本課程分析博物館和文化遺產概念和理論的歷史變革過程；以及當代博物館和文化遺產的多元化定義。透過個案研究及實地考察，本課程旨在讓學生了解博物館及文化遺產保育工作的實際情況以及分析它們在現代社會所發揮的角色。通過分析各項國際文化遺產國際公約及守則的歷史發展，勾勒出國際及地區性合作對於達致可持續文化遺產保育和管理的重要性。

第1講 授課老師及課程大綱簡介 02/09

第2講 博物館和文化遺產概念的源起及發展  09/09

第3講 博物館策展和公眾教育  16/09

第4講 香港文化遺產保護的歷史演變  23/09 （颱風假順延下周）

第5講 香港文化遺產保護的歷史演變   30/09

07/10 中秋節翌日假期

11/10及12/10 澳門導修考察（詳見導修部分）

第6講    嘉賓分享：Dr. Reynold Kai Won TSANG曾啓泓 （CityU）14/10  

第7講  聯合國世界文化遺產的運作及管理機制   21/10

國際衝突下的世界遺產； 博物館與原住民歷史演繹  

第8講 實地考察  28/10  前流浮山警署 15：30-16：30 （14：30大學站外鄭裕彤樓門口集合上車，包車往返中大）需在此報名留位：10月28日星期二 前流浮山警署考察

第9講 文化遺產的政治、文化和社會角色：文化遺產與國際政治搏奕/衝突  04/11

第10講 實地考察  11/11 香港抗戰與海防博物館 15：30-17：00 （自行前往筲箕灣）

第11講 文化遺產的多元性：從非物質文化遺產到水下文化遺產  18/11

第12講 博物館及文化遺產與不同社群公眾的關係和連結   25/11

第13講 國際及地區性合作在文化遺產保育上所面對挑戰

（課程大綱會定期更新）

1. 期終論文 50%

      學生需自訂題目，字數要求為5000字(參考資料及詮釋不計算在內)，可接受加減10%，即字數範圍為4500字至5500字之間。

2. 導修表現及導修小組習作 40%

      導修詳情會在Add-drop期結束後落實並公佈。

3. 課堂表現及參與 10%

# 導修安排 = 1日澳門實地考察 + 2次導修課（其中一次小組匯報），及期末小組導修報告1份 #或製作5分鐘vlog

10月11日、12日全班分兩批至澳門歷史城區導修考察1日，由學系提供港珠澳大橋穿梭巴士（金巴）港澳往返車資65×2=130港幣。並另有兩次導修小組匯報討論課，須就所給研究主題匯報考察發現。導修ppt匯報之時長約為15-20分鐘。

同學自行組隊後，期末繳交2000-2500字(字數不含注釋)左右小組考察報告一份，或製作5分鐘左右vlog。導修作業提交日期為12月3日（星期三）18：00。匯報占20%；報告或Vlog占20%。

請各位同學在下列組別選項中選擇其一，並同時確認澳門考察時間（10月11日或12日）及導修時段：

* 選項一：周一1030-1215 YIA411（10月27日、11月10日）

1A_11號澳門：澳門世界文化遺產的保育利用與澳門歷史論述的演變

1C_12號澳門：澳門博企與澳門文化旅遊可持續發展的關係

10月27日：1A匯報  | 11月10日：1C匯報

* 選項二：周二1130-1315  SC科學館139（10月28日、11月11日）

2A_11號澳門：澳門博企與澳門文化旅遊可持續發展的關係

10月28日：2A匯報 | 11月11日：討論澳門世界文化遺產的保育利用議題及評論本課程導修作業情況

* 選項三：周五1130-1315 LSK204（10月24日、11月7日）

3A_11號澳門：澳門博企與澳門文化旅遊可持續發展的關係；

3B_12號澳門：澳門世界文化遺產的保育利用與澳門歷史論述的演變

3C_12號澳門：澳門世界文化遺產的保育利用與澳門歷史論述的演變

3D_11號澳門：澳門博企與澳門文化旅遊可持續發展的關係

10月24日：3A及3B匯報 |  11月7日：3C及3D匯報

*同學務必出席兩次導修，其中匯報這一次需與同組同學一起參與原本時段，另一次可根據自身時間參與其他時段的導修。

下列書目屬於基礎參考書目，每節講題的參考書目會適時公佈，請經常留意Blackboard系統的更新和公佈。

Smith, L. (2006a). Authorised heritage. In L. Smith (Ed.), Uses of heritage (pp. 84-191). Oxon: Routledge.

