sustainability

Article The Safeguarding of Intangible from the Perspective of Civic Participation: The Informal Education of Chinese Embroidery Handicrafts

Wen-Jie Yan 1,2,* and Shang-Chia Chiou 1

1 Graduate School of Design, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Yunlin 64002, Taiwan; [email protected] 2 Fujian Key Laboratory of Novel Functional Textile Fibers and Materials, Minjiang University, Fuzhou 350108, * Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Heritage education can enable social empowerment. Within the broader goal of social empowerment, a current challenge is to establish principles that promote social participation in traditional education. The practice of protecting intangible cultural heritage in China has developed its own unique working model based on the basic theoretical level of UNESCO. This research used cultural citizenship as a theoretical guide, focused on the traditional embroidery craftsmanship of China’s intangible cultural heritage, and conducted exploratory research on the learning intention and value influence indicators of citizens participating in intangible cultural heritage. The research   design of this study was divided into two phases: the first phase was designed to collect evaluation indicators that affect the learning of intangible cultural heritage skills, and to support these data using Citation: Yan, W.-J.; Chiou, S.-C. semi-structured in-depth interviews. In the second phase, the convergence of the value indicators The Safeguarding of Intangible that affect the learning of intangible cultural heritage techniques was completed using questionnaire Cultural Heritage from the surveys and statistical analyses. Factor analysis was performed using SPSS software. SEM (structural Perspective of Civic Participation: equation modeling) confirmatory analysis was performed using Amos software. Through a two- The Informal Education of Chinese stage hybrid study, a value recognition scale for the informal educational inheritance of intangible Embroidery Handicrafts. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958. https:// cultural heritage handicrafts was obtained within the local context of China. The scale contains four doi.org/10.3390/su13094958 first-level indicators (ICH’s authenticity, cultural identity, performed value, and social recognition) and 17 second-level indicators. The research results were based on UNESCO’s education indicators Academic Editor: Cosme for SDG 4, and put forward principles for practices aimed at protecting China’s intangible cultural Jesús Gómez-Carrasco heritage’s local informal education. Reflecting on the Chinese tradition of citizen participation in protecting intangible cultural heritage could provide references for the practice of intangible cultural Received: 7 April 2021 heritage protection in other fields and regions. This is consistent with the UN’s SDG 4.7 (ensure all Accepted: 26 April 2021 learners acquire knowledge and skills needed to promote ). Published: 28 April 2021 Keywords: intangible cultural heritage safeguarding; Chinese embroidery handicrafts; Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral informal education; civic participation; sustainability with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations. 1. Introduction 1.1. Intangible Cultural Heritage and Civic Cultural Participation The safeguarding and protection of intangible cultural heritage (hereinafter referred Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. to as ICH) is quickly becoming an international social and cultural movement with a vast This article is an open access article range of influences. Different countries, groups, and individuals have diverse requirements distributed under the terms and and carry out different protection practices according to their specific contexts. In order to conditions of the Creative Commons promote greater engagement and broader participation, ICH safeguarding has developed Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// from a single-industry concept to one that requires involvement across multiple fields creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ of society. It can be applied in numerous ways, from the protection of donations to the 4.0/). sustainable development path of diversified empowerment (Figure1). The reality is that,

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094958 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2021,, 13,, xx FORFOR PEERPEER REVIEWREVIEW 2 of 21

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 2 of 21 developed from a single-industryindustry conceptconcept to one that requires involvementinvolvement across multi- ple fields of society.. It can be applied in numerous ways, from the protection of donations to the sustainable development path of diversified empowerment (Figure 1). The reality underisis thatthat the,, under -led the government administrative-ledled administrativeadministrative management managementmanagement model, China’s model,model, ICH China’s safeguarding ICH safe- workguarding primarily work focuses primarily onhealth focuses care on functionality.health care function It doesality. not effectively It does not fulfill effectively the upward fulfill incentivethe upward function incentive [1]. Therefore, function [1] it. is. Therefore, necessary it to is mobilize necessary the to enthusiasm mobilize the and enthusiasm creativity ofand ICH creativity safeguarding’s of ICH subjects,safeguarding’s to encourage subjects them,, to encourage to participate them in to ICH participate safeguarding in ICH work,safeguarding and to establish work, and a relationship to establish a between relationship them between and ICH them to promote and ICH the to continuouspromote the performancecontinuous perfo of ICHrmance safeguarding’s of ICH safeguarding’s social functions. social functions.

Figure 1. Changes in the concept of China’s ICH safeguarding practices. FigureFigure 1. 1.Changes Changes in in the the concept concept of of China’s China’s ICH ICH safeguarding safeguarding practices. practices.

TheThe international international community community regards regards ICH ICH safeguarding safeguarding as aas scientific a scientific work work related related to humanto human rights. rights. The The safeguarding safeguarding and and use use of ICH of ICH have have become become increasingly increasingly social, social, making mak- theseinging these social social and cultural and cultural affairs affairs more vibrantmore vibrant and sustainable. and sustainable. When others—representedWhen others—repre- hereinsented by herein the government,by the government, academia, academia, and commercial and commercial organizations—habitually organizations—habitually rely onrely their on their absolute absolu discursivete discursive power power and and powerful powerful social social resources resources to to intervene intervene in in the the inheritanceinheritanceinheritance of ofof ICH, ICH,ICH, the thethe cultural culturalcultural subject subjectsubject will willwill passively passivelypassively drift driftdrift outside outsideoutside the thethe scope scopescope of safeguarding. ofof safeguard-safeguard- Thus,ing.ing. Thus, owners owners of economic of economic capital capital and executives and executives of administrative of administrative power must power go beyondmust go theirbeyond duties. their Such duties. behavior Such behavior strengthens strengthens the consciousness the consciousness of the weakest of the cultural weakest subjects. cultural Thesubjects. cultural The subject cultural status subject of status citizens of citizens has gradually has gradually declined, declined, and the and role the of role citizens of cit- hasizensizens steadily hashas steadily shifted shifted away fromaway “thefrom fringe “the fringe of participation” of participation to “the” to participation“the participation of the of fringe”the fringe [2]” (Figure [2] (Figure2). For 2) citizens,.. For citizens, cultural cultural heritage heritage has become has become another another , culture and,, the and government’sthe government’s protection protection in good in good faith faith has has caused caused the the disappearance disappearance of of their their subjective subjective statusstatus and and undermined undermined the the continuation continuation of of cultural cultural vitality. vitality. Therefore, Therefore, ICH ICH safeguarding safeguarding needsneeds to to reflect reflect on on how how to to ensure ensure social social empowerment empowerment across across both both inheritance inheritance rights rights and and humanhuman rights rights and and ensure ensure that that citizens citizens have have the the conditions conditions and and opportunities opportunities to to participate participate ininin cultural culturalcultural communities communitiescommunities at atat the thethe local, local,local, national, national,national, and andand global globalglobal levels. levels.levels.

FigureFigure 2. 2.The The change change of of citizens’ citizens’ subjective subjective consciousness consciousness in inin ICH ICHICH safeguarding. safeguarding..

RobertRobert D. D.Putnam Putnam [ 3[3]] stated stated his his belief belief that that social social capital capital was was deeply deeply embedded embedded in in variousvarious factors factors that that affect affect citizen citizen participation, participation,,and andandthat thatthatit ititbecomes becomesa a glue glue for for citizen citizen par- par- ticipationticipation in inin aa reciprocalreciprocal social network network... However, However, the the concept concept of of participation participation varies varies ac- accordingcording to to environment environment... InIn Inthethe the contextcontext context ofof post of post modernization modernization,,, thethe keykey the feature keyfeature feature ofof thethe of wordword the wordparticipation participation is related is related to politics to politics and andmedia, media, and and participation participation must must be embedded be embedded in the in theextended extended political political outlook outlook [4] [4.. ].TheThe The newnew new experienceexperience experience ofof of politicalpolitical participationparticipationparticipation comes comescomes from frofrom daily practice. For participating subjects, how to choose a way to define citizenship has become essential to citizen participation [5]. Participation in cultural activities or cultural organizations is one of the basic elements of cultural citizenship. Cultural citizenship is Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 21

