An interactive educational platform based on data mining and serious games to contribute to preservation and learning of the Cañari indigenous cultural heritage in Ecuador

This chapter explores Indigenous peoples’ culture and cultural heritage, a global treasure in urgent need for safeguarding and space for flourishing. It arrives at four conclusions. First, Indigenous peoples’ rights are essentially culturally grounded and culturally bounded. They are intended to sustain and intensify the colours of the tapestry of global cultural diversity. Second, Indigenous cultural heritage encompasses a wide variety of tangible and intangible elements. To effectively safeguard them, a holistic definition is needed. Third, the right to self-determination empowers Indigenous peoples to define their identity through their own interpretation, continuation, or modification of their ways of life. Lastly, access to and use of their traditional lands, territories, and resources is essential to the survival and flourishing of Indigenous cultural heritage. Other manifestations of their culture are to be safeguarded as well, cherishing their traditions and values in the quest for an inclusive world order of human dignity.

This article critically considers the legal regulation of Indigenous people's cultural heritage in Western Australia and its operation within the framework of Australia's federal system of government. The article also sets out the different ways in which Indigenous cultural heritage is conceptualised, including as a public good analogous to property of the crown, an incidental right arising from group native title and as the subject of private contract. The article explores the various notions of 'Indigenous cultural heritage' that exist under Western Australian public law and the significant role of private contractual arrangements. Particular attention is devoted to the uneasy nexus between the laws of native title and heritage in Western Australia.

Africa is one of the continents gifted with a diverse and rich cultural, natural, tangible, and intangible heritage. The manifestations of these diverse gifts are often interweaved through the indigenous people's ways of living, their beliefs, perceptions, and many more. Most importantly, the heritage of Africa, particularly in Zimbabwe, is also brought to life through the partnership of nature and culture, where the intangible gives meaning to the tangible and both provide indigenous communities with their recurrent cycles of life. There is a growing consensus that indigenous intangible cultural heritage is crucial to the social and economic development of Zimbabwe. However, this cultural heritage is in danger of disappearing if no proper steps are taken to sustain it and make it available for present and future generations. To be kept alive, indigenous intangible cultural heritage (IICH) should be relevant to the indigenous communities and continuously be recreated and transmitted from one generation to the other. Despite the risk that certain elements of indigenous intangible cultural heritage could die, or disappear without help, safeguarding measures should be put in place to ensure the IICH is always available and sustainable. Safeguarding indigenous intangible cultural heritage should involve the transferring of knowledge, skills, and meaning to future generations. The transmission of indigenous intangible cultural heritage was emphasized in the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Convention OF 2003 rather than the production of tangible expressions such as songs, dances, musical instruments, or crafts. This indigenous intangible cultural heritage is transmitted from generation to generation and is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to their environment, their interaction with nature, and their history. The IICH provides the indigenous communities with a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity. A lot has been written on the preservation of IICH but very few writers have gone a step further into discussing the factors affecting the utilisation and dissemination of IICH in Zimbabwe. This chapter seeks to assess the role being played by cultural and heritage organisations in ensuring that the indigenous intangible cultural heritage is being utilised, supported, and sustained for long-term access. Although the role of these cultural and heritage organisations is to collect, preserve, and disseminate information in any medium and format, it is unfortunate that the indigenous intangible cultural heritage (IICH) is slowly becoming invisible and irrelevant in some communities in Zimbabwe, thus compromising its existence and use by future generations. This chapter discusses some of the threats to the sustainability of IICH and the possible strategies of making IICH available for long time access. The chapter also explores the importance of documentation, preservation, advocacy, and transmission of IICH for its sustainability and accessibility to succeeding generations. The chapter concludes by calling for more research into the effective utilization of the IICH for sustainable development in Zimbabwe.

