お知らせ News

【レポート】Project Practice in Mount Fuji

2014年8月1日 14時53分

Project Practice inMount Fuji


From 7 to 11 July, inFujinomiya City, Shizuoka, at the foot of Mount Fuji (or in fact already on theMount Fuji), the Global Negotiation Programme Project Practice “World Heritageand Local Identity” was held in collaboration with the Nature Conservation Programme’s “Nature Conservation Study Tour 1”, with a focus on Interpretationand Eco-tourism.


*******************************************************************

What I learned duringthis program; there are mainly three points. These are ecotourism,interpretation, and Mt. Fuji.

<Ecotourism>


Mr.Shintani, thelecturer in this course is an interpreter/eco-guide of Mt.Fuji and hasparticipated in ecotourism projects in the world. We learned interpretationthrough examples of his works.

Mr. Shintani saidthat ecotourism is a solution for cultural and environmental problems. Inecotourism, tourists can see or experience indigenous nature and or culture inlocal areas, where local people or community participate in the tour as guidesand performers. Therefore, ecotourism contributes to spread understanding ofnature and culture, and contribute to economic benefits needed for the localpeople and the conservation of nature. Moreover, local people can strengthentheir identity. The subjects of ecotourism are indigenous things in the localarea. Since these are always near to the local people, they may think thesethings are ordinary and don’t care very much. However, by being exposed infront of the viewpoints of visitors, they can realize the value of the natureand culture. They can understand the importance and rareness, and be proud of them.

Tourism isinteresting and exciting, but I have been worried about an aspect of tourismthat external producers occasionally form images of the area as resources forbusiness, and tourists see the place through the filter made by external people.I doubted whether they could really understand the nature and culture through suchtourism. Also, the filter puts burden on local people. Perhaps tourism throughthick filters as such cannot convey local people’ message or what they think asreally important. I consider that a proper ecotourism can solve the problemlike this. In ecotourism, the main producers are local people themselves, andit enables to shorten the distance between what tourists see and experience andwhat local people do so.

On the other hand,ecotourism should be executed cautiously. Ecotourism have great influence onlocal people and community. It can change the community and people. An ideal ofecotourism may be that all people of local area can receive the favors, beproud of their culture and nature, and participate in conservation. However, Ithink that in reality the benefits are not distributed to everyone equally. Forexample, there is a possibility that ecotourism makes economical differences betweenthose who are engaged in ecotourism and those who are engaged in agriculture,or between the local area where ecotourism is executed and other areas aroundit. Moreover it is also possible that ecotourism affects on the culture itself.For example, local people might decide that they make the content of theirperformances more dramatic to show to visitors, or an aspect of culture maychange unconsciously through the contact with outsiders. If there is suchphenomenon, local people who relate to traditional culture or the industry oftradition cultures are forced to change their lifestyles. Ecotourism focuses onproblems in the local area and attempts to solve them through their action, soit becomes a solution for them, indeed, but at the same time, we shouldremember that it can change the structure of local community and local people’slives and such change can cause new problems. We must consider deeply not onlygood influences but also bad ones when making a plan of ecotourism, and we mustmonitor the condition of the area during and after execution.





<interpretation>


Before this projectpractice, I didn’t understand the concept of interpretation very much, but Ifelt thatI could grasp the general outline through this practice. There are somedifferences between interpretation and a mere providing of information. Whatcounts is “message”, as I understood. Interpretation is an action that conveysa message behind culture and nature. This point is an important difference froma mere information providing. Then, it is expected that visitors receive themessage and deepen the understanding of nature and culture. Therefore,communication is important in interpretation. Interpreters extract conversationwith visitors by effectively throwing questions about nature or culture for themto think and react, or appealing to the visitors’ five senses. Through these methods,visitors can understand the ‘message’ and have deeper interests, which is notmomentary. At the same time, interpreters change their attitude and ways ofcommunication according to the visitors’ character and reaction. They alsolearn something from the visitors, and always try to brush up their way ofinterpretation based on the learning. Therefore, interpretation is mutualaction between interpreters and visitors.

After entering thisgraduate school, I learned that it is not sufficient that natural and culturalresources are protected to exist. What is important is how to show theresources to people. I think what I had learned about it since this April weremainly about arrangement, institution, zoning, restoration and so on, that is,the side of protection of resources. On the other hand, in this practice, Ilearned about the side of the receiver such as interpretation.

