Collyn Chan and Amy Z. Zhou, How to Save Chinatown: Preserving affordability and community service through ethnic retail (2022)

Summary

An article by Collyn Chan and Amy Zhou, How to Save Chinatown: Preserving affordability and community service through ethnic retail, published in the Berkeley Planning Journal, Vol. 32(1), 2022, pages 1–25 (DOI 10.5070/BP332052798). The paper examines how COVID-19 closures, anti-Asian xenophobia, retail gentrification, structural disinvestment and gaps in small business support have threatened businesses in Chinatowns across the United States and Canada. It cites a September 2020 Yelp report finding nearly 100,000 permanent business closures and December 2020 CityLab data showing consumer interest in Chinatowns across six major U.S. cities declined by up to 40% relative to surrounding metro areas, arguing for preservation policies that protect intangible community value and ethnic retail affordability.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Collyn Chan and Amy Z. Zhou, How to Save Chinatown: Preserving affordability and community service through ethnic retail (2022).” Original at escholarship.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/collyn-chan-and-amy-z-zhou-how-to-save-chinatown-preserving-affordabil-b156af651e/, SHA-256 33a9950792b84aab4248215db4d3c923f77f4a7c5ba7726a1279c45e61437cfa.

Full text

UC Berkeley
Berkeley Planning Journal

Title
How to Save Chinatown: Preserving affordability and community service through ethnic
retail

Permalink
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3p5213jd

Journal
Berkeley Planning Journal, 32(1)

Authors
Chan, Collyn
Zhou, Amy

Publication Date
2022

DOI
10.5070/BP332052798

Copyright Information
Copyright 2022 by the author(s). All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the
author(s) for any necessary permissions. Learn more at https://escholarship.org/terms

eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library
University of California
How to Save Chinatown: Preserving Affordability and
Community Service Through Ethnic Retail
Authors: Collyn Chan and Amy Zhou

Introduction

Small businesses are vital to the economic health and development of our economies, creating
local jobs, contributing to local economies, and anchoring communities. It is also undeniable that
COVID-19 has impacted small businesses across the US and Canada. In a September 2020 report,
Yelp showed almost 100,000 businesses had permanently closed due to pandemic closures (Yelp
2020). A report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in late 2020 also revealed that the
largest drop in active business owners was higher among Black, Latinx, and Asian business owners
compared to their white counterparts (Mills, n.d.).

Chinatowns in North America have been especially hit hard by COVID-19, with declining
business patronage even before major shutdowns in early 2020 during Lunar New Year, typically
the busiest time of the year (Bliss 2020; Derworiz 2020; Kang 2020). In the months that have
followed, recovery for Asian American and Chinese businesses has been impacted also by
xenophobic fears, spurred on by political figures and media conflating the origins of the
coronavirus with Asian American communities. In December 2020, CityLab reported data
showing that in six major US cities, a greater decline in consumer interests in Chinatown was
observed when compared to their surrounding metro areas, in some areas up to 40%.

The disappearance of businesses in ethnic enclaves and Chinatowns have been of major concern
in cities across the US and Canada in recent years. As tourism and economic development have
adapted in planning policy, ethnic enclaves have become a brand of diversity that modern cities
utilize, set on a pedestal to attract tourists and investors alike to a slick, international city (Santos,
Belhassen, and Caton 2008). These enclaves are represented as a hub of exotic food, theatrical
architecture, or an adventurous foreign experience. The preservation and protection of these
cultural hubs has been limited, often focused on traditional historic preservation measures that
focus on tangible assets such as urban design, physical structures, or symbolic designations.

Chinatowns and ethnic enclaves alike, however, are often borne from discriminatory housing,
zoning, and labor practices (Hom 2020a; Moore, Montojo, and Mauri 2019; Xie and Batunova
2019). These communities that represent safety and acceptance, supported through enterprises that
provide goods, services, and activities. Chinatowns, therefore, represent deep histories of both
segregation and cultural belonging, intangible assets that are also deserving of preservation and
protection. The value of ethnic business and entrepreneurship within these cultural hubs, therefore,
extend beyond marketing potential and attraction potential for economic development.

The desire to preserve and protect the cultural, intangible value of these neighborhoods is a difficult
endeavor. Traditionally, historic preservation has been the main mechanism for city governments
to protect the character and culture of neighborhoods. However, in the case of ethnic enclaves,
decades of structural disinvestment and dismantling of affordable housing, the allowance for retail
gentrification, and the gap for small business support have also impacted the ability for these

1
communities to be preserved. In short – physical design and symbolic designations have not been
able to preserve the confluence of factors that enable these enclaves. Years of multi-sectoral
disinvestment influence how Chinatowns are surviving, and how they may recover from the
pandemic. Recently, some cities have developed initiatives targeted at preserving this value
created through enterprises in cultural enclaves. In 2015, the City of San Francisco initiated the
Legacy Business Registry and Legacy Business Historic Preservation Fund through their Office
of Small Business in response to an elevated number of commercial evictions and commercial
rents. Additionally, the City seeks to recognize and protect “intangible cultural heritage” through
a Cultural Heritage Districts program. Similar initiatives have been explored in Los Angeles and
Vancouver, but the programs are either in their early stages or have not been completed. However,
the findings from assessment remain as artefacts for analysis.

This study investigates the difference in retail change in Chinatowns in Vancouver, San Francisco
and Los Angeles – areas of concentrated ethnic businesses where retail change has been a huge
concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Concurrently, this study also examines the impact of
retaining a legacy business program on retail landscapes, especially amidst the pandemic.
Investigating questions include: What is the value of ethnic retail within urban cores? How have
legacy businesses supported the retention of ethnic retail before and during the pandemic? What
meanings does disappearing ethnic retail convey and what is needed? The selection of these three
cities focuses on major west coast cities with large Chinese populations. The focus on Chinatowns
from three cities also enables a comparison between cities that have enacted legacy business and
small business protection programs, those that have seriously considered enacting one, and ones
that have not enacted any programs. Semi-structured interviews, analysis of public documents, and
policy analysis were conducted. The results reveal the cross-cultural value of ethnic retail and
implications for affordability within urban centers, a structural deficit in planning for the
survivability of affordable community enterprises, and an invaluable loss in cultural heritage
through ethnic retail. The findings contribute to understanding the value of enabling affordable
retail, protecting ethnic entrepreneurship, and developing policy and planning that can inform
municipalities on the future of cultural preservation that can provide material impacts for ethnic
enclaves.

Background and Literature Review

Urbanism of ethnic entrepreneurship

Ethnic enclaves like Chinatown grew as segregated neighborhoods within larger metropolitan
areas congregated in a single neighborhood due to racism and explicitly racist policies preventing
them from living elsewhere in the city. However, this congregation in a space also allowed
residents to build community, identity, and place for culturally appropriate goods, services, and
activities (Liu and Geron 2008). Rather than being seen solely as a method of self-preservation,
other scholars have argued that ethnic enclaves like Chinatown are a valuable source of community
assets: Chinatown provides immigrant Chinese with opportunities and resources without enabling
the loss of their cultural identities (Zhou 2006), and they are an important source of community
institutions and assets (like family associations)(Shieh and Chen 2018).

2
Ethnic-owned businesses are critical for these communities. Min Zhou (2006) introduces the
concept of “enclave entrepreneurs”, which are entrepreneurs bound by shared ethnic backgrounds,
social structures, and location, and can extend beyond commercial activities, and at a consumer
market. These enclave economies can encourage residents of a specific enclave and others from
the same ethnic background from outside of the enclave to meet and create social networks
between each other that otherwise may have been disrupted by immigration (Zhou 2006). Many
of these relationships extend beyond monetary relationships, and on reciprocal relationships that
are more flexible and inclusive; as an example, in Los Angeles Chinatown, hours can be more
flexible and employers can be more tolerant of children because workers may also be wives and
mothers (Zhou 2006). These businesses may also provide employment benefits, hiring those from
the community, and providing other benefits in the development of these communities. Ethnic,
immigrant and minority businesses, for example, can act as economic, social and cultural centers
for their community (Schuch and Wang, 2015; Liu, Miller and Wang, 2013).

