Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회논문집)

Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Concept and Characteristics of Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties - Focused on ICOMOS Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments and Case Reports -

유산영향평가의 개념과 특성에 관한 연구 - 이코모스 유산영향평가 지침서와 사례 보고서를 중심으로 -

  • 김충호 (서울시립대 도시공학과) ;
  • 이경아 (한국전통문화대 전통건축학과) ;
  • 김동민 (서울시립대 도시공학과)
  • Received : 2020.05.04
  • Accepted : 2020.07.27
  • Published : 2020.08.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to identify the concept and characteristics of Heritage Impact Assessments (HIA) in order to introduce and implement HIA in Korea. For this, the 2011 ICOMOS guidance on HIA and case reports were analyzed through the methods of document analysis and case study. As a result, the study reached the following five conclusions: First, HIA is an assessment system based on Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), using specific assessment items and methods drawn from each property and its proposed development. Second, HIA team as transparent and independent assessment agent has the authority to plan, conduct, and take the responsibility for HIA. Third, HIA assessment methods are derived and developed through consultation with relevant stakeholders. Fourth, HIA procedure consists two main stages such as scoping stage creating the scoping report and undertaking stage producing the HIA report. Fifth, mitigative measures and recommendations are proposed in order to avoid, reduce, and mitigate negative impacts of potential developments on OUV of properties. Finally, the study is expected to promote academic understanding and vibrant discussions for domestic introduction and smooth implementation of HIA.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn, H.K., & Lim, D.J. (2009). A Comparative Case Study of the Reduction of administrative Burdens and its Implications to Korea - Focused on Dutch and British Cases. Korean Association For Policy Science, 13(1), 97-122.
  2. Ana, P.R., & Ron, V.O. (2012). Guidance on heritage impact assessments - Learning from its application on World Heritage site management. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 2(2), 104-114. https://doi.org/10.1108/20441261211273671
  3. Bae, E.H. (2001). Environmental Change, Institutional change and Policy Change - the New Institutionalism. Korean Institute of Public Affairs, 39(2), 103-139.
  4. Choi, S.H., Jung, J.H., & Jung, S.W. (2016). Concept and Procedures of Qualitative Content Analysis. Korean Association for Qualitative Inquiry, 2(1), 127-155.
  5. Chun, S.Y., Ko, J.W., Park, D.S., & Chun, S.K. (2012). An Analysis of School Funding System in England. Korean Civil Law Association, 21(3), 197-215.
  6. Chung, C.M., & Ko, S.H. (1999). A Study on the Estabilishment of District Planning System in Urban Planning. Journal of Korean-International Society of Community Development, 24(1), 87-104.
  7. Cultural Heritage Administration (2019a). A Study on the Basis of World Heritage Management.
  8. Cultural Heritage Administration (2019b). Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties.
  9. Federal Chancellery of the Republic of Austria (2019). Heritage Impcat Assessment 'Heumarkt Neu' Construction Project and Development of the World Heritage Property 'Historic Centre of Vienna'.
  10. Jo, E.G. (2015). A Study on World Heritage conservation policies through the case of the Dresden Elbe Valley. National Research Institute of Cultural Properties, 48(2), 96-109.
  11. Jung, J.J. (2010). A Study on the Change of the Measures for Fiscal Dividend Implementation - Application of Integrated System Approach. Institute of Governmental Studies, 16(1), 117-154.
  12. Kang, K.H., & Kim, J.D. (2010). A Preliminary Study on Demostic Embracement and Development Plan regarding UNESCO World Heritage Programme. MUN HWA JAE - Annual Review in Cultural Heritage Studies, 43(1), 56-85.
  13. Kim, H.S. (2016). Institutionalist Approach to the Korean Question. THE INSTITUTE FOR FAR EASTERN STUDIES, 32(2), 1-32.
  14. Kim, M.K., Roh, M.S., Kim, I.S., & Jun, H. J. (2012). A Study on the Applicability of GBT(Green BIM Template) for BIM-based Green Building Certification System - Focused on CASBEE in Japan. Society of Design Convergence, 11(4), 31-44.
  15. Kim, T.E. (2015). Critical Review of Historical Institutionalism Research Trend. Korean Public Administration Review, 49(4), 57-96. https://doi.org/10.18333/KPAR.49.4.57
  16. Kim, Y.C., & Jung, S.W. (2015). Documents Analysis as Qualitative Research Method. Education Research Institute, 21(6), 253-285.
  17. Korean National Commission for UNESCO. March 16, 2020 from http://www.unesco.or.kr
  18. Lee, J.Y., & Lee, J.H. (1999). Comparative Analysis of EIA System. The Korean Association For Public Administration, 33(3), 145-160.
  19. Patrick R.P., Peter G., & Frank, V. (2019). Improving heritage impact assessment - an analytical critique of the ICOMOS guidelines. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HERITAGE STUDIES, 25(4), 333-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2018.1477057
  20. Studio Thompson (2015). Heritage Impact Assessment - Proposed Development Near to the World Heritage Property of Old Town of Galle and its Fortifications.
  21. Studio Thompson (2014). Heritage Impact Assessment - Proposed Development in the Buffer Zone of the World Heritage Property of Villa Adriana.
  22. Suh, W.S. (2011). A Study on the Introduction of Climate Change Risk Disclosure. Korea Business Law Association, 25(3), 253-295.
  23. Sung, Y.K. (2010). An analysis on perspectives and concepts of global education in curriculum document - with reference to national curriculum in the UK. Research Institute of Education Korea University, (37), 23-40.
  24. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. June 15, 2020 from http://whc.unesco.org
  25. Weon, S.Y. (2008). A Study on Introduction and Issues of Building Agreement. The Regional Association of Architectural Institute of Korea, 10(4), 123-130.
  26. World Heritage Committee (2018a). Adoption of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value. World Heritage 42COM, 17-18.
  27. World Heritage Committee (2018b). State of conservation of the properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. World Heritage 42COM, 91.
  28. World Heritage Committee (2019). State of conservation of the properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. World Heritage 43COM, 81-84.