Ecomuseum evaluation : experiences in Guizhou and Guangxi, China

In general, ecomuseums are new forms of open-air museum for the in-situ interpretation and conservation of heritage as well as for aiding community development. Chinese ecomuseums have been established in some villages for the conservation of cultural heritage values of its ethnic minorities. This research summarises international benchmarks for ecomuseum evaluation and uses them to examine three ecomuseums in Guizhou and three in Guangxi. The goal is to assess how much each meets international benchmarks. In the research it was discovered that in none of these six cases were originated or were led by local communities, negating the appropriateness of benchmarking them against international benchmarks. With interviews and observations undertaken in each six cases, the problems of each site were identified. The essence of Chinese ecomuseum is then considered at the end of this paper-- a trial approach for developing cultural tourism, carried out by low-level governments, for the purpose of poverty alleviation in minority villages.

Narrating heritage's living stories : a comparative study of China's Suojia ecomuseum and Australia's Melbourne living museum of the West

The Ecomusée, as emerged in France in the 1970s, is a form of open-air museum that aims to maintain collections in their original environments with local communities serving as curators and managing their own heritage. This approach and philosophy implies and is dependent upon democratic principles in the conservation and interpretation processes. Since the 1990s, China has adopted the ecomusée concept for the conservation of selected ethnic villages to relieve tensions between poverty and heritage conservation. However, does this concept really work in China? To answer this question, the Suojia Ecomuseum, the first such initiative - has been selected as a case study and assessed using the mixed methodologies of on-site observation, documentation and semistructured interviews. This process has identified several issues and problems associated with this ecomuseum. It demonstrates that Suojia Ecomuseum has not achieved international benchmarks, neither philosophical nor practical expectations have been met. This conclusion challenges the internationally acknowledged notion that all ecomuseums develop and are operated using a bottom-up approach, that they were all community-based and democratic. These discrepancies lead to other questions about the differences between ecomuseums in China and elsewhere. In order to map and compare the differences between ecomuseums in China and in Western democracies, a detailed survey was undertaken using Melbourne’s Living Museum of the West, Australia. Applying the same methodologies as in China, a comparable examination was undertaken as to its background, objectives, management structures, programs and activities, and project outcomes as well as problems. The differences between Suojia Ecomuseum and Melbourne’s Living Museum are then explained and shown. They demonstrate quite diverse organisations with different objectives and management structures relating to different cultural and natural resources. However, the unexpected finding was that the futures of both ecomuseums relied on the financial support and passion of younger generations and hence were vulnerable.

Examining the Suojia Ecomuseum and the Nandan Ecomuseum in China

China hosts some 55 ethnic minority groups, which together account for 8.41% of the Chinese population. These populations reside in predominantly Ethnic Minority Villages presenting great value and culture of their heritage, with living landscape, festivals, architecture and costumes, but the actual living conditions are very poor. Since the 1990s, China has adopted French concept 'ecomuseum', for the conservation of some ethnic villages to relieve the conflict between poverty and heritage conservation. ln short, this concept involves the creation of open-air museums keeping buildings and people in their original sites, with local communities serving as curators managing their own sites, which necessitates democracy in the conservation and interpretation processes. The concept seems ideal for the Chinese government, with its bilateral objectives of heritage conservation and poverty alleviation, without necessitating the relocation of any or buildings. However, does this concept really work? It remains unanswered and the subject of little academic research. In order to examine how successfully these ecomuseums are being managed, two projects has been selected for case studies - the Suojia Ecomuseum and the Nandan Ecomuseum. In-depth field studies have been conducted at the two ecomuseums, involving the methodologies of site observation, documentation and semi-structured interviews. This paper reviews the ecomuseum development in China, and then provides detailed critiques and overviews of the Suojia Ecomuseum and the Nandan Ecomuseum in terms of their backgrounds, management structures, programs and activities as well as pertinent issues. Based upon these descriptions, it is·identified that the two cases have different management structures and focuses: 1) the Suojia Ecomuseum has been under the management of government authorities whilst the Nandan Ecomuseum has been operated by local villagers, and 2) the focus of the Suojia Ecomuseum has been improving living conditions for the residents, while in Nandan Ecomuseum cultural inheritance has been operated as a core program. However, there is a lack of financial support in both cases. All these issues lead to a discussion that the Nandan Ecomuseum has made greater achievement in terms of being community-based. The conclusions are hence drawn as to the suggestions to Chinese ecomuseums--the sustainability and success requires local villagers as curators as well as external financial assistance. In addition, another and more urgent need is to pass the ethnic cultures and their values to the next generation.

Villages that never were : the museum village as a heritage genre

Villages of relocated buildings now constitute a phenomenon of the world's repertoire of heritage. They go by a multitude of names depending on particular inflection: open air museum, folk museum, living history museum, heritage village, museum village and so forth. 1 This paper reviews the context of the form of the genre's manifestation in Australia, where it is often known as the `pioneer village'. They are the fruit of a populist vision of national history which celebrates white rural settlement as its central theme. In practice, the villages manifest a deep commitment to collecting and saving old buildings as the meaningful construction of a favourite historical identity. But the generation that established Australia's villages has been overtaken. Today, the intersection of museum villages with the managerialist pressures of local economy enhancement and modern professional standards of heritage management challenge most villages' survival.

The model of Chinese ecomuseums -- benchmarking, evaluation and a comparison with Australian open-air museums

This thesis is a comparative study of Chinese and Australian ecomuseums in terms of their governance & strategies, local participation & empowerment, and heritage interpretation & conservation. It concluded their difference and critical problems. In the end, a model is built up towards a better management of Chinese ecomuseum.