I thinkinterpretation realizes both the satisfaction of visitors and conservation ofresources, and it plays a great role in tourism. At the same time, I also thinkthat the way of interpretation can apply to other situations. For example, in schooleducation. Duringthis course, I felt that my feelings and senseswere similar to the ones during class on Pedagogy. ‘Message’ is important inschool education too. Teachers must establish the important ‘message’ (theme)and make a plan of the classes along the ‘message’. It is ideal that theystimulate their students’ curiously and make them have continuous interest. Theideal of interpretation is similar to that of school education. What is more,Mr. Shintani said that it is importance for an interpreter to think of the positioning(where to stand) and the way of speaking. These skills are also important in schooleducation. Therefore I think interpretation and education can create mutualbenefit by cooperating with each other.

Furthermore, I thinkwe can also apply interpretation on a more micro situation. During this course,for the exercise on interpretation, we respectively introduced our ownimportant things. Through this practice, I realized that the method ofinterpretation makes it easier to convey more effectively and smoothly what Iwant the audience to know. With interpretation, we can learn what a personthinks and what is important for him/her. In a mere self-introduction, interpretationis valid. It becomes a tool for mutual understanding among people.



<Mt. Fuji>

I hadnever been to Mount Fuji until this project practice. When I went to Fuji anditssurrounding, I actually understood the greatness of Mount. Fuji. First, Iwitnessed the real size of Mount Fuji. Actually Mount Fuji was very huge, butit was not just a huge mass. I felt certain solemn atmosphere about Mount Fuji.

When I climbed themountain, I realized very strongly the greatness of Mount Fuji. When we startedto climb, the weather was fine, but on the way to climb, it suddenly changed.When around having arrived at the Houei Crater, fine rain began to fall and thewind became stronger. Then, according to the judgment of Mr. Shintani, westarted to go down. During descent from the mountain, we were enveloped by fogand the temperature went down. When climbing, we could see the blue sky and itwas even hot. However, when going down, our fields of vision were obstructed byfog and I felt it was cold. I might understand the sense of people who are lostin mountains. The situation changed completely in 20 or 30 minutes. If it werenot for Mr. Shintani and other teachers, I would have felt extremely uneasy. Iwas astonished by the changeable weather and realized the severe part of natureeven though I only stayed on Mount Fuji for few hours. However, I think itbecame beneficial to experience even slightly the two sides of Mount Fuji.

On the day we climbedI became worried about the safety of mountain climbers. There is an expected increasein the number of climbers who have little experiences in climbing because of the inscriptionof Mount Fuji on the World Heritage List. I realized that even around the sixthstation, people could meet danger like bad weather, landslides, and fallingrocks. I fear that climbers are injured because of their shortage of knowledgeor carelessness. Mass media is advertising the climbing of Mount Fuji, but Ithink they should be prudent. Then, I thought that interpretation would beeffective to ensure climbers’ safety.

Last of all, I wantto mention another thing I was concerned about. During this course, I reallyfelt the impact of the inscription of Mount Fuji on the World Heritage List bysigns, flags or posters. What I was concerned about was a poster in Sengenshrine. It was hung on the “torii”. Torii is the gate of the shrine. It plays arole as a border between sacred place and worldly place. I think that the toriiis sacred itself. On the other hand, poster is a worldly matter. So I think thepresent situation of the main torii of the Sengen Shrine cannot embody themeaning which torii primarily has. I want the concerned actors of the site toconserve not only its tangible value but also the intangible value.


Reported by Kazusa Miki, Masters’ Programmestudent in World Heritage Studies


自然保護寄附講座公開講座のお知らせ

2014年7月29日 14時46分
学外イベント


2014年自然保護寄附講座公開講座のお知らせ

        
        

筑波大学大学院自然保護寄附講座では、
①自然保護法制度
②生態系の保全と復元
③自然保護教育と環境教育
④環境影響評価
という4つのテーマについて、公開講座を実施します。
各分野で目覚しい活躍をされている方々を講師としてお招きしています。
学生・社会人かかわらず、自然保護にご関心のあるすべてのみなさまのご参加をお待ちしています。

詳しくはこちらの資料をご覧下さい。→公開講座プリント.pdf
HPからのお申込はこちらから→公開講座申込フォーム

【レポート】景観・緑地保全と人と自然環境との関わり

2014年7月24日 11時10分

201472日から4日に「景観・緑地保全論」が行われた。初日・2日目は景観・緑地保全の概要と農林水産業の景観保全に関して講義があり、3日目に石岡市八郷地区における茅葺屋根の民家と、茅の供給源となっている高エネルギー加速器研究機構内の茅場を見学した。




