奈良+20：關(guān)于遺產(chǎn)實(shí)踐、文化價(jià)值和真實(shí)性概念的回顧性文件

奈良+20：關(guān)于遺產(chǎn)實(shí)踐、文化價(jià)值和真實(shí)性概念的回顧性文件

Nara + 20: On Heritage Practices, Cultural Values, and the Concept of Authenticity

為回顧1994年《奈良真實(shí)性文件》所設(shè)定的關(guān)于尊重世界范圍內(nèi)的文化和遺產(chǎn)多樣性的原則；回顧此文件拓展了在遺產(chǎn)實(shí)踐中關(guān)于遺產(chǎn)文化價(jià)值和真實(shí)性的概念；

為確認(rèn)在遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)實(shí)踐中社區(qū)參與、社會(huì)包容、可續(xù)性的實(shí)踐以及代際間責(zé)任的重要性；

為承認(rèn)意識(shí)到由于全球化、城市化、人口變動(dòng)乃至新技術(shù)發(fā)展對(duì)遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)和傳播帶來(lái)的現(xiàn)實(shí)挑戰(zhàn)；

為認(rèn)同不同社區(qū)群體在保持和傳承其特有的、物質(zhì)和非物質(zhì)的文化表達(dá)方式上的權(quán)利；

基于《奈良真實(shí)性文件》通過(guò)后的一系列國(guó)際公約和憲章以及學(xué)術(shù)研究和專(zhuān)業(yè)論壇的成果，拓展了文化遺產(chǎn)的涵蓋領(lǐng)域，突出了文脈和文化多樣性的重要性；

日本文化廳為了紀(jì)念《奈良真實(shí)性文件》20周年，與九州大學(xué)合作舉辦了一系列專(zhuān)業(yè)會(huì)議，用以評(píng)估和學(xué)習(xí)20年來(lái)在文化遺產(chǎn)認(rèn)定和管理中應(yīng)用《奈良文件》的實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)?；凇都方ㄗh》，本文件認(rèn)定，在全球、國(guó)家和地方文脈等各層面，廣大社區(qū)和利益相關(guān)者采取的行動(dòng)應(yīng)當(dāng)優(yōu)先關(guān)注以下5個(gè)關(guān)聯(lián)要素：

1 “遺產(chǎn)演變”的多元性

如《奈良文件》所述，真實(shí)性隨遺產(chǎn)所處文脈的不同而不同，而文化遺產(chǎn)的概念本身也包含多元的形式和演化進(jìn)程。在過(guò)去的20年中，遺產(chǎn)管理和保護(hù)的實(shí)踐中，越來(lái)越多地考慮了“社會(huì)演進(jìn)”的因素，而正是通過(guò)“社會(huì)演進(jìn)”，文化遺產(chǎn)才得以創(chuàng)造、應(yīng)用、闡釋和保護(hù)。而且，隨著人們接觸和感知遺產(chǎn)的技術(shù)與方式的發(fā)展，“影響遺產(chǎn)的社會(huì)演進(jìn)”和“對(duì)真實(shí)性的認(rèn)知”也在隨之變化。

需要進(jìn)一步發(fā)展自己的方法論，用以認(rèn)知日益豐富的文化形式及其演進(jìn)過(guò)程，以及物質(zhì)和非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)之間的內(nèi)在互動(dòng)關(guān)系。

2 “遺產(chǎn)價(jià)值”演變的內(nèi)涵

《奈良文件》認(rèn)為文化遺產(chǎn)持續(xù)處于一個(gè)演變的過(guò)程。在過(guò)去的20年中，上述認(rèn)識(shí)為遺產(chǎn)管理帶來(lái)了挑戰(zhàn)，并使實(shí)踐者們對(duì)于遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)中一些共性原則產(chǎn)生疑問(wèn)。此外，在這一時(shí)期，社區(qū)在上述“遺產(chǎn)演變”中的有效參與也帶來(lái)了人們對(duì)于此前沒(méi)有認(rèn)知的新的遺產(chǎn)價(jià)值的承認(rèn)。這些變化要求我們將對(duì)于遺產(chǎn)價(jià)值的認(rèn)知及其真實(shí)性的判定放在一個(gè)能夠容納人們認(rèn)知和觀點(diǎn)變化的周期性的審視之中，而非建立在一個(gè)孤立的評(píng)判程序上。

