By Taiwan Association of Cultural Policy Studies.
Image credit: 建國眷村 by Tsin Ng / Flickr: CC BY-SA 2.0 DEED.
This article is a part of the special issue that presents five cultural policy strategies emerging from the four expert forums co-convened by the Taiwan Association of Cultural Policy Studies (TACPS) and the Foundation for Future Generations, Taiwan. Through the collective efforts of scholars, practitioners, and professionals in various fields, it is hoped that the ideas will allow Taiwan’s future leaders to better understand and address the pressing issues in current cultural policies, especially in their political agendas for the upcoming elections, and provide insights for the next generations of citizens. This article focuses on the policy strategies for the redevelopment and regeneration of cultural assets and cultural-historical spaces with critical approaches.
Since the Ministry of Culture introduced the “Regeneration of Historic Sites” policy in 2017 to harmonise cultural and spatial governance, counties and cities have been grappling with a range of challenges involving restoration, repurposing, operational management, and interdepartmental coordination. While these issues are not new, the substantial investment in the “Regeneration of Historic Sites” policy has shed light on the ongoing struggles in cultural asset management.
Today, cultural heritage is no longer solely a cultural concept; it has evolved into a medium and a realm for reflecting and reconstructing urban and rural environments. Whether we refer to it as “cultural heritage” or “cultural inheritance,” the emphasis remains on preserving cultural value. Consequently, alongside the growth of developmentalism, the spirit and techniques of preservation, maintenance, and reuse have become pivotal benchmarks for reshaping urban and rural environments. In essence, it is essential to concurrently support the redevelopment of urban and rural spaces and the preservation of cultural assets. First and foremost, a high-quality, comfortable, and dignified living environment forms the bedrock of social justice. The preservation and regeneration of culture must be integrated with environmental enhancement to augment its social significance.
Second, it is essential to integrate contemporary values into the field of cultural preservation, enabling individuals to grasp and experience the significance of cultural inheritance, maintenance, and reuse in their daily lives.
Third, the expansion of communication channels and public participation should be rooted in collaborative cultural governance rather than mere administrative control. The objective is to seamlessly incorporate historical heritage into the lives of ordinary citizens through value interpretation, encompassing activities like historical site restoration, historic house preservation, and cultural education.
Lastly, hardware alone cannot accomplish these goals. To address deficiencies in infrastructure, software content enhancements are imperative for the restoration and reuse of cultural assets, along with the efficient operation of cultural governance systems.
How to Contribute to the Redevelopment of Cultural Assets and Spatial Construction Through Policy?
Land planning in both urban and rural settings should prioritise cultural asset preservation. Preserving the historical appearance of these environments requires more than relying solely on competent authorities responsible for statutory cultural assets. It necessitates additional land and resource inventory, as well as comprehensive planning. Unfortunately, current land planning implementation falls short of offering sufficient regulation and support from an urban preservation perspective.
Publicly owned cultural assets should formulate a comprehensive national asset utilisation plan in alignment with societal demands. The public asset spaces managed by the Bureau (Department) of Cultural Affairs should offer a diverse array of cultural functions. We need to go beyond the constraints set by the Bureau (Department) of Cultural Affairs and devise revitalisation and repurposing strategies that align with broader national asset utilisation goals. This will make cultural assets more accessible to the general populace and address social needs such as youth housing and long-term elderly care.
To ensure the sustainable development of cultural assets, we should establish administrative corporations with the core objective of cultural asset management. This should encompass both policy frameworks and physical infrastructure. In line with the shift from Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the growing emphasis on Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) in business, facilitating private sector participation in the cultural assets sector can generate additional job opportunities related to cultural assets. Administrative corporations could be established to oversee sustainable cultural asset development and coordinate resources from various stakeholders.
Efforts to enhance the accessibility and ease of cultural asset donations are crucial. Currently, citizens have limited avenues for supporting cultural assets through donations. While Article 101 of the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act offers a 100% tax deduction for cultural asset donations, such contributions must be directed to the competent authority, the National Culture and Arts Foundation, or municipal or county (city) cultural foundations. Streamlining and simplifying the donation process is a pressing issue that can bolster public willingness to support cultural institutions.
Sustaining preservation and rejuvenation initiatives for privately owned historic structures is essential, and regulatory limitations on the refurbishment and reconstruction of these aged buildings need enhancement. The existing construction management system makes it challenging for pre-1971 buildings to secure legal building permits, hindering their potential for gaining legal status through revitalisation and repurposing. It is imperative to reevaluate and update outdated policies and execution plans related to the preservation and rejuvenation of privately owned historic buildings.
Guidelines for cultural asset restoration and ethical maintenance procedures should be instituted. Recent conflicts have arisen from differences in ideas and practices concerning the restoration of architectural cultural heritage. Much of this discord can be attributed to the absence of international restoration standards integrated into Taiwan’s cultural heritage system. Given the irreversibility of cultural assets, it is crucial to develop principles and guidelines for restoration and maintenance.
Broadening the scope of cultural asset education and promoting its integration from the grassroots level is essential. This approach aims to nurture a collective inclination to engage with cultural sites through cultural education experiences, thereby fostering a sense of familiarity and closeness between the public and historical sites. The ultimate goal is to make cultural resources an integral part of people’s lives.
Additionally, it is crucial to sustain the growth of fundamental research on cultural assets and foster additional avenues for cultural content interpretation. Effective cultural asset interpretation relies on a diverse array of cultural contents and materials. However, research findings, work reports, historical studies, and academic results stemming from oral interviews about cultural assets often end up archived and forgotten once a case concludes. To address this issue, a portion of the standard budget allocated to the cultural sector should be consistently earmarked to advance the research and practical application of cultural asset knowledge.
Finally, fostering cultural asset professionals and ensuring their job security is of paramount importance. The significance of cultural heritage preservation diminishes if cultural assets, technological expertise, knowledge systems, and traditional skills cannot sustain a livelihood. The primary challenge lies in safeguarding the right to employment in the field of cultural asset restoration and related professional roles. This ensures that individuals dedicated to preserving our cultural heritage can continue their vital work with job security.
Through these actions, it is hoped to contribute to a broader understanding and development of an environment that allows for better and ethical practices in the regeneration of cultural assets and historic spaces.
The special issue “The Sustainability of Culture and Democratic Governance in Taiwan” is a critical report that outlines the five strategies for sustainable cultural policy. The report is compiled and organised by Dr Jerry C. Y. Liu (Graduate School of Arts Management and Cultural Policy, National Taiwan University of Arts), Dr Fang-Jay Rong (Department of Environmental and Cultural Resources, National Tsing Hua University), Dr Chih-hung Wang (Graduate Institute of Building and Planning, National Taiwan University), Dr Li-Jung Wang (Department of Hakka Language and Social Science, National Central University), and Dr Chieh-Hsiang Wu (Department of Arts in the National Changhua University of Education; Director of TACPS). The articles in this special issue are edited by Chee-Hann Wu with slight modifications made to enhance the readability for readers of Taiwan Insight.
This article was published as part of a special issue on Cultural Sustainability and Democratic Governance in Taiwan.
Taiwan Insight 