However, many of these immigrant and community-oriented businesses are located in
neighborhoods facing distinct challenges. Many of these businesses are in neighborhoods
threatened by neighborhood change driven by development (Zukin, 2009), like Chinatown in Los
Angeles (Lin, 2008). Many may also experience lower cash flows and are smaller than non-ethnic
entrepreneurs (Chaganti and Greene, 2002; Perricone, Earle and Taplin, 2001), and many, which
are family-owned businesses, may face potential sources of failure in the unwillingness of family
members to continue the business down family lines, or may simply be unable to adapt to changing
markets (Perricone, Earle, and Taplin, 2001). The loss of these businesses are therefore felt beyond
the loss of a typical business. Also found was that businesses located in ethnic communities are
more likely to have longevity when they have greater access to capital; however, capital for many
of these entrepreneurs can be difficult to access due to many of existing socioeconomic conditions
of the owners, a distrust from entrepreneurs to accessing banks, and existing discriminatory
barriers to capital (Bates and Robb 2013).

With the positive impacts that these businesses have on their co-ethnic community as a whole,
there have been recent attempts to build out support systems to allow these businesses to sustain
themselves. With many of these small ethnic businesses being integral to the institutional
completeness of a community (Zhou 2006), and with how the disappearance of these businesses
signaling gentrification and changing the face of the neighborhood within which they reside (Zukin
2009), it is notable that many of them struggle to survive long (Bates and Robb 2013), though
there have been recent efforts to support those that have survived and become important parts of
the communities they serve.

Preserving ethnic retail

The literature shows that there has been some analysis on policy support for small businesses in
Europe (Dhaliwal 2006; Ram and Smallbone 2003), but less has been written on policy support
for ethnic small businesses in the United States. Taking the lead from European cities, the City of
San Francisco has studied and pioneered two programs to support the maintenance of legacy
businesses and preserve cultural heritage. These programs attempt to move beyond traditional
historic preservation strategies that looked to preserve physical and tangible assets (like a building
facade) over the intangible cultural assets located within (Buckley and Graves 2016). The dispute

3
within historic preservation between tangible and intangible assets has been a tension that has
existed for decades, particularly in communities with a significant number of ethnic residents. One
study looking at this issue in San Francisco Chinatown showed that members in the business
community disagreed with policies determined to “iconize” Chinatown by maintaining restrictions
on the physical structure by not allowing building alteration plans that did not conform to
“traditional” Chinese design, not allowing the businesses to improve the quality of the buildings
or renovate (Chuo 2011). This conflict continues to this day through balance between the material
supports that may be provided to help a business survive, offsetting supports that are more
symbolic in nature (such as a historic preservation register, or marketing).

Many cities in the United States have begun to grapple with the necessity of preserving ethnic
retail and culturally invaluable businesses. As this topic falls jointly between economic
development and historic preservation, there has been little academic study and few practical
programs.

A handful of cities have begun to employ strategies ranging from those more focused on preserving
the tangible assets mentioned above to improving the prospects of the businesses located in the
tangible assets. In all, understanding these differences, one can identify that strategies can broadly
fit into two categories: those that provide material support, (where resources actively affect the
longevity and survival of a business), or symbolic supports (where resources don’t impact the
survivability of a business, instead impacting the physical elements like the facade). Table 1 below
describes these supports in greater detail.

4
Table 1. Summary of municipal preservation mechanisms
Type of Support Example

Material Funding or Grant San Francisco’s Legacy Business program provided a
Support rent stabilization grant and a business assistance
(though the latter was unable during the pandemic)
(City of San Francisco

Ordinances Sonoma City has specific Use Permit requirements
related to diversity, balance, and community character,
and restricts larger chain businesses (like large-scale
formula restaurants with more than 250 outlets, from
settling in the Sonoma Plaza area) (Sonoma City)

Technical The City of Seattle’s pilot Legacy Business program
Assistance offers 2 hours of free legal consultation and 8 hours of
free Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CPTED) consultation.

Marketing Support Similar to the City of Seattle’s pilot Legacy Business
program having technical assistance, they also have a
social media marketing toolkit.

Symbolic Written reports Some jurisdictions like the City of Los Angeles have
Protections written reports specific to ethnic-cultural contexts like
the Chinese American in Los Angeles, 1850-1980

Registries The City of San Francisco created a Legacy Business
Program Registry that allows any business that has been
operating for 30 years or more, or if it has contributed
to the neighborhood’s history and/or identity of a
particular neighborhood or community (City of San
Francisco).

While the literature gives an overview of how ethnic businesses have experienced numerous
threats, and how many cities have begun to attempt to turn the tide on the loss of these businesses,
there is little literature on how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected these community-facing
businesses, and even less on how these community-facing businesses have been affected in ethnic
communities like Chinatown. Even without the looming shadow of COVID-19, there are
knowledge gaps on the processes of preservation for legacy, ethnic businesses. This study attempts
to contribute to the literature by contextualizing the presence of these legacy and heritage-oriented
small business programs under the umbrella of the COVID-19 pandemic by considering how these
programs may have influenced the continued survival of the businesses they are supposed to serve.

5
Methodology

The methodology for study involves the case studies of three specific cities: Los Angeles, San
Francisco, and Vancouver. Due to the relative youth of legacy business programs (San Francisco,
the most predominant one, has only been operating since 2015), there has not been as much
opportunity for exploration into the implementation of these programs, let alone the effectiveness.
With Zhuang (2015) noting that exploratory case studies can be useful in achieving generalized
understanding, the paper also employs case studies to go in greater depth on the individual contexts
of these cities while also drawing out generalizations that may be applicable elsewhere. In this
specific case, there has been little exploration done on legacy business programs because these
programs are relatively new and sufficient quantitative information isn’t particularly available.

Figure 1. Affiliations of the Interviewees
• Former and Current City of Vancouver Staff
• LA Conservancy
• Youth Collaborative for Chinatown
• Yarrow Intergenerational Society
• Chinatown Community Development Center (CCDC)
• Chinatown Community for Equitable Development
(CCED)
• City of Los Angeles
• City of San Francisco

To explore each of these cities, background research was conducted on programs provided by
cities during and prior to the pandemic that may have assisted ethnic entrepreneurs in Chinatown.
Thirteen interviews were conducted across the three cities, falling broadly into two categories: city
staff, and non-city staff who were community organizers, members of the community, or
employees of community organizations with knowledge of either historic preservation or
Chinatowns. Figure 1 highlights the affiliations of the interviewees.

After they were identified, interviewees were asked about their impression of the state of ethnic
entrepreneurship prior to and after the pandemic’s start, how they perceived the city’s legacy
business program or other city aid programs, their definition for a legacy business, their assessment
of how businesses and the community as a whole were faring and potential challenges they may
be facing, the nature of historic preservation in their specific areas, and what types of supports
would be offered or preferred. Responses were collected and coded to identify common themes.

In addition to interviews, each case study (of San Francisco, Vancouver, and Los Angeles) includes
analysis of existing programs, past reports, council briefs, and other official documents related to
legacy businesses and cultural preservation.

