or indirectly to the built environment and heritage buildings.

A critical step in conducting an SLR is the selection of appropriate keywords and search terms to ensure comprehensive coverage of relevant literature. The central research question of this study is: What heritage capacities can drive the regeneration of traditional villages? To address this question, the study categorized the keywords into three main dimensions—heritage capacity, village regeneration, and traditional village—and conducted a two-round keyword search to develop the framework. The specific process is illustrated in Figure 2.

Round 1—Initial Keyword Identification

Further scoping was conducted for the three core dimensions, as presented in

Table 1. Identify the keywords of round 1.

Heritage Capacity	AND	Village Regeneration	AND	Traditional Village
“Community participation” “Cultural promotion” “Local characteristic inheritance” “Industry development” “Landscape conservation”		“Village regeneration” “Village sustainability” “Village sustainable development”		“Traditional village” “Ancient village” “Historical village” “Rural settlement” “heritage site”

, leading to the identification of the following primary keywords:

• Heritage Capacity:

Given the strong conceptual alignment between community-building theory and the notion of heritage capacity, as discussed in Section 1.3, this study adopts the theory’s five core dimensions as the basis for identifying the relevant keywords of heritage capacity, as presented below.

• “Community participation” (People)
• “Cultural promotion” (Culture)
• “Local characteristic inheritance” (Land)
• “Industry development” (Industry)
• “Landscape conservation” (Landscape)

• Village Regeneration:

The second keyword is “village regeneration”, supplemented by related terms such as “village sustainability” and “village sustainable development”, which are commonly used to describe efforts to revitalize rural areas and promote long-term resilience.

• Traditional Village:

The final keyword is “traditional village”. To broaden the scope and ensure comprehensive coverage of relevant literature, related terms commonly used in human geography, such as “ancient village”, “historical village”, “rural settlement”, and “heritage site”, are also incorporated into the search strategy.

Round 2—Keyword Refinement

This phase refines the framework based on round 1 results, using keywords from two dimensions: round 1 outcome and framework refinement, as detailed in

Table 2. Identify the keywords of round 2.

Round 1 Outcome	AND	Framework Refinement
“Public Participation” “Media Platform Construction” “Adaptive reuse” “Heritage industry development” “Landscape maintenance”		“Framework” “Model” “Indicator” “Framework” “Index” “Assessment” “Benchmarking” “Criteria”

.

• Round 1 outcome:

This study established five core dimensions of heritage-led regeneration based on the filtering and refinement of articles in round 1. These five main dimensions serve as the foundation for the round 2 keyword refinement, which is further detailed in Section 3.2.

• “Public Participation”
• “Media Platform Construction”
• “Adaptive reuse”
• “Heritage industry development”
• “Landscape maintenance”

• Framework refinement:

The second round aims to refine the five primary dimensions identified in round 1 by focusing on structural and evaluative aspects. Key refined terms include: “Framework”, “Model”, “Indicator”, “Index”, “Assessment”, “Benchmarking”, and “Criteria”.

2.1.2. Paper Selection Process

The selection of papers from the Scopus and Web of Science databases was also conducted in two rounds, corresponding to the development of the preliminary framework and the integrated framework, respectively. The detailed process is illustrated in Figure 3.

2.2. Experts Interview

Following the SLR, expert interviews were conducted between February and March 2025 to validate the findings. The sample size was determined based on the principle of saturation, defined as the point at which no new perspectives emerged during result discussions [50]. Saturation was reached after the seventh interview, but three additional interviews were conducted to ensure completeness, resulting in a final sample of ten experts.

Semi-structured interviews were selected for their ability to balance focused inquiry with flexibility to explore emerging insights [51]. The study was approved by the University of Malaya Research Ethics Committee (UMREC). The interview questions were as follows:

• Do you think the preliminary framework is suitable? If not, please explain why.
• Do you think the integrated framework is suitable? If not, please explain why.