 景観・緑地保全に関する概念や手法について、とくに景観については、その概念の幅の広さゆえの規制することのむずかしさを感じた。景観においては文化的景観など、文化財保護の視点からも重要な要素である。緑地も景観とは切り離して考えることはできない。そういった意味では景観・緑地というものを、文化財を取り巻く空間としてとらえることによって、“文化財保護”という視点からその保全に取り組んでいける可能性を感じた。

 現在、景観・緑地に関する法制度はいくつかある。法律で規制されることは景観・緑地保全において、開発を阻止することが可能となるなどある一定の効果があることは確かである。しかし、法に担保されて守られているだけの景観・緑地は本来の意味での景観・緑地保全とはいえないのかもしれない。私が授業を通して強く感じたのは、景観・緑地保全を考えるということは、人(社会)と自然環境の関係性を考えていくことなのだ、ということである。地域住民とその土地との結びつきが深ければ、それはそのまま景観・緑地が保全されているという状態なのではないだろうか。

 時代や生活様式の変容によって、人(社会)と自然環境との関係性は失われてきている。そのために現代社会は、景観・緑地保全のためのさまざまな制度を必要とするのであるが、それだけに頼って守っていくのではなく、今の時代に合った人(社会)と自然との関係性を築いていくことが重要であるし、それが成り立っている空間こそが本来の意味での理想的な景観・緑地保全のすがたであると感じる。

 

 授業で紹介された白川村の合掌造り集落において、合掌造りの家は文化財として維持保存が行われているものの、本来合掌造りの家と関連して成り立っていた林業や農業、日常生活やコミュニティのあり方というものはすでに変化してしまっており、その関係性は希薄化あるいは失われてしまっているということであった。映像でみたムカデやニュウ、ホエなどは人と自然との関わりが密接だったなかで自然に生まれたものであり、その知恵や生きる力のようなものは、現代に生きる私にとってとても尊いものである。

 私は工芸分野で学んだ経験をもつが、工芸分野においても伝統的な技や意匠は地域性や自然との関わりのなかから生まれ発展してきたものであった。そのようななかでこれまで伝統として先人たちに受け継がれてきた伝統的な技法や意匠などを、今という時代に生きている自分が表現する意味を考え表現することが常に求められた。工芸分野における制作・表現活動において、伝統をそのまま表現するのではなく、現代の視点で捉え直していく作業が必要であるということは、手法は違えどどの分野でも必要とされていることなのではないかと感じている。景観・緑地保全や文化財保護の分野においても、人間と自然という関係性を現代の視点で捉え直して、実際にどういうかたちをとっていくのか考えていくことが求められている。

 

 今回見学させていただいた八郷地区の茅葺き屋根の茅は、高エネルギー加速器研究機構の茅場があってこそ茅の供給ができているが、全国的にみれば茅場の減少や葺き替えの負担が茅葺き屋根の保存にとっての大きな問題点になっているということであった。昔は、葺き終わった茅を肥料に使ったり、茶畑に敷き詰められたりと屋根以外の様々な用途で使用されており、茅がどこにでも生えていて、葺き替えも地域全体で行うものであったため家主の負担もそれほどではなかったという。



 文化財としての“モノ”が残っているということは最優先に重要なことである。しかし、茅葺き屋根が抱えている課題にもいえるように、文化財を単体として捉え保存するだけでは、その保存がむずかしくなってしまう場合がある。とくに人の活動と自然環境の密接な関係性によって生み出されたようなものの場合には、その文化財を取り巻く様々な事象とうまく関連づけられれば、その関連のなかで保護も自然と成り立つのだろう。昔はそれが自然と成り立っていたのであろうが、今求められるのはそのような仕組みを新たに作りながら維持していくことである。人間の生活する空間と自然環境を切り離してそれぞれを維持保存していこうとするのではなく、両者の関係性(結びつき)を前提のものとしながら、とくに人の側から自然環境をどうとらえていくのかということが、景観・緑地保全の目指すところだと感じた。




