JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES

世界遺産学研究
Special Issue 2018:
Proceedings of the Second Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages
in Heritage Conservation in Asia and the Paciﬁc 2017
September 15-26, 2017, Tsukuba, Japan

SACRED LANDSCAPES

神聖な景観

UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation

筑 波 大 学 ・世 界 遺 産 専 攻 ・世 界 文 化 遺 産 専 攻

U n i v e r s i t y o f T s u k u b a ・W o r l d H e r i t a g e S t u d i e sCopyright: © 2018 University of Tsukuba.
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without priorwritten permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of thispublication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the
copyright holder.
Citation: Ishizawa, Maya, Inaba, Nobuko and Yoshida, Masahito, Eds. (2018). Proceedings of the Capacity
Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation, Asia and the Paciﬁc 2017. Sacred
Landscapes. Journal of World Heritage Studies, University of Tsukuba, Japan: University of Tsukuba. 151 pp.
Editorial Board of the Journal of World Heritage Studies:
Yasufumi Uekita (Chief editor)
Hiromu Ito and Ikuyo Saeki (Associate editors)
Edited by: Maya Ishizawa, Nobuko Inaba and Masahito Yoshida
Editorial assistance: Claudia Uribe Chinen
Available from:
UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation
World Heritage Studies, University of Tsukuba
1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki
Japan 305-8571
Tel +81-29-853-6344
Fax +81-29-853-7099
oﬃce@heritage.tsukuba.ac.jp
http://nc.heritage.tsukuba.ac.jp/UNESCO-Chair/
ISSN:2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIESSpecial Issue 2018:
Proceedings of the Second Capacity Building Workshop
on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation in
Asia and the Pacific 2017

SACRED LANDSCAPES

神聖な景観
Organized by

UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages
in Heritage Conservation

In collaboration with
UNESCO World Heritage Centre
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration ofCultural Property (ICCROM)
International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)SEPTEMBER 15-26, 2017
UNIVERSITY OF TSUKUBA, TSUKUBA, JAPANTable of Contents■ Foreword.......................................................................................................................................................1■ Introduction....................................................................................................................................................................3■ Acknowledgements.............................................................................................................................................................5■ Part One: Proceedings of the Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation, Asia and the Pacific. SACRED LANDSCAPES

Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage in the Huong Son Complex of Natural Beauty and Historical
Monuments, Northern Vietnam by Vuong Tan Tu, Chu Ti Hang, and Nguyen Tru-ong Son.....................................9
Reinforcing Conservation with Faith and Beliefs: The Potential of Peak Wilderness Sanctuary in the Central
Highlands World Heritage Site – Sri Lanka
by Shamodi I Ireshika Nanayakkara and Enoka Priyadarshani Kudavidanage.............................................................17
Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary: Nature-Culture Linkages in a Sacred Landscape in Indian Himalayan Region
by Upma Manral................................................................................................................................................................26
Sacredness in Laponia Mixed World Heritage Site by Florence Revelin......................................................................34
Sacredness in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area by Emma Lee........................................................42
The Sacred Places of Talang Mamak Indigenous People, Indonesia by Nukila Evanty..............................................47
Kapiti Island: A Sacred Landscape by Xavier Forde........................................................................................................53
Feasibility Study on the Nomination of “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands: Cultural Landscape of Taoism
Worldview” by Mingxia Zhu.............................................................................................................................................59
Forikrom Bio-Cultural Heritage, Brong-Ahafo Region, Ghana by Portia Ama Bansa.................................................66
The Sacred Landscape of the Yading Nature Reserve by Zhengli Liu.......................................................................76
Western Tien-Shan World Heritage Site (Kyrgyz Part). From Tradition to Modern Manage-ment Challenges
by Ilia Domashov................................................................................................................................................................83

■ Part Two: Report of the Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Her-itage Conservation,
Asia and the Pacific (CBWNCL 2017) SACRED LANDSCAPES.

Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................................90
Module 1: Understanding Nature-Culture Linkages in the context of the Sacred LandscapeConservation.....................................................................................................................................92
Module 2: Management, implementation and governance in sacred landscapes................................................102
Module 3: Reflection on Theory and Practice..............................................................................................................107
Module 4: International Symposium............................................................................................................................113■ Annexes
Annex 1 : CBWNCL 2017 Participants Abstracts............................................................................................132
Annex 2 : List of participants...........................................................................................................................137
Annex 3 : Program of the CBWNCL 2017................................................................................................................139
Annex 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkagesby Emma Lee, Ilia Domashov and Upma Manral .......................................................................................144

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Foreword

In 2011, the World Heritage Committee in its 35th session at UNESCO approved the World Heritage Capacity
Building Strategy with one of the main strategic objectives being to bring together cultural and natural heritage
practitioners to favour exchange and raise awareness of the work developed by these two sectors of theconservation practice.
Since then, the World Heritage Capacity Building Programme was developed by ICCROM and IUCN in
consultation with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS. As a result, several new training courses havebeen established around the world, with partners in every region, among them, Universities, Category 2 Centres
and UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs.
In this process, the UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation was created at
the University of Tsukuba, with the objective to become a platform for exchange between heritage practitioners
dedicated to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage, through the development of capacity building
workshops and initiatives for the Asia and the Pacific Region.
In its second year, the 2017 workshop focused on Sacred Landscapes, a complex type of heritage that
represents well the inextricability of the relationship between culture and nature, tangible and intangible heritages.
Japan, a country characterized by the importance of its sacred landscapes and especially mountains, has a lot tooffer for participants of the region and the world, to explore these interlinkages.
Already in 2001, a UNESCO Thematic Experts Meeting on Asia-Pacific Sacred Mountains was held inWakayama City, Japan, with a field work at the Kii Mountains, a few years before the inscription of the Sacred Sites
and Pilgrimage Routes of the Kii Mountain Range as World Heritage cultural landscape (2004). Sixteen years later,
the international symposium and workshop held in Tsukuba recalled the discussions and debates at that time, witha renewed vision and more sacred mountains of Asia and the Pacific Region inscribed in the World Heritage List. It
has been with great pleasure that colleagues that attended the meeting in 2001, met again in Japan, at Tsukuba,
especially with more comprehensive work done towards the recognition of the values of cultural landscapes,
and especially, the cultural and spiritual values in nature as tools for the conservation of our cultural and natural
heritage. Now, we share the task of passing on the work to a new generation of heritage experts that can work ona solid basis that will support and address the urgent challenges of climate change and the implementation of theAgenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.
In this Special Issue of the Journal of World Heritage Studies presenting the proceedings of this second
workshop, we find a variety of sacred places of Asia and the Pacific and also case studies from other regions, which
provide an overview of the situation and review the needs for their conservation.
We commend the continuous efforts of the UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages hoping that theircontribution to the World Heritage Capacity Building Programme, and in cooperation to the new World Heritage
Leadership Programme lead by ICCROM and IUCN will be sustained.
Mechtild Rössler
Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Division of Heritage

1

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

2

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Introduction

The Second Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation in Asia and thePacific, focusing on the theme of “Sacred Landscapes,” was organized by the UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture
Linkages at the University of Tsukuba, Japan, in collaboration with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, ICCROM,
IUCN, and ICOMOS. This workshop was the second of a series of four workshops, running from 2016 to 2019. It
gathered sixteen heritage practitioners from Asia and the Pacific, from both the culture and nature sectors, from
Australia, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines,
Sri Lanka, Solomon Islands, Vietnam, Ghana, and France, as well as five students from the Certificate Programme on
Nature Conservation at the University of Tsukuba from Australia, Japan, Liberia, Peru, and Uganda, who took part in
the process as observing participants.
In the following special issue of the Journal of World Heritage Studies, we have, on the first part, theproceedings of the workshop. We have collected eleven articles from the sixteen case studies presented during theworkshop (see Annex 1). Four World Heritage sites, from which two are Mixed Cultural and Natural Heritage (Sweden
and Australia), and two Natural Heritage (Sri Lanka and Kyrgyzstan), one site in the Tentative List (Vietnam), four
nationally protected (India, New Zealand, two in China), and two community-based conserved sacred landscapes(Indonesia and Ghana) are presented, providing an overview of the issues and challenges faced in the region andbeyond. Common problems are, the mass tourism arising in pilgrimage routes, especially of World Heritage sites,
the conflicting perspectives over nature conservation and cultural heritage safeguarding, especially in the practiceof spirituality, and the low consideration to, or even lack of recognition of, sacred values in natural protected areas,
especially in sites where indigenous territories and traditions have encountered conflicts with nature conservation
approaches. In their contributions, authors agree that nature-culture linkages need to be promoted for theeffective management of heritage places, and that more synergies between nature and culture sectors need to be
developed in order to conserve sacred landscapes comprehensively.
In the second part, we report the activities developed during the workshop, structured by modules. First,
we briefly introduced the purpose, objectives, and content of the CBWNCL and present the theme of the CBWNCL2017.
In Module 1, Understanding Nature-Culture Linkages in the Context of the Sacred Landscape Conservation,lecturers and participants were invited to the University's campus for three days. The lectures given by theinternational experts, in the field of heritage, in both the nature and culture sectors, have been reported. The
participants’ case study presentations were outlined and the discussions, focusing on the main issues regarding
sacred values in landscapes, are described.
For Module 2, Management, Implementation, and Governance in Sacred Landscapes, there is a recount of
the five-day field trip to the Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range.
In Module 3, Reflection on Theory and Practice, participants were placed into groups. The outcomes fromeach group, on the analysis of and proposals for the places visited, are described.
For Module 4, the International Symposium, the keynotes and debates are reported. Ten international
experts participated: representatives of the partner organizations – UNESCO World Heritage Centre, IUCN,ICCROM, and ICOMOS –, two academic specialists on sacred landscapes, one from Keio University, Japan, and theother from the University of Technology, Malaysia, representatives of the University of Montreal and the Bezalel
Academy of Arts and Design, as well as international consultants representing Terra-sana Environmental Consulting
and The Mountain Institute. Finally, the conclusions of the workshop, based on the outcomes of the participants’reflections and the symposium debates, regarding the challenges faced by sacred landscapes, within the region andglobally, are reported.
In the annexes, the abstracts of the presentations of all workshop participants (Annex 1), the list of3

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

participants (Annex 2) and the programme of the workshop (Annex 3) can be found. In Annex 4, a special
contribution that emerged from participants’ initiative can be found. They reflect on the learning experience,
specially pointing out the importance of indigenous and local knowledge for the integration of culture and nature in
the conservation of heritage sites.

4

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Acknowledgements

The editors would like to thank the editorial board of the Journal of World Heritage Studies for their continuous
support in the publication of the CBWNCL Proceedings as a special issue of the Journal.
We would like to acknowledge and thank the collaboration of our partners, ICCROM, IUCN, ICOMOS andthe UNESCO World Heritage Centre, and their support to the UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation. Moreover, we would like to especially thank Tim Badman, Edwin Bernbaum, Jessica Brown, Kristal
Buckley, Carolina Castellanos, Erlend Gjelsvik, Amran Hamzah, Thomas Schaaf and Gamini Wijesuriya for accepting
collaborating as reviewers of this second special issue of the Journal of World Heritage Studies. Special thanks go
to Dr. Mechtild Rössler, Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre for her kind support and collaboration. We
would like to acknowledge as well, the continuous cooperation of the authors who have patiently work on theirarticles, contributing to a diverse and rich illustration of the sacred landscapes in Asia and the Pacific region.
Thanks are also due to the academic and administrative staff of the World Heritage Studies and Certificate
Programme on Nature Conservation at the University of Tsukuba for accompanying this project. The cooperationof students involved in these programs is also appreciated, their support during the symposium and workshop has
been indispensable. Special thanks go to Imme Arce Hüttmann, Anna Bogdanova, and Helga Janse.
Maya Ishizawa, Nobuko Inaba and Masahito Yoshida
Tsukuba, 2018

5

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

6

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Part One:
Proceedings of the
Capacity Building
Workshop on NatureCulture Linkages in
Heritage Conservation,
Asia and the Pacific
SACRED LANDSCAPES

7

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

8

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Conservation of Natural andCultural Heritage in the Huong
Son Complex of Natural Beautyand Historical Monuments,
Northern Vietnam
Vuong Tan Tu1,2*, Chu Thi Hang1, Nguyen Truong Son1,2

1Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology, No. 18 Hoang Quoc Viet road,
Hanoi, Vietnam; +84 (0) 964 022 954, *vttu@iebr.ac.vn / tuvuongtan@gmail.com
2 Graduate University of Science and Technology, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology, Nº 18, Hoang Quoc Viet road,
Cau Giay district, Hanoi, Vietnam■ Abstract
The Huong Son Complex has long been recognised as an important sacred landscape in Vietnam due to its
spiritual and cultural values. The area also retains many aesthetic and biological values. Unfortunately, its
cultural and natural treasures are currently at risk due to anthropogenic impacts, mainly associated withincreased spiritual tourist activities. Some urgent solutions have been implemented, but they give priority
to protecting cultural values and sometimes conflict with nature conservation efforts. This problem wasencountered during our recent bat conservation research in Huong Son. Our preliminary findings revealed
symbiotic relationships between natural and cultural heritage in Huong Son; thus, linking nature and culture
in conservation planning and management is critical for the sustainable development of the site. However, theapplication of this approach in Huong Son, and other sacred places in Vietnam, is challenged by gaps in basic
research and the inadequate attention of local stakeholders.

KEY WORDS: Sacred Sites, Cultural and Natural Heritage, Conservation, Conflict, Vietnam, Huong Son, Bat.

■ 1. Introduction

million, 1.4%), and others (Muslims, Bahais, Hindus
and other smaller groups, <1%). Associated with thesereligions, many kinds of sacred places can be foundthroughout Vietnam. Buddhist pagodas and temples –monuments to worship a deity or an ancient celebrity –are the two most popular (Government Committee for
Religious Affairs 2013, Bielefeldt 2014, Chung and Linh2016).

Vietnam is a multi-ethnic country with 54 ethnic
groups coexisting peacefully. The country is alsoa nation with diverse beliefs and religions, which
also contribute to the diverse cultures of Vietnam.
According to official statistics, more than 70% of over
90 million Vietnamese people have no religion but
rather practice the Vietnamese folk religion, which is afusion of Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism (called
the three teachings). The rest are followers of one of
the recognized religions: Buddhists (11 million, 12.2%),
Catholics (6.2 million, 6.8%), Caodaists (4.4 million,4.8%), Protestants (1.4 million, 1.6%), Hoahaoists (1.3

Considered one of Vietnam’s most importantsacred sites, the Huong Son Complex of Natural
Beauty and Historical Monuments (alternative
names: Perfume Pagoda or Chùa Hương in
Vietnamese) is located in the Huong Son commune,
9

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

calendar [Fig. 1B]. Every year, the area attracts not
only hundreds of thousands of pilgrims, who cometo pray for prosperity and happiness, but also large
numbers of tourists. The tourists, both Vietnameseand foreigners, just want to enjoy the atmosphere of
the festival, visit the important archaeological sites ofancient Viets belonging to the Hoa Binh Culture, or
explore the beautiful scenery of the area (Bang 2007;
Tordoff et al. 2004).

My Duc district, ca. 60 kilometers southwest of Hanoi[Fig. 1A]. It comprises a vast complex of Buddhist
pagodas and temples that were built into thelimestone Huong Tich mountain. The complex centeris the Perfume Pagoda, located inside the Huong
Tich cave [Fig. 1B]. According to legend, this place iswhere the Bodhisattva stayed in order to help savehuman souls. Other monuments have also been
associated with many tales of Buddhism, Vietnamese
folk religions, and/or historical events (Bang 2007).

Apart from the above spiritual and culturalvalues, during the period outside of the religious
festival, Huong Son is also known as a tranquilsightseeing spot in Vietnam. The area is dominatedby the limestone Huong Tich mountain, whichreaches a height of 381 m and retains evergreen
forests [Fig. 1C]. To the north and east, this limestone
mountain is bordered by the low coastal plain of the
Red River Delta. The natural beauty of the Huong Sun
landscape is even more impressive because of the
network of streams of the Day River watershed. The
variety of natural habitats, particularly the evergreen■ 2. Significance of the heritage place, including
natural and cultural values
Since the early 15th century, Huong Son was known as"one of the Buddhist centres of Vietnam" or "northVietnam’s most famous pilgrimage site". Pilgrimages
to Huong Son can take place throughout the year, but
the main season is during the Perfume Pagoda Festivalwith a traditional Vietnamese Buddhist celebration,and other cultural activities, held annually from 6
January to the end of March, according to the lunar

Figure 1: A – location and vegetation type of the Huong Son complex (modified from Tordoff et al., 2004); B – Crowdsof pilgrims and visitors in the Huong Tich cave during Perfume Pagoda Festival; C - Tower karst landscape with tropicalevergreen forest covers the steep slopes within Huong Son; and D – day roost of a bat colony inside Huong Tich cave.
B.C.D©V.T.Tu
10

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

above, Huong Son is an example of a site containing
mixed natural and cultural properties in Vietnam.
Thus, under the existing legal framework of Vietnam,
the management of its natural and cultural heritage
has been performed in accordance with numerous
laws and regulations. For instance, as a special-use
forest, forest protection and development in Huong
Son are based on the Law on Forest Protection andDevelopment (amended in 2016); whereas the Law
on Cultural Heritage (amended in 2009) determines
the protection of historical-cultural values of thearea. Indeed, some considerable discrepancies
among different laws or legal frameworks ofVietnam occur in defining the mutually symbiotic
relationships between natural and cultural values
in most natural sacred sites of the country; Huong
Son is not an exception. Therefore, the current
management arrangements of the area are seen
as obstacles, creating overlapping and sometimes
conflicting responsibilities and interests among
different stakeholders, consequently reducing theeffectiveness of conservation efforts therein.

forests on limestone and caves, have also supported
high levels of biodiversity and endemism [Fig. 1C-D](Tordoff et al. 2004). Previous studies have indicatedthat the natural habitats within Huong Son are home
to 917 vascular plant species (belonging to 597
genera and 192 families) and 290 animal species(85 families and 26 orders). Many of the recordedplants and animals are recognized as precious andrare species or have been recently described as new
species to science (Tordoff et al. 2004, Chan et al.
2008, Luu et al. 2011, Do and Vu 2013).
■ 3. Current management arrangements
The area and its existing values are protected byvarious laws and regulations. With its cultural andnatural importance, Huong Son was discussed for a
possible nomination as a Mixed Cultural and Natural
site to the World Heritage List by the Vietnamese
Government in 1991. However, during that periodof time, they lacked an effective conservation
management program with which to mitigate theadverse effects of human activities on its culturaland natural heritages. Hence, the preparation of its
nomination dossier was suspended. Regardless of thesituation, the area is still included on the country’s
Tentative List and, with recent conservation actions, a
new program for its nomination is being consideredby the local authorities (Huong Son Cultural andHistorical Site Management Board in litt. 2017).

■ 4. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity
The enforcement of existing legislation on natureand culture conservation in Huong Son is not reallyeffective. In recent years, coupled with fast economic
development (at an average annual growth rate of
8-10%), the area has experienced a population boom
and rapid urbanization (i.e., the population of Huong
Son commune has increased from 17,598 in 1999 to
20,059 in 2009 and to 22,681 by the end of 2017).
Such social-economic growth is strongly correlatedwith the development of spiritual tourism andassociated services.

