• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.15 no.9
• /
• pp.29-36
• /
• 2015

This study aims to examine the problems that transmissions of an intangible cultural heritage in Korea may be cut off because of the public indifference, low demand for it and lack of government funding and seek ways to revitalize an intangible cultural heritage by increasing citizens' awareness of it and demand for it. According to recent studies, many holders of important intangible cultural properties have a difficulty doing because government funding is not enough to make their living and people who want to learn and pass on traditional skills keep decreasing. Many experts say that governments need to increase citizens' awareness of an intangible cultural heritage and demand for it in the long run to solve this problem, but governments focus on improving condition of holders rather than that. On this account, this study criticizes the government's policy and surveys citizens' awareness of an intangible cultural heritage and demand for it and suggests a plan of revitalizing an intangible cultural heritage.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.56
• /
• pp.147-182
• /
• 2018

Intangible cultural heritage is formless. It's of importance to preserve heritage in line with society drastically being transformed. It's passed down by human being. It is, on the other hand, impossible to preserve intangible cultural heritage solely based on memory, for it's changed in succession. Thus, it be archived to pass down. This study investigated on the state of affair related with Intangible cultural heritage documentations, examined the shortages thereupon. Furthermore, Training center should be in charge of documentation for a solution. This will provide an opportunity to overcome the limitations attributed to the top-down documentation system by central administrative organ, to open up the possibility of viewpoint of different successors, organizations. In addition to that, Intangible cultural heritage documents should be of different aspects of community history. Features of Intangible cultural heritages, which are convergent to the Regionality, tendency of variation, transmission, can be magnified when documentating. Finally, Training center is going to play a major role being vitalised. The record management of intangible cultural heritage, institutions and policies about Intangible cultural heritage have been highly complicated since National Intangible Heritage Center opened and the law on Intangible cultural heritage enacted with its recognition attracted. Therewith this study wishes to see a cornerstone of records on intangible cultural heritage by laying stress on training center in which educations and pass-down of intangible cultural heritage are lively achieved.

• Journal of Smart Tourism
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.41-52
• /
• 2021

This paper explored the digital application of intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of cultural ecology. Through field investigations, combined with cultural ecology theory, an ontology-based semantic web technology was proposed, and Nanjing "Yunjin" brocade weaving technique was selected as the research object. The specific steps were as follows: First, based on the field surveys and cultural ecology theory, the intangible cultural ecological environment was divided into natural and social environments. Next, constructing the intangible cultural heritage ontology was constructed, including the collection and collation of Nanjing Yunjin weaving technique knowledge corpus, based on user needs analysis and corpus analysis, CIDOC CRM was used to create rules to build the ontology. Finally, based on the MediaWiki platform and Semantic MediaWiki, the semantic web model of the intangible cultural heritage was designed, and its semantic retrieval function was realized, thereby achieving the practical application of intangible cultural heritage digitization. Based on the perspective of cultural ecology, a set of intangible digital application models was proposed, which expanded the digital application of the cultural ecology theory, verified the application of this model in the sustainable development of cultural tourism, and provided reference for the sustainable development of cultural tourism.

• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.8 no.11
• /
• pp.299-306
• /
• 2017

In this paper, the development of differentiated programs for visitors as well as those for teaching, ways on how to make these halls a culture complex that can support diverse cultural activities for citizens, and strategies to increase their utilization for the public as an facility open to the community, given the trend that intangible cultural heritage teaching halls are getting bigger and complex. The intangible cultural heritage teaching halls of it is need to make improvements to the facility for their activation. Therefore In this paper as a collected information on their establishment and administration to find ways for their activation from a user perspective by visiting three intangible cultural heritage teaching halls except Seoul and large cities of metropolitan areas. We expect that findings from the study will provide a basis to set directions to make intangible cultural heritage teaching halls a culture complex facility.

• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.199-224
• /
• 2018

Intangible cultural heritage is a collection of community wisdom and talents and it has artistic and cultural values of the nation. And because it represents an identity of the country, it is an important records information resources that we must be inherited from generation to generation. Korea's intangible cultural heritage system has developed with the aim of preserving and transmission, but now it is necessary to take an creative approach as a resource as a resource for cultural diversity and utilization in an intangible cultural source. Therefore, it is important to maintain systematic management of intangible cultural heritage records information resources in order to continuously preserve, but it is also important to establish a basis for continuous use. The purpose of this study is to propose improvement plans for the archival information services of domestic intangible cultural heritage. We analyzed the status of the archival reference services of intangible cultural heritage institutions in consideration of the characteristics of intangible cultural assets. In-depth interviews were conducted with the responsible person to collect opinions and requirements during the service. We suggested the improvement plans through drawing out implication on problems and direction of archival information services for intangible cultural heritage.