福田藍

フィールド実習事前学習会&交流会が開催されました。

2014年7月4日 09時28分
学内イベント

6月26日(木)に、春日プラザ4F会議室でフィールド実習事前学習会が開催されました。
今年度の自然保護サーティフィケートプログラムで開催される実習は、
吉田教授、岡橋准教授による富士山での「自然遺産実習1」、ベトナム・ハロン湾で
行われる「自然遺産実習2」と、上條教授による「陸域フィールド実習」、
和田助教による「海域フィールド実習」が予定されています。
両フィールド実習の参加者、そして実習参加者だけではなく、今後フィールドでの研究や
調査を実施する学生の為の事前学習会となりました。



学習会では、「野外における危険な生物」と「自然観察会におけるリスクマネジメント」の2冊が
配布され、こちらのテキストを元に吉田教授からのご説明がありました。



その後、寄附講座技術職員である武さんによるご説明もあり、学生達は自然の中に潜む危険
について、そしてその危険を回避する為のリスクマネジメントについて学習しました。



陸域フィールド実習を担当する上條教授からは、実習で作製する標本を用いての説明や、
フィールド実習での装備について等、細かいご案内がありました。
学生達は興味津々で先生のお話を聞いていました。



最後に和田助教より、担当する「海域フィールド実習」についてのご説明がありました。
筑波大学下田臨海実験センターで行われる海域フィールド実習での注意点等、東日本大震災
が起こった時の実際の海の写真等も交え、海に潜む危険についてご説明して下さいました。



寄附講座を受講する学生の中には、フィールドでの活動を行ったことの無い学生もおり、
自然に対する深い知識を持ち、フィールドでの経験豊富な先生方の生のお話を聞くとても良い
機会となった様です。
実習事前学習会の後は、今後行われる集中講義(公開講座)について、また、インターンシップ
についての説明もあり、今後行われる自然保護寄附講座の様々な取り組みへの期待が
高まる時間となりました。


事前学習会終了後には、自然保護寄附講座受講生と教職員による交流会が開催されました。
自然保護寄附講座受講生が決定してから初の交流会となり、それぞれの目標や豊富を
語り合い、充実した時間を過ごしたようです。




※今回事前学習会で配布した「野外における危険な生物」と「自然観察会におけるリスクマネジメント」
  の2冊は、春日プラザ4Fプロジェクト室に保管されておりますので、
  閲覧希望の場合は事務室までお越し下さい。

【レポート】Disaster Risk Management for Cultural Heritage

2014年6月27日 15時28分

On 24and 25 May 2014, the intensive course entitled Environment and Sustainability(code shared with World Heritage and Sustainability) was held in the SeminarRoom, Kasuga Plaza, Tsukuba.

 

Disaster RiskManagement for Cultural Heritage

The course on disaster risk management for cultural heritage was very informative and dealt with an area in heritage and conservation that I was not very familiar with before. During the course I learnt the difference between numerous terms related to risk and disaster management such as risk, disasters, preparedness, resilience,reduction, management, and many more. It is possible that in the past I have used some of this terminology in the wrong context but after getting a logical understanding of what each of the terms mean, it is now clear how they all relate to one another.


Dr. Jigyasu began with an explanation of what heritage means and showed us various pictures of heritage sites all over the world. Some were natural and others were cultural. Among them were Danxia landform in China and Himeji castle in Japan. He sought to clarify that heritage is not just as a thing of the past but of the present too, since it is through these heritage sites and values that a story can be told about a certain place and a certain people at a certain time. Asterling example was that of the image on a number of manholes in Belgrade (1950/60’s).Though the manhole image was not representative of any place in Belgrade, it showed a number of iconic cities in the world at the time. The image on the manholes has since been converted to souvenirs and these are sold to tourists visiting Belgrade. Therefore heritage does not have to be something extravagant, little things too can shape the whole heritage narrative.


We further discussed about assigning value to heritage. This differs with culture, time and the people. Value is contextual and depending on the use, exchange, rarity,aesthetics and cultural symbolism, different people can and may assign different values to one heritage site. Values change over time and something which could be of value today because of its usage, may overtime see the use change,or cease. UNESCO uses the concept of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) to allow for nomination and listing of World Heritage Sites. OUV implies that a heritagesite has been valued and assessed by various impartial parties from all over the world and they all agree that there is something exceptional by world standards about the heritage site.

A Heritage site should not be viewed in isolation, but rather in its context. As one aims to protect heritage, they must also aim to protect the livelihoods of the community who are within or around the heritage site. People, the built formand the environment are three important components of heritage and must all betreated in an integrated manner.

