Silver craft and Buddhist temple in the shaping of neighbourhood communities in <scp>Wua‐Lai</scp> , Chiang Mai, Thailand

This paper explores neighbourhood‐based projects such as "local project" (Magnaghi, 2005), the strategic scenarios that set out a process of mobilisation and promotion of local resources, planned and run by local people. It focuses on two residential communities in Wua‐Lai neighbourhood, namely Chumchon Wat Muen‐Sarn and Chumchon Wat Sri‐Suphan. The analysis deals with three local projects: Wua‐Lai Walking Street and Saturday Market, Lanna Arts Study Centre and community museums. It seeks to understand how the residents use silver handicraft, Buddhist temple and local marketplaces for shaping their projects and for connecting the neighbourhood to the city. This study allows us to identify the key elements in place on which the local projects are premised and how these elements reproduce sense of belonging and sociability that create the potential for collective action. It intends to highlight on the neighbourhood capacities, and its limits, to carry out local initiatives and to challenge more economic forces.

Keywords: community museums; craft; identity; neighbourhood‐based project; temple; urban heritage

Introduction

The accelerated growth since the 1980s of Chiang Mai, the economic capital and tourist centre of the northern region of Thailand, has erased many urban legacies. The development of mass tourism and speculative construction has contributed to a profound socio‐economic transformation of the old urban neighbourhoods and the decline of local craft production and trade. Fearing a loss of livelihood and local identity due to urban and socio‐economic changes, the residents of Wua‐Lai neighbourhood have initiated a number of collaborative projects to promote their local heritage as a resource for surviving in an era of globalisation. This neighbourhood is well known for its silver craft skills, inherited from Tai Shan silversmiths who immigrated in the 19th century from Salween river valley in Shan State to Chiang Mai, the former capital of Lanna Kingdom (1296–1884).[1] The members of the neighbourhood (residents, monks, craftspeople and silver shop owners), in collaboration with the local authorities and academics, have developed various neighbourhood‐based projects, for reviving their livelihoods and promoting their unique craft skills, in the long‐term run (community museum, craft study centre and weekend craft market) and in the short‐term run (exhibition, contest and event).

Our research focuses on two residential communities in Wua‐Lai, which are built around two Buddhist temples (Wat), namely Wat Muen‐Sarn and Wat Sri‐Suphan. Both communities use the temples as centres of coordination and shared spaces for running their collaborative projects, which involve tourism programmes, revival of craft production and local heritage promotion. The craft production is mobilised as a local identity and heritage, as well as a main source of livelihood. This situation raises two sets of inquiries. First, the questions on connection between the neighbourhood and the city: How do residents incorporate themselves into the economic production process of the contemporary city? How do they involve everyday practices that connect to tourism and heritage promotion? Second, the question on the role of traditional institution of neighbourhood: How do the monks take a role in developing neighbourhood‐based projects? How are temples' spaces used for these projects? The findings from our fieldwork revealed that Wat Muen‐Sarn and Wat Sri‐Suphan shared some common approaches to develop their collective projects (creation of the community museum, book publication on the neighbourhood's history, extension of partnership to civil society organisations, and local and national authorities). However, the two communities have developed different kinds of relationship between monks and residents, as we will see in the following pages.

In a broader perspective, this study seeks to understand how the neighbourhood collaborative projects were conducted in response to urban and socio‐economic changes. We intend to explore the neighbourhood capacities to carry out local initiatives and to challenge more economic forces. The study of neighbourhood initiatives and capacities provides an insight into the role of residents, local institutions and communities in shaping local collective actions outside of the scope of – or going along with – the central and local authorities' master plans. This study also reveals the challenges that the residents are facing and have to overcome. Through the analysis of neighbourhood projects, we seek to understand the conditions and key elements in place on which the local initiatives and capacities are premised and how these key elements (temple, handicraft, local networks and partnership) enable sociability and create the potential for collective action (Ho, [12]). By understanding the key elements of neighbourhood initiatives, as well as the challenges faced by them, we can develop contextualised knowledge of the city, which help promote the cooperative networks that link neighbourhood to the city and strengthen local capacities that are part and parcel of urban development. These latter must be considered as key resources of city‐building process and city‐building process knowledge.

To approach these issues, we examine the neighbourhood‐based projects through the concept of "local project" (Magnaghi, [17]), referring to the strategic scenarios that set out a process of mobilisation and promotion of local resources, planned and run by local people, as diverse or averse as they might be. The local project enables the neighbourhood as the third way (Fallov, [8]) to city building, an alternative to state‐driven and market‐driven ventures, which involves an active citizenship developed through local collective action (Ho, [12]). In this perspective, we examine the local project for its creative ability and adaptation capacity to socio‐economic and urban change, which can be viewed as "the globalization from bottom‐up" (Magnaghi, [18]). This urban practice is based on citizen involvement, inter‐local cooperation and manipulation of the devices of globalisation (e.g., creation of marketplace and tourism attractions, development of local products to meet the new demands of tourists, etc.). Our assumption is whether the residents of Wua‐Lai adopt these devices in order to resist the standardisation and marginalisation that the top‐down globalisation of tourism and trade often inflicts on them.

In parallel with the creation of craft marketplace, the residents of Wua‐Lai created the community museums for presenting neighbourhood history and promoting local heritage (silverware and lacquerware in a mixed Burmese–Lanna style) which are not included in official inventories of national heritage. The museum and heritage have thus a role in asserting cultural and historical values of the neighbourhood. They are also used to express neighbourhood identity and to strengthen a sense of belonging. In this way, the heritage and museum are engaged in community consolidation and in the construction of community identity (Crooke, [6]). Moreover, the creation of community museum reflects the local communities' involvement in both tangible and intangible heritage management, which has developed in Thailand since the 1990s (Pattama et al., [25]; Lertcharnrit and Niyomsap, [15]). Like many other community museums in Thailand (Kanokmongkol, [13]; Sirivanichkul et al., [32]; Lertcharnrit and Niyomsap, [15]), the museums at Wua‐Lai are located in the Buddhist temple, found through the coordination between residents and monks, and aimed to attract visitors and tourists.