All ten experts interviewed in this study are senior professionals based in Mainland China, with expertise in rural revitalization, heritage conservation, and traditional village development. They represent a range of institutions, including universities, research institutes, government agencies, and design firms actively engaged in heritage-led projects across China, as detailed in

Table 3. The experts interviewed information.

Expert Code	Education	Position	Affiliation
NO. 01	PhD	Associate Senior Professional	University
NO. 02	PhD	Associate Senior Professional	University
NO. 03	PhD	Senior-level Professional	Research Institute
NO. 04	Master	Mid-to-Senior Professional	Government
NO. 05	Master	Mid-to-Senior Professional	Government
NO. 06	Bachelor	Mid-to-Senior Professional	Design Company
NO. 07	Bachelor	Mid-to-Senior Professional	Design Company
NO. 08	Bachelor	Mid-to-Senior Professional	Design Company
NO. 09	PhD	Senior-level Professional	Research Institute
NO. 10	Master	Mid-to-Senior Professional	University

. Their professional backgrounds ensure that their insights are grounded in China’s specific cultural, institutional, and policy contexts.

3. Results

3.1. General Observations

3.1.1. First Round of the SLR

In the first round of the SLR, 27 articles were selected to establish a preliminary framework for heritage-led regeneration in Chinese traditional villages. Among them, 7 articles (26%) were review papers, highlighting the importance of conceptual exploration and providing a strong foundation for framework development. Geographically, 16 articles (59%) focused on China, reflecting a strong regional emphasis, while 4 articles (15%) examined international cases (England, Turkey, Italy, and India), offering valuable comparative insights, as shown in Figure 4.

Methodologically, 22 articles (81%) adopted qualitative approaches, 4 (15%) used mixed methods, and only 1 (4%) employed a quantitative method. This distribution supports the review’s objective, as qualitative studies are especially effective in exploring themes and contextual nuances essential for early-stage framework building.

3.1.2. Second Round of the SLR

In the second round of the SLR, 37 articles were selected to develop a more integrated framework based on the five key dimensions identified in the previous stage. Among these, 19 articles (51%) focused on the Chinese context, while the remaining 18 articles (49%) drew on international cases, including those from Malaysia, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, South Korea, Iran, Indonesia, and others, as shown in Figure 5.

Given that this stage aimed to refine the classification structure of the framework, many of the selected studies involved the use of models, evaluation criteria, or framework construction. Accordingly, 21 articles (57%) adopted quantitative methods, 3 articles (8%) used mixed methods, and 13 articles (35%) employed qualitative approaches, as shown in Figure 5.

3.2. Identify the Preliminary Framework

The preliminary framework was developed based on the findings of round 1 of the SLR. Through a comprehensive analysis of cutting-edge research, the study identified five key dimensions of heritage capacity that contribute to the regeneration of Chinese traditional villages: public participation (PP), media platform construction (MPC), adaptive reuse (AR), heritage industry development (HID), and landscape maintenance (LM), as detailed in

Table 4. The definition of preliminary framework.

Preliminary Framework	Definition	Reference
Public participation (PP)	PP in traditional villages refers to the active engagement of residents and stakeholders in preserving and regenerating their communities.	[52,53,54,55,56,57]
Media platform construction (MPC)	MPC in traditional villages involves using media channels to promote, preserve, and support sustainable development.	[58,59,60,61,62]
Adaptive reuse (AR)	AR in traditional villages means repurposing historic buildings for new uses while preserving their cultural and architectural value.	[63,64,65,66,67,68,69]
Heritage industry development (HID)	HID in traditional villages refers to establishing businesses that sustainably leverage the village’s cultural, historical, and natural resources.	[70,71,72]
Landscape maintenance (LM)	LM in traditional villages maintains the environment to sustain aesthetic, ecological, and cultural values.	[73,74,75,76,77,78]

.