The Perfume Pagoda Festival has been listed
as one of the most important national festivals of
the country. The Perfume Pagoda was classified as anational historical and cultural monument in 1962. Atthat time an area of 500 ha around the monument
was designated as a cultural and historical site
under Decision No. 194/CT date 09/08/1986 by
the Chairman of the Council of Ministers. In 1993,
the area of Huong Son was expanded to 4,354 ha
and additionally functions as a special-use forest– a type of protected forest listed in the national
nature conservation strategy by the Vietnamese
Government. Currently, the area of Huong Son
is 4,705 ha and coordinated by two independent
management boards, one responsible for the
spiritual and tourism activities (the Huong Son
Cultural and Historical Site Management Board) andthe other for the natural resources (Management
Board of Huong Son special-use forest). As presented

4.1 Spiritual tourism and its impacts
The number of pilgrims and visitors coming to the
Perfume Pagoda has rapidly increased from 352,802
in 2007 to nearly one million in 2010, and up to
ca. 1.5 million in 2017. Accordingly, the number of
local people providing services for spiritual tourism(i.e. lodgings, restaurants, boat drivers, porters)
has also increased from 4,667 in 2007 to 5,334
in 2010 and more than 6,000 in 2017. However,since most tourists only visit Huong Son during the
Perfume Pagoda Festival, the imbalance between

11

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

destructive impact of humans. It also should be
noted that, based on studies in other areas of theworld, several bat species are considered as natural
reservoir hosts for zoonotic pathogens, including
human pathogenic coronaviruses (SARS Coronavirus),
henipaviruses (Hendra, Nipah), and lyssa viruses.
The intensive human encroachment into the natural
habitats of bats (caves and surrounding areas) in
Huong Son, may increase the risk of the emergenceof zoonotic diseases (Schneeberger and Voigt 2016).
Yet, scientific knowledge and social awareness of the
public health risks from bat pathogens in Huong Son
and other areas of Vietnam remain neglected. Thus,
this project aimed to address these issues by providing
much needed information in the development ofconservation actions that will ensure environmental
sustainability while maintaining human well-being.
The experience gained from this project will then be
used as a model for follow-up conservation initiatives
in the country’s other sacred natural sites.

the increased requirements of spiritual tourism
and the insufficient capacity of services has long
been considered to be a specific concern to this site
(People's Committee of Huong Son Commune, inlitt. 2017). These tourist activities, particularly during
the Perfume Pagoda Festival, have collectively led toincreasing rates of illegally or intentionally destructive
effects on the cultural and natural heritage of the site.
These anthropogenic impacts include: (1) destruction
or disturbance of cultural sites (Buddhism pagodas,
temples); (2) deforestation in favour of cultivatedlands and/or infrastructures and suppliers mainly for
spiritual tourism; (3) over-harvesting of plants andanimals; (4) limestone mining; and (5) environmental
pollution caused by waste (air, solid, liquid). Although
local authorities have implemented many urgent
solutions (i.e. strengthening the protection andrenovation of Buddhist pagodas, temples, andstatues as well as infrastructures such as access roads
and marinas, replacing motorboats with rowboats,
and improving facilities for garbage collection anddisposal) to mitigate such negative effects, mostrecent efforts have prioritized the protection of theexisting cultural heritage of Huong Son. The basis forthese actions is mostly short-term – to attract moretourists and consequently to obtain more benefits
from spiritual tourism and other inherent activities.
This approach sometimes conflicts with nature
conservation due to the lack of scientific guidance.
These conservation issues have been encounteredthroughout our on-going bat conservation researchin Huong Son.
4.2 Case study on bats

So far, two field surveys using mist-nets andharp-traps during March-April and in July 2017 havebeen carried out in Huong Son. Our preliminary
results have revealed that the study sites support
at least 13 species of five bat families, accounting
for nearly 10% of Vietnamese bat diversity [Table
1; Fig. 2]. All of the recorded bat species were
found to be widespread elsewhere in Vietnam andnearby territories (Kruskop 2013). However, ourunderstanding regarding the bat diversity in Huong
Son is underestimated because our recent surveys
were conducted only in small areas associated with
Buddhism pagodas and temples.

Bats were chosen as the focus for research as they
are one of the native mammalian groups in thelimestone forests and caves in Huong Son. Bats play
many important roles in local ecosystems throughthe ecological and economic services they provide
in plant pollination, seed dispersal, and insect
consumption. In addition, many bat species roostingin caves can produce large quantities of guano, whichis regarded as a primary nutrient source for entire
cave ecosystems and as a fertilizer source (Altringham
2011). Despite their importance, little is known about
the current status and ecological requirements of
the local bat community. However, like many othercreatures in Huong Son, local bats, particularlycave and forest dwellers, have been exposed to the

As presented in Table 1, with the exception of
the Tylonycteris fulvida that roosts in bamboo
internodes, all other bat taxa were known to roost inlarge colonies in caves. These cave-dwelling bats haveoften been exposed to destructive human impacts(i.e. air and light pollution, noise) through crowdsof visitors and/or religious practices, particularly
during the Perfume Pagoda Festival [Figs. 1B, 3A].
This inference corroborated the results of our recent
monitoring surveys in the Huong Tich cave in MarchApril and July, 2017. During both trips, we foundconsiderable numbers of bat carcasses on the cave's
floor under their roosts [Fig. 3B]. All of these fatalities
are attributable to the exposure to the toxic smokeof candles and incenses at high concentration in the

12

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

these periods is critical. Unfortunately, most pilgrims
and tourists only visit Huong Son during the threemonth festival. As a consequence, the high numberof visitors and their associated destructive activities(noise, toxic smoke, and light pollutions) duringcave. In addition, the relative abundance of cavedwelling bats observed in March-April (during the
Perfume Pagoda Festival) was significantly lower
than that in July (out of festival period). Specifically,
consistent with previous studies in northern Vietnam(e.g. Furey et al., 2011), our reproductive assessmentof captured bats has also indicated that March–
July is the timing of major reproductive events (i.e.
pregnancy, lactation, and weaning – the period
when offspring become independent) for local bat
species, thus protection of maternity roosts during

Figure 2: Portraits of selected bat species recorded in
Huong Son A – Cynopterus sphinx; B – Rhinolophus
stheno; C – Hipposideros larvatus; D – Taphozous
melanopogon©V.T.Tu

Table 1: Checklist of bat species recorded in Huong Son

Figure 3: Conflicts between religious practices and bat conservation in Huong Son A – Light and air pollution caused byritual activities in Perfume Pagoda inside the Huong Tich cave; B – carcass of Taphozous melanopogon found in Huong
Tich cave; C – bat excreta damage on the statues of worship in Tien Son cave; D – fishing nets used for banishing bats inTien Son cave.©V.T.Tu
13

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under grant
number 106-NN.05-2016.14, the Institute of Ecology
and Biological Resources (IEBR.TST.03/17), and the
Rufford Foundation (UK).

the festival are particularly detrimental to local bat
assemblages.
In many caves where Buddhist pagodas and temples
exist, the accumulated guano and urine of cavedwelling bats causes severe damage to the buildings
or disturbs visitors with its bad odour [Fig. 3C]. Theseissues have also been encountered in many other
World Heritage sites around the world (e.g. Angkor
monuments in Cambodia) (Voigt et al. 2016 andreferences therein). Although bat-related damage
to monuments can easily be prevented by removing
the accumulated guano, covering exposed structureswith plastic sheets, and/or creating isolated safe
corridors inside caves for bats, local authorities(monks, guardians) in Huong Son usually banishbats in an unpleasant manner, e.g. using fishing nets
[Fig. 3D]. This displacement may lead to the collapseof the bat populations and consequently spread
potential bat related zoonotic diseases (Schneeberger
and Voigt 2016).
■ 5. Recommendations
The preliminary results of our case study in Huong
Son provides snapshots of existing conservation
issues, particularly the conflicts in current
conservation planning and management, in natural
sacred sites in Vietnam where coexisting cultural andnatural values have been threatened by increased
adverse anthropogenic impacts. In order to resolve
such issues, based on practical experience gained
during our on-going research and the available
guidelines of international organizations (UNESCOWorld Heritage Centre and its advisory bodies, IUCN,ICCROM, and ICOMOS) for the conservation andmanagement of sacred natural sites, i.e. Wild andMcLeod (2008), a decision-making flowchart forsafeguarding natural and cultural heritage in Huong
Son and in other natural sacred sites of Vietnam has
been proposed in Fig. 4, which we hope could be
used by local authorities and relevant stakeholders.
■ Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Gábor Csorba, Tamás Görföl
(Hungarian Natural History Museum, Hungary), andGábor Kemenesi (Szentagothai Research Centre,
University of Pécs, Hungary) for their collaborationand support. This research was supported by the
Vietnam National Foundation for Science and14

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

No

Do cultural and natural values interact?
Yes
Are these values currently at risk?

No

Yes
Is there any conflict between
cultural heritage and nature
conservation?

Apply available
conservation strategies foreach element

No

Yes
Apply an integrated nature–culture approach

Governance and Management- Develop a legal framework forcoordination between different stakeholders;- Strengthen the effectiveness of legislation
enforcement and conservation management- Adapt the socio-economic planning for
reducing contradictions between
conservation and development issues

Research and Education- Analyse the contradictions between
conservation and development issues- Provide scientific guidance for the
integration of natural and cultural heritage
management;- Enhance public awareness andenforcement of conservation legislation

Figure 4: Decision-making flowchart for safeguarding natural and cultural heritages in Huong Son

15

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Altringham, J. D. 2011. Bats: From evolution to conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Bang N. D. 2007. The history of Perfume Pagoda. Ethnic Culture Publishing House, Hanoi. [in Vietnamese].
Bielefeldt, H. 2014. Press Statement on the visit to the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam by the Special Rapporteuron freedom of religion or belief. United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Available at http://www.
ohchr.org/EN/News Events/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14914&LangID=E [ accessed 7 November 2017 ]Chan L. T., Tu N. H, and Tai V. A. 2008. Flora of Huong Son special use forest. Vietnam Plant Data Center.
Available at http://www.botanyvn.com./cnt . asp?Param=news&newsid=523 [ accessed 7 November 2017 ]Chung, T. V. and Linh, N. T. 2016. The situation of new religious studies in Vietnam. Tattva- Journal of Philosophy 8:
pp. 45–60.
Do, Q. H. and Vu, T. T. 2013. New records for the fauna of Huong Son special use forest, Hanoi. Journal ofForestry Science and Technology 4: pp. 31–39. [in Vietnamese].
Government Committee for Religious Affairs. 2013. Vietnamese legal documents on belief and religion.
Religion Publishing House, Hanoi. [in Vietnamese].
Furey, N. M., Mackie, I. J., and Racey, P. A. 2011. Reproductive phenology of bat assemblages in Vietnamese
karst and its conservation implications. Acta Chiropterologica 13: pp. 341–354.
Kruskop, S. V. 2013. Bats of Vietnam: Checklist and an identification manual. KMK Sci Press, Moscow.
Luu, V. Q., Nguyen, T. Q., Do, H. Q., and Ziegler, T. 2011. A new Cyrtodactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from
Huong Son limestone forest, Hanoi, northern Vietnam. Zootaxa 3129: pp. 39–50.
Schneeberger, K. and Voigt, C. C. 2016. Zoonotic viruses and conservation of bats. In Voigt, C. C. and Kingston, T.
(eds): Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of bats in a changing world, pp. 263–292. Springer e-book.
Tordoff, A. W., Bao, T. Q., Tu, N. D., and Hung, L. M. 2004. Sourcebook of existing and proposed protected areasin Vietnam. 2nd edition. BirdLife International in Indochina and Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,
Hanoi.
Wild, R. and C. McLeod (eds.). 2008. Sacred Natural Sites: Guidelines for Protected Area Managers, IUCN,
Gland, Switzerland.
Voigt, C. C., Phelps, K. L., Aguirre, L. F., Schoeman, M. C., Vanitharani, J., and Zubaid, A. 2016. Bats and buildings:
The conservation of synanthropic bats. In Voigt, C. C. and Kingston, T. (eds): Bats in the Anthropocene:
Conservation of bats in a changing world, pp. 427–462. Springer e-book.

16

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Reinforcing Conservation with
Faith and Beliefs: The Potentialof the Peak Wilderness
Sanctuary in the Central
Highlands of Sri Lanka World
Heritage Site
Shamodi Ireshika Nanayakkara

Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka, Faculty of Graduate studies/ Faculty of Applied Sciences, Belihuloya, Sri Lanka; 70140;+94 (0)71 4473791, shamodi.nanayakkara@gmail.com

Enoka Priyadarshani Kudavidanaga

Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka, Department of Natural Resources, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Belihuloya, Sri Lanka;
70140; +94 (0)71 8221727, enokakudavidanage@gmail.com■ Abstract
The cultural, spiritual, and historical beliefs revolving around the Peak Wilderness Sanctuary, in the Central
Highlands of Sri Lanka World Heritage Site, attracts millions of pilgrims. The symbolic footprint on the peak isworshiped, by various religions, as a sacred footprint of: Lord Buddha by the Buddhists, Adam by the Muslims(hence the name “Adam’s Peak”), St. Thomas by the Christians, and Lord Siva by the Hindus. The area is a
designated sanctuary under the jurisdiction of the Department of Wildlife Conservation. It includes some of theleast disturbed sub-montane and montane rain forests of Sri Lanka and is considered as a “super biodiversity
hotspot” within the Western Ghats and Sri Lanka biodiversity hotspot. Although the sacredness of the peak, asheld by three major religions, has afforded some degree of protection to the site, it is still threatened by multiple
issues that hinder effective conservation management. The Peak Wilderness Sanctuary provides a great
potential to understand the influence of religious beliefs and practices on biodiversity conservation as well as
develop and implement a management approach that takes these influences into account.
KEY WORDS: Peak Wilderness, Biodiversity, Conservation, Religious faiths■ 1. Introduction

and the Knuckles Conservation Forest, among otherprotected forest patches (UNESCO World Heritage
Centre 2017). Out of all three components, the Peak
Wilderness Sanctuary and the famous “Sri Pada”
mountain (the peak of sacred footprint), which isthe fourth highest mountain in Sri Lanka, attracts
the highest worldwide attention due to its religious
significance, as well as its unique biodiversity[Fig. 1]. According to Mahawanshaya, in the epic
documentation of the historical record of Sri Lanka,
which almost dates as far back as the Lord Buddha’s

1.1 Overview of the World Heritage Site
Located in the south-central part of the island,
the Central Highlands of Sri Lanka’s landscape wasinscribed as a World Heritage site in 2010, undercriteria x and xi. The World Heritage Site, which is a
serial property, includes the Peak Wilderness
Protected Area, the Horton Plains National Park,

17

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

area of the sanctuary is about 24,000 ha, of which
the majority (21,175 ha) comprises of montane
forests or semi-natural vegetation; the rest is ahuman-dominated landscape and includes a tea
estate and village settlements (De Alwis et al. 2007).
Most of the terrain is rugged, with altitudes ranging
from 50 m near Ratnapura to 2,238 m at Sri Pada.

period, the first person to discover the sacredfootprint on this peak was King Valagambahu (10476 BC). At the time, he was in exile in the mountainwilderness, now known as Sri Pada Adaviya (Domain
of Sacred Footprint), to escape the marauding
Cholians. The legend depicts that he was led to thesummit of the mountain by a deity in the guise of astag. Since then, the peak has been worshiped for atleast 1,000 years. The first historical mention of SriPada was during the reign of Vijayabahu (1065-1119
AD). It is through historical evidence that the peak
was in the limelight long before the recorded historyof the island.

■ 2. Significance of the heritage place including
natural and cultural values
2.1 Natural values of the site
The Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the site
is based on the presence of almost undisturbed
patches of montane and sub-montane forests andthe large number of threatened and endemic species
it harbors within (UNESCO World Heritage Centre
2017). The Peak Wilderness Sanctuary includes someof the least disturbed sub-montane and montane
rain forests in Sri Lanka and is considered as a “super
biodiversity hotspot” within the Western Ghats and
Sri Lanka biodiversity hotspot. Studies have shownthat the floristic composition of the Peak Wilderness
montane forests differs from that of the adjacent
Horton Plains National Park (Greller et al. 1987). The
Peak Wilderness is dominated by several species ofthe endemic genus Stemonoporus in the canopy,
which is unique as no other dipterocarps havebeen recorded at such high elevations elsewherein the world. The area contains a large proportionof the country’s endemic species. A small herd ofelephants is reported to still reside in the sanctuary(DWC 1998). Out of the recorded 408 species ofvertebrates, 83% of the indigenous fresh water fish,
and 81% of the amphibians in the Peak Wilderness
Protected Area are endemic (UNESCO World Heritage
Centre 2017). Eight new species of Pseudophilautus(Amphibia: Anura: Rhacophoridae) were recorded
recently within the Peak Wilderness, making it a local
amphibian hotspot in Sri Lanka. Therefore, the area
is of prime importance for the in-situ conservation of
the island’s fauna and flora.

Figure 1: Map of the Central Highlands World Heritage site
(Source: Lockwood 2015)

1.2 Brief description of the sacred landscape
The Peak Wilderness Protected Area was designatedas a sanctuary on the 25th of October 1940. The
sanctuary lies in the center of the western ridge of
the Central Highlands, occupying the escarpmentthat rises steeply from the lowlands to the south
and west, straddling the border of the Central andSabaragamuwa provinces (6°48′47″N 80°29′04″E).
Its eastern boundary is contiguous with the Horton
Plains National Park. According to the most recent
wildlife management plan (2005), the geographical

2.2 Cultural values of the site
The cultural, spiritual, and the historical beliefs
revolving around the Peak Wilderness attracts 3.5
to 5 million pilgrims annually, most arriving during
its peak/pilgrimage season (from the December

18

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

feeds the major paddy agricultural zones in the northand north central part of Sri Lanka.

full moon to the May full moon) to revere thefootprint that lies on the top of the hill. Sri Pada isvalued as a symbol of interfaith harmony among
many religions existing in Sri Lanka and is known as
the only mountain in the world considered sacredby the followers of four major faiths in the world(Jayathilake 2017). The symbolic footprint on thepeak is worshiped as the footprint of: Lord Buddha
by the Buddhists, Adam by the Muslims (hence thename “Adam’s peak”), St. Thomas by the Christians,
and Lord Siva by the Hindus (Wickramasinghe 2002).
The Sri Pada pilgrimage is punctuated with tradition
as the pilgrims practice a series of rituals during theirjourney to the peak. This religious significance has led
to relatively minimum active destruction of the SriPada Mountain and its forest, but it is not adequate.
Restraints to prevent environmental damage in thePeak Wilderness often springs from fear of gods andspirits believed to be inhabiting the mountain or fearof sinning. At the Peak Wilderness Sanctuary, it isobserved that the older generations often are more
responsible as custodians of their sacred places incomparison to many of the younger generations,who veer from such beliefs (Dudley et al. 2005).
History marks that many distinguished persons, like
Ibn Batuta, the Arab traveler, and Marco Polo, haveclimbed Sri Pada. It is described by Sinbad the Sailor
in “One Thousand and One Arabian Nights" that"the island of Serendib lie under the equinoctial line
bounded by a lofty mountain and a deep valley. The
mountain is conspicuous from a distance of threedays and it contains many rubies and other minerals,
and spice trees of all sorts. I ascended that mountainand solaced myself with a view of its marvels which
are indescribable" (Living Heritage Network 2017).