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 3 of 21 daily practice. For participating subjects, how to choose a way to define citizenship has become essential to citizen participation [5]. Participation in cultural activities or cultural organizations is one of the basic elements of cultural citizenship. Cultural citizenship is relatedrelated to to the the participation participation of of individual individual citizens citizens in in cultural cultural events events and the the creation of systemssystems and and projects projects to to promote promote cultural cultural participation in their communities [ 6]].. Flores Flores [ 7] hashas argued thatthatcultural cultural citizenship citizenship is ais way a way for peoplefor people to organize to organize their owntheir values, own values rights,, rightsand beliefs., and beliefs. Moreover, Moreover, it creates it creates a common, a common, unified unified feeling feeling of cultural of cultural belonging belonging and is andflexible is flexible and actionable. and actionable. Cultural Cultural citizenship citizenship is the is result the result of the of combined the combined forces forces of self- of selfmaking-making and being-madeand being-made [8], which [8], whi meansch means that individual that individual effort and effort initiative and initiative can play canjust playas important just as important a role in people’sa role in people’s lives as the lives forces as the that forces underpin that underpin the social the systems social insystem whichs inthey which operate. they Theoperate core. The idea core behind idea these behind two these views two is “citizenviews is participation.” “citizen participation. Through” Throughparticipation, participation, people not people only developnot only as develop individuals as individuals but also become but also interconnected become intercon- with nectedothers. with Figure others3 shows. Figure the 3 relationship shows the relationship between cultural between heritage cultural education heritage undereducation the underguidance the ofguidance cultural of policies cultural and policies implementation and implementation in citizens’ culturalin citizens' lives. cultural Citizen lives cultural. Cit- izenheritage cultural education heritage from education national from cultural national policy cultural expands policy the wayexpands individuals the way participate individu- alsin public.participate The in top-down public. The cultural top-down approach cultural has approach promoted has citizens’ promoted participation citizens’ partici- in the pationprotection in the of culturalprotection heritage. of cultural Thus, heritage citizen. participationThus, citizen closeparticipat to personalion close life to experience personal lifeis conducive experience to is fostering conducive a sense to fostering of community a sense belonging, of community increasing belonging, informal increasing social con- in- formalnections social between connections citizens, between and strengthening citizens, and citizens’ strengthening cultural citizens’ education. cultural With aneducation increase. Within citizen an increase participation, in citizen social participation, capital has social also beencapital accumulated, has also been including accumulated, establishing includ- ingpublic establishing values, norms public of values, reciprocity, norms social of reciprocity, trust, and socialsocial relationshiptrust, and social networks. relationship Social networks.capital in theSocial civic capital community in the civic encourages community and promotesencourages the and participation promotes the of citizensparticipa- in tionsocial of activitiescitizens in to social improve activities citizens’ to senseimprove of social citizens’ responsibility sense of social and theresponsibility sense of accom- and theplishment sense of of accomplishment citizenship self-realization of citizenship to understand self-realization the psychological to understand empowerment the psychologi- of cultural citizenship. cal empowerment of cultural citizenship.

FigureFigure 3. 3. TheThe rooting rooting relationship relationship diagram of cultural heritage education with citizen participation.

Therefore,Therefore, this this research research will will take take the the concepts concepts of of “ “culturalcultural rights, rights, cultural cultural identity, identity, andand identity identity”” as as outlined outlined in in the the definition definition of “ “culturalcultural citizenship citizenship”” and use them as a lens throughthrough which which to to interpret interpret any any findings findings.. Combin Combininging political political science science and and cultural cultural heritage heritage asas the the theoretical guidance ofof disciplines,disciplines, exploratoryexploratory research research is is conducted conducted on on the the behavior behav- iorintention intention and and value value perception perception of citizens of citizens participating participating in ICH in ICH handicraft handicraft safeguarding. safeguard- ing. 1.2. Research Object and Purpose

The object of this research is Jincang embroidery, a traditional technique of intangible cultural heritage in Quanzhou, China (it uses golden embroidery thread, which is shaped similar to allium). This embroidery technique belongs to the Fujian Provincial Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection List and is used primarily in puppet costumes and embroi- dered decorations in temples and halls. The technical characteristics of Jincang embroidery are the heightening skills of adding cotton wool and paper, as well as the three-dimensional embroidery skills of collage and splicing, and the strong visual impact rendered using gold and silver threads (Figures4 and5). In Quanzhou, where worshiping ghosts and gods are admired, people use the lively and exaggerated visual effects of Jincang embroidery to convey the ultimate reverence for the gods. It can be said that Jincang embroidery in Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 21 Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 21

1.2. Research Object and Purpose 1.2. Research Object and Purpose The object of this research is Jincang embroidery, a traditional technique of intangible culturalThe heritageobject of inthis Quanzhou, research is China Jincang (it embroidery,uses golden embroiderya traditional thread,technique which of intangible is shaped culturalsimilar toheritage allium). in ThisQuanzhou, embroidery China technique (it uses golden belongs embroidery to the Fujian thread, Provincial which Intangibleis shaped similarCultural to Heritageallium). ThisProtection embroidery List and technique is used belongsprimarily to in the puppet Fujian costumes Provincial and Intangible embroi- Culturaldered decorations Heritage Protection in temples List and and halls. is used The primarilytechnical characteristicsin puppet costumes of Jin candang embroi-embroi- dereddery are decorations the heightening in temples skills and of addinghalls. The cotton technical wool andcharacteristics paper, as well of Jin asc angthe threeembroi--di- dery are the heightening skills of adding cotton wool and paper, as well as the three-di- Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 mensional embroidery skills of collage and splicing, and the strong visual impact4 ofren- 21 mensionaldered using embroidery gold and silverskills threadsof collage (Figure and ssplicing, 4 and 5) and. In Quanzhou,the strong visualwhere impactworshiping ren- deredghosts using and gods gold areand admired, silver threads people (Figure use thes 4lively and and5). In exaggerated Quanzhou, visualwhere effects worshiping of Jin- ghcangosts embroidery and gods are to conveyadmired, the people ultimate use reverence the lively for and the exaggerated gods. It can visual be said effects that Jin ofc Jin-ang cQuanzhouembroideryang embroidery does in Quanzhou not to convey represent does the a ultimate purenot represent hand reverence embroidery a pure for handthe technique. gods. embroidery It can It also be techniquesaid signifies that aJin. nativeItc angalso embroideryattachmentsignifies a native carriedin Quanzhou attachment by the methoddoes carried not and represent by practice the method a of pure faith handand in the practice embroidery spirit of of appealing faith technique in the to the.spirit It godsalso of signifiescausedappealing by a risknativeto the and godsattachment uncertainty. caused carriedby risk byand the uncertainty. method and practice of faith in the spirit of appealing to the gods caused by risk and uncertainty.

(a) (b) (a) (b) Figure 4. 4. QuanzhouQuanzhou Jincang Jincanghandicrafts handicrafts embroidery embroidery.. (a) Semi-finished (a )products Semi-finished (b) Finished products Figure 4. Quanzhou Jincang handicrafts embroidery. (a) Semi-finished products (b) Finished (productsb) Finished. products. products.

(a) (b) (a) (b) Figure 5. Table skirt and leader flag made by Jincang embroidery. (a) Table skirt made by Jincang embroidery, (b) Leader Figureflag made 5. Table by Jincang skirt and embroidery leaderFigure flag. 5. madeTable by skirt Jinc andang leaderembroidery flag made. (a) Table by Jincang skirt made embroidery. by Jincang (a) embroidery, Table skirt made (b) Leader by Jincang flag made by Jincang embroideryembroidery,. (b) Leader flag made by Jincang embroidery. Due to the decrease in folk temples and opera performances in Quanzhou, the de- mandDueDue for to Jincang thethe decreasedecrease embroidery in in folk folk products temples temples andhas and operadropped opera performances performances sharply. At in present, Quanzhou, in Quanzhou Jincang the, demandembroi-the de- mandfordery Jincang productsfor Jincang embroidery in embroideryQuanzhou products areproducts mainly has dropped has supplied dropped sharply. to sharply. Southeast At present, At Asiapresent, Jincangand Jin Taiwan.cang embroidery embroi- Quan- deryproductszhou products citizens’ in Quanzhou contactin Quanzhou with are Jincang mainly are mainly embroidery supplied supplied to is Southeast alsoto Southeast limited Asia to Asiaand public Taiwan.and cultural Taiwan. Quanzhou ac Quan-tivities citizens’ contact with Jincang embroidery is also limited to public cultural activities or- zhouorganized citizens’ by governmentcontact with departmentsJincang embroidery and collections is also limited in local to cultural public centers.cultural However,activities ganized by government departments and collections in local cultural centers. However, organizedwith the development by government of activitiesdepartments of intangible and collections cultural in heritagelocal cultural entering centers. campuses However, and wwithith the the development of of activities of intangible cultural heritage entering campuses and communities, Quanzhou Jincang embroidery skills gradually reappeared in the lives of local citizens. As one of the administrative tasks of the government’s management nature, China’s intangible cultural heritage safeguarding has shifted from focusing on the “protection list” to “protection effectiveness.” Hence, conventional evaluation methods can be divided into two types: “first-party evaluation” (supervision and evaluation by the government’s cultural management department) and “second-party evaluation” (self-examination and evaluation by the inheritor of the heritage object). The neutrality, objectivity, profession- alism, and system of the “third-party assessment” can provide more active and effective re-verification and supplementation of the results of the “first-party assessment” and Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 5 of 21

“second-party assessment.” Furthermore, it can play an active role in safeguarding intangi- ble cultural heritage, which pays more attention to “protection effectiveness.” Therefore, this research uses the perspective of “third-party evaluation” required for safeguarding intangible cultural heritage handicrafts and uses intangible cultural heritage as a social public cultural resource to design evaluation indicators for handicraft learning activities involving citizens.