Regarding the use of the word neighbourhood to describe neighbourhood in Thailand, we use it in reference to the word ban, an everyday Thai word that designates both a house and a village. The double meaning of ban shows the expansion of filiation link from the family to the village that is composed of houses of several families. This relates to the meanings of the term neighbourhood that express both spatial and social dimensions. The words ban and neighbourhood refer to the social relations that define the place, and the place becomes the site where specific kinds of social relations predominate, as mentioned by Eric Harms (see his article in this special issue). Hence, the ban/neighbourhood is closely linked to the appropriation of a site, the social relations, as well as the common identity, that allow for the reproduction of sociability and belonging.

Concerning the use of the word community, we use it in reference to the word chumchon, a Thai translation of the concept of community (Reynolds, [29]). In 1950s and 1960s, the concept of community arrived in Thailand via the language of development in which American aid programmes were couched (ibid: 287). The word chumchon then entered the Thai bureaucratic lexicon for designating the lowest level of administrative division, below the sub‐district (tambon) level, in urban areas. In the 1980s, NGOs and academics working in development began to promote the concept of community culture as a defence against the deleterious effects of development (ibid: 287), and for elaborating the conceptual framework relating to the development that is based on an idealised vision of the village and a return to the roots of the rural communities (Phongphit, [27]). Such a conceptual framework is essential to the economic and cultural projects run at the neighbourhood level, such as community museum and community enterprise.

This paper is based on key findings from the fieldwork conducted between 2017 and 2019, within the framework of the Southeast Asia Neighbourhoods Network (SEANNET) research programme. We conducted urban and architectural surveys to understand the neighbourhood's spatial organisation and place‐making practice of the residents. In parallel, we conducted a round‐table forum and interviews with the master craftspeople, business owners and key persons of the neighbourhood, in order to gain insight into the silver craft production, as well as the dynamics and aspirations of livelihood strategies.

The analysis comprises two main parts: The first part is a historical overview providing the context for understanding the trajectory and urban evolution of the Wua‐Lai neighbourhood and silverware production. The second part deals with three local projects, which are often interlinked and interdependent on each other, namely Wua‐Lai Walking Street, Lanna Arts Study Centre, and community museums.

Evolution of Wua‐Lai neighbourhood and silverware production

The immigration of Tai Shan people is confirmed by a variety of accounts as spearheading the resettlement of population of Chiang Mai city in the 19th century. As early as 1801 the chronicles relate that Phraya Kawila (r. 1802–1813), Prince‐ruler of Chiang Mai, sent his forces across Shan State (present‐day Myanmar) and Sibsongbanna (the present autonomous prefecture for Dai people in Yunnan Province, China), in order to attack settlements and bring back captives for repopulating the deserted city after 18th‐century guerrilla warfare (Vatikiotis, [34]; Penth and Forbes, [26]; Ongsakul, [23]; Setthakun, [31]). The groups of artisans were settled around the southern and western perimeters of the square walled city, the royal city of Chiang Mai, in segregated villages. These new villages were often named after the places of origin place of the villagers (Gavila, [10]). Indeed, it was the practice of Chiang Mai's prince‐rulers since the foundation of the city in the late 13th century to install, whether by invitation or by force, craftspersons from the other regions to produce goods either for the court or for sale to passing merchants (Vatikiotis, [34]:39). Ethnic diversity in Chiang Mai was fostered and therefore an important component of the urban social structure (ibid). For the artisans, the great majority of them were Tai people who practiced spirit worship (phi) and Theravada Buddhism. Their village were founded inside and on the surrounding areas of the walled city of the Buddhist kings. The other ethnic communities who practiced in commerce (Chinese Buddhist, Chinese Muslim, Indian Muslim and Indian Sikh, etc.) and the Christian church of American missionaries were historically founded outside the walled city, along the Ping River. Today, as many cities in Thailand, Chiang Mai city still keeps the ethnic diversity and becomes a city of mingling and juxtaposed groups, comprising a series of residential communities organised around nodal points of markets and religious places of worship, with distinctive craft or economic activities.

Regarding the Tai Shan silversmiths from Wua‐Lai village in Shan State, they settled outside the ramparts to the south of the walled city. The name of the road, Wua‐Lai Road, offers a clue to this location (Fig. 1). Since then, the Tai Shan artisans inserted themselves into the social fabric of Chiang Mai. They produced craft products for the royal court and for trade.

Since the first half of the 19th century, the Tai Shan silversmiths built their houses around two existing Buddhist temples, namely Wat Muen‐Sarn and Wat Sri‐Suphan. Another group of artisans specialised in lacquerware settled down around the temple Wat Nantaram located in the southeast of Wat Muen‐Sarn and Wat Sri‐Suphan. Hence, three residential communities were formed in this area called Wua‐Lai village. In the first half of the 20th century, almost every household in Wua‐Lai had their own workshop and stoves for producing silverware. Family members were involved in a gender‐differentiated craft production: men moulded and forged the silver, while women carved the pieces. The common products were household goods and prestigious items for ritual and ceremonial occasions. The artisans of Wat Muen‐Sarn specialised themselves in making silver bowls (salung) in a mixed Burmese–Lanna style; those of Wat Sri‐Suphan became experts in making elaborated silver plates and trays. They distributed their products by bicycle or cart to the local markets in Chiang Mai and surrounding districts (Gavila, [10]:54–56; Ongsakul, [22]:107–108; Nernhard, [19]).

With the advent of the railway in 1921, Chiang Mai developed as a destination for domestic tourists, mainly from Bangkok (Porananond and Robinson, [28]:313–314). This linkage from the capital increased the profile of Wua‐Lai village, which was given impetus by the visit of Siamese monarchs in 1926, during which Wua‐Lai was promoted for the first time as "craft village". The artisans from Wua‐Lai village were selected by the Province of Chiang Mai to demonstrate the process of silverware production to the monarchs and the public (Gavila, [10]:52–53). After the Second World War, the artisans began to open their shops along Wua‐Lai Road, creating elongated "ribbons", which grew into silver crafts market and tourist attraction where clients come into direct contact with the producers (Cohen, [4]). The direct‐selling channels were also developed for long distance; the craft products were distributed by train to other provinces and Bangkok. Some artisans exhibited their crafts at the regional and national trade fairs (Gavila, [10]; Ongsakul, [22]:108). The Wua‐Lai silverware became then widely recognised for its uniqueness and sophisticated patterns. This contributed to the development of the urban craft neighbourhoods in Chiang Mai since the beginning of the 20th century.

