Official Archaeological Heritage Management and Community Negotiations in the Globalization Period

2021 ◽  
pp. 143-186
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Management ◽  
Archaeological Heritage ◽  
Archaeological Heritage Management

scholarly journals A Tricky Subject – archaeology in opinion polls on cultural heritage. Recent examples from Poland

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Oniszczuk
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Archaeological Heritage ◽  
The Public ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
Subjective Value ◽  
Archaeological Heritage Management ◽  
Opinion Polls

Understanding the public by analysing the wants, interests and expectations regarding their involvement in archaeology is one of the strategic aims of Europae Archaeologiae Consilium (EAC). Cultural heritage has been the topic of several public opinion polls in Poland over the past few years. In 2011 and 2015, the Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa (National Institute of Cultural Heritage) carried out two representative surveys. Subsequent polls focusing on more specific issues or groups of respondents were undertaken in 2015, 2017 and 2018. Other data from Poland come from the 2017 Special Eurobarometer survey on cultural heritage. They can be contrasted with archaeology-orientated opinion polls: a Europe-wide survey carried out within the NEARCH project led by Inrap (French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research) and several smaller-scale projects, which might be treated as starting points for more representative research. The scope of these surveys includes: public perception of cultural heritage and archaeology, subjective value of cultural heritage, attitudes towards archaeology, relevance of archaeology for the present (also in terms of the socio-economic potential of archaeological heritage), people's interaction with archaeology and archaeological heritage, sources of information about archaeological heritage etc. Comparison of these data will serve to establish the relevance of surveys for archaeological heritage management. The author will also examine if the specific nature of archaeological heritage is reflected in the surveys and how the public feels about its most hidden heritage. Based on the results of her analysis, the author will look at the desired scope of a survey aimed at filling the identified gaps and shaped to fit the needs of evidence-based archaeological heritage management.

Nationalism and preserving Korea's buried past: the Office of Cultural Properties and archaeological heritage management in South Korea

Antiquity ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 73 (281) ◽  
pp. 619-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyung Il Pai
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Korean Peninsula ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
National Museum ◽  
Art Exhibitions ◽  
Archaeological Heritage ◽  
General Government ◽  
Cultural Properties ◽  
Taisho Era ◽  
Archaeological Heritage Management

The origins of Korean archaeological heritage management can be traced to 1916, when Japan's Resident-general Government in Korea (Chōsen Sōtokufu: 1910-1945) promulgated the first comprehensive laws of historical preservation called the ‘Regulations for the Preservation of Korea's Remains and Relics’. They reflected a combination of late Meiji and early Taishō era laws tailored to the Korean peninsula such as Lost and Stolen Antiquities (1909); Temples and Shrines Protection Laws (1911); the Preservation of Stone and Metal Inscriptions (1916); and most significantly, the establishment of an administrative apparatus, the Committee on the Investigation of Korean Antiquities (1916). The Chōsen Sōtokufu Museum laws governing art exhibitions and display were compiled from Imperial Museum laws (Tokyo National Museum 1976) dating from 1890-1907 (Chōsen Sōkufu 1924: 215-30).

Contested Heritage: Relations between contemporary Pagan groups and the archaeological and heritage professions in Britain in the early 21st century

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will Rathouse
Keyword(s):  
21St Century ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Archaeological Heritage ◽  
Early 21St Century ◽  
Archaeological Heritage Management ◽  
The Early 21St Century

This book examines a tense time in archaeological heritage management. Contemporary Pagan groups were actively contesting ancient sites and campaigning for human corporeal remains to be reburied. This book draws on ethnographic field research conducted by the author between 2008 and 2013 to analyse the contestation from both Pagan and heritage management perspectives.

Territorio y paisaje en la gestión del patrimonio arqueológico. Alcances desde la experiencia del diagnóstico territorial del patrimonio arqueológico en la región Lambayeque, Perú / Territory and landscape in the archaeological heritage management. The scope of territorial assessment experience of archaeological heritage in Lambayeque Region, Peru

Ería ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-71
Author(s):  
Guadalupe Martínez Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Management ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Operational Approach ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Archaeological Heritage ◽  
Territorial Management ◽  
Archaeological Heritage Management

Los procesos de transformación del territorio en el Perú afectan la comprensión, protección y conservación de los sitios arqueológicos, desbordados por la intensidad y rapidez de los cambios. Sin embargo, los instrumentos de gestión patrimonial y territorial vigentes no facilitan espacios de integración del patrimonio arqueológico en las dinámicas territoriales actuales. El concepto de paisaje abre una oportunidad de alineación de sendas visiones sectoriales. En la región Lambayeque, en el norte del Perú, la elaboración de un diagnóstico territorial de su patrimonio arqueológico por el Ministerio de Cultura, permitiría ensayar una propuesta operativa del paisaje para la gestión de este patrimonio.Les processus de transformation du territoire au Pérou affectent la compréhension, la protection et la conservation des sites archéologiques, submergés par l’intensité et la vitesse des changements. Cependant, les instruments de gestion du patrimoine et du territoire ne fournissent pas d’espaces pour l’intégration du patrimoine archéologique dans les dynamiques territoriales actuelles. Le concept de paysage ouvre une opportunité d’aligner les visions sectorielles. Dans la région de Lambayeque, au nord du Pérou, l’élaboration d’un diagnostic territorial de son patrimoine archéologique par le ministère de la Culture, permettrait de tester une proposition de paysage opérationnelle pour la gestion de ce patrimoine.The understanding, protection and conservation of archaeological sites are overwhelmed by the strength and speed of territorial changes. However, heritage and territorial management tools do not integrate archaeological heritage into current territorial dynamics. The landscape concept is an opportunity to align both approaches. The Ministry of Culture of Peru has developed a territorial assessment of archaeological heritage in Lambayeque, North of Peru. It allows for a landscape operational approach to the heritage management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document