• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.371-405
• /
• 2004

International circulation of cultural assets involves numerous countries thereby making an approach based on international law essential to resolving this problem. Since the end of the $2^{nd}$ World War, as the value of cultural assets evolved from material value to moral and ethical values, with emphasis on establishing national identities, newly independent nations and former colonial states took issue with ownership of cultural assets which led to the need for international cooperation and statutory provisions for the return of cultural assets. UNESCO's 1954 "Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict" as preparatory measures for the protection of cultural assets, the 1970 "Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property" to regulate transfer of cultural assets, and the 1995 "Unidroit Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects" which required the return of illegally acquired cultural property are examples of international agreements established on illegal transfers of cultural assets. In addition, the UN agency UNESCO established the Division of Cultural Heritage to oversee cultural assets related matters, and the UN since its 1973 resolution 3187, has continued to demonstrate interest in protection of cultural assets. The resolution 3187 affirms the return of cultural assets to the country of origin, advises on preventing illegal transfers of works of art and cultural assets, advises cataloguing cultural assets within the respective countries and, conclusively, recommends becoming a member of UNESCO, composing a forum for international cooperation. Differences in defining cultural assets pose a limitation on international agreements. While the 1954 Convention states that cultural assets are not limited to movable property and includes immovable property, the 1970 Convention's objective of 'Prohibiting and preventing the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property' effectively limits the subject to tangible movable cultural property. The 1995 Convention also has tangible movable cultural property as its subject. On this point, the two conventions demonstrate distinction from the 1954 Convention and the 1972 Convention that focuses on immovable cultural property and natural property. The disparity in defining cultural property is due to the object and purpose of the convention and does not reflect an inherent divergence. In the case of Korea, beginning with the 1866 French invasion, 36 years of Japanese colonial rule, military rule and period of economic development caused outflow of numerous cultural assets to foreign countries. Of course, it is neither possible nor necessary to have all of these cultural properties returned, but among those that have significant value in establishing cultural and historical identity or those that have been taken symbolically as a demonstration of occupational rule can cause issues in their return. In these cases, the 1954 Convention and the ratification of the first legislation must be actively considered. In the return of cultural property, if the illicit acquisition is the core issue, it is a simple matter of following the international accords, while if it rises to the level of diplomatic discussions, it will become a political issue. In that case, the country requesting the return must convince the counterpart country. Realizing a response to the earnest need for preventing illicit trading of cultural assets will require extensive national and civic societal efforts in the East Asian area to overcome its current deficiencies. The most effective way to prevent illicit trading of cultural property is rapid circulation of information between Interpol member countries, which will require development of an internet based communication system as well as more effective deployment of legislation to prevent trading of illicitly acquired cultural property, subscription to international conventions and cataloguing collections.

• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• v.12 no.4
• /
• pp.27-54
• /
• 2011

This research attempted to present the efficiency of culture marketing to the organizations producing culture-art products and to the companies utilizing art and suggest the practical viewpoints to the culture and art policy agencies. The methodology used was to take an in-depth look at the consumer value cognition and benefits of culture-art products in contemporary consumption culture from a social context by conducting a total of 12 Focus Group Interviews, consisting of 58 males and females in their 10s~50s who can represent culture-art product consumers. The culture-art products refer to the artist's spiritual, actual act of creating or to the end products with economic exchange value. They are also sense goods and merit goods that affect the mental state of consumers. By looking at culture-art products as consumer merit goods, this research examined consumer value cognition of culture-art products based on the characteristics culture-art products. As a result, this research determined that consumers view culture-art products largely as 'aesthetic and sensuous merit goods', 'actual and individual merit goods', and 'social public property'. As 'aesthetic and sensuous merit goods', culture-art products are considered as the products of an artist's creative activities; as 'social public property', culture-art products have a public value in terms of ownership; and as 'actual and individual merit goods', culture-art products act on the spirit and reality of a consumer in terms of consumption. As a result of analyzing the benefits of culture-art products based on the above-mentioned consumer value cognition, it was observed that the benefits of culture-art-product consumption are chiefly divided into 'aesthetic character-oriented', 'social relationships-oriented', and 'individual benefits-oriented' depending on how consumers see culture-art products. A 3-conceptional structures model was constructed according to the relationship between consumer value cognition of culture-art products and the benefits. This research revealed that consumers who pursue the aesthetic value or sense of beauty as the central reason experience culture-art products themselves, enjoy intellectual quests, and pursue their satisfaction by expressing affection for and interests in culture-art products. On the other hand, consumers who pursue social value as the central reason as a means of communication by perceiving culture-art products as a public property of society, pursue sympathy with people close to them through the symbolic power of culture-art product consumption or the joy of self-display. Consumers who perceive art products as spiritual and actual merit goods and pursue consumer value as a central reason want to express their own personality, develop themselves, and differentiate themselves or identify themselves with others in the context of social relations for the ultimate goal of living a happy and satisfied life while pursuing to satisfy imminent and actual necessities as emotional stability and rest. The fact that culture-art product benefits could vary according to how a consumer perceives them implies that consumer value cognition of culture-art products and their benefits significant affect consumers' decision in choosing and consuming various culture-art products. It turned out that such benefits from the consumption of culture-art products reflect the complex contemporary consumption culture of rational consumption, symbolic consumption, experiential consumption, and social reflective consumption. This research identified conceptional structures of consumer value cognition on culture-art products and benefits that can be used for studying and understanding culture-art products consumers who pursue a variety of consumption values. They can also be used by private companies in utilizing art, as well as by national agencies in enhancing the population's quality of life. However, since this research could only conceptually grasp consumer perception of culture-art products and reveal the dimension of classification due to its own limitations arising from characteristic investigation, quantitative data on the benefits of culture-art product consumers should be measured in future studies through a quantitative investigation, while using the value cognition of culture-art products and the individual characteristics of consumers as variables based on this research.