Brief History of three neighborhoods

Chinatowns are one of the sole surviving ethnic enclaves that continue to persevere and survive in
urban, downtown cores across North America. Vancouver, San Francisco and Los Angeles retain

6
some of the largest and significant Chinatowns across the West Coast of Canada and the United
States. The shared histories of these Chinatowns is distinct, with strong connections to the history
of urban segregation, discrimination, racism and regulatory disenfranchisement seen throughout
planning history (Moore, Montojo, and Mauri 2019; Xie and Batunova 2019; Zuk and Chapple
2015). All three Chinatowns have histories of trade labor that encourage Asian men to seek work
within gold mines, but facing white hostility, were ultimately the labor behind major railroads in
the region. These Chinatowns are all peripheral to the downtowns of their cities and were targets
for slum clearance and urban renewal at some point in their histories.

At the height of anti-Chinese antipathy in America, visitors to Chinatowns "delineated the
utter foreignness, exoticism, and evil of the place." Notably, they marveled at the "visual
and olfactory sensations ''the neighborhood offered. The sights, sounds, and smells of
Chinatown no longer inspire racial animus, but descriptions of Chinatown still emphasize
it as "a sensory experience." Moreover, outsiders continue to market the neighborhood by
gesturing at its vestigial traces of danger, along with assurances of safety. Tour guides in
1914 San Francisco, for example, called it's Chinatown "the most fascinating city of
America," and made sure to tell patrons that "nowhere is the White visitor more secure in
property or person." Generations later, "[r]eal estate brokers appeal to the exoticism of
Chinatown's culture [and] reference the safety and style of neighboring SoHo and
Tribeca." The relationship between gentrification and racial capitalism has thus been
fueled, in part, by the media and real estate industries, which advance the idea of
Chinatown "as an exotic yet chic neighborhood on the cusp of a major transformation." -
(Naram 2017)

Figure 2. City of Vancouver’s Chinatown Neighborhood Plan, 2012

7
Vancouver Chinatown is located just east of the downtown and financial districts, and adjacent to
other historic and existing enclaves (Black, Japanese, Eastern European, and First Nations).
Established at the same time as the City of Vancouver in the late 19th century, Chinatown was the
only neighborhood where Chinese migrants could be housed without hostility. Patterns of
immigration and historic urban segregation clustered ethnic enclaves, low-income, and
marginalized groups together in the area. Therefore, Chinese are the largest visible minority in the
neighborhood followed by Black and Indigenous folks. Urban “decline” and calls for the
protection of cultural heritage in Vancouver’s Chinatown can be traced back as early as the 1960s,
when “slum clearance” and “urban renewal” was enacted by the city on Chinatown and Strathcona
neighborhoods (David Lam Centre 2017; Madokoro 2011). The business and retail landscape in
Chinatown in the past mainly served its residents, providing food, groceries, and personal services.
This retail landscape has changed dramatically, with pricier restaurants, chain businesses, and
other non-Chinese businesses taking root (Lee 2018; W. Li 2019; Regan 2017).

8
Figure 3. City of San Francisco’s Chinatown

Image shows boundaries as described in Montojo, 2015. Montojo identifies that the boundaries
for Chinatown have expanded beyond the city’s “official” boundaries, and these boundaries show
Chinatown’s influence in the surrounding neighborhoods.

San Francisco is home to North America’s oldest Chinatown, located just north of downtown and
west of the financial district. Similarly, racial discrimination drove many Chinese immigrants to
San Francisco’s Chinatown. In the late 1800s, anti-Chinese sentiment manifested in exclusionary
labor practices, racialized zoning ordinances, mob violence, and arson which further drove Chinese
migrants to seek housing and contain businesses to Chinatown (Moore, Montojo, and Mauri 2019;
Zuk and Chapple 2015). The 1906 earthquake in San Francisco, and fires that broke out destroyed
Chinatown – the subsequent rebuilding utilized urban design and architecture to “iconize”,
demarcate, and protect Chinatown from displacement (Li 2019; Zuk and Chapple 2015). The retail
landscape also reflects this desire to be seen as a gateway to Chinese culture, with souvenir shops
and tourism-oriented businesses present today. In recent years, San Francisco’s Chinatown has
retained many community and cultural businesses, with grocery stores, restaurants, large banquet

9
halls, temples, and other Chinese-owned businesses. The neighborhood is considered the densest
in the City of San Francisco, with a population of 14,820. The demographic make-up is 81% Asian,
and a median income of $21,219 (ACS 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates; San Francisco Planning
Department 2018).

Figure 4. Map of Old and New Chinatown and Union Station Area, Los Angeles, CA
(Metro Rail 1991)

Today’s Chinatown in Los Angeles is located just north of Downtown, and is 38.9% Asian
American, followed by 28.9% Latinx, 15.6% White and 13.1% Black (U.S. Census Bureau 2018).
Originally, Chinatown was located within the boundaries of modern-day downtown in what was
known as “Calle de los Negroes”. Chinese immigrants in Los Angeles in the 1800s experienced
the same racial discrimination as their San Franciscan counterparts as anti-Chinese sentiment grew,
leading to the Chinese Massacre of 1871 when 19 Chinese immigrants were lynched and
businesses were looted. In the early 1900s, arson attempts combined with “slum clearance” and
“urban renewal” policies led to the decline of Old Chinatown, which was demolished for the
construction of Union Station (Hom 2020a; Lin 2006). New Chinatown was built north of the old,
with “preservation movement” aesthetics incorporated in its physical design. Chinese merchants
and families banded together to provide community serving amenities including retail shops and
restaurants, as well as theatre, temple, and gardens. Concerns over the gentrification of Chinatown
began in the 90s, with rapid increase in market-rate units in the area and chain retail replacing
independent businesses. In 2000, a Business Improvement District was established, “considered a
force of gentrification from within the neighborhood as the marketing and events primarily cater
to young professionals and support the new upscale retail.” (Hom 2020a) The current retail
landscape in Los Angeles is a mix of restaurants, souvenir shops, bakeries, and others, with the

10
three most common types of businesses per 2-digit NAICS code distribution in the zip code
(90012) as Real Estate and Retail Leasing (which includes mom and pop landlords), Retail Trade
(which includes jewelry stores, home furnishing stores, family clothing stores, and various fish
and seafood and grocery markets) and Wholesale Trade (City of Los Angeles 2020).

Table 2. Summary of demographics
Vancouver San Francisco Los Angeles

Population 1800 14,820 33,800

% Asian 30% 63% 36.96%

Median income vs 23,000 vs 73,000 21,219 vs 112,000 45,003 vs 69,138
Metropolitan income
(ACS 5-year estimates 2012-2017; City of Vancouver 2020; San Francisco Planning Department
2018)

Findings about recent challenges before COVID-19

When examining the potential impact of ethnic retail preservation on COVID-19 recovery and
historic preservation, these three cities have shared histories and unique urban challenges. All three
Chinatowns have faced varying degrees of discriminatory zoning, attempts of slum clearance,
urban renewal, met with organizing efforts from the community. The success of historic planning
policies have lasting impacts which inform the survivability of Chinatowns prior to and after the
pandemic. In this section, we’ll discuss some of the unifying and differing forces experienced in
each city.

