• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.21-35
• /
• 2023

The purpose of this study is to develop a method for establishing an educational system for World Heritage interpretation applicable to World Heritage sites and to design an education program for World Heritage interpretation by applying the developed education system in this study. This study first identified the definition of interpretation and the relationship between interpretation and education through previous research and analyzed the role and significance of heritage interpretation due to the paradigm transition in the capacity building of World Heritage sites. Next, the educational status of World Heritage interpretation was analyzed through educational institutions, educational subjects, and curriculum examples. Finally, this study argues that a method for establishing a World Heritage interpretation education system should be presented according to the composition of the curriculum, and the interpretation curriculum planning by interpreters should be proposed focusing on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of World Heritage sites.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.56 no.2
• /
• pp.264-279
• /
• 2023

The 50th anniversary of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention was in 2022. In order to reflect on the present and future of the meaning of World Heritage, this paper examines the development and changes of the UNESCO World Heritage system. After promulgating the convention in 1972, the UNESCO World Heritage system prioritized the protection of heritage sites in the world that were at risk due to armed conflicts and natural disasters to bequeath heritage to the next generation. In addition, the UNESCO World Heritage's emphasis on Outstanding Universal Value represents the particular culture of human beings formed during a certain period of time, and acts as a significant source of soft power in public diplomacy. The UNESCO World Heritage might be perceived as a shared heritage that has not only become a channel to understand various national values, but also an effective medium to convey one of UNESCO's main principles, that is, peacebuilding. However, the UNESCO World Heritage is now at the center of conflicts of heritage interpretation between many stakeholders related to invisible wars, such as cultural wars, memory wars, and history wars as the social, political, and cultural contexts concerning World Heritage have dramatically shifted with the passing of time. Paying attention to such changing contexts, this paper seeks to understand the main developments in UNESCO World Heritage's discourse concerning changes to the World Heritage Operation Guidelines and heritage experts' meetings by dividing its 50-year history into five phases. Next, this paper analyzes the main shifts in keywords related to UNESCO World Heritage through UNESDOC, which is a platform on which all UNESCO publications are available. Finally, this paper discusses three main changes of UNESCO World Heritage: 1) changes in focus in World Heritage inscriptions, 2) changes in perception of World Heritage protection, and 3) changes of view on the role of the stakeholders in World Heritage. It suggests new emerging issues regarding heritage interpretation and ethics, climate change, and human rights.

• 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.44 no.1
• /
• pp.106-121
• /
• 2011

The number of World Natural Heritage Sites is smaller than that of World Cultural Heritage Sites. As of 2010, the total number of natural sites was 180, which is less than 1/3 of all cultural sites. The reason why the number of natural sites is smaller can be attributed to the evaluating criteria of OUV(outstanding universal value). Only 9 fossil related sites were designated as World Heritage Sites among 180 Natural Sites. This study compares their OUVs including the academic value and characteristics of the 9 World Heritage Sites to provide data and reference for KCDC(Korean Cretaceous Dinosaur Coast) to apply as a World Natural Heritage Site. This study was carried out to obtain information and data on the Wadi Al-Hitan of Egypt which was designated as a World Natural Heritage Site. The study includes field investigation for whale fossils, interviews of site paleontologists and staff, and inspections of facilities. Three factors can likely be attributed to its successful management and operating system. First, there is a system for comprehensive research and a monitoring plan. Secondly, experts have been recruited and hired and professional training for staff members has been done properly. Finally, the Wadi Al-Hitan has developed local resources with specialized techniques for conservation and construction design, which matched well with whale fossils and the environment at the site. The Wadi Al-Hitan put a master plan into practice and achieved goals for action plans. To designate a future World Natural Heritage Site in Korea, it is important to be recognized by international experts including IUCN specialists as the best in one's field with OUV. Full-time regular-status employees for a research position are necessary from the preparation stage for the UNESCO World Heritage Site. Local government and related organizations must do their best to control monitoring plans and to improve academic value after the UNESCO World Heritage Site designation. As we experienced during the designation process of Jeju Volcanic Island and Lava Tubes as the first Korean World Natural Heritage Site, participation by various scholars and specialists need to be in harmony with active endeavors from local governments and NGOs.

• 보존과학연구
• /
• s.36
• /
• pp.86-96
• /
• 2015

From the Asia Cooperation Program on Conservation Science(ACPCS) of National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage(NRICH), I gained conservation and management experience and knowledges which are highly applicable at the Vat Phou World Heritage site. Firstly, Check list, Mapping, Tape Test and Digital Image Analysis are simple and useful methods which can be introduced to the site directly. If we can get chance to learn more about GIS program, GIS based Database Management System would also be very liable to put into practical use since the site office has been already using the program for general purpose. Lastly, there are more other methods which can diversify the studies on cultural heritage conservation in Laos; Rebound Hardness Test, Ultrasonic Test, Infrared Thermography, XRF Analysis and Hyperspectral Image Analysis etc. To realize those research however, new equipments are needed along with proper education so more cooperation between Korea and Lao would be essential.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.114-135
• /
• 2013