During the 1960s and 1970s, the growth in tourism had been driven by the construction of the highway linking Bangkok to Chiang Mai and the upgrading of Chiang Mai Airport into an international one. In 1977, the Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) began to promote Chiang Mai as a tourist centre in the northern region of Thailand. The international tourism here began to flourish (Porananond and Robinson, [28]:316; Ouyyanont, [24]). The silverware manufacture and commerce progressed gradually; about 200 households operated silverware shops and ateliers in Wua‐Lai in 1960 (Ongsakul, [22]:111). The craft product was quickly commodified for tourists, with a shift of product purposes, materials and production methods. New product types emerge, such as tourist souvenirs, pieces of jewellery, and home decorations. The techniques of production evolved; new materials (such as aluminium) and machinery were introduced to accelerate production and decrease the cost (Chifos and Looye, [2]). However, until recently, the craft production at Wua‐Lai did not undergo industrialisation. The artisans of Wua‐Lai still produce their works manually in the workshop in the backyards or at their houses.

In the 1980s, Wua‐Lai reached its highest point, becoming the famous "Silver Village" through the promotion of TAT. Some old timber huts along Wua‐Lai Road were replaced by timber houses with air‐conditioned craft shops on the ground floor (Fig. 2). Wua‐Lai Road was extended to the south‐east of the city, near the international airport and the ring roads that facilitated access to tourist buses (Lubeigt, [16]:126). By the mid‐1980, the government integrated handicraft economy with tourism development in Chiang Mai and encouraged the craftspeople and factory owners to produce essentially for export. Following the government's economic policy, a centre for export‐oriented craft production was created at San‐Kamphaeng village, situated 13 km east of the city. This establishment formed a hub of craft production and trade that can receive busloads of mass tourism (Lubeigt, [16]; Chifos and Looye, [2]). The development of the new artisan centre caused the decline of Wua‐Lai's crafts trade in the 1990s. Many craftspeople from Wua‐Lai were hired to work at the factories in San‐Kamphaeng. Moreover, the craft market became more competitive; many marketplaces were developed in the city centre, such as Night Bazaar and Tapae Walking Street. In 2001, there were only 22 silverware shops still active in Wua‐Lai (Gavila, [10]:46). Another major threat was the absence of successors to many Wua‐Lai silverware producers. Today, there are only a few young people who are willing to learn and practice the production of silver crafts.

Regarding the urban fabric of Wua‐Lai, there are nowadays 1153 houses in the two residential communities, in an area of approximately 0.56 km2. The two communities form settlement clusters of chumchon Wat Muen‐Sarn and chumchon Wat Sri‐Suphan, as two of the smallest local governmental units in the area. Wua‐Lai Road is still the main transport link between the southern part of the city and the historic centre (walled city). This main road is always full of traffic. It is bordered by rows of shophouses, narrow building of three or four stories with a shop on the ground floor and living spaces on the upper floors. The shophouses create a solid urbanised wall, concealing the calm neighbourhood behind them from the busy traffic (Scheer and Scheer, [30]). The neighbourhoods behind the shophouses still conserve the old urban fabric of Chiang Mai, which is composed of individual timber houses with gardens and well‐maintained alleyways (soi) in organic form, that connect the clusters of houses to the main roads. Each house has a front yard that contains the well, fruit trees and shade‐giving trees that also provide shade to the alleyways. Almost every household has workshops or working spaces underneath their houses on stilts. Some houses transform their front yard into small restaurants or snack shops, which serve as relaxed meeting places between neighbours.

The Wat (Buddhist temples) are situated among the clusters of houses and complete the urban ensemble. It is often the moral, social and symbolic centre of a lay community. Ethnographic studies confirm the functional and symbolic centrality of the Wat (Condominas, [5]; Davis, [7]; Clément‐Charpentier and Clément, [3]; O'Connor, [21]). According to the Thai custom, the Wat, the royal palace and the pillar of the city (lak muang) associated with the shrine to the supreme spirit of the city, jointly form the centre of the cosmos, the relics and religious objects contained by them acting as the city's palladium. This reflects an imported form of Buddhist kingship and politico‐religious organisation that originated in South Asia, in which the religious structures serve as symbols of legitimate kingship (Tambiah, [33]; Vatikiotis, [34]). The erection and the restoration of the religious structures are one of the principal activities of the king and ruling chiefs for acquiring the "merit" (bun; Buddhist concept of merit) and justifying their status as "meritorious persons" or "holy men" (phu mi bun) that gives legitimacy to the political leader (Gabaude, [9]; Byrne, [1]:84, 91). This tradition is shared by both Thai and Burmese (and other) traditional polities and implies a close linkage between political authority and Buddhist place of worship (Tambiah, [33]:110).

The model of centralised polity is applied at the village level. The Wat and the shrine of the tutelary spirits of the village constitute the spiritual centre of the residential community. The noblemen construct the temples that mark the centre of local community within the city. Their status as great men comes from links beyond the local to the great royal and monastic urban centres. This brings localities into a larger urban order, and so helps to make a collectivity into a hierarchy (O'Connor, [20]). Many temples in Chinag Mai are named after the nobleman who is its patronage, and the surrounding community is often named after its Buddhist temple. Such is the case of Wat Muen‐Sarn at Wua‐Lai. In this way, the Wat represents a social identity of the residential community. Many residents in the vicinity of Wat Muen‐Sarn regard themselves as sattha Wat Muen‐Sarn, a grouping or collective of the people owing a common allegiance to Muen‐Sarn temple. They also call themselves chaoban Wat Muen‐Sarn ("villagers of Muen‐Sarn temple"). It is the same with the residents of Wat Sri‐Suphan. Beyond the religious sphere, the Wat plays a key role in community life. It is a meeting place and shared spaces for neighbourhood residents. Most of the collective activities take place at the temple: neighbourhood committee assemblies, polling stations, festival ceremonies and more. The Wat is, therefore, used by the group of residents as the focus of an "imagined neighbourhood" that moor them in geographical space (see the article of Eric Harms in this issue) and assert their existence as a social unit. This relates to the popular image of the city arising from a discursive culture of place that is fundamental to the Tai people (larger family of people that includes ethnic Thai). The Tai peoples see their city as a "patchwork of named places defined by activities, communities and historic events" (O'Connor, [20]:61). At Wua‐Lai, the area was named after the origin village of the Tai Shan silversmiths, and the groups of residents named their community after the temple around which they have built their community life. Hence, the communities created, reactivated and maintained the Wat while the Wat defined communities.

