The Reports of the Joint Symposium on Cultural Sites Management and Cultural Landscapes in FY2013

>>Digital Repository

 

1. Introduction

 

 At the Department of Cultural Heritage of the Nara National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, separate meetings were held to discuss  “archaeological sites management” and “cultural landscapes.” In this fiscal year, however, the 3rd Management Research Symposium for Cultural Sites and the 6th Research Meeting on Cultural Landscapes were held concurrently with a view to  encouraging in-depth discussions transcending the boundaries between these two themes, with a focus  placed on the keyword, “planning.” 

 

 

2. Insights gained from research symposiums held in the past

 

 

 To discuss the issue of archaeological site management, we held “Research Symposium on Preservation and Utilization of Historic Sites” annually from FY 2006 to FY 2010, and following the conclusion reached in the 5th round of this symposium1,  we started “Management Research Symposium for Cultural Sites” in FY 2011 to replace the former symposium. In the 2nd Management Research Symposium for Cultural Sites held in FY  2012, we discussed the theme of “Archaeological Sites and Cultural Heritage in Public” to explore the social significance of archaeological sites and heritage, which are located in various parts of the world in different conditions, focusing on a range of  stakeholders. Through the discussion, we renewed our awareness of the importance of “mechanism”and “method” which enable various people involved  in the protection of cultural sites and heritage to overcome difficulties they face2.

 

 In the field of cultural landscapes, on the other hand, we started a Research Meeting on Cultural Landscapes in FY 2008, in which we discussed the outline and diversity of cultural landscapes as a new type of cultural property (the first meeting); the system inherent in cultural landscapes that is constantly changing yet remains the same at the core (the second meeting); and management and utilization of cultural landscapes in a manner that ensures sustainability of such a  system (the third meeting). Over the years, an increasing number of 

locations were given the designation, “Important  Cultural Landscape,” which allowed us to identify specific tasks to be undertaken. Against this backdrop, the fourth meeting was held to develop a  more comprehensive understanding of the circumstances in which cultural landscapes of Japan are placed. In the fifth meeting held in FY 2012, we discussed “mechanisms” and “activities” that should be incorporated in our cultural landscape protection efforts, based on an understanding of the close linkage between cultural landscapes and

local livelihoods. In this meeting, we agreed on the necessity of taking action beyond the framework of  the ongoing cultural landscape protection scheme, while recognizing the importance of this scheme3.

 

3. Planning for cultural site and landscape management

 

 Building on the results of the abovementioned discussions, this Research Symposium dealt with the issue of “planning” as one of the “mechanisms,”  in which we discussed the significance and method  of planning based on the following nderstanding. Planning is about making clear our intention for the future. It indicates by whom, for what purpose and use, and in what manner the intention will be turned into action. Of course, planning is not a goal itself, but it is just a part of a method. Planning, if  elaborately combined with a well-defined intention, can be a reliable guidepost that will take us to the future we desire.The effectiveness and importance of “planning” that represents our intention for the future has been repeatedly stressed in our efforts to protect “monuments,” such as archaeological sites and scenic spots located in communities of all sizes and scales, and “cultural landscapes” that reflect the history of the local communities and lifestyles that have long been developed there.

 

 

 Today, Japanese governmental agencies responsible for protection of cultural sites and other monuments make it a common practice to develop a “Protection and Management Plan” as a master plan to be completed in 10 to 15 years, and a 

“Maintenance and Utilization Plan” as an action plan to implement projects. In case of groups of historic buildings and cultural landscapes, development of a “Protection Plan” is required as a  condition for applying for eligibility for protection under

the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties of Japan. For the purpose of getting the entire picture of local cultural properties, development of  a “History and Culture Basic Plan” is also encouraged, which indicates that a paradigm shift

is taking place in planning of cultural properties protection: Today, greater emphasis is placed on developing an understanding of the value of unique local cultural properties and creating new value for  the future, than on exploring measures to better

protect cultural properties that have been already recognized as valuable.