Indigenous rights to heritage have only recently become the subject of academic scholarship. This collection aims to fill that gap by offering the fruits of a unique conference on this topic organised by the University of Lapland with the help of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The conference made clear that important information on Indigenous cultural heritage has remained unexplored or has not been adequately linked with specific actors (such as WIPO) or specific issues (such as free, prior and informed consent). Indigenous leaders explained the impact that disrespect of their cultural heritage has had on their identity, well-being and development. Experts in social sciences explained the intricacies of indigenous cultural heritage. Human rights scholars talked about the inability of current international law to fully address the injustices towards indigenous communities. Representatives of International organisations discussed new positive developments. This wealth of experiences, materials, ideas and knowledge is contained in this important volume.

Indigenous cultural heritage (ICH) is threatened worldwide, driven by factors like development, private property rights, and colonial planning. Indigenous communities are increasingly navigating the inadequacies of ICH protection by exerting their rights through laws, protocols, and policies. These initiatives assert sovereignty and relational responsibility to ancestral cultural heritage outside of the mandated colonial systems of management. This study centers on the Comox Valley in British Columbia, where the ICH of K'ómoks First Nation is under increasing threat of erasure due to private and commercial development. In response, the K'omoks First Nation has developed their own Cultural Heritage Policy (CHP), and accompanying archaeological permits to protect their cultural heritage where provincial archaeological legislation fails to. In the context of the K'omoks First Nation, we explore three interconnected questions associated with the assertion of Indigenous Peoples' rights and responsibilities around protecting their ICH: how do Indigenous communities exert self-determination over their ICH, how does ICH interact with local planning processes, and how can local (settler) governments strengthen ICH protection at the local level? Our findings reveal that local level implementation of Indigenous cultural heritage policies help to ensure that ICH protection strategies are effective and meet the needs of Indigenous Indigenous communities. Challenges remain, however, regarding jurisdictional barriers to formal policy adoption within the colonial regulatory regime, capacity limitations, and the need for public education and communications regarding Indigenous-led heritage policies.

The debate about the responsibility of museums to respect Indigenous peoples’ rights (Kelly and Gordon; Butts) has caught our attention on the basis of our previous research experience with regard to the protection of the tangible and intangible heritage of the San (former hunter gatherers) in Southern Africa (Martin and Vermeylen; Vermeylen, Contextualising; Vermeylen, Life Force; Vermeylen et al.; Vermeylen, Land Rights). This paper contributes to the critical debate about curatorial practices and the recovery of Indigenous peoples’ cultural practices and explores how museums can be transformed into cultural centres that “decolonise” their objects while simultaneously providing social agency to marginalised groups such as the San.

ABSTRACTTourism is acknowledged as a vehicle that can help sustain both tangible and intangible elements of Indigenous cultural heritage, including languages, stories, song, art, dance, hunting methods, rituals and customs. Often, cultural heritage products developed for tourism promise to provide many socio-economic opportunities for the communities involved, however, tourism can also present a challenge as the self-management of Indigenous cultural product and cultural identity can be problematic. Given the pivotal role culture plays in the sustainability of Indigenous tourism products, it is time for a twenty-first century examination of the nexus between cultural heritage and Indigenous tourism. This paper reflects upon tourism and contemporary Indigenous cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible. Through a review of the current literature on Indigenous tourism and cultural heritage, the authors identify key areas for future research and aim to stimulate further discussion around the ways Indigenous tourism may be developed to sustain Indigenous cultural heritage.

Tourism is acknowledged as a vehicle that can help sustain both tangible and intangible elements of Indigenous cultural heritage, including languages, stories, song, art, dance, hunting methods, rituals and customs. Often, cultural heritage products developed for tourism promise to provide many socio-economic opportunities for the communities involved, however, tourism can also present a challenge as the self-management of Indigenous cultural product and cultural identity can be problematic. Given the pivotal role culture plays in the sustainability of Indigenous tourism products, it is time for a twenty-first century examination of the nexus between cultural heritage and Indigenous tourism. This paper reflects upon tourism and contemporary Indigenous cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible. Through a review of the current literature on Indigenous tourism and cultural heritage, the authors identify key areas for future research and aim to stimulate further discussion around the ways Indigenous tourism may be developed to sustain Indigenous cultural heritage.