■ 3. Current management arrangements
In the early 1900s, all of the forest reserves of thecountry belonged to the Forest Department under
the Forest ordinance (No.16 of 1907). On October
25, 1940 the Peak Wilderness was designated as a
sanctuary (Gazette Notification No. 8,675) under thejurisdiction of Department of Wildlife Conservation.
From 2001 to 2008, a comprehensive management
plan, including a complete resource inventory,
was developed for the sanctuary under the Sri
Lanka Protected Area Management and Wildlife
Conservation Project. Recognizing the sensitivity andthe biodiversity value of the ecosystem, a part of thePeak Wilderness Sanctuary was re-designated as anature reserve in 2007 (De Alwis et al. 2007).
In addition, the responsibility for stewardshipis shared among several government agencies,
including the Central Environmental Authority andseveral distinguished individuals. These include
the Chief Monk of the Sri Pada temple, as well as
residents whose livelihoods depend on the tea
plantations (small holders or working under theplantation companies). Altogether, approximately
fifteen sub-communities live around the area.
■ 4. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity
At present, the Department of Wildlife is upgrading
the existing management plan for the sanctuary,
with establishment of an information center atthe entrance point as one of the priority activities.
Awareness-raising and publicity is also conducted asa better management tool. Additionally, the religious
beliefs related to the Peak Wilderness hold a great
potential to understand, develop, and implement
people centered conservation approaches (Taylor2013). Religious faiths protect land through multiple
reasons which are often different from the ordinary
reasons for protected area management. Awarenessdevelopment, therefore, is useful to convince thepeople who visit this heritage site for spiritual reasonsof the meaningfulness of this place and the benefits
it could bring, thus securing their active participationin the protection process.

Sri Pada is also called Samanala Kanda(Butterfly Mountain) due to the mass movement/ migrations of butterflies towards the mountainduring the pilgrimage season, as it is in the pathwayof the annual butterfly migration route. Further, thePeak Wilderness Sanctuary and the Horton Plains
National Park are of great hydrological importance,
as several major rivers of the island - The Kalu,
Kelani, and Walawe rivers - are formed within thesecatchments. The upper catchment of these rivers
spreads across the southern slopes of the mountains,
inculcating a dissect landscape through dense
drainage. Therefore, over a thousand years this acts
as the central water catchment of the country which

19

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

the top five regions/countries that send tourists tothe site (Annual Regional Statistical Reports 2016).
The place is often subjected to over-visitation andits side effects. The accumulation of polythene andplastic waste [Fig. 2] is a major dilemma which has

The peak is worshiped by many, attracting
2 to 3.5 million people annually, following the threerecognized trails towards the peak. Most of thesepilgrims consist of locals; however, China, India,
Western Europe, Germany, and Australia remain as

Figure 2: Volunteers cleaning up the Adams peak trail (Photograph by Harindra Fonseka, Gudppl 2017)

Figure 3: Yellow eared bulbuls (a highland endemic bird of Sri Lanka) picking on a pile of garbage captured during the
Hatton trail of Adams peak May 2016 (Photograph by Sajith Madushan Abeygunawardana).

20

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

regarding the protection of the natural world throughtheir philosophy, teachings, investment choices,
approaches to land they control, and religious-based
management systems. The Peak Wilderness fulfils
both requirements by being a historical place of belief
and a declared sanctuary under the fauna and flora
protection ordinance of Sri Lanka, which is one of
the strongest fauna and flora protection legislations
existing to date within Asia. However, considering
the rich biodiversity of the location and the immensepressure from pilgrims, it is necessary to intensify
the conservation measures by systematicallycombining the advantages of faith and regulations.
Biodiversity conservation has been part of Sri Lankan
culture since ancient times, but the uniqueness of
Sri Pada as a symbol of inter-faith harmony can be
developed into a perfect conservation model withmore effort. One major difficulty encountered byconservation practitioners is convincing people toconserve habitats based on scientific arguments
regarding their biodiversity value. Linking culturalvalues with land use and conservation values (Ontario
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 2017) as wellas incorporating these links into policy frameworks
is one method that can be proposed. However,presenting conservation goals in the context ofreligious beliefs offers the potential to be clearly
understood by a wide range of people and could be
used as the ideal soil on which seeds of protection
could be cultivated. The influence and the potential
held by Sri Pada is demonstrated in the establishmentof similar types of shrines with a historic footprint symbol in south-east Asian region (Thailand,
Myanmar, Cambodia) after the thirteen century.
This place is the only one of its kind, which unites
different traditions and belongs to four main religions
for reverence purposes. This is a set example thatexhibits the potential of faith to facilitate religious
tolerance and the exceptional synergy of different
cultural groups (UNESCO World Heritage Centre
2018).

been recognized as one of the unforeseen impacts
and hinders the effective conservation of the place.
Noise pollution, generated by the congested humanforce along the peak trail, has disturbed this tenderecosystem, which is unique and rich in its endemism.
Plucking trees and flowers of sometimes endemic orrare flora species is also another issue faced due tovisitors who lack awareness of the place.
The management engages in numerous
activities during the peak pilgrimage period tofacilitate the pilgrims. These include: building
temporary infrastructures to accommodate people,
managing transportation, managing temporarycommercial structures, and maintaining visitor
facilities (resting, first aid, sanitary). Since over
the years it has been proven that participatory
approaches are the best way to manage theaccumulated waste, in 2012 a collaborative project
was launched between the Central Environmental
Authority and various volunteering parties [Fig. 3],
such as private sector organizations, people fromenvironmental NGOS, local community groups, youth
parties, and university students, to clean the trails.
Annually, these teams of volunteers successfully
remove one to two tons of polythene and otherwaste items from the World Heritage Site (Daily
Mirror 2014). Partly, the polythene and the plastic
collected are handed over to recyclers while the rest
is sent to the Puttalam Cement Corporation to use as
fuel for the incineration process.
■ 5. Recommendations
5.1 Identifying the potential of using the sacrednessof the land as a tool of conservation.
Sacred natural sites are almost certainly the world's
oldest form of habitat protection (Dudley et al.
2009). The sacredness has given the Peak Wilderness
Sanctuary an additional degree of protection throughrestrictions springing from beliefs. According toDudley et al. (2009) religious faiths can influencebiodiversity conservation in protected areas,
sometimes beyond what regulations can achieve.
First, biodiversity conservation is influenced throughthe direct, and often effective, protection afforded
to wild species in sacred natural sites and in seminatural habitats around religious buildings. Second,
religious faiths have a profound impact on attitudes

5.2 Incorporating lessons learnt from managing thePeak Wilderness in to the big picture
According to Verschuuren et al. (2007), the 1994
IUCN protected area categories should be reviewed
to ensure the existing protected area systems,
accurate designation, and their objective setting.
The conservation needs and resource allocations

21

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Conservation has always been a “people’s function.”
Combining the regulations of a country with thebeliefs of the people, that reach out to the core ofthem, can create a successful model to safeguard
nature for the generations to come (Berkes 2007).

for management planning, zoning, and trainingof managers must be prioritized, with attention
paid to the full spectrum of material, cultural, andspiritual values of the existing protected areas,
especially at the local level. Clear specification of
the identity values and existence value of the site,which define the people’s willingness to pay andtheir bond to the place through myth, legend, or
history, is crucial when defining a management plan
for a site with such values (Harmon and Putney
2003). This coincides with the suggestions forbetter management and conservation proposed by
the Department Wildlife Conservation officers of
the Peak Wilderness Sanctuary during discussion
sessions. Further, they highlight the need to restrict
off-season visitations. In a nutshell, lessons learnt
from the conservation management of the Peak
Wilderness site could be incorporated into the
management of other protected areas, throughthe recognition of their cultural and spiritual values.
Visitor management to reduce their impact on
biodiversity, management of trails and walking paths,
public engagement in pollution control, creating
avenues of income generation for local communities
are some of the examples of steps to be taken.

5.3 Converting the practitioners and the academics
from knowledge accumulators to knowledge
disseminators.
Effective management of any resource requires
addressing the knowledge gaps and research needs.
Limited community awareness about heritage often
leads to misinterpretation and destruction. A wellinformed community develops motivation for active
engagement in the conservation process. Also,
defining the nature of the relationship between
individual stakeholders and Sri Pada enables
the development of more effective strategies,
through which each party can benefit from thePeak Wilderness Sanctuary. Often there is aknowledge and application gap between academics,
practitioners, and communities at the grassroots
level. Discussed below are a few recommendations
to engage academic and practitioners to act as

Figure 4: Top view: Peak Wilderness Sanctuary and Adams Peak (Source: http://all.lk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/
adams-peak; Copyright © 2017 all.lk)
22

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

the acquired resources can be directed to address
knowledge gaps and preservation of traditional
knowledge (Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity 2011).

mediators between the different interested parties
and to enhance the effectiveness of the management
process. The Peak Wilderness provides an ideal
setup for bridging this gap as it draws people fromdifferent social strata, varied interest, and different
levels of understanding from all over the country. If
well planned, people would depart from the Peak
Wilderness, not just with renewed faith, but withrefreshed knowledge as well.

5.4 Conclusion
The Peak Wilderness Sanctuary is a uniquecomponent of the Central Highlands of Sri Lanka
World Heritage Site. It combines historical, cultural,environmental, and interfaith values in a single
location, attracting thousands of people every
year. Although faith plays a considerable role inconserving this location and its values, there arestill some threats at large. While recognizing thebeneficial actions and positive impacts of people’s
religious faith on the site, it is necessary to makethe best use of the nature culture linkages throughrecognition, engagement, awareness development,
and systematic planning. With more effort, the Peak
Wilderness Sanctuary could be an ideal model toshare with the global community, showing how faithand nature conservation could go hand in hand.

A great technique for extracting accurate
information on a system or a process is to conduct
questionnaires and discussions with the groundlevel people who interact with the property in theireveryday life (MoMD&E 2016). This group of people
includes, for example, the surrounding community,
local governmental bodies, local conservation
bodies, NGOs and youth groups, and religious
personnel, if any. This will reveal the timely issues or
unforeseen pressures and threats on the heritage
while also revealing the practical solutions thatwere not accounted for in strategic documents or
management plans.
Another approach is to add the essenceof the practitioner’s knowledge and calibrate theinformation extracted from the field. This could bedone with existing literature and available information
or by consulting experts. This can be considered
the brainstorming session, which would eventuallylead to the development of the sustainable meansof effective management of a heritage place while
securing the religious rights of the people. The
participatory waste management project at the Peak
Wilderness site is a result of this approach.
The use of modern technology can alsoenhance the conservation and sustainable utilizationof these sacred grounds. The use of automatedcameras for monitoring, such as the Spatial
Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART) to patrol
this sacred place to minimize the negative impacts
on the biodiversity is just one example. Identifying
collaborators, administrators, and resource persons
with potential to provide financial and technicalsupport can be another crucial step. This can beachieved through developing a strong stakeholder
network. According to the Aichi targets Section E,of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010),
once access and benefit-sharing are identified,

23

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Asian Development Bank. 2010. Sri Lanka Protected Area Management and Wildlife Conservation Project,
Completion Report 2010. Manila: Author.
Ambagamuwa Korale Divisional Secretariat. 2016. Annual Regional Statistical Reports 2016. Ginigathena, Sri
Lanka.
Biodiversity Secretariat, Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment. xxi + 284 pp.
Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka). 2014. Sustaining Sri Pada as a place of worship, pp. A-13.
De Alwis, S.M.D.A.U., Dayawansa, P.N., How, R., Singhakumara, B.M.P., Weerakoon, D. and Wijesinghe, M.R.
2007. Biodiversity Baseline Survey: Peak Wilderness Sanctuary. In: Green, M.J.B. (ed.): Consultancy Services
Report ARD Inc in association with InfoTech IDEAS and GREENTECH Consultants. Sri Lanka Protected Areas
Management and Wildlife Conservation Project (PAM&WCP/CONSULT/02/BDBS), (Prepared for: Departmentof Wildlife Conservation, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, Colombo), 3 pp.
Dudley, N., Higgins-Zogib, L. and Mansourian, S. 2009. The Links between Protected Areas, Faiths, and Sacred
Natural Sites. Conservation Biology 23, pp. 568–577.
Dudley, N., Higgins-Zogib, L., and Mansourian, S., eds. 2005. Beyond Belief: Linking faiths and protected areas
to support biodiversity conservation. Gland: World Wildlife Fund for Nature.
Fikret Berkes, F. 2007. Community-based conservation in a globalized world. PNAS 2007 September, 104 (39),pp. 15188-15193.
http://www.chasinsummits.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Gudppls-Cleanup-Drive-Sri Pada-Adams-Peak.
png [accessed 20 November 2017]
Harmon, D., and A.D. Putney, eds. 2003. The Full Value of Parks: From Economics to the Intangible. Lanham,Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.
Jayathilake, R. 2003. Sri Pada: Symbol of inter-faith Harmony.
http://sripada.org/jayatilake.htm [accessed 6 June 2018]
Living Heritage Network. 2017. Sri Pada: Myth, Legend and Geography.
http://sripada.org/geography.htm [accessed 20 July 2017]
Lockwood, I., 2015. Map of Central Highlands Sri Lanka, Scale 1:5000, Acr Map 1.2, Overseas School ofColombo Geography department, Survey Department, Sri Lanka, 2015.
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sports, Ontario. 2017. A Guide to Cultural Heritage Resources in the Land Use
Planning Process, pp. 1-65.
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MENR) 2006. Habitat maps for selected areas in Sri Lanka:
Peak Wilderness Sanctuary. Final Report. Prepared by EML Consultants. MENR Colombo, 68 pp.
Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment (MoMD&E). 2016. National Biodiversity Strategic Action
Plan 2016-2022. Colombo: Author.

24

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Secretariat of the Convention of Biological Diversity, Montreal. 2011. Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic
Resouces and Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on
Biological Diversity (Text and Annex).
https://www.cbd.int/abs/doc/protocol/nagoya-protocol-en.pdf [accessed 1 July 2018 ]Taylor, K. 2013. Cultural Mapping: Intangible Values and Engaging with Communities with Some Reference toAsia. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 4(1), pp.50-61.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 2018. Tentative Lists 1992-2018, Seruwila to Sri Pada (Sacred Foot
Print Shrine), Ancient pilgrim route along the Mahaweli river in Sri Lanka. https://whc.unesco.org/en/
tentativelists/5531 [accessed 1 July 2018]
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 2017. Central Highlands of Sri Lanka. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1203)[accessed 23 July 2017]
Verschuuren, B., Mallarach, J.M. and Oviedo, G. 2007. Sacred sites and protected areas. IUCN Protected Area
Categories, pp.1-9.
Wickramasinghe, A. 2002. Conservation innovations of peripheral communities: Case study of Adam’s
Peak wilderness. In Proceedings of the South and Central Asian MAB meeting of Experts on Environmental
Conservation, Management and Research, 15-18 October 2002, pp. 105-123. Hikkaduwa, Sri Lanka.

25

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary:
Nature-Culture Linkages in a
Sacred Landscape in Indian
Himalayan Region
Upma Manral

Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Post Box# 18; Dehradun-248001, Uttarakhand, upmamanral2@gmail.com■ Abstract
Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary is among the largest protected areas in Western Himalaya. The vast variability inclimate, geology, and topography results in a rich biological diversity with varied floral and faunal assemblages.
The landscape has many sacred elements, which includes the famous Kedar circuit, comprising of five Shiva
temples and many other Hindu shrines. Forest patches, alpine meadows, and trees associated with shrines or
local deities are also considered sacred. The landscape has around 172 villages with local communities holding
traditional rights of phyto-resource use from the area; 12 villages are located inside the Sanctuary. In recent
decades, various natural and anthropogenic challenges have been threatening the nature-culture mix that
forms the foundation of sacredness of the landscape. It becomes imperative that policies and action programs
to enhance ecological sustainability are appropriated and local cultural beliefs, with embedded conservation
ethics, are integrated in the environmental governance and management of the landscape.
KEY WORDS: Conservation challenges, local communities, Mandakini River basin, protected area, Western
Himalaya■ 1. Introduction

Sanctuary forests for their day-to-day sustenance.
Forests in the region have had a long history ofcommercial logging, since its pre-independence era
when it was part of the British Garhwal.

1.1 Overview of the heritage site
The Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary (hereafter KWS) issituated in the catchment of the Mandakini and
Alaknanda Rivers, and form a large sub-catchment of
the River Ganga. It is located between 78⁰54’E and79⁰27’E Longitudes and 30⁰25’N and 30⁰45’ N
Latitudes and has a wide elevational range from 1100
to 7068 m asl. With an area of 975 km 2 , KWS isamong the largest protected areas in the Western
Himalayas and the state of Uttarakhand [Fig. 1]. The
KWS landscape includes an area declared as
Sanctuary and areas falling within 5 km of its
boundaries (Singh and Gangte 2009). The landscapeincludes around 172 villages, with local communities
holding traditional rights of livestock grazing, lopping,and grass cutting from within the Sanctuary area. The
inhabitants of these villages depend largely on the

1.2 Brief description of the sacred landscape
The KWS landscape is home to the Kedarnathtemple, one of the most revered and holiest Hindu
shrines of lord Shiva and part of the Char Dhampilgrimage (which consists of four major Hindu
temples) in Uttarakhand. Shiva is among the principal
deities in Hinduism and is considered the ‘destroyer
and transformer’. There are many symbols of the
Pandavas, princes and king from the Sanskrit epic,
the Mahabharata, scattered in and around theKWS. It is believed that the Pandavas came to the
Himalaya in search of lord Shiva, to seek forgivenessfor killing their kin in the Kurukshetra war. Shiva did
not want to forgive them and, disguising himself

26

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 1: Location of Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary in Uttarakhand, India.

between April and November (from Akshaya Tritriya
to Kartik Purnima, Hindu auspicious days) due toextreme weather conditions. The deities are brought
to various Shiva temples at lower elevation during
winters.

as a bull, hid among the cattle and then sank into
the ground. However, some of the bull’s body parts
were still visible above the ground; this is where
the Shiva temples, Kedarnath, Madhmaheshwer,
Tungnath, Rudranath and Kalpeshwer, were built[Figs 2 & 3]. All the temples, except Kalpeshwer, aresituated above 3500 m elevation and are open only

Other temples include Mandani, Kalimath,Figure 2: Location of prominent Hindu shrines, high elevation lakes and trekking routes within the Kedarnath Wildlife
Sanctuary Landscape (Source: Rai et al. 2017).
27

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

falvigula), Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus),and Himalayan Pika (Ochotona roylei). With a wide
elevational gradient and rich habitat-diversity, theKWS also offers a potential for rich avian diversity.
According to a partial checklist, the Sanctuary has
244 species of birds, including three ‘threatened’
species (Lepage 2017).

Triyuginarayan, Anasuya Devi, and many smaller
shrines, which all draw thousands of pilgrims fromacross India. These temples support the local
economy greatly, as men from the neighbouring
valleys and Nepal work as guides, porters, or run
shops and lodges around these temples. Nature
and wildlife tourism are also gradually gaining
momentum among tourists in the landscape.
Famous treks include the Deoriya-Tungnath-Chopta,
Madhmaheshwer, Nandi Kund, and Mandani, toname a few.

