Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers
Municipal Engineer 163
September 2010 Issue ME3
Pages 155–161
doi: 10.1680/muen.2010.163.3.155
Paper 900051
Received 01/11/2009
Accepted 18/02/2010 Tim Heath Yue Tang
Keywords: Head of School, Department of
conservation/developing countries/ Department of Architecture and Built
history Architecture and Built Environment, University
Environment, University of Nottingham, UK
of Nottingham, UK
Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity
T. Heath BA (Hons), BArch, MA, PhD and Y. Tang
This paper focuses upon efforts to secure the future of the
historic winding hutong streets and siheyuan houses that
represent the way of life of the common people and the
true urban identity of Beijing. These remaining patches of
historic Beijing are of immense value and the urgency of
their preservation has become widely recognised. There
are many challenges facing conservation projects with
regard to the retention of the unique historic urban
character whilst achieving necessary revitalisation. This
paper will review recent practice and legislation that is
recognising the potential of the old city without com-
promising the modernity of China’s bustling capital.
1. INTRODUCTION
Globalisation has had a huge and varied worldwide impact that has
been exacerbated by the attempts of nations and indeed cities,
particularly in rapidly developing countries, to become world
economic leaders. In most cases this process of development and
modernisation has negative side-effects that often go relatively un-
noticed. In China’s case, this has been the impact upon its urban
heritage, although significantly, Vice Premier Wen Jiabao (Wen,
2004) has publicly recognised the seriousness of this issue:
At present, the pre-eminent problem in our country’s urban
construction is that some city leaders only see the economic values
of natural and cultural relics but know little about the historical,
scientific, cultural and artistic value of them. They seek only
economic benefits and development while neglecting protection, so
damage to natural and cultural relics are occurring frequently. Some
city leaders simply deem the constructions of high-rise buildings as
urban modernisation while paying insufficient attention to protec-
tion of natural scenes and historical and cultural relics. Their large-
scale dismantling and building during old city reconstruction have
damaged many traditional districts and buildings with historical and
cultural values. Some other city leaders prefer to demolish true
historical relics and build false historical sites and artificial scenes...
We must resolutely correct such wrong practices.
China is the world’s largest developing country with one of
the fastest growing economies. Rapid socioeconomic progress
is clearly the driver behind the country’s strategies for
prosperity and economic development; however, this has
often had an adverse impact upon the nation’s cultural
heritage. This paper examines the conflict between the
modernisation process in Beijing and the conservation of its
historical built form.
Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity
MEng, MA
2. THE HISTORIC CITY OF BEIJING
Beijing with its history of over 3000 years has been the capital
of China since the thirteenth century. Since the formation of the
People’s Republic of China in 1949, the city has become a truly
international city with an exciting mix of new and old. Indeed,
globally recognisable historic landmarks such as the Forbidden
City; the Summer Palace; the Temple of Heaven; and Tiananmen
Square now sit cheek-by-jowl with contemporary architectural
tour-de-force such as Sir Norman Foster’s Terminal Three at
Capital Airport; Rem Koolhas’ CCTV television authority
building; Herzog and de Meuron’s National Stadium; and Paul
Andreu’s National Theatre.
The sweeping modernisation programme that has been under-
taken has, however, had a significant and often detrimental
impact upon traditional cultural heritage particularly less well
known edifices and more significantly the general townscape
and traditional neighbourhoods. One of the greatest ironies of
this modernisation process is that, despite the plethora of
European and US-based architects working on iconic buildings
in Beijing, much of the redevelopment reflects the worst
excesses of the late 1950s through to the early 1970s in many
Western countries. Indeed, the city has become a car-dependent
environment dominated by repetitive high-rise development
with a lack of identity, in stark contrast to the traditional city
(Sorkin 2008).
