The Mediterranean Diet was one of the first food-related nominations on the international cultural heritage list. By introducing the concepts of “epistemic community” and “governmentality” to analyze this heritagization process, I will evaluate the participation and consent of “the Mediterranean people” and their belief in a common identity based in a holistic conception of this food tradition—the so-called diaita. My goal is to demonstrate that the inscription’s proposal was motivated first by a long-term strategy aimed at promoting an “umbrella brand” of agro-food products extended to the whole Mediterranean space. Then, I will emphasize the attempt to design a model of property rights protection that is adequate for this food label, which was later presented within the realm of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization as a measure for safeguarding the diaita as an item of intangible cultural heritage. Finally, I will argue that this claim totally omits the rights of the numerous expatriates living outside this region.

Following debate surrounding nominations of food practices for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s lists of intangible cultural heritage (ICH), 10 years after the entry into force of the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage, we observe that the ICH lists count a growing number of food-related heritage elements. Yet food, or even gastronomy, as a cultural domain within ICH has yet to be officially recognized. However, given the trade policies arising from the new globalization, which subject peoples and the planet to imported, globalized, and standardized models and which generate an impoverishment of agricultures and food cultures, major geo-economic issues will play out around this recognition. Thus, along with identification labels of quality and origin that protect certain products and know-how from counterfeiting, other forms of protection could be put into place for the benefit of intangible food heritage inscribed on national lists and of the products, goods, services, industries, and cultural spaces in which they are embedded. From the perspective of safeguarding cultural diversity, which any inscription of ICH should lead to, these protections could operate not only through the cultural policies within safeguarding plans but also through the creation of a new binding legal instrument—“the heritage brand”—which could become an important facet of international trade law.

During the seventies, archaeological looting, of both land and underwater sites, not only was widespread in Spain, but also went unpunished. This situation stemmed from a lack of effective administrative and criminal legislation, human resources to combat the plague, and educational policies warning of how harmful such practices were, in spite of damning reports in the media and the social alarm raised in certain professional and political fields. The new political and social phase that began with the Constitution of 1978 has enabled the country to overcome this situation in three ways: first, by passing new, more appropriate administrative and criminal laws to help combat looting and illicit trade; second, through the creation of new regional governments (the autonomous communities) able to enforce these laws, and which have hired archaeologists specializing in cultural heritage management. The fight against the criminal aspect of looting and the illicit trade of antiquities has also been intensified by the creation of police and prosecuting bodies dedicated to the area of cultural heritage, among others. Last, educational policies have been put in place to help increase social awareness of the importance of our cultural heritage and the global loss its destruction represents. In this article we will present the first two points that have improved the initial situation as regards archaeological looting and the illicit trade of looted goods.

In a rapidly globalizing world, indigenous knowledge is in mortal danger, and it will require new forms of intellectual property protection to save it. There are fundamental incongruities between Western intellectual property law and indigenous knowledge that prevent the current international intellectual property framework from fully comprehending or addressing the contexts and needs of indigenous knowledge. This article will review the history of international and regional initiatives to develop protection for indigenous knowledge. It will consider the geopolitical context that has informed discussions about protecting the intangible wealth of indigenous peoples, including the recent addition of articulate and impassioned indigenous voices to the conversation. Finally, this article will discuss some of the concerns that have been raised about subjecting indigenous knowledge to a system of formal legal regulation.

Between 1976 and 1991, central Beirut, repository of centuries of historic structures, was substantially destroyed by civil war. In 1994, a private company known by its French acronym Solidère was created by government decree and given the task of reconstructing the center of Beirut. Despite political problems, the Solidère project brought the hope of social recovery through economic renewal; yet progress should not come at the cost of memory.

How can Beirut, destroyed, be a site of both recovery and erasure? Even though traditional legal and political discourses acknowledge that cultural heritage holds a powerful position in reconstruction, there are few tools for capturing its functions. Using heuristics originally employed in archeology and art history, this article addresses psychological aspects of reconstruction by discussing contemporary Lebanese art. If culture is defined not only as what people do but how they make sense of what they have done, the enormity of the political problems of post–civil war reconstruction become clear. National governments hoping to consolidate authority would do well to consider how best to approach public places resonant with emotionally charged memories.

Policymakers should consider the complex benefits of negative heritage in drafting laws that will enable its protection. Legal reform carried out with the goal of balanced heritage policies that accommodate negative heritage is key for postconflict urban spaces. By acknowledging the weight of the past, such policies would also bolster confidence in the emergent government and the political process.

The mounting loss of the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples presents environmental as well as ethical issues. Fundamental among these is the sustainability of indigenous societies and their ecosystems. Although the commercial expropriation of traditional knowledge grows, rooted in a global, corporate application of intellectual property rights (IPRs), the survival of indigenous societies becomes more problematic. One reason for this is an unresolved conflict between two perspectives. In the modernist view, traditional knowledge is a tool to use (or discard) for the development of indigenous society, and therefore it must be subordinated to Western science. Alternatively, in the postmodernist view, it is harmonious with nature, providing a new paradigm for human ecology, and must be preserved intact. We argue that this encumbering polarization can be allayed by shifting from a dualism of traditional and scientific knowledge to an assemblage of local knowledge, which is constituted by the interaction of both in a third space. We argue that IPR can be reconfigured to become the framework for creating such a third space.