2.2 Cultural values
The forests, alpine meadows, rivers, rocks, andhigh elevation lakes within the landscape havedeep cultural significance [Figs 3 & 4]. A few of theexamples include the Mandani valley and alpine
meadow, Deoria Lake, Vaitarani River, and Kalishila
rock. According to Hindu mythology, the goddess
Durga killed the demon Mahishasura, buried him in
the earth, and sat on him as a rock in the Mandani
meadow. There are a small temple and rock at
the same place and the goddess is worshipped as
Mandani or Manani Mai. Another legend is that the
Pandavas crossed the valley during their ascent toheaven from the Swargarohini peak. In the Rudranath
temple complex, there are several sacred watertanks, or Kund, originating from natural streams andthe holy river ‘Vaitarani,’ the ‘river of salvation’. While
devotees take a dip in the holy Kund, they perform
rituals for their dead kin so that their spirit can crossto the other world in the river. Kalishila, or black-rock,is a holy rock where the goddess Kali was incarnatedin order to kill the demon Raktbeej and to rid deitiesof other demons [Fig. 3d]. Deoria taal is a lake where
Hindu deities are believed to have bathed and where
the Pandavas were asked questions by a Yakshas. ora nature-spirit, before they could quench their thirst[Fig. 3e].

■ 2. Significance of the heritage place
2.1 Natural values
KWS is neither a World Heritage site nor on the
Tentative List; however; it is recognised as a
‘Habitat/Species Management Area’ by the IUCN
(International Union for Conservation of Nature)and is reputed among the world’s richest bioreserves. The Sanctuary falls under the Himalayan
Bio-geographical zone (2) and West Himalayan Biotic
province (B) with alpine, temperate coniferous,
broadleaf, and subtropical forests as biomes (Rodgers
and Panwar 1988). The permanent ice and snow line
has been demarcated at or above 5000 m within
the Sanctuary. The diverse climate, geology, andtopography of the region has resulted in a varied
floral assemblage within the Sanctuary. It is estimatedthat about 44.4–48.8% of the area is forested, 7.7% isalpine meadows and scrub, 42.1% is rocky or underpermanent snow, and 1.5% was formerly forested
but has since degraded (Prabhakar et al. 2001).
A total of 886 dicotyledons and 253
monocotyledons have been recorded from within
the area (Rai et al. 2017). A number of endangered
plant species, including Acer caesium, A. oblongum,
Aconitum ferox, Allium stracheyi, Coelogyne cristata,
Dendrobium normale, Kobresia duthiei, Saussurea
roylei, and Schizandra grandiflora, are recorded
from the Sanctuary (Singh and Rai 2008). Twentyeight mammal species have been confirmed; theHimalayan musk deer (Moschus leucogaster), an‘endangered’ species on the IUCN Red list, is theflagship species of the KWS (Sathyakumar 1994).
Other mammals include the common leopard(Panthera pardus), Himalayan weasel (Mustela
sibirica), Himalayan yellow-throated marten (Martes

Plant species, like Saussurea spp., Primulaspp., Brassica spp., Ficus spp., and Zanthoxylum
armatum etc., are highly valued and used in various
religious ceremonies. Saussurea obvallata or Brahma
Kamal is one such plant that is highly revered andfinds its place in many mythological stories associatedwith the Hindu Gods. It grows in the high alpine
areas in the KWS and the flowers are offered to the
Hindu deities, particularly lord Shiva. It is collected by
pastoralists, brought to villages at lower elevation andis distributed among devotees as the deities’ blessings[Fig. 4]. Juniper spp. and Nardostachys jatamansi areburnt as incense sticks to offer prayers to deities and28

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ 3. Current management arrangements

Zanthoxylum branches are kept in the house to ward
off evil spirits. In villages, one or two trees (Ficus spp.,
Prunus cerasoides, Quercus spp., etc.), which growcloser to a shrine, are dedicated to Isht devta or local
deities, worshipped, and are not lopped [Fig. 3f].
Sometimes families build a small shrine and plant atree at the edge of their agricultural field as a naturalsymbol of the harmonious relationship between
humans and supernatural entities.

The Sanctuary is currently managed and protectedby the Kedarnath Wildlife Forest Division of Forest
department, the Government of Uttarakhand, andadministered under the Wildlife (Protection) Act,
1972. The inhabitants of the villages situated within
KWS, and in the immediate proximity, have traditionalgrazing and resource extraction rights within the

Figure 3: Sacred elements of the landscape: a) Kedarnath, b) Madhmaheshwer, c) Tungnath d) Kalishilla (a rockworshipped as a Hindu goddess), e) Deoriya lake (a lake where deities are believed to have taken bath) and f) A temple
and associated sacred tree within a village .

Figure 4: Snow clad peaks, alpine meadows and a holy shrine: Nature and culture as encountered together in KWS
landscape (at Budha Madhmaheshwer).
29

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

increased human population growth, development
activities within the Sanctuary and its fringes,
increased religious and nature tourist inflow, andthe consequent forest resource extraction andinfrastructure development in fragile ecosystems,
and pressure from unsustainable harvesting ofresources, and wildlife conflict and poaching. Studies
have shown that these challenges result in forest
degradation and changes in the regeneration patternsof native flora, and the impact of disturbances on
wildlife and its habitat in the Sanctuary (Manral et al.
2017; Misra et al. 2009; Singh et al. 2010; Thakur etal. 2011). There are also reports of the dispersal ofanthropogenic disturbances deeper into the relatively
undisturbed forests within the Sanctuary (Singh et al.
2010).

Sanctuary. Shepherds from these villages takelivestock to the alpine meadows every year during
summer and monsoon months. Village councils, orpanchayat, look after the local rights in these areas
as well as manage the community forests within
the landscape. The temple committee and village
councils maintain the temples, sacred meadows,
and tree-stands within the landscape. Many civilsociety organizations, working towards capacity
development, ecological restoration, and women
empowerment, work with local communities towards
achieving biodiversity conservation and livelihood
improvement. Block development offices (anadministrative division for planning and development
at district sub-division level), departments related toagriculture, horticulture, and animal husbandry areother stakeholders working towards development in
the landscape.

There are 12 villages inside the Sanctuary andabout 160 villages within 5 km from the boundaryof the Sanctuary, which vary from subtropical totemperate regions. Local communities have very
few livelihood options and are highly dependent on
the natural resources and marginalized traditional
agricultural practices [Fig. 5]. Basic amenities, suchas primary education and health services, are notuniformly available in the remote villages. The
area has seen frequent natural calamities in recent
decades, resulting in the loss of forests, humanassets, and lives. Heavy rainfall in June 2013, due toan early onset of monsoon rains, in the Mandakini
River catchment resulted in a glacial lake outburst,
landslides and flash floods that have claimed thelives of thousands of locals and tourists and resulted
in an economic loss in the millions of rupees. All ofthese challenges have resulted in negative trends
in the economic and ecological well-being of themountain people. Consequently, the region sees ahigh migration of locals in search of reliable income
sources and better prospect for their children.

3.1 Management History
Forests in the region have formed part of the
Alaknanda catchment in the British Garhwal since
1815, after the British defeated the Gorkhas. During
the first two decades, they classified these forests asclass-I and class-II forests. After independence, a 10year ban (beginning in 1953) on green felling (cutting
down green trees) was imposed in the hill regionat or above 1000 m elevation which also resulted
in the ending of green felling in the landscape as
well. Various timber extraction practices, including
fuelwood and bamboo harvest, were continued as
mentioned in the working plan of the Kedarnath
Forest Division; however, the amendment in the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, in 1991, brought allcommercial activities in the area to a halt. KWS was
created in 1972 under the General Hunting Rules
UP for 10 years. With the enactment of the Wildlife(Protection) Act 1972, the Sanctuary came under the
responsibility and dual control of the wildlife wing(ensuring protection of wildlife) and territorial staff(silviculture and other forestry activities) (Singh andGangte 2009).

This out migration of people, particularly
youth from villages, impacts local culture hugely.
Many traditional art forms (preparing woolen items
and containers from hill bamboos, playing traditionalmusic instruments, and folk songs about local deities
and kings) are being lost. The ethno-medicinal
knowledge, in their traditional health care system, isalso being lost gradually. Driven by the socio-culturalchange from subsistence to market economy, local
communities prefer cash crops over traditional crops,■ 4. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity
The KWS landscape faces a number of natural andanthropogenic challenges, which includes landslides
and flash floods in narrow valleys, forest fires,

30

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

beliefs, and rituals are associated with various naturalelements of the landscape and often have embedded
conservation ethics which underpin this relationship.
It is important for policymakers and scholars tounderstand the significance of the landscape,from both cultural and ecological perspectives;
the religious values, of both natural and humanbuilt components, within the landscape can act as
catalysts for environmental conservation throughsite-specific strategies. These cultural linkages to thenatural systems of the landscape can greatly enhance
the positive attitude of local communities and visitors
towards conservation.

resulting in the loss of many traditional varieties.
This gradual alienation of people from their land andculture may result in the loss of religious customs andcultural norms along with the indigenous knowledge
over time.
Like the rest of the Himalaya, KWS is
also prone to the projected climate change andconsequent changes in vegetation structures andcomposition. Adhikari et al. (2012) found variations inmajor plant phonological processes, such as leaf bud
break, leaf fall, and flowering in timberline species,
in response to inter-annual climate variations. Witha host of drivers such as infrastructure development,changing land-use and weak political will towards
conservation, the projected climatic variation may
bring complex changes in the social-ecologicalsystems of the landscape, threatening its role as arich repository of both natural and cultural values.

Despite being both a wildlife protected area
and a sacred landscape, KWS faces numerous threats
from both exploitative tourism and unregulatedresource extraction by the local communities. The
natural disasters during the current decade haveboth exposed and enhanced the environmental,social-economic, and cultural vulnerabilities of thenatural and anthropogenic systems of the area. Strict
regulations from the managing authorities have only
enhanced the conflict between the managing bodies,
the religio-cultural groups, and the local communities.
Lessons can be learnt from the neighboring Nanda
Devi Biosphere Reserve, where science and religion
were brought together to restore the sacred forests of
Badrinath shrine, and Eco-development committees■ 5. Conclusion and recommendations
The KWS landscape is dotted with Hindu shrines,
a vast network of pilgrimage routes, sacred alpine
meadow and forests and trees, and is an area ofrich biodiversity, which make it a region of highcultural, aesthetics, and heritage values. These
values symbolize the essence and identity of thelocal culture and traditions. Local festivals, religious

Figure 5: Natural resources from forests of Sanctuary form the foundation of local rural economy: d shows pastoralists
bringing Saussurea obvallata or Brahma Kamal to be distributed among devotees and (f) shows a woman crossing alandslide while carrying grass on her back.
31

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

needed to develop methodologies for incorporating
the sacred values of the human-built and naturalelements of a landscape, as well as the culturalbeliefs of local communities, into conservation
approaches which can be tested through establishingdemonstration models at a few locations in thelandscape.

(EDCs), comprised of villagers, were establishedwith active support from the forest department in
the Bhyundar valley regarding cleaning, upkeep,
and garbage management along the treks to theValley of Flower and Hemkund Sahib. Similarly, theKedarnath temple committee, and other religious
groups active in the region, could be involved in
the conservation efforts by enhancing their role asmedium to promote sustainable tourism practices
which could involve respecting the natural values,
proper waste disposal, and discouraging unessential
resource consumption. Local institutions could also
be involved in the restoration of the degraded lands
through scientifically informed plantation drives.
There is a need to find alternatives tohandle the natural resources that support the local
communities and the increased tourist inflow. One
such approach is to formulate long-term energy
strategies by promoting the implementation ofrenewable-energy technologies. This may include
encouraging the use of solar photovoltaic lights, solar
cookers, water heaters, and improved cook stoves
as well as the continuous need-based upgradationof these products. It is also imperative to increase
phyto-biomass production within the humanlandscape, by planting fast-growing native grasses
and multipurpose tree species, which might reduce
extraction pressure within forests.
In the pursuit of overall sustainable
development and the conservation of naturecultural linkages in the sacred and biologically rich
KWS landscape, appropriate policies and action
programs are needed to enhance the ecologicalsustainability within the region. Suitable spatialplanning policies should be made to support the
infrastructural development, particularly to support
heavy pilgrimage to the Shiva temples in naturalcalamity prone areas. In the current scenario ofcontinuous environmental degradation, the inclusionof local institutions in environmental governancehas the tendency to influence the management
and conservation of natural systems. The wide gap
in managing the natural and religio-cultural valuesof the KWS sacred landscape should be minimized
by abolishing or minimizing the exclusionist policies
while encouraging buy-in of key stakeholders by
involving them in the governance and conservation of
the landscape and its resources. Further studies are

32

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Adhikari, B. S., Rawat, G. S., Rai I. D., Bhattacharyya, S., and Bharati, R. R. 2012. Ecological assessment ofTimberline ecotone in Western Himalaya with special reference to climate change and anthropogenic pressure,
Final report, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New
Delhi. Pp 367.
Lepage, D. 2017. Avibase - Bird Checklists of the World: Kedarnath Musk Deer Sanctuary. http://avibase.bsceoc.org/checklist.jsp?region=INwhuk03&list=howardmoore [accessed 25 July 2017]
Manral, U., Badola, R., and Hussain, S. A. 2017. Forest Composition and Structure Under Various DisturbanceRegimes in the Alaknanda River Basin, Western Himalaya. Mountain Research and Development, 37(3): pp
310-322.
Misra, S., Maikhuri, R. K., Dhyani, D., and Rao, K.S. 2009. Assessment of traditional rights, local interference
and natural resource management in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary. International Journal of Sustainable
Development and World Ecology, 16(6): pp. 404-416.
Prabhakar, B., Sharma, S. S., and Singh, R. L. 2001. Management plan of Kedarnath muskdeer Sanctuary (from2000–2001 to 2009–2010) Part I and II. Wildlife Preservation Organization, Uttar Pradesh: Forest department.
Rai, I. D., Singh, G., and Rawat, G. S. 2017. Plants of Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Himalaya: A field
guide. M/s Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh, Dehradun.
Rodgers, W. A, and Panwar, S. H. 1988. Biogeographical classification of India. New Forest, Dehradun.
Sathyakumar, S. 1994. Habitat Ecology of Major Ungulates in Kedarnath Musk Deer Sanctuary, Western
Himalaya. Ph. D. Thesis, Saurashtra University, Gujarat, India.
Singh, D. K., and Gangte, B. K. 2009. Management Plan of Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary (From 2010-2011 to
2019-2020) Part I, II & Appendices. Wildlife Preservation Organization, Forest Department, Uttarakhand. India.
Singh, G., and Rai, I. D. 2008. Threatened plant of Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, Western
Himalaya, In Rawat, G. S. (ed.): Special Habitats and Threatened plants of India. ENVIS, Wildlife and Protected
Area, 11(1). pp. 51-54. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.
Singh, G., Rawat, G. S., and Verma, D. 2010. Comparative study of fuelwood consumption by villagers andseasonal ‘‘Dhaba Owners’’in the tourist affected regions of Garhwal Himalaya, India. Energy Policy 38(2010):
pp 1895–1899.
Thakur, A. K, Singh, G., Singh, S., and Rawat, G. S. 2011. Impact of pastoral practices on forest cover andregeneration in the outer fringes of Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Himalaya. Journal of the IndianSociety of Remote Sensing 39(1): pp 127-134

33

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Sacredness in the Laponian
Area Mixed World Heritage Site

Florence Revelin

National Museum of Natural History, Department Man and Environment, 17 place du Trocadéro, 75016 Paris. +33 (0)1 73 78
28 06, +33 (0)6 83 88 81 41, revelin@mnhn.fr■ Abstract
In the Laponian Area, a Mixed World Heritage (WH) Site in Northern Europe, sacred sites are notable as
outstanding components of the landscape. These places are important in the traditional Saami culture andare called sieidi in the Saami language. They relate to rock formations and reliefs that the Saami indigenous
people -who traditionally live on reindeer herding and from the land- encounter when they move or migrate
within their lands for reindeer transhumance. Sacred values associated with these sites are inherited from thetime when the traditional shamanist religion was practiced by the Saami. Sieidi are still of great importance inunderstanding the Saami’s cultural perception of landscapes. Some of these spectacular places are also valued
for their aesthetic and ecological values since the beginning of the 20th century, when the area started to
become a tourist destination, and were included in the first national parks created in Europe (1909). Today, they
are part of the mosaic of protected areas listed as the Laponian Area WH Site in 1996, and crystallise part ofthe cultural and natural values of Laponia’s landscapes.
KEY WORDS: Laponian Area Mixed World Heritage, Sieidi, Saami Sacred Places, Landscapes, Rock-formation.

■ 1. Introduction

Site, Sarek and Stora Sjöfallet, count among thefirst such protected areas established in Sweden
and Europe, in 1909, and its other national parks
and nature reserves were established in the earlysecond half of the 20th century2. The area contains
two dominant landscape types: an eastern lowland
comprising marshlands, hundreds of lakes, and mixed
woodlands; and a western mountainous landscape,with steep valleys and powerful rivers, which contains
about 100 glaciers.

1.1 Laponian Area: a mixed site in Saami Lands,
Northern Europe
The Laponian Area (shortened to Laponia1) covers
a territory of 9,400 km2 in Northern Sweden [Fig.
1]. Listed as a Mixed Cultural and Natural Heritage
Site on the UNESCO World Heritage List (WH) in
1996, Laponia brings together several protectedareas, comprising four national parks and two nature
reserves, which offer a great variety of natural andcultural landscapes.

This mosaic of protected areas is situatedin the vast region historically settled by the Saami
indigenous people, a territory covering Northern
Fennoscandia3 [Fig. 2], which they call Sápmi. The

Two of the national parks within the WH
１“Laponia” is the common name used in Sweden to refer to the WH site. This is a shortened version of the officialname found on the WH List: “The Laponian Area.” Laponia is an area situated in the broader region of Lappland(covering Northern Fennoscandia), also called Sápmi.

2

From 1942 to 1988.

3

Fennoscandia stretches across four countries: Norway, Sweden, Finland, and the Kola Peninsula in Russia.

34

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

traditional activities, especially reindeer herding,remain essential to their culture and identity. The
Saami herders living in Laponia have an intimate
knowledge of their land and of its diverse resources,
which they utilize in many ways. The site is still fully
used for reindeer husbandry today (Dahlström
Nilsson 2003) and it covers nine samebyar4 , i.e.

Saami consider this region their ancestral landand defend their close ties to it. Their traditional
livelihoods are based on a subsistence economy,
consisting of hunting, fishing, handicrafts, andtranshumant herding of semi-domesticated reindeer.
Although the Saami’s activities are more diversified
today in the context of a western livelihood, those

Figure 1: Location of Laponia among World Heritage Sites in Europe and Asia. Source http://whc.unesco.orgeninteractivemap, July 2017.

Figure 2: Location of Laponia, Northern Sweden. Source : National Geographic, 2016.

4

A Sameby (or samebyar in plural form) is a community of reindeer herders working together on a geographic

entity delimiting the grazing area.

