The presentation purposely to highlight the theories and preliminaries research finding from the field works.The result from spss analysis indicates a significant finding for further investigation.

1. FACTORS INFLUENCE
ON CONSERVATION OF HERITAGE BUILDING IN MALAYSIA
MOHD HANIZUN HANAFI, MOHD UMZARULAZIJO UMAR
ARMAN ABDUL RAZAK, ZUL ZAKIYUDI ABD.RASHID
SCHOOL OF HOUSING BUILDING AND PLANNING (HBP)11800,
UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA, PULAU PINANG

2. HERITAGE
• Heritage is defined as:
“Property that is or may be inherited; an
inheritance”, “valued things such as historic
buildings that have been passed down from
previous generations”, and “relating to things
of historic or cultural values that are worthy
of preservation”
Oxford English Dictionary (1989)
An illustration

3. HERITAGE BUILDING The Definition
• “An historic building that gives us a sense of wonder and makes us appreciate
culture and our heritage” (Feilden, 2003)
• “Buildings built in the past which have high historical and architectural values
and require continuous care and protection to preserve their aesthetic,
archaeological, spiritual, social, political, and economic values” (Kamal and Harun,
2002)
• Heritage building fells under tangible cultural heritage and can be defined as
a building or groups of separate or connected buildings ages more than
100 year with a unique value of an architecture, homogeneity or their
place in the landscape and have outstanding universal value from the
point of view of history, art or science (Malaysian National Heritage
Act,2005)

4. CONSERVATION OF HERITAGE BUILDING
The Definition
• “Includes all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural
significance which encompasses the activities that are aimed at the safeguarding of a
cultural resource so as it retains its historic value and extends its physical life”. (Article 1.4 of
the Burra Charter of ICOMOS, 1999)
• “The process of managing change to a significant place in its setting in ways that will best
sustain its heritage values, while recognising opportunities to reveal or reinforce those
values for present and future generations”. (Under Principle 4.2 of English Heritage, 2008)
• Heritage building conservation includes the process of maintenance, preservation,
restoration, reconstruction, or adaptation or combination of any mentioned process
to safeguard the physical conditions of the heritage building with reference to its cultural
significance such as social, historic, aesthetics, and scientific values. (International Council
of Monuments and Sites, ICOMOS, 1956)

5. In general, 10 conservation approaches identified by
Fielden (2000), Burden (2004), Idid (1995) Muhammad Ismail
Othman dan Paiman Keromo (2006) namely :
i. Pengekalan ( Preservation)
ii. Pengembalian semula (restoration)
iii. Pemulihan (rehabilitation)
iv. Pengeluaran Semula (reproduction)
v. Pembinaan semula (reconstruction)
vi. Pengukuhan (consolidation)
vii. Penyesuaiangunaan (adaptive reuse)
viii. Kegunaan yang sepadan (compatible use)
ix. Pencegahan (prevention)
x. Penyelenggaraan (maintenance)
CONSERVATION OF HERITAGE BUILDING
The Conceptual
An illustration

6. CONSERVATION OF HERITAGE BUILDING IN MALAYSIA
• Basically, the conservation in Malaysia
is guided by the several types of laws
and regulations relating to the
conservation of historic buildings:
• The Antic Act 1976 (Act 168)
• Town Planning Act 1976 (Act 172)
• Local Authority Act 1976 (Act 171)
• Johore Enactment 1988
• Malacca Enactment 1988
• National Heritage Act 2005
• Before the National Act Heritage 2005
was gazetted on 31st of December 2005
and came into effect on 1st of March
2006, only the Antiquities Act 1976 (Act
168) was adopted for the conservation
and preservation of National Heritage
relating to treasure trove, monuments
and cultural heritage in Malaysia
(Ministry of Information
Communications and Culture, 2012).
• As a result, on July 2008 George Town
and Mallaca were awarded as a World
Heritage Site by UNESCO