Moreover, we notice that the urban pattern and built environment of Wua‐Lai, particularly the meeting spaces and shared spaces organised in the Wat, encourage daily interaction, resulting in close social relations among neighbours.

However, the accelerated urbanisation since the 1980s of Chiang Mai has contributed to transform urban and social fabric of the old neighbourhoods located inside and outside the walled city, including Wua‐Lai. Land and property development and the promotion of tourism have led to the construction of many large footprint buildings, particularly hotels and condominiums,[2] near the historic city and on the banks of the Ping River. This has raised much public awareness of local urban heritage. The city government designated in 2012 the neighbourhood as a "Conservation Area for Thai Art, Culture and Identity." This designation comes with initiative‐building regulations that aim to protect its urban and architectural characteristics. Moreover, Wua‐Lai was included in the property boundary of World Heritage sites, submitted by Chiang Mai University in collaboration with the municipality in 2015 for inscription on the World Heritage List.

Despite the effort of the city government and the university to protect the urban heritage, the transformation of Wua‐Lai is erasing the neighbourhood's urban legacies. At the time of survey (2018–2019), a number of old wooden houses in Wua‐Lai were sold to new landowners. Some houses were transformed into hostels or coffee shops for tourists. Some were replaced by a large concrete apartment building of three to four storeys. The change in land ownership and land use is one of the main issues raised by the residents during our round‐table forum in 2018. The residents expressed concern over this change that can affect the cooperation among neighbours and their ability to cope with socio‐economic change. It is important to note that the residents of Wua‐Lai have developed a long history of cooperation in the face of many challenges. The decline of Wua‐Lai's crafts trade in the 1990s is one of the key moments that mark the neighbourhood capacity to carry out local initiatives in response to socio‐economic change.

Local projects

Economic regeneration and creation of the Wua‐Lai Walking Street

In order to cope with the decline of Wua‐Lai's crafts trade, the artisans and owners of 11 silverware shops from both Chumchon Wat Sri‐Suphan and Chumchon Wat Muen‐Sarn worked together to create a grand silver bowl (salung‐luang) in 1991. The grand silver bowl was used as an emblem of neighbourhood during the important festival parades of the city. This was a starting point of a collaboration between the two residential communities, which led to the formation of the Wua‐Lai silverware club (Chomrom Khreuang‐Ngoen Baan‐Wua‐Lai) in 2000. This latter, in cooperation with Chumchon Wat Nantaram, has launched the "Silverware and Lacquerware Market",[3] providing spaces for display and sale of neighbourhood's handicrafts. From November 2002 to January 2003, the market was organised in the small yard of the three temples, on the first weekend of the month. Due to the success of this market, the neighbourhood has collaborated since 2004 with the Chiang Mai Municipality in the creation of the Wua‐Lai Walking Street on every Saturday (Fig. 3), within the framework of Chiang Mai High Point development scheme aiming to "regenerate the economically declining traditional communities within the city"[4] (Ongsakul, [22]:115; Kulsrisombat, [14]). The objective is to create live exhibitions of handicrafts where tourists can shop at production sites, and to attract back the artisans who have left Wua‐Lai for working at San‐Kamphaeng craft centre. The neighbourhood created a committee for monitoring the market. The municipality has provided support for public relations, garbage collection, electricity and street furnitures. The Wua‐Lai Walking Street is an extension of the Sunday Walking Street located inside the walled city, one of the most popular tourist attractions of Chiang Mai.

This strategy of creating the walking street gained support from the authorities. The Wua‐Lai Walking Street has been strategically used as a key driver of economic regeneration and to restore the reputation of "Silver Village". From the interviews with the members of the neighbourhood committee, they see that this programme has helped to bring back the tourists and artisans to Wua‐Lai, thus increasing the economic viability of craft production. However, the interviewees remark that, today, the initial objective of the handicraft market is overlooked. Entrepreneurs increasingly sell industrial products, particularly trinkets and tourist souvenir objects, because they are less expensive and can be sold more easily than high‐priced artistic handicrafts. The success as a tourist attraction is engendering a "heterogeneisation" of craft products (Cohen, [4]), offered on local markets that can lead to a loss of distinct character of craft product and craftsmanship, and also to destruction of relationship between the cultural background of the artisans and their craft products. This also impacts the local Lanna culture that is reinvented and sometimes invented to provide tourist attractions and souvenirs (Chifos and Looye, [2]). We can see that the economic regeneration projects lead to another challenge concerning the risk of disappearance of the local craftsmanship and craft knowledge. This is also a major issue that preoccupies Wua‐Lai residents.

Transmission of craft skills and creation of the Lanna Arts Study Centre

In the upstream phase of the programme "Silverware and Lacquerware Market", the members of the Wua‐Lai silverware club, particularly those from Wat Sri‐Suphan, cooperated with the temple committee to organise an event entitled "Lanna Heritage and Local Wisdom"[5] in March 2000. This event consisted of a contest among artisans and an exhibition on the process of silverware and lacquerware production. It was organised in parallel with a religious ceremony celebrating 500 years of Wat Sri‐Suphan, which provided the opportunity to raise funds for this event, through the donation of the devotees of the temple. After this event, the Lanna Handicrafts group (Hatthasin Lanna) was created with the aim of preserving and transmitting craftsmanship to new generations. In 2007, this group created the Lanna Arts Study Centre, located at Wat Sri‐Suphan temple, with financial support from Princess Sirindhorn who is well known for her interest in the protection of Thai cultural heritage. This learning centre offers training courses on craft production for young monks as part of the vocational programmes of the National Office of Buddhism (Fig. 4). The Lanna Arts Study Centre offers also courses for trainee craftspersons and a short course of 1–3 h for tourists who are interested in experiencing the craving of the so‐called "silver souvenir" (made of aluminium). In 2012, the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (SACICT), a public organisation led by Queen Sirikit, stepped in to help develop new forms of silver craft and new production techniques, in order to meet new market requirements. Today, the art of chasing metal sheet for making mural decoration is highly developed at Wat Sri‐Suphan temple; the masters teach the young trainees to make not only the traditional pattern (e.g., life of the Buddha, Ramayana, etc.), but also to create new patterns, such as personal portrait and elaborated landscape scenery.

