Culture-driven Urban Regeneration: A Case Study of the Kadeejeen Neighborhood, Bangkok

Bangkok, Thailand

CULTURE-DRIVEN URBAN REGENERATION: A CASE STUDY OF THE KADEEJEEN NEIGHBOURHOOD, BANGKOK

BY NIRAMON KULSRISOMBAT

INTRODUCTION Urban regeneration has been one of the most important issues confronting inner cities, particularly of post-industrial cities in the West. Problems include new socio-economic trends resulting from demographic change, decentralization of people and jobs, exodus of younger people, physical deterioration of urban environments, and the physical decay that results from underutilization of scarce resources. Over the past decades, capitalization of cultural resources as an engine for urban regeneration has become one of the major theme in urban governance.

The significance and role of social inclusion factors gained formal recognition at policy level through the community-based development concept presented in Local Agenda 21 (United Nations, http://www.un.org/esa/ dsd/agenda21); the concept has since been extended and revised as a social inclusive regeneration model. Nevertheless, despite the clear benefits of inclusive, culture-led urban regeneration strategies for community development, there remains a lack of understanding of effective measures for engaging community residents and focusing their collective resources to implement urban regeneration projects.

Cultural activities can help rejuvenate severed social connections

in many ways. First, art is effective in stimulating community participation and promoting a sense of community. Moreover, compared with large-scale cultural landmarks, it is a less costly means of brand-building (Richards and Wilson, 2004). Research suggests that the communitybased arts festival is an effective cultural intervention strategy for inducing community mobilization, as well as building collaborative partnerships among local stakeholder organizations.

A recent collaborative effort at urban regeneration in the Kadeejeen neighbourhood of Bangkok provides a case study of the use of the community-based arts festival as an innovative and effective policy tool for sustainable regen1

Bangkok, Thailand

Figure 1 Context of Kadeejeen Neighborhood

eration. e model offers important lessons for policymakers, particularly regarding provision of policy levers and institutional support, and may have broader utility for the regeneration of other deprived historic urban areas of Bangkok, and elsewhere.

nomic and social development, including the Creative Economy Policy and the establishment of Local Culture Councils at the district level within the Bangkok Municipal Authority (BMA) and within municipalities in other provinces. e former Governor of Bangkok, Apirak Kosayothin, Cultural regeneration in is now leading the Bangkok Thailand Creative City initiative, Inspired ailand has implemented sev- by UNESCO’s concept of the eral urban policies emphasizing Creative City 2004. e initiative the roles of art and culture in eco- aims to revitalize the network 2

of culturally signi cant location ssuch as old neighbourhoods, traditional markets, temple areas and other places of cultural interest. However, the voluntary sector is dominant in driving local cultural revitalization activities via community groups, academics, NGOs and professional associations.

Kadeejeen- its rise and fall Kadeejeen is one of Bangkok’s

Bangkok, Thailand

oldest riverfront communities and has been continuously inhabited for more than two centuries since its emergence during the late Ayutthaya period (1620-1767) as a customs checkpoint for foreign merchant ships travelling to Ayutthaya. e area subsequently became a cultural melting pot, with Chinese, Portuguese and Muslim settlements.

Accessible by river and canals, Kadeejeen was a major commercial area of the city during the early Ratanakosin period, as well as a residential area for high-ranking government servants and their retainers. Later, with an in ux of missionaries and foreign merchants, Kadeejeen became recognized as one of the rst ‘expatriate’ districts of Bangkok where the city had contact with western technologies and knowledge . During the reign of King Rama V, Kadeejeen’s in uence waned as Bangkok began its eastward growth. and government officials moved to the east bank of the Chao Phraya River.

as religious rituals and practices, music, and cuisine. e area is the epitome of Bangkok’s traditional urban fabric, which is characterized by a ne-grained urban structure, centred around religious establishments.e Kadeejeen neighbourhood still retains many traditional institutions of ai society, such as the BaanWat-Rongrian(lit. CommunityTemple-School).

In terms of social capital and institutions, the Kadeejeen neighbourhood has a wealth of social capital that forms the basis for neighbourhood regeneration But despite its multi-cultural heritage, it has been in decline, physically and socio-economically. anks to its location and old morphological structures, vehicular access is difficult and the community’s troks (narrow pedestrian alleys) and klongs (canals) have been neglected.

Congestion led many residents to move to the suburbs and rent their houses to a growing in ux of labourers from outside the Today, Kadeejeen is part of area, with no social or cultural onburi district, opposite to the attachment to the locality. historic district of Ratanakosin Island. e neighbourhood enOver time, the Kadeejeen compasses approximately one neighbourhood descended more square kilometer. It consists of or less into a riverfront slum, six communities with a multi- with continuing loss of its unique cultural mixture of four religious cultural heritage. Social disintebeliefs: eravada and Mahayana gration was exacerbated by instiBuddhism; Catholicism; and tutional attitudes. e customary Islam. e community re ects security of tenure, based not on these groups’ unique cultural contract but common underheritages, ranging from spacious standing between the temple and religious places and old timber the community, has particularly residences to everyday life such affected Buddhist temples. With

abbots now appointed from outside the community, conflicts between temple and community became inevitable. Development projects were promoted over the objections of the community. e high-pro le case of Kalaya Temple became a cause célèbre (Vichienpradit, 2012).

