The World Heritage Convention in the Arctic and Indigenous People: Time to Reform?

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 226-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Marsden

This article analyses the role of the World Heritage Convention in the Arctic, particularly the role of Indigenous people in environmental protection and governance of natural, mixed and transboundary properties. It outlines the Convention in an Arctic context, profiles Arctic properties on the World Heritage List and Tentative List, and considers Arctic properties that may appear on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It gives detailed consideration to examples of Arctic natural, mixed, and potentially transboundary, properties of greatest significance to Indigenous people with reference to their environmental protection and management. In doing so, it reviews and analyses recent high-level critiques of the application of the Convention in the Arctic. Conclusions follow, the most significant of which is that the Convention and its Operational Guidelines must be reformed to be consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.J. Mc Keever ◽  
G.M. Narbonne

In 2005, IUCN published a report entitled Geological World Heritage: A Global Framework (Dingwall et al., 2005). The aim of that report was to discuss and advise on the role of the World Heritage Convention in recognising and protecting geological and geomorphological heritage. The aim of the present report is to fully revise and update the 2005 report and to look at the potential impact of the new UNESCO Global Geopark designation on future inscriptions to the World Heritage List under criterion (viii). This aim has been achieved through a thorough review of the 2005 report, and in particular the thematic approach to geology that the report used. This has led to the proposal of a rationalised set of 11 themes to guide the application of criterion (viii). This report also examines the processes of comparative analysis and questions of site integrity in relation to properties listed for geological and geomorphological values.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-184
Author(s):  
HANS RENES

Continuing landscapes as World Heritage The World Heritage Convention was adopted by UNESCO in 1972, in a period of growing awareness of the international dimensions of environment and heritage. However, it was also a period in which European visions of heritage were still dominant, for example on themes such as authenticity and the distinction between nature and culture. The World Heritage List, resulting from the Convention, put the initiative for inscriptions by state parties, leading to a bias towards unproblematic and tourism-oriented objects. In all these aspects, almost half a century of discussions brought changing ideas. The European emphasis on material authenticity and the division between nature and culture were challenged by practices from Asia and Africa. The role of the nation state became less important by global exchanges of ideas and by local and regional initiatives. The protection of cultural landscapes, particularly that of ‘living’ or ‘continuing’ landscapes, was only possible by a movement from protection towards ‘management of change’. The problem of management of such landscapes is illustrated in five case studies of cultural landscapes that are, or prepare to be, World Heritage Sites: Dresden, the rice terraces of the Cordilleras, the Beemster polder, the Altes Land near Hamburg and the Dutch/Belgian Colonies of Benevolence. The conclusion is that change within World Heritage Sites is possible but needs to be done with caution and with a sense of quality, preferably by involving landscape architects. Rather than the authentic remains of an original situation, the argument should be based on ideas such as layeredness of landscapes and path dependency in developments.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josh B. Martin

Abstract Despite growing recognition of the global value of underwater cultural heritage (uch), along with intensified international efforts to ensure its protection, the possibility of its inscription on the World Heritage List has never been comprehensively examined. Arguing that the unesco 2001 Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage (uch Convention) is insufficient alone to protect globally outstanding wrecks, such as the Titanic and the Lusitania, this article examines in detail the many legal and practical challenges involved with listing such sites under the World Heritage Convention. By reviewing key international agreements such as the uch Convention, World Heritage Convention, Law of the Sea Convention and the International Titanic Agreement, it draws the conclusion that it is the improved offshore management of uch—through ‘cultural’ marine protected areas operating under the framework of the uch Convention—which would open the possibility of nomination to the World Heritage List.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-77

Since 1972, UNESCO has established a frame of protection for cultural and natural heritage (Convention concerning the protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage) and the “World Heritage List”, which it considers as having an outstanding universal value. In 1994, at the Nara Conference, the Document of Authenticity was adopted, stating that ”the protection and enhancement of cultural and heritage diversity in our world should be actively promoted as an essential aspect of human development”. Since 1997, States Parties have to provide regular reports on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and the conservation status of each site listed on the World Heritage List. So far, two periodic reports have been made (2000-2006 and 2008-2015), and the third was recently launched (2017-2022).


