Disaster Cultural HeritageIntroduction There are many valuable assets

Disaster and Culture – AY2017Jihyeon Ohk1023-28-5754Final projectLaw for Cultural HeritageIntroduction There are many valuable assets people have that give them identification of themselves, sense of belonging, or resilience to failure. One of them is cultural heritage. People, cultural heritage, and disaster are closely correlated to each other. Buildings or poetry that eventually become cultural heritage are created after disasters and might get ruined by the disaster again after several years. In this paper, I will discuss about the significance of the cultural heritage in our life and then the relationship with the law that protects the cultural heritage from disasters. Cultural HeritageCultural heritage is the legacy of artifacts and intangible attributes of a group or society that are inherited from past generations, maintained in the present and bestowed for the benefit of future generations. Cultural heritage includes tangible culture (such as buildings, monuments, and artifacts), intangible culture (such as folklore and knowledge), and natural heritage (significant landscapes, and biodiversity).I will focus on the cultural property of cultural heritage. This includes the physical, or “tangible” cultural heritage.SignificanceObjects are part of human history research because they provide a concrete basis for ideas and can be verified. Their preservation shows the need for the past and acknowledgment of conveying the story. David Lowenthal observes that preserved objects also validate memories. Technology can obtain the shape and appearance of artifacts in unprecedented precision in human history. However, unlike replicas, the reality of the object provides a literal way to engage and touch the past.Cultural heritage is very important for the global community. The legacy of both tangible and intangible connects us with the past. It provides invaluable insights into our identity and evolution. It plays an important role in economic growth, poverty reduction and even sustainable development. In times of disaster, cultural heritage allows the affected communities to be more resilient. Classical civilizations and especially the Indians turned the highest importance to the preservation of tradition. The central idea is that social institutions, scientific knowledge and technology applications should use “heritage” as a “resource”. Ancient Indians considered that they promote both economic assets and social cohesion (such as institutions for preserving knowledge and maintaining civil order).VulnerabilityCultural heritage is vulnerable to the adverse impact of natural disasters. The lack of maintenance and the loss of traditional knowledge have increased the vulnerability of cultural heritage assets in many parts of the world. If the regular infrastructure is affected by the disaster, it can usually be repaired or rebuilt. However, the influence on cultural heritage is irreversible and may cause not only economic loss but loss of life.Loss of Heritage due to DisasterExperience shows that cultural heritage is often damaged or destroyed in the aftermath of a disaster due to insensitive conservation, recovery, and reconstruction:2016 ITALY, Earthquake Centuries-old structures, including the cathedral and basilica of San Benedetto in Norcia and St. Augustine church in Amatrice, were reduced to rubble. The  affected region generated €9 billion in tourist trade, part of which was directly linked to heritage sites. In the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, tourist arrivals declined precipitously. 2016 MYANMAR, Earthquake A 6.8 magnitude earthquake struck central Myanmar in 2016, killing at least three people and damaging almost 400 Buddhist stupas/ temples dotting the plains of Bagan. This region is a centerpiece of Myanmar’s tourist industry, which contributes about 3 percent to the economy and a similar share of employment. In addition to potential impact on income for locals, the cost  of rehabilitating these temples will be significant. 2013 THE PHILIPPINES, Earthquake Out of a total 3.2 million people affected by the 2013 earthquake, 348,000 were displaced. Many historic churches in Bohol collapsed; damage to the churches was estimated at over US$30 million. Given Philippine religious traditions, the social impact was likely greater than the economic costs. 2011 THAILAND, FloodsThe 2011 floods killed more than 220 people and inundated over 200 ancient temples in the Ayutthaya World Heritage site and its periphery. Economic damage and losses in the cultural heritage sector were estimated at over B 7.5 billion, or about US$250 million. 2011 JAPAN Tsunami, Earthquake The 2011 earthquake and tsunami left approximately 19,500 dead or missing. The total number of cultural heritage properties damaged by the earthquake exceeds 1,000.2010 NEW ZEALAND, Earthquake The Christchurch earthquake of 2011 inflicted heavy damage on the New Zealand economy, with losses estimated at about 8 percent of GDP. Christchurch is also a gateway for tourism, accounting for 20 percent of the sector’s revenues. Much of the tourism in the region is linked to cultural heritage in areas like Central City, where most of the damage occurred. Law in different countriesPreservation / ConservationCountries around the world are taking various steps to protect cultural heritage from disaster based on relevant conventions, policy frameworks and guidelines. International Disaster Risk Reduction Frameworks such as Hyogo Framework for Action and the the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 recognize the links between various aspects of culture, risk reduction and resilience, providing policies to preserve cultural assets. Many countries, including Japan, Italy, Turkey and other countries, are already pursuing innovation and are going through best practices in those area. Hurtful experience suggest that there are still many opportunities to protect heritage, avoid unnecessary loss of life, and minimize damage and loss of economic activity.In order to protect lives, livelihoods and cultural heritage, it is important to strengthen the resilience of the assets at risk and make disaster recovery an integral part of cultural heritage management. The key recommendations are consistent with the four priority areas identified in the Sendai framework: improving risk awareness, strengthening risk management, investing in risk reduction and disaster preparedness and better support.