This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of... more This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of Indigenous peoples' participation and rights. In tandem with recognition of nature-culture interlinkages, the World Heritage Committee has demonstrated a growing concern with rights-based approaches, moving Indigenous peoples' rights to a more normative position in the Convention's implementation. However, the Convention follows a Statist approach and adheres to a Eurocentric conceptualisation of nature, reproduced through World Heritage cultural governance. These issues can result in power asymmetries, coloniality of knowledge and the relegation of Indigenous peoples' worldviews and rights.
50 Years World Heritage Convention: Shared Responsibility – Conflict & Reconciliation, 2022
This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of... more This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of Indigenous peoples' participation and rights. In tandem with recognition of nature-culture interlinkages, the World Heritage Committee has demonstrated a growing concern with rights-based approaches, moving Indigenous peoples' rights to a more normative position in the Convention's implementation. However, the Convention follows a Statist approach and adheres to a Eurocentric conceptualisation of nature, reproduced through World Heritage cultural governance. These issues can result in power asymmetries, coloniality of knowledge and the relegation of Indigenous peoples' worldviews and rights.
In 1992, UNESCO's World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise an... more In 1992, UNESCO's World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise and protect cultural landscapes, setting a precedent for adoption of the concept within numerous national and international conservation designations and conventions. However, despite its widespread recognition, there is no universal definition for what constitutes a cultural landscape. In response, this review disambiguates the concept as understood within internationalised conservation instruments. It begins with an examination of hegemonic Eurocentric heritage and conservation discourses, revealing how they construct culture and nature as separate entities with distinct value typologies. Using examples, the review then explores how cultural landscapes are interpreted by Australia ICOMOS' Burra Charter and IUCN's Category V Protected Areas. Subsequently, it outlays how cultural landscapes are constituted within the World Heritage Convention itself. It is revealed that while cultural landscapes offer a framework for understanding and protecting interlinkages between nature and culture, their realisation can be constrained by Eurocentric biases in discourses underpinning the processes of the World Heritage Convention. These biases are particularly problematic in recognising and inscribing the landscapes of Indigenous peoples.
The effects of climate change threaten to damage, and possibly destroy, our collective heritage. ... more The effects of climate change threaten to damage, and possibly destroy, our collective heritage. However, World Heritage sites also play a vital role in climate action.
50 Years World Heritage Convention: Shared Responsibility – Conflict & Reconciliation, 2022
This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of... more This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of Indigenous peoples’ participation and rights. In tandem with recognition of nature-culture interlinkages, the World Heritage Committee has demonstrated a growing concern with rights-based approaches, moving Indigenous peoples’ rights to a more normative position in the Convention’s implementation. However, the Convention follows a Statist approach and adheres to a Eurocentric conceptualisation of nature, reproduced through World Heritage cultural governance. These issues can result in power asymmetries, coloniality of knowledge and the relegation of Indigenous peoples’ worldviews and rights.
In 1992, UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise an... more In 1992, UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise and protect cultural landscapes, setting a precedent for adoption of the concept within numerous national and international conservation designations and conventions. However, despite its widespread recognition, there is no universal definition for what constitutes a cultural landscape. In response, this review disambiguates the concept as understood within internationalised conservation instruments. It begins with an examination of hegemonic Eurocentric heritage and conservation discourses, revealing how they construct culture and nature as separate entities with distinct value typologies. Using examples, the review then explores how cultural landscapes are interpreted by Australia ICOMOS’ Burra Charter and IUCN’s Category V Protected Areas. Subsequently, it outlays how cultural landscapes are constituted within the World Heritage Convention itself. It is revealed that while cultural landscapes offer a framework for understanding and protecting interlinkages between nature and culture, their realisation can be constrained by Eurocentric biases in discourses underpinning the processes of the World Heritage Convention. These biases are particularly problematic in recognising and inscribing the landscapes of Indigenous peoples.
