Resistance, Engagement, and Heritage Conservation by Voluntary Sector: The Case of Penang in Malaysia

Abstract

An enduring question with regard to the voluntary sector is how it can nurture civic engagement and provide public goods. A World Heritage listing for Penang highlights this question by revealing a vibrant civil society network that has made heritage conservation an issue for public discourse and policy agenda. This paper discusses how the marginalized trajectory of Penang is related to the development of its civic realm, social cohesion and local identity, which are sources of Penang's voluntarism. It then examines the engagement pattern of the Penang Heritage Trust, a leading association, which has mounted resistance against the state's failure in heritage provision. This bottom-up approach has preserved Penang's cultural heritage and associated identity, and reveals the distinct nature and capacity of Penang's voluntary sector that goes against the general pattern in Malaysia.

World heritage sustainable development policy & local implementation: Site management issues using a case study of Sri Ksetra at Pyu ancient cities in Myanmar

“…There are, for example, broad comparative works spanning cultural heritage across Southeast Asia (see for example Chapman, ; King, ). In terms of site‐specific WH studies, a representative sample includes locations such as Angkor Wat in Cambodia (see for example, Hauser‐Schaublin, ; Miura, ; Winter, ; Winter, ); Borobodur and Prambanan in Indonesia (Black & Wall, ; Hitchcock & Darma Putra, ; Nagaoka, ); Luang Prabang in Laos (Reeves & Long, ; Vallard, ); Melaka (Cheng, Li, & Ma, ) and Penang (Aziz, ) in Malaysia; Sabang in the Philippines (Fross, ); Ayutthaya (Gozzoli, ; Srijuntrapun, Fisher, & Rennie, ), Ban Wangka (Sangchumnong & Kozak, ), Phanom Rung (Denes & Tiamsoon, ), and Thung Yai (Buergin, ) in Thailand; and Ha Long Bay (Galla, ), Hoi An (Thinh, Thanh, Tuyen, & Hens, ), and Hue (Nixon, ) in Vietnam. The diverse findings from such an array of studies reflects the variety of WH settings across countries in Southeast Asia.…”

“…Concerns over these challenges have led to calls for greater inclusion of local communities in WH, with the argument that community involvement in WH decisions helps to align tourism, development, and conservation plans with local values and thereby promotes longer‐term community support (Black & Wall, ; Gullino et al, ; Halim & Ishak, ; King, ). The expectation behind such efforts is that local interests will temper the risks to conservation posed by pro‐development state agendas (Cheng et al, ). Further, the hope is that local support will improve the prospects for conserving the qualities of a site that contribute to the WH criteria of integrity, authenticity, and outstanding universal value (Deegan, ; Denes & Tiamsoon, ; Gozzoli, ; Li et al, ; Reeves & Long, ).…”

The Dynamism of Local Culture In Metagovernance - A Cursory Look at George Town World Heritage Site, Malaysia

“…In effect, a confrontational environment permeates in the relationship with the state especially in certain aspects of development decisions, such as the Penang Transport Masterplan and Jerejak Island redevelopment. Moreover, a cultural detachment from the governance is prevalent among NGOs in Penang [30], for instance, PHT actively sought private funds in the restoration of the Suffolk House.…”

Governance of built-heritage in a restrictive political system: The involvement of non-governmental stakeholders

“…The goods and services NGOs can provide are varied in scope. In the context of built-heritage conservation, NGOs provide goods and services by managing built-heritage conservation projects (Cheng, Li and Ma, 2014).…”