7. Heritage Building in Malaysia
Source: National Heritage Department (JWN). 2016
Table 2: Number of historic building register with
National Heritage Department in Malaysia
Source: Syed Zainol Abidin Idid.1995
Table 1 : Historical Building (1800-1948) located in 247 city and town in Malaysia
No Type of Historic Building Quantity Percenta
ge
1 National heritage building 47 21.07
2 Register heritage building 176 78.93
Total 223 100.0
No State Quantity Percentage
1 Penang 5057 24.3
2 Perak 3351 16.1
3 Johor 2323 11.2
4 Melaka 2177 10.5
5 Kuala Lumpur 1763 8.4
6 Kedah 1282 6.12
7 Selangor 1166 5.6
8 Sarawak 1010 4.9
9 Negeri Sembilan 999 4.8
10 Pahang 831 4.0
11 Terengganu 420 2.0
12 Kelantan 373 1.8
13 Perlis 25 0.1
14 Sabah 10 0.05
Total 20787 100.0
Until 2016 only 223/20787 : 1.1 %of
building all over Malaysia is under radar of
JWN, others still under monitoring by state
party or in progress for registration with JWN.

8. EXAMPLE OF BUILT HERITAGE IN MALAYSIA
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) awarded and
gazetted George Town and Melaka as a Worlds Heritage Site by 07 July 2008, this awards
indicated that our built heritage in Malaysia is highly appreciated and recognise at a world
level.
• According to UNESCO(2008) and Jabatan Warisan Negara (JWN), The recognition base on
3 major Outstanding Universal Values (OUV) criteria which are;
i. Criterion (ii): Exceptional examples of multi-cultural trading town in East and Southeast
Asia, forged from the mercantile and exchange of Malay, Chinese, and Indian cultures
and three successive European colonial powers for almost 500 years.
ii. Criterion (iii): Melaka and George Town are living testimony to the multi-cultural
heritage and tradition of Asia and European colonial influences.
iii. Criterion (iv): Melaka and George Town reflect a mixture of influence which have
created a unique architecture, cultural and townscape without parallel anywhere in East
and South Asia.

9. GEORGETOWN, PENANG
• George Town shows the world that its heritage buildings, art and culture can
co-exist alongside modern development. The recognition by UNESCO to
acknowledge George Town as a heritage city means that the initial heritage
core zone and buffer zone should be preserved from further development
that would change the skyline of Penang Heritage City.
• The Historic City of Georgetown focuses its conservation efforts on pre-war
buildings. The government's effort to put the old city or historic centre on
the World Heritage List is an example of this.
• The Nomination Dossier submitted to the UNESCO (outstanding universal
values) includes: “As an outstanding example of a traditional multi-cultural
settlement which best represents the culture of tolerance, peace, diversity,
conflict and continuity in the face of modernisation and social change.”

10. FACTORS INFLUENCE IN HERITAGE BUILDING
• Excessive and reliable literature review revealed that the existing
factors surface with many supportive indicator to be explore. (See
figure 1).
• Confirmation towards theoretical assessment on factor influence need
to be accomplish by a group of people in Malaysia that equip with vast
knowledge and practice in heritage building, so called specialist.
• Perspective, opinion and vision from the group (specialist) is highly
important in shaping the future of heritage building in Malaysia.