Housing Gentrification and Retail Change

Vancouver, SF, and LA are cities known for the lack of affordability of their housing markets. All
three cities have seen rapid population increases due to job growth coupled with low densification
rates. This rise in demand for housing places pressures in areas of the city that have the lowest land
and rental values. As Chinatowns in these cities are adjacent to downtown cores, the affordability
in housing ensures that they are in prime locations for gentrification and displacement as landlords
are incentivized to sell to higher bidders. As housing prices, job growth, and urban attraction draws
wealthier demographics into the city, retail change has been a significant challenge in all three
Chinatowns as well. While traditional Chinese businesses emphasize affordability for their
patrons, new retail arriving in the neighborhoods often charge higher price points than their
traditional counterparts. Even if these stores specialize in Chinese cuisine or fusion, the marketing
and intention of the business caters to a wealthier demographic. Examples include Bao Bei, a high-
end “modern Chinese” restaurant serving $20 main courses in Vancouver; Eight Tables in San
Francisco, with a $225 tasting menu; and Majordomo, a restaurant from celebrity chef David
Chang set in an “industrial-chic space.” In combination, changing urban demographics and real
estate forces have contributed to rapid changes in both the retail and housing landscape.

11
Vancouver

In Vancouver, Japanese incarceration during World War II combined with the slum clearance and
urban renewal of Chinatown’s supporting neighborhoods in the 1960s propelled the decline of a
robust Asian population to support the businesses of Chinatown. The predominantly Chinese and
low-income neighborhood of Strathcona was targeted for renewal, and many of the homes were
seized through eminent domain for values much lower than median housing prices in the area
(Anderson 1988; Bruce 2005; Madokoro 2011). In short, the ability for the Chinese community to
live within the City of Vancouver was once again being limited and redrawn to serve
discriminatory purposes. As the housing boom in Vancouver continued, the Strathcona
neighborhood, once a Chinese enclave with predominantly low-income households, has changed
rapidly with less than a quarter of the population living in low-income housing (Anderson 1988;
Bruce 2005; Madokoro 2011). Further, the housing within Chinatown’s boundaries,
predominantly SROs – a critical portion for sheltering the extremely low-income – have fallen into
disrepair and need substantial funding to replace (City of Vancouver 2017; Denis 2020). These
dueling forces have placed pressure on seniors, the majority of which are low-income – 73%
according to the Government of British Columbia 2015 – who live in the area. Since the 1970’s,
many residents of Chinese descent have moved to find more affordable housing options in the
other ethnoburbs in the Metro Vancouver region.

In Vancouver, interviewees noted that a city-level or regional government resource for small
business support is missing. Specific to Chinatown, long standing businesses have faced rapid
demographic changes in the neighborhood, competing with more new, modern businesses for foot
traffic. In a 2018 report, the hua foundation found that patrons of traditional Chinatown businesses
tended to patronize only traditional businesses and patrons of newer businesses only patronized
newer businesses (Lee 2018). Respondents also noted that many business owners in the area
struggle to adapt to major changes, such as adopting digital food platforms during COVID-19.
Other factors have also contributed to pressures on retail exit, such as the retirement of aging
business owners, businesses without succession plans, or onerous bureaucratic processes to access
support and resources. Notably, a recurrent comment from community members is the inability of
government resources to service streets and the public realm in the neighborhood to maintain
cleanliness and safety. Some have also noted that there is a lack of public space for communal
gathering central to the retail.

San Francisco

San Francisco’s Chinatown is the city’s densest neighborhood, created out of necessity from
historic segregation and discriminatory planning policies. However, this community also has a
long history of community organizing and advocacy, bolstered by strong community institutions
such as Chinatown Community Development Center, that have mitigated some of the housing
impacts created by the tech booms in the region. This advocacy has enabled the successful
protection of subsidized units, and reduced conversion of housing to commercial land use (Moore,
Montojo, and Mauri 2019). The Chinatown area is predominantly rental housing, at rates that are
affordable in comparison with the rest of the city. However, this affordability creates a growing
disparity between the neighborhood and potential market rate prices which enables mounting
pressure to rents in the area. Some residents fear that new developments in the area, such as the

12
potential impact of the new subway station that is opening in 2022, will exacerbate these pressures
on rent. The history of Chinatown’s segregation, community building, and organizing activity has
enabled strong social connections within the Chinese diaspora. Reports and anecdotal evidence
has shown that land ownership remains within community hands, even when it is transferred and
sold as they are sold to other community members.

For the small businesses in San Francisco’s Chinatown, they faced numerous challenges before
the COVID-19 pandemic: many businesses did not have the capacity or knowledge to bring their
businesses online, and moreover, faced much competition with online retailers who were able to
provide the same wares. However, for community-serving businesses, the expensive commercial
rents were never far from the minds of the retailers renting space in the community, particularly
with its proximity to the transportation stations near the community.

Los Angeles

Multiple histories of displacement in Los Angeles’ Chinatown have been highlighted above, but
one of the most significant iterations of this displacement has been taking place since the 1990s.
Pressures from global investment capital buying land for development and subsequent pressures
the growth of the art gallery scene, and transit-oriented development have prompted much of the
displacement of working-class and immigrant communities in the Chinatown (Lin 2008). There
are reports of rent increasing 200% in buildings currently facing eviction (interview with Janis,
2021).

Not only are residents being displaced, but so too are the retailers important to the social fabric of
the community: the construction of the Gold Line Chinatown station in 2003 is correlated with the
decline in the community’s small business growth – a point of concern because of how many of
these retail businesses are community-facing and community-serving. Organizations like the
Chinatown Business Improvement District (BID), which have the purported task of “improving
business” in Chinatown, may contribute to gentrification by increasing marketing to young
professionals and those outside of the community, prompting influxes of market-rate housing
developments and retailers which may displace the working class community currently in the
neighborhood (Hom 2020b).

Historic and Retail Preservation Measures

Vancouver

Prior to the pandemic, Vancouver’s Chinatown faced a number of hardships with many long-
standing businesses closing shop due to rising rents, reaching retirement age, or declining business.
In 2017, a Legacy Business study was conducted to develop a strategy to preserve legacy
businesses that have a connection to the “community’s history, contribute to neighborhood
character, and play an integral role in the community’s way of life” (City of Vancouver, 2017).
No program was enacted, and small business support was limited to funding from Chinatown and
Strathcona Business Improvement Associations, and local funders such as Vancity Credit Union
and Vancouver Chinatown Foundation. Vancouver’s Chinatown is designated a National Historic
Site, and the City of Vancouver is actively seeking UNESCO Heritage Site status for the

13
neighborhood. At the city level, parts of the neighborhood are zoned HA-1 and HA-1A, Historic
Areas that regulate and preserve the land uses, urban form, and design of buildings (especially
older properties).

In January 2021, the Downtown East Side Special Enterprise Pilot Program was released tailored
to supporting community-focused enterprises. The funds would support businesses with technical
assistance for marketing and real estate transactions, in additional to providing funds for capital
building improvements. It is important to note that the City of Vancouver is the only amongst the
three cities that are unable to support businesses directly with financial reimbursement due to the
city’s charter.

San Francisco

Following a 2014 report from the City of San Francisco’s Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office,
a two-phased Legacy Business program was proposed. Phase 1 created the Legacy Business
Registry: eligible businesses would be 30 years or older, would be nominated by the Board of
Supervisors of Mayor, and prove at a Small Business Commission hearing that they have made a
significant impact on the neighborhood’s culture or history. Phase 2 created the Legacy Business
Historic Preservation Fund, where lease extensions would be facilitated between Legacy business
tenants and property owners (this passed under Proposition J in 2015).

Los Angeles

There is currently no legacy business program in Los Angeles, though a motion was filed by City
Councilmember Curren D. Price Jr. in 2019 to instruct the Economic and Workforce Development
Department to report to the Economic Development Committee with an analysis of the San
Francisco Legacy Business Program and other programs along with recommendations to
implement a similar program in Los Angeles. There is a local organization (LA Conservancy)
which runs a legacy business program focused on spotlighting legacy businesses through a map
and written content (L.A. Conservancy 2021). In addition, there is a series of Ethnic-Cultural
Contexts produced by SurveyLA in October 2018 and funded by the Historic Preservation Fund
that outline the history of five ethnic communities in Los Angeles: Chinese Americans, Filipino
Americans, Japanese Americans, Korean Americans, and Thai Americans (Los Angeles City
Planning 2019).