2. Literature Review 2.1. Citizen Cultural Heritage Education and Cultural Citizenship The essence of heritage is a process of heritage construction [6]. In the process of heritage construction, authoritative discourse usually interprets heritage as a material entity that embodies the will of the elite, while non-authoritative discourses regard heritage construction as a cultural process related to identity, power, skills, locality, and practical experience [9]. These non-authoritative subjects include community residents, tourists, companies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and other social groups or organizations. They all regard heritage as the focus of constructing their own identity and meaning. Therefore, emphasizing the cognition and identification of cultural citizenship will help the individual citizen’s subjectivity and inter-subjectivity to interact with one another. Citizens can better understand and use their artistic rights in social practice, thereby assuming corresponding cultural responsibilities and obligations. The cultural concept of citizenship is intended to flow within and between various levels of culture [10], which gives citizens the necessary conditions and opportunities to participate in various cultural communities at the local, national, and global levels, forming multicultural citizenship [11]. Yang [12] analyzes the connotation of cultural citizenship, that is, the value of the times, and proposes that the cultivation of cultural citizenship and identity recognition should be constructed by the educational system, citizens themselves, and the non-educational social system. Li [13] proposes from the safeguarding practice of intangible cultural heritage Midu lanterns that limited government leadership, the im- plementation of a participatory ICH safeguarding development model, the enhancement of participation capacity building, and the cultivation of participation spokespersons are effective ways to increase public participation and cultural discourse power. Wang [14] emphasizes that contemporary cultural heritage protection actions should maintain or awaken people’s response to heritage to maintain a unique cultural identity and rejuvenate the heritage’s continued vitality. Wang also suggests that “continuity” will become an essential principle of heritage protection after “authenticity” and “integrity.” Li & Ma [15] conducted educational practice research on the logical relationship between “ICH safe- guarding” and “intercultural education,” and used the study to propose that the intangible cultural heritage education path can help awaken and strengthen the cultural participa- tion, identity, and social exchanges of the inheritors. This path can also contribute to ICH safeguarding and development to create endogenous power. After conducting an epistemological analysis of Mexico’s ICH safeguarding concept and measures, Zhang [16] proposes that the community-owned attributes of ICH mean that the inheritance of heritage will be more dependent on the consciousness and participation of the community; in other words, linking intellectuals’ understanding of cultural inheritance with normal people’s daily lives will help cultivate the cultural identity and consciousness of heritage groups. In response to the evaluation needs of the development of cultural citizenship, Mercer [17] designed four sets of indicators to measure cultural dimensions at the lo- cal, national, and international level: (1) cultural vitality, cultural diversity, and cultural joy; (2) cultural accessibility, participation, and consumption (which look at the opportuni- ties and obstacles for users trying to participate in culture actively); (3) culture, , and identity (which focus on the degree to which cultural resources and capital are used to construct a specific lifestyle and identity); and (4) culture, ethics, , and behavior (which focus on the shaping of individual and collective behavior by cultural resources and capital). Mercer’s four dimensions of cultural citizenship are primarily used for cultural Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 6 of 21

governance, and the application of these indicators constitutes the basis for formulation. Simultaneously, the implicit assumption is that culture can be used as a capital resource for individuals or collectives and that culture has economic attributes. Cultural citizenship is not meant to cut off its original artistic genes but to achieve empowerment of cultural minorities when they are in a socially attached position and to establish integrity spaces and diverse associations [18].

2.2. Social Capital and Citizen Participation Robert D. Putnam (2015) defines social capital as “the private participation network of ordinary citizens, and the norms of reciprocity and trust embodied in this agreement.” So- cial capital is self-reinforcing and accumulative due to its use. A virtuous circle will produce social equilibrium and continuously form high cooperation, trust, reciprocity, citizen partic- ipation, and collective welfare. In contrast, non-public spiritual communities lacking these qualities are also self-reinforcing. American sociologist Alexandro Portes (1998) believes that social capital is not an asset but a kind of ability, obtaining scarce resources in a social network or social structure, a membership status. He also distinguished between positive social capital and negative social capital. Francis Fukuyama (2000) believes that social capital is an informal norm that helps two or more individuals cooperate with what can be explained by strength; trust, network, civil society, and other things related to social capital. Lochner & Kennedy [19] pointed out that the measurement indicators of community social capital include community social organizations, social support, sense of belonging, social network, informal interaction, and volunteer participation activity. The World Bank has made significant contributions to research on social capital measurement. A-SCAT [20] uses seven questions to measure structural social capital and 11 questions to measure cognitive, social capital. These 18 questions include organizational connections (and participation in associations is relatively close), collective action, participation in public affairs, social support, social cohesion, sense of belonging, trust, and reciprocity, etc. The connotation of “participation” has its definition in various specific social practices. The “participation” in the theoretical interpretation focuses on the involvement of various stakeholders in the decision-making process of related affairs. It enhances their capabilities by changing their understanding so that citizens can bear their dues: responsibilities, use, and control of resources. Empowerment is defined as people gaining control over their personal lives and communities [21]. It represents a new orientation in the development of social capital, emphasizing the cooperation between community members and professionals rather than treating professionals as authorities who guide or carry out work in the community from top to bottom. At the local level, empowerment is a natural construct linked to social capital. It focuses on the individual’s self-efficacy, self-confidence, competence, critical reflection, and how individuals rely on mutual respect, care, and participation. The ways of acquiring and exchanging resources relate to changes at the group, organization, and community level [22]. At the individual level, empowerment can predict the degree of residents’ participation, forming a mutually reinforcing virtuous circle between empowerment and residents’ involvement. Citizen participation constitutes the formal behavioral dimension of social capital. Based on the documents mentioned above, this study takes citizens’ willingness to protect intangible cultural heritage by measuring cultural citizenship. Initial indicators include authenticity, social network, norms and trust, cultural identity, cultural identity, and community awareness.

3. Research Design 3.1. Research Process The research design is divided into two phases. The first phase involves collecting qualitative data, including the inheritance subject (inheritor and teacher) of ICH handicraft and the ICH safeguarding subject (student). The second phase consists of collecting and Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 21

munity level [22]. At the individual level, empowerment can predict the degree of resi- dents’ participation, forming a mutually reinforcing virtuous circle between empower- ment and residents’ involvement. Citizen participation constitutes the formal behavioral dimension of social capital. Based on the documents mentioned above, this study takes citizens’ willingness to protect intangible cultural heritage by measuring cultural citizenship. Initial indicators include authenticity, social network, norms and trust, cultural identity, cultural identity, and community awareness.

3. Research Design

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 3.1. Research Process 7 of 21 The research design is divided into two phases. The first phase involves collecting qualitative data, including the inheritance subject (inheritor and teacher) of ICH handi- craft and the ICH safeguarding subject (student). The second phase consists of collecting analyzing quantitative data, which is carried out by using questionnaire surveys. The qual- and analyzing quantitative data, which is carried out by using questionnaire surveys. The itative data analysis uses grounded theory methods, the data analysis of quantitative data qualitative data analysis uses grounded theory methods, the data analysis of quantitative uses SPSS for analysis, and the model verification analysis uses Amos. Thus, it can be said data uses SPSS for analysis, and the model verification analysis uses Amos. Thus, it can that this study uses a mixed research method to achieve comprehensive and authentic data be said that this study uses a mixed research method to achieve comprehensive and au- collection (Figure6). thentic data collection. (Figure 6)

FigureFigure 6. 6.Research Research process. process.

3.2.Phase I: In-Depth Interview Method and Interview Design An in-depth interview is a style of interview in which open-ended questions are used to better understand participants’ beliefs, attitudes, and motivations. The information gleaned from the participants involves how they see their world and how they interpret important events in their lives [23]. Overall, an in-depth interview aims to achieve two purposes: to clarify and refine the content of the basic information questionnaire and to focus on key events by more profoundly examining the specific process of the event, the accompanying emotional experience, and the related influencing factors. To further clarify citizens’ value perception and cultural identity in the informal educa- tional inheritance of ICH handicraft, this study divides the in-depth interview population into two groups. In the first group, from 23–24 November 2020, the research team members will organize the ICH handicraft inheritance workshop for college students as an organizer (participants: one inheritor, one assistant, nine students, three teachers) conducted semi- structured in-depth interviews during this period. Figure7 shows the activity scene of the embroidery handicraft inheritance workshop and the Jincang embroidery works completed by the students. On 6 March 2021, the researcher participated in the embroidery inheritance workshop organized by the community university in the second group. Figure8 shows the scene of the second group of members participating in the embroidery experience activities organized by the community. During this period, the researcher conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with other participants [AppendixA]. Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 21 Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 21

3.2. PhaseⅠ: In-Depth Interview Method and Interview Design 3.2. PhaseⅠ: In-Depth Interview Method and Interview Design An in-depth interview is a style of interview in which open-ended questions are used to betterAn in understand-depth interview participants is a style’ beliefs, of interview attitudes, in which and open motivations-ended questions. The information are used gleanedto better from understand the participants participants involves’ beliefs, how attitudes, they see their and world motivations and how. The they information interpret importantgleaned from events the participantsin their lives involves [23]. Overall, how they an in see-depth their interview world and aim hows to they achieve interpret two purposes:important toevents clarify in andtheir refine lives the[23 ]content. Overall, of anthe in basic-depth information interview questionnaireaims to achieve and two to focuspurposes: on key to clarifyevents andby more refine profoundly the content examining of the basic the information specific process questionnaire of the event, and the to accompanyingfocus on key events emotional by more experience, profoundly and examiningthe related the influencin specificg process factors. of the event, the accompanyingTo further emotionalclarify citizens experience,’ value perceptionand the related and culturalinfluencin identityg factors. in the informal ed- ucationalTo further inheritance clarify of citizens ICH handicraft,’ value perception this study and divides cultural the identity in-depth in interviewthe informal popu- ed- lationucational into inheritance two groups. of In ICH the handicraft, first group, this from study 23– 24divides November the in -2020,depth th interviewe research popu- team memberslation into will two organize groups. theIn the ICH first handicraft group, from inheritance 23–24 November workshop 2020, for college the research students team as anmembers organizer will (participants: organize the one ICH inheritor, handicraft one inheritance assistant, nine workshop student fors, threecollege teachers) students con- as ductedan organizer semi- structured(participants: in- depthone inheritor, interviews one during assistant, this nine period student. Figures, three 7 shows teachers) the activ- con- ityducted scene semi of the-structured embroidery in-depth handicraft interviews inheritance during workshop this period and. Figure the Jincang 7 shows embroidery the activ- worksity scene completed of the embroidery by the students. handicraft On inheritance 6 March 2021, workshop the researcher and the Jincangparticipated embroidery in the embroideryworks completed inheritance by the workshop students. organizedOn 6 March by the2021, community the researcher university participated in the second in the groupembroidery. Figure inheritance 8 shows the workshop scene of organizedthe second by group the communityof members university participating in the in thesecond em- broiderygroup. Figure experience 8 shows activities the scene organized of the second by the group community. of members During participating this period, in thethe em- re- Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 8 of 21 searcherbroidery conductedexperience semi activities-structured organized in-depth by the interviews community. with Duringother participants this period, [Appen- the re- dixsearcher A]. conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with other participants [Appen- dix A].