Public Participation: PP is crucial for historical community development, as demonstrated in countries like England, Malaysia, and India [52,53]. However, in China’s traditional villages, PP is limited, with a top-down, government-driven model prevailing [54]. This is partly due to scarce resources, limited participation channels, and low participation awareness among local populations [55,56,57].To address this, there is a need for enhanced education, increased awareness, and capacity building to improve accessibility and foster greater community engagement in the regeneration process.

Media Platform Construction: Media platforms have undeniably become essential tools for users to access information, especially in an era characterized by information overload [58]. For Chinese traditional villages, these platforms present both significant opportunities and challenges. They provide an innovative avenue for the public to engage with and gain a deeper understanding of traditional villages. However, it is crucial to emphasize not only improving the accuracy and efficiency of information transmission but also safeguarding against the risk of exaggeration and the spread of misinformation. Ensuring reliable and responsible communication through media platforms is essential for fostering a well-informed public and promoting the sustainable development of these communities [59,60,61,62].

Adaptive Reuse: AR is a comprehensive approach that seeks to preserve the heritage values of buildings while adapting them to contemporary needs. Much of the existing research on AR focuses on historical buildings in developed countries, such as Italy and Poland, with an emphasis on functional transformation [63,64,69]. However, the concept has been less explored within the context of Chinese traditional villages [65,66,67,68]. Unlike built heritage, traditional villages include not only historical buildings but also intangible heritage and other cultural elements. Therefore, exploring AR in traditional villages requires broadening the focus beyond just historical buildings, incorporating a wider range of heritage aspects. This remains an area that requires further investigation.

Heritage Industry Development: HID is a key driver of economic growth, job creation, and community well-being. In the context of Chinese traditional villages, developing heritage-related industries is essential for sustainable village regeneration [70,71,72]. These industries not only contribute to the preservation of cultural heritage but also stimulate economic development and improve the overall well-being of local communities, making them a central element in fostering long-term sustainability.

Landscape Maintenance: LM is deeply influenced by regional climate, culture, and traditions. While Western countries often favor structured, symmetrical designs inspired by European gardens, Eastern countries, including China, emphasize natural harmony and minimal intervention [73]. In Chinese traditional villages, the landscape integrates both natural and human-made elements, serving as the foundation for sustainable development [74,75]. While previous research has focused on landscape genes and design, the current priority should be the long-term preservation of village landscapes, ensuring their sustainability while maintaining cultural and environmental integrity [76,77,78].

3.3. Identify the Integrated Framework

To enhance the specificity of the framework, this paper further analyzes the five aforementioned dimensions and ultimately establishes an integrated framework.

3.3.1. Public Participation

Public participation (PP) has been widely studied across domains such as heritage tourism, heritage rehabilitation, sustainability in rural and urban contexts, and environmental assessment [79,80,81]. This study specifically focuses on constructing a public participation framework in Chinese traditional villages. As summarized in

Table 5. The integrated framework of public participation.

Preliminary Framework	Integrated Framework	Reference Framework	Reference
Public participation (PP)	Participation motivation Participation opportunity Participation ability	Motivation Opportunity Ability	[79]
		Motivation Opportunity Ability	[80]
		Motivation Opportunity Ability	[86]
		Attitudes knowledge Contextual factors	[82]
		Participation opportunities Governmental sector Voluntary sector Arenas for participation	[83]
		Arenas Sectors Aims	[84]
		Participation processes Competence of participants	[85]
		participation Motivation	[81]

, existing frameworks typically include key elements such as attitude, knowledge, contextual factors, participation sectors, participation arenas, participation processes, motivation, opportunities, and abilities [81,82,83,84,85]. As some elements overlap, refining and adapting them to the context of traditional Chinese villages is essential, as not all factors may be directly applicable.

