Zoning for world heritage sites: dual dilemmas in development and demographics

Since listing as a UNESCO World Heritage Site (WHS) in 1999, Hoi An Ancient Town in Vietnam has been transformed by tourism development with visitor numbers increasing more than sixteen-fold. Beyond positive economic impacts, tourism has generated considerable funds for conservation, with revenue assisting authentic restoration of the town’s historic center. However, tourism impacts have provoked criticism linked to social sustainability, examined in this paper using the core-and-buffer-zone principle - a neo-normative spatial planning framework. Our longitudinal, mixed-method analysis from development and demographic perspectives combines interviews and census data with spatial planning guidelines and maps. Findings show that architectural renovations, accompanied by stricter regulations and hierarchical World Heritage Site zoning, legitimized rapid development of Hoi An’s buffer zone in tandem with ‘museumification’ of the core, epitomized by the central clustering of traditional wooden architecture renovation projects. By 2010, population in the core had declined by 20% as ‘adaptive re-use’ of heritage buildings paved the way for conversion of private residences into shops or other services and the core transformed from living heritage into a tourism stage. Demographic and development trends reinforced the dual hierarchy, although attempts to mitigate museumification, including a series of craft villages around the perimeter, provided impetus for revitalization of the newly-expanded buffer zone. Our findings highlight certain implications of spatial zoning for social sustainability, pointing the way for better integration with adaptive re-use policies. Our study contributes to further the debate on social sustainability at a living heritage site by investigating the bipolarity between museumification of the core and concurrent development of the buffer zones. The implications of our study extend beyond the current context of developing Southeast Asia, as this paper draws parallels and expounds opportunities for more site-specific planning and management of World Heritage Sites.