• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.61-74
• /
• 2008

This study analyzes institutional characteristics and activities of the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. In particular, the study provides cultural heritage institutions with policy strategies for social inclusion. Futhermore, it discusses how the establishment of a nation-level cultural collaborative body impacts on an archival areas in depth. The case study of the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council is expected to be an important reference for building a cooperative cultural heritage institution model in South Korea.

• 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.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 2023

After 60 years since the enactment of the cultural property protection act, Korea's national system of protecting what has been valued has been transformed into a 'National Heritage System'. To meet the new system, the classification of national heritage has been re-classified into three categories as cultural heritage, natural heritage, and intangible heritage. In accordance with the sub-classification, acts for cultural heritage act and intangible heritage has been amended and act for natural heritage has been enacted. Act for natural heritage defines natural heritage as natural objects or cultural heritage formed through the interaction between human beings and natural environment. The sub-classification are categorized as follows; animal, plant, geological and natural reserves, natural landscapes, historical-cultural landscapes, and mixed landscapes. It also allows creating traditional landscapes so that traditional way of landscaping can be encouraged and integrated with modern life within historic environment. In line with the new concept of traditional landscaping, existing practices will be also needed to be changed. Traditional landscaping will play a significant role in setting out the new administrative paradigm which focuses on more value preservation. This paper recommends that effective collaboration between government, experts of traditional landscaping, and owners should be established to integrate the new policy in practice.

• 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.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.55 no.4
• /
• pp.296-312
• /
• 2022

This paper examines the concept and process of heritagization, as well as other measures for the value enhancement of food culture as heritage, through the case of the gastronomic meal of the French, which has a long history as a socially constructed heritage. Heritage refers to what a society perceives as worthy of being transmitted. Thus, a heritage is something that a society or group chooses to preserve and that represents its identity. In the 19th century, France began to designate and protect heritage through a policy of preserving historical monuments, and heritage became both a social construct and creation with the purpose of preserving and enhancing values. Interest in heritage spread around the world with globalization, and has grown even greater since the 1972 UNESCO Convention. This interest has progressively extended to nature, urban landscapes and intangible cultural heritage. In 2003, the UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the Intangible Cultural Heritage was adopted, and this has strengthened the interest in intangible cultural heritage worldwide. Food-related heritage has been excluded from the list due to difficulties in establishing inscription criteria and concerns about the potential commercialization of heritage. However, in 2010, the food cultures of the Mediterranean, Mexico, and France were inscribed on UNESCO's Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, which prompted interest in food culture and efforts to inscribe the food heritage of a number of other countries, including Korea. France has a long history of interest in gastronomy as a cultural heritage and part of its national identity. Efforts to preserve and popularize gastronomy as a part of the national identity and heritage have been made at both the private level, by gourmets and associations, and at the governmental level. Through these efforts, the culture of gastronomy as a heritage has been firmly established through theoretical discussion, listing of food-related heritages, and policies. Sustainable development of the heritage is pursued through certain ongoing institutional approaches, including the City of Gastronomy network, the National Food Program, and the promotion and labeling of the Year of the French Gourmet.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.40
• /
• pp.5-34
• /
• 2007

Archaeological Heritage is material testimony of national and regional history, and it is one of the tourist's attractions. So it has very important meaning and identical value for a local residents. Public concern on the heritage site elevate higher day by day. They are willing to use it for a multiful purpose, cultural, educational, and even commercial one. But Archaeological Heritage is fragile, and visitors can impact negatively for protection and management of the authenticity on the heritage site. In this research I try to compare legal and administrative measure for the protection, management, and culturalization of Archaeological Heritage in many countries. And I suppose sustainable and practical strategies for keeping integrity of heritage.

• Asia-pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.325-336
• /
• 2019

There are many bamboo weir (Juk-Bang-Ryeum) with the highest preservation value as a fisheries heritage from Sacheon to Namhae area in the Korea Hanrye National Marine Park. It was designated as a Korea National Cultural Property Sightseeing No. 71, and also as an important fishery asset listed in the Korea National Important Fisheries Heritage No. 3. It is an important cultural heritage that should be preserved for the future as a community asset to the local residents, and should be preserved as it's original form because of unique traditional fishery style in the world as well as natural environment oriented fishing system. The purpose of this study is to review the value of Juk-Bang-Ryeum in the South Sea as well as to preserve the tradition of it. This paper will make a contribution to the registration of it on the list of World Important Agricultural and Fishery Heritage (GIAHS), which is recognized by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). To make basic data for listing on it, we will analyze the characteristics and structure of Juk-Bang-Ryeum, and also research the value of it from the historical literature review as well state of arts. We also develop a scheme for listing on FAO GIAHS through checking necessary items step by step. Finally, we suggest some idea to preserve it more effectively.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.252-269
• /
• 2019

