Paper short abstract:

After the introduction of a strict building code in 2007, there is a curious tendency to re-privatise the historical townscape of Kyoto. Who is more mindful of this public good, local government or the private neighbourhood initiatives tasked with discussing construction details with builders?

Paper long abstract:

The visual appearance of the urban built environment can be a key public good for pleasing residents, attracting visitors and thereby stimulating the provision of a whole range of private goods, from the apartment to the souvenir. The townscape is unevenly distributed, however, and how exactly the single buildings constitute it and what must be done to protect it is often hotly contested. Few cities have seen as much debate in this regard as Kyoto, the historical capital of Japan. While hesitant for a long time, the city government adopted the strictest building code of the country in 2007, with permissible heights greatly reduced and Kyoto design features mandatory now.

The new rules stand uncontested and have contributed their share to the current boom of particularly foreign tourism. Based on fieldwork in 2019/20, however, the paper will deal with a curious tendency to re-privatise the townscape. For one thing, the city government keeps praising the traditional town houses that define Kyoto style. The ones too large for conversion into shops, restaurants or guesthouses still get demolished, however, with Kyoto City reluctant to buy up such private real estate. For another, the development of more fine-grained rules for specific neighbourhoods has been suspended in favour of builders' consultations with neighbourhood-based initiatives, often formed around veteran activists. The paper looks at the contradictions arising from empowering these "townscape warriors/worriers" rather than the public bureaucrats and asks which of the two sides is more mindful of the public good.