需要進(jìn)一步深入認(rèn)識(shí)這種“遺產(chǎn)演變”，從而達(dá)到對(duì)真實(shí)性進(jìn)行周期性評(píng)判。

3 多元利益相關(guān)者的參與

《奈良文件》中，文化遺產(chǎn)的守護(hù)職責(zé)被賦予給了創(chuàng)造和守護(hù)遺產(chǎn)的特定社區(qū)群體。而過(guò)去20年的經(jīng)驗(yàn)證明，文化遺產(chǎn)對(duì)于更廣泛的社會(huì)群體，乃至包含了1994年還不存在而現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)存在著的全球社會(huì)在內(nèi)的利益相關(guān)方，都有著其在不同方面的重要意義。讓此種情形更加復(fù)雜的是，社會(huì)個(gè)體可能同時(shí)屬于不同的社區(qū)群體，且這些利益相關(guān)者之間的權(quán)利也由于遺產(chǎn)立法、決策機(jī)制和經(jīng)濟(jì)利益的不同而不均衡。因此，我們認(rèn)為對(duì)于遺產(chǎn)重要性、價(jià)值、真實(shí)性的判定，以及管理和遺產(chǎn)資源利用方式上擁有權(quán)威的群體應(yīng)擔(dān)負(fù)起將所有利益相關(guān)者納入上述過(guò)程的責(zé)任，而不要忽視聲音弱小的群體。遺產(chǎn)的專(zhuān)業(yè)人士應(yīng)當(dāng)參與到能夠影響遺產(chǎn)的社區(qū)事務(wù)之中。

需要進(jìn)一步致力于判定遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)中的權(quán)利、責(zé)任、代表性和社區(qū)參與程度的方法研究。

4 沖突的聲張與調(diào)和

《奈良文件》呼吁尊重在文化價(jià)值認(rèn)知上存在分歧的案例中的文化多樣性。然而，在過(guò)去的20年中，事實(shí)證明，存在遺產(chǎn)價(jià)值和內(nèi)涵認(rèn)知上的矛盾仍往往會(huì)導(dǎo)致看似不可調(diào)和的沖突。基于這種情況，我們需要更加具有公信力和透明的程序用以彌合這種分歧。通過(guò)這種程序，存在分歧的不同社會(huì)群體，即使在遺產(chǎn)重要性上難以達(dá)成一致意見(jiàn)，也能夠認(rèn)同并參與此遺產(chǎn)的保護(hù)。

需要進(jìn)一步致力于尋求達(dá)成共識(shí)的方法。

5 文化遺產(chǎn)在可持續(xù)發(fā)展中角色

《奈良文件》未專(zhuān)門(mén)論述文化和發(fā)展的問(wèn)題。然而，在過(guò)去的20年中，將文化遺產(chǎn)納入可持續(xù)發(fā)展和減少貧困戰(zhàn)略的需要已經(jīng)得到廣泛認(rèn)可。對(duì)于文化遺產(chǎn)在發(fā)展中的利用，在保證經(jīng)濟(jì)利益和社會(huì)利益平衡的基礎(chǔ)上，必須顧及文化價(jià)值、遺產(chǎn)演變、社區(qū)需求和管理需要。文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)利益發(fā)展之間的平衡必須被視作可持續(xù)發(fā)展理念的一部分。

需要進(jìn)一步致力于探索文化遺產(chǎn)在可持續(xù)發(fā)展中所能扮演的角色，并探尋能夠衡量上述平衡和共贏的方法，從而使遺產(chǎn)的文化價(jià)值與社區(qū)需求能夠融合在發(fā)展過(guò)程中。

此文件中的下述關(guān)鍵詞的闡釋為：

真實(shí)性：因文化而異的屬性，且其與遺產(chǎn)的位置、實(shí)踐以及承載文化價(jià)值的載體相關(guān)；是一個(gè)演進(jìn)著的文化傳統(tǒng)的有意義闡釋?zhuān)徊⑶遥ɑ蛘撸┠軌蛞鹕鐣?huì)個(gè)體間的群體認(rèn)知上的情感共鳴。