14
Table 3: Summary of Historic and Retail Preservation Programs from City Governments*
Vancouver San Francisco Los Angeles

Financial Assistance No direct financial Yes - there has been a No
assistance provided rent stabilization grant
and a business assistance
grant.

Protections and Zoned Historic While there is a program No
Covenants Areas (facade and that specifically
land use designates “cultural
protections), some heritage districts”, there
funding for are no associated
renovating these regulatory controls.
buildings

Promotion Activities New Enterprise Anticipated to begin No
program (2021) soon, this component of
the program is not yet up
and running, though a
website is currently
being constructed.

Technical Assistance New Enterprise Yes, there is some No
program (2021) technical assistance
offered by the SF
Department of Small
Business, including
assistance with permits
and licenses.
As of December 2021

Findings about Available Resources During the COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic and various shut-down orders, the Chinatowns in each of the
individual cities had varying levels of access to resources. Small businesses in San Francisco and
LA Chinatown had the ability to apply for the United States Small Business Administration’s
Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL). Vancouver (in
Canada) had access to various Government of Canada programs like the Canada Emergency
Business Account (CEBA), Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance (CECRA), and the
BC Small and Medium Sized Business Recovery Grant.

However, when distilled down to the local level, it was clear that there were the differences in
what was offered as resources in each city at a local level.

15
In San Francisco, community organizations like Chinatown Community Development Center
(CCDC) have supported the creation of various programs that support both the restaurants and
businesses within the neighborhood but also the residents within the SROs. Feed and Fuel
Chinatown is a program that provides 122,000 meals to Chinatown SRO residents, sourced through
34 Chinatown based restaurants, with current fundraising efforts going to support a second version
of this program (Chinatown Community Development Center, n.d.). In addition, San Francisco’s
Shared Spaces program allowed Grant Street (a part of San Francisco Chinatown) to completely
close to cars and allow restaurants (which often had limited spaces) to expand their dining spaces
onto the streets (Batey 2020). The City of San Francisco also provided a variety of COVID-19
relief programs such as SF Resiliency Fund, SF HELP, Neighborhood Mini-Grants, African
American Small Business Revolving Loan Fund in addition to the State of California’s Small
Business COVID-19 Relief Grant Program. Respondents also noted that it was difficult for shop
owners to access many of these funds in the case, and when they did, may not have understood the
requirement. There have been accounts of some owners using funds provided for business rent and
may be in a position where they are required to pay it back. Other accounts noted that these grants
are not guaranteed, and competition made it difficult to receive financial aid even after applying
to multiple funds.

In Vancouver, there was a broad consensus that there was not enough direct assistance available
for local residents and retail organizations. The federal and provincial funds available were
dependent on applications and contributions from landlords in order to access funds. Further, some
interviewees noted that there were language barriers, and lack of capacity from small business
owners to complete the necessary documentation for the funds. At the community scale, grassroots
organizations formed the Chinatown Cares program to deliver groceries and hot meals to isolated
seniors in the neighborhood (Cheng 2020; hua foundation 2020).

In Los Angeles, there was little support from the city. Organizations on the ground like Chinatown
Community for Equitable Development (CCED) were doing outreach and supporting small
businesses while they were being evicted, and also created a coupon book for the small businesses
that raised over $10,000 for the businesses participating.

While there were community organizing efforts and available funds across all three cities,
interviewees noted that above all else, direct assistance was needed to pay for commercial rent.
None of the respondents we spoke with noted any adequate programs or resources that
significantly mitigated retail pressures. Overall, program requirements and restrictions from
financial assistance during the pandemic were unclear or onerous processes that didn’t fully meet
the needs of the community.

Overall Findings and Key Takeaways

From the interviews, historic analysis, and policy analysis conducted, it is clear that there are both
distinct and similar themes regarding the preservation of ethnic retail in Chinatowns across all
three cities. Further, under city measures provided for small business support and historic
preservation, these findings apply to both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

16
Historic Preservation and Small Business Support programs did not provide enough assistance
for Chinatowns even before the pandemic

Interviewees were clear that Chinatowns had been facing struggles long before COVID-19. Across
all three cities, Chinatowns were facing rapidly changing demographics, rising commercial rents,
and pressures from skyrocketing real estate prices.

Some issues identified are the decline in business patronage due to a combination of changing
demographics, marketing, and “an inability to keep up with changes”. In Vancouver, some also
attributed falling patronage due to lack of management in the public realm (i.e. street cleaning,
garbage pickup), the opioid epidemic, and “feeling unsafe in the area”. Retirement and
successorship have also been issues across all Chinatowns, as aging owners reach retirement age
and do not have the capacity, interest, or option to pass the business on. Aging building stock is
also an issue, where business owners or landlords may not have the capital to improve stock,
furthering storefront vacancy and affecting the ability to keep building ownership with the Chinese
community. Relatedly, slow and onerous permitting processes were cited as a possible barrier to
capital and public realm improvements to revitalize the neighborhood’s atmosphere. Large
infrastructure projects affected business decisions as well: in San Francisco, the planned
construction of a new transit line is seen as a threat to the commercial and housing rental prices in
the neighborhood.

Juxtaposing the needs, gaps, and stressors most commonly expressed by interviewees with the
available government programs showcases gaps in ethnic retail preservation. Programs made
available through historic and cultural preservation programs, small business support programs,
and pandemic relief programs did not fulfill the needs of the community and fill in these gaps.
Interviewees across all three cities noted that traditional preservation programs, such as the
protection of building facades did not protect the longevity and survivability of businesses and
affordable housing units. Direct commercial rent control and support was emphasized as critical
for business survivability.

As part of the interviews, participants were asked on their effectiveness and whether they believed
these programs were impactful in supporting Chinatown businesses during the COVID-19
pandemic. Across the board, interviewees expressed that COVID-19 exacerbated the existing
stressors on Chinatowns and that there was not enough direct financial assistance to mitigate
business impacts. The interviewees did not believe that existing programs prior to COVID-19
reduced impacts. In Vancouver, the benefits made available during the pandemic were difficult for
business owners to access due to capacity, cultural expectations, or onerous reporting. For
example, one business closed down because commercial rent relief required participation from the
building’s landlord, and they did not enter the program. In another instance, business owners did
not apply to relief programs because they felt that the requirements for documentation entitled the
government to too much personal information. Lastly, one interviewee noted that some business
owners simply don’t have the accounting or assistance needed to fill out the relief funding forms
as they only have time to keep their business accounting afloat.

In San Francisco, Chinatown shop owners were eligible for the federal Paycheck Protection
Program, but as with all businesses, it was not guaranteed. For those who did, they may not have

17
understood what was allowable through the program. For example, there was one account of an
owner using funds for commercial rent and they may now be in a position where they are required
to pay the funds back. Direct assistance was provided to Chinatown’s businesses through SF’s
Resiliency Fund where grants were provided up to $10,000. While there was the existing Legacy
Business Registry and Legacy Business Preservation Fund, they did not add any new supports
during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Los Angeles, there were certain programs made available to
the businesses to support them on CARES Act applications (which included applications to the
PPP). There were also small business loan programs available to Los Angeles businesses,
including the LA County Small Business Stabilization Loan Program, and grant programs,
including the LA Regional COVID Fund (which provides both loans and grants). However, while
these programs were available, many of them did not offer in-language support, which made it
difficult for many businesses in Los Angeles’ Chinatown to apply.