The city of Beijing has grown at an incredible pace with an
average annual growth of around 2% since 1980. The city’s
population was around 18 million by 2010 of which nearly
25% were migrants. Such growth has placed exhaustive
pressures upon services, and development activity has been a
priority to accommodate the city’s expanding residential
population often at the cost of historic buildings. The city is
subdivided into two counties and sixteen districts. The historic
city is, however, contained within the second ring road and is
divided into four districts. One of the fundamental issues
relating to conservation in these districts is the complex
system of administration. Indeed, the day-to-day governance
of the old city rests with many government departments
including: the Capital City Planning Committee; the Beijing
City Planning Committee; the Beijing City Cultural Relics
Office; the Housing Office and Beijing City Construction
Bureau. Significantly, the Beijing Master Plan 1991–2010
indicates that each district planning bureau has responsibility
for planning including historic conservation, however, the
Heath ? Tang 155
 government’s Cultural Relics Protection policy puts the local
Cultural Relics Bureau in charge of the management and
maintenance of local-level protected sights (Tibet Heritage
Fund, 2004).
3. BEIJING’S HISTORIC LANES AND COURTYARD
HOMES: THE HUTONG AND SIHEYUAN
In 1267, Kublai Khan ordered the transfer of the Yuan dynasty’s
capital from Mongolia to the site of the present day Beijing. As
such, the principles of Beijing’s urban layout and its current
street grid date back to this time. The historic grid pattern of
residential lanes known as hutong – most of which date back to
the early Qing period of the mid-seventeenth century – is the
key component of one of the oldest centrally-planned cities and
examples of ancient Chinese city planning (Steinhardt, 2002;
Zhi, 2000). Yuan dynasty city plans had three categories of
streets: major streets (37?2 m wide); minor streets (18?6 m
wide); and hutong (9?3 m wide). The major and minor streets
mainly ran north–south whereas the hutong mostly ran west–
east (Figure 1). Hutong typically contained an integrated
mixture of residential and commercial buildings together with
important public buildings such as temples and monasteries
(Tibet Heritage Fund, 2004).
The hutong are narrow alleyways that divide single-storey brick
and stone courtyard houses. Found only in Beijing, hutong is a
Mongol word that refers to the space between tents or the way to
the well. Their character has resulted in them becoming
symbolic of the traditional social culture of the city (Figure 2).
Indeed, this network of arteries provides the soul of the real city
and typically, hutong residents consider themselves as true
Beijingers and many speak their own hutong dialect (Tibet
Heritage Fund, 2004).
The hutong are formed by groupings of traditional single-
storey residential buildings arranged around one or more
private courtyards (Figures 3 and 4). These siheyuan are
typically timber-framed homes with blue-grey brick walls and
tiled roofs contrasting with bright red painted timber beams
and columns. The colour and decoration together with the
height and elaborateness of the design was restricted in
Figure 1. Figure ground plan of the Nan Luo Gu conservation
area illustrating the relationship of the siheyuan and hutong
156 Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity
Figure 2. The human scale and intimacy of the traditional
hutong lanes acted as the thoroughfares and meeting places for
everyday community life
imperial times and graded according to the status of the owner.
Siheyuan normally have their main building located on the
northern side of a courtyard with two sub-rooms to either side.
This is typically flanked by east and west wings with the south
side having a building facing onto the street and a main gate.
The houses are designed to suit Beijing’s climatic conditions
with main buildings designed to block the northern winds
while allowing sunlight from the south (Li, 1997; Steinhardt,
2002). Siheyuan are designed to provide peace and solitude
away from the hustle and bustle of the city. Originally
constructed as single-family residences, after 1949 they
gradually became homes for anywhere up to 30 families
(Ouroussoff, 2008). In these cramped conditions with few even
having basic plumbing, the quality of life was inevitably poor
and this sped up the desire amongst officials and many
residents for redevelopment.
4. MODERNISATION OF AN IMPERIAL CITY – THE
DESTRUCTION OF BEIJING’S RESIDENTIAL
HERITAGE
The destruction of urban heritage has been a major conse-
quence of rapid modernisation in China and Beijing’s historic
residential neighbourhoods have been among the most
significant casualties. As Domenach-Chich (2008) identifies:
‘The rapidly growing economy is radically transforming the
spatial structure of the city as well as the social and economic
conditions of the population. In spite of the regulations for the
protection of cultural heritage, more than half of the siheyuan
and hutong of Old Beijing were demolished in the past 20
years’.