Kadeejeen’s first art festival e Conserving Kadeejeen Project (CKP) was funded and launched in 2008 by the Association of Siamese Architects Under Royal Patronage (ASA), one of Thailand’s most active cultural conservation advocates. e project’s objectives were (1) to survey, identify and document Kadeejeen’s cultural resources; (2) using the cultural mapping tool for as a collective learning platform to help communities recognize and safeguard their cultural diversity; and (3) to link cultural resources to neighbourhood regeneration. The ASA’s Conservation Committee used participative methods to promote inclusive regeneration, working with leaders of Kadeejeen’s six communities leaders and academics from the Architecture and Urban Design schools network to establish the Conserving Kadeejeen Group (CKG).

The cultural mapping process was conducted jointly by residents, students, and experts, to compile an inventory of the neighbourhood’s cultural assets. is comprised three elements: (a) assessment of the artistic and 3

Bangkok, Thailand

Map 1 Map of the First Kadeejeen Art Festival

cultural value of buildings and the environment; (2) an oral history survey and mapping, with inputs from local experts and the community elders; (3) a ‘Photo Safari’ workshop for the community’s children and young people, to develop a photographic record and cultural map; and (4) a public forum, where cultural maps were exhibited to residents and the general public.

However, although cultural heritage mapping drew participation from academics and conservation networks and local elites, there was less interest among the younger generation, lower income groups, religious 4

leaders, the Cultural Council of communities, two were selected Thonburi District or the local by the Design Review Committee government including the BMA for implementation. and the onburi District Office. e First Kadeejeen Art Festie First Kadeejeen Art Festi- val was a two day open-air event, val was therefore initiated as an held a week aer the Community experiment to build wider com- Design Charrette, with the main munity engagement, improve festival spaces chosen from the the image of the neighbourhood, outputs of the charrette. The and gain political buy-in from event was concentrated around local government. First, a Com- the spaces of the temples, church, munity Design Charrette, was shrine and mosque in Kadeejeen. held, in which residents teamed e evening timing was ideal as it up with volunteer urban design avoided the daytime heat; lighting students to collaborate in an in- of religious landmarks and other tensive two-day planning session historic buildings (augmented to develop a shared vision for by hand-made decorative lightdevelopment. From the nine de- ing made by local children from sign schemes proposed by the six recycled materials) was used to

Bangkok, Thailand

nineteen partners were involved, seventeen from the voluntary sector and two from the private sector. No government agencies participated.

Figure 2 e First Kadeejeen Art Festival

create an unique atmosphere in and capturing their way of life. celebrating the neighbourhood’s In A Wall of Nostalgia, the third multi-cultural heritage. exhibition, the artist asked local inhabitants to contributing their  e festival featured art ob- old photographs, uncovering jects and exhibitions installed in significant but neglected local public spacesall over the neigh- memories. In all three exhibibourhood, including three pho- tions, the artists modestly and tograph exhibitions which drew skillfully intervened and intergreat interest among residents. acted with the community to e rst exhibition- e Mus- reveal collective memories and keteers’ Journey through Kadee- values, provoking wide discusjeen’s Memoir. captured the at- sion among local residents. mosphere of the neighbourhood and installed photographs along e festival was supported by the troks (alleys). The second a partnership among four key exhibition- Neighbourhood’s actors- CKG, ASA, the ArchiSmiles resulted from days of tecture and Urban Design & walking through the neighbour- Planning schools network, and hood, interviewing residents community leaders. Altogether,

The positive response from residents in all communities led to a decision to make the festival an annual event. Planning began immediately, with strong and meaningful stakeholder participation, with the aim of stimulating inclusive conservation. e event itself inaugurated several local development projects, creating a new sense of ownership.

This time, significant funding was raised to support local initiatives. e second Edition was a three-day event, and featured a diverse range of art and cultural performances performed by local youth or volunteers, including A Cappella Music, Portuguese Dance, Gu Zheng Music, a Hulu Ligay eatre Performance, and ai Music. e Deputy BMA Governor participated in the opening ceremony, which was widely covered in the national media.

The second event attracted greater engagement from religious leaders, who helped mobilize funding support as well as new partners such as BMA, onburi District Office, and the Royal Navy. The number of partners doubled from 19 to 39 organizations- 29 from the voluntary sector, six from the private sector and four from the public sector.

