Browsing by Subject "politics of scale"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-1 of 1
  • Vamio, Ida (Helsingin yliopisto, 2019)
    The cultural and sacred heritage of indigenous peoples is in a vulnerable position, because of the general threats cultural and religious heritage are facing around the world and because indigenous peoples are often not in a position where their wishes and needs are listened to. In addition to this, indigenous heritage may require a special approach and the following of certain rules, which may clash with existing heritage practices. This thesis researches how the sacred heritage of indigenous peoples is discussed through analyzing documents pertaining to the subject of indigenous sacred heritage and discusses how this may affect the way this heritage is approached in practice. It focuses on the following question: who has the power to manage and care for the indigenous sacred heritage? Additionally, it analyzes how these documents accommodate the rights of indigenous peoples, if they do so at all. It attempts to reveal this by critically examining the discourses found within the texts. The core of the thesis discusses the visible and implicit power relations present in the heritage practices and the wider sector involving the indigenous sacred heritage. The primary source material consists of the Sacred Natural Sites – Guidelines for Protected Area Managers compiled by IUCN, the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, its practice note The Burra Charter and Indigenous Cultural Heritage Management and the Statement on Indigenous Cultural Heritage, produced by Australia ICOMOS. Critical Discourse Analysis is used as an analysis method and approach. The theoretical framework is based on the ideas presented in the Critical Heritage Studies, more specifically the Politics of Scale, concerning the issue of scale in the heritage field, and how heritage has commonly been understood and managed through the Authorized Heritage Discourse. The thesis shows that the existing power relations clearly preference the national scale of heritage, as well as the heritage practitioners in the management and overall control of indigenous sacred heritage. While the involvement of indigenous peoples is at times encouraged and even demanded, and some discourses present in the text give full control to indigenous peoples, these people ultimately have very little authority in the matters related to their heritage. The rights of indigenous peoples are only somewhat accommodated in the analyzed texts, partially due to the strong influence of the national scale, because the acknowledgment of the rights of indigenous peoples varies by country.