 

 In addition, it has become a growing trend for Japanese municipalities to incorporate local cultural  properties at the core of community development projects, representative of which is the “Plan for the Maintenance and Improvement of the Beautiful  Historical Scenery in the Region” developed under the Law for the Maintenance and Improvement of  the Beautiful Historical Scenery in the Region.

 

 In recent years, predetermined criteria for developing plans, or standard forms, guidelines and templates based on such criteria are available on most occasions and adherence to such criteria is likely to be regarded as important. Against this backdrop, it seems that a great many people are mistakenly convinced that they can develop plans for historical heritage protection simply by filling in individual local information (e.g. local situations, name and type of the heritage) on such forms. In fact, we have often come across such cases.

 

 It should be noted, however, that while various criteria, standard forms, guidelines and templates are available for planning, all they indicate are matters that we should take notice of and consider  to confirm, reconstruct and express our intention

for the future, as well as procedures to implement  plans, and they can never cover specific details of what we intend to do with our plans or structures  of plans. Let me also add that for example, Japan’ s projects to protect archaeological sites, which

started more than 100 years ago and have since continued evolving, now cover a far more diverse range of properties. In case of cultural landscape, which was newly added to the category of cultural  properties to be protected in consideration of 

the recent social situation, we may say that the intention of planning itself can determine the value of a  certain landscape as cultural heritage. This means that lack of clear intention can obscure the reason for protecting the particular landscape.

 

 With this understanding in mind, we organized the Research Symposium to explore the idea and practice of “planning,” focusing on the significance of planning for cultural heritage such as archaeological sites and cultural landscapes and how such plans should be developed and implemented.

 

4. Structure of the Research Symposium

 

 

 Designed to explore the principle and process of planning, the Research Symposium consisted of three lectures and four presentations on topics relating to planning for archaeological sites, cultural  landscapes and other types of cultural heritage.

At the beginning of the Research Symposium (January 24, 2014), Mr. Hirasawa shared issues to be addressed that had been identified in the discussions held during the Management Research Symposiums for Cultural Sites and the Research

 

Meetings on Cultural Landscapes in the past. He also raised problems concerning the current practice of “planning” for archaeological sites and cultural landscapes, while discussing the reason for focusing on “planning” in this symposium.

 

 Next,  a  special lecture titled “Planning and Implementation of Projects for Regional Development and Heritage” was delivered by Mr. Kensuke Ohishi from the Economic Infrastructure Department of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). He discussed the relevance between JICA’s projects and local cultural heritage and stressed the importance of planning in implementing projects for the dual purpose of promoting regional development and protecting local cultural heritage, by referring to two

projects undertaken by JICA―the Project for the Construction of the Petra Museum (Jordan) and the Project for the Conservation Centre in the Grand Egyptian Museum (Egypt). This was followed by Keynote Lecture 1: “From Individual Planning to Comprehensive Planning,” by Professor Konomi Ikebe from the Graduate School of Horticulture of Chiba University. Professor Ikebe indicated that plans for cultural property protection developed by competent governmental agencies are not effective 

enough to meet today’s needs, and discussed how we should develop workable plans that would benefit local communities into the future. Keynote Lecture 2, “Concept of Conservation and Planning of Landscape Values,” was delivered by Associate

Professor Hisako Koura from the Graduate School of Engineering of Osaka University, who emphasized that landscapes could be a  useful platform for region-wide planning, in light of the recognition of the value of landscapes that has been 

growing since the 1960s and the potentials of today’ s landscaping projects.