This is not just a contemporary phenomenon, however, the
pace of demolition has quickened since the 1990s, as China
emerged as an economic force and Beijing strived to become an
international city. Indeed, cycles of urban development that
took many decades to complete in the west have taken only a
few years to complete. Following the formation of the People’s
Republic of China in 1949, the first phase of destruction
resulted from massive road-widening projects and redevelop-
ment to create monuments to the new regime in the 1950s and
1960s. The second phase occurred during the Cultural
Revolution between 1966 and 1976. This was a time when
heritage was considered as the remains of a feudal system and
Heath ? Tang
 Figure 3. Cross-section through the siheyuan and hutong of the Nan Luo Gu conservation area

therefore often irrevocably destroyed and replaced with The late 1970s did, however, see the Chinese government
factories and four or five-storey socialist-influenced apartment launch a preservation drive including the Cultural Relics
blocks (Ouroussoff, 2008; Yao, 2008). As a result, by the 1980s Protection Law to protect many historic cultural sites (Xin,
there were less than 4000 hutong lanes remaining in Beijing. 2004).

Figure 4. Map of Beijing in the Ming and Qing dynasties showing the location of the hutong mentioned in this paper in relation to the
Forbidden City: 1, Shichahai; 2, Nan Luo Gu Xiang; 3, Nanchizi; 4, Dashilan; 5, Xianyukou

Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity Heath ? Tang 157
 Another significant blow to heritage conservation came in 1983
when the Beijing City Construction Master Plan proposed new
industrial development and upgrading of the old city’s infra-
structure (Tibet Heritage Fund, 2004). Furthermore, in 1993, the
Beijing City Master Plan 1991–2010 was approved to establish
Beijing as an international city. This placed increased pressure on
historic sites and common to most Chinese cities ‘...misunderstood
what modernisation should be about as they compete with each
other to present a modern look through lines of skyscrapers’ (Zhu
Tiezhen in Xin (2004)). Despite the negative impact of these
government plans, the most significant factor has been the massive
increases in land and property prices since the late 1980s, which
have fuelled a property development boom and resultant disregard
for historic structures. Much of this was the result of the
government allowing private capital to be officially invested in the
real estate market since 1992 (Yao, 2008). Indeed, Fang (2001)
estimates that in excess of 4 million m2 of hutong neighbourhoods
were destroyed between 1990 and 1999.
Despite considerable media coverage in the lead-up to the 2008
Olympics, the destruction of Beijing’s hutong and siiheyuan
continued apace. Demolition to create new streets, high-rise
development or extensions to the growing subway network
continued to erode this important architectural and cultural
legacy (Wang et al., 2008). Jacobs (2009) also identifies that: ‘In
the years leading up to the Beijing Olympics in August, the
destruction took on a manic pace... and many more neighbor-
hoods, like the colorful Qianmen district just south of
Tiananmen Square, are scheduled for renewal’. The scale of this
demolition should not be underestimated, indeed, in 1949 there
were over 7000 hutong in central Beijing, yet by 2009 over 88%
of Beijing’s old residential quarters have been demolished
(Figure 5). The Beijing Cultural Heritage Protection Center claim
that only about 1000 hutong with around 30 000 siheyuan
remain (Levin, 2008). The fate of the hutong is not solely the
responsibility of the government with redevelopment activity
also reflecting the aspirations of the people. Indeed, one of the
major challenges for conservationists is that the majority of
Beijing’s residents do not take issue with the replacement of a
500 year-old Buddhist temple with a modern replica (Meyer,
2008).
Figure 5. Whole neighbourhoods of hutong and siheyuan such
as Xianyukou off the reconstructed Qianmen street continue to
be demolished as part of comprehensive redevelopment
projects
158 Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity
5. DEVELOPING A CONSERVATION STRATEGY
Despite the devastation of the city’s traditional neighbourhoods,
a number of individuals, organisations and even government
departments have recognised the need for sensitive conserva-
tion. Many have realised the importance of heritage with
academics such as Zhu Tiezhen (in Xin (2004)) suggesting that a
city ‘...should cherish its cultural heritage because it offers not
only a unique brand and identity but also an important basis for
building a modern city’. One of the earliest signs of recognition
for Beijing’s heritage actually appeared in the Beijing City
Master Plan 1991–2010. Despite stimulating increased devel-
opment activity the plan proposed a balance in the integration
of contemporary development with the city’s ancient heritage.
