Environmental Sustainability Opportunities at Informal Settlements in Unesco World Heritage Areas: A Case Study of Hue, Vietnam

Abstract

Within a "socialist-state" context; Vietnam is a relatively progressive nation with strong economic and diplomatic growth. But it has not always been this way. Vietnam has a legacy of occupation, division and conflict. The informal settlement at the Hue Citadel; a UNESCO World Heritage site, became established during the Vietnam War in response to displacement and the need for protection. The informal settlement now comprises hundreds of dwellings situated around, and on top of, the Citadel walls. Without sufficient access to clean water, sanitation or waste management; coupled with a lack of infrastructure, the Hue informal settlement has impacted significantly upon the environment. Waterways have high nutrient levels and are stagnant and carp-infested and rubbish and waste is disposed of to waterways and streets. These issues are in-turn impacting upon the integrity of the heritage listing itself. As a result of this; there is now a push by the Thua-Thien-Hue Province to relocate informal settlement residents to new locations outside of the Citadel. This paper discusses the limited success of such relocation programs and alternatively outlines the potential to implement an incremental environmental improvement plan that could contribute to local sustainability and allow residents to remain in an area within which they have strong community connections.

Assessing the environmental impacts of informal settlements in vietnam: The case study of the hue citadel unesco world heritage site

“…for every goal identified in the environmental improvement plan, there would need to be associated actions, tasks, timing, benefits, funding opportunities and environmental indicators developed [41]. individual tasks would delineate those on-ground activities that could be achieved with the right funding and timing.…”

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.…”

“…There are, however, challenges in that tourism brings pressures to commercialize heritage for mass consumption, bringing risks in that preparations for commercial tourism may erode site qualities needed to meet WH criteria for integrity, authenticity, and outstanding universal value (Denes & Tiamsoon, ; Gozzoli, ; Su, ; Thinh et al, ). In addition, the linkage of WH tourism with national development efforts tends to produce centralized top‐down governance structures that dictates particular forms of development and conservation that ignores the needs, opportunities, and rights of locals (Chan & Ma, ; King, ; Nixon, ). The denial of a share in WH management or benefits pushes local communities toward alternative development livelihoods that can be harmful to conservation (Srijuntrapun 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, ). Hence, while it is possible that communities may desire development that is harmful to WH criteria, aspirations for sustainable forms of conservation would be better served by greater partnerships between national and local levels in WH governance (Halim & Ishak, ; Nixon, ).…”

“…As a result, WH notions of integrity, authenticity, and outstanding universal value do not necessarily accord with the expectations of locals (Buergin, ; Nagaoka, ). For example, WH studies in Southeast Asia argue that the WH system tends to favor restoration or preservation of sites based on historical idealizations, while some local cultures tend to follow perspectives of sites as living heritage tied to the survival of local communities (Aziz, ; Miura, ; Nagaoka, ; Nixon, ). Compounding such differences are the consequences of WH status, which transforms sites from local heritage into national icons with global recognition (Black & Wall, ; King, ; Winter, ; Winter, ).…”