지방무형유산 보호제도의 도입과 전개양상 연구 - 경기지역을 중심으로 -

Abstract

Since the enactment of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act in 1962, the intangible heritage protection system has contributed to preventing the interruption of transmission of intangible heritage and preserving and passing on its value. This paper starts from the need to examine the process of introduction and policy operation of the local intangible heritage protection system, which has been an important axis of the protection along with the national system, at a time when heritage-related systems are changing due to the enactment and implementation of the Basic Act on National Heritage. The studies on local intangible cultural heritage systems, especially ‘ordinances’ and system operation of cities, counties, and districts, which are basic autonomous organizations, is poor. Gyeonggi-do's intangible heritage protection system goes through three stages. The first is the state-led protection of local intangible heritage through designation as a national intangible heritage after the Cultural Heritage Protection Act of 1962, and the second is the protection of local intangible heritage in the 1970s. The introduction of an intangible heritage protection system by the province(metropolitan government), and the third step is the operation of the system through the enactment of city/county local heritage protection ordinances after 1985. Through this multi-layered protection system, intangible heritage has been designated and protected in Gyeonggi-do and counties. Looking at the designation status as a result of system operation, differences appear in the nature of heritage, Gyeonggi-do designated intangible heritage appears to have little differentiation from the national or other city/province designated items, while in the case of counties, many items with strong local characteristics are designated. Also, Gyeonggi-do designation, the majority are individual parts, whereas in cities and counties, group are overwhelmingly high. Meanwhile, in the newly introduced fields of traditional knowledge, oral tradition and expression, there are no or very few designated in both Gyeonggi-do and counties. The reason for the low acceptance of new fields is that the system is operated conservatively and the implementing entity does not share the purpose of introduction. In addition, the reason for the low level of differentiation between the national and regional governments appears to be that, as the national designation classification and designated objects were transferred to the Gyeonggi Province ordinance through standard ordinances(rules), it became similar to the central administration and regional characteristics disappeared. In order to utilize the intangible heritage protection system in the future, it is necessary to enact or revise ordinances that take advantage of regional characteristics, and link with natural or tangible heritage, especially non-designated heritage. If the linkage between city/county designation, provincial and national designation is made through value judgment among the list of non-designated intangible cultural heritage, the phenomenon of excessive overlapping designation and the gap between national and local intangible heritage administration will be resolved. Utilization appropriate to the unit can also be actively implemented. From an emotional and spiritual perspective, intangible heritage is evaluated as an important asset for regional sustainability, and as specified in the Framework Act on National Heritage, ‘respect for the unique history and diversity of the region' promotes ’revitalization of the community and regional development'(Article 7) can contribute to realizing this. The role of intangible heritage can be expanded in maintaining and preserving locality and diversity. In particular, in recent years, the management of heritage has expanded from the concept of ‘point' to ‘area‘, ‘space', and even ‘region', so that the management of intangible heritage at the regional level has expanded. Discussions on active and complex heritage protection are becoming more active, and not only physical structures but also emotional and spiritual values are being shed new light. In the future, if the local intangible cultural heritage protection system actively accepts and operates this trend, it is expected to become richer in both form and content.