A unified analysis of these factors suggests they can be broadly categorized into three dimensions: participation motivation, participation opportunity, and participation ability. Participation motivation refers to the driving forces that inspire individuals or groups to participate [86]. In traditional villages, attitudes, interests, and perceived benefits—such as economic returns and communal development—are central components of motivation. Participation opportunity denotes the enabling conditions for participation, including contextual factors, participation sectors, and arenas [79]. These elements collectively define the structural and situational conditions for effective public involvement. Participation ability represents the capacity of individuals or groups to participate meaningfully in decision making [80]. It encompasses knowledge, skills, education, and access to necessary resources. Strengthening these capabilities is crucial for enhancing public engagement in the development of traditional villages.

In summary, PP in Chinese traditional villages can be divided into three dimensions: participation motivation, participation opportunity, and participation ability, as shown in Table 5.

3.3.2. Media Platform Construction

To further refine the classification of media platform construction (MPC) in traditional villages, this study examines media platform applications in heritage promotion, tourism development, online museums, and broader social media engagement [87,88,89].

Table 6. The integrated framework of media platform construction.

Preliminary Framework	Integrated Framework	Reference Classification	Reference
Media platform construction (MPC)	Perceived usefulness Perceived ease of use Perceived enjoyment	Perceived usefulness Perceived usefulness	[87]
		perceived usefulness perceived ease of use Social media self-efficacy	[90]
		Perceived ease of use Perceived usefulness Perceived security	[91]
		Social presence Perceived enjoyment Concentration on	[88]
		Perceived ease of use Perceived usefulness Perceived enjoyment	[92]
		Digital experience Museum media marketing	[89]
		Perceived usefulness Altruism Self-interest	[93]

summarizes key influencing factors, including perceived usefulness, ease of use, self-efficacy, security, digital experience, and enjoyment [89,90,91,92,93].

The identified elements are further examined and refined in terms of the specific characteristics of traditional villages. Perceived usefulness refers to the platform’s capacity to facilitate information access, image sharing, and communication [87,90]. Perceived ease of use emphasizes intuitive interfaces, user-friendly tools, and simple content operations [90]. Both serve as foundational constructs in the development of effective media platforms for traditional villages. Digital experience and perceived enjoyment capture users’ emotional responses and satisfaction derived from platform interaction [88,89]. As a broader construct, perceived enjoyment encompasses both interactional pleasure and overall experiential satisfaction; thus, it is adopted as the guiding dimension in this study [92]. Finally, although self-efficacy and perceived security are relevant, they are excluded from the final framework. Self-efficacy relates primarily to user experience rather than platform construction [90], while perceived security is not a central concern in the context of traditional village platform design [91].

In summary, MPC in Chinese traditional villages can be divided into three dimensions: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived enjoyment, as shown in Table 6.

3.3.3. Adaptive Reuse

Adaptive reuse (AR) repurposes existing structures for new functions while preserving their cultural, architectural, and historical value. Current research mainly centers on historical buildings, addressing heritage, architecture, structure, spatial environment, regulations, and implementation [94,95,96]. Of course, its classification is also based on the perspective of built heritage. For example, [97] assess historic buildings by architectural noumenon, spatial environment, and multi-agent involvement; [98] consider environmental context, occupation profile, and structural integrity; and [99] evaluate factors such as building information, functional suitability, design, safety, and legal aspects.

These classifications offer valuable references for traditional villages but are not fully applicable, as traditional villages are comprehensive heritage complexes that include more than just historical buildings. To more comprehensively classify AR in traditional villages, this article traces the definition of traditional villages, focusing on three dimensions: historical buildings, site selection patterns, and intangible heritage. Since site selection patterns are fixed and unchangeable, but the public spaces they create offer opportunities for transformation, this article substitutes site selection patterns with public space [16,35].

In summary, AR in Chinese traditional villages can be divided into three dimensions: historic building reuse, public space reuse, and intangible cultural heritage reuse, as shown in

Table 7. The integrated framework of adaptive reuse.

Preliminary Framework	Integrated Framework	Reference
Adaptive reuse (AR)	Historic building reuse	[16,35,94,95,96,97,98,99]
	Public space reuse
	Intangible cultural Heritage reuse

.