In 2006, Bolivians began living under their first indigenous president and undergoing an explicitly pro-indigenous “process of change,” alongside much rhetoric of indigenous autonomy and state “decolonization.” However, this article suggests that this same government’s twenty-first century policies regarding intangible heritage and “culture” hardly mark a departure from mid-twentieth-century mestizo-dominated liberal nationalist projects. Through the ethnography of disputed cultural claims to folklore, such as those with Peru involving the devil dance, this article examines how proprietary nationalism is experienced and expressed among certain Bolivians. For example, indignant internationally touring folklore workers imagine a hyperreal scarcity of specific expressions that have become framed as “cultural resources” for the nation. Indeed, it is common to hear propertied language employed when international disputes heat up, as cultural images circulate at high speeds through social networks and digital media. Within these media platforms, the visual sensory mode often overshadows aural and kinesthetic ones, as socially interwoven music and dance expressions fade into the background and stand-alone images of spectacular costumes move forward.

Economists, political scientists, and journalists around the world have suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic will have long-term effects on twenty-first-century global society. As a precipitating factor in the final collapse of the post-1945 world order, the pandemic has been seen as an epochal turning point in human history. This article will examine the long-term effects that the pandemic may have on the protection and promotion of cultural heritage, which has become a major economic and political undertaking in the post-World War II era, with earlier roots in elite aesthetics and the rise of mass tourism in the nineteenth century. This article will identify some dramatic changes in economic activity and politics that may transform the social role of cultural heritage in the coming decades.

This article presents the preliminary findings of a scoping study that Geneva Call is conducting to understand the existing dynamics between armed non-state actors (ANSAs) and cultural heritage. Geneva Call is a Swiss-based non-governmental organization dedicated to promoting the respect of international humanitarian law by ANSAs. The study centres on three case studies—Syria, Iraq, and Mali—on which information has been obtained through desk and field research, interviews with ANSAs operating in those countries, and with leading organizations committed to the protection of cultural heritage, globally or regionally. The article first maps the various attitudes of ANSAs toward cultural heritage, highlighting both positive and negative examples from current practices. Then it analyzes the response of specialized organizations to the impact of ANSAs on cultural heritage and their level of engagement with these actors on cultural heritage issues. Finally, the conclusion offers some tentative recommendations to enhance the respect of cultural heritage by ANSAs in non-international armed conflicts.

Cultural heritage legislation and management commenced in Nigeria seventy years ago. Nonetheless, the Nigerian commission for museums and monuments remains a marginal institution without adequate resources to manage and protect the country's cultural heritage. The consolidating legislation of 1979 was hurriedly enacted and has many defects. The sanctions and protective measures enshrined in the Act are now hopelessly inadequate. In short, the legislation is in need of urgent revision and re-enactment. The cultural heritage managers need to evince a greater commitment and a higher sense of probity than hitherto in order to have a comprehensive cultural heritage management programme for the country. Cultural heritage management in Nigeria today is neither well organized nor co-ordinated. The authorities must appreciate that cultural heritage management has an ideological basis, which is sustaining the cultural identity of a people.

Provenance, the ownership history of an artifact or work of art, has become one of the primary mechanisms for determining the legal status and authenticity of a cultural object. Professional associations, including museum organizations, have adopted the “1970 standard” as a means to prevent the acquisition of an ancient object from promoting the looting of archaeological sites, which is driven by the economic gains realized through the international market. The Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD), one of the museum world’s most influential professional organizations, requires its members to list the ancient artworks and artifacts that they have acquired after 2008 that do not conform to the 1970 standard in an online object registry. The study presented here of the AAMD’s Object Registry for New Acquisitions of Archaeological Material and Works of Ancient Art analyzes the extent to which AAMD member museums do not comply with the 1970 standard and, perhaps of greater significance, the weaknesses in the provenance information on which they rely in acquiring such works. I argue that systematic recurrences of inadequate provenance certitude are symptomatic of the larger problem of methodology and standards of evidence in claiming documented provenance. A museum’s acceptance of possibly unverifiable provenance documentation and, therefore, its acquisition of an object that may have been recently looted, in turn, impose a negative externality on society through the loss of information about our past caused by the looting of archaeological sites.

The law of cultural property is primarily based on the interests of the states concerned. If a cultural object is of high monetary or identificatory value, states will contest the ownership, and many of these cases are resolved by compromise. If a cultural object is of less monetary or identificatory value, states often neglect its preservation. Yet the law for protection of cultural property should not only be a method for the arbitration of national interests but should also take into account the interests of humankind in general, including preservation of the object in its original context, public accessibility, and the scientific, historic and aesthetic interests that can be associated with an object. While some states are unable to protect their cultural heritage, especially in times of war, public international law does not prevent a state from destroying its cultural heritage. Cultural heritage law is developing rapidly, and national laws and international conventions are in the process of creation. At this time, the author posits, it is therefore necessary to consider the reasons for the protection of cultural objects.