Since the inauguration of the Kim Jong-un regime in 2012, the safeguarding and management system of cultural heritage in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has been changing to a form similar to that of a democratic country's legal system. In addition, the National Authority for the Protection of Cultural Heritage (NAPCH) has continuously recorded and cataloged intangible cultural heritage elements in the DPRK, listing Arirang, kimchi-making, and ssireum on the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Representative List. In particular, the multinational nomination of ssireum in October 2018 is symbolic in terms of inter-Korean exchanges and cooperation for peace and reconciliation, raising expectations for the further multinational nomination of the two Koreas' intangible cultural heritage. Currently, South Korea lists 20 items on its Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, three of which are shared by various countries with multinational nominations such as falconry, tug-of-war, and ssireum. However, when comparing the process of applying for multinational nomination in the three elements that follow, it is necessary to discuss whether these cases reflect the nature of multinational nomination. In particular, in the case of ssireum, without a working-level consultation between the two Koreas to prepare an application for a multinational nomination, each applied for a single registration; these applications were approved exceptionally as a multinational nomination by the Intergovernmental Committee under the leadership of the Secretary-General of UNESCO, and no bilateral exchanges have taken place until now. This is symbolic, formal, and substantially similar to the individual listings in terms of the spirit of co-listing on the premise of mutual exchange and cooperation. Therefore, the only way to strengthen the effectiveness of the multinational nomination between the two Koreas and to guarantee the spirit of multinational nomination is to request multilateral co-registration, including the two Koreas. For this, the Korean government needs a strategic approach, such as finding elements for multilateral co-listing; accumulating expertise, capabilities, and experience as a leading country in multilateral co-listing; and building cooperative governance with stakeholders. Besides, to reduce the volatility of inter-Korean cultural exchanges and cooperation depending on political situations and the special nature of inter-Korean relations, measures should be taken toward achieving inter-Korean cultural heritage exchanges and cooperation under a multilateral cooperation system using UNESCO, an international organization.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.57 no.2
• /
• pp.144-166
• /
• 2024

The Cultural Heritage Committee is an important organization that has been deliberating on important matters related to the preservation of cultural properties in the Republic of Korea for more than 60 years since 1962. The Cultural Heritage Preservation Committee was active in 1961, which was a short period of about a year, but the minutes prepared at the time confirmed that it had the following meanings. First of all, legally, it was meaningful in that the concept of cultural property or intangible cultural property was used for the first time in Korea in laws and regulations on the term of office of professional members. These matters became the basis for the operation of the current Cultural Heritage Protection Act and the Cultural Heritage Committee. The following confirms that, unlike previously known activities, they were active despite political upheaval at the time. In spite of rapid regime change at the time, the committee had no change in its members, and the meetings continued without interruption. At that time, there was an exclusive relationship between different groups in relation to the preservation of cultural heritage, and this relationship was confirmed by the minutes that disappeared with the establishment of the Cultural Heritage Management Bureau, which integrated these groups. Finally, the form of the minutes prepared then shows the form of documentation at the time, where it is confirmed that the traditional documentation format is changing into a new form. It can be good research material in terms of modern and contemporary bibliography. As discussed earlier, the Cultural Heritage Conservation Committee of 1961 has historical significance in terms of legal and actual activities. The reason why the committee's activities were low valued is presumed to be that the minutes and related documents prepared at the time were not organized well due to the lack of a related administrative system. The minutes of the Cultural Heritage Conservation Committee record various facts about cultural heritage policies and decisions at that time. Therefore, analysis and research on these contents can reveal more facts about the cultural heritage policies and perceptions of that time.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.69
• /
• pp.451-479
• /
• 2017

The objective of this study is to examine the tasks for listing martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" on the UNESCO Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. The conclusions are like below. First, "Muyedobotongji" was published in 1790(14th year of King Jeongjo). The 24 martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" were basically divided into three types like stabbing, chopping & cutting, and hitting. Second, the value of martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" is highly evaluated because it has systematically put together the martial arts of three countries like Korea, China, and Japan of the 18th century, suitable for the actual status of Joseon Dynasty, in the new perspective. The value of "Muyedobotongji" as a Memory of the World is the martial arts book emphasizing the practicality, so that everyone including officers and soldiers could easily learn. Third, the procedure of registering martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" in the UNESCO Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity has three stages including preparation/submission, screening, and decision, which takes two years. Especially, the screening assistance organization, as an organization under the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention Intergovernmental Committee is composed of total six countries(one for each area) out of 24 member countries. Fourth, the tasks for listing martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" in the UNESCO Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity are like following. (1) It would be necessary to conduct a total inspection of the collection of "Muyedobotongji". (2) It would be necessary to designate the martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" as the municipal/provincial/national intangible cultural heritage. (3) It would be needed to standardize the practical martial arts technique/movement of "Muyedobotongji". (4) The historical evidence of martial arts costumes/weapons of "Muyedobotongji" should be studied. (5) A committee for the registration of martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" in the UNESCO Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity should be organized. (6) There should be a close cooperation system between relevant departments like the World Heritage Team of Cultural Heritage Administration and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (7) Domestic/foreign data related to martial arts of "Muyedobotongji" should be comprehensively collected to meet the registration standard of UNESCO. (8) The registration type of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity should be prepared.