11. • Base on assimilation from
literature review, potential
factor that have a very
significance impact directly and
indirectly on heritage building
namely physical, social,
economic, technology, law
and enforcement, function,
environment, infrastructure,
politic, finance
• Consist of a total 68 criteria
being indentified to be consider
in the decision making process
for TRP in local autority. (Figure
1)
Figure 1 : Factors influence in heritage building base on theoretical assessment
By researcher at national and international level.
Source : Modification from (Hanafi, et al., 2016)
Factor influence
Social
Image, aesthetics, landscape, history, facilities, human scale, the
neighbourhood and the environment, ,
Enviroment
Carbon emission, renewable energy, climate change, waste management, ozone
depleting substances, temperature, air velocity, humidity, pollution source
Physical
Structure Integrity, Physical Character, interior and exterior integrity, Structural
integrity, durability of materials, workmanship, treatment, design, originality,
Economy
Population density, market, site access, disclosure, design constraints, the
size of the plot, location,
Politic The adjacent building, site ecology, conservation, public, urban master
plans, zoning, ownership,
Law
Heritage Management plan, fire protection, internal quality, occupational health
and safety, security, comfort, convenience of the disabled, energy efficiency,
acoustics, conservation plan,
Function
Flexibility, compartmentalisation, disassembly, stream room, function ability ,
atrium, grid structure, channel services and corridor, rental,
Technology
Scientific approach, Orientation, glazing, insulation and shading, natural light,
natural ventilation of the building management system, solar access, complexity,
Financial Financial resources, Financial planning, acquisition budget,
Infrastructure Transport, utility and services,

12. • The purpose of the research is to establish and confirm
factors influence towards heritage building in Malaysia by
using the finding from the literature reviews as an evidence
base.
• Quantitative research with Inference Study Method (try to infer
from the sample data what the population might think) used to guide the
process of dealing with factors influence, population and
sampling approach.
METHODOLOGY

13. • Instrument (Questionnaire)
✓A set of questionnaire used to collect a necessary data namely,
demography profile, experience profile and Likert scale
(Likert,.1932) on Important (1 – Very Important, 2- Important, 3 –
Neutral, 4-Unimportant, 5- Very Unimportant) implement on the
factor influence in heritage building by criteria in each factors.
✓Pilot study was conducted to identify issues and problems that may
arise before, during and after the actual data collection process.
METHODOLOGY

14. • Sampling
✓Random Stratified Sampling made to an available respondent in a state of
Selangor and Wilayah Persekutuan
✓Proportionate stratified random sampling technique made to ensure that
sample size is divided according the setting strata for the target population.
✓Where the first layer come from professional and contractors within the state
and the second layer is a professional and contractors registered as a specialist
in the specific area namely building conservation.
✓Base on the research subject criteria, information(profile) gathered from
reliable resources such as local and federal authority, namely Construction
Industry Development Board (CIDB), Jabatan Warisan Negara (JWN), Jabatan
Warisan Negeri, and others.
METHODOLOGY

15. • Sample size calculation using Yamane's (1967) formula approach used to
simplify the data collection process for a small group of the respondent.
(See figure 2) :
Figure 2 : Yamane Taro Sampling Formula
𝑛 =
𝑁
1 + 𝑁(𝑒2)
• Where : n : sample size, N : Population size , e : the acceptable sampling
error.
METHODOLOGY

16. No Respondent Total
(N)
Yamane (1967)
(n)
Percentage
(%)
1 Contractor 238 123 63.40
2 Consultant 139 71 36.60
Total 377 194 100.00
Table 3 : Respondent from State of Selangor and Wilayah Persekutuan (Yamane Sampling Formula)
Table 4 : Summary of data collection feedback by respondent
No Collection Mode Total
Sampling
Responded Balance
Sample
1 Via email 194 7 187
2 Telephone 187 36 151
3 Interview with questionnaire 151 86 65
Refuse to participate due to confidentiality 65
Total participate respondent 129
Source: Authors 2017
Source: Authors 2017

17. RESULTS & FINDINGS
- Preliminaries Finding

18. No Independent Variable Freq. Percent
Gender
1 Male 93 72.1
2 Female 36 27.9
Total 129 100.0
Age (year) Freq. Percent
1 18-24 0
2 25-34 4 3.1
3 35-44 88 68.2
4 45-54 19 14.7
5 55-64 17 13.2
6 65 and above 1 .8
Total 129 100.0
Education Background Freq. Percent
1 Certificate 0
2 Diploma 0
3 Bachelor degree 109 84.5
4 Master’s degree 20 15.5
5 Philosophy Degree 0
6 Others 0
Total 129 100.0
Experience in conservation
work (year)
Freq. Percent
1 < 2 4 3.1
2 2-5 16 12.4
3 5<x>10 89 69.0
4 10-20 20 15.5
5 >20 0
Total 129 100.0
Table 5 : Demography Profiles
Source : Authors 2017
PRELIMINARIES FINDING