(a) (b) (a) (b)

FigureFigure 7.7. TheThe firstfirst groupgroup of JingcangJingcang handicraft handicraftss workshop in in university university.. (a) The activity scene of (Figurea) The 7.activity The first scene group of the of Jembroideryingcang handicraft handicrafts workshop inheritance in university workshop,. where the inheritor is the embroidery handicraft inheritance workshop, where the inheritor is teaching embroidery skills; teaching(a) The activity embroidery scene skills;of the embroidery handicraft inheritance workshop, where the inheritor is (b) The Jincang embroidery works completed by the students. (teachingb) The Jincang embroidery embroidery skills; works completed by the students. (b) The Jincang embroidery works completed by the students.

(a) (b) (a) (b) FigureFigure 8.8. TheThe secondsecondgroup group of of Jingcang Jingcang handicrafts handicrafts experience experience activity activity in in community. community. (a ) The people Figure 8. The second group of Jingcang handicrafts experience activity in community. of(a) the The community people of the are c acquiringommunity embroidering are acquiring experience embroidering and workingexperience together and working to complete together a work; to (a) The people of the community are acquiring embroidering experience and working together to (completeb) The Jincang a work; embroidery works completed by the community. (completeb) The Jin ac work;ang embroidery works completed by the community. (b) The Jincang embroidery works completed by the community. The content of the in-depth interview includes four dimensions and six interview questions. The researcher recorded the interview with the consent of the participants. In addition to in-depth interviews, the researchers also conducted informal interviews with participants in their daily lives to ensure an abundance of information. The first dimension pertains to the participants’ basic knowledge, including the participants’ experience before learning. The second dimension covers questions about skill learning, including the participants’ motivation and activity goals for learning embroidery handicraft, as well as questions about how the participants’ backgrounds have helped to form their opinions. The third dimension involves three questions related to key events. These questions are discussed in terms of three aspects—direct event description, indirect reflection opportunity description, and special moment recall—and they guide students to narrate important learning processes in as much detail as possible to collect rich learning and transformative learning experiences and approaches. The fourth dimension aims to summarize the factors that affect learners’ understanding and invites participants to add other important information that has not yet been discussed. The in-depth interview data of the first phase were compiled using NVIVO software to form an evaluation index for the informal education and inheritance activities of ICH embroidery handicraft (the data used in this study are Q11–Q13). Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 21

The content of the in-depth interview includes four dimensions and six interview questions. The researcher recorded the interview with the consent of the participants. In addition to in-depth interviews, the researchers also conducted informal interviews with participants in their daily lives to ensure an abundance of information. The first dimension pertains to the participants' basic knowledge, including the participants’ experience be- fore learning. The second dimension covers questions about skill learning, including the participants’ motivation and activity goals for learning embroidery handicraft, as well as questions about how the participants’ backgrounds have helped to form their opinions. The third dimension involves three questions related to key events. These questions are discussed in terms of three aspects—direct event description, indirect reflection oppor- tunity description, and special moment recall—and they guide students to narrate im- portant learning processes in as much detail as possible to collect rich learning and trans- formative learning experiences and approaches. The fourth dimension aims to summarize the factors that affect learners’ understanding and invites participants to add other im- portant information that has not yet been discussed. The in-depth interview data of the first phase were compiled using NVIVO software Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 9 of 21 to form an evaluation index for the informal education and inheritance activities of ICH embroidery handicraft (the data used in this study are Q11–Q13).

3.3.3.3. Phase Phase II: Ⅱ: Questionnaire Questionnaire Survey Survey Method Method and and Design Design AccordingAccording to to the the interview interview data data of of Phase Phase I, Ⅰ, this this research research establishes establishes a a conceptual conceptual framework,framework, asas shown in in Figure Figure 9.9. For For the the measurement measurement of variables of variables,, such such as social as social recog- recognition,nition, intangible intangible heritage heritage authenticity, authenticity, cultural cultural identity, identity, and andbehavioral behavioral intentions intentions,, pub- publishedlished scales scales,, such such as Heater as Heater [24] [,24 Zhu], Zhu [25] [, 25and], andHoukamau Houkamau [26] [are26] cited. are cited. The sub The-facets sub- facetsof each of each variable, variable, operational operational definitions, definitions, number number of of items, items, andand literature sources sources are are shownshown in in Table Table1. 1 Each. Each item item is is measured measured using using a a Likert Likert 5-point 5-point scale. scale. To To avoid avoid the the problem problem ofof common common method method variation variation caused caused by by homology homology deviation, deviation, Podsakoff Podsakoff & & Organ Organ [27 [27]] and and Podsakoff,Podsakoff, MacKenzie, MacKenzie, Lee, Lee and, and Podsakoff Podsakoff [28 [28]] were were used used in in the the questionnaire questionnaire design design and and layout,layout, using using the the interviewed interviewed information information concealment concealment method, method item, ite meaningm meaning concealment conceal- method,ment method, and the and reverse the problem reverse problem item design item method design to method reduce theto reduce error result the error caused result by thecaused common by the method common variation. method variation.

FigureFigure 9. 9.Research Research hypothesis. hypothesis.

AA questionnaire questionnaire survey survey is is a dataa data collection collection method method that that lends lends itself itself from from statistical statistical re- searchresearch into into specific specific social social and economic and economic issues among issues large-scaleamong large populations.-scale populations. Researchers Re- cansearchers design acan series design of questions a series of and question then gives and them then to thegive interviewees them to the tointerviewees answer question- to an- nairesswer toquestionnaires obtain sample to data obtain from sample a specific data population from a specific related population to the research related topic. to Therethe re- aresearch several topic. advantages There are several to questionnaire advantages surveys: to questionnaire they are time-flexible;surveys: they are they time are-flexible highly ; efficient;they are theirhighly sample efficient sizes; their are notsample restricted; sizes are they not are restricted; effective they at ensuring are effective anonymity; at ensuring it is easyanonymity to obtain; it the is easy consent to obtain of the the subjects consent answering of the su thebjects survey; answering and they the cansurvey; help and to form they objective,can help to easily form quantifiable objective, easily conclusions. quantifiable Poor conclusions survey response. Poor s rateurvey and response low efficiency rate and arelow among efficiency the limitationsare among the of thelimitations questionnaire of the questionnaire survey method. survey Therefore, method. because Therefore, of thebecause authenticity of the authenticity and representativeness and representativeness of the questionnaire of the questionnaire survey method, survey this method, study adopted a convenient sampling method for the pre-test of the questionnaire, and the design of the formal questionnaire was commissioned to a professional questionnaire survey platform (Credamo). The hypotheses of this study are as follows:

H1: The authenticity of ICH has a significant impact on perceived value.

H2: Perceived value has a significant impact on the social recognition of ICH products.

H3: The authenticity of ICH has a significant impact on cultural identity.

H4: Cultural identity has a significant impact on perceived value.

H5: Cultural identity has a significant impact on social identity.

The indicators of cultural identity related to this hypothesis come from individual identity and social identity. The Multi-Dimensional Model of Maori Identity and Cultural Engagement (MMM-ICE), developed by Houkamau et al. [29], includes six measurement dimensions: (1) group membership evaluation, (2) socio-political consciousness, (3) cultural efficacy and active identity engagement, (4) spirituality, (5) interdependent self-concept, Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 10 of 21