Smith, L. (2006b). Response to authorised heritage. In L. Smith (Ed.), Uses of heritage (pp. 192-297). Oxon: Routledge.

Smith, L. (2006c). Use of heritage (1. publ. ed.). London u.a.: Routledge. 中文版：劳拉简·史密斯《遗产利用》，北京：科学出版社，2020年。

Su, X. (2014). Urban entrepreneurialism and the commodification of heritage in China. Urban Studies, 52.

Harrison, R. (2008). The politics of the past: Conflict in the use of heritage in the modern world. In G. J. Fairclough (Ed.), The heritage reader (pp. 177-190). London: London: Routledge.

Harrison, R. (2012). Heritage: Critical approaches. London: Routledge.

Babou, I. (2019). Natural heritage, participatory democracy, and UNESCO: A structure of disillusionment?

Chiang, M., Huang, L., Huang, S., & Hsiao, H. M. (2017). Policy formation and civil society engagement in heritage-making in Taiwan: A historical examination. In H. M. Hsiao, Y. Hui & P. Payam (Eds.), Citizens, civil society, and heritage-making in Asia (pp. 232-250). SG: ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.

Chih-yu Shih. (2020). From “Asia’s east” to “East Asia”: Aborted decolonisation of Taiwan in the cold-war discourse. Asian Perspective, 44(2), 279-302.

Hall, S. (1999). Whose heritage? Un-settling ‘the heritage’, re-imagining the post-nation. Third Text, 13(49), 3.

Hsiao, H. M., Hui, Y., & Peycam, P. (2017). Citizens, civil society, and heritage-making in Asia. SG: ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.

Lin, F. C. (2015). Heteroglossia Asia: The transformation of urban Taiwan. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.

Lu, T. L. -. (2009). Heritage conservation in postcolonial Hong Kong. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(2), 258-272.

Matsuda, A., & Mengoni, E. (2016). Introduction: Reconsidering cultural heritage in East Asia. In A. Matsuda, & E. Mengoni (Eds.), Reconsidering cultural heritage in East Asia (pp. 31-46). London: Ubiquity Press.

Tien, C. (2010). The formation and impact of museum clusters: Two case studies in Taiwan. Museum Management and Curatorship, 25(1), 69-85.

Trifu, I. (2018). Dealing with a difficult past: Japan, South Korea, and the UNESCO world heritage list. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Walsh, K. (1992). The representation of the past: Museums and heritage in the post-modern world (1st ed.). GB: Routledge Ltd.

Waterton, E., & Watson, S. (2010). Heritage and community engagement: Collaboration or contestation? London: Routledge.

Zhu, Y. (2020). In Maags C. (Ed.), Heritage politics in China: The power of the past. London; New York, New York: Routledge.

Attention is drawn to University policy and regulations on honesty in academic work, and to the disciplinary guidelines and procedures applicable to breaches of such policy and regulations. Details may be found at here.

With each assignment, students will be required to submit a signed declaration that they are aware of these policies, regulations, guidelines and procedures.

• In the case of group projects, all members of the group should be asked to sign the declaration, each of whom is responsible and liable to disciplinary actions, irrespective of whether he/she has signed the declaration and whether he/she has contributed, directly or indirectly, to the problematic
• For assignments in the form of a computer-generated document that is principally text-based and submitted via VeriGuide, the statement, in the form of a receipt, will be issued by the system upon students’ uploading of the soft copy of the assignment. 
• Students are fully aware that their work may be investigated by AI content detection software to determine originality.
• Students are fully aware of the AI approach(es) adopted in the course. In the case where some AI tools are allowed, students have made proper acknowledgment and citations as instructed by the course teacher.

Assignments without the properly signed declaration will not be graded by teachers.

Only the final version of the assignment should be submitted via VeriGuide.

The submission of a piece of work, or a part of a piece of work, for more than one purpose (e.g. to satisfy the requirements in two different courses) without declaration to this effect shall be regarded as having committed undeclared multiple submissions. It is common and acceptable to reuse a turn of phrase or a sentence or two from one’s own work; but wholesale reuse is problematic. In any case, agreement from the course teacher(s) concerned should be obtained prior to the submission of the piece of work.

The copyright of the teaching materials, including lecture notes, assignments and examination questions etc., produced by staff members/ teachers of The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) belongs to CUHK. Students may download the teaching materials produced by the staff members/ teachers from the Learning Management Systems, e.g. Blackboard adopted by CUHK for their own educational use, but shall not distribute/ share/ copy the materials to a third-party without seeking prior permission from the staff members/ teachers concerned.