3.3.4. Heritage Industry Development

Industry development is commonly categorized into three sectors: primary, secondary, and tertiary [100,101,102], a classification that also applies to rural areas. Existing studies have explored rural industrial transformation, integration, and digital inclusion across these sectors [29,103,104,105], as shown in

Table 8. The integrated framework of heritage industry development.

Preliminary Framework	Integrated Framework	Reference
Heritage industry development (HID)	Rural characteristic industries	[29,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107]
	Rural tertiary industries

. However, in the context of traditional villages, such general classifications often overlook their unique characteristics, particularly those related to heritage-related industries.

A closer examination of heritage industry development (HID) in these villages reveals a strong interconnection between the primary and secondary sectors. The primary sector, which produces raw materials such as tea and medicinal herbs, supplies essential inputs for the secondary sector. The latter adds value through craftsmanship and techniques, transforming these raw materials into culturally significant handicrafts. Moreover, given the relatively small scale of the first and second sectors, discussing them in isolation is insufficient for HID. Combining these sectors into “rural characteristic industries” more effectively captures their integrated role in the development of heritage industries.

Another crucial aspect of HID is the tertiary sector, which has gained increasing attention in recent years. This sector includes a variety of activities, such as tourism, cultural and creative industries, and digital services, all essential for the sustainable development of rural areas [106,107]. In this study, it is synthesized as the “rural tertiary industry.”

In summary, HID in Chinese traditional villages can be divided into two dimensions: rural characteristic industries and rural tertiary industries, as shown in Table 8.

3.3.5. Landscape Maintenance

Landscape maintenance (LM) in traditional villages focuses on managing villagers’ daily production and living spaces, ensuring sustainable development, and enhancing both ecological and cultural resilience. As summarized in

Table 9. The integrated framework of landscape maintenance.

Preliminary Framework	Integrated Framework	Reference Element	Reference
Landscape maintenance (LM)	Ecological landscape Heritage landscape	Plant diversity Ecological design	[108]
		Sitting layout Village environment Building and structure Folk customs	[109]
		Livelihood landscape Heritage and spatial identity Heritage-based collaboration	[110]
		Ecological landscape	[111]
		Cultural landscape	[112]

, the reference dimensions of LM are broadly categorized into ecological and cultural landscapes [108,109,110,111,112].

Ecological landscape maintenance focuses on preserving the natural environment by enhancing plant richness, promoting biodiversity, reducing pollution, and protecting natural resources [108,111]. In this study, the term “cultural landscape” is refined to “heritage landscape” to better align with the heritage-led regeneration context of traditional villages. While “cultural landscape” generally refers to landscapes shaped by human activity and culture, “heritage landscape” places greater emphasis on the cultural, historical, and natural elements recognized as heritage assets. This terminological shift highlights the unique identity and historical continuity of traditional villages and reflects the study’s focus on conserving and revitalizing both tangible and intangible heritage embedded in the landscape.

In summary, LM in Chinese traditional villages can be divided into two dimensions: ecological landscape and heritage landscape, as shown in Table 9.

3.4. Validation of the Framework by Expert Interview

To enhance the clarity of the results, expert interviews were conducted and analyzed using coding methods. The number of experts supporting each theme was recorded to provide quantitative support for the qualitative findings, as shown in

Table 10. The coding of experts’ interviews.