This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of... more This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of Indigenous peoples' participation and rights. In tandem with recognition of nature-culture interlinkages, the World Heritage Committee has demonstrated a growing concern with rights-based approaches, moving Indigenous peoples' rights to a more normative position in the Convention's implementation. However, the Convention follows a Statist approach and adheres to a Eurocentric conceptualisation of nature, reproduced through World Heritage cultural governance. These issues can result in power asymmetries, coloniality of knowledge and the relegation of Indigenous peoples' worldviews and rights.
50 Years World Heritage Convention: Shared Responsibility – Conflict & Reconciliation, 2022
This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of... more This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of Indigenous peoples' participation and rights. In tandem with recognition of nature-culture interlinkages, the World Heritage Committee has demonstrated a growing concern with rights-based approaches, moving Indigenous peoples' rights to a more normative position in the Convention's implementation. However, the Convention follows a Statist approach and adheres to a Eurocentric conceptualisation of nature, reproduced through World Heritage cultural governance. These issues can result in power asymmetries, coloniality of knowledge and the relegation of Indigenous peoples' worldviews and rights.
In 1992, UNESCO's World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise an... more In 1992, UNESCO's World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise and protect cultural landscapes, setting a precedent for adoption of the concept within numerous national and international conservation designations and conventions. However, despite its widespread recognition, there is no universal definition for what constitutes a cultural landscape. In response, this review disambiguates the concept as understood within internationalised conservation instruments. It begins with an examination of hegemonic Eurocentric heritage and conservation discourses, revealing how they construct culture and nature as separate entities with distinct value typologies. Using examples, the review then explores how cultural landscapes are interpreted by Australia ICOMOS' Burra Charter and IUCN's Category V Protected Areas. Subsequently, it outlays how cultural landscapes are constituted within the World Heritage Convention itself. It is revealed that while cultural landscapes offer a framework for understanding and protecting interlinkages between nature and culture, their realisation can be constrained by Eurocentric biases in discourses underpinning the processes of the World Heritage Convention. These biases are particularly problematic in recognising and inscribing the landscapes of Indigenous peoples.
The effects of climate change threaten to damage, and possibly destroy, our collective heritage. ... more The effects of climate change threaten to damage, and possibly destroy, our collective heritage. However, World Heritage sites also play a vital role in climate action.
50 Years World Heritage Convention: Shared Responsibility – Conflict & Reconciliation, 2022
This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of... more This essay analyses synergies and antagonisms of World Heritage cultural governance in respect of Indigenous peoples’ participation and rights. In tandem with recognition of nature-culture interlinkages, the World Heritage Committee has demonstrated a growing concern with rights-based approaches, moving Indigenous peoples’ rights to a more normative position in the Convention’s implementation. However, the Convention follows a Statist approach and adheres to a Eurocentric conceptualisation of nature, reproduced through World Heritage cultural governance. These issues can result in power asymmetries, coloniality of knowledge and the relegation of Indigenous peoples’ worldviews and rights.
In 1992, UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise an... more In 1992, UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention was the first global legal instrument to recognise and protect cultural landscapes, setting a precedent for adoption of the concept within numerous national and international conservation designations and conventions. However, despite its widespread recognition, there is no universal definition for what constitutes a cultural landscape. In response, this review disambiguates the concept as understood within internationalised conservation instruments. It begins with an examination of hegemonic Eurocentric heritage and conservation discourses, revealing how they construct culture and nature as separate entities with distinct value typologies. Using examples, the review then explores how cultural landscapes are interpreted by Australia ICOMOS’ Burra Charter and IUCN’s Category V Protected Areas. Subsequently, it outlays how cultural landscapes are constituted within the World Heritage Convention itself. It is revealed that while cultural landscapes offer a framework for understanding and protecting interlinkages between nature and culture, their realisation can be constrained by Eurocentric biases in discourses underpinning the processes of the World Heritage Convention. These biases are particularly problematic in recognising and inscribing the landscapes of Indigenous peoples.
Uploads
Papers by Irene Fogarty
Books by Irene Fogarty