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Stefania Ferrucci

<p><b>State aspirations to have national properties recognised as belonging to the heritage of humanity with an international significance has increasingly empowered the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in regard to its influence upon international behaviour. In the early 1970s, UNESCO embarked on an ambitious mission to protect and preserve humanity’s most outstanding heritage to guarantee that it will be passed to future generations. It also aimed to recognise people’s interaction with nature and to ensure a balance between them. Towards this end, UNESCO launched a global World Heritage regime to accomplish its noble mandate. Over the past thirty-nine years this regime has become an international success as it has enabled the safeguarding of numerous tangible and intangible goods of exceptional value for the entirety of humanity. The key to its success has been a balanced combination of measures that highlight the regime’s direct and indirect forms of power. Yet, with a growing number of sites inscribed on the World Heritage List and with growing threats to them, the World Heritage system has found itself increasingly facing difficulties in maintaining its “moral power”. These challenges have been exacerbated by a lack of coercive force and sanctioning methods in realistic terms, as well as by rising flows of tourism and, at the same time, decreasing international assistance and funds. The ongoing success of the regime thus come to depend, more than ever, upon the shared involvement and commitment of the States Parties, the international community, and the civil society.</b></p> <p>This thesis proposes to examine the multiple ways in which the World Heritage regime has used its power mechanisms to achieve its current significant international position. It will begin with a definition of the UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention, an international treaty to preserve the world cultural and natural and intangible heritage. UNESCO’ s World Heritage regime is thus chiefly based on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention through the World Heritage Committee (WHC). A brief diachronic view of the Convention’s work and aims are therefore imperative for understanding the regime’s power mechanisms and its dynamics. Also provided will be definitions of cultural and natural heritage as well as cultural landscapes and the adopted criteria for the nomination of world heritage, which are all key aspects and assessment measures of UNESCO’ s Heritage regime. After a brief synopsis of the differences between this regime and conventional International Organisations (IOs), this research will shed light on the nature of its persuasive forms of power: scientific objectivity, blacklisting, mimicry, and competition - especially regarding the significance of both the States Parties and the regime’s reputation, as well as its legitimacy. It will discuss how vital these forms of power are to success in influencing states to ratify the World Heritage Convention, to ensure compliance, and persuade them to jointly achieve the proposed goals. It will be further shown that the regime’s legitimacy is based on the perception of its procedures and favourable outcomes by its Member States. In addition, this research will theorise on the constructivist IR approach by adapting it to the regime. How Member States follow constructed rules and adopt a ‘logic of appropriateness’ will also be explored. It will in addition involve examination of its political tools, the World Heritage List, the List of World Heritage in Danger and socio-cultural tools, since they represent the conduit for its power mechanisms, and argue the chances of success in each arena. Examples from the Cologne Cathedral in Germany and the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal illustrate how the regime’s tools can be used as a deterrent mechanism to ensure the integrity of World Heritage sites. Moreover, the dichotomy of heritage viewed through the lens of national and international interests will be addressed, as well as what this entails for the States Parties’ sovereignty. International interests may come to the forefront of heritage protection, creating a new form of sovereignty: ‘Disaggregated sovereignty’. The World Heritage regime’s various benefits will also be discussed, its impact on the state’s economies especially in regard to tourism, the granting of international assistance as well as funds, and its influence on the States Parties social life by igniting a sense of prestige and pride about their World Heritage properties and by sensitising entire nations regarding the necessity to jointly protect and conserve this collective treasure. Examples from Cambodia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo illustrate the effectiveness of international assistance provided by the regime, while the example of the Galapagos Islands’ underlines the need to develop sustainable tourism practices to prevent the deterioration of heritage sites. ...</p>


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (S260) ◽  
pp. 494-496
Author(s):  
Anna P. Sidorenko

AbstractProperties with a relationship to science are amongst the least represented on the UNESCO World Heritage List and the values of these properties, located in all the regions of the world, are not sufficiently recognised. The UNESCO and IAU encourage the States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to actively participate in the development and implementation of the Thematic Initiative “Astronomy and World Heritage” aiming to provide an opportunity to identify the properties connected with astronomy and for keeping their memory alive and preserving them from progressive deterioration, through the inscription of the most representative properties on the World Heritage List.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-176
Author(s):  
M. Cotte

