Cultural landscape management at Borobudur, Indonesia
Masanori Nagaoka (Author)
This volume investigates a historical account of the development of landscapes management at Borobudur. In the 1970s and 1980s, there was large scale heritage conservation intervention of the Borobudur Temple by UNESCO and a simultaneous attempt of a wider landscapes management at Borobudur. But in the late 1980s and early 1990s, a global heritage discourse of an enlarged value system emerged. This discourse embraced issues such as cultural landscape, living history, intangible values, vernacular heritage, and urban landscapes with community involvement. The early 1990s saw a move against the European-dominated discourse of heritage as well as the concept of authenticity in the World Heritage system and other European-oriented classifications. The Asian experience in heritage discourse has begun to have a significant impact on the European standard. Additionally, in the 1990s, there was a gradual recognition of the concept of cultural landscape, which differed both within Asia and between Asia and Europe. These different ideas are evident in the case of the Borobudur Temple and its 1991 nomination to the World Heritage List. This book focuses how the management of the Borobudur historical monument and its landscapes was developed and reached current exclusive national legislative framework and set as an example for others sites in the region and for other regions to consider
1 online resource (147 pages)
9783319420462, 3319420461
2192-4910
957437019
Preface; References; Acknowledgements; Contents; List of Figures ; List of Tables; Abbreviations; About the Author; Chapter 1: Historical Setting of Borobudur; 1.1 Introduction: Borobudur; 1.2 Geographical Features of Borobudur and the Kedu Plains; 1.3 Discovery of the Borobudur Temple and Scientific Research; 1.4 First and Second Restoration Works of the Borobudur Temple in the Twentieth Century; 1.5 UNESCO International Campaign for the Safeguarding of Borobudur; 1.6 UNESCO Consultative Committee for the Safeguarding Borobudur Project and the Cultural Landscape Preservation Approach. 1.7 Chihara's Initiative for the Landscape Protection at Borobudur1.8 Outstanding Universal Value of Borobudur; 1.9 Conclusion: Buddhist Heritage in a Predominantly Islamic Region; References; Chapter 2: Concept of Landscape Management at Borobudur in the 1970s; 2.1 Introduction; 2.2 European and Asian Approaches to Heritage and Cultural Landscape; 2.3 Heritage Discourse in Japan for the Protection of Cultural Properties, Natural Monuments, and Cultural Landscape; 2.4 Context of Javanese Cultural landscape; 2.5 Management Concept of Landscape Protection in the JICA Master Plan. 2.5.1 The Regional Master Plan Study (1973-1974)2.5.2 Project Feasibility Study (1975-1976); 2.5.3 JICA Master Plan (1978-1979); 2.6 Evolution of the Zoning Concept and Geographical Scope from 1974 Regional Study, 1976 Feasibility Study to 1979 JICA Master Plan; 2.7 Derivation of the Legislative Aspect of the JICA Zoning Concept from the 1966 Japanese Ancient Cities Preservation Law; 2.8 Influence of Japanese Cultural Perception Approach in the JICA Master Plan; 2.9 Scholars' Criticisms of the JICA Master Plan and Counterarguments from Nagai. 2.10 Japanese Heritage Practitioners to Support the Landscape Concept in the JICA Master Plan2.11 Conclusion; References; Chapter 3: Buffering Borobudur for Socioeconomic Development in the 1980s: An Approach Distinct from European Value-Based Heritage Management; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 The Evolution of Buffer Zones in the European-ƯDominated Heritage Discourse and World Heritage System; 3.3 Community Participation in Heritage Management; 3.4 Buffer Zones as Management Tools; 3.5 The Borobudur Archeological Park Concept in the 1979 JICA Master Plan. 3.6 Advocacy of the JICA Master Plan: Community Participation in the Safeguarding of Borobudur3.7 Outline of the Updated Plan; 3.8 The Educational Function of Buffer Zones; 3.9 Strategic Use of Social, Cultural, and Economic Factors of the Buffer Zone; 3.10 Limitations of the Park Project; 3.10.1 Breaches of Fair Indemnity to the Land Owners; 3.10.2 Non-involvement of the Community in the Decision-ƯMaking on Resettlement; 3.10.3 Forced Displacement; 3.11 Conclusion; References