The Lanna Arts Study Centre is run by the Silver Temple Foundation of Wat Sri‐Suphan, whose objective is to develop educational tourism according to the abbot's concept of "Sri‐Suphan Development Model".[6] Besides the training courses, this foundation proposes a visit to the "Silver Temple" (Ubosot‐Ngoen), the Lanna Craft Wisdom Museum, and the silver souvenir shop of Wat Sri‐Suphan community enterprise (Fig. 5), which has gained the support of One Tambon (sub‐district) One Product (OTOP), a governmental programme aimed at supporting the unique locally made and marketed products of each sub‐district. This programme has helped developed the products and marketing and has provided a local and international stage for the promotion of the products of Wat Sri‐Suphan community enterprise. In this way, tourists can participate in a specific programme of Wat Sri‐Suphan temple, where they can appreciate the religious architecture, make the "silver souvenir" by themselves, and buy the neighbourhood's handicrafts. However, these touristic activities are concentrated exclusively within the temple compound. This effectively reflects the organisation of "Sri‐Suphan Development Model" that centralises the craft knowledge, education and production at the temple. The abbot has a line authority over the development of touristic programmes and decision‐making of the community enterprise. This creates a vertical relationship between monks, residents and craftspeople, and reflects the way in which the monks mobilise the artisan community as a way of securing their influence. Furthermore, through the supports of the Buddhist authorities, royal and governmental organisations, the local craft skills and knowledge are institutionalised into official educational and marketing systems. The Lanna Arts Study Centre has now become part of the Non‐Formal Education Centre of Royal Academy. This reflects also the mutual support between monarch and temple, a deep‐rooted social structure of Thai society.

Building neighbourhood identity and creation of community museums

Another observable issue in Wua‐Lai is the making of neighbourhood identity, which seems to be of interest to both communities but each of them demonstrates comparable approaches that reveal distinctive perspectives. These neighbourhood identity‐making approaches consist of (1) publication of a book on the neighbourhood's history and (2) creation of a community museum.

Book publication on the neighbourhood's history

Chumchon Wat Sri‐Suphan published a book entitled "Handicraft and Silver Temple of Wat Sri‐Suphan"[7] in 2016. The book presents the neighbourhood's history as written by Somchot Ongsakul, a well‐known historian of Chiang Mai University. Based on several chronicles and archives, the historian traced back the establishment of Sri‐Suphan temple in the 16th century and the settlement of Tai Shan silversmiths in the 19th century. He highlights the social link between villagers and temple, by stressing the role of temple as a source of learning the Buddha's teaching (Dharma, spiritual guidance of inhabitants), and as a source of craft knowledge by mentioning the Lanna Arts Study Center. The publication also features the artisanal specificities and master craftspeople of the neighbourhoods in Chiang Mai, including Wua‐Lai, which the author called "handicraft communities" (chumchon hatthakam). Moreover, the book presents the key projects of Wat Sri‐Suphan, by bringing forward the role of the abbot, the Lanna Handicraft group, and the Royal Academy as the main actors in the preservation and transmission of the silver craftsmanship, the cultural heritage of the neighbourhood.

In the case of Chumchon Wat Muen‐Sarn, a book entitled "Temple Wat Muen‐Sarn, Ban Wua‐Lai in the Stream of Community Culture"[8] was published in 2012. The book was written by Jirawan Gavila, a curator who was born in Wua‐Lai. Like the history book of Wat Sri‐Suphan, the author traces back the establishment of the temple and the settlement of Tai Shan silversmiths in Wua‐Lai. However, the history book of Wat Muen‐Sarn put more emphasis on the role of the ordinary residents, entrepreneurs and craftspersons who developed craft business in Wua‐Lai after the Second World War. The author indicates precisely the key craftspeople and entrepreneurs of each period, and stresses the collaboration of Wat Muen‐Sarn, Wat Sri‐Suphan and Wat Nantaram in carrying out the neighbourhood's economic regeneration programmes.

Creation of the community museums

The Lanna Craft Wisdom Museum was established at Wat Sri‐Suphan temple in 2012, through the support of the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (SACICT). This museum presents the artisanal handcrafted specificity of 11 neighbourhoods in Chiang Mai, by placing spotlight on the master craftspeople of Wat Muen‐Sarn, Wat Sri‐Suphan and Wat Nantaram. The museum also hosts exhibits some silverware and lacquerware.

In the case of Chumchon Wat Muen‐Sarn, the community museum was initiated by the neighbourhood committee that consisted of residents and monks. They also used the temple ground to host the community museum. In the 2000s, they started an inventory to collect old masterpieces of silverware and lacquerware in the neighbourhood. The abbot of the temple (chao awat) supported the project by helping to promote it and by convincing residents to donate their families' heirlooms. A collection of silverware and lacquerware is now displayed in a vacant building of the temple (Fig. 6). Such approach transposed family legacies into the community museum, making them a shared heritage and marker of neighbourhood identity, providing a focus for local pride. The museum also displays information panels telling a 200‐year history of Wua‐Lai. These recount the displacement of people and craftspeople from Shan State and Sibsongbanna to Chiang Mai in the 19th century. The historical narrative puts an emphasis on the importance of Wat Muen‐Sarn temple as the anchor point of Wua‐Lai villagers and silversmiths who migrated from Salween river valley in Shan State. This historic narrative seeks to connect the past of Wat Muen‐Sarn and Wua‐Lai with the history of the old Kingdom of Lanna (1259–1884), for highlighting the historical value of the neighbourhood. The museum's exhibition narrative also emphasises some ancient artisanal techniques that the craftspeople of Wua‐Lai inherited from Tai Shan silversmiths (Fig. 7). As such, there was an effort to promote artistic expression and the cultural value of silverware and lacquerware in a mixed Burmese–Lanna style, which is typically excluded from official inventories of national heritage.