Developing further upon this, in 2002 the Municipal
Government adopted two significant conservation plans:
Conservation Planning of 25 Historic Areas in Beijing Old City
and The Conservation Plan for the Historic and Cultural City of
Beijing (Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, 2002a;
2002b). These plans recognised the importance of hutong and
gave more detailed guidelines on how the old city should be
protected. One of the consulted experts Wu Liangyong describes
the plan as ‘...creative, in which the organic renovation and
preservation [of siheyuan] has been agreed upon by all. The
preservation work on the old city [involves] ...organic renova-
tion and dynamic conservation’. Similarly, Ruan Yisan suggests
‘...that the principles for conservation planning should be
keeping authenticity, comprehensiveness and sustainability’
(Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, 2002a, pp. 4, 5).
Five key conservation area guidelines were identified in the
plan.
(a) The overall style and features of the areas must be preserved
according to their nature and characteristics.
(b) Authentic historic features and heritages must be preserved.
Historic relics include historical architecture, traditional
quadrangles and other historical housing and components
of value.
(c) Renovation in these areas must proceed in a gradual and
measured manner.
(d) Improve environmental quality and infrastructures as well
as the living standards of the residents.
(e) Encourage the public participation of the preservation work
(Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, 2002a, p. 10).
In addition, a number of regulations outlined how new or renovated
buildings should maintain historic continuity and not impact
negatively upon a conservation area. The plans also state that where
possible historical architecture, hutongs and old trees should be
preserved particularly in the key conservation areas of Shichahai,
Dashilan and Xianyukou. These conservation plans highlighted the
need for protected status in 25 hutong including around 600
siheyuan comprising 1038 hectares with a population of 2 857 000
people (Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, 2002a;
2002b). Unfortunately, the full meaning of this protection is not
entirely clear and its implementation has yet to have a major impact
(UN-Habitat, 2008). Indeed, the Xianyukou conservation area has
witnessed significant wholesale demolition since 2004. Alarmingly,
the redevelopment is creating an entirely new character and
therefore disregarding the conservation plans (Figure 6).
The conservation policies did, however, lead to the municipal
government selecting the residential neighbourhood of
Heath ? Tang

Figure 6. The redeveloped Qianmen Street in Xianyukou
immediately to the south of Tiananmen Square has some
elements of traditional hutong but recreated as an artificial
character for tourists and shoppers
Nanchizi, which was once part of the royal storehouses adjacent
to the Forbidden City as a pilot project for its own revitalisation
efforts. Significantly, public opinion was sought on the
implementation plan and after 2 years of heated debate, the pilot
project commenced in 2003 (UN-Habitat, 2008). Many cultural
purists argued that the neighbourhood should be totally
preserved, however, this was vetoed due to the cramped and
squalid conditions of unplanned and unsafe infill development
from the early twentieth century. It was decided, therefore, that
selective demolition and redevelopment was needed to com-
plement the conservation efforts. One of the more controversial
decisions involved the relocation of some of the poorer
residents. This was made possible by a bye-law on historic and
cultural zone protection known as the ‘101 Document’ that
‘...underscores the importance of protecting original courtyards
and encourages poor residents to move out’ (UN-Habitat, 2008;
p. 41). Initially, the community embraced the designation of
Nanchizi as a pilot project; however, this soon changed when
they all received notification requiring them to move out of
their homes. Two-storey houses were built to replace slum
structures for residents who wished to return to the neigh-
bourhood and derelict siheyuan were rebuilt and sold to enable
reinvestment in the project. These new homes were designed to
fit in with the architectural style of the single-storey siheyuan
and the area retained much of its traditional character. Indeed,
UN-Habitat (2008; p. 42) describe how:
Old women sit in the corner of hutong, sewing in the sunshine; a
group of middle-aged residents play Chinese chess beside the grey
walls of old homes; young men read the newspaper on a traditional
porch inscribed with images of lilies and fish. These are the
occupants of the new placid and calm scene in Nanchizi. Most of the
old residents have remained and they say they are happy to live in
traditional-styled yet modern homes.