35

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 3: Reindeer herds during a winter-spring transhumance (east of Laponia). Source: Florence Revelin.

conception of the world, with a strong belief in thepresence of ancestors and other spiritual beingsat certain locations. These holy places, sometimes
consisting of entire mountains, were objects ofdifferent kinds of ceremonies. They are to be foundeverywhere in the Saami landscape – along the
migratory routes, at the dwelling sites, in the hunting– grounds and by fishing-waters.” (Mulk 1994, p.123)

reindeer herding communities and their territories,
which comprise different seasonal grazing areas [Fig. 3].
1.2 Sieidi: sacred places inherited from the ancient
shamanist religion
In Laponia, sacredness mainly refers to sacred sites,
which are places noticeable for their outstanding
natural formations. These places are important in
the traditional Saami culture and are called sieidi5 in
Saami language or seite in Swedish. They relate torock formations and reliefs that herders encounter
when they move or migrate within their territories
for purposes of reindeer transhumance (Roué 2015).
Sieidi are often remarkable for their shape: it canbe a singular stone or an unusual land form that isnoticeable in the landscape. The archaeologist IngaMaria Mulk describes these places, which weresacrificial places, as important components of the
Saami society and of their intimate relation to theland and to spirituality:

Sacred values associated with sieidis are
inherited from the period when the traditional
shamanist religion was still practiced by the Saami. At
this time, sacred sites were used as places of worshipand sacrifice, where the shamans (noaide) officiated.
The Christianization of Northern Scandinavia, whichstarted in the 16th century, eroded the traditionalreligion, which was based on an animist ontology,
and practices associated with sacred sites havevirtually disappeared today. However, shamanismand many sacred places are still named and known
by the Saami, who still recognize that some sites andlandscapes hold a sacred value. Mulk (1994) showsthat this heritage has been transmitted not only

“ They were part of the pre-Christian
5

We will use the saami term of “sieidi" in the article to refer to sacred places.

36

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

are often located near unusual natural formations,like a mountain, a strangely shaped rock, a cave
or a cliff. Several Sámi names tell of sacred places,
for example Sájvva6 . Sacrificial sites began to be
used in the 900s and may have been used into the19th century. They are still revered within the Sámi
community, and as a visitor you should show respect
for these sites. Leaffásáiva in northern Laponia is an
example of an area with Sámi sacrificial sites locatedby a lake and a mountain.”(Laponia Management

through the persistence of oral tradition, but also
through other means such as historical records andscientific investigation (Op.cit., p122).
Sieidis are still of great importance tounderstanding the Saami’s cultural conception andperception of landscapes, as well as the Saami’s
language and traditional singing (juoigos), all ofwhich are important components of the Saami’s
identity today despite being largely hybridized with

Figure 4: Nammásj (center of the picture) and Skierffe (right) in the valley of Rappadalen, Laponia.
Source:www.panoramio.com, July 2017

the Swedish and Western culture. In Laponia, as in alllands inhabited and used by the Saami for reindeer
husbandry, many sacred places are still known today
and identified as such, although they are not formallyused for religious matters. A complete inventory ofsuch places has not been made, but their existence
is described in the management plan for the WH
site, putting the emphasis on the relation between
sacredness and the toponymy of the landscapes:

Plan 2011, p.42)
Two sacred places are especially known for
their spectacular landscapes: Skierffe and Nammásj[Fig.4]. These rock formations have specific shapesthat form steep and scenic landscapes which contrast
with a large valley (Rappadalen). They include several
sites where people and the gods met, according tolocal history. Holding a sacred value from the Saami’s
perspective, those places are also representative
images of the local spectacular landscapes fromoutsiders’ perspectives. They are symbolic images“Sacrificial sites and other sacred grounds arefound in many places in the Sámi landscape. They
6

Sájvva is a suffix meaning “sacred lake” or “sacred mountain” in Lule Saami, one of the two Saami dialects (with North Saami) spoken in this part ofSápmi.

37

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

migration with reindeer herds in an annual cycle was
fully established. (UNESCO WHC, Decision: CONF 201
VIII.B, 1996)
The justification of OUV also refers tocontemporary Saami culture and the persistenceof a semi-nomadic livelihood based on reindeer
transhumance:of the area, staged in a century’s worth of tourist
brochures and iconography, to represent its “wild”
nature and the scenic landscapes of the local
national parks. We will see that these aesthetic andnatural values have played a significant role in theconservation of the area, both as a symbol of an“untouched” nature and as a testimony to the site’s
integrity.

[…] these ancestral ways of life, based on theseasonal movement of livestock, have been renderedobsolete or been abandoned in many parts of theworld, making the property one of the last andamong the largest and best preserved of those few
that survive. (Ibid.)■ 2. Significance of natural and cultural heritageand conservation status
2.1 World Heritage values of the site
Aesthetic and natural values of Laponia compose theforefront of the heritage conservation system, madeof multiple layers on the national and international
scales. Several attributes of the area have indeed
contributed to defining the Outstanding Universal
Value (OUV) of Laponia through the criteria vii(aesthetic), and partly led to its nomination to the
WH List7 Two other natural criteria describe Laponia’svalues: viii (geology) and ix (ecological processes).
They refer to the great variety of natural phenomenathat relates to the variety of the sites’ landscapes,
including their rich flora, mountains, lake areas withactive deltas, wetlands, and primeval boreal forest(IUCN/WCMC, 1996).

Although these cultural features arerecognised today and included in the management
and conservation system of the area, it is importantto underline that the WH application process wasprimarily only based on the natural values of thesmaller territory of the Sjaunja nature reserve. The
initiative emerged from a century-long history ofconservation efforts for the diverse ecosystems andoutstanding natural heritage in the region (especiallywetlands and avifauna). These first stages of theprocess, in the late 1980’s-early 1990’s, were seen
by Saami representatives involved in the defence ofindigenous rights as a denial of their close ties to theregion (Dahlström 2003, Green 2009; Roué 2013,
Revelin 2013). It is only since 1996 that the culturalvalues of the area have been officially recognizedthrough the international status of the WH andthanks to the intervention of Saami representatives,
who demonstrated the cultural values of the site
(Mulk I-M. 1997; Teilus M., Lindahl K. 2000).

The mixed WH nomination includes therecognition of cultural values. These relate tocenturies of occupation of the area by the Saami
people, which represents an outstanding living
example of a traditional human interaction with theenvironment (criteria iii and v). Ancient monuments
and cult sites connected with the Saami areprotected under the provisions of the 1988 Ancient
Monuments Act.

2.2 Sacredness and Conservation as shown by
Laponia
Analysis of the official documentation (IUCN 1996
and ICOMOS 1996) and research focusing on the WH
application process (Dahlström 2003, Green 2009,
Roué 2013) show that sacredness was not a coredimension in the demonstration of the OUV during
the application process. However, it is an implicit
and inherent dimension when talking about theSaami’s cultural landscapes: it relates to the Saami’s
toponymy and intimate knowledge and experience

Archaeological remains attest to the arrival ofearly inhabitants to Laponia 6,000-7,000 years ago:
The settlers were nomadic hunter-gatherers,
subsisting principally on wild reindeer, and traces of
their occupation are found in the form of hearths andhouse-foundations. The domestication of reindeer
began about two thousand years ago. It evolved
gradually, and in the 16th and 17th century the Saami7

See the description of the criteria for the assessment of Outstanding Universal Value in the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World
Heritage Convention (WHC, 2017, pp. 25-26).

38

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

of landscapes, both of which are essential to themigrations of herders during transhumance.

Protection Agency (SEPA),- 1 seat for the County Administrative Board.

T h e m a n a ge m e nt p l a n o f t h e a re a
makes a small reference to this dimension, inline with the Convention on Biological Diversity,
as an “international instrument which implies
commitments for Sweden for the management of
Laponia” (Laponia Management Plan, Appendix 42011). This refers to the Akwé: Kon Guidelines (2004):“Voluntary guidelines for the conduct of cultural,environmental and social impact assessments
regarding developments proposed to take place on,or which are likely to impact on, sacred sites and on
lands and waters traditionally occupied or used byindigenous and local communities.”

This committee functions by consensus
decision-making, drawing on a traditional systemused in herding communities. Its establishment
represents an important step forward for the Saami:
it symbolizes a significant change in the governanceof their traditional lands. The management of thenational parks and nature reserves, previously piloted
by the SEPA, has been transferred to this organ andis regulated by a common management plan. The
UNESCO World Heritage Centre now presents thisoverall management system as an example of goodpractice based on its collaborative dimension andthe significance of local people’s participation (World
Heritage Review 2012).

Sacredness does not play a major rolein Laponia’s official management system for theconservation of landscapes: sacred places are
not referred to as a core aspect of management,
although mentioned as places for which “visitors
should show respect” as they are “still revered within
the Saami community” (Laponia Management
Plan 2011). However, the places are significant
as intangible cultural heritage related to the local
landscapes and are thus respected in the ordinary
use that the reindeer herders make of this area.

3.2 Current state of conservation and challenges for abetter integration of sacredness
According to the recent IUCN Outlook
Assessment of the WH natural and mixed sites,“the overall state of conservation of the site is goodand stable.” The four national parks and two nature
reserves within the property demonstrate “highly
effective management”8 (World Heritage Outlook,consulted in August 2017).

■ 3. Which management system and what are thestakes for sacredness in Laponia?

A key challenge for maintaining thesacred value of landscapes would be to achieve
better knowledge and integration of this implicit
dimension. This challenge is reinforced by thefact that the spiritual and sacred values of a given
natural landscape do not easily fit within the official
management categories of national and international
systems.

3.1 Laponia Tjuottjuddus: a Participatory
Management System including the Saami’s
perspective on conservation
Since 2012, the WH site has had its own
management board, in charge of implementing
the management plan (adopted in 2011). Thisparticipatory management system, officially called
Laponia Tjuottjudus (in saami), is composed in
majority of Saami representatives and integrates
representatives from all levels of society:- 5 seats for Saami representatives,- 2 seats for the representatives of both
municipalities encompassed within the site’sborders,- 1 seat for the Swedish Environmental

Collecting detailed knowledge of sieidi from a Saami’s
perspective would allow for better understanding
and the integration of this dimension into theconservation of the area. This issue is, today, partly
addressed through the “Naturum” project, a visitor
centre dedicated to presenting the “Reindeer
Landscapes” through a Saami lens (Revelin 2015).
This project also encompasses a website dedicatedto presenting Laponia’s heritage, in all its diversity:
laponia.nu. It puts the emphasis on the description of

8

Conclusions made in the IUCN Outlook only concern natural criteria.

39

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

of the area (2010s) - including both the setting up
of a participatory management board where Saami
representatives are involved and the adoption of amanagement plan where the Saami’s perspective isconsidered - strengthen the linkages between natureand culture in the stewardship of the area. This more
integrated approach is based on a greater recognitionof the local perspective on heritage conservationand contributes to overcoming the historical
opposition between nature conservation and local
development. Transhumant reindeer herding is thus
addressed as an evolving and living practice, including
modernization dynamics, and which is inherently
linked to the local landscape and its conservation.

the Saami’s cultural landscapes. Some research is still
currently being undertaken on the Saami’s intangible
cultural heritage in order to enrich this project.
■ 4. Conclusion: linkages of nature and culture insieidi
Laponia is an interesting example where close
linkages between nature and culture are observablethrough the sacred value of landscapes. Specificnatural formations in the landscape were considered
as sacred places (sieidi) by the Saami. They wereused as worship places and held an important role inthe shamanist religion. There is no evidence of thepersistence of such shamanist practices. However,siedi still imply particular knowledge, relationships,
and perceptions of local natural landscapes which
are important today to Saami culture, identity, andempowerment.

The sacred value of Laponia is also part of thisnexus between nature and culture, as it relates tolivelihoods, knowledge, transhumance, and theheritage of ancient worship practices that constitutethis cultural landscape, both historically and today.
Thus, even if sacredness has not been addressed as amajor stake in local conservation history, the physicalsubstrate of this spirituality has been preserved for its
natural values. Though difficult to implement, recent
revalorization of the Saamis’ role and perspective
on heritage identification and management appears
as a major asset to better address and consider
sacredness as a component of the complex heritagein Laponia.

If this cultural dimension constitutes asignificant heritage from a Saami perspective, it is
not a core dimension of the multi-scale conservation
system, partly because the sacred values of thelandscapes are not easily graspable. This stems
both from the erosion of practices linked to thisspiritual dimension and from the places themselves,
whose identification is not complete due to thiserosion of practices. Sacred places are moreoverpart of a greater landscape and comprise a variety
of identifiers of diverse scales, which are still usedas visual landmarks by Saami herders. That makes
the sacred value of this Saami landscape difficult to
encapsulate in the current national and international
conservation systems, which are mainly based onnatural and aesthetic values.

■ Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the organisers and participants of
the Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture
Linkages on Sacred Landscapes of the University ofTsukuba, especially Dr. Maya Ishizawa, Prof. Yoshida
Masahito and Prof. Inaba Nobuko, for the valuable
experience and insights that contributed to thispublication. Financial support was partly provided by
the programme “Exploration Japon” of the French
Government for participating to the workshop. I am
also grateful to Alix Levain and Marie Roué for theirhelpful comments on earlier version of the text, andto Xavier Forde for reviewing the written English.

Indeed, the conservation of the region,
operated under the guidelines of national parks
since the early 20th century, is still largely associatedwith the image of wilderness prevailing in outsider’s
perspectives. This dominant perception partly resultsfrom the history of the colonization of Northern
Fennoscandia but also from the fact that the Saami’s
traditional livelihood and transhumant herding leavevery few traces in the landscapes (sacred places
included) – or traces that are not easily perceptible
from a non-Saami’s gaze.
Recent developments in the management

40

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Dahlström Nilsson Å. 2003. Negotiating Wilderness in a Cultural Landscape. Predators and Saami
Reindeer Herding in the Laponian World Heritage Area. Uppsala, Acta Universitatis Upsalensis, 534 p.
Green C. 2009. Managing Laponia. A World Heritage as an arena for Sami ethno-politics in Sweden. Uppsala,Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 230 p.
ICOMOS. 1996. Advisory body Evaluation, n°774.
IUCN/WCMC. 1996. World Heritage Nomination – IUCN Summary, The Laponian Area (Sweden).
Laponia Management Plan. 2011.
Mulk I-M. 1997. Sami Cultural Heritage in the Laponia World Heritage Area. Jokkmokk, Ajjte, 60 p
Mulk I.-M. 1994. Sacrificial Places and their meaning in Saami Society. In Carmichael D.-L., Hubert J., Reeves B.,
and Schanche A. (dirs.), Sacred Sites, Sacred Places. One World Archaeology Vol. 23. London, Routledge, pp.
121-131
Revelin F. 2015. Le naturum de Laponia : cultiver un nouveau regard sur la nature et sa conservation. Revue
Nordiques 30, pp. 59-76
Revelin F. 2013. Montagnes à vivre, à voir et à préserver. Dynamiques du tourisme et sites européens dupatrimoine mondial (Laponia et Pyrénées-Mont Perdu). Paris, MNHN, 458p.
Roué M. 2015. Le paysage culturel sami. De la phénoménologie à la poésie. Revue Nordiques 30, pp. 31-44
Roué M. 2011. A Saami Reindeer Hereder’s Cultural Landscape : Memory, the Sense and Ethics. In Raasakka N.,
Sivonen S. (dirs.), Northern Landscapes ʻʻImplementation of the European Landscape Convention in the North
Calotte Area Municipalitiesʼʼ- Conference in Inari, Finland 7-9.9.2011
Roué M. 2013. Paysages culturels et gouvernance : nouveau contrat social ou retour du refoulé. In Luginbühl Y.
& Terrasson D. (dirs.), Paysage et développement durable, Versailles, Quae, pp. 261-274
Teilus M. Lindahl K., 2000. Mija Ednam- Samebyarnas Laponiaprogram. Jokkmokk, Samebyarnas kansli, 87 p.
UNESCO WHC, Decision : CONF 201 VIII.B, 1996. http://whc.unesco.org.
WHC 17/01, 2017. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. 172 p.
World Heritage Outlook, http://www.worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/explore-sites/wdpaid/124388 , consulted
in August 2017
World Heritage Review. 2012. World Heritage and Indigenous People 62.

41

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Sacredness in the TasmanianWilderness World Heritage
Area
Emma Lee*(1)Research Fellow, Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, c/- Castray Esplanade, Hobart, Tasmania 7001,
emma.lee@utas.edu.au■ Abstract
In the 1980s Aboriginal Tasmanian heritage helped shape the declaration of the Tasmanian Wilderness World
Heritage Area and clarified environmental powers of the Australian government. The rediscovery of sacredcave markings in the Southwest National Park was a focal point for both actions. Since then, in Tasmania, theinfluence of the sacred has waned. In 2016 a new plan of management for the Tasmanian Wilderness was
designed to include Aboriginal Tasmanian inputs, which latterly resulted in the creation of a joint management
framework to act as a new governance arrangement. The use of free, prior and informed consent conditions
for Aboriginal engagement led to a re-awakening of the sacred in planning for a world heritage area, which inturn led to a collaborative process of designing joint management.
KEY WORDS: Tasmanian Wilderness, Aboriginal, Sacred, Joint management■ 1. Introduction

Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
proclamation of TWWHA country, and the Australian
government obligations under the World Heritage
Convention, clashed with the Tasmanian state
government’s desire to build a hydro-electric damin the middle of it (Murchison 1995). In winningthe case and legitimising the TWWHA country
nomination, the Australian government also resolved
an issue of constitutional powers, namely theirright to make environmental legislation that may
supersede the state’s rights or desires (Godden &Peel 2005). In the High Court judgement, one offour reasons that stopped the dam construction,and influenced clarity over constitutional powers,
gave regard to the unlawful act of destroying cultural
heritage, namely our ancestral sacred markings
upon cave walls of TWWHA country (High Court ofAustralia 1983).

1.1 An overview and brief description of thesignificance of the Tasmanian Wilderness World
Heritage Area, including natural and cultural values.
I am a senior trawlwulwuy woman of tebrakunna
country, and our peoples, otherwise known as
Aboriginal Tasmanians, hold great connection to
the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area
(TWWHA), or TWWHA country. Palaeolithic ochre
hand-stencils and engraved sacred markings foundwithin limestone caves of the Southwest National
Park of Tasmania, Australia, and of my peoples,
became central to Australian Government
constitutional reform and formal listing of TWWHA
country in 1983 (High Court of Australia 1983).
The High Court of Australia heard a case that year,
commonly known as the Franklin Dam Case, where
the December 1982 United Nations Educational,

TWWHA country is listed as of Outstanding
Universal Value (OUV) under three “cultural” criteria

*Emma Lee from Research Fellow, Centre for Social Impact, Swinburne University, c/- John Street, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122 Australia, e: ejlee@swin.edu.au

42

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

through conservation not only for my own peoples,but for others to share and respect in TWWHA
country.

(related only to Aboriginal peoples) and four “natural”
criteria and in 2017 the listed area comprises
approximately 1.58 million hectares, or one-fifthof Tasmania’s land mass, including the Southwest
National Park [Map 1]. Until late 2016, the vast
majority of TWWHA country was solely Tasmanian
government managed. Public interests, such as
tourism, conservation, local government, scienceand Aboriginal interests, were represented throughthe Tasmanian Government’s National Parks andWildlife Advisory Council (NPWAC) as the lead bodythrough which concerns could be raised in a formal
environment.

