The Roles and Challenges of Local Communities Created by the Amendment of the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties

2018/08/15

With the Tokyo Olympics approaching in two years, Japan is pushing forward toward becoming a tourism-oriented nation. The "Japan Heritage" project, launched in 2015 under the leadership of the Agency for Cultural Affairs, is likely still fresh in many people's minds. This project, which organizes cultural properties scattered across regions based on history and stories unique to each area, develops them, and disseminates information to the world, could be called the "Cool Japan Strategy" for cultural properties.

The recent direction regarding cultural properties seems to be moving "from protection to utilization." The amended Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties (enforced on April 1, 2019), which was passed by the ordinary Diet session in 2018, is not unrelated to this trend. The purpose of the amendment is stated as follows:

"Against the backdrop of depopulation and a declining birthrate with an aging population, preventing the loss or dispersal of cultural properties is an urgent issue. It is necessary for the entire local community to work together to pass them on while utilizing cultural properties, including those that are undesignated, for community development. To this end, we aim to promote the planned preservation and utilization of cultural properties in regions and strengthen the driving force of local cultural property protection administration." (Quoted from the Agency for Cultural Affairs website)

The content consists of the "Partial Amendment of the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties" and the "Partial Amendment of the Act on the Organization and Operation of Local Educational Administration." Without going deeply into the details of the amendment, its core lies in delegating much of the authority for cultural property administration, which was previously held by the national government, to regions such as prefectures and municipalities. The aim of the amendment is to allow regions to proceed with the protection and utilization of cultural properties more flexibly based on this transferred authority, and to utilize cultural properties for regional and community development.

What is expected most from this amendment is that regions will be able to approach cultural property protection activities with more authority than ever before. It is hoped that people from various positions in the region will be involved, realizing more flexible and highly sustainable protection and utilization that fits the actual situation of each cultural property. Furthermore, attempts to incorporate a region's unregistered cultural properties into the national cultural property protection system under regional leadership will lead to reflecting the region's sentiments more strongly in the value standards of cultural properties.

On the other hand, concerns have been raised in Diet deliberations and by academic organizations such as the Association for Local History Research that the involvement of people other than the parties directly concerned may lead to utilization and commercial use being prioritized over protection. Furthermore, there are fears that cultural properties may be caught in competition with each other from an economic perspective of "earning vs. not earning," leading to the alteration or modification of the cultural properties themselves.

It is true that when local culture is designated as a national cultural property, it can receive unprecedented attention, which can drastically change its environment. It is not uncommon for it to be newly used for tourism purposes. As a result, there have been numerous reports of cases where unexpected changes occurred in cultural properties, leading to discrepancies in protection and succession activities, often discussed in the context of the "resource-ification of culture" where culture is utilized as a "cultural resource." These are cases I also frequently hear about during field surveys.

However, while it is certainly important to be cautious of the risks associated with utilization, an attitude that excessively prioritizes protection alone and criticizes utilization as something evil based on stereotypes is nothing more than an idealism lacking empathy for the parties struggling with protection and succession.

For regions currently facing a crisis of succession due to a declining birthrate, aging population, and depopulation, aiming to revitalize the region by utilizing cultural properties is an important strategy for survival. In that process, coming into close contact with cultural properties can foster cooperation and understanding for cultural property protection activities. There are many examples where activities that seem far removed from protection ultimately result in enhancing the protection activities of cultural properties.

In the flow "from protection to utilization," an approach to cultural properties with a sense of balance between protection and utilization will be increasingly required in the future. Looking at the details of the amendment, that responsibility will be entrusted to local people more than ever before.

Furthermore, moving forward, discussions will be needed that look not only at cultural properties but also at the local social environment surrounding them.

Previously, through research on Kagura in the Chugoku region, I had the opportunity to interact with high school students who were performers. They were promising successors who had been dancing Kagura since childhood. However, after graduating from high school, they were forced to leave their hometowns for higher education or employment, and some had no choice but to give up Kagura. The story of having strong enthusiasm for succession but the environment not allowing it is likely one of the challenges heard in various parts of the country.

Those who best understand the actual situation of cultural properties are the owners, performers, and local experts such as curators. On the other hand, to objectively view the social environment in which cultural properties are placed and to determine the necessity of protection and the direction of utilization, perspectives from external and other fields are also necessary.

I believe that the existence of local administrations, which serve as platforms to bring together the characters spreading out in concentric circles around cultural properties—owners, performers, experts, and the local community—and to promote better protection and utilization of cultural properties, will become increasingly important in the future.