The most holistic approach to the protection and conservation of
the siheyuan and hutong began in early 2002, when the charity
Tibet Heritage Fund joined with Tsinghua University’s School of
Architecture and local city management departments. In
partnership, they undertook a 2-year comprehensive study –
including architectural documentation and social surveys – of
intact neighbourhoods within the second ring road. Their aim
Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity
was to identify alternatives to commercial redevelopment and to
develop strategies for sensitive conservation. Their project
focused upon three hutong neighbourhoods in the northern part
of the old city for which they prepared a conservation strategy
that adopted six key principles.
(a) Preserving historic building materials.
(b) Preserving the townscape and setting of the siheyuan houses
in the hutong.
(c) Retaining the mixed-uses and varied housing tenures.
(d) Working with existing communities.
(e) Regulating traffic.
(f) Upgrading living conditions (Tibet Heritage Fund, (2004);
p. 7).
The Tibet Heritage Fund (2006) actually found that ‘...the
majority of residents actually praise the life-quality of hutong in
terms of social relations with their neighbours (developed over
decades of having to live together in small spaces), security,
greenness, quietness and, of course, the convenient location in
the centre of Beijing’. In partnership with the local communities,
they developed pilot projects for the refurbishment of multi-
family public housing. The projects represented the three main
types of ownership in the hutong: public housing, private homes
and live–work units. The refurbishment included replacing the
damaged elements of the building, upgrading drainage facilities,
water supply, providing toilets, courtyard paving and restoring
the historic facades (Zhu & Goethert, 2009). The owners of the
private and live–work homes contributed towards the costs, and
work on the public housing was co-financed by the housing
department. All of the residents were able to return to their
homes and the project has promoted community-driven
conservation and further ‘...raise awareness of the highly
endangered urban heritage and their living communities’ (Tibet
Heritage Fund, 2006). The strategy and projects have subse-
quently been widely circulated as best practice amongst the
municipal planning and housing departments. Despite a
relatively minor impact in terms of scale, the role of the project
should not be underestimated and the Beijing Housing
Department have since refurbished some siheyuan according to
the established guidelines (Figure 7).
Figure 7. The sensitive conservation of the hutong protects
both the historic buildings, townscape and improves living
conditions while retaining the community identity
Heath ? Tang 159
 The future of individual siheyuan received a boost in 2004,
when the municipal government – as part of its conservation
and restoration strategy – enabled corporate and individual
buyers to purchase, sell, lease or inherit siheyuan. The
legislation, which enables buyers to enjoy favourable taxes on
the purchase and sale of siheyuan also applies to foreigners and
as a result many have restored private dwellings (Levin, 2008).
This process has not been without its own problems, however,
with Ouroussoff (2008) identifying that:
Meanwhile the growing historical awareness among intellectuals and
the wealthy has unleashed a different set of destructive capitalist
forces. The courtyard houses’ sudden architectural cachet has made
them coveted status symbols for people with seemingly unlimited
resources. As affluent foreigners and China’s new rich buy the
houses, they are embarking on multimillion-dollar renovations that
are robbing the neighbourhoods of their souls.
Such gentrification processes can themselves threaten the social
cohesion of historical districts where ‘...social community is
often endangered by the very process of revitalisation. In many
situations, the result is the gentrification of the historic area, and
the poorer residents are forced to move out’ (Domenach-Chich,
2008). The gentrification that has occurred to date has, however,
served to highlight the potential for these lanes and houses to
play an integral role in the future development of the city. There
is also the danger that renovated hutong and siheyuan will meet
tourists’ expectations rather than local social needs. Indeed, the
Nanluogu Xiang neighbourhood in the Dongcheng district to
the north-east of the Forbidden City has undergone a developer-
driven overhaul that has created tourist shops and cafés for
foreigners (Ouroussoff, 2008).
