• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.193-214
• /
• 2018

This study aims to analyze enactment of China's old and rare books management. For the purpose, the review on China's legal system and management related to old and rare books were studied. And this study investigated 4 laws, 6 administrative regulations, 4 sector regulations, and 13 administrative normativity papers. Among those, 5 major sources for old and rare books management were identified as follows : 1) China's National Civilization Protection Law in 2013, 2) China's Old and Rare Book Organization Directive in 1989, 3) Regulation on Management of Research, Organization, and Publication of Old and Rare Books in 1986, 4) Standards on Grading Classification of Civilization Collections in 2001, and 5) Provisional Regulation on Civilization Auctioning in 2003. Based on the analysis of these sources, this study deduced implications in terms of Chinese old and rare books management such as the necessity to give considerations to 1) the importance of old and rare books management policy, 2) nationwide old and rare books management, 3) expansion of eduction and training of human resources, 4) establishment of institution specializing in old and rare books, and 5) special management of science of Chinese medicine.

• 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.