Dimension	Code	Description	Frequency
Overall perception	Future Development Trend	Heritage-led regeneration is essential for future development	10/10
	Framework Needed	Lack of a systematic and comprehensive framework	9/10
Public participation	Local-Government Cooperation	Highlight the importance of Coordination between villagers and the government	4/10
	From Cognition to Action	Public participation should move from awareness to engagement	6/10
	Coordinated development	Motivation, opportunity, and ability	5/10
Media platform construction	Result acceptance	Media platform construction is mainly driven by perceived usefulness, ease of use, and enjoyment.	7/10
	Technical Support	Lack of tech talent limits platform construction in remote villages	4/10
Adaptive reuse	Heritage Elements	Covers buildings, public spaces, and intangible heritage	8/10
	Urban Experience Reference	Suggest learning from urban cases	4/10
Heritage industry development	Beyond Tourism	Should not rely solely on rural tourism	7/10
	Industrial Linkage	Tertiary industries can stimulate rural characteristic industries	6/10
Landscape maintenance	Classification Endorsement	Support for “ecological landscape” and “heritage landscape”	8/10
	Monitoring Importance	Need for dynamic monitoring and early warning systems	5/10

.

The coding results indicate a strong consensus among experts regarding the importance of heritage-led regeneration as a future pathway for traditional villages (10/10). Most experts (9/10) pointed out the absence of a systematic framework, suggesting the need for integrated guidance.

Regarding the preliminary framework involving five proposed dimensions, most interviewees confirmed their relevance and comprehensiveness. The only point of contention concerns the classification of landscape maintenance. Expert No. 4 suggested replacing “ecological landscape” and “heritage landscape” with “natural landscape” and “artificial landscape”. However, the majority of experts (7/10) supported the original classification, which provides a broader and more accurate framework for traditional villages. The term “natural landscape” overlooks specific ecological functions, while “artificial landscape” fails to reflect heritage values. Therefore, the current classification more effectively captures the ecological and cultural significance of traditional villages.

Additionally, concerning the integrated framework, most experts demonstrated a supportive attitude and provided constructive insights along with suggestions for further investigation.

Public Participation: Four experts emphasized the importance of collaboration between local villagers and government bodies, while six highlighted the need to advance public participation from awareness to active engagement. Five experts further suggested that fostering effective public participation in traditional villages requires coordinated efforts across all three dimensions to achieve meaningful and sustainable outcomes.

Media Platform Construction: Seven experts confirmed the validity of a user-centered classification—perceived usefulness, ease of use, and enjoyment—while four emphasized that technical talent is essential for media development in remote areas.

Adaptive Reuse: Eight experts believed the three subcategories (historic buildings, public space, and intangible heritage) fully capture reuse elements; four suggested learning from urban adaptive reuse practices.

Heritage Industry Development: Seven experts supported expanding beyond tourism, and six emphasized the need to integrate heritage industries with rural tertiary sectors.

Landscape Maintenance: Eight experts agreed with the classification into “ecological” and “heritage” landscapes, while five stressed the importance of monitoring mechanisms (e.g., early warnings).

In summary, this study ultimately establishes a heritage-led regeneration framework for Chinese traditional villages, as illustrated in Figure 6.

4. Discussion

This study proposes a preliminary framework grounded in community-building theory, identifying five key dimensions of heritage capacity essential for promoting village regeneration: public participation, media platform construction, adaptive reuse, heritage industry development, and landscape maintenance. As the first systematic application of this theory to heritage-led regeneration, the framework offers a significant theoretical contribution and a solid foundation for future research. The five dimensions are further refined into 13 sub-dimensions, culminating in an integrated framework, as illustrated in Figure 6.

According to expert interview feedback, in-depth discussions are essential not only to examine the interrelationships among the framework’s five core dimensions but also to address practical implementation challenges and identify directions for future refinement.

4.1. Interrelations Among the Five Dimensions

Public Participation: PP provides human capital and community engagement, forming the basis for the success of other dimensions.

Media Platform Construction: MPC facilitates communication and coordination, supports public participation, promotes heritage industries, and enhances awareness of adaptive reuse and landscape preservation.

Adaptive Reuse: AR benefits from both local participation and media outreach to ensure culturally sensitive and economically viable outcomes.

Heritage Industry Development: HID depends on participation, media promotion, and effective reuse of local heritage assets.

Landscape Maintenance: LM requires community-based monitoring and media-supported technologies for dynamic observation and ecological protection.