In 2005, the Beijing Cultural Heritage Bureau revealed a full
protection plan for the old imperial area including nearly 7 km2
of palaces, gardens and temples with the Forbidden City at its
centre. In theory, this regulation for the protection of the city’s
heritage means that no more historic urban areas will be
demolished and that new development must be outside the
second ring road (UN-Habitat, 2008). Such a wholesale
conservation strategy for the old city area with sensitive infill
development has to be the way forward for Beijing in the
twenty-first century. The success of plans such as this lie,
however, in their implementation and enforcement and this is
always going to be contentious at a time when the city is still
undergoing a modernisation process. The interpretation of such
policies can also be varied and as the Tibet Heritage Fund (2004;
p. 23) observe:
In some cases, developers have totally missed the point as far as
conservation is concerned. They have constructed replica historic
streets as tourist attractions, having first demolished the original
historic district. This kind of practice although criticised at the
highest level, has not yet been effectively legislated against.
6. CONCLUSIONS
As Beijing reinvents itself as an international city, major
redevelopment programmes have resulted in the modernisation
of significant areas of its old city. Fortunately, the city still
retains some of its historic neighbourhood identity, however,
despite notable efforts to deliver conservation these have had a
limited impact and a successful balance has yet to be found. If
this historic legacy is to continue to contribute to the unique
character of Beijing then appropriate and urgent measures are
160 Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity
needed. As Domenach-Chich (2008) states: ‘That is why, in this
city, which is struggling between its new identities and its
cultural roots, it is of upmost importance to raise the issues of
public participation, social cohesion and balance between
modernisation and historical preservation’. Nevertheless, the
efforts of eminent academics and the research being undertaken
in universities not just in Beijing but across the world gives
considerable hope for the future of these unique homes and
communities.
Many would argue that Beijing would not be Beijing without the
hutong and the remaining neighbourhoods are therefore of
immense value. A number of legislative measures have been
introduced since the early 2000s, however, their implementation
and effectiveness is limited. Colin (2008) argues that: ‘It is now
time for Chinese policy makers to formulate an effective,
balanced and long-term urban strategy for social cohesion and
heritage conservation’. At a time when the world is striving to
create more sustainable cities, it is ironic that these lanes that are
the epitome of mixed-use development and are walking and
bicycle-friendly are still endangered. The survival of the hutong
and siheyuan is due to a small number of individuals and
organisations that have developed conservation strategies,
identified best practice and undertaken pilot projects. The Tibet
Heritage Fund piloted a micro-managed approach to the
conservation of hutong at the scale of individual courtyards
within a larger framework set by the municipal government. This
enabled the original residents to return to their homes, therefore,
preserving not just the physical qualities of these unique
neighbourhoods but also helping to maintain the social fabric and
identity. An exemplar approach, this ensures a delicate balance
between improved living conditions for local communities and
the need for the conservation of a city’s cultural heritage. Projects
such as this serve as examples of important best practice for China
and other countries experiencing similar development pressure.
Tangible success is, however, dependent upon the numerous city
authorities developing, and more importantly effectively imple-
menting, coordinated sensitive conservation policies for the
remaining historic neighbourhoods. Such policies need to
consider the protection from views of modern urban development
from the siheyuan, the restriction of vehicular traffic along the
hutong lanes together with the provision of sensitively located
parking for residents and the designation of dedicated cycle ways
and tram routes through these neighbourhoods. Considered
implementation of such policies could yet see these unique
hutong communities flourishing once again as vital and viable
places within Beijing.
REFERENCES
Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission (2002a)
Conservation Planning of 25 Historic Areas in Beijing Old
City. Beijing Yan Shan Publishing House, Beijing, China.
Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission (2002b)
Conservation Planning of Historical and Cultural City of
Beijing. Yan Shan Publishing House, Beijing, China.
Colin B (2008) Social sustainability in historic districts: inter-
national comparative research on social transformations
within historic districts. In Balanced Urban Revitalization for
Social Cohesion and Heritage Conservation: Proceedings of
the Unesco International Seminar, Tsinghua University,
21-23 January 2007, Beijing. Unesco, Paris, France,
pp. 34–37.
