Heritage conservation, official heritage, unofficial heritage, traditional philosophy, Yogyakarta



Today heritage is of strategic importance not only because of its historical value, but also due to the capacity to sustain traditional philosophy. A problem arose in association with the over-commercialisation of heritage that led to a question of how the citizens react to the problem and the emerging values. The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between heritage conservation practices conducted by the government and local people.


This study used qualitative analysis to investigate official documents and newspapers. In-depth interviews were used to elaborate citizens’ perception about heritage values.


There were connection and disconnection between the implementation of heritage conservation policy and citizens’ opinions about conservation practices. The connection should be maintained to anticipate the change of meanings and overcome problems stemmed from heritage tourism and the uncontrolled urban development.

Research Limitations/Implications

This study bridged a possibility of evaluating the impact of urban development on heritage value by assessing perspectives from different social actors. It was evidenced that the official and unofficial values of heritage are differently recognised. However, this study had a limitation in terms of the social group involved in interviews. The analytical framework of this research needs to be developed incorporating quantitative analysis with a survey of particular population in Yogyakarta. This kind of study is essential to discovering how the population reacts to urban development and heritage sites.

Social/Practical Implications

The government should not dominate the practice of heritage conservation. It is essential to maintain the cultural authenticity of heritage by involving general public in monitoring urban development surrounding heritage sites.


This study provides a framework for integrating different perspectives to better recognise and manage heritage sites and the overall urban landscape. This framework can be used as a foundation for evaluating heritage impact relating to societal changes and the dynamics of urban development.

Author Biographies

Johannes Parlindungan Siregar, Department of Regional and Urban Planning, Universitas Brawijaya

Dr Johannes Parlindungan has received his Ph.D. in the field of urban design from Queensland University of Technology, Australia. His main concerns are thematic urban design, public space and urban morphology relating to the dynamics caused by urbanisation and societal changes. He currently works in Department of Regional and Urban Planning, Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia.

Wara Indira Rukmi, Department of Regional and Urban Planning, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia

Dr Wara Indira Rukmi gained her doctoral degree from Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia. She has involved in many researches relating to urban settlement, traditional settlement and heritage.  Wara is currently a lecturer in Department of Regional and Urban Planning, Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia.


Aditya, I. (2017). Yogyakarta the city of philosophy.

Alexander, H. (2015). Yogyakarta, Kota Pusat Perbelanjaan.

Balai Pelestarian Cagar Budaya Yogyakarta. (2019). The Potential of Cultural Heritage Object in Yogyakarta, BPCB Yogyakarta.

Balai Pelestarian Pusaka Indonesia. (2013). Piagam Pelestarian Kota Pusaka Indonesia. BPPI.

Brennen, B. (2012). Qualitative research methods for media studies. Routledge.

Byrne, D. R. (2008). Heritage as social action. In G. Fairclough, R. Harrison, J. Schofield, & J. H. Jameson (Eds.). The heritage reader (p. 149). Routledge.

Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research: theory, methods and techniques. Sage.

de Noronha Vaz, E., Cabral, P., Caetano, M., Nijkamp, P., & Painho, M. (2012). Urban heritage endangerment at the interface of future cities and past heritage: A spatial vulnerability assessment, Habitat International, 36(2), 287–294.

Ferish, N. (2016). Krisis air dan konflik infrastruktur komersil di Yogya makin_memprihatinkan._

Fitri, I., Ahmad, Y., & Ahmad, F. (2015). Conservation of tangible cultural heritage in Indonesia: A review current national criteria for assessing heritage value, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 184, 71–78.

Fredheim, L. H., & Khalaf, M. (2016). The significance of values: Heritage value typologies re-examined, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 1–17.

Giyanto, A. (2015). Tujuh Prioritas Pembangunan Kota Yogyakarta 2016.

Graham, B., Ashworth, G. J., & Tunbridge, J. E. (2000). A geography of heritage: Power, culture, and economy. Arnold; Oxford University Press.

Handinoto. (2015). Perkembangan kota di Jawa abad XVIII sampai dengan pertengahan abad XX. Ombak Publisher.

Harrison, R. (2013). Heritage: Critical approaches. Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Herliana, E. T., Hanan, H., & Kusuma, H. E. (2019). Significant factors of sense of place that makes Jeron Beteng Yogyakarta sustainable as a historical place, Advances in Engineering Research.

Herusatoto, B. (2001). Simbolisme dalam budaya Jawa. Hanindita Graha Widia.

Hung, H. (2015). Governance of built-heritage in a restrictive political system: The involvement of non-governmental stakeholders, Habitat International, 50, 65–72.

ICOMOS. (2004). International charters for conservation and restoration. International Secretariat of ICOMOS.

ICOMOS. (2008). The ICOMOC charter for the interpretation and presentation of cultural heritage sites. ICOMOS.

Jokilehto, J. (2006). Considerations on authenticity and integrity in world heritage context. City & Time, 2(1), 1.

Juodinyte-Kuznetsova, K. (2011). Architectural space and Greimassian semiotics, Socialiniu Mokslu Studijos, 3(4).

