• Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.171-182
• /
• 2016

Since FAO introduced the Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems(GIAHS) in 2002, 36 sites of 15 countries so far have been listed on GIAHS. This study aims to find the important agricultural heritages of Korea and to prepare the methods for them to be selected as GIAHS. We have analyzed the proposals of the 36 GIAHS listed in order to study the characteristics of their components of the agricultural heritage which worked for being selected. To analyze the components of the agricultural heritage first, agricultural heritage was classified into 13 types and 42 components in light of GIAHS criteria. Then central themes were set to analyze the relevant contents in the proposals. They were, the type of GIAHS Site, significant agricultural landscape, the agriculture-forestry-fisheries-livestock linkage systems, the multi-layered, inter-cropping, circulation cultivation systems, the soil and water management systems, the conservation of agrobiological diversity and genetic resources, the history of the agricultural heritage, the succession of traditional farming techniques, the cultural diversity and so on. Most GIAHS are located in mountains, grasslands, rivers and coasts, desert than in plains, through which GIAHS assure us that it is the heritage of human challenge to overcome the harsh geographic environment and maintain a livelihood. In these sites the traditional farming techniques are carried on, such as mountain clearings, terraced rice paddies, and burn fields, and the unique irrigation systems and agricultural landscapes are well maintained, and the eco-friendly traditional farming techniques utilizing abundant forest resources and agriculture are well handed down. The origin or home of crop growing, a variety of genetic crop storage, the world's largest crop producer and preserving cultural diversity are also important factors for the selection.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.34
• /
• pp.210-220
• /
• 2001

UNESCO convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage(hereafter 'UCH')was adopted in the Fourth meeting of governmental experts on the draft Convention on the protection of UCH. Accordingly, Korea will prepare an appropriate policy for the protection of UCH. This article aims to give policy directions for the protection of UCH in Korea. Korea has some legislation relating to protection of cultural property. However, these legislation did not have effective schemes to protect UCH. Moreover, the Cultural Properties Administration which is a primary agency for protecting UCH has been ineffective in their effort for protecting UCH. To Protect UCH, I suggest establishment of law relating to protection of UCH, designation of competent authorities for protection of UCH in accordance to UNESCO Convention, and establishment of a long term national plan for protection of UCH.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.61-71
• /
• 2020

The Cultural Heritage Administration is operating the resident supervision and non-resident supervision system to prevent poor repair and ensure the quality of cultural heritage repairs And recently, responsible supervision system was introduced to enhance the supervision of cultural heritage repairs. However, many problems have arisen in the operation of the supervision work, and need improvement. Accordingly, this study improved the resident and non-resident supervision of cultural heritage repair and developed work guidelines for the responsible supervision. First, this research has derived unreasonable sectors and problems of work guidelines for resident supervision about cultural heritage repair and has suggested supervision work guidelines which are improved. Second, we have derived the problems of work guidelines for non-resident supervision about cultural heritage repair and has suggested non-resident supervision work guidelines which are improved. Third, this paper has proposed the development direction and detailed supervision work to perform responsible supervision as a result of the adoption of the supervision system for cultural heritage repair.

• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.43
• /
• pp.405-440
• /
• 2021

The members of the holding group 'YangjuByeolsandae-nori' (National Important Intangible Cultural Heritage) were divided into two groups in 2010. This means that the internal groupwhich has been going on since the previous period exploded. The subject of the researchis to deal with thedisruption. The first purpose of the research is to record the cause·deployment·ending of the 'YangjuByeolsandaeTalnori'. The second purpose of the research is to reviewthe appropriateness of the administrative measures taken by the Cultural Heritage Administrationin intervention. The thirdpurpose of the research the Cultural Heritage Administration's contribution to the establishment of principles to cope with group disruption. The fourth purpose of the researchis to serve as a reference to the resolution of the disruption of other preservation groups. The result of the research suggests that the administration should recognize that the conflict of the ownership over the group must be resolved in order to boost the overall success of the project, and must establish and respond to the principles. The content is a reconstruction of the explanation. To deal with divisions is also considered to be a field of study. The research which deals directly with the main researcher's problems is put forward in hopes of contributing to the study and contributing to society.