The understanding of the relationship between culture and nature as manifested in the UNESCO declarations and practices has changed over the last few years. The World Heritage Convention is continuing to evolve its definitions to reflect the increasing complexities of world cultures as they grapple with the heritage conservation policies that reflect their multiple stakeholders. They are also integrating a greater cultural perspective in their recent resolutions to the convention. Although the links between nature and culture have been clarified through this new attention to cultural landscapes, many countries and their bureaucracies have not yet adopted these new perspectives. The article suggests that to achieve an integrated approach to conservation, national, regional, and international bodies and their professionals must be involved. Two examples are discussed to address the shortcomings of the application of the convention and to illustrate the complexities of defining and conserving cultural landscapes.

The contentious, sometimes even raucous debate over the repatriation and reburial of Native American human remains has been calm compared to the clamor raised over the so-called Kennewick Man. Although the reburial debate has captured substantial worldwide media and public attention, the debate over the Kennewick find has done what no other case has so far managed - to raise a serious legal challenge to parts of the 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), a law providing for the return of human remains and burial artifacts to tribes. This case study examines the core issues surrounding the archaeological discovery, the entanglements related to NAGPRA, and possible impact of Kennewick on NAGPRA itself.

In the late nineteenth century, while advocates garnered support for a law protecting America's archaeological resources, the U.S. government was seeking to dispossess Native Americans of traditional lands and eradicate native languages and cultural practices. That the government should safeguard Indian heritage in one way while simultaneously enacting policies of cultural obliteration deserves close scrutiny and provides insight into the ways in which archaeology is drawn into complex sociopolitical developments. Focusing on the American Southwest, this article argues that the Antiquities Act was fundamentally linked to the process of incorporating Native Americans into the web of national politics and markets. Whereas government programs such as boarding schools and missions sought to integrate living indigenous communities, the Antiquities Act served to place the Native American past under the explicit control of the American government and its agents of science. This story of archaeology is vital, because it helps explain the contemporary environment in which debates continue about the ownership and management of heritage.

The 2009 Bolivian Constitution significantly changed the structure of the state and paved the way for the creation of regional, local, and even indigenous autonomies. These autonomies are charged with the management of archaeological sites and museums within their territory. This article answers the question of who currently owns the Bolivian past, it stems from concerns raised at the 2011 renewal hearing of the Memorandum of Understanding preventing the import of illicit Bolivian antiquities into the United States. By combining an analysis of recent legal changes related to the creation of the autonomies and a short discussion of a notable case study of local management of a Bolivian archaeological site, this article offers a basic summary of the legal framework in which Bolivian archaeology and heritage management functions and some preliminary recommendations for governments and professionals wishing to work with Bolivian authorities at the state and local level.

This article seeks to demonstrate that the figures used to describe the size and scope of cultural property crimes—that it is a $6 billion illicit industry and that it ranks among the third or fourth largest criminal enterprise annually—are without statistical merit. It underscores the ambiguities inherent in the figures and uses the 2003 theft of the Duke of Buccleuch's painting by Leonardo da Vinci, Madonna of the Yarnwinder, to illustrate the difficulties related to establishing monetary estimates for cultural property crimes. It calls for a more empirical approach to measuring the magnitude of the problem on the part of cultural property crime experts. Finally, it examines the reporting methods of the world's largest cultural property crimes law enforcement agency, the Comando Carabinieri per la Tutela del Patrimonio Culturale, in order to provide a model for others to follow in the effort to communicate the severity of the problem and to increase its financial, social, and political support.

Kayoiura, located at the most easterly point of Omijima Island, Nagato City, Japan, is a small fishing village where community-based coastal whaling took place from late 1600 to early 1900. Today, more than 100 years since the end of whaling, the community maintains a number of cultural properties, both tangible and intangible, dedicated to the spirits of whales, including prayers for the whales given daily by two elderly Buddhist nuns. This article suggests that these cultural properties convey the former whaling community's ethics and spirituality with a strong sense of reciprocity that acknowledges the undeniable human dependency on other lives. It is argued that such spirituality has an important implication for our understanding of sustainability. Whaling is no doubt one of the most contentious issues in today's environmental debates, where divisive arguments collide over a wide range of issues. Although any study on whaling would play a role in the debate, this article's intention is elsewhere: to acknowledge the importance of ethics and spirituality as intangible cultural heritage and their role in sustainability debate.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: I would like to acknowledge the generous support provided by Mr. Fujii, director of the Nagato Whale Museum in organizing the fieldwork in Nagato. His passion, willingness, and commitment to the local community provided immense support for this study. I am grateful for the people at Kayoi who accommodated me and shared their knowledge, experiences, and many stories. I am particularly indebted to obii-sama, the Hosen-an nuns, for allowing me to hear the stories of their lives as well as record the sound around Hosen-an, including their prayers. I wish for the safety and prosperity of the people who live with and care for the natural environment and the spirits of all beings.