19. No General Factor Item Mode Median
n=129
1 Social 7 2 2
2 Environment 9 2 2
3 Physical 7 2 2
4 Economic 7 2 2
5 Function 9 2 2
6 Technology 7 2 2
7 Political 7 2 2
8 Law and Regulation 9 2 2
9 Infrastructure 3 2 2
10 Finance 3 2 2
Total 68
Table 6 : Value Mode and Median of Factor influence on Building Heritage Conservation
Source : Author 2017
Note : 1-Very Important. 2- Important, 3- Neutral, 4-Unimportant, 5- Very Unimportant
PRELIMINARIES FINDING

20. Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha Part 1 Value .897
N of Items 17a
Part 2 Value .895
N of Items 17b
Total N of Items 34
Correlation Between Forms .821
Spearman-Brown Coefficient Equal Length .902
Unequal Length .902
Guttman Split-Half Coefficient (Interpretation – Good) .899
a. The items are: 1. Structure Integrity, 3. Work and how to work, 5. Design, 7. Physical features, 2.
Compartmentalisation, 4. Flow space, 6. Atrium, 8. Corridor service channel, 1) Population density, 3) Transport
structure, 5) Disclosure, 7) Plot size, 2) Glass, 4) Natural light, 6) Solar access, 1) Financial source, 3) Budget
takeover.
b. The items are: 1) Legacy Management plan, 3) Conservation plans, 5) Occupational health and safety, 7) Disabled
facilities, 9) Acoustics, 2) Ecological site, 4) Public interest, 6) Zone, 1) carbon discharge, 3) Climate change, 5)
Lack of ozone, 7) Airflow, 9) The causes of pollution, 2) Value of statics, 4) Public interest, 6) Neighbourhood, 2)
Transport.
Table 7 : Reliability Test : Split-half Method on General Thought to Factor Influence within Indicator
Source : Authors 2017
PRELIMINARIES FINDING

21. No Factor
Influence
Item Cronbach
Alfa (value)
Cronbach alfa base on
standardized (value)
Reliability coefficient
(Interpretation)
1 Social 7 0.891 0.894 Good
2 Environment 9 0.894 0.903 Excellent
3 Physical 7 0.834 0.806 Good
4 Economic 7 0.836 0.832 Good
5 Function 9 0.915 0.915 Excellent
6 Technology 7 0.809 0.784 Good
7 Political 7 0.754 0.797 Acceptable
8 Law 9 0.894 0.898 Good
9 Infrastructure 3 0.755 0.757 Acceptable
10 Finance 3 0.772 0.774 Acceptable
Total 68
Table 8 : Reliability Test : Internal Consistency Method on General Thought to
Factor Influence within indicator
• Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient
normally ranges between 0 and 1. George
and Mallery (2003) provide the following
rules of thumb: “_ > .9 – Excellent, _ > .8 –
Good, _ > .7 – Acceptable, _ > .6 –
Questionable, _ > .5 – Poor, and_ < .5 –
Unacceptable”
• Based upon the formula, see figure 3 :
𝑟𝑘
1 + 𝑘 − 1 𝑟
• where k is the number of items considered
and r is the mean of the inter-item
• Correlations the size of alpha is determined
by both the number of items in the scale
and the mean inter-item correlation
Source : Authors 2017
PRELIMINARIES FINDING