Together, these dimensions form a cohesive, mutually reinforcing system that supports traditional villages’ inclusive, economically viable, and ecologically sustainable regeneration.

4.2. Implementation Challenges and Future Research Directions

Despite the framework’s conceptual coherence, experts noted several implementation challenges and future development directions:

Public Participation: Although supported by motivation, opportunity, and ability, PP requires concrete strategies and close coordination between villagers and authorities to move from passive awareness to active engagement, particularly within the context of Chinese rural party-state governance.

Media Platform Construction: Although user experience dimensions (usefulness, ease of use, and enjoyment) are crucial, technical capacity for development and maintenance remains a major barrier, particularly in remote or under-resourced areas.

Adaptive Reuse: While this study expands AR to include public spaces and intangible heritage, these aspects remain underexplored and call for deeper investigation and context-sensitive practices.

Heritage Industry Development: Although rural characteristics and tertiary industries are complementary, establishing an integrated industry chain remains complex and requires comprehensive planning and cross-sector collaboration [16].

Landscape Maintenance: The dual focus on ecology and heritage necessitates technological support for real-time monitoring, as subtle changes often go unnoticed without advanced tools [113].

4.3. Regional Applicability and International Implications

Finally, to enhance practical value, future studies should explore the framework’s applicability across diverse regions in China, where traditional villages vary significantly in cultural background, economic strength, resources, and governance structures. In underdeveloped areas, limited access to technology and talent poses significant challenges for media platform construction and public participation, issues that have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic [114]. Conversely, economically stronger regions may offer more favorable conditions for heritage industry development and greater resilience to such external shocks. Therefore, pilot applications across different regional contexts are crucial for testing the framework’s adaptability and scalability. These studies will not only support the localization of the framework but also provide valuable insights to refine its components and enhance its practical relevance.

Moreover, similar disparities exist in many rural areas beyond China, where heritage resources are unevenly matched with development capacity. In such contexts, the proposed framework may also offer a useful reference for guiding heritage-led regeneration efforts in other countries, particularly those facing comparable challenges in balancing conservation, development, and community participation.

5. Conclusions

This study employs a two-round SLR to analyze 64 articles from the Scopus and Web of Science (WOS) databases to develop both a preliminary and an integrated framework for heritage-led regeneration in Chinese traditional villages. Grounded in community-building theory, the preliminary framework identifies five key dimensions: public participation, media platform construction, adaptive reuse, heritage industry development, and landscape maintenance. Building upon this foundation, the integrated framework further elaborates on these dimensions by identifying 13 corresponding sub-dimensions, as illustrated in Figure 6. To validate the above framework, expert interviews were subsequently conducted. This study offers a comprehensive, theory-driven proposal to guide heritage-led regeneration in traditional villages. Importantly, the proposed framework is designed as a flexible guideline, adaptable to diverse rural contexts across various regions in China and potentially applicable to other countries facing similar challenges in rural heritage conservation.

Despite its contributions, this study has several limitations. First, the framework is based on community-building theory and five key dimensions, which may overlook other relevant elements in heritage-led regeneration. Second, the literature review was limited to English sources from Web of Science and Scopus, potentially excluding important research in Chinese and other languages, thus affecting the framework’s cultural representativeness. Future research should include non-English literature to enhance inclusiveness. Third, expert interviews mainly involved participants from specific institutional backgrounds, possibly causing selection bias and limiting perspective diversity. Future studies should engage experts from a broader range of institutions and linguistic backgrounds to improve robustness and applicability.

Finally, the framework still requires further refinement to enhance its applicability and effectiveness. Future research should explore the integration of emerging technologies, such as digital mapping, virtual simulation, and AI-driven heritage visualization, to support more innovative and efficient regeneration strategies in traditional villages. Moreover, greater attention should be given to examining the interactions and synergies among the framework’s key dimensions and sub-dimensions in order to better understand how these components influence and reinforce one another in practical settings.