世界遗产公约》、人权和土著人民

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Irene Fogarty
{"title":"世界遗产公约》、人权和土著人民","authors":"Irene Fogarty","doi":"10.3828/hgr.2024.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses how the World Heritage Convention contradicts and coalesces with rights to culture and rights of Indigenous Peoples as asserted in international law. It describes the origin and universalistic aims of the Convention, and how the Convention’s state-centrism and Eurocentric heritage discourses have stymied the equitable participation of Indigenous Peoples in World Heritage conservation. However it also asserts that a broadening conceptualisation of World Heritage value alongside an increasing focus on synchronicity with human rights can enable recognition and protection of Indigenous Peoples’ worldviews, rights and cultural continuity under an international legal framework. Finally, the article examines the variance among states parties and the World Heritage Committee in upholding human rights standards, using case studies of five World Heritage sites: Budj Bim Cultural Landscape, Australia; Pimachiowin Aki and Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada; the Kenya Lake System in the Great Rift Valley, Kenya; and Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex in Thailand. The article concludes that despite the rights-based turn of recent years, the World Heritage system remains inconsistent in its adherence to international human rights standards.","PeriodicalId":36941,"journal":{"name":"Hunter Gatherer Research","volume":"22 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The World Heritage Convention, human rights and Indigenous Peoples\",\"authors\":\"Irene Fogarty\",\"doi\":\"10.3828/hgr.2024.7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article discusses how the World Heritage Convention contradicts and coalesces with rights to culture and rights of Indigenous Peoples as asserted in international law. It describes the origin and universalistic aims of the Convention, and how the Convention’s state-centrism and Eurocentric heritage discourses have stymied the equitable participation of Indigenous Peoples in World Heritage conservation. However it also asserts that a broadening conceptualisation of World Heritage value alongside an increasing focus on synchronicity with human rights can enable recognition and protection of Indigenous Peoples’ worldviews, rights and cultural continuity under an international legal framework. Finally, the article examines the variance among states parties and the World Heritage Committee in upholding human rights standards, using case studies of five World Heritage sites: Budj Bim Cultural Landscape, Australia; Pimachiowin Aki and Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada; the Kenya Lake System in the Great Rift Valley, Kenya; and Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex in Thailand. The article concludes that despite the rights-based turn of recent years, the World Heritage system remains inconsistent in its adherence to international human rights standards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hunter Gatherer Research\",\"volume\":\"22 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hunter Gatherer Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3828/hgr.2024.7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hunter Gatherer Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hgr.2024.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文讨论了《世界遗产公约》如何与国际法所主张的土著人民的文化权利和权利相抵触,又如何与之相融合。文章描述了《公约》的起源和普遍性目标,以及《公约》的国家中心主义和以欧洲为中心的遗产论述是如何阻碍土著人民公平参与世界遗产保护的。不过,文章也断言,扩大世界遗产价值的概念,同时日益关注与人权的同步性,可以使土著人民的世界观、权利和文化连续性在国际法律框架下得到承认和保护。最后,文章通过对以下五个世界遗产地的案例研究,探讨了缔约国和世界遗产委员会在坚持人权标准方面的差异:澳大利亚的布吉比姆文化景观、加拿大的皮马乔温阿基和水牛国家公园、肯尼亚大裂谷的肯尼亚湖系统以及泰国的Kaeng Krachan森林综合体。文章的结论是,尽管近年来出现了以权利为基础的转变,但世界遗产系统在遵守国际人权标准方面仍不一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The World Heritage Convention, human rights and Indigenous Peoples
This article discusses how the World Heritage Convention contradicts and coalesces with rights to culture and rights of Indigenous Peoples as asserted in international law. It describes the origin and universalistic aims of the Convention, and how the Convention’s state-centrism and Eurocentric heritage discourses have stymied the equitable participation of Indigenous Peoples in World Heritage conservation. However it also asserts that a broadening conceptualisation of World Heritage value alongside an increasing focus on synchronicity with human rights can enable recognition and protection of Indigenous Peoples’ worldviews, rights and cultural continuity under an international legal framework. Finally, the article examines the variance among states parties and the World Heritage Committee in upholding human rights standards, using case studies of five World Heritage sites: Budj Bim Cultural Landscape, Australia; Pimachiowin Aki and Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada; the Kenya Lake System in the Great Rift Valley, Kenya; and Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex in Thailand. The article concludes that despite the rights-based turn of recent years, the World Heritage system remains inconsistent in its adherence to international human rights standards.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hunter Gatherer Research
Hunter Gatherer Research Arts and Humanities-Archeology (arts and humanities)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信