Urban regeneration in Western countries can count on a long--lasting tradition of experiences in which civil society has played a fundamental role in counterbalancing the system of power, resulting in profound urban governance readjustments. This has been the result of the increasing centrality of horizontal alliances between citizens and associations involved in urban affairs since the late 1960s in the West. Similar theoretical frameworks have been applied in China.However, these have frequently resulted in conceptual shortcuts that depict civil society as immature or lacking and the state as authoritarian. This paper will explore whether these categories are still entirely valid to urban regeneration in China. While the regime has traditionally prevented horizontal linkages of associations in urban governance (supporting their vertical integration to ensure a certain degree of soft control), there are signs of change. In particular, three cases of urban regeneration in historic areas will be used to discuss the changing role played by civil society in China. The ultimate goal is to examine whether horizontal linkages across groups of heterogeneous citizens are arising at the micro--level of urban governance. Keywords Urban regeneration; historic districts; horizontal linkages; community; civil society; China Introduction Western urban planning practices, which arose during the twentieth century, have been mainly (and deeply) shaped by opposite ideologies, either in favour of a central role of the state or of a free market in society and economy. The former has been accused of leading to centralised and 'command control' policymaking, featuring economic inefficiency and democratic tightening; the latter leading to unwanted individualistic behaviours and a constrained role of government, the preconditions of any market failure. A minority stream has advocated a communitarian and self--organised management strategy for city transformation. Overall, the tension between the state, market and community--centred planning has shifted interest to institutional analysis and communicative approaches in planning theory in an attempt to frame the challenges of planning within systems undergoing policy rescaling and increasing societal fragmentation (Healey, 1997).
2The urban regeneration practice, in particular, is quite paradigmatic of such tension especially when applied to historic areas. The articulation of voices around historic areas is growing much more complex than for other ordinary urban transformations, ranging from local citizens directly affected by the regeneration projects to external societal components intellectually committed to protect the universalistic heritage value embedded in historic areas.