Direct Assistance for commercial rent was biggest gap before – but especially during – the
pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, all interviewees noted that direct assistance - specifically funds
that were available to pay for commercial rent - was the biggest gap in programs provided.
Although some programs in these cities provided some direct financial aid that could be paid
towards rent, it remains an issue even now. Commercial rent was also cited as an ongoing issue,
even prior to the pandemic. Some businesses, like those in Los Angeles’ Chinatown, can pay
upwards of $25,000 a month, and there is more incentive for landlords to keep rents high due to
Chinatown’s proximity to urban cores. Across the three Chinatowns, some businesses received a
level of empathy from landlords during the COVID-19 pandemic, with rent deferral or reduced
rents given. In Los Angeles, some business owners organized to ask landlords to lower rent over
the course of the pandemic. However, despite these efforts, it was noted that commercial rent and
a lack of commercial rent control leaves much of the affordability and survivability of businesses
to the hands of benevolent landlords. In San Francisco, one interviewee noted that state laws hinder
the ability to enact policies that control commercial rent. The same interviewee noted that high
ownership rates of buildings that stayed within the Chinese community was very important for the
neighborhood, as the owners were invested in the survivability of their commercial tenants and
were more willing to ease on rent and other measures.

Preserving ethnic retail is the act of preserving community services, as opposed to cultural or
economic value

Through our interviews with members from all three cities, part of the difficulty in establishing a
program that preserves ethnic retail (such as a legacy business program), was the unclear
definitions for businesses that should be protected or supported. These definitions varied,
particularly between those in the community and city staff.

In San Francisco (which was the only city with a formalized legacy business program out of the
three cities), the program defines a legacy business as one that is older than 30 years, and
“contributes to the history and/or identity of a specific neighborhood.” Similarly, when speaking
with city staff from LA working in historic preservation, the same qualities of longevity,
permanence and characteristics of whether they contributed to community or cultural identity

18
arose. In contrast, Vancouver’s legacy business study emphasized a fluidity to the definition –
allowing the community to define what the parameters were for retail businesses that should be
supported. Further, Vancouver’s 2021 Special Enterprise Pilot Program draws a distinction
between “legacy business” (something transmitted by, or received, from an ancestor or predecessor
or from the past) and use the term “heritage business” (based on values and their attributes, and
often more complex and nuanced than legacy) to address the living heritage, culture and identity
of Chinatown” (City of Vancouver 2021). These distinctions in definitions are important, as the
adoption of legacy business programs often require strict guidelines (i.e. number of years, etc.) in
order for retail entities to qualify for support.

Community members from all three Chinatowns saw legacy businesses as community assets and
institutions, providing a sense of place and identity, and essential goods and services for the
neighborhoods, in addition to being a driver for the local economy. Some community members
defined the legacy business as one that was specifically attached to the community and that their
patrons were long-term residents of an area. Others asserted that legacy businesses in Chinatowns
were those that provided community service – working hard to ensure that culturally appropriate
goods and services were provided for community members at an affordable price point. Another
interviewee emphasized that legacy businesses are those that go beyond simple economic units of
the economy, noting that while beloved businesses in Chinatown may not be adapting to new food
trends, there is still value in their service to the community.

Given these sentiments, it seems that there is still a gap in existing programs to address that is truly
valued by community members - the survivability of businesses that provide for the populations
that live there. The technical supports currently provided (a legacy business registry, employee
subsidy, and technical support for marketing and rent negotiation) do not seem to be mitigating
the drivers of business closure like the lack of commercial rent control, onerous and culturally
inappropriate processes for grant funding, lengthy zoning and permit processes.

Preserving ethnic retail also requires the preservation of housing and affordability

As cities continue to look to address retail gentrification and the protection of legacy businesses,
the findings from this research show that the desire to retain cultural, historic, and community
defining retail may be separate from the idea of legacy. Many of our interviewees noted that
enterprises that should be part of support programs are those that provide a community service by
meeting community necessities like social services, food kitchens, shelter, and more. Specific to
Chinatowns and adjacent enclaves, interviewees noted that this meant low prices and culturally
appropriate goods and services. This is supported by business owners who have acknowledged
their intentionally cheaper pricing to meet the needs of patrons. Other information that supports
this is related to the context given by our interviewees, where some noted that business owners
don’t invest in modernizing changes to adapt to the trends of today such as newer aesthetic appeal
that would drive a corresponding increase in prices.

The idea of protecting legacy businesses extends beyond the idea of protecting old enterprises. As
demographics, housing prices, and retail enterprises in our neighborhoods rapidly change, these
communities have noticed that beloved businesses find it harder to adapt. A challenge identified
by some interviewees is that ethnic entrepreneurs in Chinatown are unable to adapt to changes in

19
demand and are not meeting economic competition. These entrepreneurs do not engage in utilizing
digital delivery services, marketing through mapping and other business review applications, or
keeping up with food trends such as emphasizing food aesthetics. Existing businesses form the
backdrop against which new businesses enter the community: some see these new businesses in
Chinatown as revitalizing “blighted” neighborhoods, while critics of these new modern businesses
say that they don’t serve the neighborhood, instead importing wealthier demographics from other
areas of the city.

Given that Chinatowns are home to the low- and very-low-income, immigrants, non-native English
speakers, and pan-Asian folks who need affordable housing, affordable and culturally appropriate
goods and services – ethnic retail fills a gap beyond mere units of the economy. Small businesses
in these neighborhoods often charge relatively little and do not prioritize investment into the
aesthetic appearances that are trending in today’s retail landscape. The preservation of these ethnic
retail units and, by hopeful extension, the culture of the neighborhood, is also a narrative about the
value of affordability within the urban core. The survivability of Chinatowns and ethnic enclaves
must be about the preservation of affordable commercial rent, affordable housing, and prices for
goods and services for those who live there.

This idea is supported by the differences between San Francisco’s Chinatown and those of
Vancouver and Los Angeles. Even prior to the pandemic, interviewee concerns around the
survivability of San Francisco’s Chinatown seems less severe in comparison to the other two cities.
While there were obvious worries regarding the city’s affordable housing prices and the new
Chinatown station to be built, community members noted that Chinatown was doing well.
Interviews and other studies credit the positive landscape of SF’s Chinatown to its history of
organizing and political activism that have retained many of the residential buildings within the
Chinese community and have intentionally kept rents affordable. In short, the ownership of
buildings by community members have allowed the survivability of affordable housing units and
relatively more affordable commercial rent. Organizers were also more successful in halting urban
renewal and discriminatory housing practices in decades past, allowing a significant population to
continue to inhabit Chinatown and surrounding neighborhoods. In stark contrast, Vancouver and
Los Angeles both suffered significant decline in Chinese populations as a result of slum clearance,
eminent domain, and planned disinvestment in neighborhoods as outlined in the history. To this
day, descriptors by media outlets as well as current and former Chinese patrons in both
neighborhoods are reminiscent of those from over a century ago. In Vancouver, many see
Chinatown as dangerous, dirty, and unkept; this is attributed to storefront vacancy, declining
business, lack of street cleaning and community public spaces. In Los Angeles, this is attributed
to rising rents, gentrifying businesses, and even the work of ill-meaning landlords who have
disinvested in their buildings in hopes of evicting tenants and redeveloping the buildings. This
dynamic can make it difficult to determine truth from perception, but it is nonetheless clear that
these two Chinatowns were losing businesses and residents long before the pandemic.

