Collaborating with Local Communities to Identify Improvement Priorities for Historic Urban Landscape Based on Residents’ Satisfaction: An Application of Asymmetric Impact-Performance Analysis in Dandong, China

Abstract

In the process of urbanization and globalization, urban conservation reinforces the links among past, present, and future, which enhances local identity and is indispensable for urban sustainability. The concept of Historic Urban Landscape (HUL), as both a notion and an approach, has been playing an increasingly important role in urban conservation discourse. Prioritizing actions is one of the pivotal procedures to perform the HUL approach. Instead of simply focusing on values selected and graded by experts, more attention should be paid to local residents' satisfaction. A collaborative approach involving communities to prioritize actions in urban conservation and regeneration is proposed. Using the data from residents in the old town of Dandong, China, this study pioneers the application of the Asymmetric Impact-Performance Analysis (AIPA) technique in the urban conservation field. HUL attributes are categorized into basic factors, excitement factors, and performance factors based on their potential asymmetric impact on residents' satisfaction. By taking performance levels of the attributes into consideration, this study further identifies improvement priorities for HUL, which helps planners and city managers to make rational choices in managing historic cities.As the link between history and present, urban heritage is an integral component of local identity. Urban heritages together with the memories and associations inherent in them are the evidence that addresses how urban landscape has been continuously shaped and changed [4]. Both tangible and intangible urban heritage are precious and have the potential to be drivers of social cohesion and urban regeneration [5].Urban conservation has been a focus in urban planning, architecture, and other related fields since it was developed after the French Revolution [2]. Along with the evolution of this idea, the motivations for conservation have been changing over time. Urban conservation has gone through "Antiquarian Bias", "Commemorative Bias", and "Aesthetic Bias" in both academia and practice during the past three centuries, while a new bias is emerging in the 21st century which focuses on the relationships between different things, as well as between things and people, rather than things themselves [6]. This current trend is to see the human environment as a cultural landscape with an intention to manage it within the landscape discourse, which is called "Ecological Bias". From this holistic view, urban conservation and urban development are no longer incompatible with each other, since their joint aim is to enhance the human environment and allow communities to prosper. It has become increasingly clear that urban conservation is a key resource and an indispensable part of urban sustainability [7].The culmination of this new trend came in 2011 when Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape was declared [1] and commonly accepted. The concept of Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) was first set out at a UNESCO conference in Vienna in 2005 [8], thus HUL, as a new a...

Prioritizing Subway Station Entrance Attributes to Optimize Passenger Satisfaction in Cold Climate Zones: Integrating Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with Asymmetric Impact-Performance Analysis

“…Caber, Albayrak, and Loiacono [54] developed a variation of IAA, termed asymmetric impact-performance analysis (AIPA), offering enhanced visual simplicity and interpretability. This method, proven reliable and effective, has been utilized in business-to-business, tourism, and urban researches to identify priorities for improvement [56,57]. AIPA falls under penalty-reward contrast (PRC) analysis, based on the idea that poor attribute performance incurs a penalty and dissatisfaction, whereas excellent performance brings rewards and delight.…”

Current Trends in Urban Conservation: Medieval Historic Arab City Centers

“…This assessment process is more straightforward in cases of physical heritage conservation, while in the case of intangible heritage, it is much more complicated. Ilde Rizzo, as cited by Pietro, highlighted the following arguable assessment issues: scope, priorities, intervention strategies, preservation strategies, and long-term outcomes [47,48]. The newly adopted definition of heritage comprises the physical urban environment and intangible cultural values.…”

An Attachment-Based Management Framework of Destination Attributes: Drawing on the Appraisal Theories of Emotion

“…Therefore, the three-factor model classifies attributes into basic factors (extremely dissatisfactory if not present, but the satisfaction does not increase when the attribute is present), performance factors (similar to the symmetric effects), and excitement factors (a superior level of satisfaction occurs if present, but consumers are not dissatisfied if it is not present) (Fajriyati et al, 2020). Some scholars have also integrated the advantages of the two methods and utilized an asymmetric IPA (e.g., Caber et al, 2013; Dueñas et al, 2021; Ji et al, 2020).…”