• Legal, policy, and institutional frameworks. Strengthening the resilience of cultural heritage should be considered an integral component of a country’s overall DRM strategy. It is crucial to establish an enabling legal, policy, institutional, and operational framework for resilient cultural heritage, and to outline responsibilities and coordination protocols for various stakeholders and across the spectrum of DRM practices, from risk assessment to preparedness, response, and recovery. Greater coordination between the different stakeholders, including academia, the private sector, and the local communities, is needed beyond the times of a disaster.• Understanding risk. Baseline data collection and scientific identification of risks through multi-hazard risk assessments and impact scenarios are cornerstones for improved management of disaster risk facing cultural heritage assets.• Risk reduction and capacity building. A variety of measures can be taken to reduce disaster risks to cultural assets, including both physical mitigation and non-engineered solutions such as improved building codes, coordination, or site management. Data, technology, and innovative approaches can help protect monuments against natural disasters at the level defined by criteria and expected risks, for example by helping to prioritize and protect the most important heritage assets in the context of limited resources, and by identifying the right combination of measures.• Preparedness and early recovery. Post-disaster recovery is a sensitive time when additional factors (debris removal, theft, misclassification, further disaster events) can amplify the impact of the initial disaster. Stakeholders need to be better prepared if they are to effectively respond to disaster impacts on heritage assets and support sensitive recovery, especially when local communities and livelihoods are closely connected to heritage sites.Relationship between law and disasterBagan is an important historical site in Myanmar located in a geologically active area. On August 24, 2016, some 400 Buddhist stupas and temples experienced a 6.8 magnitude earthquake. Rapid evaluation of structures affected by the support of UNESCO, the World Bank and other partners was carried out. For some monuments, detailed assessments were conducted, including structural stabilization options and suggestions to improve Bagan’s resilience. These assessments highlight the impact of the 2016 damage and low-level preservation, repair, reconstruction and maintenance of many monuments affected since the 1916 earthquake. After the 1975 earthquake that affected most of Bagan’s monuments, almost all the temples and gate were restored, at least partially. However, most of the past reconstruction efforts have been carried out without seismic strengthening. In many cases, new structures added during the reconstruction process further deformed the bearing walls, negatively impacting the ability to withstand earthquakes, and causing significant damage in the 2016 earthquake. Some monuments question their effectiveness and aesthetics, notwithstanding the several interventions such as metal frames and block walls improve resilience. Hundreds of “new” monuments built on the floor of the long lost monument without any resilience had a major impact on the 2016 earthquake. On the other hand, according to the recommendations and suggested methods, including the UNESCO / UNDP project BUR 78/023, the seismic-reinforced structures well performed and suffered minimal damage.Buildings or heritage with preventionMulti-hazard risk and vulnerability assessments and multidisciplinary studies of heritage sites should be conducted on a periodic basis for a better understanding of risks and more effective risk mitigation investments and planning. For example, the Philippines Department of Tourism, with the support of the World Bank and the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), conducted a vulnerability assessment of 16 key cultural heritage sites after the 2013 Bohol earthquake and Typhoon Hayian. A detailed multi-hazard vulnerability assessment led to specific recommendations on risk reduction interventions for each structure, with conceptual designs and cost estimates for structural strengthening and restoration.There needs to be a better understanding of  risks and risk forecasts which require regularly conducted site studies on multi-hazard risk and vulnerability assessment. For example, the Philippines Department of Tourism, with the support of the World Bank and the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), conducted a vulnerability assessment of 16 key cultural heritage sites after the 2013 Bohol earthquake and Typhoon Hayian. Detailed assessment meant specific recommendations, allowing improvement in the conceptual design and structure of the restoration cost and anticipation of the cost of each structure through risk mitigation interventions.Network between countries or people (Bridging)•  It is necessary to have an expert trained in risk identification, risk reduction, restoration after disaster for the protection of cultural heritage. We also need to encourage cooperation with scholars to promote research in this field. In Japan, Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage at Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH) is internationally acknowledged worldwide for educated experts and efforts to reproduce and strengthen Japan’s capabilities globally.