At the northern side of the community museum of Wat Muen‐Sarn is the Silver Art Gallery Sutthajito (Fig. 8). The construction of the art gallery was launched in 2002 by the neighbourhood committee that mobilised donated funds for the construction. The committee stimulated the sense of cooperation and willingness to contribute to this project through the Theravada Buddhist concept of merit (bun) and the long‐standing practice of Northern Thai society of collaboratively constructing sacred structures for their neighbourhoods. Based on the concept of merit, the residents and devotees of the temple saw the donations as acts of "merit‐making" (tham bun). They donated money and material goods and worked together to build the art gallery. About 43 silversmiths and monks of Wua‐Lai contributed their skills to the construction. They also created wall decorations in low relief, depicting the history of Wua‐Lai villagers' immigration from Salween river valley, scenes of daily life in the past, silver craft production and ritual ceremonies of the villagers. As a result, the textual narrative at the community museum was illustrated in images. Furthermore, this art space was made sacred by the presence of three sculptures, each depicting a venerated monk (kruba) of Chiang Mai and Wat Muen‐Sarn (Fig. 9), as well as by a low relief mural representing 12 sacred stupas of the Northern region. Hence, the sacred and the secular are combined in one place. The realm of the sacred infuses and legitimises the craftsmanship and history of the ordinary neighbourhood. This sacred art gallery stands today as an emblem of Wat Muen‐Sarn. Many tourists from the Wua‐Lai Saturday Market and Walking Street come to appreciate the fine craftsmanship in a spiritual atmosphere.

Through these neighbourhood identity projects, the neighbourhood committee of Wat Muen‐Sarn acts as a network consisting of a variety of entities. First, the residents created a strong partnership with monks. The residents were able to propose and manage the projects in accordance with their respective expertise and occupation (e.g., curator, professor, artisan, historian silver shop owner). Meanwhile, the monks displayed a strong willingness to engage in the neighbourhood's activities, especially the abbot's assistant, a young monk who graduated in Buddhist Studies for Community Development from the Mahamakut Buddhist University. We can see that the collaboration at Wat Muen‐Sarn is based on a horizontal relationship between monks and residents. Second, the neighbourhood committee widened the partnership to include other civil society organisations in the city. At the time of the urban and architecture survey on which this paper is based (2018–2019), they developed a community‐based tourist project with two other craft neighbourhoods in Chiang Mai (Wat Puak‐Tam and Wat Nantaram), in collaboration with the Chiang Mai Green Beauty Scented, which was a civil society organisation advocating for environmental and cultural heritage protection that provided expertise and advice on the practices of community‐based tourism as well as facilitated inter‐neighbourhood collaboration. This joint project proposed a visit to the community museums, the artisans' workshops and local craft shops of the community enterprise. This project was eventually disrupted by the COVID‐19 pandemic, but the emphasis on the role of residents and artisans reflects their aim, which was to create a supplementary income for the residents and artisans, to raise the visibility of the neighbourhood's craft products, and to promote the ordinary heritage of their neighbourhoods.

Conclusions

The analysis of Wua‐Lai's local projects provides insight into the autonomy of citizens in conducting neighbourhood‐based projects, as well as their ability to use and adapt urban resources and deep‐rooted cultural practices for contemporary projects. This study allows us to identify the key elements in place on which the local projects are premised and how these elements reproduce a sense of belonging and sociability that creates the potential for collective action. The following elements in place shape the local projects and connect the neighbourhood to the city.

Common identity

The creation of community museum and the publication of the neighbourhood's history contribute to the process of identity building. This relates to the appropriation of the cultural resources (temple and silver craft) that provide a significant fulcrum for manifesting the presence and power of a social group (Veschambre, [35]). Through the historical narrative of the museums and the publications, the two residential communities identify their neighbourhood with ethnic origin, the settlement of their ancestor in this area, and craft skills that were passed down through generations. This is a form of self‐inscription in time and space, providing a key factor for reproducing a shared identity among neighbours and strengthening a sense of belonging to the neighbourhood. The elements of identity continue to be shared through involvement in the local projects; the discourse on the settlement of Tai Shan silversmiths is still repeated by the residents during our interviews and discussions.

Temple as shared spaces and centre of coordination

Based on the multifunctional and social character of the temple, the Buddhist temple plays a key role in community life. As mentioned earlier, it is a meeting place and shared space for neighbourhood residents. Most of the collective activities take place at the temple: festival ceremonies, religious rituals, neighbourhood committee assemblies, polling stations and more. In this way, the temple becomes a centre of coordination where the residents can organise occasionally an informal forum for discussion, allowing neighbours to talk and exchange ideas, develop their collaborative projects. Both residential communities of Wua‐Lai use the temple to host a community museum for conserving and exhibiting the objects (old masterpieces of silverware and lacquerware) and displaying the neighbourhood history that represents collective memory, a shared heritage and marker of neighbourhood identity. In doing so, the temple becomes a "neighbourhood icon" (Ho, [12]), where residents build association, memories and attachments that are part and parcel of everyday lives. It also becomes a centre of belonging for people who share the same ethnic origin (or who are of the descend of the Tai Shan silversmiths) and who share the same cultural identity. We can see this as a form of community localism and community attachment to local cultural heritage (Gentry, [11]) in Chiang Mai that has developed since the 2000s, as a result of the citizen movement to defend the "heritage of community" (moradok chumchon) and of the inscription of Chiang Mai in the Creative Cities Network of UNESCO leading to the development of the Chiang Mai City of Crafts and Folk Art project that highlights the local know‐how and traditional craftsmanship of local communities.

It is worth noting that the use of the temple as a centre of coordination goes well beyond the religious sphere. Even though it is the monks who lead or participate in the development of local projects, they do not bring Buddhism or religious topics at the forefront. As we can notice in both local museums, the spotlight is on the "heritage of community" (silver craft) and the neighbourhood historical narrative. Some religious concepts and practices, such as concept of merit (bun) and acts of "merit‐making (tham bun), are used occasionally for stimulating the sense of cooperation and willingness to contribute to local projects, and the realm of the sacred helps legitimise the craftsmanship and history of the ordinary neighbourhood (see the Section 3.3, Creation of the community museums). The temple is used as a place for developing the local museum, the craft study centre and workshop and local landmark of the Walking Street, which open up and present the neighbourhood to the visitors and trainees craftspersons who are Thais or foreigners, Buddhists or non‐Buddhists. In this way, the temple function as a place of collaboration that connects the neighbourhood to the contemporary city, through community museums, educational and touristic programmes.

