Safeguarding Indigenous Intangible Cultural Heritage: the Issue of Universality INTRODUCTION Indigenous intangible cultural heritage (ICH) and traditional knowledge (TK) are the source of many unique innovations, artistry and craftsmanship which offer much to the global community. Beyond aesthetic values, they present many opportunities for effective natural conservation. Yet Indigenous cultures sit uneasily within the World Heritage approach and there is no universally applicable model to successfully safeguard the diversity of Indigenous ICH. Intangible heritage is inherently prone to change, however is considered threatened when circumstances lead to erosion or drastic changes to cultural practices in ways that are unwanted and detrimental to an Indigenous group’s continued existence. The challenge remains to ensure rights are defended at the local level, and that needs and desires of Indigenous peoples are respected. This research seeks to shed some light on the issues that make it difficult to effectively safeguard Indigenous ICH and TK, as well as presents some pathways that can lead to better protection.
Aboriginal rock painting at Carnarvon in Australia, this practice continues today but is threatened by listing and protection of existing sites
I N T E R N AT I O N A L F R A M E W O R K S F O R S A F E G U A R D I N G I C H A N D T K Since the World Heritage convention in 1972, further agreements and declarations have presented a framework for the safeguarding and support Indigenous rights, intangible heritage and traditional knowledge. This includes the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UNESCO’s Convention on the Safeguarding of Intangible Heritage, the Nara Document on Authenticity and the ILO convention 169. Enacted at the international level, these documents are meant to hold national bodies accountable and encourage safeguarding of Indigenous ICH, yet establish no formalized approach to be followed. Due to this, there is great variation in how nation-states enact safeguarding measures within their borders according to their own policies and legislations. These documents also highlight the importance of Indigenous involvement in decision making, but in practice there are varying levels of engagement from Indigenous peoples based on local contexts and constraints.
I N D I G E N O U S I C H A N D C O N S E R VAT I O N In UNESCO’s World Heritage convention, both cultural and natural heritage are included. Yet the definition of what may hold “outstanding universal value” is limited to tangible expressions such as sites, monuments, or specific features of a landscape. Lacking is intangible cultural heritage (ICH), cultural practices and values which shape cultural and natural heritage sites. This monumental and aesthetic focus of the heritage discourse is problematic in regards to Indigenous cultural heritage. The intangible dimensions of Indigenous CH, including language, music, traditional food systems, handcrafts and spirituality reflect the interconnectedness of these cultures with their natural environments. The traditional knowledge (TK) of Indigenous peoples play an important role for the conservation of natural landscapes and protection of biodiversity, yet is not always attributed the same weight as western scientific knowledge and conservation practices. With industrialized resource extraction, infrastructure developments and the displacement of Indigenous peoples, their capacity to protect the environment is reduced, which has noticeable repercussions for the global climate. Today there are documents which can serve the purpose of protecting Indigenous ICH and TK’s by highlighting their role for natural conservation. Examples of this include the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. These emphasize the importance of Indigenous voices for the perpetuation of biological knowledge, which is an asset to the whole of humanity. Through these, the participation of Indigenous communities in decision making is promoted, as is the continuation of traditional and customary practices surrounding TK.
Inuit shaman Aua beside KTZ’s sweater design
C A S E S T U D Y – I N U I T I N TA N G I B L E H E R I TA G E Inuit ICH faces many risks. Climate change threatens the stability of arctic ecosystems making challenging communities ability to engage in traditional hunting, fishing and related craft skills while also changing the landscape which has fostered unique traditional knowledge. A history of assimilative colonial practices has contributed to the erosion of social structures, traditional lifestyles and language. More recently, the universality of Inuit cultural heritage has been challenged by negative attention on practices such as seal hunting, creating stigma and tension in the global arena. Simultaneously, Inuit traditional knowledge has been appropriated by western markets, such as the kamik boot lending its name to a trademarked shoe company and the kayak being commercialized for leisure around the world. However, Inuit communities have proved to be resilient and have actively sought to safeguard their intangible cultural heritage. With support from national agencies and extensive community engagement, the Pauktuutit Inuit Women’s Association of Canada have developed strategies to protect Inuit intellectual property rights and TK using legal structures. The Amauti Project, focused on this traditional women’s garment, demonstrated how TK and skills could be sustained while also being protected from negative forces such as commercialization and appropriation. The approach taken has fostered local economic development and offered opportunities for indigenous women, while bringing the amauti to a global audience.