Contents: Introduction Bibliography and further reading. Part I Foundations: The Concept of Cultural Heritage: Cultural property internationalism, John Henry Merryman On defining the cultural heritage, Janet Blake The Politics of Cultural Heritage Rights: The expanding purview of cultural properties and their politics, Rosemary J. Coombe The politics of preservation: privileging one heritage over another, Jonathan S. Bell. Part II Types of Cultural Heritage Rights: Natural Heritage as Cultural Heritage: Nature and culture: a new World Heritage context, Shabnam Inanloo Dailoo and Frits Pannekoek World Heritage and rights-based approaches to nature conservation, Gonzalo Oviedo and Tatjana Puschkarsky Urban Landscapes as Cultural Heritage: Informal settlements and urban heritage landscapes in South Africa, Lindsay M. Weiss Artefactual Cultural Heritage Rights: Sir, how much is that Ming vase in the window? Protecting cultural relics in the People's Republic of China, Michael L. Dutra Underwater Cultural Heritage Rights: 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, Sarah Dromgoole Intangible Cultural Heritage Rights: Heritage trouble: recent work on the protection of intangible cultural property, Michael F. Brown The UNESCO concept of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: its background and Marrakchi roots, Thomas M. Schmitt Indigenous Cultural Heritage Rights: Indigenous cultural heritage in development and trade: perspectives from the dynamics of cultural heritage law and policy, Rosemary J. Coombe with Joseph F. Turcotte Indigenous cultural landscapes and the politics of heritage, Melissa F. Baird. Part III Contemporary Issues in Cultural Heritage Rights Law: Repatriation of Cultural Heritage: Resolving material culture disputes: human rights, property rights and crimes against humanity, Robert K. Paterson Illicit Trade in Cultural Heritage: Controlling the international market in antiquities: reducing the harm, preserving the past, Patty Gerstenblith Armed Conflict and Cultural Heritage Protection: The protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict: the practice of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Hirad Abtahi The obligation to prevent and avoid destruction of cultural heritage: from Bamiyan to Iraq, Francesco Francioni and Federico Lenzerini Tourism, Economic Development and Cultural Heritage Protection: Posta Econflict heritage and tourism in Cambodia: the burden of Angkor, Tim Winter. Part IV Future Directions in Cultural Heritage Rights Law: Cultural Heritage Protection and the Challenge of Climate Change: Changing climate, changing culture: adding the climate change dimension to the protection of intangible cultural heritage, Hee-Eun Kim Cultural Expressions as Cultural Heritage: The UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of Cultural Expressions: building a new world information and communication order?, Rachael Craufurd Smith The Human Genome and Cultural Heritage: The human genome as common heritage: common sense or legal nonsense?, Pilar N. Ossorio Beyond Rights? Rethinking the Cultural Heritage Protection Paradigm: Cultural heritage rights: from ownership and descent to justice and well-being, Ian Hodder. Name index.

This paper examines the complex interplay between Indigenous cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, human rights, and intellectual property within international law. It highlights the legal and ethical challenges Indigenous communities face, including exploitation, misappropriation, and historical injustices, particularly in the contexts of commercialization, tourism, and development projects. Through an analysis of international legal frameworks, case law, and policy gaps, the study underscores the fragmentation of existing protections and the lack of Indigenous agency in legal decision-making. It argues for comprehensive legal reforms that integrate human rights principles with intellectual property protections, ensuring collective ownership, equitable benefit-sharing, and the incorporation of customary law. By advocating for a holistic, community-driven approach, this paper emphasizes the importance of self-determination, cultural continuity, and the ethical stewardship of Indigenous heritage for future generations.