Discussion

This study explored how ethnic retail has been changing in the Chinatowns of Vancouver, San
Francisco, and Los Angeles, and how a legacy business program and other support systems have
impacted these businesses before and during COVID-19. Legacy business programs in practice

20
and the preservation of ethnic retail in general fall between historic preservation and small business
development, and there is yet to be intensive studies on the impact and effectiveness of legacy
business programs on this subset of retail. Existing studies have focused on the value of ethnic
businesses within their communities, existing challenges to operating a business within urban
cores, and physical historic preservation policies. As a first step, our current study has examined
the impact of these programs to understand how business preservation programs have fared amidst
the pandemic across three cities. Findings reveal how residents value ethnic businesses within their
communities, the effectiveness of city programs to meet needs of ethnic businesses during and
before the pandemic, and how the perception of disappearing retail from varying Chinatowns
influence policy decisions. This data seeks to fill a gap in research about how ethnic retail should
be preserved through historic preservation and small business support in planning and policy.

The three case studies revealed and affirmed that ethnic enterprises are beloved for their
community functions far greater than merely for their goods and services within Chinatowns. For
many, these community functions are as familial gathering spaces, representatives of rich historical
contributions, or are spaces where residents can find affordable and culturally appropriate meals
and supplies. These ideals extend beyond the definitions of legacy businesses as understood
through existing preservation programs and studies which identify an amount of time within the
neighborhood. The emphasis on community contribution draws attention to how we can protect
these businesses, not as economic assets, but rather as a part of a fabric of the neighborhood as
affordable retail and community spaces integrated into Chinatowns and ethnic enclaves alike.

Preservation programs have focused on providing physical building protections through zoning,
relief grants, marketing support, and succession planning support. However, the largest perceived
gap in need prior to and during the pandemic was direct rental relief, commercial rent control, and
creating more culturally appropriate processes for bureaucratic programs.

Further, our comparison between these three case studies have shown that affordability and
survivability of ethnic retail in Chinatowns is also dependent on how the community has been able
to survive past discriminatory planning practices that have tried to rid these neighborhoods of
public realm improvements and housing ownership. The importance of community-based
ownership of buildings has provided protection to Chinatown from those who may seek to raise
rents for housing and commercial businesses beyond what is survivable from Chinese tenants.

This research contributes to an ongoing and evolving discussion on how to preserve intangible
cultural assets, identified as ethnic retail in our three case studies. Across all three cities, it appears
that programs need to preserve the community service of affordable, and culturally appropriate
goods and services; protect or provide direct assistance in the form of rent control or rent relief;
and lastly programs should protect affordable housing stock and promote community ownership
of residential and commercial buildings in these communities.

We acknowledge, however, that there is a gap between San Francisco and Vancouver and Los
Angeles. San Francisco’s Chinatown is struggling, but still retains a large neighborhood of Chinese
residents and owners. The solution for a neighborhood that still retains many assets and strengths
is to focus on preservation and protection. This would include avenues to retain community
ownership and reduce commercial rent burden to weather the pandemic and other shocks. This

21
includes avenues to preserve affordability and enable continued ownership from the Chinese
residents and business owners that remain – potentially through alternative ownership methods
like the community land trusts and community co-ownership.

For Chinatowns and enclaves in greater decline and that have lost significant community
populations, municipalities may wish to create pathways for community ownership, but also look
to re-envisioning the community on the basis of affordability. Often, planners look to declining
neighborhoods as projects for revitalization, attempting to create “mixed-income” neighborhoods
by developing housing stock that may import wealthier demographics from outside the
community. These initiatives may not be well received well by existing community members,
further exacerbating sentiments in ethnic enclaves as these policies tend to ignore that the decline
of their neighborhoods also stem from past planning decisions. Potential solutions may be to aim
to create mixed-income neighborhoods through social support services and pathways for existing
residents to reach higher income levels. This is a topic for further research.

Due to the timing of this research, quantifying the impacts of COVID-19 on ethnic businesses in
Chinatowns may have to wait for after the decline of the pandemic. The data collected since may
better identify the factors for closure both during and prior to the pandemic, and to evaluate the
impact of legacy business and other preservation programs in these neighborhoods. In addition,
while some research has been formulated on the importance of small businesses to the social
infrastructure of ethnic enclaves, there should be more qualitative research conducted on 1) the
institutional completeness provided by ethnic retail; and 2) how historic and legacy businesses
programs can better protect the completeness provided by ethnic retail.

Conclusion

Historic preservation and economic development programs from cities are currently developing
programs and policies to preserve ethnic retail and retain cultural neighborhoods. Thus far, these
programs have focused on preserving legacy, and have not met the needs of their constituents.
Chinatowns have been on the decline even prior to the pandemic, and COVID-19 has only
exacerbated the factors that have forced closures. Through our research, we have found that
programs that preserve ethnic retail should understand that these policies should focus on the
preservation of community services within the neighborhood, as opposed to the preservation of
physical buildings or economic contributions. We have also found that the preservation of ethnic
retail may require commercial rent control and direct assistance for rental relief during COVID-
19 and beyond. Lastly, retaining cultural neighborhoods such as Chinatowns, likely requires the
prioritization of housing affordability and pathways towards community ownership in order to
sustain the cultural institutions, spaces, and assets created for years to come.

References

Anderson, K J. 1988. “Cultural Hegemony and the Race-Definition Process in Chinatown,
Vancouver: 1880–1980.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 6 (2): 127–49.
https://doi.org/10.1068/d060127.
Bates, Timothy and Alicia Robb. 2013. “Greater Access to Capital is Needed to Unleash the Local
Economic Development Potential of Minority-Owned Businesses.” Economic

22
Development Quarterly 27(3): 250-259.
Batey, Eve. 2020. “New Effort Promises $25,000 to Chinatown Restaurants for Outdoor Dining.”
Eater SF. August 5, 2020. https://sf.eater.com/2020/8/5/21355779/chinatown-san-
francisco-coronavirus-grants-outdoor-dining.
Bliss, Laura. 2020. “Chinatown Businesses Face a Particularly Brutal Winter.” Bloomberg.Com,
December 7, 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-07/covid-19-has-
been-a-disaster-for-u-s-chinatowns.
Bruce, Michael. 2005. “‘A New Breed of Group’: Community Activism in Vancouver’s
Strathcona Neighbourhood, 1968-1972,” 52.
Buckley, James Michael and Donna Graves. 2016. “Tangible Benefits from Intangible Resources:
Using Social and Cultural History to Plan Neighborhood Futures. Journal of the American
Planning Association 82(2): 152 - 166.
Chaganti, Radba, and Patricia G. Greene. 2002. “Who Are Ethnic Entrepreneurs? A Study of
Entrepreneurs’ Ethnic Involvement and Business Characteristics.” Journal of Small
Business Management 40(2): 126-143.
Cheng, Deanna. 2020. “‘How Do We Find Comfort in Food?’: Seniors in Vancouver Get Unique
Chinatown Grocery Support.” 2020. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/hua-foundation-
vancouver-grocery-seniors-162335972.html.
City of San Francisco. N.d. “Office of Small Business: About the Rent Stabilization Grant.”
https://sfosb.org/legacy-business/rentgrant
———. N.d. “Office of Small Business: Legacy Business Directory.”
https://sfosb.org/legacy-business
City of Sonoma. N.d. “Formula Businesses.” https://www.sonomacity.org/formula-businesses/
Li Chuo. “Chinatown and Urban Redevelopment: A Spatial Narrative of Race, Identity and Urban
Politics,” PhD diss. (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2011).
City of Vancouver. 2017a. “Chinatown Legacy Business Study 華埠傳統及特色商店研究.”
2017. https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/legacy-business-study.aspx.
———. 2017b. “Single Room Occupancy Revitalization Action Plan.”
https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/sro-revitalization-action-plan.pdf.
———. 2020. “Vancouver: City Social Indicators Profile 2020.”
———. 2021. “Downtown Eastside Special Enterprise Pilot Program.”
https://council.vancouver.ca/20210119/documents/r1.pdf.
David Lam Centre. 2017. “Vancouver Chinatown.” Vancouver Chinatown, 1886-2011. 2017.
https://www.sfu.ca/chinese-canadian-history/vancouver_chinatown_en.html.
Denis, Jen St. 2020. “After Two Disastrous Decades, Vancouver Gets Serious about Protecting
SROs.” The Tyee. The Tyee. November 13, 2020.
https://thetyee.ca/News/2020/11/13/Two-Decades-Now-Vancouver-Serious-Protecting-
SROs/.
Derworiz, Colette. 2020. “Chinatowns across Canada Report Drop in Business Due to Coronavirus
Fears,” February 27, 2020. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-chinatowns-
across-canada-report-drop-
in-business-due-to-coronavirus/.
Dhaliwal, Spinder. 2006. “The take-up of business support by minority ethnic enterprises: The
experience of South Asian businesses in England.” International Entrepreneurship and
Management Journal 2: 79-91.
Government of British Columbia. 2015. “Chinatown Senior Housing Feasibility Study.”