and (6) authenticity beliefs. He [30] based this on the NATID scale created by Keillor et al., combining the “valuing national heritage” and “valuing cultural identity” dimensions of the scale into different cultural identity factors, and considered it to be related to the awareness of domestic products. Ethnocentrism has essential differences; the above dimensions of cultural identity are biased toward the group, organization, or ethnic level and belong to social identity. Zhu (2018) used handmade paper as a case of public communication and proposed the identification model indicators of the new media communication path of handmade paper, including “use recognition, use habits, use behaviors, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use” as first-level indicators and “satisfaction and dependence” as secondary indicators. Heater (2004) constructed three dimensions for the citizenship model: (1) the geographic scale of citizenship; (2) the elements of citizenship, namely law and citizenship, politics and society, virtue and identity (or self-definition); (3) and education (including knowledge, attitude, and technology, and pertaining not only to formal school education but also education related to the degree of socialization and cultural adaptation). The value of ICH is that it has the characteristics of “culture,” reflecting the way people think, communicate, and behave, as well as the traditional ideas and social mechanisms that lead to these [31]. Inheritance gives people a sense of ownership in some ways, making them think that inheritance belongs to their hometown, and this hometown is viewed as a region. People are proud of “owning” (not necessarily legally owning) this heritage, which strengthens the psychological identity between groups and gives heritage a symbolic “social value.” Heritage also creates a sense of pleasure in cultivating temperament and increasing the satisfaction of knowledge for foreign guests who come to visit. Moreover, heritage has “entertainment value” and “educational value.” Sun [32] divides heritage value into intrinsic existence value and external existence value and uses emotional value to connect the two. Thus, intrinsic value includes time value and other values, while external use value is divided into measurable value (economy) and immeasurable value (history, art, science, society). The folk handicraft activities under the ICH list have noticeable commercial and self-consistent differences in function presupposition. Commerciality means producers pay more attention to the economic exchange value of products and expect to realize it through commodity trading activities. Self-consistency means that the producer pays more attention to the spiritual satisfaction function of the product and hopes to achieve it through a cultural endowment in community activities. Throsby [33] stated that authenticity value “refers to the fact that the work is the authentic, original, and unique artwork which it is represented to be.” Yan & Chiou [34] define authen- ticity value based on customer value, which is determined by reliability, responsiveness, empathy, kind and courteous tone, real-time online presence, and efficiency. In 2015, China began to implement the ICH inheritance group training and train- ing program. The training plan brings together ICH inheritors with different skills and unique characteristics and conducts systematic training through university lectures. This training led to the homogenization and official vulgarization of the four traditional Chi- nese embroidery techniques and the dissolution of ICH’s authenticity and unique charm. The reasonable preservation and development of the authenticity of ICH require continuous reflection and adjustment in practice. Based on the theoretical basis of the literature and the cultural heritage value of the scholars mentioned above, the content of the questionnaire and item arrangement selected in this study are shown in Table1. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 11 of 21

Table 1. Questionnaire design.

Variable Indicator Number of Items Source Cognition 6 [25] (Zhu,2018) Social Familiarity 6 [35] (Xiao&Guo,2018) Identity Dissemination 6 [2] (Liu,2006) Participation 6 [4] (Dahlgren &Alvares,2013) Cultural continuity 4 [25] (Zhu,2018) Educational value 4 [24] (Heater,2004) Perceived Value Aesthetic value 4 [33] (Throsby,2001) Public value 3 [26] (Houkamau,2010) ICH’s Authenticity 3 [34] (Yan& Chiou,2020) Authenticity Historic 3 [5] (Benmayor,2002) Identity 5 [7] (Flores,1997) Sense of 5 [3] (Putnam,2015) Cultural accomplishment Identity Sense of honor 5 [12] (Yang,2016) Social responsibility 5 [36] (Coleman,1998) Community 5 [37] (Dalton,2007) connection

3.4. Results and Analysis 3.4.1. Sample Characteristics The date of the questionnaire survey is 17–18 March 2021, and the electronic ques- tionnaire will be used for the questionnaire survey. Forty-six valid questionnaires were collected in the pre-test questionnaire; 360 formal questionnaires were collected in total, with 60 invalid samples and 346 valid samples. From the perspective of demographic infor- mation distribution, the occupational distribution of the surveyed population is relatively uniform. The age distribution of the sample number is between 18–40 years old, which is a wide range of ages, and the sample characteristics are well represented (Table2). The initial item pool of the pre-test questionnaire is 76 items. To maximize the content validity of the scale and ensure the correctness and pertinence of the items, the questionnaire was statistically analyzed, and six items with weaker correlation were deleted. Finally, a formal scale containing 70 items was formed. The formal questionnaire questions are divided into four basic informational questions and 13 descriptive questions.

Table 2. Demographic distribution of the subjects tested in the questionnaire (n = 346).

Percentage Percentage Postgraduate and above 10.40% College and undergraduate 86.12% Male-189 54.62% High school Gender Education level 1.44% Female-157 45.37% Junior high school 1.44% Primary school 0.57% Other Under 18 0.57% Full-time student 16.47% 18–25 27.16% Production staff 13.58% 26~30 43.93% Marketing/Sales/Staff 27.74% Age 31~40 20.80% Occupation Designer 14.16% 41~50 4.33% Consultant/Consulting 4.62% 51~60 2.60% Teacher 9.24% Above 60 0.57% Other professionals 14.16%

3.4.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis Exploratory factor analysis was performed on 346 samples using SPSS 26.0. The sta- tistical value of KMO was 0.912, and the significance of Bartlett’s sphere test was 0.000, Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 12 of 21

which is suitable for factor analysis. In this study, principal component analysis was used to perform factor analysis with maximum variance rotation. Combined with relevant literature, the following item deletion criteria were adopted: (1) the degree of commonality is less than 0.2; (2) the maximum load of factors is less than 0.5; (3) it has a high cross load; that is, the factor load value of a specific item in two or more dimensions is higher than 0.4, and the difference is less than 0.2; (4) items that are improperly classified or cannot be explained [38]. According to the above deletion criteria, after seven times factor analyses, a formal scale of 13 items was finally obtained. It can be seen from Table3 that the project factor loads are all above 0.5. There are four factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, the cumulative total variance accounted for 59.391%, and the extraction method is the principal component analysis.

Table 3. Component matrix after rotation α.

Component No Items 1 2 3 4 Q6_1 Date of Cultural and Natural Heritage Day 0.800 0.056 0.070 0.086 Intangible Cultural Heritage WeChat official Q6_4 0.733 0.208 0.038 0.136 account The location of the intangible cultural Q6_2 0.730 0.094 0.088 0.090 heritage museum in the Cultural experience activities organized by Q6_3 0.729 0.036 0.143 0.154 the intangible cultural heritage museum Q7_5 Intangible cultural heritage + E-commerce 0.710 0.217 0.178 –0.148 Intangible cultural heritage training courses Q8_3 0.704 0.129 –0.046 0.231 organized by communities and associations Chinese traditional culture/cultural heritage Q6_5 0.691 0.061 0.243 0.075 articles Intangible heritage experience course Q8_2 0.681 –0.071 0.291 0.012 organized by the inheritor’s studio Intangible cultural heritage + lectures Q7_1 0.653 0.226 –0.150 0.233 (online, offline) Handicraft experience courses of commercial Q8_4 0.645 –0.092 0.401 –0.076 training institutions Intangible cultural heritage + public Q7_8 0.629 0.022 0.009 0.151 publication Weekend intangible cultural heritage Q8_1 0.620 0.178 0.050 0.108 experience Q7_7 Intangible cultural heritage + live program 0.567 0.273 –0.015 0.150 Purchase intangible cultural heritage DIY Q8_5 0.567 0.142 0.124 –0.337 experience package Traditional craftsmanship continues the Q14_3 0.150 0.765 0.102 0.050 historical continuity of local culture Q17_3 The value of historical witness 0.047 0.738 0.050 0.112 Q9_3 The decorative art of embroidery 0.103 0.677 0.015 0.260 Q10_4 Inheritance of embroidery craftsmanship 0.125 0.627 0.330 0.090 Intangible cultural heritage is a cultural Q14_10 0.218 0.553 0.415 –0.083 wealth shared by all people Q10_6 The seriousness of the decorative pattern 0.231 –0.003 0.733 0.140 Q10_2 The authenticity of embroidery skills 0.037 0.206 0.722 0.085 Q10_5 The history of embroidery culture 0.022 0.255 0.549 0.150 Close the interaction between myself, the Q14_7 0.179 0.194 0.190 0.696 community, and others Connects the relationship between my daily Q14_6 0.193 0.126 0.396 0.637 life and traditional culture Enlightened me to respect and think about Q14_5 0.257 0.437 0.021 0.561 the cultural life of myself and others Extraction method: principal component analysis method. Rotation method: Caesar normalized maximum variance method. α. The rotation has converged after six iterations. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 13 of 21

According to the content and meaning of the items contained in each factor, the rele- vant literature and expert opinions are referred to, and the four factors that are extracted are named. Factor 1 includes six items; its content is the public’s understanding of intangible heritage information and the public’s willingness to participate in the intangible heritage craftsmanship course, named “Social Recognition.” Since factor 2 contains five items, the content is the evaluation of social participation activities of intangible cultural heritage, the assessment of the value of intangible cultural heritage embroidery, and the assessment of the functional significance of intangible cultural heritage. They are the value evaluation of experience, product, and functionality. Therefore, it is named “Perceived Value.” Factor 3 contains three items; its content evaluates the skills, culture, and aesthetics of intangible cul- tural heritage embroidery, thus called Intangible Cultural Heritage’s Authenticity (“ICH’s Authenticity”). Factor 4 is the evaluation of social participation activities of intangible cultural heritage. The content is the interaction and reflection between individuals and traditional culture, and individuals and communities, named “Cultural Identity.”

3.4.3. Reliability and Validity Test The reliability coefficient of the whole scale is 0.862, and the reliability coefficient of the subscale is between 0.917 and 0.632, which is a relatively high level of reliability. It can be seen from Table4 that the corrected item-total correlation (CITC) of each subscale is greater than 0.5, and the Cronbach’s α value when the item is deleted is lower than the original value, indicating that the internal of the item has always been relatively good.

Table 4. CITI value, Cronbach’s α coefficient, and factor loading of the scale.

