IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i10p4378-d1653980.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paths to Policy Sustainability for Protecting Cultural Heritage: A Quantitative Analysis of Conservation Policies for the Great Wall Within the “Instrument–Objective–Stakeholder” Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Yu Chen

    (School of Public Administration, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
    China Great Wall Cultural Research and Dissemination Centre, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Zeyi Wang

    (School of Public Administration, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Jingwen Zhao

    (School of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Xinyi Zhao

    (School of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Sixue Zuo

    (School of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Jingwen Zhao

    (School of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Weishang Liu

    (School of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

Abstract

The sustainable protection of cultural heritage is essential for the intergenerational transmission of cultural diversity and represents a central theme in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on “heritage resilience governance”. To address the policy sustainability challenges of large-scale linear heritage governance, this study examines the characteristics and shortcomings of Great Wall Cultural Preservation (GWCP) policies during its steady implementation. To analyze how policy instruments are distributed, whether policy objectives are synergistic, and whether stakeholders’ participation is reasonable, this study uses GWCP policy texts issued by China from 2006 to 2024 as research objects and establishes a three-dimensional analytical framework (“instrument–objective–stakeholder”). With the help of the NVivo 20 tool, the study analyzes the policy texts in one dimension and multiple dimensions, and finds that China’s GWCP policy has shortcomings in sustainability governance, such as the imbalance in the use of policy instruments, the overflow of contextual policy instruments, the government’s over-exertion of force, the need to release the functional space of stakeholders, and the lack of attention to the synergy between the goals of conserving architectural heritage and safeguarding the Great Wall ethos. Based on these findings, the study proposes three targeted optimization recommendations. This GWCP case study offers developing nations insights into balancing heritage protection objectives under SDG 11.4 with local development needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu Chen & Zeyi Wang & Jingwen Zhao & Xinyi Zhao & Sixue Zuo & Jingwen Zhao & Weishang Liu, 2025. "Paths to Policy Sustainability for Protecting Cultural Heritage: A Quantitative Analysis of Conservation Policies for the Great Wall Within the “Instrument–Objective–Stakeholder” Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-21, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4378-:d:1653980
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4378/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4378/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mingqian Li & Lingping Zhang & Junyan Huang & Yiyi Lu, 2024. "A Quantitative Evaluation Study on Return-to-Hometown Entrepreneurship Policies in 16 Provinces (Municipalities) and Autonomous Regions in China Under the Rural Revitalization Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-29, November.
    2. Jonathan Liljeblad & Khin Thinn Thinn Oo, 2020. "World heritage sustainable development policy & local implementation: Site management issues using a case study of Sri Ksetra at Pyu ancient cities in Myanmar," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 468-477, May.
    3. Guiver, Jo & Lumsdon, Les & Weston, Richard, 2008. "Traffic reduction at visitor attractions: the case of Hadrian’s Wall," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 142-150.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bursa, Bartosz & Mailer, Markus & Axhausen, Kay W., 2022. "Travel behavior on vacation: transport mode choice of tourists at destinations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 234-261.
    2. Andrew Ngawenja Mzembe & Ko Koens & Licia Calvi, 2023. "The institutional antecedents of sustainable development in cultural heritage tourism," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 2196-2211, August.
    3. Yae‐Na Park & Choong‐Ki Lee & James W. Mjelde & Yu‐Jin Kwon, 2022. "Policy implications of willingness to pay for sustainable development of a world agricultural heritage site: The role of stakeholders' sustainable intelligence, support, and behavioral intention," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 636-646, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4378-:d:1653980. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.