Reconciling Nature and Culture in a Global Context? - Rainforest ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Sandra Pannellinteraction with and experience of their environment. In many ways, the relationship oflandscape to geographical object is akin to the distinction that art historian, Kenneth Clark,makes between nude and naked in art. To summarise Clark’s argument, the nude in art isthe naked human body clothed in culture (1956).The work of Kuchler, Bender and Carter point to the idea of landscape as both an immanentand emergent cultural construct, which is informed by and, in turn, shapes historicalexperiences and social relations. Put another way, landscapes can be regarded as both theobjects and effects of specific discourses. If landscapes are created by humans, then theyare also contested, disputed and at times denied by them. In this sense, the idea oflandscape can be regarded as a “concept of high tension” (Inglis 1977), often enacted at theinterstices of history, politics and society. The extent to which the current World Heritagelisted ‘cultural landscapes’ recognise this tension and identify it as a value worth protecting isquite debateable. Indeed, it is clear that the so-called ‘cultural landscapes’ recognised underthe Convention to date conform with the sanitised and non-threatening heritage thatcharacterises the many other cultural properties on the List.WORLD HERITAGE CULTURAL LANDSCAPESSince 1992, the World Heritage Convention’s ‘Operational Guidelines’ have recognised thecategory of ‘cultural landscapes’ for inscription on the World Heritage List. By the end of2002, 30 of the 563 World Heritage cultural properties had been listed as ‘official’ culturallandscapes. However, in a report on World Heritage cultural landscapes, Fowler argues thatthis number does not accurately reflect the fact that more than “one hundred culturallandscapes actually exist on the current World Heritage List” (2003: 7). These culturallandscapes haven’t been formally recognised or renominated to date 62 .Broadly speaking, the Convention defines cultural landscapes as properties that “representthe combined work of nature and of man” (UNESCO 2005a: 83). More specifically, culturallandscapes are defined in terms of three main categories, namely:(i) “a landscape designed and created intentionally by man”;(ii) An “organically evolved landscape”, which may be a “relict (or fossil) landscape” or a“continuing landscape”; and(iii) An “associative cultural landscape”, which may be valued because of the “religious,artistic or cultural associations of the natural element” (UNESCO 2005a: 84).Examples of World Heritage cultural landscapes include the religious landscape of Vat Phouin Laos, the pilgrimage landscape of the Kii Mountain Range, Japan, the vineyard culturallandscape of the Alto Douro Wine Region, Portugal, the archaeological landscape of the FirstCoffee Plantations in the Southeast of Cuba, the regal landscape of Ambohimanga,Madagasgar, the industrial landscape of Blaenavon in the United Kingdom, and, of course,the artistic and aesthetic landscape of Val d’Orcia, Italy.As these few examples indicate, the associations of a cultural landscape can be quitediverse, and many of the listed landscapes possess characteristics of more than one of theWorld Heritage landscape categories. Furthermore, the diverse nature of the culturallandscapes listed suggests that the concept itself, as defined in the Operational Guidelines62 Interestingly, Fowler does not include the Wet Tropics in his ‘wider view’ of cultural landscapes onthe World Heritage List, even though the official nomination documents for this area stated that: Thewet tropics of North-East Australia preserves the only recognised extant Aboriginal rainforest cultureand is therefore a major component of the cultural record of an Aboriginal society which has a longcontinuous history in the nominated area for at least 40,000 years (DASETT 1987: 19).64
Reconciling Nature and Culture in a Global Context?Lessons from the World Heritage Listfor the World Heritage Convention, can accommodate a range of cultural understandings andvalues, and not just European ones at that. This said, of the thirty cultural landscapes listedby the end of 2002, more than half of these (eighteen) were listed as ‘category 2blandscapes’ – as ‘continuing landscapes’ which retain “an active social role in contemporarysociety closely associated with the traditional way of life, and in which the evolutionaryprocess is still in progress” (UNESCO 2005a: 84). While properties are nominated in termsof one or more of the three main World Heritage landscape categories, cultural landscapesare also assessed and inscribed on the basis of the six ‘cultural heritage’ criteria 63 , whichapply to all potential World Heritage sites.In Australia, only one World Heritage property, Uluru Kata Tjuta National Park, is listed as an‘official’ World Heritage cultural landscape. Uluru Kata Tjuta National Park was renominatedin 1994 as an ‘associative’ cultural landscape with attributes, which comply with WorldHeritage criterion (v) and (vi) for the assessment of outstanding universal value 64 . Central tothe significance of this ‘associative cultural landscape’ is the Indigenous philosophy ofTjukurpa (or the ‘Law’) and the ‘ancestral heroes’, which are regarded by Anangu(Aboriginal) Traditional Owners as giving form and meaning to the natural and socialenvironment.Associative cultural landscapes, like Uluru Kata Tjuta, make up a small percentage of theoverall number of listed cultural landscapes. For example, as of 2002, only seven propertieswere what could be considered ‘numinous inscriptions’ (Fowler 2003: 28) or category 3 (iii)‘associative’ cultural landscapes. Fowler observes that category 3 landscapes, specificallybased upon criterion (vi), are “used only rarely” by nominating state parties. He further statesthat the already inscribed cultural landscape of Tongariro in New Zealand “set such a highstandard […] that extreme care is being taken with further claimants” (2003: 28). As Fowlerpoints out using examples of failed or deferred cases, not all nominated cultural landscapesare able to meet the World Heritage Committee’s criteria of ‘outstanding universal value’ andthe additional requirements of ‘authenticity’, ‘integrity’ and ‘distinctiveness’ (2003: 23-25).Since 1994, nominated properties are also required to take into account UNESCO’s ‘GlobalStrategy for a Balanced, Representative and Credible World Heritage List’. In part, thisstrategy represents an attempt to address the under-representation of ‘living cultures’ and‘traditional cultures’ on the World Heritage List. Indeed, as Lennon points out, of the 690properties on the List at the beginning of 2001, only seven were specifically listed for theirIndigenous values, with four of these being in Australia (Lennon et al. 2003: 31) 65 .It could also be argued that the under-representation noted in the ‘Global Strategy’ reflectsthe way in which culture and heritage are regarded by different state parties, as well asindicating something about the politics and economics of heritage nomination and listing 66 .63 Previously these six criteria were identified as ‘cultural heritage’ criteria and formerly presented as aseparate criteria set, distinct from the four natural heritage criteria set. The 2005 OperationalGuidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention merge the ten criteria(UNESCO 2005a: 19).64 “(v) be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea use which isrepresentative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially whenit has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change; (vi) be directly or tangiblyassociated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary worksof outstanding universal significance” (UNESCO 2005a: 20).65 The four Australian properties are Kakadu National Park, Tasmanian Wilderness, Willandra LakesRegion and Uluru Kata Tjuta National Park (Lennon et al. 2001: 27).66 While there are 122 nation-state signatories to the World Heritage Convention (Lennon et al. 2001:31), it is apparent from looking at sessions of the World Heritage Committee that issues of stateparty autonomy and resourcing also inform nominations.65
Page 3 and 4:
RECONCILING NATURE AND CULTUREIN A
Page 5:
Reconciling Nature and Culture in a
Page 8 and 9:
Sandra PannellCOLOUR PLATESLIST OF
Page 10 and 11:
Sandra PannellMap 2: No ‘Terra Nu
Page 12 and 13:
Sandra PannellMap 4: The varied cul
Page 14 and 15:
Sandra PannellFigure 3 (left):Walla
Page 16 and 17:
Sandra PannellFigure 7: Komodo drag
Page 18 and 19:
Sandra PannellFigure 10 (above):Fis
Page 20 and 21:
Sandra Pannell(a)Figure 14: Aerial
Page 22 and 23:
Sandra PannellFigure 16 (above): Bu
Page 24 and 25:
Sandra PannellFigure 19: The ‘cul
Page 26 and 27:
Sandra Pannell‘habitats of threat
Page 28 and 29:
Sandra PannellIn keeping with this
Page 30 and 31:
Sandra PannellLike other ‘natural
Page 32 and 33:
Sandra Pannelltogether, “they co-
Page 34 and 35:
Sandra Pannellof rainforest and the
Page 36 and 37:
Sandra PannellAs Raymond Williams (
Page 38 and 39: Sandra Pannelland twentieth century
Page 40 and 41: Sandra Pannelldepiction of Brazilia
Page 42 and 43: Sandra PannellIn the operationalisa
Page 44 and 45: Sandra PannellJakarta introduced pr
Page 46 and 47: Sandra PannellNeedham, provides a d
Page 48 and 49: Sandra PannellPresenting a ‘Komod
Page 50 and 51: Sandra PannellFurthermore, Komodo l
Page 52 and 53: Sandra Pannelltourist facilities es
Page 54 and 55: Sandra Pannellearth’s fauna and f
Page 56 and 57: Sandra Pannellintroduces a new role
Page 58 and 59: Sandra Pannellgebang palm, has dire
Page 60 and 61: Sandra Pannellpromoted in the three
Page 62 and 63: Sandra Pannellmethodology of modern
Page 64 and 65: Sandra Pannell‘Integrated Conserv
Page 66 and 67: Sandra PannellWhile a study on alte
Page 68 and 69: Sandra Pannell1996). In TNC’s Ede
Page 71 and 72: Reconciling Nature and Culture in a
Page 87: Reconciling Nature and Culture in a
Page 96 and 97: Sandra PannellLike Marilyn Strather
Page 98 and 99: Sandra Pannellprovide research and
Page 100 and 101: Sandra Pannelland visitor informati
show all

Reconciling Nature and Culture in a Global Context? - Rainforest ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?