Karsono, B., & Wahid, J. (2008). Imaginary axis as a basic morphology in the city of Yogyakarta-Indonesia. 2nd International Conference on Build Environment in Developing Countries.

Kurniawan, B. (2017). Gedung BI, salah satu bangunan bergaya Indis di Yogyakarta._

Kusumaputra, R. A. (2010). Diprotes, bangunan tua di Jogja dijadikan resto cepat saji.

Loulanski, T. (2006). Revising the concept for cultural heritage: the argument for a functional approach, International Journal of Cultural Property, 13(2), 207.

Luthfi, Nazir, Tohari, Winda, & Tristiawan. (2014). Keistimewaan Yogyakarta yang diingat dan yang dilupakan. Ombak Publisher.

Maharani, S. (2016). Yogyakarta marak pembangunan hotel.

Malpas, J. (2008). New media, cultural heritage and the sense of place: Mapping the conceptual ground, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 14(3), 197–209.

Monteiro, V., Painho, M., & Vaz, E. (2015). Is the heritage really important? A theoretical framework for heritage reputation using citizen sensing, Habitat International, 45, 156–162.

Mualam, N., & Alterman, R. (2018). Looking into the ‘black box’ of heritage protection: Analysis of conservation area disputes in London through the eyes of planning inspectors, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(6), 599–618.

Murti, C., & Wijaya, H. B. (2013). Pengaruh kegiatan komersial terhadap fungsi bangunan bersejarah di koridor jalan Malioboro Yogyakarta, Jurnal Teknik PWK, 2(1), 60–75.

Najd, M. D., Ismail, N. A., Maulan, S., Yunos, M. Y. M., & Niya, M. D. (2015). Visual preference dimensions of historic urban areas: The determinants for urban heritage conservation, Habitat International, 49, 115–125.

Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage Publications.

Roqib, M. (2007). Harmoni dalam budaya Jawa. Pustaka Pelajar.

Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. Vintage Books.

Schorch, P. (2014). Cultural feelings and the making of meaning, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 20(1), 22–35.

Shepherd, R. (2002). Commodification, culture and tourism, Tourist Studies, 2(2), 183–201.

Siregar, J. P. (2019). The ideological meanings of heritage: The conflicting symbols in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. DIMENSI (Journal of Architecture and Built Environment), 45(2), 121–132.

Smith, A. D. (2012). Towards a global culture? Theory, culture and society. In M. B. Steger (Ed.), Globalization and Culture (Vol. 1, pp. 349–369). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Routledge.

Su, J. (2018). Conceptualising the subjective authenticity of intangible cultural heritage, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(9), 919–937.

Suryanto, Ahmad, D., & Sudaryono. (2015). Aspek budaya dalam keistimewaan tata ruang Kota Yogyakarta, Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah Dan Kota, 26(3), 230–252.

Tanudirjo, D. A. (2003). Warisan budaya untuk semua: Arah kebijakan pengelola warisan budaya Indonesia di masa mendatang. Kongres Kebudayaan V, 19–23.

The Municipal Government of Yogyakarta. (2012). Heritage city action plan of Yogyakarta.

The Municipal Government of Yogyakarta. (2015). Municipal Regulation number 1 / 2015: The detailed spatial plan and zoning regulation.

The Provincial Government of Yogyakarta. (2012). Provincial Regulation number 6 / 2012: The conservation of cultural heritage.

The Republic of Indonesia. (1989). Presidential Decree number 26 / 1989: Pengesahan convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage.

The Republic of Indonesia. (2010). Act number 11 / 2010: Cultural heritage.

The United Nations. (n.d.). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.

Tweed, C., & Sutherland, M. (2007). Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development, Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(1), 62–69.

UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape.

UNESCO. (2017). Historical city centre of Yogyakarta.

Vargas, A. (2018). The tourism and local development in world heritage context: The case of the Mayan site of Palenque, Mexico. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(9), 984–997.

Vecco, M. (2010). A definition of cultural heritage: From the tangible to the intangible, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 11(3), 321–324.

Veenendaal, A. M., & Knaap, P. D. G. (2015). Building modernity: Indische architecture and colonial autonomy, 1920-1940. In Faculty of Humanities: Vol. Bachelor. Utrecht University.

Wall, G., & Black, H. (2004). Global heritage and local problems: Some examples from Indonesia, Current Issues in Tourism, 7(4&5), 436–439.

Wardani, L. K., Soedarsono, R. M., Haryono, T., & Suryo, D. (2013). City heritage Of Mataram Islamic Kingdom In Indonesia. Case study of Yogyakarta Palace, The International Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1), 104–118.

World Heritage Committee. (2012). World heritage tourism programme. UNESCO.

World Heritage Committee. (2015). World heritage and sustainable development. UNESCO.

Yunus, H. S. (1991). The evolving urban planning: The case of the city of Yogyakarta, Indonesian Journal of Geography, 21(61), 1–14.

Zhu, Y. (2018). Uses of the past: Negotiating heritage in Xi’an, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(2), 181–192.




How to Cite

Siregar, J. P., & Rukmi, W. I. (2020). RETHINKING THE HERITAGE VALUE FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, CASE STUDY IN YOGYAKARTA. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning ISSN: 2147-9380, 8(2), 498–517.