• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2013.10a
• /
• pp.419-421
• /
• 2013

이 글은 등대문화유산 분류체계와 DB구축 방안에 관한 기존의 법령과 제도를 기반으로 기존의 국립등대박물관의 등대문화유산 분류체계에 문화재관리 및 박물관수장품관리와 연계성을 보완하고, 등대문화유산 DB구축에 문화재기록관리 및 박물관정보관리 체계의 호환성을 제고할 수 있도록 유형별 범주와 기능별 용도에 따라 효율적으로 체계적으로 관리할 수 있도록 실무방안을 제시하고자 한다.

• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.117-136
• /
• 2019

This study aims to suggest the ways of integrated services for Cultural Heritage Archives that belong to the Cultural Heritage Administration. To this end, the study analyzed the archives of major affiliated organizations of the Cultural Heritage Administration that manage and preserve Korean cultural assets. A cultural asset metadata based on the multiple entity model and applicable data link model standard was suggested for the integrated service of high-value-added cultural heritage information resources.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2014.06a
• /
• pp.189-191
• /
• 2014

2003년 대한민국 등대 100주년을 기념하여 등대문화유산 관련 조사와 규정이 제정된 이래, 지난 10여 년 동안 다양한 노력을 통하여 많은 유산들이 보존되고 정리되었다. 그 결과 등대 관련 시설들이 전 국민에게 개방되어 새로운 해양문화를 체험할 수 있는 영역으로 자리잡고 있다. 때문에 등대문화유산이 어떻게 보존되고 활용되었으며 관리되고 있는가를 살펴보는 것은 기 지정된 등대문화유산 이외에도 새로운 유물을 발굴하고 보존 및 활용하기 위한 필수적인 작업이라고 할 수 있다. 이러한 맥락으로 볼 때, 본 연구는 부산지방해양항만청과 부산지방해양항만청 제주해양관리단 관할에 있는 기 등록된 등대문화유산의 실태조사를 바탕으로 새롭게 등대문화유산으로 지정하여 보존하고 활용할 가치가 있는 건조물을 선정하고, 향후 등대문화유산의 보존 및 활용방안에 관해 필요한 사항을 정리 및 제시하는 것을 목적으로 한다.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.34-43
• /
• 2022

This study compared the characteristics of cultural heritage in China and Vietnam, which have developed in the relationship of mutual geopolitical and cultural influence in history, and the following conclusions were made. First, the definition of cultural heritage in China and Vietnam has similar meanings in both countries. In the case of cultural heritage classification, both countries introduced the legal concept of intangible cultural heritage through UNESCO, and have similarities in terms of intangible cultural heritage. Second, while China has separate laws for managing tangible and intangible cultural heritages, Vietnam integrally manages the two types of cultural heritages under a single law. Vietnam has a slower introduction of the concept of cultural heritage than China, but it shows high integration in terms of system. Third, cultural heritages in both China and Vietnam are graded, which is applied differently depending on the type of heritage. The designation method has a similarity in which the two countries have a vertical structure and pass through steps. By restoring the value of heritage and complementing integrity through such a step-by-step review, balanced development across the country is being sought through tourism to enjoy heritage and create economic effects. Fourth, it was confirmed that the cultural heritage management organization has a central government management agency in both countries, but in China, the authority of local governments is higher than that of Vietnam. In addition, unlike Vietnam, where tangible and intangible cultural heritage are managed by an integrated institution, China had a separate institution in charge of intangible cultural heritage. Fifth, China is establishing a conservation management policy focusing on sustainability that harmonizes the protection and utilization of heritage. Vietnam is making efforts to integrate the contents and spirit of the agreement into laws, programs, and projects related to cultural heritage, especially intangible heritage and economic and social as a whole. However, it is still dependent on the influence of international organizations. Sixth, China and Vietnam are now paying attention to intangible heritage recently introduced, breaking away from the cultural heritage protection policy centered on tangible heritage. In addition, they aim to unite the people through cultural heritage and achieve the nation's unified policy goals. The two countries need to use intangible heritage as an efficient means of preserving local communities or regions. A cultural heritage preservation network should be established for each subject that can integrate the components of intangible heritage into one unit to lay the foundation for the enjoyment of the people. This study has limitations as a research stage comparing the cultural heritage system and preservation management status in China and Vietnam, and the characteristic comparison of cultural heritage policies by type remains a future research task.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2019.11a
• /
• pp.89-91
• /
• 2019

국내의 유일의 등대문화유산을 관리, 조존하는 국립등대박물관에서 등대문화유산을 체계적으로 관리 할수 있는 IT 시스템에 대한 구축을 위한 사업을 진행 중이며 그에 적합한 통합관리시스템의 설계를 수행 하였다.

• Proceedings of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• 2019.05a
• /
• pp.43-47
• /
• 2019

In the field of cultural heritage, for the purpose of its preservation and restoration, cultural heritage has been recorded using three-dimensional (3D) digital technology. However, these 3D digital records are a large-scale digital record produced through complicated steps from point cloud data acquisition to 3D model production, and long-term preservation problems cannot be avoided. With international discussions are ongoing, this study looks into the preservation direction of the cultural heritage 3D digital records based on precedent research and case analysis.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.56-85
• /
• 2010

