How Do We Rebuild a Disaster damaged Heritage Settlement: A study of the Post- Earthquake Reconstruction of the Village of Taoping. A Traditional Qiang Settlement in Sichuan China

Abstract

This research is about post-disaster reconstruction of culture heritage settlements, not as an activity but conceptually, by addressing the question of how do we preserve a heritage settlement damaged by disaster? Underpinning that issue is a case study of Taoping Qiang Village. Taoping is a Qiang Minority’s traditional settlement which went through a post-earthquake reconstruction from 2008 to 2011 in Sichuan, China. In my thesis heritage settlement is understood as “lived-in cultural heritage settlements”. The “lived-in” situation refers to heritage settlements which suspends the natural coherence between inhabitants and dwellings. This coherence refers to settlements renovate and maintenance according to their needs and wills of their inhabitants. Which in turn are driven by their livelihoods, social practices and living habitus etc. “Lived-in” heritage illustrates a state in which the protected old dwellings host a present-day mode of living. “Lived-in” heritage also displays the coexistence of habitation and conservation. Furthermore it implies a complicated relationship between those two actives. To rebuild a heritage settlement after disaster is not only to rescue the damaged historical buildings but also to reestablish the homes of the inhabitants. This research is built on that recognition and regards the local community as a key player in the reconstruction of heritage settlements. To understand possible behavior and reaction of the community to the reconstruction we need to know its social context. Hence my research employs “modernity” and “citizenship” in order to set up a “reference frame”. The extent of modernity and state of citizenship substantially impact the underlying attitude and reactions of the community. I employ a three-stage investigation in the Taoping case, those of past, present, future. Phase one covers the two uncoordinated “reconstructions” of Taoping, the official reconstruction and the subsequent self-restoration. The reason for the latter was the failure of the first to recognize the key role of the community. They focused on rebuilding homes rather than saving heritage. In stage two I focus on the reconstruction’s impact on the present-day life of the community. (Re)building on agricultural land forced the local community to alter their means of livelihood, from agricultural to tourism. Hence the village of Taoping was converted from an old village into a tourist attraction, a showcase of traditional Qiang life. Consequently those activities devalued the heritage settlement. In stage three I discuss the resilience of the reconstructed Taoping and how they can meet natural hazards in the future. The models of testing the resilience of Taoping show that Taoping is still vulnerable to seismic hazards and extreme-weather-caused floods and landslides. My study shows that the Taoping community was not to take part in the official reconstruction because of the top-down policymaking regime and current state of citizenship, inhabiting the inhabitants to wield their rights. Livelihood shifts may benefit the social modernization and enhance the community’s economic citizenship, however, it neglects the development of a culture of modernity and the responsibility of citizenship. The fact that Taoping remains vulnerable to hazards is the consequence of a reconstruction that did not recognize the complexity of a “lived-in” state. The insights gained through this research highlight that heritage settlement conservation after disaster inevitably have to consider the interaction between habitation and conservation. To clarify the relationship between community and the historical dwellings is crucial. So is the risk assessment in order to enhance the resilience and thus secure the future of rebuilt heritage settlement.