22. No Factor Influence Score Score (%) Rank
1 Social 0.0362 3.62 2
2 Environment 0.1141 11.41 6
3 Physical 0.0231 2.31 1
4 Economic 0.1220 12.20 7
5 Function 0.0745 7.45 5
6 Technology 0.0909 9.09 4
7 Political 0.1750 17.50 10
8 Law and Regulation 0.1610 16.10 9
9 Infrastructure 0.1401 14.01 8
10 Finance 0.0631 6.31 3
Total 1.00 100.00
Table 9 : General Ranking in Factor Influence by Expert Perception
Source: Authors 2017
Note - Ranking determination base on the lower range of the score.
The more lower the score is the high ranking of the factors influence.
PRELIMINARIES FINDING

23. FINDING AND CONCLUDING REMARK
• Preliminaries analysis result indicates that more available test need to
be conduct in order to have a strong grip in term of determination for
factors influence.
• Even though there is a positive result from the split-half model and the Alfa
Cronbach Co-efficiency on internal consistency, again no conclusion can be
made but a positive result will guide and lead the research to the next level
of interpretation.
• The analysis of co-variance namely Chi Square Test, Mann-Whitney U and
Kruskal-Walis H need to be used(test) to support current positive result as
well as co-relation test using Spearman-rho test.
• Completing the task will ensure more concrete evidence surface within the
research output.

24. • Cane Hill Asylum. (1882). Abandoned Britain. (Available online:
http://www.abandoned-britain.com/PP/canehill/1.htm
• Chua, Y. (2011). Kaedah Penyelidikan. 2nd ed. Shah Alam: McGraw-Hill
Education.
• English Heritage. (2008). Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidelines.
London: English Heritage.Malacca and Penang. (2011). Conservation
Management Plan: Historic Cities of Straits of Malacca. Unpublished
• Feilden, B. (1982). Conservation of Historic Buildings. Great Britain:
Architectural Press.
• George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple
guide and reference. 11.0 update(4thed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Hashima/Gunkanjima Building. (1930). Hashima Island, Japan’s Abandoned
City. (Available online: http://thehiat.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/hashima-
island-japans-abandoned-city.html
• Hanafi, M.H., A.Rashid, Z., Abdul Razak, A. and Umar, M.U. (2016).
Developing An Adaptive Reuse Model For Organization Management In
Conservation Of Heritage Building In Malaysia: A Conceptual Framework. In:
1st International Conference on Livable Built Environment (ICLBE).
• Harun, S.N., 2011. Heritage building conservation in Malaysia: Experience
and challenges. Procedia Engineering, 20, pp.41-53.
• Harun, S. N., Ahmad, A. G., Kayan, B.A., Kamal, K. S., Abdul Rashid, R, Mohd
Isa, A. F., Ab Wahab, L., Salleh, N. H. (2010). Pemuliharaan Bangunan
Bersejarah (Historic Building Conservation). UPENA: UiTM.
• Hulley, Stephen B.(2007), Designing Clinical Research. Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins, , p.168-169
• ICOMOS. (1956). Charter for the Protection and Management of the
Archaeological Heritage. ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and
Sites): International Cultural Tourism Committee, Paris, France
• Kamal, K., AbWahab, L. and Ahmad, A., 2008. Pilot survey on the
conservation of historical buildings in Malaysia.
• Kamal, S.K. and Harun, S.N. (2002). Building Research Methodology in the
Conservation of the Historic Buildings in Malaysia. Proceedings of the
International Symposium Building Research and the Sustainability of the
Built Environment in the Tropics, University Tarumanagara, Jakarta,
Indonesia. 14-15thOctober 2002
• Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of
Psychology,22(140), 1–55.
• National Heritage Act 2005
• Syed Zainol Abidin Idid; (1995); Pemeliharaan Warisan Rupa Bandar
(Conservation for Urban Intervention); Malaysia Heritage Trust; Malaysia
• The Burra Charter (1999). The Burra Charter 1999. Sydney: Australia
ICOMOS
• The Oxford English Dictionary. (1989). The Oxford English Dictionary.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• UNESCO. Available online: http: //www.whc.unesco.org
• Yamane, Taro. (1967). Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 2nd Edition, New
York: Harper and Row.
REFERENCE

25. THANK YOU
View publication statsView publication stats