檢視現行古蹟審議法制的相關規定，即可看出立法者所採取的專家參與模式，然而現行專家參與的審議制度卻並非沒有制度上的缺失。除了制度漏洞有待填補外，在這個多元化的社會中，學者專家與大眾的價值觀間的落差，也可能導致在文化資產保存上產生爭議。因此透過專家參與的審議模式，是否即是最適合古蹟保存事務的決策過程模式，似乎也並非全然無疑。所以如何透過制度的改進，以溝通與調和不同的價值，便成為了推動古蹟保存的重要課題。本文即試圖以法律分析的方法，從基礎的規範理論出發，檢視古蹟審議委員會在相關程序中的角色，以進行對現行古蹟審議程序的檢討與建議。

When reviewing the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act, we can find the preference the legislators have had for experts and at the same time some weaknesses or defects of the committee system. Nevertheless, it may be that there is a difference in the values held by experts and the general public, resulting in potential controversies over cultural heritage. It has become doubtable whether the current act serves as the best procedural model for preserving cultural heritage based on experts’perspectives. Therefore, learning how to reform the review committee through negotiation and the recognition of value differences has become an important issue. In this report we attempt to analyze the aforementioned problems by using the jurisprudence method. In the conclusion, we offer some reviews and proposals for administrative system-level reforms regarding the current procedures used for heritage evaluation and assessment.