The article examines the existing relationship between two important concepts, but which are different a priori. First is the heritage of astronomy, generally associated with modern European science and its development through the construction of aseries of famous observatories with large fixedinstruments, all along lgth - 20th centuries. Second is the successful implementation  of the World Heritage convention  from around 50 years, with its famous List of heritage sites, monuments, ancient cities and landscapes.The article shows the relatively limited number, but already notable, of places nowadays registered on the World Heritage List or even sometime places aiming to be nominated for next years. Additional questions raise, asked by a partnership between Astronomy and World Heritage List; e.g.: the existing astronomical heritage from ancient civilizaions or indigenous societies; astronomy as associated value of broader nominations including classical heritage as palaces, monuments, historical cities and etc. In conclusion, we shortly examine the perspectives of the joint field of Astronomy and World Heritage.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Stefania Ferrucci

<p><b>State aspirations to have national properties recognised as belonging to the heritage of humanity with an international significance has increasingly empowered the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in regard to its influence upon international behaviour. In the early 1970s, UNESCO embarked on an ambitious mission to protect and preserve humanity’s most outstanding heritage to guarantee that it will be passed to future generations. It also aimed to recognise people’s interaction with nature and to ensure a balance between them. Towards this end, UNESCO launched a global World Heritage regime to accomplish its noble mandate. Over the past thirty-nine years this regime has become an international success as it has enabled the safeguarding of numerous tangible and intangible goods of exceptional value for the entirety of humanity. The key to its success has been a balanced combination of measures that highlight the regime’s direct and indirect forms of power. Yet, with a growing number of sites inscribed on the World Heritage List and with growing threats to them, the World Heritage system has found itself increasingly facing difficulties in maintaining its “moral power”. These challenges have been exacerbated by a lack of coercive force and sanctioning methods in realistic terms, as well as by rising flows of tourism and, at the same time, decreasing international assistance and funds. The ongoing success of the regime thus come to depend, more than ever, upon the shared involvement and commitment of the States Parties, the international community, and the civil society.</b></p> <p>This thesis proposes to examine the multiple ways in which the World Heritage regime has used its power mechanisms to achieve its current significant international position. It will begin with a definition of the UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention, an international treaty to preserve the world cultural and natural and intangible heritage. UNESCO’ s World Heritage regime is thus chiefly based on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention through the World Heritage Committee (WHC). A brief diachronic view of the Convention’s work and aims are therefore imperative for understanding the regime’s power mechanisms and its dynamics. Also provided will be definitions of cultural and natural heritage as well as cultural landscapes and the adopted criteria for the nomination of world heritage, which are all key aspects and assessment measures of UNESCO’ s Heritage regime. After a brief synopsis of the differences between this regime and conventional International Organisations (IOs), this research will shed light on the nature of its persuasive forms of power: scientific objectivity, blacklisting, mimicry, and competition - especially regarding the significance of both the States Parties and the regime’s reputation, as well as its legitimacy. It will discuss how vital these forms of power are to success in influencing states to ratify the World Heritage Convention, to ensure compliance, and persuade them to jointly achieve the proposed goals. It will be further shown that the regime’s legitimacy is based on the perception of its procedures and favourable outcomes by its Member States. In addition, this research will theorise on the constructivist IR approach by adapting it to the regime. How Member States follow constructed rules and adopt a ‘logic of appropriateness’ will also be explored. It will in addition involve examination of its political tools, the World Heritage List, the List of World Heritage in Danger and socio-cultural tools, since they represent the conduit for its power mechanisms, and argue the chances of success in each arena. Examples from the Cologne Cathedral in Germany and the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal illustrate how the regime’s tools can be used as a deterrent mechanism to ensure the integrity of World Heritage sites. Moreover, the dichotomy of heritage viewed through the lens of national and international interests will be addressed, as well as what this entails for the States Parties’ sovereignty. International interests may come to the forefront of heritage protection, creating a new form of sovereignty: ‘Disaggregated sovereignty’. The World Heritage regime’s various benefits will also be discussed, its impact on the state’s economies especially in regard to tourism, the granting of international assistance as well as funds, and its influence on the States Parties social life by igniting a sense of prestige and pride about their World Heritage properties and by sensitising entire nations regarding the necessity to jointly protect and conserve this collective treasure. Examples from Cambodia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo illustrate the effectiveness of international assistance provided by the regime, while the example of the Galapagos Islands’ underlines the need to develop sustainable tourism practices to prevent the deterioration of heritage sites. ...</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document