The harvest of ayahuasca vine for medicinal and spiritual use is threatened as popularity with western tourists drives overharvesting
I N T E L L E C T U A L P R O P E R T Y V S C U LT U R A L P R O P E R T Y A common threat to ICH is that of misappropriation aka cultural appropriation. This entails the use of intangible cultural property in a way that is damaging to the originators or done without consent. One tool available to Indigenous people for protecting ICH and TK is legal protection using intellectual property rights (IPR). These include copyrights, patents and trademarks, each with benefits and disadvantages. Applying IPR is not always straightforward as they are typically attributed to individuals or corporate entities, whereas Indigenous ICH and TK are held collectively by a community. Western or modern conceptions of property and individual ownership may clash with Indigenous customs and traditions. In some cases, trademarks have been used collectively by Indigenous groups to establish a standard of quality for their cultural products. Copyrights are also commonly used yet only protect a specific expression of ICH rather than the idea behind it or practice through which it is produced. Problematically, IPR may also only be enforceable at a national level, and the onus of responsibility for enforcing IPR lies with the holder. This means holders must monitor for potential misuse themselves, which may be difficult for Indigenous groups depending on their access to the global market. Yet some bodies, such as the World Intellectual Property Organization, have established specific guidelines for handling IPR for TK which can support Indigenous people in maintaining control over the distribution of their ICH.
There are still many aspects of Inuit intangible cultural heritage and traditional knowledge that do not have such formal protections and still face external threats. For example, in 2015 fashion label KTZ released a line “inspired” by Inuit designs, including a sweater which blatantly copied the pattern of a shaman’s garment with no attributions or recognition of the source. Living relatives decried this case of misappropriation as disrespecting the sacred nature of the original garment. The company’s apology later credited the affected community but offered no reparations. KTZ noted their support for multiculturalism and diversity, a universalist statement which demonstrates a lack of understanding of the importance of the intangible values associated to indigenous traditions, in this case including spiritual and social dimensions represented by the garment. Safeguarding Indigenous ICH is a complex issue with no clear solution due to the great variety of ICH and contexts in which it is enacted. Broadly speaking, the creation and maintenance of conditions in which Indigenous people can continue to engage with their culture on their own terms clashes with the concept of a shared universal heritage in which anyone can partake. It is a matter of power and control, and Indigenous sovereignty is continuously threatened by the influence of outside forces such as political conflict, commercialization, tourism, biopiracy and resource extraction.
Akagawa, Natsuko, and Laurajane Smith. Intangible Heritage: the Practices and Politics of Safeguarding. Routledge, 2018. Finger, J. Micheal, and Philip Schuler. Poor People's Knowledge: Promoting Intellectual Property in Developing Countries. Copublication of the World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2004. “KTZ Responds to Outcry over Inuit Design Rip-Off.” Dazed, 30 Nov. 2015, www.dazeddigital.com/fashion/article/28635/1/ktz-responds-to-outcry-over-inuit-design-rip-off. Pauktuutit Inuit Women’s Association, and Phillip Bird. Intellectual Property Rights and the Inuit Amauti. Publication prepared for The World Summit on Sustainable Development, 2002 Oviedo, Gonzalo, and Tatjana Puschkarsky. “World Heritage and Rights-Based Approaches to Nature Conservation.” International Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 18, no. 3, 2012, pp. 285–296..
This poster’s author and friend, both Métis women, scraping a deer hide in preparation for brain-tanning
Geneviève Manahan MA Cultural Heritage and Sustainability June 2020