Indigenous peoples have always strived for recognition of the right to their ancestral lands, resources, protection of their language, customs and traditions, all of which in combination constitute their (cultural) identity. This strife for recognition of their cultural rights, even if misinterpreted by some, is justifiable given that indigenous peoples’ very survival depend on their cultural ties to lands, customs, traditions etc., passed down from generation to generation. Departing from initial attempts at integrating indigenous peoples into the rest of the society, the current legal regime recognizes distinct cultural rights of indigenous peoples. However, the absence of explicit references to indigenous peoples’ right to their own cultural heritage in the relevant human rights instruments casts an uncertainty over the possibility that the cultural rights of indigenous peoples include a right to their cultural heritage over which they will exercise control. This article studies the current situation regarding indigenous cultural heritage right claims and elaborates on the various hurdles preventing the realization of this right. Addressing the uncertainties surrounding the existence of indigenous peoples’ right to their own cultural heritage, international treaty law, customary international law and case law are analyzed to make a proposition that there is, indeed, evidence of such a right under international law. Conceding the lack of clarity on this issue, recommendations towards a more effective regime on the protection of cultural heritage rights of indigenous peoples are suggested.

This introductory article examines key issues related to Indigenous conceptualisations of cultural heritage, especially intergenerational aspects, Indigenous concepts of time, Indigenous knowledge, heritage language, and relationships with the environment. It urges to reflect on how these aspects are integrated when legal mechanisms protecting and promoting Indigenous cultural heritage have been designed and developed. The article also discusses the ability to form resistance through Indigenous cultural heritage. Our examples, which primarily come from the Sámi and also from global Indigenous perspectives, all point to the importance of a holistic approach to guarantee Indigenous peoples’ rights to their cultural heritage. Finally, we discuss the crucial role of research and appropriate research methodologies in contributing to better protection of Indigenous cultural heritage.

The uptake of spatial mapping technologies and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) by Indigenous communities in Victoria, Australia is hindered by limited resources. Cultural Heritage Management (CHM) projects that employ these technologies offer practical community capacity building strategies to re-engage people in formal education and protect heritage. Wadawurrung cultural heritage officers use a cultural heritage management system with a field mapping application that enables cultural heritage sites to be recorded (including highly accurate GPS). GPR is a vital complementary technology to spatial mapping technologies in the field of Indigenous cultural heritage but access to GPR has been limited.

The digitization of cultural heritage has become a common practice among cultural and educational institutions. The Internet and the widespread of new technologies have made the heritage more accessible and facilitates cultural exchange. However, digitization both raises challenges and creates opportunities for the sustainable and appropriate treatment of Indigenous digital cultural heritage collections, as the use of new technologies may render such heritage more vulnerable to misappropriation and misuse. It is therefore vital to investigate the possibilities of Intellectual Property tools to protect, preserve, and promote such heritage. This article addresses the following questions with respect the Indigenous heritage: What is the nature of the relationship between IP protection and the safeguarding of intangible heritage?; What are the consequences of misappropriation and misuse of traditional cultural expressions for Indigenous Peoples?; and What is the impact of digitization on Indigenous cultural heritage?

The protection of cultural and spiritual landscapes and materials is fundamentally important to maintaining Indigenous culture. Indigenous cultural heritage is an 'ongoing part of Aboriginal existence which is vital to Aboriginal well-being'. In recent years, the advocacy work of Indigenous traditional owners, community groups and academics has led to greater public awareness of the importance of Indigenous cultural heritage, as well as some positive legal reforms. However, legal protection of cultural heritage has often been, and continues to be, ineffective. One of the key reasons for this ineffectiveness is a piecemeal approach to protection of Indigenous cultural heritage. Such an approach manifests a distinction between 'the environment' and Indigenous heritage. This seems extraordinary given that 'it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to protect [an Indigenous heritage] site without also protecting the surrounding environment'. Further, what the State recognises or defines as cultural heritage worthy of protection and recogition does not necessarily accord with what Indigenous peoples consider to be their cultural heritage. Importantly, Indigenous worldviews emphasise holistic relationships, rather than reductionist approaches.