Cronbach’s α Value When Factors Item CITC Factor Loading the Item was Deleted Q6_1 0.755 0.906 0.800 Q6_4 0.716 0.908 0.733 Social Recognition Q6_2 0.691 0.909 0.730 α = 0.917 Q6_3 0.700 0.908 0.729 Q8_3 0.666 0.910 0.704 Q7_8 0.564 0.914 0.629 Q14_3 0.620 0.708 0.765 Q17_3 0.541 0.735 0.738 Perceived Value Q9_3 0.527 0.741 0.677 α = 0.774 Q10_4 0.547 0.733 0.627 Q14_10 0.506 0.746 0.553 Q10_6 0.473 0.495 0.733 ICH’s Authenticity Q10_2 0.461 0.518 0.722 α = 0.632 Q10_5 0.407 0.580 0.549 Q14_7 0.461 0.619 0.696 Cultural Identity Q14_6 0.486 0.586 0.637 α = 0.676 Q14_5 0.521 0.537 0.561

This study uses combined reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) indicators in convergence validity. It can be seen from Table5 that the CR value of each potential variable is above 0.7 (generally required to be above 0.6), signifying that the intrinsic quality of the scale is ideal. Moreover, AVE can directly show how much of the variance explained by the latent variables is due to measurement errors. The general judgment criterion is that AVE is greater than 0.5. The AVE of each dimension of the scale is greater than 0.5, implying that the measurement indicators can more effectively reflect the potential characteristics of their common factor constructs. In this study, comparing AVE root mean square and correlation coefficient proposed by Fornell et al. [39] was used to analyze the discriminative validity of this scale. As shown Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 14 of 21

in Table6, the root mean square of AVE is greater than the correlation coefficient between the factors, indicating that the scale has good discriminative validity.

Table 5. Reliability analysis of the scale.

Social Perceived ICH’s Cultural Variable Recognition Value Authenticity Identity Social recognition 0.677 0.527 0.365 0.363 Perceived value 0.588 0.323 0.169 ICH’s authenticity 0.838 0.046 Cultural identity 0.915 CR 0.92 0.784 0.738 0.775 AVE 0.536 0.421 0.364 0.466 Note: The value on the diagonal is the root mean square of AVE.

3.5. Overall Model Structure Analysis The fitted model for when the sample data is imported into Amos 24.0 is shown in Figure 10. The maximum likelihood method (maximum likelihood) was used to estimate the parameters of the study model. The values of the fitness indexes were as follows: CMIN/DF = 1.913 < 3, AGFI = 0.906, NFI = 0.896, RFI = 0.874, IFI = 0.948, TLI = 0.936, Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 21 CFI = 0.947, these are all close to or greater than 0.9, RMSEA=0.051 < 0.08, indicating that the model fits well.

FigureFigure 10. 10.Value Value recognition recognition scale scale for for the the informal informal educational educational inheritance inheritance of of ICH ICH handicrafts. handicrafts.

FigureFigure 11 11 shows shows the the overall overall model model estimation estimation value value and and items. items. It It can can be be seen seen from from TableTable6 6that that the the standardized standardized path path coefficient coefficient valuesvalues ofof intangible heritage heritage authenticity authenticity to toperceived perceived value, value, cultural cultural identity identity to toperceived perceived value, value, and and perceived perceived value value to tosocial social ac- acceptanceceptance are are respectively respectively 0.393, 0.393, 0.239, and 0.723. All ofof thesethese areare positivepositive values, values, of of which which “ICH’s“ICH’s Authenticity” Authenticity” and and “Perceived “Perceived Value” Value” reached reached a a significant significant level level of of 0.001, 0.001, the the social social valuevalue reached reached a a considerable considerable level level of of 0.05, 0.05, and and the the related related hypotheses hypotheses were were verified. verified.

TableTable 6. 6.Path Path coefficient coefficient estimates estimates of of model model variables. variables.

ValidationValidation Re- PathPath EstimateEstimate S.E. S.E. C.R. C.R. P P Resultssults PerceivedPerceived value value← ←ICH’sICH’s authenticity authenticity 0.3930.393 0.090 0.090 4.370 4.370 ****** SupportSupport PerceivedPerceived value value← ←Cultural Cultural identity identity 0.2390.239 0.094 0.094 2.543 2.5430.011 0.011 SupportSupport SocialSocial recognition recognition← ←Perceived Perceived value value 0.7230.723 0.141 0.141 5.137 5.137 ****** SupportSupport Note:Note: ** **p

Figure 11. Overall model estimation diagram.

From the summary table of intermediary effect in Table 7: 1. The value of the indirect effect is 0.284. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0. The p value is less than 0.05, indicating that the perceived value does play a significant intermediary role in the relationship between ICH’S authenticity and social recognition. 2. The direct effect value of “ICH’S authenticity → Perceived value” is 0.393. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0, and the p value is less than 0.05, so the direct effect is significant. Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 21

Figure 10. Value recognition scale for the informal educational inheritance of ICH handicrafts.

Figure 11 shows the overall model estimation value and items. It can be seen from Table 6 that the standardized path coefficient values of intangible heritage authenticity to perceived value, cultural identity to perceived value, and perceived value to social ac- ceptance are respectively 0.393, 0.239, and 0.723. All of these are positive values, of which “ICH’s Authenticity” and “Perceived Value” reached a significant level of 0.001, the social value reached a considerable level of 0.05, and the related hypotheses were verified.

Table 6. Path coefficient estimates of model variables.

Validation Re- Path Estimate S.E. C.R. P sults Perceived value ←ICH’s authenticity 0.393 0.090 4.370 *** Support Perceived value ← Cultural identity 0.239 0.094 2.543 0.011 Support Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 15 of 21 Social recognition ← Perceived value 0.723 0.141 5.137 *** Support Note: ** p ＜ 0.001.

FigureFigure 11. 11. OverallOverall model model estimationestimation diagram. diagram.

FromFrom the the summary summary table table of intermediaryintermediary effect effect in in Table Table7: 7: 1. The value of the indirect effect is 0.284. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected 1. The value of the indirect effect is 0.284. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0. The p value is less than 0.05, indicating that the andperceived percentile value does does not play contain a significant 0. The intermediary p value is roleless inthan the relationship0.05, indicating between that the perceivedICH’S authenticity value does and play social a significant recognition. intermediary role in the relationship between 2.ICH’SThe a directuthenticity effect valueand s ofocial “ICH’S recognition. authenticity → Perceived value” is 0.393. The 95% 2. Theconfidence direct effect interval value of bias-correctedof “ICH’S authenticity and percentile → doesPerceived not contain value 0, and” is the0.393p value. The 95% confidenceis less than interval 0.05, so of the bias direct-corrected effect is and significant. percentile does not contain 0, and the p value 3.is lessThe than direct 0.05, effect so valuethe direct of “Perceived effect is valuesignificant.→ Social recognition” is 0.723. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0, and the p value is less than 0.05, so the direct effect is significant. 4. The total effect value of “ICH’S authenticity → Perceived value” is 0.393. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0, and the p value is less than 0.05, so the direct effect is significant. 5. The total effect value of “ICH’S authenticity → Social recognition” is 0.284. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0, and the p value is less than 0.05, so the direct effect is significant. 6. The total effect value of “Perceived value → Social recognition” is 0.723. The 95% confidence interval of bias-corrected and percentile does not contain 0, and the p value is less than 0.05, so the direct effect is significant. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 16 of 21

Table 7. Intermediary effect summary table.

95% Confidence Interval Estimate BC/PC P–Value BC PC Indirect Effect Cultural identity→Perceived 0.173 0.071/0.122 –0.023~0.391 –0.060~0.365 value → Social recognition ICH’S authenticity → Perceived value → Social 0.284 0.001/.001 0.100~.613 0.100~0.613 recognition Direct Effect Cultural identity → 0.239 0.093/0.122 –0.048~0.503 –0.071~0.489 Perceived value ICH’S authenticity → 0.393 0.001/0.001 0.190~0.750 0.179~0.707 Perceived value Perceived value → Social 0.723 0.002/0.001 0.378~1.066 0.407~1.102 recognition Total Effect Cultural identity → 0.239 0.093/0.122 –0.048~0.503 –0.071~0.489 Perceived value Cultural identity → Social 0.173 0.071/0.122 –0.023~0.391 –0.060~0.365 recognition ICH’S authenticity → 0.393 0.001/0.001 0.190~0.750 0.179~0.707 Perceived value ICH’S authenticity → Social 0.284 0.001/0.001 0.100~0.613 0.100~0.613 recognition Perceived value → Social 0.723 0.002/0.001 0.378~1.066 0.407~1.102 recognition BC: Bias-corrected percentile method. PC: Percentile method. The above description shows that perceived value does play a significant intermediary role in the relationship between ICH’S authenticity and social recognition.

4. Research Result and Discussion 4.1. The Rationality of the Theoretical Model Is Supported The social identity of intangible heritage value is not static forever. In a dynamic envi- ronment, the relationship between the authenticity of intangible heritage and social identity is one where they influence one other. This research takes the authenticity of intangible cultural heritage value as the research lens, constructs a conceptual model of the value perception and cultural identity of intangible cultural heritage social identity, and hopes to explore the impact of intangible cultural heritage authenticity variables (perceived value, cultural identity) on social identity. We can further understand the direction of intangible cultural heritage as a public cultural resource in a changing environment. The analysis results of the structural equation model show that the scale for measuring various variables has positive validity and reliability, and the fitness index of the conceptual model also supports the rationality of the theoretical model of this study. The relationship between the variables, except that cultural identity has no significant effect on perceived value, reveals that ICH’S authenticity has a positive impact on perceived value; ICH’S authenticity has a positive effect on social recognition, and perceived value has a positive effect on social recognition. It also proved that perceived value has an intermediary effect between ICH’S authenticity and social recognition.