保護(hù)：所有為理解一項(xiàng)遺產(chǎn)或遺產(chǎn)要素；用以獲知、反映和傳播其歷史和內(nèi)涵；促進(jìn)其守護(hù)，以及管控其變化而采取的行動(dòng)。用以保證其遺產(chǎn)價(jià)值在當(dāng)代和后代間的最好保留。

社區(qū)：任何擁有共同的文化和社會(huì)特征、共同利益、有著時(shí)間上的延續(xù)性，以及將其自身區(qū)別于其他群體特征的群體。上述部分能夠定義一個(gè)社區(qū)特殊性的特征、利益、需求和認(rèn)知會(huì)與遺產(chǎn)直接相關(guān)。

文化價(jià)值：不同社區(qū)賦予他們指定為遺產(chǎn)的事物上的意義、功能和利益，從而賦予了某個(gè)場(chǎng)所或者物體以文化上的重要性。

信息源：可使人了解文化遺產(chǎn)的性質(zhì)、規(guī)范、意義、歷史及其蘊(yùn)含的共同記憶的所有物質(zhì)的、書(shū)面的、口述的與圖像的來(lái)源。

利益相關(guān)者：一個(gè)由于特殊關(guān)聯(lián)、意義，以及（或者）法律和經(jīng)濟(jì)上的關(guān)系而對(duì)遺產(chǎn)具有某種特殊利益的具體個(gè)人、群體或者組織。其影響對(duì)遺產(chǎn)的相關(guān)決策，或者受到對(duì)遺產(chǎn)的相關(guān)決策的影響。

《奈良+20》由在日本政府文化廳、奈良縣和奈良市的邀請(qǐng)下，于2014年10月22-24日出席在奈良舉辦的“紀(jì)念《奈良真實(shí)性文件》20周年會(huì)議”的代表以英文起草。（徐桐 譯）

Recalling the achievements of the 1994 Nara Document on Authenticity in setting principles of respect and tolerance for cultural and heritage diversity around the world, and in expanding the concepts of cultural value and authenticity in heritage practices;

Affirming the importance of community participation, social inclusion, sustainable practices and intergenerational responsibility in the conservation of heritage;

Recognizing present challenges to the conservation and appreciation of cultural heritage resulting from globalization, urbanization, demographic changes and new technologies;

烤雞翅經(jīng)調(diào)味、燒烤后具有外焦里嫩的口感而備受青睞。但直接用燒烤模式進(jìn)行燒烤時(shí)，食物表面容易烤焦、汁液流失，口感柴、難咀嚼。然而利用真空低溫烹飪不僅可以實(shí)現(xiàn)水分和重量最小程度的損失，還能更好的保留食物的原味和色澤，烹制的菜肴營(yíng)養(yǎng)美味又健康[3，4]。

Acknowledging the rights of communities to maintain and transmit their particular forms of tangible and intangible cultural expressions;

Building on international conventions and charters, and the work done in academic and professional fora since the drafting of the Nara Document that have helped to expand the scope of cultural heritage and underscore the importance of cultural context and cultural diversity;

The Agency for Cultural Affairs (Government of Japan), in celebrating the 20th anniversary of the Nara Document initiated a series of meetings of experts in cooperation with Kyushu University to evaluate and learn from the practical experiences of applying the Nara Document to the identification and management of heritage sites over the last 20 years. This Nara+20 text, building on the Himeji Recommendation identifies five key interrelated issues highlighting prioritized actions to be developed and expanded within global, national and local contexts by wider community and stakeholder involvement.

1 Diversity of heritage processes

Just as the Nara Document indicates that authenticity varies according to the cultural context, the concept of cultural heritage itself assumes diverse forms and processes. In the last 20 years, heritage management and conservation practices have increasingly taken into consideration the social processes by which cultural heritage is produced, used, interpreted and safeguarded. In addition, social processes and perceptions of authenticity have been affected by emerging modes and technologies for accessing and experiencing heritage.

