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

第2講 博物館和文化遺產概念的源起及發展

第3講 博物館策展和公眾教育

第4講 香港文化遺產保護的歷史演變

第5講 聯合國世界文化遺產的運作及管理機制

第6講 國際衝突下的世界遺產

第7講 博物館與原住民歷史演繹

第8講 實地考察（保良局）

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

第10講 文化遺產的多元性：從非物質文化遺產到水下文化遺產

第11講 實地考察 (景賢里)

第12講 博物館及文化遺產與不同社群公眾的關係和連結

第13講 國際及地區性合作在文化遺產保育上所面對挑戰

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%

導修由田野考察與展示報告兩部分組成。

田野考察：10月19日/10月20日，兩日同學分為兩組，分別在澳門歷史城區展開考察，田野考察為導修必須之內容，全體同學必須出席。

（往返澳門交通費用提供報銷。按規定，報銷導修當日往返港澳之跨境巴士費用（港幣130元）。若搭船，則至多報銷港幣130元；若僅提供一程有效車票，或只一程車票符合報銷規定，則予以一程報銷，即港幣65元。報銷費用屆時統一撥予各組組長，由組長代為分配。

未交車票，或車票非始發於香港、澳門者，且往返時間與本人導修時間不符者，按規定不予報銷！未出席田野者，不予報銷！）

展示報告：各同學分組，對田野考察中所發現之問題，經小組討論後，形成一份報告，並在導修課程中公開展示匯報，時間為11月4日上午及下午；11月11日上午與11月12日上午。

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.

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 https://www.cuhk.edu.hk/policy/academichonesty/.

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 contents.
• 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.

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.