本文關(guān)鍵詞：非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)國(guó)際條約保護(hù)的沖突與協(xié)調(diào)　出處：《北京外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn) 國(guó)際條約 國(guó)際組織

【摘要】：隨著人們對(duì)非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)(以下作“非遺”或“非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)”)認(rèn)識(shí)的不斷加深,以聯(lián)合國(guó)教科文組織(“教科文組織”或"UNESCO")、世界知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)組織(“知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)組織”或"WIPO")為主的國(guó)際組織已經(jīng)通過(guò)簽訂條約、協(xié)定等國(guó)際法律文書的形式基本形成了公法和私法相結(jié)合的非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)的國(guó)際保護(hù)體系。 本文以理論研究和實(shí)證分析相結(jié)合,首先以非物質(zhì)國(guó)際條約保護(hù)為中心,整理主要國(guó)際機(jī)構(gòu),如UNESCO和世界貿(mào)易組織(“世貿(mào)組織”或“WTO”)等在不同領(lǐng)域?qū)Ψ俏镔|(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的保護(hù)做出的努力；而后,創(chuàng)新地將現(xiàn)行與非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)相關(guān)的國(guó)際條約進(jìn)行綜合橫向比較,找到非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)國(guó)際條約保護(hù)體系內(nèi)部可能存在的沖突和矛盾,力圖為沖突的協(xié)調(diào)提供思路；最后,將非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)國(guó)際條約保護(hù)制度與我國(guó)非遺保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀結(jié)合,通過(guò)分析為我國(guó)非遺保護(hù)制度提供有益思路。 雖然現(xiàn)行國(guó)際條約從不同角度出發(fā),對(duì)非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)進(jìn)行多種方式的保護(hù)和規(guī)制,然而鑒于非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)自身的特殊性,現(xiàn)行國(guó)際條約并不能給與每個(gè)國(guó)家、不同形式的非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)以全面的保護(hù)。同時(shí),現(xiàn)行WTO貿(mào)易制度并沒(méi)有針對(duì)非遺的文化商品和貿(mào)易作出相關(guān)具體規(guī)定,導(dǎo)致根據(jù)國(guó)際條約規(guī)定對(duì)于非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)的行為很可能違反WTO規(guī)則。因此,為了加強(qiáng)非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的保護(hù),國(guó)際立法層面需要作出相應(yīng)的調(diào)整。 對(duì)于尚在起步階段的非遺國(guó)內(nèi)法保護(hù)的深化和發(fā)展,借鑒現(xiàn)行國(guó)際法律文書十分必要。一方面,現(xiàn)行的國(guó)際法律文書經(jīng)過(guò)締約方長(zhǎng)期討論和實(shí)踐,已經(jīng)論證可行；另一方面,現(xiàn)行的國(guó)際法律文書由眾多締約國(guó)一同締結(jié),具有良好的國(guó)際合作基礎(chǔ)。目前,具有行政法性質(zhì)的非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)公法保護(hù)在實(shí)踐中經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)調(diào)節(jié)不力、效率低下等問(wèn)題。為了加強(qiáng)我國(guó)非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的保護(hù)工作,仍需立法工作者借鑒參考國(guó)際立法并結(jié)合我國(guó)實(shí)際,真正從法律上保障非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)。
[Abstract]:Along with the people of the intangible cultural heritage (hereinafter as "intangible cultural heritage" and "intangible heritage") deepen understanding, to UNESCO ("UNESCO" or "UNESCO"), the World Intellectual Property Organization ("intellectual property organization" or "WIPO") is the main international organizations have through treaties, agreements and other international legal instruments in the form of the basic form of the international protection system of public law and private law combination of intangible heritage.
This paper combines theoretical research and empirical analysis, first of all to protect the intangible international treaties as the center, finishing the main international institutions such as the UNESCO and the World Trade Organization ("WTO" or "WTO") to make the protection of the intangible cultural heritage in different fields will be innovative efforts; then, the current and non material heritage protection related international treaties for comprehensive comparison, find the conflicts and contradictions within the intangible heritage of international treaties may exist in the system, to provide ideas for conflict coordination; finally, combining status of intangible cultural heritage protection system of international treaty and intangible cultural heritage protection in our country, through the analysis to provide useful ideas for China's intangible cultural heritage the protection system.
Although the existing international treaties from different angles, a variety of ways for the protection and regulation of the intangible cultural heritage, but in view of the special nature of intangible heritage of the current international treaties and can not give each country, different forms of intangible heritage by comprehensive protection. At the same time, the existing WTO Trading system did not make specific provisions for non heritage cultural commodity and trade, according to the result of Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection Act provisions of international treaties is likely to violate WTO rules. Therefore, in order to strengthen the protection of intangible cultural heritage, the legislative level needs to make the corresponding adjustment.
For the intangible cultural heritage is still at an initial stage of development and deepening of domestic law protection, according to the existing international legal instruments is necessary. On the one hand, after the parties long-term discussion and practice in current international legal instruments, has proved feasible; on the other hand, the existing international legal instruments by many parties to conclude, with a good foundation of international cooperation. At present, the intangible cultural heritage protection law has the nature of administrative law often ineffective regulation in practice, problems such as low efficiency. In order to strengthen the protection of intangible cultural heritage in China, still need to reference the international legislation and legislative workers with the reality of our country, the real from the legal protection of intangible cultural heritage.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：北京外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D993.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王平;;非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)相關(guān)問(wèn)題研究[J];北京郵電大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年03期

2 黃玉燁;戈光應(yīng);;非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的法律保護(hù)模式[J];重慶工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年05期

3 劉金萍;賈鴻雁;;非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)與開(kāi)發(fā)研究綜述[J];東南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年S1期

4 郭玉軍;唐海清;;非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的國(guó)際人權(quán)保護(hù)研究——以《保護(hù)非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)公約》為視角[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2009年06期

5 齊愛(ài)民;;非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)系列研究(一) 非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的概念與構(gòu)成要件[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年04期

6 齊愛(ài)民;;非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)系列研究(二) 保護(hù)非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)的基本法律問(wèn)題[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年05期

7 唐海清;;論非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)跨國(guó)爭(zhēng)議的訴訟解決機(jī)制[J];法律適用;2012年05期

8 梅術(shù)文;;“非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)與知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)國(guó)際研討會(huì)”綜述[J];法商研究;2007年04期

9 謝菲;;國(guó)外非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)相關(guān)研究述評(píng)[J];貴州民族研究;2011年03期

10 唐海清;;略論非物質(zhì)文化遺產(chǎn)國(guó)際人權(quán)法保護(hù)中的權(quán)利沖突——以文化權(quán)利與其他基本人權(quán)的沖突為視角[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2013年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1409953