Page 61 - JCAU-7-3

Journal of Chinese
Architecture and Urbanism Rural–urban village regeneration

As part of the initiatives, villagers were invited to commercial activities and regenerative initiatives, actively
collaborate as project partners and organize cultural encouraging non-profit cultural projects that can revitalize
workshops, with reasonable remuneration offered in underutilized land resources, such as informal spaces,
return. However, the system for compensation presented unofficial historic buildings (those not officially listed),
significant challenges. Technically, no form of payment landscapes, and farming areas.
other than salary is permitted, and this is governed by In Hong Kong, town planning is highly dependent
formal employment contracts. As a result, all villager- on zoning, with the Town Planning Board periodically
partners were classified as university staff, with their salaries updating land uses through new statutory outline zoning
calculated according to the university pay scale, which is plans. For example, agrarian villages such as Shui Hau
determined by academic experience. This arrangement are reassessed based on current ecological conditions and
led to highly inequitable and uncompetitive compensation are often designated new planning zones, such as coastal
rates when compared to the job market. protection or conservation areas. When farmlands are
Monetary compensation emerged as a significant abandoned, nature processes often take over, transforming
motivating factor for the conservation initiatives. Villagers these lands into wetlands. This transformation, fueled
repeatedly expressed that, without proper compensation, by nutrient-rich soils, can recreate habitats and nurture
there was little incentive for families to preserve historic biodiversity. Nonetheless, such ecological changes may
structures rather than redevelop the properties for profits. inadvertently hinder the regeneration of cultural values,
This dynamic fostered mistrust and strained relationships, as the temporal aspect of these morphological changes is
with villagers often becoming dismissive of the research frequently overlooked. To address this, planning policies
team’s efforts and critical of decisions. This mistrust should be reviewed to balance and leverage cultural
resulted in a hierarchical power dynamic, where the significance alongside ecological benefits.
villagers, as landowner clients, viewed the researchers as At the middle level, policy focus should shift from
“service providers” tasked with fulfilling their demands to restrictive development controls to proactive incentives
complete the project. for conservation and regeneration. Current funding
Subsequent requests for modifications to spatial mechanisms often emphasize the sustainable use of restored
provisions and equipment led to increased time and buildings beyond the funding period, which imposes
cost implications. As other researchers have noted, rural unrealistic expectations on villagers. These expectations
regeneration partnerships that lack sufficient human capital are misaligned with the priorities of stakeholders such as
are heavily dependent on “strong, local voluntary and practitioners, researchers, and grant providers. Given the
community sector infrastructure” (Osborne et al., 2004, long-standing lack of private investment interest among
p. 156). Consequently, the project’s outcomes – including villagers, the government should consider assuming
architectural esthetics and program implementation – greater responsibility for implementing regenerative
became increasingly difficult to manage. proposals – particularly when cultural heritage, both
tangible and intangible, is integral to the city’s identity.
7. Implications for new policies, incentives, For historic buildings that are unoccupied or unmanaged,
and community design the government could purchase, restore, and reactivate
Systemic changes in new policies, incentives, and these structures. In addition, small-scale funds could
community design are essential to bridge the gap between empower proactive villagers to propose and implement
expected and actual realities in countryside regeneration. their regenerative schemes. Villagers should also be
At a high level, land policies and development-based engaged outside the existing university framework, which
planning regulations should be re-examined to address often misrepresents them as employees rather than equal
pressing issues such as land fragmentation, inactive partners.
lands, inconsistent land boundaries and footprints, and At the community level, the place identity of Shui
land misuse. Specific guidelines tailored to countryside Hau village, rooted in its eco-cultural landscape,
areas – including village zones, greenbelts, conservation should be reinforced. Village culture and traditions
areas, and coastal zones – should be formulated to can be leveraged through social design methods to
govern rural developments while allowing flexibility foster sustainable innovation. Key stakeholders who
for innovative initiatives. The current policy, which are proactive, passionate, and willing to contribute
categorizes land uses to regulate development, mistakenly should be identified and supported. Traditions such as
includes restoration works under these controls. To farming and clam harvesting can be reinterpreted and
address this, the government should distinguish between showcased as part of an educational tourism experience.

Volume 7 Issue 3 (2025) 12 https://doi.org/10.36922/jcau.4992