PARTICIPATION IN GLOBAL CULTURAL HERITAGE GOVERNANCE INTERNATIONAL LAW ASSOCIATION
6-8 July 2021
Intersessional Meeting, Nairobi, Kenya (online event)
Amidst the ongoing challenges the world faces with COVID-19 related restrictions, the International Law Association Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance, in collaboration with Strathmore Law School of Nairobi, Kenya, organized an online event. The event spanned over three days, from 6 – 8 July 2021. The first two days were hosted by Strathmore Law School and involved webinars with special guests to discuss issues on community participation and sustainable development, with special focus on the African situation. The third and last day of the event had a closed intersessional meeting of the Committee to discuss the work which had been done this year, pursuant to the Committee’s mandate. CS Consulting was present throughout the three days of the online event, as an active participant of the Committee.
The opening day session was titled: “Community Participation and Holistic Approaches to Sustainable Development with Special Focus on Africa,” started with an open attendance, prompting for a wide participation and awareness to these important issues, enforced by two slide show presentations. The first presentation was made by Professor Toshujuki Kono, professor of law at Kyushu University in Japan and member of the Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance. Titled “The Protection of Cultural Heritage and Community Participation”, Professor Kono’s presentation provided for important information on the current practices being adhered to throughout the world, regarding cultural heritage and its protection, ranging from the authenticity test of historical monuments as provided by the Venice Charter[1], to the Operational Guidelines of the World Heritage Convention of 2019. The very important, ever-developing legal structure of cultural heritage protection, that appears to be the most recent point of contention, was presented and in its legal structure and the role of both, experts on cultural heritage, and people-based communities, was viewed in determining what should constitute cultural heritage. The case was made that for any substantial progress to be made in cultural heritage protection, the involvement of the people-based communities would be crucial, thus the people-based approach acquiring further support throughout the legal community.
The second presentation of the day, made by Dr. Francis Kariuki, lecturer at Strathmore Law School, focused he Kenyan situation, providing interesting domestic examples, such as the Ogiek case. Dr Kariuki presented the forms of participation available within Kenya with regards to cultural heritage protection and with a state-centric and top-down approach, the many challenges being faced in the Kenyan context, became clear. Most of the participation modalities regarding protection of cultural heritage within Kenya present a passive form of participation for the people and communities, falling short of the international upheld standard of ‘Free and Prior Informed Consent’ (FPIC). In order to achieve a sustainable approach to cultural heritage protection within Kenya, the case was made for traditional institutions to be strengthened, which would involve more collaboration with the communities themselves, whilst recognizing the importance of local knowledge and empowerment.
The second day session (once again with open attendance) was titled “Heritage and Resource Management for Sustainable Development” and involved a series of presentations leading to a discussion at the end, between the panelists. First off, was Professor Alison Dundes Renteln, member of the Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance, to discuss issues of cultural resource management, focusing on examples from within the United States. The importance of collaboration between governmental bodies and communities associated with the cultural resource, was highlighted and how, at times, the unequally amassed power possessed by scientific- or field experts, regarding cultural heritage resources, could present a danger. The crucial component for successful cultural resource management appears to be a collaborative approach to the resources at hand. Next to present, was Professor Washington Unyango-Ouma, Director of Anthropology, Gender and African Studies at Nairobi University, providing a sociological perspective to the day’s session. The contribution of cultural heritage to sustainable development was described in detail as Professor Unyango-Ouma began, by broadly defining culture as being deeply connected with ways of life, also touching on economic sustainability and environmental conservation. The case was made that cultural heritage, being shaped by community practices, which involve trade, commerce, and local biodiversity knowledge, should play an integral part in any sustainable development and only then could sustainable development be effectively achieved.
Professor Benedetta Ubertazzi, also a member of the Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance, addressed the panel and began by looking at the role of intangible cultural heritage with regards to its contribution to sustainable development. From the UNESCO 2003 preamble to UN operational directives, Professor Ubertazzi presented how internationally intangible cultural heritage had been recognized as playing a crucial role in sustainable development. The case study of Alpine food heritage, relating to the safeguarding and promoting of traditional food productions, culinary practices and techniques, provided an example of how intangible cultural heritage can support the economic and geographic sustainability of a region. Next to address the panel was Ms. Chao Tayiana Maina, a digital heritage specialist and digital humanities scholar. Questioning what is internationally understood as resources and the international standards alongside it, Tayiana Maina highlighted the importance of local participation in regard to any such determination. On this point, Professor Irene Calboli, another member of the Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance, took the panel floor to highlight just how different understandings and practices may be from region to region. Focusing primarily on South East Asian examples, Professor Calboli highlighted how, despite the seemingly legally embedded requirement of participation regarding cultural heritage management, it always appeared to be a state-centric and top-down approach, with passive forms of participation for the communities affected.
The third and final day of the online event was a closed meeting, between members of the Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance. This closed meeting provided for the Committee the opportunity to discuss the work which had been done thus far during the year. Pursuant to the Committee’s mandate, research had been carried out from the start of 2021 and reports had been filed, with CS Consulting contributing from its South African perspective. The Committee concluded the online event by setting out a schedule for future research reports and Committee meeting dates.
Alexander Carl Dinopoulos 19 July 2021
[1] Article 7, The Venice Charter, 1964.