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2012.05a
• /
• pp.233-234
• /
• 2012

천연기념물로 지정된 식물 중 사찰에 분포하는 것의 종교적 상징성과 일반 사찰의 식물과 비교해 본 결과 불교와 관련된 상징성은 크지 않으며, 일반 사찰의 식물과도 상관성은 크지 않은 것으로 분석되었다.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.49 no.3
• /
• pp.256-269
• /
• 2016

In September 2015, the United Nations (UN) has adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as a goal of the international community to push forward from the year 2016 to 2030. Accordingly, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) has established a new chapter on sustainable development and intangible heritage the through revision of the Operational Directives for the Implementation of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Although Sustainable development is a fundamental principle of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, it is believed that the Convention has not provided guidelines of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage for sustainable development. The Operational Directives provide States Parties with guidelines on the integration of sustainable development and safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Intangible Cultural Property Institution of South Korea was designed to preserve the traditional culture in the economic development process of the industrialization since the 1960s. The institution played a role of cultural support on the development of the modern concepts. Now South Korea should implement intangible cultural heritage policy combined with sustainable development while succeeding the efforts from the former development. This study examines the meaning of sustainable development and how it should be implemented in the intangible cultural heritage policy in South Korea. And this study suggests that the South Korea's intangible cultural heritage policy should foster sustainable development particularly along with social development and human development.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.78-103
• /
• 2019

The Conservation Decree of the Chosun Treasures Historic and Natural Monuments (hereinafter referred to as the Conservation Decree), which was enacted during the Japanese colonial period, was preserved in accordance with the provisions of article No. 100 of the constitutional law. However, legislative attempts were made to replace the Conservation Decree during the US military administration and early Korean Government. The first attempt was about the National Treasures Historic and Natural Monuments which were brought in by the Legislative Assembly of South Chosun (1947) during the US military administration. The second was a bill by the government for preservation of historical interests (1950), which was submitted to the National Assembly on March 15, 1950 (the so-called Preservation Act (1950)). These two bills were amended and supplemented on the basis of the existing contents of the Conservation Decree. Afterwards, from 1952 to 1960, the legislation of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act (1959) and the Cultural Heritage Bill (1960) were subsequently introduced and enacted. The government's attempt to enact such a cultural property bill was aimed at the legislature to replace the preservation order system that had been in effect since the Japanese colonial period. However, due to the political situation at the time, these laws did not reach final legislation. In October 1960, the government enacted the Regulations for the Preservation of Cultural Property, which was an administrative edict that was promulgated and enacted in November. This was the first official cultural property decree introduced by the Korean government. With the enactment and promulgation of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act in January 1962, Korea's judicial cultural property legislation was established, based on the Korean government's unremitting efforts and experience in legislation of cultural property. In that context, the Cultural Heritage Protection Act is a historical product. The Cultural Heritage Protection Act, which was enacted in 1962, is known to emulate or transplant Japan's Cultural Heritage Protection Act (1950). It was not fully recognized that it was an extension of the Korean government's legislative process of cultural property during the period of 1945-1960. Therefore, it is important to examine the legislative process of cultural property from 1945 to 1960 to understand the background of enacting the Cultural Heritage Protection Act in 1962 along with the establishment of the Korean Cultural Property Law.

• Korean Journal of Veterinary Research
• /
• v.56 no.1
• /
• pp.51-52
• /
• 2016

Hodgson's bats are critically endangered in South Korea. This study analyzed the concentrations of elements in liver, kidney, and intestine tissues from a Hodgson's bat found dead in the wild. The concentrations of essential elements followed the order Fe > Zn > Cu > Mn > Se in the three tissues. Hg was detected at the highest concentrations among the non-essential elements analyzed in the liver and kidney tissues, while As was the most highly concentrated non-essential element in the intestine. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study of tissue element concentrations in Hodgson's bats.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.49
• /
• pp.77-119
• /
• 2016

A modern architectural building is a cultural heritage, which is also part of our history until the present. Documentation is thus considered an irreplaceable method to preserve our cultural heritage as it may be the last resort of preservation. The study analyzed the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) on the Heritage Documentation Programs of the National Park Service. Based on the analysis of the comparison and documentation of the modern architectural building implemented by the Cultural Heritage Administration, the study suggested improvement plans from three different perspectives. First, specifically detailed regulations of the legal system are supposed to be used for the implementation of the documentation of modern architectural buildings. Second, it is suggested that a general plan for continuous documentation be made. Last, by setting up a collection method, an information service needs to be provided for the public.

• 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.