Problems and Strategies: Building a Future for Cultural Heritage Protection in Shaanxi, China

In China’s ancient history, 14 dynasties set their capitals in Shaanxi. The most glorious periods included the Zhou, the Qin, the Han and the Tang Dynasties. Owing to Shaanxi’s particular historical position, a large quantity of cultural heritage had been left underground and overground. Protecting well these cultural heritage is of great significance. By literature review, it is indicated that different types of research have been conducted from the perspectives of protection work (investigation report, annual report, material assembly), academic exploration (Shaanxi cultural heritage protection in earlier period, macro-research), monographic study (great site protection, revolutionary cultural heritage protection, field cultural heritage protection, cultural heritage protection and social economy, archaeological site and cultural heritage protection, legal system, cultural heritage crime, fight against cultural heritage crime, cultural heritage digitization) and case studies. However, these studies are inadequate in quantity, quality, depth, analysis and creativity. In particular, besides the natural deterioration, the cultural heritage is suffering from human damages during the economic activities, such as urbanization, commercialism, consumerism, tourism and cultural heritage crime. The existing protection management and utilization approach are no longer effective and influential enough, deserving improvements. This paper aims to investigate the problems in cultural heritage protection in Shaanxi, and then analyze their causes and finally put forward targeted strategies and suggestions. Field investigation, literature review and comparative data analysis methods have been adopted. It is found that the cultural protection problems in Shaanxi lie in natural damage, human destruction, constructive damage, protective damage and commercial damage, which are caused by incomplete and inadequate execution of protective policies and conservative measures, incompetence to carry out an overall and sustainable protection thoroughly, insufficient investment in cultural heritage protection, insufficient professional protection staff, underdeveloped infrastructural facilities, inadequate public supports, severe challenges in capacity building, imperfect legal system and conservative concepts. Correspondingly, the multi-approaches strategies concerning improvements in investment, archaeological excavation, security supervision, fight against tomb robbing and smuggling and public interest litigation system are put forward. And suggestions on enhancing value recognition, digitization, big data platform, talents and team building, revolutionary cultural heritage protection and collaboration are also discussed. It concludes that the new protective conception of “both object and humanity spirit take equal priority” should be implemented.