China’s broad geopolitical strategy and positioning for global influence includes its averred legal position in relation to its sovereignty and jurisdiction in the South China Sea. A response to this legal position was the Philippines’ initiation of arbitral proceedings constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Despite the non-participation of China in these proceedings, the arbitral decision of 2016 clarified a number of legal provisions pertinent to the ongoing territorial and maritime disputes in the South China Sea. This decision impacted directly on China’s assertion of sovereign and jurisdictional historical title or rights, which, in part, relies on evidence obtained from underwater cultural heritage and the associated maritime archaeology. This article critically evaluates China’s maritime archaeology program and its policy with respect to underwater cultural heritage in light of the 2016 arbitral decision and the underlying international law of the sea. While recognizing that China’s policy is not inconsistent with its broader heritage policy, and its national approach to the protection of underwater cultural heritage, this article argues that this cannot be used to support China’s South China Sea claims and is not only misplaced, such as to pose a risk to the archaeological record, but also inconstant with international developments in the form of the 2001 United Nations Convention of the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage.

This article considers the role of recently adopted human rights-based policies in the context of preparations for the world heritage nomination of Bagan in Myanmar. Several conceptual, political, and practical factors influence the way in which such policies can be implemented. Conceptually, conflicting interpretations of the meaning of certain categories of human rights—most notably, cultural, development, and land rights—create ambiguity about who has rights to what. Politically, multilateral and bilateral negotiations between states parties inform whether and how human rights-based policies are enforced. On a practical level, implementation of such policies may be challenged by the low legal and administrative capacity of the state of Myanmar. Taking account of these factors, it is argued that human rights-based approaches can provide certain valuable insights but remain subject to serious limitations.

“Traditional” foodways are represented as an important part of cultural heritage in Europe. Two legal instruments aim to play a role in safeguarding them—namely, the Traditional Specialties Guaranteed (TSG) scheme and the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. These instruments are sometimes used in parallel—for example, in the TSG registration for “Pizza Napoletana” and the nomination of “the art of Neapolitan ‘pizzaiuolo’” to one of the lists of the Convention. While recognizing the important role of state actors in this process, this article proposes going beyond a simple “misappropriation” thesis to look at the possible economic effects of registration and inscription.

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.