5

Bangkok, Thailand

Despite disruptions caused by the 2011 oods, a third event was held in 2012 to coincide with the Chinese Lunar New Year, expanding in both scale and ambition. e festival drew many high-pro le visitors, including scholars, dignitaries and celebrities. The event received extensive media coverage and helped return Kadeejeen as a major attraction on Bangkok’s cultural map. All this was accomplished through cooperation among a web of strategic partners (Figure 3).

A model for inclusive cultural regeneration A poll showed the art festivals were considered a major success among residents, with most respondents agreeing that the event had improved the neighbourhood’s local image and identity, enhanced social cohesion, empowered residents and catalyzed new initiatives for neighbourhood revitalization.

Moreover, the art festivals were an effective tool in renewing and strengthening relationships within and among the six communities of Kadeejeen. e festivals were a neutral event in which all residents, as well as its local institutions including temples, church, mosque and schools all joined hands to realize. Lastly, the art festivals served as a catalyst for communication of broader public issues for the whole neighbourhood.

“Kadeejeen, from KadeeKhao Mosque to Santa Cruz Church to Prayurawongsawas Temple and Saphan Put, still retain the unique traditional skyline of Bangkok. This is the last part of the city where the silhouette of religious places still dominates. We should protect and enhance it. The festival is a good strategy to encourage local inhabitants to work together” PhraDhammakosajarn, Abbot of Prayurawongsawas Temple and Rector

Figure 2: Institutional Arrangement of the First, Second and ird Edition of the Kadeejeen Art Festival Altogether, 70 organizations were involved, 42 of them from the voluntary sector.

culture-led regeneration model oen rely on volunteerism. It is particularly difficult to mobilize disadvantaged groups within communities. Traditional participatory community-based Challenges Initiatives based on the inclusive, projects are oen limited to con6

sultative mechanisms, and oen suffer from inadequate community engagement. Sustaining a long-term initiativeis one of the main challenges of such efforts (Clague, 1997). In order to scaleup community-based initiatives

Bangkok, Thailand

to last longer term and be able to address the multi-dimension urban problems, it needs a supportive policy framework as well as effective institutional machinery.

As previously mentioned, partnerships are the modus operandi of urban regeneration strategies.

Even though the government adopted the culture-led urban regeneration as a policy tool to enhance social and economic development, there has been a lack of institutional machinery to ensure the implementation. e urban governance and institutional structure remained unchanged. Government at national and local levels need to adopt stronger nancial, scal, legal and institutional measures to support culture-led regeneration initiatives.

Innovations and policy implications The Kadeejeen experience has shown that the community-based art festival can be effectively used as an entry point for community engagement. Several categories of innovation can be identi ed within the complex process of preparation, organization and implementation of such events, as follows: • Inclusive, culture-led urban regeneration process (process innovation) • Holistic fashion in the contents of urban regeneration (product innovation) • Building a neighbourhood brand (position innovation)

• Building a meaningful part• Adopt holistic approaches nership (institutional innova- in culture-led urban regeneration tion) programs. Socio-economic as well as environmental programs • Empowering communities should go hand-in-hand with the and local government through a physical improvement programs; bottom-up approach (paradigm innovation).

• Create a link between national, city, and district-levelculture-led urban regeneration e key success of the Kadeepolicies, as well as between art, jeen model relied heavily on its cultural, and urban development institutional arrangements which policies allowed the core team to mobilize the necessary resources within • Strengthen the capability and outside the neighbourhood. of the district office not only in While the cooperation of vari- terms of strategic planning but ous partners from voluntary, also community organizing and private and public sectors was establishing linkages with the critical in carrying out the re- BMA, other public, private and generation initiatives, it must be voluntary sectors that could help acknowledged that the synergies in initiating and implementing between the traditional local in- culture-led urban regeneration stitutions (Baan-Wat-Rongrian), programs in the community; the design school network, the • Encourage partnerships professional association (ASA) between the BMA, the district ofand the district offices formed the ces and other public, private and cornerstone in this example of voluntary sector organizations in successful regeneration initiative. implementing culture-led urban e critical challenge is how to regeneration programs at a comsupport and sustain this initiative munity level. by linking it to a formal planning system.

Clear policy direction and Given these findings, some effective implementation based policy options to be considered on best practice will be essential to re ne the existing culture-led to realize the goal of inclusive, urban regeneration policies of the culture-led urban regeneration.

Unless policy is informed by BMA are offered as follows: best practice and lessons learned, • Empower the communityevents such as the Kadeejeen based initiative by providing reArt Festival will be remembered alistic nancial and institutional merely as impressive phenomena support, such as seed funding instead of being recognized as programs or a Community Dean effective policy tool to induce velopment Committee by Setasustainable regeneration in other gaya Municipal Ordinance; deprived neighbourhoods.

