文化身份视角下移民城市的城中村更新模式探讨——基于新加坡与深圳的实证研究

选取新加坡和深圳的3个城中村作为实证研究对象，从文化身份的理论视角切入，剖析移民城市的城中村更新的文化塑造过程；指出要理解文化身份的内涵与本质，需要理解地方蕴含的全球性与在地性、过去与现在这两组关系。在解读宏观文化政策的内在政治和经济推动力的基础上，基于参与式观察和半结构化访谈资料，运用质性分析方法，比较探讨典型移民城市城中村的更新模式、政策机制及社会影响。结果发现，2座城市在对待文化身份尤其是移民文化的态度不同，产生了不同的更新效果。新加坡案例以实际生活在此的移民群体的生活方式为出发点塑造地方特色，并提供公屋政策支持，因而能够在发展展示经济的同时保有社区的延续性。深圳案例则是人为选择和指定某个历史时期的建筑风格作为特色加以强调，发展文化旅游经济，这种方式塑造的文化身份与原有社区和住民的关系不大，最终导致地区的高档化，使得大部分移民群体被驱逐、社会关系网络断裂。研究认为，文化身份的选定本质上是对文化资本的使用，代表的是城中村更新主导方的价值取向。而身份认同在文化语境中的话语权，代表了群体对城市空间的社会权利。因此，文化导向的城中村更新应从当地社区居民的角度出发，关注其长期积淀的社会关系和特定人群需求，而非物质空间的表面意向，才能实现更为公正、包容且可持续的城市复兴。

Urban Villages' Redevelopment in Cities of Migration through the Lens of Cultural Identity: A Comparative Study of Singapore and Shenzhen

With a strong emphasis on historical heritage and culture-making, culture-led redevelopment has become an important policy in many megacities to revitalize declining areas, such as urban villages. However, local governments have different understandings of cultural development and historic preservation and often take them at face value while ignoring the internal mechanisms. For cities of migration, cultural identity has richer connotations. The time-space nexus between the origins and destinations of migrants is highly significant for fostering a diverse and more inclusive urban culture. Taking three urban villages in Singapore and Shenzhen as empirical cases and using the theoretical perspective of cultural identity, this paper explores the culture-making process in the redevelopment of urban villages. We argue that the essence of cultural identity lies in social relations, not merely in visual symbols and images, and understanding cultural identity requires comprehending the relations between the global and the local, as well as between the past and the present embedded in places. The paper starts with an interpretation of the culture-led macro policy, followed by an analysis of urban redevelopment's internal political and economic driving forces. Based on data from participant observation and semi-structured interviews in both cities, a qualitative analysis on the modality, mechanism, and influences of identity-making in urban village redevelopment was conducted. Research findings include differences in the dominant stakeholders' attitudes toward cultural identity, especially migrants' identity, in the redevelopment modalities in the two aforementioned cities. These differences have led to different outcomes. The case of Singapore's Geylang Serai Village centered on the living needs and activities of Malay migrants, who were the main residents there, to conduct the regeneration. Further, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) issued a policy to ensure residents' housing rights. Therefore, the program maintained the continuity of the existing community by protecting the spontaneously formed identity while developing the showcase economy based on simultaneous market activities. Regarding Shenzhen, developers of Nantou Ancient City and Gankeng Hakka Town focused on specific historical periods and designated the architectural style as the local characteristic in order to develop the tourism economy. However, the top-down imposed identity had little to do with the migrants' community, which led to their exclusion and broke down their established social networks, indicating that the mere focus on beautifying the physical environment will lead to gentrification catering to middle-class aesthetics. The study findings point to the conclusion that the designation of the cultural identity of a place is, effectively, the use of cultural capital. The voice of identity in cultural discourses represents the social right of a community to urban spaces. Therefore, culture-led urban village redevelopment should focus more on local communities' social relations and actual needs in order to promote a more just, inclusive, and sustainable urban redevelopment.