Geographies of Knowledge: Cultural Diffusion and the Regulation of Heritage and Traditional Knowledge/Cultural Expressions in Southeast Asia

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Antons
Author(s):  
Stoll Tobias

This chapter looks at the specific right to intellectual property and technologies in Article 31. Article 31 sets out a number of rights of indigenous peoples relating to their science, technology, and culture, and calls for State action in this regard, which is to be taken with the involvement of those peoples. The provision relates to three different subject matters, between which there obviously exists quite some overlap. It refers, first, to ‘cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions’. Second, it refers to ‘intellectual property’ over such heritage, knowledge, and expressions, and third, to ‘manifestations of…sciences, technologies and cultures’ — representative examples of which find themselves included in an illustrative list. According to Article 31, with a view to each of these subject matters, indigenous peoples have a right to ‘maintain, control, protect and develop’.


Transfers ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 108-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Hannam

In this brief commentary on the articles in this special section, I would like to relate them to more contemporary mobilities issues as well as the wider mobilities theoretical literature. In so doing, I seek to highlight and interrogate a key theme, namely Asian innovation in mobilities and processes of cultural diffusion. As the editors of the special section suggest, historically the introduction of new transportation technologies and their ensuing mobilities practices became symbols of modernity for much of South and Southeast Asia under colonialism. They also emphasize that such innovations were highly contested and thus they suggest that the mobility of mobilities is seldom a smooth process, but, rather, laden with negotiations and struggles over power. Furthermore, the editors highlight that Asia should not be represented as an imitator of Western mobility and modernity but rather seek to place innovation agency in Asian hands. The articles prompt me to ask a further question about the role of non-human actors in these processes: Is it more a question of placing innovation in the vehicles of mobility themselves?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document