Yet the lack of framing of what constitutes
the sacred in TWWHA country was incidental in
its role as a lever for positive social mood shifts inAustralia towards the environment and conservation,
particularly at the highest judicial and parliamentarylevel in the early 1980s (Cove 1995). Our sacredplaces had the most august beginnings in modern
Australian conservation measures, however the
first plan of management (PoM) for TWWHA
country, does not mention the word ‘sacred’or frame cultural criteria as meaningful to us aspeoples. In 1999, the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife
Service produced the Tasmanian Wilderness World
Heritage Area Management Plan 1999, as thefirst statutory document guiding management
actions and objectives. Within it our interests are
represented within the things we produced, such as‘rock art’, and possessing meaning only in cultural,
not sacred, values. The focus was not that of us, as
contemporary peoples with connections to sacredcountry, but rather that of a managing authority
assuming the right to speak on behalf of a distant andpast version of us: the archaeological value of pastobjects (Langford 1983).

As a past member of NPWAC, I have cared
for sacred TWWHA country. For me, the sacredcave markings speak of pathways and cradles forknowledge and connection to this special country– sacredness is of all the things that comprise■ 2. Current management arrangements(Legislations, institutions, resources)
With the first PoM long outdated, in 2013 theTasmanian Government committed to producing
a new PoM for TWWHA country (Department ofPrimary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
2016a). This presented a chance to rectify theongoing structural displacement of Aboriginal
Tasmanians and sacred values of TWWHA country
to the margins in the management of the site, suchas management authorities devoting only half of
one per cent of 2012’s total $AUD7 million TWWHA
country budget to conservation of the cultural criteria(Australian Government 2012). The management of
TWWHA country, from the first PoM, is characterised
as a ‘culture of nature’, where country becomesvoid of our peoples in favour of the disinterested
bureaucrat and defender ecologist (WillemsBraun 1997), and a ‘fences and fines’ mindset
determined conservation themes. This is one

Map 1: A map of TWWHA country © Jen Evans.

TWWHA country, yet the cave markings are a potent
and tangible signifier of our belonging. They haveaffected me deeply; walking across the side of a deepriver gully, crouching low at their altar base of a cave
floor to look up and across a deep rock divide as thetorchlight frames my view and awe in their presence.
They remind me of the Old People who walk with me
and their lessons: The markings deserve continuance

43

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

first ancestors walked across the Milky Way. Thus the
TWWHA is of global significance for all humanity. It
holds the secrets of dynamic, culturally diverse andspiritually rich peoples… (Department of Primary
Industries, Parks, Water and Environment 2016b, pg.
v).

reason why sacredness has been unacknowledged
and uncharacterised, as my peoples have not been
properly resourced or visible within the process of
caring for TWWHA country.
To overcome the planning disadvantage to
our peoples through the imbalanced focus on natural
criteria, the Tasmanian government employed theservices of an Aboriginal Liaison Officer (Ms Fiona
Hamilton) to co-ordinate our input and engagement
activities (Department of Primary Industries, Parks,
Water and Environment 2016a) [see Plate 1]. Our
Aboriginal Tasmanian engagement process began
in late 2013 and ended in December 2016 withthe approvals from the Tasmanian and Australian
governments, and oversight from the World Heritage
Committee, for the final draft report, TasmanianWilderness World Heritage Area (TWWHA) Plan
2016, to become the new statutory document
guiding future management and objectives.

In Section 2.1 Cultural Values of the new PoM(Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water
and Environment 2016b, p. 38) the word ‘sacred’is mentioned five times, largely in the context ofour peoples today holding knowledge or having
connection to the sacred of TWWHA country.
Another context in which the sacred is important isin the act of healing, or reconnecting with country
that has previously been managed in exclusion ofus. One participant states in the new PoM that by“getting to know our land once more, we are able tore-vision that land – that is, we are able to reconnect
to the sacred” (Department of Primary Industries,
Parks, Water and Environment 2016b, p. 39). For
our peoples, we were able to use sacredness as atheme that bridges the listing of our cultural values- as previously understood to be archaeologicaland of the past - with the vitality of a contemporary
peoples that still holds knowledges and aspirations
to participate in management planning of TWWHA
country.

Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC)
conditions for our engagement was a critical factor
in leading the work of the Aboriginal Liaison Officer.
A Reactive Monitoring Mission from UNESCO to
TWWHA country in November 2015, to review the
PoM drafting process, stated that “the quality andlevel of participation in the process appear highby global standards” (United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization 2016, p. 10)
and includes our engagement. The conditions of
Aboriginal FPIC included commercial in confidence
processes and, within the PoM, referral to ethicalguidelines (Department of Primary Industries,
Parks, Water and Environment 2016b) to provide acultural safety around participants. This meant thateach person who contributed could be guaranteed
their knowledges would not, for example, be used
inappropriately or details shared with others without
permission.

The freedoms to participate in caring for
TWWHA country with respectful attention paid tosacred places, knowledges and processes created aspace to further the aims and intent of the new PoM.
By this, in rethinking the dispossessing management
practices of the 1999 TWWHA country PoM andreviewing outcomes of the Aboriginal engagement
FPIC strategy, the managing authorities and ourpeoples came to agreement that TWWHA country
could be jointly managed.
■ 3. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity

The reinforcing FPIC circle of cultural safety
allowed our peoples to introduce notions of sacred
back into the planning process for TWWHA country.
In the new PoM, Aunty Patsy Cameron’s Welcome
to Country message opens the dialogue aboutsacredness and connection, when she states that:

The Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area
(TWWHA) Plan 2016 represents the first time a
Tasmanian government has approved a plan fora protected area to be jointly managed between
current stakeholders and Aboriginal Tasmanianpeoples. Within the PoM is Key Desired Outcome
4.1, where “management of Aboriginal cultural

Aboriginal people shaped the landscapeusing ancient firing practices, passed on since the44JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

country. Some of these sacred messages havebeen revealed on the front cover of the new PoM[Fig. 1], denoting an importance and reinvigorationof cultural criteria in support of the call to jointly
manage TWWHA country. In leading national change
in the 1980s and then fading into obscurity, oursacred cave wall messages have remained patient. It
is in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area
(TWWHA) Plan 2016 that concepts of the sacred andan understanding of how people hold, connect toand transmit sacred knowledges have helped shiftexclusionary management practices into positive
terrain for Aboriginal Tasmanians.

values in the TWWHA is undertaken through a
joint management governance arrangement that

Plate 1: Flying across TWWHA country on a reconnectionand engagement day © Author supplied.

is supported by a dedicated unit…” (Department ofPrimary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
2016b, p. 97). Other Key Desired Outcomes of
the PoM (Department of Primary Industries,
Parks, Water and Environment 2016) include thatinterpretation and presentation of the cultural values
are determined by our peoples, access to resources
and rights to actively participate in management
are devolved to us, and that TWWHA country bereassessed as a Cultural Landscape under WHA
criteria to reflect our longstanding connections,activities and knowledges. There is a space for us
and our connections to the sacred and other valuesof TWWHA country to be expressed now that ourrole is elevated to governance partner and joint
manager.

Figure 1: Front cover of the Tasmanian Wilderness World
Heritage Area (TWWHA) Plan 2016 © Department ofPrimary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment.

One of the tangible outputs of my peoples’
expression of sacredness – the ochre stencils andengravings – has returned in prominence to help
guide the future decision-making of TWWHA

45

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Australian Government. 2012. State party report on the state of conservation of the Tasmanian Wilderness
World Heritage Area (Australia) property ID 181bis: in response to World Heritage Committee decision WHC
32 COM 7B.41. Canberra, ACT
Cove, J.J. 1995. What the bones say: Tasmanian Aborigines, science and domination. Carleton University Press,
OttawaDepartment of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. 2016a. Report from the Director of National
Parks and Wildlife to the Tasmanian Planning Commission: public representations received on the draft
Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area management plan 2014. April 2016. Department of Primary
Industries, Parks Water and Environment. Hobart, Tasmania
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. 2016b. Tasmanian Wilderness World
Heritage Area (TWWHA) management plan 2016. Department of Primary Industries, Parks Water andEnvironment. Hobart, Tasmania
Godden. L. and Peel. J. 2005. Australian environmental management: a 'dams' story'. University of New South
Wales Law Journal 28 (3): 668-695
High Court of Australia. 1983. The Commonwealth of Australia v. Tasmania, the Tasmanian dam case. [1983]
HCA 21; (1983). High Court of Australia, accessed 31 July 2017. < http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/158clr1.html>
Langford, R. 1983. Our heritage — your playground. Australian Archaeology. 16: 1-6.
Murchison, K.M. 1995. Environmental law in Australia and the United States: a comparative overview. Boston
College Environmental Affairs Law Review. 22: pp. 503-519
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 2016b. Reactive Monitoring Mission to theTasmanian Wilderness, Australia, 23-29 November 2015. Mission Report. International Council on Monuments
and Sites, International Union for Conservation of Nature. Accessed 31 July 2017, <http://whc.unesco.org/en/
list/181/documents/>
Willems-Braun, B. 1997. Buried epistemologies: the politics of nature in (post) colonial British Columbia. Annalsof the Association of American Geographers. 87 (1): pp. 3-31

46

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

The Sacred Places of The Talang
Mamak Indigenous People,
Indonesia
Nukila Evanty

Institute for Strategic and Development Studies (ISDS); +62215682703, nukilaevanty@gmail.com■ Abstract
The protection of cultural heritage in Indonesia is regulated by the Law No. 11 of 2010 on Cultural Heritage,
while the protection of nature is regulated by the Environmental Law No. 32 of 2009. Therefore, this normative
separation poses challenges in the protection of the cultural heritage in Indonesia, particularly for the inclusionof sacred places, where nature and landscape are integral elements. Furthermore, sacred places that aresynonimous of the nature-cultural heritage are under the ownership and stewardship of indigenous people.
These sacred places are generally located in remote forest landscapes or mountains which have not been
specifically managed for conservation purposes, lacking access restrictions. This paper presents the preliminary
findings of research based on observations and dialogues with the Talang Mamak people regarding theprotection of their cultural heritage and sacred places as well as its challenges.
KEY WORDS: Sacred places, Indigenous People, Talang Mamak, Cultural heritage protection■ 1. Introduction

when the sacred places were often associated witha belief in the attached sacredness of nature. Thesesites are respected and guarded by the indigenous
people, through traditional beliefs and practices(Oviedo, Jeanrenaud & Gland 2005; 5).
One of Indonesia’s indigenous groups are
the Talang Mamak people, who still maintain theircultural heritage and sacred places. They continue topractice ancestral traditions such as having long hair,
wearing turbans, and having gnarled and black teeth
due to eating areca nut. As part of their customs,
they perform ceremonies, for example during birth
they perform ceremonies with the help of baby
witches, such as circumcisions and the batambak
ceremony (which pays respect to the deceased spirit
and repairs the grave of the dead in order to improvesocial status). This paper examines the protection ofsacred places as part of the Talang Mamak’s cultural
heritage in the Indragiri Hulu Regency, Riau Province
Indonesia. This research was conducted in the Talang
Kedabu Village, Indragiri Hulu, Riau between June
2016 and February 2017.

1.1 Overview of the heritage site
Indonesia is the largest archipelagic country in theworld, consisting of 17,504 islands (Indonesian
National Defense Council 2017), with a vast territory
and a rich diversity of natural resources. Indonesia
also has diverse ethnicities, beliefs, customs, andcultural heritage. Each region has its own culture and,in locations with limited access, some regions are also
home to indigenous peoples who have maintained
traditional cultural practices.
As defined, sacred natural sites are naturalplaces that have a particular spiritual importance topeople and society, including natural places deemedas sacred by indigenous people, as well as naturalplaces recognized by institutionalized religions orfaiths as places for worship and remembrance(Oviedo, Jeanrenaud & Gland 2005; 4). The main
characteristics of indigenous peoples’ sacred naturalplaces may have their origins in Paleolithic times,

47

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ 2. Significance of the heritage place, including
natural and cultural values[Fig. 1]. Their sacred forests must also be guarded
and some trees are prohibited from cutting orcollecting because of their sense of belonging. The
third sacred place is the eternal waters, called Parigi
Asal (lake of origin) [Fig. 2]. This lake is considered anancestral place for the Talang Mamak people. Parigi
Asal is a lake that never dries, even when the riverand springs around the region have dried up during
the summer or due to a long drought. The people
believe that the source of Parigi Asal is something
eternal. If the Talang Mamak people perform a ritualat the lake of origin, that involves burning incensealong with saying a prayer asking for fish, it is believedthat the fish will appear in this lake. However, thedemand for the fish should be accompanied by goodintentions. Therefore, the Talang Mamak people
often hold traditional ceremonies at the lake, during
which they give offerings. Parigi Asal is also where
the Kuala Sungai Limau (the river of limes) is found.

2.1 Heritage Place of Talang Mamak People
The cultural heritage and sacred places of the Talang
Mamak people are located along the Indragiri River,in Rakit Kulim, which is part of the Indragiri Hulu
Regency, in Riau, Indonesia. Their cultural heritageand sacred sites have existed for decades and arepreserved by the indigenous Talang Mamak people
themselves, independently from the government,
because of their sense of belonging to their culture
and sacred places.
2.2 Nature-Culture Linkages
For the Talang Mamak people, the land and forest area part of life that cannot be separated. For hundredsof years they have lived peacefully and became one
with nature. They live by collecting forest products
and shifting cultivation. The Talang Mamak people
preserve and protect their sacred places because
they respect the beliefs of their ancestors. The
traditions of protection are inherited and sometimes
involve worshiping objects. Their local wisdom
dictates that they are the stewards and care-takers
of nature and natural resources; therefore, they takeonly what they deem to be necessary and do notgreedily exploit nature.

According to the Talang Mamak people’s
story, Kuala Sungai Limau is where the remnants of
their ancestors are. It is considered to be the placeof the foundation of their nation's history and theorigin of their great rituals. This location is still wellpreserved and a ritual is held there every year [Fig.
3]. Also, Kuala river tunu, located in the same area, isa sacred land and is believed to be a magical place.
The Talang Mamak people hold a ritual there every
month and hold custom rituals every two years.
These practices and their sense of protection
show how the Talang Mamak people continuously
respect their sacred sites and maintain their cultural
practices.

The old relics of stone statues and the gravesof their ancestral kings are scattered throughout
their sacred forest, river, and the 15 plus hectares ofancestral land. The sacred forest is believed to be theshelter for and dwelling place of spirits. According
to the Talang Mamak people, if the forest is not
maintained then these spirits will commit evil andunwanted actions. Therefore, every year a ritual isheld to contain these spirits within the forest.

■ 3. Current management arrangements
3.1 Legislations, Institutions and Resources
The law stipulates that "[c]ultural heritage is aheritage in the form of buildings, structure, sites, andareas on land or water that need to be preserved
because it has important value for history, science,education, religion, or culture through the processof determination" (Article 1 Law No 11 of 2010
on Cultural Heritage). Therefore, cultural heritage
can be either natural or human-made, movable
or inmovable, a unity or a group or parts of it, oreven the remains of possessions that have a close

There are three main sacred places for the
Talang Mamak people. The first are three blocks oftimbat stone, or sacred stone, that are hundreds ofyears old and located in the Jarinjing area. This is theplace where traditional and meditation ceremonies
are performed. The second is the sacred land, or
the origin of the soil in the local language, which
are areas of lush forests where they believe theirancestors, the first people in the Riau region, reside48

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

at ensuring the viability of the intangible cultural
heritage, including the identification, documentation,
research, preservation, protection, promotion,enhancement, and transmission, particularly throughformal and informal education, as well as therevitalization of the various aspects of such heritage”(2003 Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention).

relationship with culture and the history of humandevelopment (Article 1 Law No 11 of 2010 on
Cultural Heritage).
Furthermore, in order for an area to be
designated as a cultural heritage site, it must meeta specific criterion: at least two heritage sites must
be located adjacent. When designating the site asa cultural landscape, the land use pattern should
show its past function and the historical influence ofhumans on the land use system for at least fifty years.
It should contain evidence of the cultural landscapeformation, and the soil layers should contain theevidence of human activity or fossil deposits (Article
10 Law No 11 of 2010 on Cultural Heritage).

Intangible cultural heritage in Indonesia isregulated at the Ministerial level through the Ministryof Education and Culture with the Regulation No. 106
of 2013 on Intangible Cultural Heritage of Indonesia,
the Joint Regulations of the Ministry of Home
Affairs and Ministry of Culture and Tourism No. 42
of 2009 and No. 40 of 2009 concerning Guidelines
for Cultural Preservation. Moreover, the Ministry ofHome Affairs passed the Regulation No. 52 of 2007
on Guidelines for the Preservation and Developmentof Customs and Social Values of Cultural Society.
However, in the Law No. 11 of 2010 on Cultural
Heritage, there is no article that refers to intangible
cultural heritage. Arrangements are mentioned in the
General Elucidation of the same Law.

The Cultural Heritage Law only regulates
tangible cultural heritage and does not cover
the protection of nature, landscapes, and theenvironment of cultural heritage. The Cultural
Heritage and Museum Preservation Directorate only
focuses on cultural heritage while the Environment
and Forestry Ministry plays a role in regulating andprotecting the nature, landscape, and environment,
separately. As stipulated in article 1, Law No. 32 of2009 on Environmental Management and Protection,“environment” is understood as a unity of space andall non-living and living things contained, including
human beings. This also considers humans’ behavior,
which affects nature, and the survival of humans
other living beings. Since 2003, Indonesia has ratified
the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible
Cultural Heritage and passed the Presidential
Regulation No. 78 of 2007. As a follow up of theratification, since September 2016, approximately
150 intangible cultural heritage elements wereidentified and their designation was endorsed by
the Ministry of Education and Culture based on
the recommendations of the Indonesian Cultural
Heritage Expert Team.

Currently, intangible cultural heritage
receives little attention from the Government.
Although Indonesia is a signatory to the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples (UNDRIP) and the 2003 Convention for the
Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage,
government officials argue that the concept
of indigenous peoples is not applicable. As aconsequence, the government has rejected all calls
regarding the specific needs of groups that identify
themselves as indigenous (IWGIA 2018).
Local governments have greater authority inthe safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage
being practiced by the indigenous people in the rural
areas where they reside. Based on Article 96 of Law
No. 11 of 2010 on Cultural Heritage, the duties of
local governments include establishing the ethics
of preservation of cultural heritage, coordinating
the preservation of cultural heritage, collecting
cultural heritage data, establishing cultural heritage
management rules, organizing cultural conservation
preservation, establishing sites and areas, and saving
cultural heritage for security and other interests.
However, there is lack of coordination with theTechnical Implementation Unit, which are institutions

Based on the 2003 UNESCO Convention
for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage(UNESCO 2003), a community or group is entitled
to register a form of traditional cultural expression
which they have passed down from generation to
generation and continue to preserve it in such a
way that it is part of their identity. The emphasis
is put on safeguarding efforts. As stated in Article
2, “safeguarding” is defined as “measures aimed

49

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 1: A woman of talang mamak people prepares the offerings for ancestors in sacred places. Photo credit: Nukila &Gilung.

Figure 2: Parigi origin or lake of origin, a sacred lake, is hundreds of years old, has a miracle because it never dry in a longdry season. Talang Mamak people perform worship and seek blessings. Photo credit: Nukila & Gilung.

■ 4. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity

established by the Central Government, such as
the Archaeological Heritage Removal Center (BP3),
the Agency of Conservation History and Traditional
Values, or Archeology Agency.