4.2. Reflections on the Sustainable Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage Comparing the values obtained from Q9, Q10, and Q11 (Figure 12), the results show (Table8): Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 21

perceived value, reveals that ICH’S authenticity has a positive impact on perceived value; ICH’S authenticity has a positive effect on social recognition, and perceived value has a positive effect on social recognition. It also proved that perceived value has an intermedi- ary effect between ICH’S authenticity and social recognition.

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 4.2. Reflections on the Sustainable Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage 17 of 21 Comparing the values obtained from Q9, Q10, and Q11 (Figure 12), the results show (Table 8):

(a1) (b1) (c1)

(a2) (b2) (c2)

Figure 12. EEmbroiderymbroidery was was used used in in the the questionnaire questionnaire.. (a1 (a1 and,a2 )a2 belong) belong to to question question Q9, Q9 the, the name name is isDragons Dragons are are playing playing with with a a pearl. pearl. ( b1(b,1b2 and) belong b2) belong to question to question Q10, Q10 the name, the name is Zhongkui is Zhong protectskui protects safety. (c1 and c2) belong to question Q11, the name is Handicraft embroidery from the safety. (c1,c2) belong to question Q11, the name is Handicraft embroidery from the Hmong. Hmong.

Table 8. Evaluation of authenticity value of ICH embroidery.embroidery. Q9 Q10 Q11 Item 1–6 Q9 Q10 Q11 Item 1–6 Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract DiversityDiversity of of Chinese cultureculture 0.5320.532 0.4870.487 0.6060.606 The authenticity of embroidery craftsmanship 0.499 0.502 0.496 TheThe authenticity decorative arts of ofembroidery embroidery craftsmanship 0.6670.499 0.4710.502 0.5710.496 TheInheritance decorative of embroidery arts of embroidery skills 0.5030.667 0.4460.471 0.5770.571 InheritanceThe history of of embroidery culture skills 0.4310.503 0.4310.446 0.6240.577 TheThe history seriousness of embroidery of the decorative culture pattern 0.6570.431 0.6310.431 0.7310.624 TheExtraction seriousness method: principalof the decorative component analysispattern method. Note: This0.657 data are obtained0.631 from SPSS’s first-factor0.731 analysis of initial data. Extraction method: principal component analysis method. Note: This data are obtained from SPSS’s first-factor analysis of initial data. 1. Embroidery with strong authenticity (Item 9) has the weakest score of 0.499 on the 1. Embroidery“authenticity with of embroidery strong authenticity technique” (Item and 9) the has strongest the weakest score ofscore 0.657 of on0.499 the on “deco- the “authenticityrative art of embroidery.” of embroidery It istechnique” assumed thatand the embroiderystrongest score with of strong 0.657 on authenticity the “dec- orativeof ICH art has of weak embroidery.” authenticity It (authenticity)is assumed that and the strong embroidery decoration with (social strong recognition), authentic- itywhich of ICH supports has weak Hypothesis authenticity H1. (authenticity) and strong decoration (social recog- 2. Embroidery with medium authenticity (Item 10) has the weakest score (0.431) on nition), which supports Hypothesis H1. the “historically of embroidery culture” scale and the strongest score (0.631) on the 2. Embroidery with medium authenticity (Item 10) has the weakest score (0.431) on the “seriousness of decorative patterns” scale. The embroidery with medium authenticity “historically of embroidery culture” scale and the strongest score (0.631) on the “se- of ICH is assumed to score low on cultural history (perceived value) and score high riousness of decorative patterns” scale. The embroidery with medium authenticity of on pattern seriousness (social recognition), supporting Hypothesis H2. ICH is assumed to score low on cultural history (perceived value) and score high on 3. Embroidery with weak authenticity (Item Q11) has the weakest score of 0.496 on the pattern seriousness (social recognition), supporting Hypothesis H2. “authenticity of embroidery skills” and the strongest score of 0.731 on the “seriousness of decorative patterns.” It is assumed that the embroidery with the weakest authentic- ity of ICH has weak authenticity (authenticity) and strong pattern seriousness (social recognition), which supports Hypothesis H1. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 18 of 21

4.3. Research Conclusion UNESCO created the “Masterpiece of Oral and Intangible Cultural Heritage of Human- ity,” an international honor aimed at drawing the attention of , educational institutions, non-governmental organizations, and local communities to intangible cul- tural heritage to promote its scientific protection. However, China’s current practice of protecting intangible heritage handicrafts is still one of the working principles led by the government. These top-down “protection of guest position” measures did not solve the fundamental problem of “subject inheritance.” In protecting intangible cultural heritage, the focus is also on protecting personal or individual knowledge or skills. Regarding the significance of culture to the community, the importance, necessity, and possibility of relying on the power of the people in the community to protect culture has not received enough attention. Modern youth’s intangible cultural heritage transmission activities are carried out primarily through school education. However, this type of transmission method is limited because it is straightforward to break away from the original space of intangible cultural heritage inheritance and be abstracted as a type of symbol and replaced with a new scene. It may cause some “distortion” and impact the effect of inheritance. Simultaneously, non-specialized intangible cultural heritage school education has strong openness, is often universal, and the inheritance is easy to “taste” without practical results. The management and protection of culture are inseparable from the active partici- pation and creation of people. An actor who does not recognize a specific right can only passively participate in a particular activity at best; the generation of a specific right also requires a specific situation of society. The protection of intangible cultural heritage is not to establish a kind of specimen protection isolated from other groups. Instead, based on clarifying their cultural identity, the inheritance group realizes traditional rejuvenation through self-management. Under the conditions of equality and diversity, they are given full space for development to create an inheritance and development heritage solution. Only when people have the subjective willingness to inherit and the cultural psychology of identity can it be possible to realize the current transformation of cultural heritage. “Participation” is not just “appearing” in a spe- cific cultural event in the traditional sense, or viewing culture and art, and making cultural and artistic creations. Its deeper meaning is “empowerment, autonomy, and democracy.” The key to the sustainable development of traditional skills lies in the cultivation of talents. The training of handicraft talents cannot be separated from family education and so- cial education. Only when social education forms a high-level, middle-level, and low-level talent base, coupled with the assistance of family education, can the handicraft industry have a considerable talent base. Furthermore, only with an appropriate talent base can future masters of arts, crafts, and representative inheritors be born. Talent training is related to the development trend of the entire industry. It is also related to whether many important intangible cultural heritages can be truly protected and passed on. Relying on single-family education can no longer independently shoulder all the training successors of traditional skills. Establishing a diversified social education mechanism is the future direction of development, and by selecting a sound professional intangible heritage protec- tion system, the government and communities need to make corresponding adjustments to their roles and functions, which will help achieve sustainable intangible heritage cultural education take root (see Figure 13). SustainabilitySustainability2021 2021,,13 13,, 4958 x FOR PEER REVIEW 1919 of 2121

FigureFigure 13.13. SustainableSustainable intangibleintangible culturalcultural heritageheritage safeguardingsafeguarding circle.circle.

4.4.4.4. DiscussionDiscussion CulturalCultural citizenship from from the the perspective perspective of ofparticipatory participatory governance governance focuses focuses on pro- on promotingmoting people’s people’s participation participation in local in local cultural cultural governance, governance, including including participation participation in cul- in culturaltural life life and and creation, creation, cultural cultural public public policy policy decision decision-making-making processes, processes, and andpublic public gov- governance.ernance. It pays It pays attention attention to the to theways ways or channels or channels of participation. of participation. ThisThis studystudy currentlycurrently onlyonly discussesdiscusses thethe typetype ofof informalinformal educationaleducational protectionprotection ofof intangibleintangible culturalcultural heritage.heritage. TheThe socialsocial capitalcapital partpart ofof culturalcultural heritageheritage protectionprotection hashas notnot beenbeen addressedaddressed in-depth,in-depth, andand futurefuture researchresearch cancan bebe addedadded toto thethe empiricalempirical studystudy ofof locallocal cultural knowledge in community education. cultural knowledge in community education. The contribution of the research lies in the evaluation of the effects of citizen participa- The contribution of the research lies in the evaluation of the effects of citizen partici- tion in the ICH cultural experience and the third-party perspective of evaluation indicators pation in the ICH cultural experience and the third-party perspective of evaluation indi- for ICH protection. Through hybrid research methods, executives of administrative duties cators for ICH protection. Through hybrid research methods, executives of administrative can listen to citizens’ voices and see more comprehensive and essential needs. The value duties can listen to citizens' voices and see more comprehensive and essential needs. The recognition model of informal education inheritance of intangible cultural heritage pro- value recognition model of informal education inheritance of intangible cultural heritage posed in this research can be applied to the performance evaluation of other manual skills proposed in this research can be applied to the performance evaluation of other manual activities (paper-cutting art, bamboo weaving crafts, etc.). Furthermore, the evaluation skills activities (paper-cutting art, bamboo weaving crafts, etc.). Furthermore, the evalua- standard can be used to evaluate the teaching effect of other cultural education courses tion standard can be used to evaluate the teaching effect of other cultural education and can be used to find the direction of the problem. courses and can be used to find the direction of the problem. Future research can be conducted by focusing on the following three aspects: Future research can be conducted by focusing on the following three aspects: 1. The research field and sample size can be expanded to better reduce the research 1. Theerrors research caused byfield regional and sample differences size can and be sample expanded size so to that better the researchreduce the conclusions research errorshave broader caused by applicability. regional differences and sample size so that the research conclusions 2. haveIn the broader future, weapplicability. can expand the scope of research, study the role of intangible cultural 2. Inheritage the future, in algorithmic we can expan contentd the distribution scope of andresearch, social study communication, the role of findintangible the weight cul- turalindicators heritage in the in algorithmalgorithmic model, content and distribution make data and the standardsocial communication, for intangible culturalfind the weightheritage indicators protection in and the communication.algorithm model, and make data the standard for intangible 3. culturalDue to the heritage limitation protection of the model,and communication. it was not possible to conduct a correlation study 3. Dueon the to influencethe limitation of demographic of the model, variables it was not and possible citizen identification.to conduct a correlation Future research study oncan the study influence the effects of demographic of demographic variables variables, and citizen such identification. as gender, occupation, Future research age, caneducational study the background, effects of demographic and cultural variables citizenship, such identity, as gender, to better occupation, understand age, theed- ucationalrole of the background, public in cultural and cultural citizenship citizenship identity identity recognition., to better understand the role Intangibleof the public cultural in cultural heritage citizenship is the common identity cultural recognition. heritage and a fundamental right enjoyedIntangible by citizens. cultural We heritage must promote is the common and strengthen cultural intangibleheritage and cultural a fundamental heritage right and helpenjoyed citizens by citizens. enjoy the We right must of intangiblepromote and cultural strengthen education, intangible which iscultural consistent heritage with and the goals of the United Nations SDG 4.7 (“Ensure all learners acquire knowledge and skills help citizens enjoy the right of intangible cultural education, which is consistent with the Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 20 of 21

needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, global citizenship, and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development” [40]).

Author Contributions: W.-J.Y. developed the research design, collected the data, and conducted the analysis. W.-J.Y. and S.-C.C. wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by Project of Central Leading Local Science and Technology Development, grant number 2018L3012. This research also was supported by the Research Project of Minjiang University, grant number YSZ20007. Institutional Review Board Statement: The study not involving humans or animals. Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. Data Availability Statement: Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed W.-J.Y. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Information regarding the interviewees.

Code Number Gender Occupation Interview Time Interview Place F1 Female Teacher 2020.11.23 University campus F2 Female Teacher 2020.11.23 University campus F3 Female Student 2020.11.23 University campus F4 Female Student 2020.11.23 University campus F5 Female Student 2020.11.24 Public cultural hall F6 Male Student 2020.11.24 Public cultural hall M1 Female Citizen 2020.3.6 Public cultural hall M2 Male Citizen 2020.3.6 Public cultural hall M3 Male Citizen 2020.3.6 Public cultural hall M4 Male Citizen 2020.3.6 Public cultural hall

References 1. Song, J.H. (Ed.) Annual Development Report on Chinese Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding (2019), 1st ed.; Social Sciences Academic Press: Beijing, China, 2020; p. 78. 2. Liu, Y.M. Right, and Development: The Principle of Non-material Culture Heritage Protection. J. Southwest Minzu Univ. 2006, 173, 191–199. 3. Putnam, D.R. Marking Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy; W, L.; Lai, H.R., Translators; China Renmin University Press: Beijing, China, 2015; pp. 216–226. 4. Dahlgren, P.; Alvares, C. Political Participation in an age of Mediatisation. Javnost Public 2013, 20, 47–65. [CrossRef] 5. Benmayor, R. Narrating cultural citizenship: Oral Histories of first-generation college students of Mexican origin. Soc. Justice 2002, 29, 96–121. 6. Andrew, C.; Gattinger, M.; Jeannotte, M.S.; Straw, W. (Eds.) Accounting for Culture: Thinking through Cultural Citizenship; University of Ottawa Press: Ottawa, Canada, 2005; pp. 1–6. 7. Flores, W.V.; Benmayor, R. (Eds.) Latino Cultural Citizenship: Claiming Identity, Space, and Rights; Beacon Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1997; p. 322. 8. Ong, A. Cultural citizenship as subject-making: Immigrants negotiate racial and cultural boundaries in the United States. Curr. Anthropol. 1996, 37, 737–762. [CrossRef] 9. Harvey, D.C. Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope of heritage studies. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2001, 7, 319–338. [CrossRef] 10. Ong, A. Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality; Duke University Press: Durham, UK, 1999. 11. Turner, B.S. Outline of a General Theory of Cultural Citizenship in Culture and Citizenship; Stevenson, N., Ed.; Sage: London, UK; Thousand Oaks, CA, USA; New Delhi, India, 2001; pp. 11–32. 12. Yang, J. Cultural Citizenship: A New Trend of Citizenship Research. J. Fujian Inst. Educ. 2016, 5, 128. 13. Li, G. Study on Public Participation in the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage—A Case Study on Protection of Yunnan Midu Huadeng Opera. J. Dali Univ. 2018, 11, 7–11. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4958 21 of 21

14. Wang, L. “Continuity” in the protection of contemporary cultural heritage. China Cult. Herit. 2019, 5, 52–58, CNKI: SUN: CCRN.0.2019-05-009. 15. Li, X.Y.; Ma, Z.Y. Research on the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage from the Perspective of Cross-cultural Education. J. Hebei Univ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 107–112. 16. Zhang, Q.R. Social Mobilization, Ethnographic Methodology, and Reconstruction of the Global Society: Experience and Inspiration of the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Mexico. Stud. Ethn. Lit. 2018, 3, 29–38, CNKI: SUN: MZWX.0.2018-03-004. 17. Mercer, C. Towards Cultural Citizenship: Tools for Cultural Policy and Development; Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation: Stockholm, Sweden, 2002; pp. 13–60. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2153304 (accessed on 27 April 2021). [CrossRef] 18. Francis, F.; Marwah, S. Comparing East Asia and Latin America: Dimensions of Development. J. Democr. 2000, 11, 80–94. 19. Lochner, K.A.; Kawachi, B.; Kennedy, P. Social capital: A guide to Its measurement. Health Place 1999, 5, 259–270. [CrossRef] 20. Onyx, J.; Bullen, P. Measuring social capital in five community. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 2000, 36, 23–42. [CrossRef] 21. Rappaport, J. Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. Am. J. Commun. Psy- chol. 1987, 15, 121–148. [CrossRef][PubMed] 22. Perkin, D.D.; Zimmerman, M. Empowerment theory, research, and application. Am. J. Commun. Psychol. 1995, 23, 569–579. [CrossRef] 23. McMillan, J.H.; Schumacher, S. Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry, 7th ed.; Zeng, T.S., Translator; Educational Science Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2013; p. 355. 24. Heater, D. Citizenship: The Civic Ideal in World History, Politics, and Education, 3rd ed.; Manchester University Press: Manchester, UK, 2004; pp. 141–163. 25. Zhu, Y. A study on the Communication’s Cognition of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in the New Media Form—A Case Study of Domestic and Foreign Handmade Paper. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Science and Technology of China, Anhui, China, 2018. 26. Houkamau, C. Identity construction, and reconstruction: The role of socio-historical contexts in shaping Maori¯ women’s identity. Soc. Identities 2010, 16, 179–196. [CrossRef] 27. Podsakoff, P.M.; Organ, D.W. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Manag. 1986, 12, 531–544. [CrossRef] 28. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [CrossRef][PubMed] 29. Sibley, C.G.; Houkamau, C.A. The multi-dimensional model of Maori¯ identity and cultural engagement: Item Response Theory Analysis of Scale Properties. Cult. Divers. Ethn. Minority Psychol. 2013, 19, 97–110. 30. He, J.X. The Structure of Consumers’ Affects in the Context of the Chinese Culture and their Effects on the Equity of China’s and Foreign Brands. Manag. World 2008, 6, 95–108. 31. Murphy, F.R. Culture & Social Anthropology: An Overture; Wang, Z.J., Translator; The Commercial Press: Beijing, China, 2009; pp. 30–52. 32. Sun, H. Introduction to Cultural Heritage (Part 1)—Typologies and Values of Cultural Heritage. Study Nat. Cult. Herit. 2020, 1, 8–17. 33. Throsby, D. Economics and Culture; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001; pp. 25–37. 34. Yan, W.J.; Chiou, S.C. Dimensions of Customer Value for the Development of Digital Customization in the Clothing Industry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4639. [CrossRef] 35. Xiao, B.; Guo, Z.H. (Eds.) Citizenship and Civil Society Studies; Shanghai People’s Publishing House: Shanghai, China, 2018; Volume 3, pp. 8–13. 36. Coleman, J.S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am. J. Sociol. 1988, 94, 95–120. [CrossRef] 37. Dalton, J.H.; Maurice, J.E.; Abraham, W. Community Psychology: Linking Individuals and Communities; Wadsworth Pub Co: Belmont, CA, USA, 2007; pp. 312–393. 38. Wu, M.L. Questionnaire Statistical Analysis Practice—SPSS Operation and Application; Chongqing University Press: Chongqing, China, 2010; p. 192. 39. Fornell, C.; Larcker, F.D. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. J. Market. Res. 1981, 18, 382–388. [CrossRef] 40. UNESCO. Quick Guide to Education Indicators for SDG 4. Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265 396?posInSet=13&queryId=f3fc0ba6-1594-428e-adc9-4a051828b727 (accessed on 5 April 2021).