Furthermore, in the case of Wat Muen‐Sarn, the temple is also used as a memorial place for Japanese soldiers and the victims of the Second World War. The temple Wat Muen‐Sarn was used by the Japanese troop for hospitalising injured soldiers and storing their supply of food and arms. The story of Japanese troop is displayed at the community museum as part of the neighbourhood history. Since 1970, by mid‐August of each year, the Chiang Mai War Memorial Celebration Committee (Japanese veterans organisation) organises together with the neighbourhood committee a memorial ceremony for Thai victims and passed away soldiers. Many relatives of the Japanese soldiers come each year to the temple for participating in this event. This also shows the multifunctional and social character of the temple beyond the religious sphere, and the way how the residents try to connect their neighbourhood to the historical event of the city and beyond.

Common interest on handicraft as a source of livelihood and local heritage

Both residential communities consider silver craft as local heritage. In the case of Wat Muen‐Sarn, the old masterpieces of silverware and lacquerware in the neighbourhood are conserved and promoted at the community museum. The handicraft has thus a role in asserting cultural values of the neighbourhood. Regarding Wat Sri‐Suphan, an official learning centre (Lanna Arts Study Centre) is established for transmitting craft techniques and knowledge to new generations, as well as for developing new craft product types, with distinct craft techniques, in order to meet new market demands. In parallel, both communities see also the handicraft as a source for economic regeneration. By creating the local marketplaces (Wua‐Lai Walking Street and Saturday Market), they link the silver handicraft with the tourism sector of the city, and establish silver handicraft as one of the products and souvenirs of Chiang Mai. However, there is a risk of disappearance of local craft knowledge and craftsmanship when the initial objective of the handicraft market is neglected. We witness the "heterogeneisation" of craft products (Cohen, [4]) by the important presence of industrial products in the Wua‐Lai Walking Street. This can lead to a lot of distinct characteristics of craft product and craftsmanship.

Cooperative networks linking neighbourhood and city

The neighbourhood‐based projects are based on flexible networks of neighbours and cooperative practices that already existed. In response to the decline of the neighbourhood's craft trade, this local network is tightened. However, the neighbourhood network is potentially less stable and powerful than institutional system. Thus, the residents seek to consolidate and strengthen their network by collaborating with other civil society organisation and seeking support from local and national authorities. Furthermore, the cooperative networks of Wua‐Lai participate in the citizen movements to protect the local cultural heritage. It will be interesting to continue observing the network of neighbourhoods and civil society organisations, particularly the way in which the Wua‐Lai neighbourhood connects local heritage issues with broader ideologies and movements that circulate in the city. This is especially so in the context of Chiang Mai's increasing momentum as a heritage city, from the "Creative Cities Network" of UNESCO and the "Chiang Mai City of Crafts and Folk Art" project, which has some link with the One Tambon (sub‐district) One Product (OTOP) governmental programme. It will be also interesting to continue observing the interconnection between the development and heritage programmes of the national and international organisation at the neighbourhood level.

Furthermore, this study reveals the future challenges facing Wua‐Lai. First, the new approach of craft production and trade. As mentioned above, the adaptation to new market demands, while keeping the sophisticated techniques of production, is the main challenge for the craftspeople of Wua‐Lai. Second, the challenge related to the change in land ownership and land use, the arrival of new business development, particularly Bed & Breakfast hotels, developed by and for the "outsiders" who have no relation with the neighbourhood. The new development, in which the residents cannot take part in the decision‐making, will be a challenge that they have to overcome.

Acknowledgement

Research for this paper was part of the Southeast Asia Neighbourhoods Network, a research and education programme funded by the Henry Luce Foundation. We are very grateful to the residents, monks and craftspeople of Chumchon Wat Sri‐Suphan and Chumchon Wat Muen‐Sarn who participate in this study for taking the time to share their thoughts, experiences and insights.

Conflict of interest

The research team in Chiang Mai is part of the Southeast Asia Neighbourhoods Network (SEANNET), a research and pedagogical initiative funded by the Henry Luce Foundation.

All authors of this paper are part of SEANNET since 2017, for which Rita Padawangi, lead editor of the special issue, and Paul Rabé, one of the co‐editors of the special issue, are coordinators.