External threats endanger the cultural heritage andsacred places of the Talang Mamak people. These
include changes to the natural environment and theland belonging to the Talang Mamak people due
to erosion caused by development projects run by
the State or by the private sector, as well as land usechange and urbanization, among others. In addition,
there is an internal threat: the change of values in
the community. Indigenous peoples such as Talang

Therefore, an effective coordination between
the previously mentioned institutions needs to be
developed, including the safeguarding of Intangible
Cultural Heritage of indigenous groups, and synergies
should be established with the Law that refers totangible heritage, in order to protect sacred placesfrom destruction.

50

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 3: Talang Mamak people preparing rituals for sacred places. Photo credit: Nukila & Gilung.

Sites (ICOMOS), and the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), as
well as academia, can play a role by advising thegovernment in the preservation of the natureand cultural heritage as well as sacred places ofindigenous peoples.

Mamak people are traditional groups that still depend
closely from nature. Yet, modern society assumes
that Talang Mamak rituals and sacred places are notimportant, they do not respect them because they
represent values of animism, mysticism and ritual.
Moreover, the local government has not provided
significant assistance to archaeological research,such as sending expert teams for the registration of
the cultural heritage belonging to the Talang Mamak
people. Therefore, it would be necessary to develop
programs that raise awareness on the importance toprotect cultural heritage as well as sacred places.

The cultural heritage and natural heritage owned by
the Talang Mamak People are unique, mystical, rare,
limited, and full of history. It is necessary to change
the perception of the government so that the natural
heritage and the cultural heritage are not only seen
for their economic value, which is beneficial, but also
for their historical and sacred values so that they canbe enjoyed by future generations.

■ 5. Recommendations
It is important to involve all areas of the governmentand researchers, including interdisciplinary teams ofhistorians, archaeologists, anthropologists, as well
as young generations, to support the protection ofsacred places and cultural and natural heritage inIndonesia.

Finally, the protection of sacred places must respect
the spiritual values that are indigenous people’s
heritage from their ancestors.

In the case of the Talang Mamak people’s
heritage, the local government needs to implement
protection programs, involving the central
government, such as the Ministry of Education
and Culture and the Ministry of Environment, toprotect nature, cultural heritage, and their sacredlandscape. International institutions, such as theInternational Union for Conservation of Nature(IUCN), the International Council on Monuments and51

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature citedIndonesian National Defense Council Data, 2017.
Law No. 11 of 2010, Law on Cultural Heritage of the Republic of Indonesia
Law No. 32 of 2009, Law on Environmental Protection and Management of the Republic of Indonesia
Minister of Education and Culture. 2003. Regulation No. 106 of 2013 on Intangible Cultural Heritage ofIndonesia
Oviedo, G, Jeanrenaud, S., and Otegui Gland, M. 2005. Protecting Sacred Natural Sites of Indigenous andTraditional Peoples: an IUCN Perspective, Switzerland, pp. 21.
UNESCO. 2003. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, 17 October, UNESCO,
Paris.

52

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Kāpiti Island:
A Sacred LandscapeXavier Forde

Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, 63 Boulcott Street, Wellington, 6011; New Zealand; +64 (4) 272493645■ Abstract
Te Waewae Kāpiti o Tara rāua ko Rangitāne is a 20 km 2 island just off the coast of Te Ika ā Māui in Aotearoa
New Zealand. For centuries it was a plentiful source of food and a strategic defensive position for many Māori
tribes, and is covered with ancestral and sacred places. At the time of European arrival in the early 19th century,
it became a stronghold of the Ngāti Toa Rangatira tribe, who used it for as a base for conquest, trade, andwhaling. The majority of the island was forcibly purchased by the government from 1897 in order to create abird sanctuary. The northern end remained in the ownership of Māori, who have established a lodge and nature
tours company. The Māori concept of kaitiakitanga, or traditional custodianship, is examined as a useful term
to negotiate the tension between the protection of natural and cultural values on the island.
KEY WORDS: Kāpiti, Indigenous, Ancestral, Sacred, Reserve, Heritage.

■ 1. Introduction‘Ka tito au, ka tito au, ka tito au, I sing, I sing, I sing,Kia Kupe te tangata
Of Kupe the man
Nana i topetope te whenua,
Who cut off the land
Tu ke a Kāpiti…
Kāpiti stands apart…’(Mitchell H. & J. 2005)

1.1 The history and cultural landscape of Kāpiti
Te Waewae Kāpiti o Tara rāua ko Rangitāne, generally
known as Kāpiti Island, is an island around 10km in
length and 2km in width situated just off the western
coast of Te Ika a Māui, the northern half of Aotearoa
New Zealand [Fig. 1]. It rises out of Te Moana o
Raukawa, the strait separating the northern andsouthern islands, reaching 521m at its highest point.

In the later 13th and 14th centuries, large
scale migration took place by ocean voyaging
canoes (waka hourua) from the Society and Cook
Islands, and Aotearoa was settled in its entirety.
The migrants brought with them their language,
culture, genealogies, and tribal identities from
Eastern Polynesia, and adapted these to their
new environment in different locations aroundthe comparatively larger islands of Aotearoa. They
became the people now known as “Māori”. Many
generations of tribes lived on or around Kāpiti overcenturies. Their legacy lives on the name of the island
Te Waewae Kāpiti o Tara raua ko Rangitāne, theboundary between Tara and Rangitāne, and in someof the ancestral burials and associated placenames
such as Tuteremoana, the name of an ancestor
given to the highest peak of the island after his burial
there. These places all have some element of tapu,

Aotearoa is one of the last places on earth tobe reached by human settlement. Some time aroundthe 13th century A.D., our Polynesian ocean voyaging
ancestors explored the last remaining frontiers of the
Pacific (known to us as Te Moana nui a Kiwa). They
travelled thousands of kilometres, going as far northas Hawaii, as far east as Rapanui, and as far southas Aotearoa. Perhaps the earliest record of Kāpiti
appears in an ancient oriori or lament recounting
the exploits of the famed explorer and ancestor
Kupe, who is said to have separated Kāpiti from themainland with the blow of his weapon:
53

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

land to the government. From that point on, Ngāti
Toa began to lose its land and economic resources,leaving it virtually landless only a century later.

or sacred nature, and are important to the many
descendants of the Māori tribes that have at one
time inhabited Kāpiti Island. Many other pā (hillforts)sites and archaeological sites provide evidence of
the ancestral occupation of the island and have thecharacter of wāhi tūpuna, ancestral sites (Maclean
1999).

By 1850, there were only a few European
farmers left who lived on the island full time, onlarge properties leased from Māori owners. The
isolation would prove too much for these farms, andby the late 1870s, the island was void of permanent
inhabitants, although local Māori continued tofish and hunt there. The government effectively
confiscated some 90% of the island between
1897 and 1907 in order to create a bird sanctuary.
Volunteers and government rangers contributed overdecades to the revegetation and pest eradication
efforts. The island was declared pest free in the 1990s
and is home to many endangered species of birds
native to Aotearoa New Zealand that are either veryrare or absent from the mainland. Visiting the nature
reserve is restricted to no more than 100 visitors perday, and visitors are subject to biosecurity inspection
to prevent unwanted arrivals of pests, weeds, ordisease (Maclean C., 1999).

Kāpiti Island was last conquered by the tribeof Ngāti Toa Rangatira and its allies in 1824. Other
tribes further north had obtained guns from theEuropean traders and whalers arriving in the two
decades prior, and had threatened the survival of
Ngāti Toa in their homeland. Rather than face slavery
and conquest, the tribe migrated over 500km south
on foot, and fought their way to supremacy overKāpiti Island and surrounds. One of their leaders, Te
Rauparaha, had earmarked Kāpiti as a strategic basefor access to trade with the European ships passing
through the strait, and a defensible position withinreach of both of the large landmasses of Aotearoa.
Kāpiti was taken in 1824 during the battle known as
Te Umupakaroa, after which many of the vanquishedwere ritually cooked and eaten, adding another layerof tapu or sacredness to this area. Ngāti Toa and its
allies quickly developed a small empire by conqueringswathes of both northern and southern islands [Fig.
2]. They invited Europeans to set up whaling andtrading stations and grew wealthy from the resulting
commerce.

The remaining 10% of the island at its
northern end is still owned by Māori who descendfrom the original owners and is restricted to 60
visitors per day. They own a boat and nature tours
company as well as a private lodge where visitors
can stay overnight. In Māori cultural terms, they
are the ahi kaa (people who keep the home fires
burning, maintain occupation of the land) and kaitiaki(guardians over the land and the sustainability of its
resources).

After the Treaty of Waitangi formalised
Aotearoa as a British colony in 1840, small tracts ofland on Kāpiti Island began to be sold to immigrant
farmers. Relative peace had alleviated the need fora defensible position, the whaling stations closed
down, and most Ngāti Toa moved to the coast of
the mainland facing Kāpiti. Although many deceased
Ngāti Toa had been placed in the burial caves atthe southern end of the island, the last Ngāti Toa
chieftain on the island, Te Rangihiroa, was buried on
the battlefield he had fought on to secure the island,
as a statement of mana whenua (authority overthe land). Some of Te Rangihiroa’s descendants still
maintain his grave, own the land around it, and live inits vicinity (Forde X., 2017).

There is also a marine reserve around part ofthe island, established in 1992, in which no fishing ispermitted.
Some vestiges of the whaling stations are stillin existence but for the most part no visitor facilities
have been installed around these (Forde X., 2017;
Maclean C., 1999; Collins H., 2010).
■ 2. Current management arrangements(Legislations, institutions, resources)
2.1 Heritage Status

In 1846, the colonial government kidnapped
Te Rauparaha and held him as ransom for 18 months
without trial until Ngāti Toa had sold much of their

Only one site is listed for its cultural significance to54

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

attachment to their land in the terms of their own
culture, albeit directed in such a manner as tosatisfy the terms and processes of a western legal
framework.

Māori on Kāpiti island (in August 2017): The grave of
Te Rangihiroa at Waiorua Bay has been recognised
as a Wāhi Tapu, a place sacred to Māori, under thenational legislation for cultural heritage (the Heritage
New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014) [Fig. 3].
Some whaling stations that were formed by local
Māori and European whalers have been recognised
as Historic Places under this legislation (Forde X.
2017).

■ 3. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity
As a nature reserve established for over a century,a pest-free island with mature regenerating forest,with controlled access and sustainable tourism,
Kāpiti Island is in a great state in terms of its natural
heritage. There is always a danger of biologicalcontamination from the mainland but the risk would
seem relatively low.

A new category, National Historic Landmark,has recently been introduced under this legislation,
and Kāpiti island has been suggested as a potential
candidate for this based on both its cultural /historical values and its natural heritage value as thefirst major bird sanctuary in this country.

In terms of its cultural heritage, 150 years ofcolonial neglect of Indigenous values for sacred andcultural sites and landscapes are only just beginningto be reversed. Some of the archaeological sites
on the island have been recorded and are thus
known as well as protected by law. Fortunately thelongstanding natural reserve status and controlled
access to the island has kept much of the damage ofhumankind at bay, although revegetation may wellhave damaged evidence of former habitation sites.
Many of the archaeological sites are not recorded,and hardly any of them have any recognition for theirintrinsic value as forming part of the cultural heritage.
The greatest challenge to the conservation of thesevalues is fostering the capacity of the traditional

It has not been put forward for inscription on
the World Heritage List.
It figures as a site of national importancefor its natural heritage as the Kāpiti Island Nature
Reserve, a status governed by the Reserves Act 1977.
As a result of the settlement under theTreaty of Waitangi to compensate the tribeof Ngāti Toa Rangatira for the past misdeedsof the Crown, the role of Ngāti Toa as kaitiaki(guardian) has been recognised by statutory
acknowledgement. A Strategic Advisory Committee
made up of representatives of both Ngāti Toa andthe Department of Conservation (the government
department for natural heritage) has been created in2015 to inform the management of the Kāpiti Island
Nature Reserve. This statutory acknowledgement
also makes Ngāti Toa an affected party at Kāpiti Island
under the Resource Management Act (which governs
the use of the land).
An Overlay Classification also acknowledges
the traditional, cultural, spiritual and historicalassociation of Ngāti Toa with the Kāpiti Island
Nature Reserve administered by the Departmentof Conservation. This Overlay Classification status
requires Ngāti Toa to develop and publicise a set ofprinciples that will assist the Minister of Conservation
to avoid harming or diminishing values of the tribe
with regard to that land (Ngāti Toa Rangatira andthe Crown 2012). It involves Indigenous systems
only insofar as Ngāti Toa are able to express their

Figure 1: Location of Kāpiti Island (Forde X., 2017)

55

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 2: Kāpiti Island at dusk (Theresa McMillan, 2009, cropped, CC0)

Figure 3: The grave of Te Rangihiroa on the battlefield of Waiorua Bay, Kāpiti Island (Forde X. 2017)

who still maintain their association with the islandby deriving a livelihood from it. As long as Kāpiti
remains both a dwelling place and an economic
resource for Ngāti Toa, it remains a valued culturallandscape in which the maintenance of the many
natural resources (particularly the wildlife, as a bird
sanctuary) is a source of modern livelihood (tourist
revenue) as well as traditional subsistence (foodsource).

conservator and custodian of the island, the local
tribe, Ngāti Toa, and its associated kinfolk, to access,record, manage and care for their many sites that
contribute to forming this cultural landscape.
3.1 Interdependency of nature and culture
From a Māori perspective, the key link is in theconcept of kaitiakitanga, or guardianship, of thesesites as taonga, treasures or resources, for Ngāti Toa
and associates, most particularly for those families

The existence of many wāhi tapu (sacred
56

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

places) and other taonga, linked to ancestors andtheir occupation, is a powerful driver for continued
kaitiakitanga over the natural and cultural featuresof this island, regardless of government ownership.
Altogether, the past imprinted on the land byancestors meshed with the future potential for
subsistence and self-determination provide ameaningful environment in which to live as Māori.
In this cultural landscape, the Indigenous people cancontinue to occupy the land and “keep the home
fires burning” (the concept of ahi kaa), to live a wayof life defined by traditional gathering of food on
their own land, and be present to remember thewhakapapa (layers of genealogy of their ancestors)
imprinted on the land in cultural and sacred sites,by practicing traditional rituals and adding their own
layers of history to Kāpiti. In this respect, it is crucial
that Ngāti Toa maintains its own private land at
the northern end of the island without restrictions
on its way of life, and discovers ways to raise theprofile of its cultural heritage on all of the island toa point that continuing traditional cultural practices
are not hindered by factored into the rules of the
Nature Reserve. Raising the profile of its cultural
heritage on the whole island through on-site physicalinterpretation, tour guiding, official recognition andexplanation in media associated with the Nature
Reserve will raise a wider public consciousness ofthe cultural and historic importance of the island
to Ngāti Toa. This should in turn foster goodwill
towards their continuation or revival of cultural
practices such as gathering food (and notably birds
and sea food) in reserves in which these activities areotherwise now prohibited. As stated by kaumatua(elders) such as Ngarongo Iwikatea Nicholson in
the past, they already reserve the right to do so.
This will require further adjustment by government
agencies overseeing these reserves with the input of
the new Strategic Advisory Committee and Overlay
Classification principles, so that their management
is in closer alignment with international principles
around natural heritage in indigenous territories
such as those in IUCN’s “Indigenous and Traditional
Peoples and Protected Areas” (Beltran 2000).

57

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Beltran J. (Ed.)

2000. Indigenous and Traditional Peoples and Protected Areas: Principles, Guidelines, and Case
Studies. World Commission on Protected Areas, Best Practice Protected Area Series Guidelines no.4.
Collins H. 2010. Ka mate, Ka ora: The Spirit of Te Rauparaha. Steele Roberts. 2010
Forde X. 2017. “Report for a Wāhi Tapu Area, Te Rua Tūpāpaku o Te Rangihiroa, Kāpiti Island”. New Zealand
Heritage List / Rārangi Kōrero. Heritage New Zealand Pouhere
Taonga. 2017
MacLean C. 1999. Kapiti. Whitcombe Press, Wellington.
Mitchell, H. & J. 2005. Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka, A History of Maori Nelson and Marlborough. Volume 1. Huia.
Ngāti Toa Rangatira and The Crown. 7 December 2012. “Deed of Settlement of Historical Claims”. Office ofTreaty Settlements.

58

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Fe a s i b i l i t y S t u d y o n t h e
Nomination of “Cave Heavens
and Blessed Lands: CulturalLandscape of Taoist Worldview”
Mingxia Zhu

CHCC (Cultural Heritage Conservation Centre in Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tsinghua University),
No.12, North Olympic Science & Technology Park, No.1 South Baosheng Rd., Haidian Dist., Beijing, China; 100192; +86
13051001930, zhumingxia@thad.com.cn■ Abstract“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” are a unique Taoist conceptual system of sacred places in China. These
sacred spaces, located in spectacular and abundant landscapes where immortals dwell in legend, reflect the
Taoist worldviews about the balance of nature, society, and belief in immortality. The system was first recordedin the 2nd century and came to maturity in the 7th century, during which 118 locations across China were
established by 2 Taoist masters as the official components of the system. This system had a profound impact
on rituals, literature, painting, and gardening art in China and other countries in East Asia. Taoists have kept
these places as spiritual and natural sanctuaries for over 1,000 years. In the context of a Feasibility Study for
the Nomination of “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands: Cultural Landscape of Taoist Worldview” on to the World
Heritage List, this article aims to give a brief introduction and analysis of the sacredness of the Cave Heavens
and Blessed Lands.
KEY WORDS: Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands, Taoism, Sacred Mountain, Cultural Landscape, Serial Heritage■ 1. Introduction

This system consists of the 10 “Major Cave Heavens”( 十 大 洞 天 Shi Da Dongtian) (Mt.Wangwu 王 屋
山 [Fig. 1], Mt.Weiyu 委 羽 山 , Mt.Xicheng 西 城
山 , Mt.Xixuan 西 玄 山 , Mt.Qingcheng 青 城 山 ,Mt.Chicheng 赤 城 山 , Mt.Luofu 罗 浮 山 , Mt.Juqu
句曲山 , Mt.Linwu 林屋山 , Mt.Kuocang 括苍山 ),36 “Minor Cave Heavens” ( 三十六小洞天 Sanshiliu
Xiao Dongtian) and 72 “Blessed Lands” ( 七十二福地
Qishier Fudi). The majority of these components arelocated in the Southeast and Southwest provincesof China [Fig. 2] such as Sichuan, Zhejiang, Jiangsu,
Anhui, Fujian, Jiangxi, Shandong, Henan, Shanxi,
Shaanxi, Hunan, Hubei, Guangdong, Guangxi, and
the Gansu Province, which was the main territory of
the Tang Dynasty (619-907).

“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands,” 洞天福地 , area unique Taoist conceptual system of sacred placesin China. For Taoist disciples, these spectacular andabundant places are the dwellings of immortals,
the transition between Heaven and Earth, and theentrance from the human world to the celestialworld. Taoist priests deemed the “Cave Heavens”( 洞 天 Dongtian), literally meaning Heavens in theCave, but also called Grotto-heavens or Speluncean
Heavens, to be senior portals to reach deities in
Heaven. The “Blessed Lands” ( 福 地 Fudi), alsotranslated as “Places of Bliss”, are regarded as juniorportals to reach Earthly deities, which humans canaccess these once they cultivate themselves.