UNESCO World Heritage Programme was introduced following the adoption of Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972 in order to protect cultural and natural heritage with superb value for all mankind. Despite its short history of less than 40 years, it has been evaluated as one of the most successful of the cultural area projects of UNESCO with 890 world heritage registered worldwide. For systematic protection management of World Heritage, UNESCO, through systemization of registration, emphasis on the importance of preservation management plan, institutionalization of monitoring, and operation of World Heritage Fund, has utilized World Heritage Programme not just as a means of listing excellent cultural properties, but as a preservation planning tool, and accordingly, such policies have had a significant influence on the cultural heritage protection legislations of numerous nations. Korea has ratified World Heritage Convention in 1988, and with the registration of the Royal Tombs of the Joseon Dynasty in 2009, it has 9 World Heritage Sites. Twenty years have passed since Korea joined the World Heritage Programme. While World Heritage registration contributed to publicity of the uniqueness and excellence of Korean cultural properties and improvement of Korea's national culture status, it is now time to devise various legislative/systematic improvement means to reconsider the World Heritage registration strategy and establish a systematic preservation management system. While up until now, the Cultural Properties Protection Law has been amended to arrange for basic rules regarding registration and protection of World Heritage Sites, and some local governments have founded bodies exclusive for World Heritage Site management, a more fundamental and macroscopic plan for World Heritage policy improvement must be sought. Projects and programs in each area for reinforcement of World Heritage policy capacity such as: 1) Enactment of a special law for World Heritage Site preservation management; 2) enactment of ordinances for protection of World Heritage Sites per each local government; 3) reinforcement of policies and management functionality of Cultural Heritage Administration and local governments; 4) dramatic increase in the finances of World Heritage Site protection; 5) requirement to establish plan for World Heritage Site preservation protection; 6) increased support for utilization of World Heritage Sites; 7) substantiation and diversification of World Heritage registration; 8) sharing of information and experiences of World Heritage Sites management among local governments; 9) installation of World Heritage Sites integral archive; 10) revitalization of citizen cooperation and resident participation; 11) training specialized resources for World Heritage Sites protection; 12) revitalization of sustainable World Heritage Sites tourism, must be selected and promoted systematically. Regarding how World Heritage Programme should be domestically accepted and developed, the methods for systemization, scientific approach, and specialization of World Heritage policies were suggested per type. In the future, in-depth and specialized researches and studies should follow.

• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.8 no.11
• /
• pp.321-329
• /
• 2017

Baekje Historic Areas were inscribed on the UNESCO World Cultural Heritage List unanimously at the 2015 World Heritage Committee held in Bonn, Germany. There are three ramparts in Beakje Historic Areas; Gongsansung fortress in Gong-ju, Busosangsung fortress and the outer city wall in Buyeo. The purpose of this study is to research the use plan and the condition of the conservation and management for enhancing values of the World Cultural Heritage. This paper analyses basic survey, repair, documentation, conservation, management, and the cases of the utilizing these fortresses through literatures and a field studies. This study, based on the management and use of Baekje fortresses, could give implications for the conservation, management, and use of other fortresses.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.52 no.2
• /
• pp.106-121
• /
• 2019

Sustainable development in society has become the center of focus in many fields such as industry, environment, health, culture, etc. Considering that the concept of heritage involves understanding it as a 'resource' to improve the quality of people's lives, sustainability is an important goal that heritage policy has to achieve. Adopting the definition of sustainability in the 1987 Brundtland Report, this paper defines the concept of sustainability with respect to heritage, as well as their respective roles. Following that, three action principles are presented: value-based conservation, rational decision-making, and community involvement. Two cases demonstrating how the three principles should be practiced in managing change are then illustrated. Considering that heritage can play its role as a resource once its significance is protected, this paper argues that value-based rational decision-making is of paramount importance and the first principle. Conservation aims to manage change by practicing a cyclic process of value identification, value sustaining, and value dissemination. Therefore, this paper argues that all processes should be connected in the context of heritage values. A rational decision-making process practicing value-based conservation is then suggested. This paper argues that rational decision-making can only be practiced once values are identified by objective criteria and managed by rational judgment upon impact assessment. Community involvement, the third principle, is necessary to realize value-based conservation and rational decision-making. Recognizing that a community is a beneficiary of heritage and a creator of a beneficial process at the same time, it discusses the role of community and the importance of this role in policies for the sustainability of heritage. This paper concludes with a set of recommendations to improve policies after examining the two decision-making cases.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.4-17
• /
• 2019

Both as a means of improving North-South relations, as well as a necessary component for carrying out research on the past of the Korean peninsula, interest in North Korean cultural resources has been growing in South Korean society. As a result, studies have begun to look beyond North Korean cultural resources themselves and attempt to determine how cultural resources are managed in North Korea. Such studies have tended to investigate laws related to the management of cultural heritage in North Korea, but information gleaned from laws alone is limited. To provide a more complete picture, research must also investigate how cultural resource management laws are applied and enforced and also take into consideration aspects of cultural resource management that are not directed or regulated by law. In this study, we refer to the current National Cultural Resources Protection Laws in order to investigate systems of cultural resource management in North Korea. Furthermore, we conducted interviews with a former North Korean national who had until recently worked as a director of historical sites in North Korea. Through comparisons of information relating to organization, labor power, responsibilities, budget, and other factors of cultural resource management gained through the interviews and the 'National Cultural Resources Protection Laws,' we hoped to gain a fuller understanding of the reality of cultural resource management in North Korea. As a result, we were able to gain a better understanding of the organization and tasks related to cultural resource management and, at the same time, clarify some of the provisions that were unclear in the laws. Throughout the process, we were also able to determine that the management of cultural resources in North Korea is currently inadequate. However, because this study focuses on a specific region and is limited only to historical sites, it is difficult to generalize our findings to the entirety of cultural resource management in North Korea. In order to gain an objective and more accurate understanding of the current state of cultural resource management in North Korea, information must be collected at many levels to be synthesized and compared.