•  Due to uneven professional knowledge, it is helpful to share experiences and lessons throughout various countries. The Recognition of Best Practice in World Heritage Management is the initiative of the World Heritage Committee, whose heritage shows “New Sites and Creative Management.” They help other countries to establish a knowledge of resilient cultural heritage. The historic district of Vigan, Philippines, regardless of their limited resource, were evaluated as the best in practice due to community participation in conservation and management, and “multifaceted conservation measures.”•  Standard operating guidelines can be used as a reference point for rehabilitation activities. They are at the institutional or national levels that direct planning, restoration and reconstruction activities. For example, British Library in the UK has an contingency plan in an emergency. Where there are cultural sites in densely populated areas and where it can be used as a haven for affected people, measures should be taken to prevent further damage in terms of use.Case Studies of Improvement in LawITALY, EarthquakeLoss: Small village churches, clock towers, frescos, mosaics, stained-glass windows, sculptures, and so on.Italy has some of the world’s richest cultural heritage. It is also an earthquake-prone country with 111,573 people affected over the last decade. Italy has developed risk maps based on the alphanumeric databases and cartography of cultural assets scattered throughout the region. This database is a reference tool for maintaining the Italian heritage of the disaster. The 6.2 magnitude earthquake in central Italy in 2016 not only took 296 people, but also destroyed more than 50 sites. It destroyed historic buildings in three cities: Amatrice, Accumoli and Arquata del Tronto.Case in Italy confirms the ‘must prepare for disaster’. As part of the first response to the earthquake in 2016, the Carabinieri officer at the Comando Tutela Patrimonio Culturale, better known as the “Art squad”, protected artefacts and artifacts at churches and museums. The UNESCO-trained Ministry of Culture task forces collected, packaged, and moved the warehouse for the preservation and early assessment of damage. The “Art squad” collected ancient stones and bricks from the leftovers and used for reconstruction. To strengthen the recovery and disaster cooperation between governments and non-governmental organizations, the Italian government became an important partner of the European Union (EU)-funded ResCult platform (“Increasing Resilience of Cultural Heritage”). ResCult allows civil protection departments, heritage departments, local governments, private investors and communities to help preserve cultural heritage in the overall Sendai framework. ResCult will be developing the European Heritage Map along with the disaster record. It will also monitor and model risk scenarios that are related to various risk factors and help with design prevention strategies. Italy wants to be a key partner in this initiative to prevent damage due to disaster on its rich cultural heritage.Italy stands at the forefront of modern technology, such as seismic isolation for infrastructure to withstand earthquakes. However, intervention in cultural heritage cause challenge. Given the historical relationship between people and these assets, there is a restriction for seismic mitigation technologies. JAPAN, Earthquake, flood, fireLoss: Temples, shrines, and castles Japan has a long history of disaster management. The Kobe earthquake of 1995 (6,000 deaths) and the 2011 tsunami (15,000 deaths) are two examples of where Japan had restored in a better condition. The Japanese government system depends on the coordination of national and local governments following the legislations and funding procedures. The case in Japan is a comprehensive approach to building disaster resilience. This approach includes strategies that include location, real and operational aspects. Japanese law defines the types of cultural heritage, tangible cultural heritage, intangible cultural assets, folk cultural property, monuments and sites, cultural landscapes, six types of cultural heritage and traditional buildings. Financial support depends on the property’s classification. Disaster risk reduction measures for heritage properties are divided into three major areas, fire prevention, crime prevention, and environment conservation to protect cultural heritage. Since 2007, the Japanese government made the list of comprehensive cultural heritage in these areas. This list will capture heritage left undesignated within the national or international frameworks, but nevertheless of critical importance at the local level. Local governments are supported by heritage protection, but during emergencies an integrated heritage rescue approach is followed. The Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage’s work at Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH) builds needed human resource capability and is recognized globally for training professionals across the world. Reconstruction of damaged historical structures in this part of the world is only aimed at preserving “original” as much as possible, but Japan will also emphasize the preservation of knowledge, skills, and materials used to create structures.Without a system to preserve historical records, those kept in personal collection can be vulnerable and at high risk of disappearing during disaster. Due to lack of process-level preparedness and governance clarity, efforts to rescue cultural heritage properties did not begin until 20 days after the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami in 2011. Conclusion”Without the culture that connects us to our territory, we lose our identity. There may not be many famous artists or famous monuments here, but before anything, Italians feel proud of the culture that comes from their own towns, their own regions. And when we restore a church or a museum, it gives us hope. This is not just about preserving museum culture. For us, it’s about a return to normalcy.” Although the safety of the people might be more important, cultural heritage gives ‘spirit’ for people to withstand the moments of despair and loss after the disaster.