1 Founded in 1296, Lanna was a kingdom of Tai‐Kadai speaking people centred in present‐day Northern Thailand. It became a tributary state of Burma in 1558. In 1775, the Lanna rulers left the Burmese control to join Siam (Thailand). 2 Jointly owned apartment blocks generally located in towers of ten to thirty storeys. This type of individual accommodation has been particularly sought after in Bangkok since 1985 (Lubeigt, [16]:note 15). 3 In Thai, Kad‐Mua Khua‐Ngoen Khau‐Hak Khau‐Hang (กาดหมั้ว คัวเงิน คัวฮัก คัวฮาง) 4 Chiang Mai High Point is the first phase of the Lanna High Point (2005–2006) which is a holistic regional development scheme based on tourism and handicraft development. Inspired by the High Point market in North Carolina, this development scheme consists of two major components: (1) regeneration of the economically declining traditional communities within the city; (2) distribution of growth to outlying communities (Kulsrisombat, [14]:84). 5 In Thai, Moradok Lanna Phumpanya Thongthin (มรดกล้านนาภูมิปัญญาท้องถิ่น) 6 Interview with Phrakru Pitaksutthikhun, abbot of Wat Sri Suphan temple, and Swan Kwaenthaisong, manager of Silver Temple Foundation, in 2018. 7 In Thai, Sinlapahatthakam Ubosot‐Ngoen Wat Sri‐Suphan (ศิลปหัตถกรรมอุโบสถเงินวัดศรีสุพรรณ) 8 In Thai, Wat Muen‐Sarn Ban Wua‐Lai – Saithan Wattanatham Chumchon (วัดหมื่นสารบ้านวัวลาย สายธารวัฒนธรรมชุมชน) Byrne, D. (2014) Counterheritage: Critical perspectives on heritage conservation in Asia. New York & London : Routledge. Chifos, C. and J.W. Looye (2002) The handicraft sector in Chiang Mai: Its role in sustainable urban development, in M. Romanus and C. Auffrey (eds.), Managing intermediate size cities: Sustainable development in a growth region of Thailand, pp. 91 – 126. Dortrecht : Kluwer Academic Publishers. Clément‐Charpentier, S. and P. Clément (1990) L'habitation lao dans les régions de Vientiane et de Luang Prabang. Paris : Peeters. Cohen, E. (2000) The commercialized crafts of Thailand: Hill tribes and lowland villages. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press. Condominas, G. (1980) L'espace social à propos de l'Asie du Sud‐Est. Paris : Flammarion. Crooke, E. (2006) Museums and community, in S. Macdonald (ed.), A companion to museum studies, pp. 170 – 185. Oxford : Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Davis, R. (1984) Meuang metaphysics a study of northern Thai myth and ritual. Bangkok : Pandora. Fallov, M.A. (2010) Community capacity building as the route to inclusion in Neighbourhood regeneration? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34 (4): 789 – 804. 9 Gabaude, L. (2001) Politique et religion en Thaïlande: dépendance et responsabilité, Revue d'études comparatives Est‐Ouest 32 (1): 147 – 173. Gavila, J. จิราวรรณ กาวิละ (2001) ทางเลือกของการท่องเที่ยวเชิงวัฒนธรรม: กรณีศึกษาหมู่บ้านวัวลาย อำเภอเมือง จังหวัดเชียงใหม่ [Cultural Tourism Alternatives: A Case Study of Wualai Village, Muang District, Chiang Mai Province], Master thesis, Chiang Mai University. Gentry, K. (2013) History, heritage and localism, Policy Studies 34 (5–6): 508 – 522. Ho, K.C. (2019) Neighbourhoods for the City in Pacific Asia. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Kanokmongkol, N. (2016) The situation of community museums in the north of Thailand, in N. Sonoda (ed.), New horizons for Asian museums and museology. Singapore : Springer. Kulsrisombat, N. (2008) De facto urban regeneration: A case study of Chiang Mai City, Thailand, in T. Kidokoro, N. Harata, L.P. Subanu, J. Jessen, A. Motte and E.P. Seltzer (eds.), Sustainable City regions. Tokyo : Springer. Lertcharnrit, T. and N. Niyomsap (2020) Heritage management, education, and community involvement in Thailand: A central Thai community case, Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage 7 (3): 187 – 197. Lubeigt, G. (1994) Traditional and recent aspect of the urban development of Chiang Mai, Thailand, in A. Marc and L. William (eds.), Cultural identity and urban change in Southeast Asia: Interpretive essays, pp. 117 – 134. Victoria, Australia : Deakin University Press. Magnaghi, A. (2005) The Urban Village. A charter for democracy and local self‐sustainable development. Chicago : University of Chicago. Magnaghi, A. (2017) La conscience du lieu. Paris : Editions Etérotopia. Nernhard, A. อนุ เนินหาด (2015) บ้านวัวลาย [ Baan Wai‐Lai ]. Chiang Mai: Nopburi Kan‐Phim. O'Connor, R.A. (1990) Place, power and discourse in the Thai image of Bangkok, Journal of the Siam Society 78 (2): 61–73. O'Connor, R.A. (1993) Interpreting Thai religious change: Temples, Sangha reform and social change, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 24 (2): 330 – 339. Ongsakul, S. สมโชติ อ๋องสกุล (2006) ผังเมืองเชียงใหม่: มิติทางประวัติศาสตร์ [ City Plan of Chiang Mai: Historical Dimension ]. Faculty of Education, Chiang Mai University. Ongsakul, S. (2005) History of Lan Na. Translated by Chitraporn Tanratanakul. Chiang Mai : Silworm Books. Ouyyanont, P. (2017) A regional economic history of Thailand. Singapour : ISEAS‐Yusof Ishak Institute. Pattama, P., R.H. Chamnan and K. Marisa (2013) Local ethnic museum: Administration for the Conservation of indigenous knowledge in Central Thailand, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 3 (10): 1 – 10. Penth, H. and A. Forbes (2004) A brief history of Lan Na: Northern Thailand from the past to present. Chiang Mai : Chiang Mai City Arts & Cultural Centre. Phongphit, S. (1986) Back to the roots. Village and self‐reliance in a Thai context, Bangkok: Rural Development Documentation Centre and Village Institution Promotion, Culture and development series 1. Porananond, P. and M. Robinson (2008) Modernity and the evolution of a festive tourism tradition: The Songkran festival in Chiang Mai, Thailand, in J. Cochrane (ed.), Asian tourism: Growth and change, pp. 311 – 321. Amsterdam : Elsevier Science. Reynolds, C.J. (2009) Chumchon: Community in Thailand, in C. Gluck and A.L. Tsing (eds.), Words in motion:Toward a global lexicon. Durham and London : Duke University Press. Scheer, B. and D. Scheer (2002) Towards a sustainable urban form in Chiang Mai, in M. Romanos and C. Auffrey (eds.), Managing Intermediate Size Cities: Sustainable Development in a Growth Region of Thailand. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Setthakun, R. รัตนาพร เศรษฐกุล (2009) ประวัติศาสตร์เศรษฐกิจวัฒนธรรม แอ่งเชียงใหม่‐ลำพูน [ Economic and Cultural History of Chiang Mai‐Lamphun Valley ]. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books. Sirivanichkul, J., N. Koompong, S. Supornchai, D. Weeranan and L. Chaturong (2018) Interpretation of a local Museum in Thailand, Sustainability 10 (7): 1 – 33. Tambiah, S.J. (1976) World conqueror and world renouncer: A study of Buddhism and polity in Thailand against a historical background. Cambridge; New York : Cambridge University Press. Vatikiotis, M.R.J. (1984) Ethnic pluralism in the northern Thai City of Chiangmai. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oxford. Veschambre, V. (2008) Traces et mémoires urbaines: enjeux sociaux de la patrimonialisation et de la démolition. Rennes, France : Presses universitaires de Rennes.

By Pijika Pumketkao‐Lecourt; Komson Teeraparbwong and Pranom Tansukanun

Reported by Author; Author; Author