Factor analysis and interpretation of HDBE improvement indicators under

61

performed to compare before-after HDBE indicators in the resident group. An independent sample t-test was performed to compare between resident and visitor groups. The final results were used to explain the attitude of residents and visitors towards the implementation of HDRP.

Figure 5.1 Research framework

62

extracted from the visitor group (V group), and the cumulative interpretative variance ratio was 67.12% (Table 5.2, Table 5.3).

Table 5.2 Factor Analysis of R group improvement indicators

Indicators contents of R group 1 2 3 4 5

2-Entrance parking lots configuration -.020 .536 .128 .592 -.130

5-Street furniture .351 -.102 .120 .737 .251

8-RP attach importance to local characters .800 .096 .004 .373 -.064

7-RP respects residents' opinions .492 .136 .353 .495 .213

9-RP builds and enhances identity and cohesion .670 .035 .182 -.099 .110

10-Traditional culture and uniqueness .667 .083 .145 .116 .234

4-Perceived environment .651 .457 .096 .094 .241

11- Preservation of historic streetscapes .283 .098 .166 .061 .812

12-Preservation and re-use of historical buildings -.066 .345 .065 .523 .619 13-Historical open space recovery and improvement .457 .595 .134 .324 .242 15-Modern application and marketing of cultural project development .467 .422 .123 .355 -.123

16-Retail business increase .131 .715 .339 .138 .115

17-Rent and land price increase .114 .857 .170 -.093 .163

3-Place-Making practices in entrance of the historic district .138 .336 .569 .364 .005 6-Pedestrian environment and accessibility .115 .119 .763 .381 -.013

19-Strong sense of place .312 .080 .592 -.078 .491

18-Visitors increase .133 .300 .843 -.095 .233

Summary statistics

Eigenvalues 6.63 1.67 1.44 1.17 1.02

Variance(% ) 17.71 15.73 14.08 12.59 10.04

Cumulative Variance (%) 17.71 33.44 47.51 60.10 70.14

Extraction method: Principal component analysis Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization Rotation converged in 15 iterations

Table 5.3 Factor Analysis of V group improvement indicators

Indicators contents of V group 1 2 3 4

8-Historical development introduction and cultural exhibition .771 .298 -.246 .154

16-District management and service .551 .337 .384 .101

12-Preservation and re-use of historical buildings .669 .106 .470 .015 14-Inheritance and modern application of internal cultural heritage .743 -.080 .194 .298 17-Modern application and marketing of cultural projects development .738 .027 .422 .148

18-Commerce function arrangement .553 .216 .505 .172

19-Access to consumption and tourism information .753 .288 .371 -.033

1-Infrastructure and amenities .097 .797 .335 -.120

2-Entrance parking lots configuration .050 .660 -.020 .292

3- Place-Making practices in entrance of the historic district -.106 .561 .165 .620

4-Perceived environment -.031 .634 .375 .279

63

5-Street furniture .218 .789 .189 .066

6-Pedestrian environment and accessibility .377 .696 -.078 .097

10-Direct cultural identity .214 .217 .746 .106

11-Preservation of historic streetscapes .160 .181 .713 .035

13-Historical open space recovery and improvement .215 .006 .797 .310

7-Strong sense of place .301 .366 .281 .588

9-Warm and friendly residents .451 .288 .027 .542

15-Local food and products .475 -.109 .279 .562

Summary statistics

Eigenvalues 7.72 2.37 1.59 1.07

Variance(% ) 21.93 18.70 16.94 9.55

Cumulative Variance (%) 21.93 40.63 57.57 67.12

Extraction method: Principal component analysis Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization Rotation converged in 11 iterations

(1) From the component analysis result of R group, we can get the results that factor 1 belongs to content that establishing participation and promoting cultural identity; factor 2 belongs to content that promoting economy; factor 3 belongs to content that building characteristic community environment; factor 4 belongs to content that improving facility convenience; factor 5 belongs to content that protecting history.

After calculating the average value of five-factor groups, the results showed that residents had the highest satisfaction with the intervention outcome of HDBE space supporting (F3=3.95). Specific physical outcome contents include entrance design in the historic district, walking environment, and walking accessibility;

community-based outcome content includes a strong sense of place. The second satisfactory outcomes are HDBE protection (F5=3.62), participation, and cultural identity (F1=3.60). Specific outcome contents include conservation of the physical and perceptual historical environment by HDRP, and emphasize characteristics of local culture. At the end were facility convenience (F4=3.46) and economic benefit (F2=3.42).

(2) From the component analysis result of V group, we can get the results that factor 1 belongs to content that applying traditional resources and promoting industrial economy; factor 2 belongs to content that improving the physical and perceived environment; factor 3 belongs to the content of protection of historical feature; factor 4 belongs to content that establishing local characteristics.

64

After calculating the average value of four-factor groups, the results showed that visitors had the highest satisfaction with intervention outcomes of HDBE historical feature protection (F3=3.71) and environmental improvement(F2=3.70). Historical feature outcome contents include landscape and cultural features; environment outcome contents include an improvement of the physical environment and perceptual environment, which promote the establishment of a walking-friendly environment.

Followed by visitors' recognition of local characteristics (F4=3.65), mainly from the surviving traditional communities and residents in the historic district. The last were traditional resources modern application and industrial economy improvement.

Through the structural analysis of HDBE improvement indicators' factor groups, we can form a basic interpretation framework of end-users evaluation preferences:

Two groups of users have a consensus on preserving historical features and improving the outcome of environment. The improvement of the walking environment and green open space has established a friendly environment. On the one hand, it can increase the daily social interaction of residents, and improve life quality and community cohesion; on the other hand, it can also improve visitors' satisfaction with the surrounding environment. Residents' strong sense of place supports their urban identity. As a property in modern society, the protection of historical heritage is a kind of development that is conducive to the continuity of residents' lives and the sustainability of human development. The unique charm of historical heritage also attracts visitors from all over the world and improves local tourism growth.

Benefits brought by the promotion of a regional economy are apparent. The sustained and robust economy will bring about regional vitality. Especially in historical areas, the combination of heritage structure and development may produce incredible attraction and promote industrial economy, and finally realize regional sustainable development. However, the primary completion of phase Ⅰ HDRP did not significantly improve the development of tourism economy. As some commercial areas have not completed implementation and come into service, the potential positive performance of economic and commercial target strategy in the future is still unknown. Maybe after the completion of the HDRP lifecycle, the historic district can achieve significant benefits in the driving effect of economy.

65

There is a particular gap between the two groups of users in terms of the configuration and improvement of street furniture and parking facilities. Because the configuration of these facilities is highly related to tourism, prominent convenience brought to visitors makes the satisfaction of visitors significantly higher than residents.

Therefore, the HDRP implementation in the next stage can further optimize the daily facilities configuration on residents.

5.3.2. The cross-sectional and quasi-longitudinal evaluation of HDBE