This article comes as the conflict in Syria has entered its fifth year, bringing with it loss of life and the displacement of the Syrian people as well as extensive damage to, and destruction of, the country’s cultural heritage. This article will first provide an overview and explanation of the national and international legal framework for protecting cultural property in conflict as it applies to the Syrian State and the non-State actors involved, using examples from the whole conflict, including the recent actions of Da’esh. Second, we demonstrate that the destruction of all types of cultural property, regardless of its importance, can be considered a prosecutable violation of these laws, and we examine the possibilities for prosecution. Following from this discussion, we question whether the existing framework can be considered effective and consider the role the international heritage community can play.

Indigenous groups and individuals may have different needs and aspirations in relation to their local plant foods (“bush foods”). Interests may reflect totemic relationships, customary rights and duties, social positions, political and economic motivations, and personal capacities. This article uses a systems method to identify strategies to support the diverse interests of Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the commercial development of gourmet bush food products. The aim is to identify possibilities for further consideration by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Since “intangible cultural heritage” (ICH) became the new focal point in the global heritage discourse, governments and scholars in many countries have begun to promote this new form of “immaterial” culture. The People’s Republic of China has been one of the most active state parties implementing the new scheme and adapting it to domestic discourses and practices. Policies formulated at the national level have become increasingly malleable to the interests of local government-scholar networks. By conducting a comparative case study of two provinces, this article aims to identify the role of local elite networks in the domestic implementation of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage, focusing on the incentives of scholars and officials to participate in ICH policy networks. It finds that the implementation of the Convention has not removed the power asymmetry between elite and popular actors but, instead, has fostered an elite-driven policy approach shaped by symbiotic, mutually legitimizing government–scholar networks.

The present article discusses perceptions of cultural heritage and the development of heritage management in Ethiopia against the background of various pieces of legislation. Compared to many colonized countries of sub-Saharan Africa, the enactment of laws for the protection and preservation of cultural heritage is a recent phenomenon in Ethiopia. Even though archaeological research in Ethiopia dates back to the mid-nineteenth century, there have been no formal heritage laws or scientific restoration programs until 1966. However, living heritage, which is economically and spiritually beneficial to the local communities, has been protected and preserved with TMSs in communities such as Yeha, Konso, and Lalibela. Unlike Western management systems that emphasize the authenticity and integrity of physical features, the TMSs of Ethiopia have focused on the ideals and thoughts of the agencies that produce the cultural heritage. It had its own implications, to say, while retaining the ideological aspects, most built heritages in Ethiopia have been subjected to considerable physical interventions. Such physical interventions have disregarded structural authenticity and integrity of the monuments. Due to foreign invasions, continuous civil conflicts, and sporadic famines in the past, attention to cultural heritage and the implementation of heritage legislation has been negligent. However, Ethiopia has witnessed growing interest in the conservation and preservation of its heritage—cultural and natural; tangible and intangible—during the last twenty years. With the support of international collaborators, the Ethiopian government has initiated several measures to protect its heritage assets.