Heath ? Tang
Domenach-Chich (2008) Welcome speech. In Balanced Urban
Revitalization for Social Cohesion and Heritage
Conservation: Proceedings of the Unesco International
Seminar, Tsinghua University, 21-23 January 2007, Beijing.
Unesco, Paris, France, pp. 16–18.
Fang K (2001) Contemporary Redevelopment in the Inner City of
Beijing. China Architecture and Industry Press, Beijing, China.
Jacobs A (2009) Finding Treasures in a City’s Disappearing Past.
The New York Times, 18 January 2009. See http://www.
nytimes.com/2009/01/19/world/asia/19beijing.html?_r51
for further details (accessed 05/09/2009).
Levin D (2008) In Ancient Alleys, Modern Comforts. The New
York Times, 24 July 2008. See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/
07/24/garden/24beijing.html?ref5garden&pagewanted5all
for further details (accessed 03/09/2009).
Li W (1997) Beijing’s Hutong. Yan Shan Publishing House,
Beijing, China.
Meyer M (2008) The Last Days of Old Beijing: Life in the Vanishing
Backstreets of a City Transformed. Walker & Co., New York, USA.
Ouroussoff N (2008) Lost in New Beijing: The Old
Neighbourhood. The New York Times, 27 July 2008. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/arts/design/27ouro.
html?ref5garden for future details (accessed 10/10/2009).
Sorkin M (2008) Learning from the Hutong of Beijing and the
Lilong of Shanghai, Beijing Transformed. Architectural
Record 196(7): 51–53.
Steinhardt NS (ed.) (2002) Chinese Architecture: the Culture
and Civilization of China. Yale University and New World
Press, New Haven, USA.
Tibet Heritage Fund (2004) Beijing Hutong Conservation Plan.
Tibet Heritage Fund with Tsinghua University Architecture
Department, Beijing, China.
Tibet Heritage Fund (2006) Beijing Hutong. Tibet Heritage Fund,
Beijing. See http://www.tibetheritagefund.org/pages/pro-
jects/beijing-hutong.php for further details (accessed 15/09/
2009).
UN-Habitat (2008) Best Practices on Social Sustainability in
Historic Districts, United Nations Human Settlements
Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Vice Premier Wen Jiabao (2004) Third Representative
Conference of China Mayors’ Association on ‘How to
properly handle the relationship between the modernization
of a city and the protection of historical relics’. In Beijing
Hutong Conservation Plan. Tibet Heritage Fund with
Tsinghua University Architecture Department, Beijing,
China, p.3.
Wang JH, Koizumi A and Lui X (2008) Advancing sustainable
urban development in China. Proceedings of the Institution
of Civil Engineers, Municipal Engineer 161(1): 3–10.
Xin Z (2004) Cherishing Assets from the Past. China Daily, 18
October 2004. See http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/
doc/2004-10/18/content_383124.htm for further details
(accessed 07/10/2009).
Yao Y (2008) The conservation of urban heritage in market
China: private property, pubic policy and cultural heritage.
In Balanced Urban Revitalization for Social Cohesion and
Heritage Conservation: Proceedings of the Unesco
International Seminar, Tsinghua University, 21-23 January
2007, Beijing. Unesco, Paris, France, pp. 38–44.
Zhi HR (2000) Beijing Urban History and Geography. Yan Shan
Publishing House, Beijing, China.
Zhu L and Goethert R (2009) Upgrading historic cities by integrated
and innovative solutions. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, Municipal Engineer 162(2): 87–94.

What do you think?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be forwarded to the
author(s) for a reply and, if considered appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as discussion in a future issue of the
journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be
2000–5000 words long (briefing papers should be 1000–2000 words long), with adequate illustrations and references. You can submit
your paper online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you will also find detailed author guidelines.

Municipal Engineer 163 Issue ME3 Beijing’s hutong and siheyuan: conservation of an urban identity Heath ? Tang 161
Copyright of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Municipal Engineer is the property of Thomas
Telford Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.