7

Bangkok, Thailand

References Clague, Christopher (1997) Institutions and Economic Development: Growth and Governance in LessDeveloped and Post-Socialist Countries, the John Hopskin University Press.

Richards, Greg, Wilson, Julie (2004) e Impact of Cultural Events on City Image: Rotterdam, Cultural Capital of Europe 2001, in Urban Studies, Vol.41, No.10, pp.1931-1951, September 2004.

United Nations, Agenda 21, http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21 Vichienpradit, Pornsan (2012) Conservation of Religious Facilities and Surrounding: Contrast between Buddhist, Islamic and Catholic Communities in Bangkok, ailand, in the Proceeding of AESOP 26th Annual Congress, Ankara, Turkey, 11th-15th July, 2012.

Further reading Askew, Mark (1993) e Banglumphu District: A Portrait of Change in Inner Bangkok, e 1993 YearEnd Conference, 10th– 11th December, 1993, Chonburi, ailand.

Bailey, Christopher, Miles, Steven and Stark, Peter (2004) Cultural-led Urban Regeneration and the Revitalization of Identities in Newcastle, Gateshead and the North East of England, in International Journal of Cultural Policy, 10 (1), pp. 47-65.

Cameron, Stuart and Coaffee, Jon (2005) Art, Gentri cation and Regeneration: From Artists as Pioneer to Public Arts, in European Journal of HousingPolicy, 5 (1), pp.39-58.

Evans, Graeme (2001) Cultural Planning: An Urban Renaissance?, Routledge.

Hall, Tim, Robertson, Iain (2001) Public Art and Urban Regeneration: Advocacy, Claims and Critical Debates, Landscape Research, Vol. 26, No.5-26.

Institute on Social Exclusion at the Adler School of Professional Psychology, http://www.adler.edu/ page/institutes/institute-on-social-exclusion/about Kulsrisombat, Niramon (2008), De Facto Urban Regeneration: A Case Study of Chiang Mai City, ailand in Sustainable City Regions: Space, Place and Governance, edited by Kidokoro et al, cSUR-UT Series: Library for Sustainable Urban Regeneration Volume 7.

Kulsrisombat and Vichienpradit (in press) KonkaiKarnMeeSuanRuam Kong PrachachonNaiKarnJadkarnChoomchonPratetYipoon (Citizen Participation Mechanism in Community Management in Japan, in ai), in LaewRaoJaAnurakKan Dai Yang Rai? (How Can We Conserve? In ai), Institute of Siamese Architects.

Laothamatas, Anek (2003) PrachaSangkom (Civil Society) (2nd Edition), Tipping Point Press.

Lawrence, Gary (1998) e Future of Local Agenda 21 in the New Millenium, a UNED-UK / LGMB Seminar, London, England, 29th June, 1998.

Lin, Cheng-Yi and Hsing, Woan-Chiau (2009) Cultural-led Urban Regeneration and Community Mobilization: e case of e Taipei Bao-An Temple Area, Taiwan, Urban Studies 2009 46: 1317.

Matarasso, Francois (1997) Use or Ornament: e Social Impact of Participation in the Arts, Comedia.

Roberts and Skyes (2000) Urban Regeneration: A Handbook, Sage Publication Ltd. 8

Bangkok, Thailand

Sasaki, Masayuki (2010) Urban Regeneration rough Cultural Creativity and Social Inclusion: Rethinking Creative City eory rough a Japanese Case Study, Cities, doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2010.03.002.

Sharp, Joanne, Pollock Venda, and Paddison, Ronan (2005) Just Art for a Just City: Public Art and Social Inclusion in Urban Regeneration, Urban Studies, Vol.42, Nos 5/6, 1001-1023.

Sorensen, Andre (2002) e Making of Urban Japan: Cities and Planning from Edo to the Twenty-First Century, Routledge Taylor & Francis.

Sugano Seminar on Civic Engagement in America, e Art and Social Capital, John F.Kenndy School of Government, Harvard University.

Suntornsaratoon, Suyada, Titpad, Phairat, Supongpichet, Rachanon (2009) e Collaboration of Family, School, Temple and Community: Towards Creating Cultural Immunity for Youths in Bangkok Metropolitan Area, European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 10, Number 3.

Tangnamo, Somkiat (2004) SilapaNaewKitjakam : SilapaPueChoomchonLaeSangkom (Activist Art: Art for Community and Society, in ai), the Midnight University Website, http:www.midnightuniv. org Wongtes, Sujit (2012) Bangkok: A Historical Background (3rd Edition), Dream Catcher Press.

CONTACT INFORMATION Dr. Niramon Kulsrisombat DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE, CHULALONGKORN UNIVERSITY Phayathai Road, Patumwan, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand +66-2-218-4441 +66-2-218-4440 (Fax) http://www.cuurp.org n.kulsrisombat@gmail.com_

With support from