• 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.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.51 no.4
• /
• pp.208-223
• /
• 2018

This paper focuses on strategies and issues involving a joint inscription of an Intangible Cultural Heritage element to UNESCO through multinational cooperation and conclusive characteristics and the significance of the multinational filing. The case of "Falconry", which was jointly filed by 18 State Parties including ROK and inscribed on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity of UNESCO on 2010, was analyzed as the main object of discussion The issues can be summarized as follows: First; State Parties that participated at the joint nomination process got to grasp the purpose of the multinational nomination mechanism a lot better than before through drawing up the nomination forms. Especially, we learned that the inscription of the falconry eventually has to contribute to the perception of ICH in general and applying that knowledge at the submission of the multinational file was the major aspect for the inscription on the list in 2010 and the extension of the inscription 2012. Second; the very nature of prosecution of the multinational nomination, State Parties are given opportunities to communicate and cooperate over their shared ICH element, through which a mutual understanding of other cultures and the national characteristics of other countries - which means implementing the very ideology of UNESCO- to contribute to cooperation and peace among nations through multinational nominations. Third, the falconry, according to the Operational Directives of the <>, has a chance to be deemed a Best Practice case, since it continuously extends through more and more State Parties participating to the multinational file. Extension of a Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity element can help defusing the tension caused by identifying the owner of the intangible heritage and can mean more awareness of the purpose of the convention.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.30-45
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that transmissions of an intangible cultural heritage in Korea may be cut off because it is separated from human and social environment and protected and managed under the national system. In addition, another purpose is to criticize concept and method dichotomy in the current institution from an ecological perspective and consider the problem that the intangible cultural heritages are transmitted mainly by holders having skills and accomplishments by distinguishing them from others. Furthermore, the last purpose is to suggest a direction of policy emphasizing an importance of establishment of environment which allows nurture, change and development of local people, which may ensure continuous transmission in order to solve the problem and a transmission system of the intangible cultural heritage by using a principle in which the system is operated by self-recovery and natural rule of the ecology. The findings of this study show that seven problems can be analyzed by reviewing concept establishment and protection and transmission measure of intangible cultural heritages according to the Cultural Properties Protection Law, based on the ecological perspective. The protection and transmission methods of the intangible cultural heritage through the cultural heritage ecology are suggested by applying ecological theory to it. The intangible cultural heritage ecology defined in this paper means 'a sustainable community consisting of intangible cultural heritage, subject of activity and physical environment.' Since it is operated according to the principle reflecting the rules and features of natural ecology, it can keep system through self-recovery without an external intervention, as the case of natural ecology.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.55 no.1
• /
• pp.35-50
• /
• 2022

The Korean cultural heritage protection act, enacted in 1962, is known to have been enacted in imitation of the Japanese cultural heritage protection act. The Japanese law differs from the current law dealing with intangible cultural heritage, folklore materials, and buried cultural properties. The Japanese law was enacted in consultation with the GHQ, and reflected the historical issues at the time of the enactment. Recently, in Japan, GHQ documents have been released and so research on the cultural heritage protection act is carried out. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the meaning and achievements of the Japanese cultural heritage protection act before comparing it with the Korean law. GHQ stipulated the emperor as a symbolic entity in the Japanese constitution and prescribed the country as a liberal democracy. Influenced by this, the cultural heritage protection act was enacted to identify the people's cultural heritage. Accordingly, the cultural heritage protection committee is a private and independent organization in Japan. The committee designates cultural heritage assets, and it operates as the national museum and the cultural heritage research institute. This system was a part of policy changes shifting cultural heritage management to the private sector. Since many cultural heritages are associated with the imperial family, museums were managed by the imperial family. Meanwhile, the Japanese house of councillors persuaded GHQ, which was negative about including intangible cultural heritage in the cultural heritage protection act. The purpose of this idea was to provide the system of the government support for Japanese imperial court music and dance. In addition, folk materials were included with the consent of the GHQ in that they represent the cultural heritages and the academic achievements of the people at the time in Japan. According to the Korean Law, the subject of designation of cultural heritage is the government, and the cultural heritage committee acts as an advisory body with its limited functions. In the early days, the committee confused the concept of intangible cultural heritage and folklore materials. This was because the concepts of cultural property was borrowed from Japanese law and applied to the Korean law without a full understanding. In response, the cultural heritage committee urged the ministry to investigate the current situation in Japan. The cultural heritage committee, mainly consisting of folklore scholars, was confused about the concepts of intangible cultural heritage and folklore materials, but the concept became clear when the enforcement regulations of the cultural heritage protection Act was enacted in 1964.

• 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.