Tulisan ini membahas sejumlah kasus pengelolaan sumber daya budaya di Kalimantan yang tidak sesuai dengan Undang-Undang Cagar Budaya dan menyusun gagasan tentang sebuah model pelestarian cagar budaya berbasis pemanfaatan. Upaya tersebut dilakukan dengan mengidentifkasi dan mengevaluasi implemantasi peraturan dan kegiatan pelestarian yang telah dilakukan oleh para pemangku kepentingan kebudayaan di Kalimantan. Hasil evaluasi menunjukkan adanya standar ganda penerapan peraturan pelestarian cagar budaya di Kalimantan. Selain itu, persepsi subyektif-afektif dan kepentingan stakholders ternyata juga mempengaruhi tujuan dan aktivitas pengelolaan cagar budaya. Dengan demikian, model pelestarian yang diajukan adalah menginduksikan perspektif pemanfaatan cagar budaya dalam konteks sistem, yang melibatkan masyarakat secara aktif dalam aktivitas pelestariannya, serta memposisikan instansi arkeologi sebagai fasilitator, mediator, dan pengawas pelestarian cagar budaya. Kata kunci: cagar budaya, pelestarian, undang-undang, evaluasi, sumber daya budaya, model pengelolaan, konteks sistem Abstract. CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT MODEL: (CASE STUDY IN KALIMANTAN). This paper discusses a number of cases of cultural resources management in Kalimantan, which did not comply with the Heritage Act and formulate ideas of a benefitting-based model of cultural heritage preservation. Such efforts were conducted by identifying and evaluating implemented rules and conservation activities, which have been undertaken by the stakeholders of culture in Kalimantan. The evaluation shows that a double-standard regulation implementation of cultural heritage conservation in Kalimantan have had occurred. Furthermore, apparently, subjective-affective perceptions and interests of stakholders have had also affected the objectives and activities of cultural heritage management. Thus, the proposed preservation model is built by inducing cultural heritage benefitting-perspective in the system-context, which actively involving communities in conservation activities, as well as positioning archaeological offices as facilitators, mediators, and cultural heritage preservation supervisors.