@article{3888,
  author = {Kim Kun},
  title = {Coexistence with Gap of Korean Shamanism and Intangible Cultural Property Policy},
  abstract = {This paper was asked to compare the shamanic field as part of a project called “Comparative Study of Intangible Heritage and Folklore”. However, the hierarchy of comparison between intangible heritage and folklore is not right. Therefore, the subject will be changed to allow discussion. In other words, it is to confirm the sense of distance or gap between “Shamanism” as the subject of research and cultural property policy. And this confirmation soon becomes a reference material for policy directions related to shamanism-related intangible cultural properties.In this paper, I first presented ‘Overview of the discussion on the gap between folklore and intangible cultural properties’. Previous studies that looked at the relationship between folklore and intangible heritage were reviewed. Through this, I understood a number of common criticisms related to the designation and transmission of national intangible cultural properties in the shamanic field mentioned in the discussion. Based on this, in \textlessDesignation and Background of Shamanic Cultural Property\textgreater, the background of designation of the designated shamanic field was investigated along with the relationship between the situation at the time, participating researchers, and policies. The gap between research and policy on shamanism reveals the difference between research and policy showing different uses for the same object of shamanism. Most of all, the research targets the whole shamanism, but the key difference is that the policy selects, evaluates, and manages some of them. And I checked the policy and the gaps with the researchers at that stage.},
  year = {2020},
  journal = {Korean Journal of Intangible Heritage},
  volume = {9},
  pages = {5-34},
  issn = {2508-5905},
  doi = {10.22956/nihc.2020..9.001},
}