A PERCEPTION-BASED STUDY ON GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IN URBAN CONSERVATION AREAS

Abstract

As government intervention directly or indirectly affects various stakeholders, it is important to ask how these affected people perceive such intervention. Thus, the main aim of this paper is to study people s perception on the success or failure of a conserved area, and to relate such perception to their views on the extent and form of government intervention in the respective area. The low and moderate success indicators of Tanjong Pagar Phase 1 and Clarke Quay have coincided with the low rating given to their respective form of government intervention. High and moderate extent of government intervention through direct implementation and sales-of-site are not deemed to be appropriate for the areas. On the other hand for Little India, the high success indicator coincides with the high rating given to its form of government intervention. Many people have felt that a lower extent of government intervention through legislation seems more appropriate for the area. Furthermore, the findings have revealed that the public still perceive that the responsibility for urban conservation remains greatly with the government. As indicated by the top 2 most appropriate of forms of government intervention, it is still a top-down approach where the government should set the rules and regulations and improve the environment of the conserved areas. However, full intervention by the government is not desired by most people. This may be because such full intervention may cause the area to be mundane without the creativity injection by the private sectors. The people are also generally not in support of the proposition that the government should do nothing at all to the conserved areas.