Further work is needed on methodologies for assessing this broader spectrum of cultural forms and processes, and the dynamic interrelationship between tangible and intangible heritage.

2 Implications of the evolution of cultural values

The Nara Document acknowledges that cultural heritage undergoes a continuous process of evolution. In the last 20 years, recognition of this evolution has created challenges for heritage management and has led practitioners to question the validity of universal conservation principles. In addition, during this period, fruitful engagement by communities in heritage processes has given rise to the acceptance of new values that had previously gone unrecognized. These changes require that the identification of values and the determination of authenticity be based on periodic reviews that accommodate changes over time in perceptions and attitudes, rather than on a single assessment.

A better understanding is needed of the processes by which authenticity can be periodically assessed.

3 Involvement of multiple stakeholders

The Nara Document assigns responsibility for cultural heritage to specific communities that generated or cared for it. The experience of the last 20 years has demonstrated that cultural heritage may be significant in different ways to a broader range of communities and interest groups that now include virtual global communities that did not exist in 1994. This situation is further complicated by the recognition that individuals can be simultaneously members of more than one community and by the imbalance of power among stakeholders, often determined by heritage legislation, decision-making mechanisms, and economic interests. Those with authority to establish or recognize the significance, value, authenticity, treatment and use of heritage resources have the responsibility to involve all stakeholders in these processes, not forgetting those communities with little or no voice. Heritage professionals should engage in community matters that may affect heritage.

Further work is needed on methodologies to identify the rights, responsibilities, representatives, and levels of involvement of communities.

4 Conflicting claims and interpretations

The Nara Document calls for respect of cultural diversity in cases where cultural values appear to be in conflict. In the last 20 years it has become evident that competing values and meanings of heritage may lead to seemingly irreconcilable conflicts. To address such situations, credible and transparent processes are required to mediate heritage disputes.These processes would require that communities in conflict agree to participate in the conservation of the heritage, even when a shared understanding of its significance is unattainable.

Further work is needed on consensus-building methods to heritage practice.

5 Role of cultural heritage in sustainable development

The Nara Document does not specifically address issues of culture and development. Over the last 20 years, however, the need for considering cultural heritage in sustainable development and poverty reduction strategies has gained broad acceptance. The use of cultural heritage in development strategies must take into account cultural values, processes, community concerns, and administrative practices while ensuring equitable participation in socio-economic benefits. The tradeoffs between conservation of cultural heritage and economic development must be seen as part of the notion of sustainability.

Further work is required to explore the role that cultural heritage can play in sustainable development, and to identify methods of assessing trade-offs and building synergies so that cultural values and community concerns are integrated in development processes.

For the purpose of this document, the following interpretations of key words were used:

Authenticity: A culturally contingent quality associated with a heritage place, practice, or object that conveys cultural value; is recognized as a meaningful expression of an evolving cultural tradition; and/or evokes among individuals the social and emotional resonance of group identity.

Conservation: All actions designed to understand a heritage property or element, know, reflect upon and communicate its history and meaning, facilitate its safeguard, and manage change in ways that will best sustain its heritage values for present and future generations.

Community: Any group sharing cultural or social characteristics, interests, and perceived continuity through time, and which distinguishes itself in some respect from other groups. Some of the characteristics, interests, needs and perceptions that define the distinctiveness of a community are directly linked to heritage.

Cultural values: The meanings, functions, or benefits ascribed by various communities to something they designate as heritage, and which create the cultural significance of a place or object.

Information sources: all physical, written, oral, and figurative sources that underlie the understanding and appreciation of the nature, specificities, meaning, and transmission of cultural heritage and the collective memory it embodies.

Stakeholder: A person, group or organization who has a particular interest in the heritage on the basis of special associations, meanings, and/or legal and economic interests, and who can affect, or be affected, by decisions regarding the heritage.

Nara+20 was drafted in English and adopted by the participants at the Meeting on the 20th Anniversary of the Nara Document on Authenticity, held at Nara, Japan, from 22-24 October 2014, at the invitation of the Agency for Cultural Affairs (Government of Japan), Nara Prefecture and Nara City.