23
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/our-
history/historic-places/documents/heritage/chinese-legacy/clan-associations-
pdfs/vancouver_chinatown_senior_housing_study_finalreport_pdf_19mb.pdf.
Hom, Laureen D. 2020a. “Symbols of Gentrification? Narrating Displacement in Los Angeles
Chinatown.” Urban Affairs Review, September, 1078087420954917.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087420954917.
———. 2020b. “Symbols of Gentrification? Narrating Displacement in Los Angeles Chinatown.”
Urban Affairs Review, September, 107808742095491.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087420954917.
hua foundation. 2020. “Chinatown Cares Grocery Delivery Program.” Hua Foundation (blog).
2020. https://huafoundation.org/work/food-systems/chinatown-cares/.
Kang, Anna. 2020. “Chinatown Wants Supporters, Not Saviors.” Forbes. June 18, 2020.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/annakang/2020/06/18/chinatown-wants-supporters-not-
saviors/.
Lee, Christina. 2018. “Vancouver Chinatown Social Cohesion Report.”
https://huafoundation.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/05/Report_VanCTSocialCohesion.pdf.
Li, Chuo. 2019. “Postwar Urban Redevelopment and the Politics of Exclusion: The Case of San
Francisco’s Chinatown.” Journal of Planning History 18 (1): 27–43.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513218755043.
Li, Wanyee. 2019. “Rift in Vancouver’s Chinatown Keeping Newcomers and Longtime
Businesses Apart, Report Suggests.” Thestar.Com. January 22, 2019.
https://www.thestar.com/vancouver/2019/01/22/nearly-half-of-chinatowns-traditional-
businesses-are-in-decline-report-suggests.html.
Lin, Jan. 2006. “The Removal and Renewal of Los Angeles Chinatown From the Exclusion Era to
the Global Era,” 40.
———. 2008. “Los Angeles Chinatown: Tourism, Gentrification, and the Rise of an Ethnic
Growth Machine.” Amerasia Journal, 16.
Liu, Michael, and Kim Geron. 2008. “Changing Neighborhood: Ethnic Enclaves and the Struggle
for Social Justice,” 19.
Liu, C. Y., J. Miller, and Q. Wang. 2014. “Ethnic enterprises and community development.”
GeoJournal 2014 (79): 565-576.
Madokoro, Laura. 2011. “Chinatown and Monster Homes: The Splintered Chinese Diaspora in
Vancouver.” Urban History Review 39 (2): 17–24. https://doi.org/10.7202/1003459ar.
Metro Rail. n.d. “Map of Old and New Chinatown and Union Station Area, Los Angeles, ca.
1991 :: Chinese Historical Society of Southern California Collection, ca.1880-1933.”
Accessed March 1, 2021.
http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll73/id/1737.
Mills, Claire Kramer. n.d. “DOUBLE JEOPARDY: COVID-19’S CONCENTRATED HEALTH
AND WEALTH EFFECTS IN BLACK COMMUNITIES,” 8.
Monder, Ram and Trevor Jones. 2008. “Ethnic-Minority Businesses in the UK: A Review
of Research and Policy Developments.” Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space
26: 352-374.
Montojo, Nicole. 2015. “Chinatown: Community Organizating amidst Change in SF’s
Chinatown.” https://www.urbandisplacement.org/content/chinatown-san-francisco.
Moore, Eli, Nicole Montojo, and Nicole Mauri. 2019. “Roots, Race, & Place: A History of Racially

24
Exclusionary Housing in the San Francisco Bay Area.”
https://belonging.berkeley.edu/rootsraceplace.
Naram, Kartik. 2017. “No Place Like Home: Racial Capitalism, Gentrification, and the Identity of
Chinatown.” Asian American Policy Review (blog). June 29, 2017.
https://aapr.hkspublications.org/2017/06/29/gentrification/.
Perricone, Philip, John R. Earl and Ian M. Taplin. (2001). “Patterns of Succession and Continuity
in Family-Owned Businesses: Study of an Ethnic Community.” Family Business Review
14(2): 105 - 122.
Regan, Wes. 2017. “Density and Diversity: Considering the Impacts of Mixed-Use Development
on the Retail Culture of Vancouver’s Main Street.” Simon Fraser University.
https://summit.sfu.ca/item/17814.
San Francisco Planning Department. 2018. “San Francisco Neighborhoods Socio-Economic
Profiles,” 96.
Santos, Carla Almeida, Yaniv Belhassen, and Kellee Caton. 2008. “Reimagining Chinatown: An
Analysis of Tourism Discourse.” Tourism Management 29 (5): 1002–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.002.
Schuch, J. C. Qingfang Wang. 2015. “Immigrant businesses, place-making and community
development: a case from an emerging immigrant gateway.” Journal of Cultural
Geography 2015: 1 - 28.
Shieh, Leslie, and Jessica Chen. 2018. “Chinatown, Not Coffeetown: Authenticity and
PLacemaking in Vancouver’s Chinatown.” In Planning for AuthentiCITIES. Routledge.
Xie, Shuyi, and Elena Batunova. 2019. “Shrinking Historic Neighborhoods and Authenticity
Dilution: An Unspoken Challenge of Historic Chinatowns in the United States through the
Case of San Francisco.” Sustainability 12 (1): 282. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010282.
Yelp. 2020. “Yelp: Local Economic Impact Report.” Yelp Economic Average. September 2020.
https://www.yelpeconomicaverage.com/business-closures-update-sep-2020.
Zhou, Min. 2006. “Revisiting Ethnic Entrepreneurship: Convergencies, Controversies, and
Conceptual Advancements1.” International Migration Review 38 (3): 1040–74.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00228.x.
Zukin, Sharon, Valerie Trujillo, Peter Frase, Danielle Jackson, Tim Recuber, and Abraham
Walker. 2009. “New Retail Capital and Neighborhood Change: Boutiques and
Gentrification in New York City.” City & Community 8(1): 47-64.
Zuk, Miriam, and Karen Chapple. 2015. “Case Studies on Gentrification and Displacement in the
San Francisco Bay Area.” University of California, Berkeley.
https://www.urbandisplacement.org/sites/default/files/images/case_studies_on_gentrificat
ion_and_displacement-_full_report.pdf.

File and source

File: chan-2022-how-to-save-chinatown-preserving-affordability-and-community-service-through-eth.pdf
Size: 722,115 bytes
SHA-256: 33a9950792b84aab4248215db4d3c923f77f4a7c5ba7726a1279c45e61437cfa
Our copy: chan-2022-how-to-save-chinatown-preserving-affordability-and-community-service-through-eth.pdf
Original: escholarship.org