 

 On the second day of the Research Symposium (January 25 2014), four presentations were made based on case studies, by two planners and two municipal government officials in charge of heritage protection. The planners are Mr. Kunio

 

Akiyama from Historic Environment Planner’s and Architect’s Studio, and Mr. Sadao Yoshida from the Department of City and Regional Planning of PREC Institute Inc., who spoke on the themes “Development and Implementation of Plans for

Archaeological Site Management” (Presentation 1) and “Viewpoint and Method for Developing Plans for Preserving Local Resources” (Presentation 2), respectively. The municipal governmental officials are Mr. Hiroshi Sugimoto from the Historic 

City Promotion Section of the Uji Municipal Government, who shared the experiences of Uji City in his presentation titled “Planning and System  for Creation of a Historic City” (Presentation 3), and Mr. Shinya Kawamura from the Lifelong Learning

Division of the Shimanto City Board of Education, who introduced the experience of Shimanto City in the Shimanto River basin in his presentation “Planning to Make Cultural Landscapes a Natural Part of the Local Environment” (Presentation 4).

 

 These presentations were followed by  a discussion titled “Significance and Method of Planning” (Moderator: Mr. Hirasawa), which also addressed questions from the floor.

 

5. Viewpoint of “planning”: a summary of the discussion

 

 

 In this discussion, the lecturers and presenters made comments and answered questions from the floor, and a variety of topics were discussed,including persuasiveness, flow of time, vision,concept, sustainability, relationship between

regional development and cultural heritage protection, universal design, planning as a means to describe value, landscape literacy, process of sharing, and education to raise public awareness.

 

 The discussion started with an indication that in our efforts to pass down archaeological sites and cultural landscapes to the future 50 years and 100 years from now, we should note that what we seek today may not necessarily match

the needs of future generations, and that as an important part of the planning process for cultural heritage protection, we should think how we can communicate the validity of our plans and convince people of our times of the significance of these

plans. It was also argued that we cannot deal with all types of cultural properties and cultural heritage in the same manner. Using archaeological sites and cultural landscapes as an example, time flows differently over them in terms of values to be 

protected, beneficiaries of the values, and materials to be handled. Despite such difference, however, it was stressed that protection of all types of cultural heritage should be planned with an approach that ensures the well-being of local residents into the

future.

 

 

 In response to questions from the floor, important  requirements for planning were identified, which include (a) incorporating  a  system that local residents can manage on their own; (b) making plans simple so that local residents will naturally take

interest in them; (c) continuing persistent efforts to solve problems that may arise in implementing a plan and promote greater understanding among people involved in such problems; (d) making plans based on a comprehensive understanding of various

demands to ensure the plans will benefit as many people as possible.

 

 In discussing how the value of cultural heritage should be described in a  plan, an opinion was expressed that residents become gradually aware of the value of local cultural heritage through repeated interactions with the heritage in their

community lives, and in this process, the value is established. The issue of “sharing of value” was discussed along with the issue of “coexistence,” in which attention was paid to the role and function of a planning process in creating a linkage between 

local cultural heritage and residents and among residents in the community, with the understanding that the value for which plans are made is created  through awareness and dialogue among various stakeholders.

 

 The discussion allowed us to share the understanding that “value” at the core of “planning,” which is the theme of this symposium, is not something given or recognized by others but should be discovered through substantial local experiences  that have long been accumulated, combined with aspirations for the future.

 

 The discussion closed with the following statement. People of different positions have different expectations on what “planning” can bring, and for them, planning may have different functions and meanings. On the other hand, all heritage protection plans should be developed in a  manner that convinces local residents that the plan  has a direct concern with their lives. Such plans should also incorporate a system that allows futureoriented initiatives to be continuously pursued and  further developed by local residents. Desirably, any heritage protection plan should be developed through discussion on its details including uses, and people of various positions will participate and  cooperate in the planning process. It is hoped that  the intention behind the plan will be embraced by  many people, who in turn, will communicate the intention for wider support.

 

HIRASAWA Tsuyoshi and NAKAJIMA Yoshiharu (Nara National Research Institute for Cultural  Properties)

 

2014年12月25日 発行

計画の意義と方法 ~計画は何のために策定し、どのように実施するのか?~

平成25年度 遺跡整備・景観合同研究集会‌報告書

 

このページの先頭へ

上に戻る