We further discussed risk in relation to heritage management. Risk is defined as the probability of a negative occurrence in the future based on the present circumstances. Risk is calculated as a product of hazard and vulnerability. Hazardsare situations that pose a level of threat to life, property or the environment. Vulnerability in my thinking implies a point of weakness that makes us more susceptible to hazards. These weaknesses (vulnerabilities) are categorized into: physical (poor structure, construction or material); social(lack of a proper community response system); economic (unsustainablelivelihoods) and institutional (lack of a proper policy framework).

In order to understand the concept of risk, we engaged in exercises whereby everyone picked a case study in their own country and analyzed the values of each site.Thereafter, the hazards and vulnerabilities were analyzed and the value they were most likely going to affect. I picked the case of Lamu Old Town in Kenya which is a world heritage site enlisted in 2001. Some of the greatest values of this site is the old town itself and the rich Islamic culture of the people of Lamu. One of the social hazards facing the town is uncontrolled tourism which when multiplied by the vulnerability of weak policy and institutional frameworks is bound erode the core values of the town and its people. The values would be eroded through: The dilution of the conservative Islamic culture that forms part of the cultural heritage and alteration of the architectural character and urban morphology of the town to accommodate more tourists. This example and the examples from the other students helped me understand the concept of risk inrelation to hazards and vulnerabilities.

Risk will often times become a reality and when this happens we have a disaster. Risks and disasters relate in two ways. One is that risk can result into a disaster.Secondly, risk can also emerge from a disaster. This can therefore be an infinite process whereby risk leads to a disaster and then the disaster results into another risk that leads to a disaster etc. Therefore to curb this infinite process from occurring we have to manage risk. Risk management is a 3 level cyclical process from before the disaster happens, during the disaster and after the disaster has occurred. Before the disaster happens, three points are important: prevention, mitigation and adaptation. During the disaster,emergency preparedness, rescue and response are imperative. After the disaster,recovery, restoration and retrofitting, damage assessment, treatment and rehabilitation are carried out. Recovery is concerned with physical and economic aspects, whereas rehabilitation is concerned with people.

Risk management can also be viewed in three simple steps: one is to stop the hazards, two can be to create a buffer between the hazard and the heritage site at risk and lastly it is to strengthen what is at risk so that it can withstandand recover from any effect of the hazard. An example was given whereby, a roadpassing through an ecologically sensitive park with rich bio-diversity is posing a hazard through carbon emissions coming from the vehicles which affectthe plants and animals in the park. To deal with this situation there is theoption of closing the road so that no vehicles can pass through (hazardelimination), or planting trees along the road to create a barrier between itand the park (buffering) or both.

To further understand the concept of risk, we were tasked to take up a case of one disaster e.g fire, earthquake, typhoon, or tsunami and look at the interrelationship between the causes and effects of that hazard. Our group was tasked with expounding on fire disaster and we chose the case of Kyoto city. In our analysis of this case, it emerged that the great Kobe earthquake (cause)led to massive destruction and fire outbreaks especially in areas dominated by wooden architecture. Some of the fire outbreaks were experienced in Kyoto and the rich architectural heritage of this city was lost (effect).


Traditional knowledge plays a big role in disaster risk reduction and management. However, on many occasions traditional knowledge has been ignored and replaced with the so called modern technology. For example: we were shown a picture of traditional round-shaped huts which are able to withstand strong winds. Architects in the US are now researching on this issue and it has emerged that dome-shaped houses are able to withstand hurricanes much more than ordinary houses. Basically, acombination of traditional knowledge and modern technology provides the bestsolutions. Heritage sites also have been safe havens in the face of disasters.For example: temples were useful at the time of the 2011 great East Japan Earthquake since they are located in high areas where the resultant tsunami could not reach. They served as shelters for the displaced people.

These and many other lessons were drawn from the course and the most important thing in my view was being able to relate what was being taught with our areas of research and the situations in our home countries. I learnt that resilience does not mean going through disaster after disaster and just surviving it but it is being able to bounce back in an even better frame than before after a disaster strikes. I concluded therefore that my country Kenya, which experiences many disasters on a daily basis, from terror attacks, to political violence to firesto famine and floods is an example of ‘survival’ and not resilience as I had earlier thought. However, this is not the way it is supposed to be. Therefore,with this newly acquired knowledge I hope to contribute in the efforts towards making my country a resilient nation in the face of disasters and more so, to ensure that our heritage sites are also taken care of in such situations.

Reported by Melissa Wangui Wanjiru(Doctorate programme student in Policy and Planning Sciences)