Among the UNESCO World Heritage Sites, the proportion of natural heritage to cultural heritage is relatively small. In 2007, the "Jeju Volcanic Island and Larva Tubes" was the first one that was designated as an UNESCO World Natural Heritage Site in Korea. The growing Korean geological heritage condition and conservation case studies on management of the geological heritage were examined in this study. Furthermore, the purpose of this study is to show future driving strategy for conservation and improvement plan on our geological heritage. Natural Monuments as a state-designated natural property and Geoparks as a new application system for geological heritage are important to conserve our geological heritage. Public engagement through establishment of visitor centers is definitely needed to improve education and promotion. The study includes field investigation for the "Wadden Sea", an World Natural Heritage Site for a mud flat, interviews with staffs and experts who are responsible for investigating and managing the site. Three factors can likely be attributed to its successful management and conservation policy for the "Wadden Sea". First of all, there is an operation for integrated management system and joint secretariat for research and monitoring. Next, researchers invigorate the visitor centers for promotion and education on geological heritage. Finally, experts and staffs implement various research topics and projects based on a long-range plan. The study was carried out to evaluate the present condition of our geological heritage and to make a proposal as a policy to improve value and conserve them. In conclusion, this study provided future discussion that may help researchers to make a decision on long-term policies for the geological subject of Korean natural heritage.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.81-92
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to compare values, characteristics and the world heritage listed tendency of walls in East Asia. Walls in East Asia are similar by the geographically adjacent, type, form and materials, etc. Thus to demonstrate the differentiation is not easy, but walls heritage of a tentative list or listed on the UNESCO World Heritage were discriminated by the evaluation criteria of world heritage. Hidden problems are not to be described the differences by the consistent manner. So we need efforts to separate the distinction and originality of walls according to the characteristics of each heritage. As the method of this study, we reviewed the terminology associated with the wall and then have examined the following four aspects as the characteristics of each heritage category. 1) Classification according to the function and purpose, 2) Classification according to the type and size of the walls(the length of wall), 3) Classification according to the location and topography, 4) Classification according to materials and technology(construction method). And we have analyzed the tendency of OUV(Outstanding Universal Value) of the world heritage listed wall. Also we examined the value basis of the differences and similarities presented by each heritage. In the future, we should complement the following two aspects of the wall heritage in East Asia for comparing the exact value. first, we ought to come up with a system that we can easily compare the similarities and differences of similar walls heritage. Second, we have to make every effort to describe the walls heritage by considering OUV evaluation criteria to be able to share with people all around the world.

• Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science
• /
• v.104 no.3
• /
• pp.476-487
• /
• 2015

This study was conducted to analyze the potential of Baekdu-daegan Mountain System (BDMS) in the Republic of Korea for World Heritage inscription and undertook preliminary global comparative analysis. UNEP WCMC global datasets, World Heritage global gap analyses and thematic studies conducted by IUCN were reviewed to see if the BDMS could have been identified within these as a priority area for World Heritage. With respect to potential Outstanding Universal Value this study found that the case for BDMS was weak. The BDMS lies within biogeographic regions which are already represented on the World Heritage List and at a global scale its natural values do not stand out. It was emphasized that a more fine scale analysis of the values should be undertaken. The BDMS stands out at a global scale in terms of the degree of contiguity between protected areas along its length and the legal and institutional frameworks established in the Republic of Korea. The BDMS has potential for a trans-national and serial properties along the full length of the BDMS, if two Koreas agree to work together.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.51-61
• /
• 2013

In order to answer the research question of 'how the listed World Cultural Heritage is being managed now?' the indicators of management effectiveness evaluation were set up based on international principles on the basis of the preceding research. The weights and priorities of each evaluation indicators were worked out through the Analytic Network Process(ANP) Technique. Therefore, the evaluation system to evaluate the management status of the World Heritage Sites have been established. Also, through calculate the converted score of 100 points based on the relative importance of these evaluation indicators among the World Heritage Site management effectiveness evaluation index for scoring and the score table was created. When evaluated for the management status of World Heritage Sites to set five rating of the final evaluation score: very deficiency, deficiency, general, good, excellent. According to the results the follow-up study will be carried out in the future.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.127-133
• /
• 2019

This study intends to discuss the system improvement of landscape architecture field in the cultural heritage protection system, which is changing continuously. The results are as follows. First, the status of landscape architecture in cultural heritage, including natural monuments and scenic sites, must be defined. If possible, careful consideration should be given to establish the natural monuments law and scenic sites law, respectively, related to landscape architecture. Second, natural heritage must be preserved by focusing on "space" to include cultural artifacts and landscapes that may be missing through the method of "object" focused protection. Institutionally, the scope of work should be clearly shared by reviewing the redundancy and interrelationship of related laws. Third, in order to protect and manage natural heritage, a department that is wholly responsible for landscape architecture should be established independently at the Cultural Heritage Administration. Fourth, the landscape architecture field should be specified as the requirements for the commissioner of commission at the Cultural Heritage Protection Act. In addition, it is necessary to improve the system such as expending the roles of the repairing technician for landscape architecture and plants in the Cultural Heritage Protection Act.