1.2 History
1.1 Location
The belief that the “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands”

59

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 1: Drawing of Mt. Wangwu 王屋山图 , the 1st Major Cave Heaven. Source : Drawings of Famous Mountains in
the World 天下名山图 , Qing dynasty (1644-1912).

wildlife, started to be revered as “Cave Heaven” or“Blessed Lands” and provided an alternative pathto the immortal mountains. As late as during theSouthern Dynasties (420-589), 36 “Cave Heavens”
appeared as a concept in the record of Zhen Gao(Hongjing 456-536).

were a link to the world of immortals derived fromthe ancient Chinese belief that immortals resided
in Mount Kunlunshan 昆 仑 山 (the ideal centre of
Heaven and Earth in Ancient Chinese cosmology)
and the “Three Immortal Mountains on the sea in
the Warring States Period” (475 B.C.-221 B.C.). These
immortal mountains could not be reached in reality.

During the Tang Dynasty, two famous Taoist
masters, Sima Chengzhen 司 马 承 祯 (639-727)
and Du Guangting 杜 光 庭 (850-933), researched,assessed, and made a detailed list of 118 sites under
three levels: 10 “Major Cave Heavens”, 36 “Minor
Cave Heavens”, and 72 “Blessed Lands” (Chengzhen639-727, Guangting 850-933). This conceptual system
was widely accepted and gradually propagated, witha profound influence on rituals, literature, painting,and gardening art in China, as well as in other Easterncountries.

nd

During the 2 Century, 24 mountain sites
in Shu 蜀 (Sichuan Province) were chosen as Zhi
治 (parishes) by Taoist masters, which could beconsidered the origins of nature reserves becauseof the strict prohibition of hunting, felling, mining, or
any source of pollution. The Taoist adepts inhabitedZhi during peacetime, observing detailed rules forprotecting all living beings around Zhi, while thegeneral public were also allowed to live there during
wartime or famine(Sheng 2010).

■ 2. Sacredness of “Cave Heavens and Blessed
Lands”

Many Taoist sanctuaries were establishedwith the spreading and expanding of Taoism throughother provinces in the following centuries, withnumbers reaching more than 150. These tangible
places, with landscape beauty, vegetation, andGenerally speaking, a “Blessed Land” represents thewonderland that human beings can reach in life. Its

60

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 2: Locations of Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands. Source : Illustrated by CHCC in May , 2017.

rich soil and graceful landscape allow people who
inhabit them to attain immortality, or at least good
health and longevity. Therefore, a “Blessed Land”
is a concept that can be applied to other places
besides just the 72 “Blessed Lands”. In fact, there
are 88 recorded “Blessed Lands” in different ancient
documents.

conceptual characteristics [Fig. 3]: inaccessible
entrance, another world, birth of a new life, and awindow to the sky. People who hope to enter the“Cave Heaven” have to fast, pray, and undertake along journey to find the entrance and get inside thecave. In this process, they will experience separation,
limen and aggregation.

Compared with the “Blessed Land”, theconcept of a “Cave Heaven” is rather complex andmore abstract. In the ideal model of a “Cave Heaven”
there are four entrances in four directions. Someentrances exist in reality and can be recognized whilesome are only conceptual and cannot be found. Every“Cave Heaven” is a small world, just like the outside
world, surrounding the centre, Mount Kunlunshan,and connecting with each other. The sacred spaceof a “Cave Heaven” generally has the following

To some extent, similar inaccessible
entrances and symbols of rebirth in caves can befound in other cultural contexts, like Tie Yangzom ofTibetan Buddhism in China and Mount Omine of the
Shugendo tradition in Japan. The difference is thatcaves in other religions are independent and can beaccessed, while caves in the “Cave Heaven” in Taoism
are believed as external portals, mouths, or “gasopenings” linked to the other world and to the other“Cave Heavens”, which could hardly be confirmed
61

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

as physically accurately given the deep and narrow
inner structures.
Since the portals of a “Cave Heaven” were
important to people, the early Taoists used to live
beside the entrance where they set altars to worship
Taoist immortals living in this area. Gradually, thesealtars became building complexes that, over time,
became sacred historical sites [Fig. 4, Fig. 5]. Similarly,
the existing “Blessed Lands” became Taoists’ sacredsites for the cultivation of vital energy, surrounded byabundant resources and gifted with scenic beauty.

Figure 3: Ideal Model of the Cave Heaven. Source :Illustrated by Tao Jin 陶金 of CHCC in May , 2017.

Figure 4: Drawing of Mt. Juqu (Huayang Cave Heaven), the 8th Major Cave Heaven. Source : Base map: Maoshan
Chronicle 茅山全志 , Qing dynasty (1623-1692). Illustrated by the author in May , 2018.

Figure 5: Sacred Compositions of Mt. Juqu (Huayang Cave Heaven), the 8th Major Cave Heaven. Source : Photograph:
CHCC in July, 2016.
62

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ 3. Significanceto Taoist beliefs was not considered as part of their
Outstanding Universal Value. In the case of Mt.
Wudangshan, the architectural value of the groupof buildings (WHC 1994) has been stressed in its
statement of Outstanding Universal Value, while inthe case of Mt. Dujiangyan-Qingchengshan (WHC
2000) the scientific value of its ancient irrigation
system has been praised. Moreover, Mt. Longhushan(WHC 2010) and Mt. Sanqingshan (WHC 2008)
have been inscribed as Natural Heritages, with noacknowledgement of their religious value.

“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” are an importantpart of the traditional Chinese worldviews about
the balance of nature, society, and their belief in
immortality. These places represent the embodimentof the concept "Harmony between Man and Nature”( 天 人 合 一 Tian Ren Heyi), which stands for theunity of man’s body with the mountains, rivers,and earth. The distribution of “Cave Heavens andBlessed Lands” records the development of Taoism.
This conceptual system has influenced traditionallandscape design in China, as well as literature,landscape painting, and garden arts in other East
Asian countries. The landscape, architecture, rituals,
and literature related to “Cave Heavens and Blessed
Lands” have been safeguarded and have survived tothis day.

■ 4. Current situation
Each site is separately managed by 3 different typesof departments: religion departments (Religious
Activities Site in State Administration for Religious
Affairs of P.R.C, China Intangible Cultural Heritagein Ministry of Culture of P.R.C), cultural heritage
departments (World Cultural Heritage and Cultural
Relics Protection Units in State Administration ofCultural Heritage) and natural heritage departments(World Natural Heritage and National Park of China
in Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Developmentof P.R.C, Nature Reserve of China in Ministry ofEnvironmental Protection of P.R.C, National Forest
Park of China in State Forestry Bureau, National
Geopark of China in Ministry of Land and Resourcesof P.R.C). In most sites, management systems arefocused on single ancient buildings or limited scenic
spots and do not provide protection for the integral
area or recognize the sites as a system.

Compared to other World Heritage
properties, where religious beliefs are part of
the Outstanding Universal Value [Fig. 6], very
few properties include Taoism in their statementof significance. However, with Buddhism listed
as one of the main religions, there are 7 World
Heritage properties in China (Mogao Caves, Dazu
Rock Carvings, Longmen Grottoes, etc.) and 43
World Heritage properties in other Asian countries.
Even though 4 famous Taoist mountains havealready been inscribed (Mt.Wudangshan 武 当 山 ,Mt.Qingchengshan 青 城 山 , Mt.Longhushan 龙 虎
山 , and Mt.Sanqingshan 三清山 ), their association

Figure 6: World Heritage properties based on religion belief. Source : Illustrated by the author in May , 2017.

63

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

caves, Taoist temples and their associated rituals in“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” bear a uniqueand complete testimony of the development of local
Chinese beliefs over the past 2,000 years. The sites
and the sacred cave landscapes of “Cave Heavens
and Blessed Lands” provides endless legends about
immortality, great ancestors and initiation, and are
directly and tangibly associated with living Taoist
rituals, traditional folk religion, as well as artistic andliterary works of outstanding universal significance in
China and other East Asian countries. “Cave Heavens
and Blessed Lands” are exceptional landscapes interms of natural beauty, with caves, mountains,vegetation, and wildlife, where no hunting, land
clearing, mining, or pollution was allowed in ancient
China making them important protected areas foralmost 2,000 years.

Nevertheless, an alternative comprehensive
approach to heritage conservation could support
the protection of the “Cave Heavens and Blessed
Lands” system. For instance, the concept ofCultural Landscape in the World Heritage context
is broad, flexible, and applicable to heritage sitesthat represent a harmonious relationship between
humans and nature, which is sometimes expressed
through intangible cultural values. As a culturallandscape representing the Taoist religious system,“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” need to beconserved and managed by overarching policies thatprovide a consistent approach to the whole system.
Following comprehensive research on thesubject (Aishan Foundation 2013) and seeking the
support of the local administration, the request for
the nomination of the cultural landscape of “Cave
Heavens and Blessed Lands” was officially proposedby the Chinese Taoist Association in 2018.

“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” embody
the sustainable and environment-friendly Taoist
worldview of oriental naturalism. The continuous
conservation of “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands”
reflects the Chinese ideal for an Earthly paradise inboth spiritual and natural sanctuaries. Therefore, its
nomination and possible inscription would fill existing
gaps in the World Heritage List as well as positively
contribute to dealing with the world’s environmental
problems by showing a comprehensive picture ofancient China.

“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” could
be nominated as a Cultural Landscape, which
represents the “combined works of nature andof man”. Under the sub-category of “associative
cultural landscape,” this property could be listed on
its virtue of its powerful religious associations to its
natural environment, like other sacred landscapes,
such as Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in theKii Mountain Range in Japan (WHC 2004), Tongariro
National Park in New Zealand (WHC 1993), theSulaiman-Too Sacred Mountain in Kyrgyzstan (WHC2009), Osun-Osogbo Sacred Grove in Nigeria (WHC2005), rather than based on material culturalevidence. In addition, a nomination as a serial
property could have international relevance andprovide a more powerful and comprehensive
interpretation of all values.
■ 5. Recommendations
As a result of this feasibility study, “Cave Heavens andBlessed Lands” could meet the criteria for OUV as a
Cultural Landscape World Heritage site.
The monuments and sites that form thecultural landscapes of “Cave Heavens and Blessed
Lands” originated from the period of Han Dynasty(202 BC to 220 AD) and illustrate the interchange
and development of Taoist religious cultures. The

64

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 , 456-536. Zhen Gao 真诰 . Daozang 道藏 .
Sima Chengzhen 司马承祯 , 639-727. Tiandi Gongfu Tu 天地宫府图 . Daozang 道藏 .
Du Guangting 杜光庭 , 850-933. Dongtian Fudi Yuedu Mingshan Ji 洞天福地岳渎名山记 . Daozang 道藏 .
Edwin Bernbaum. 1997. Sacred Mountains of the World. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Li Sheng 李晟 . 2010. Research on the Beliefs of Immortality. Bashu Publishing House, Chengdu.
Shi Shouqian 石守谦 . 2015. The Moving Peach Blossom Land: Landscape Painting in the East Asia World. SDX
Joint Publishing Company, Beijing.
World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 1994. Ancient Building Complex in the Wudang Mountains.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/705 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 2000. Mount Qingcheng and the Dujiangyan Irrigation System.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1001 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 2010. China Danxia.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1335 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 2008. Mount Sanqingshan National Park.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1292 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 2004. Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1142 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 1993. Tongariro National Park.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/421 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 2009. Sulaiman-Too Sacred Mountain.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1230 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. 2005. Osun-Osogbo Sacred Grove.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1118 [ accessed 10 October , 2017 ]Aishan Foundation, Netherlands. 2013. The nature sanctuaries of Daoism.
http://www.aishanfoundation.org/ [ accessed 6 August , 2017 ]65

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Forikrom Bio-Cultural Heritage,
Brong-Ahafo Region, Ghana

Portia Ama Bansa

Centre for Indigenous Knowledge and Organizational Development (CIKOD). P.O. Box CT 4131, Cantonments, Accra-Ghana.
(+233) 302 518045 / (+233) 264243362, portiabansa2@gmail.com■ Abstract
Nature and Culture are two components of the ecological world that cannot be separated. The connection
between people and their environment drives them to make certain decisions that may either harm or protect
it. In our African region, most of our concept of our natural environment goes beyond the aesthetics, taking
into consideration the intangible elements of our culture in order to preserve it. Our belief systems, traditions,rituals practices, and indigenous wisdom stem from the natural environment and, as such, shape the manner inwhich humans live. This paper highlights key issues about the Forikrom community cultural heritage and theirbio-cultural resources which cut across both the natural and cultural elements of the community. It emphasizes
the sacredness conferred to the place and how that has supported its conservation. Detailed site information
is given as well as their significance and the challenges that arise in the bid to manage and conserve them.
Finally, a section is dedicated to discussing the interdependency of culture and nature in relation to the Forikrom
cultural landscape and what recommendations can be brought forward to strengthen the conservation andpromotion of such assets.
KEY WORDS: Belief Systems, Bio-cultural Resources, Cultural landscapes, Interdependency, Sacredness■ 1. Introduction

23.89oC (75oF) and a double maxima rainfall pattern.
The area contains the richest soils within the country
and is where the majority of farming takes place andmost staple foods are grown. Forikrom is surrounded
by a myriad of rocky hills, mountains, small patchhesof forests, and farmlands. A traditional system ofgovernance, composed of a chief and queen mother(community heads) and their sub-chiefs, govern thecommunity. The leaders have a strong connection
to the land, and as such, their history, cosmovision,
survival, and spirituality are all linked to the rocks(popularly referred to as Boten) that surround theplace.

1.1 Overview of the heritage site
Forikrom is located in the Techiman (Capital)
municipality of the Brong Ahafo Region of Ghana.
It is located between Latitutude 7.6540⁰ N andLongtitude 1.9490⁰ W [see Fig 1 (a)(b)]. The small,multi-ethnic, community is found at the Eastern
periphery of the Municipal Capital. It is bordered byother towns such as Fiaso, Boankro, Anomatua, andAmpemkrom. The community is about 8 km from theMunicipal capital, Techiman, and about a 5 minutes
drive to the community. The population of the town
is about 8,000 people, with a majority being women,
52%, and male with 48%, comprised of adults, youth,and children. The community is located in a tropicalclimate region, with high temperatures averaging

Over the years, Forikrom has remained avery traditional area with strong traditional ties totheir cultural heritage, including their bond with
the natural landscapes, such as the rocky hills

66

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

area at about 50 square meters in size. It is located in
the forested area of the rocky zones, about 1,000 km
from the main town. The Boten shrine is embodied
in the ancestral royal cave and is considered a holy
place in the community that is meant for the spiritual
protection of the people of Forikrom, Techiman,
and its surrounding areas. The royal chiefs of thepast were buried there and it was refered to as

and mountains that surround the community.
Other cultural elements, such as the Kwamene
festivals, traditional practices, and the traditional
governance system, form part of their daily life. Theycelebrate two major festivals, the Apour (a steward
accountability and evaluation festival) and the
Kwamene (a bumper yam harvest festival).

Figure 1 (a): Map of Ghana showing location of Techiman Municipality: (b) Map of Brong-Ahafo Region, (source: https://
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Brong_Ahafo_districts.png

Nananompom (resting place of chiefs). This place isdeemed very sacred because it is inhabited by thespirits of the departed chiefs. Due to its sacredness,
the Nananom (chiefs) visit the place to offer libation
for the community, asking for guidance as well asprotection. The place also serves as grounds for
performing the Bragoro, the traditional puberty ritesof teenage girls and boys. Before entering into the
Boten shrine, the traditional leader needs to shout
three times, in order to alert the spirits of one’s
presence. It is believed that not all places are visible
without the assistance and permission of spirits .
Another important feature of this site is theAnpan buom (bat sanctuary). Inside the ancestral
cave are hudreds of scores of fruit bats. The bats
not only pollinate the crops but they also help
fertilize some of the community farms through thecollection of guano (bat drooping). These bats havealso become objects of scientific research for young
university researchers on wildlife. [see Fig 3 (a) (b)]1.2 Brief description of the sacred landscape
Located at the central point of all the rocks are
the Holy Mountains (high cavement). The area
is surrounded by a number of twin binding rocks
and a number of indigenous trees creating several
segments of unique havens. These rocks aresegmented in sections at various angles and arenas.
Over the years, the place has served as a religious
camp grounds for Christian worshipers and pilgrims.
Mythical legend has it that the place is famous for
granting answers to people’s prayers. Christianpilgrims come to pray and worship, asking their
God for a miracle and answers to their prayers.
Over the years, the leaders of the community havecome to respect this belief and the super natural
power associated with the place, naming it the Holy
mountains [see Fig 2 (a)(b)(c)].
On the outskirts of the main town,
overlooking the major road, is the Ancestral Cave
which had served as an ancestral cemetery forburying the royals. It is the second biggest cave in the

The biggest cave in the area, which is referred
to as the Magic cave, is located at the periphery of67

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

come to be known as the “Ancestral sleeping ground”(Nananom pom), serving as a consultative place
for many cultural and spiritual exercises. It is worth
noting that two of the important rituals performed in
the community are the rain harvesting ritual and the
puberty ritual. Because of the sacred belief attachedto these caves, most spiritual activities, such as these
two rituals, take place in the caves. Surrounding thesecaves are small holder farms which add additional
emphasis to the fact that the people are notseparated from the landscape. Their very existence(occupation as farmers) and practices (rituals andrites) are linked directly to the resources which areutilized to their benefit. The dualism of spirituality has
become a very normal practice in the community, inthe sense that there is the culture of ‘yenfa nananom
diε nmanwon ne yenfa Caesar diε so nmano’ literally
meaning, ‘giving that of the gods to them and that of
Caesar to him.’ The Christians worship grounds werethus named by the chiefs. This dualism has created aculture of peace within the community.

the Forikrom township, a kilometer walk from themain road into a forest patchment. The Magic cave
has a circular rock opening, which legend and myth
say that it was regulated to open and close by somesecret magic words spoken by the community priest.
However, those magic words are not known byanyone alive today. The cave is sacred to the people
because of its past protective power. It is believedthat during the olden days, when wars were eminent,
the place was used as a hiden haven for the women,children, and elderly. Inside the cave is an ever grean
forest patchment with a variety of indigenous tree
species and a running stream which is almost dried
up. Legend has it that once the chief priest leads
everyone inside the cave, recites the magic words,
the cave will shut close. Inside the cave there arelarge foot stone slabs that one would have to climb
and other rocks you must manuvre around in orderto reach the other sites that have the flat toped rocks[See Fig 4 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)].
Another significant feature is the river
Asuketia (River Ketia), which serves as a water source
for the community. This same river is used to cleanse
abominations in the community, therefore there
are many taboos surrounding it that the people still
adhered to.

2.2 Natural values
Undoubtedly, sacred natural sites are becoming
increasingly known for their high levels of biodiversity
and their preserved environs, especially in India andAfrica (Dudley et al. 2010). The myriad of complex
rocks, hills, and forest patches surrounding thecommunity provides rich vegetation cover and also
harbours a number of tree species and animals thatare significant for biodiversity conservation. About
90% of the tree species are primary vegetation. These
include the Kyenkyen (bark tree), which is famously
used for weaving an uncommon cloth which is worn
during festivals, African mahogany, Abisaa (African
Plum), Mankube (African royal pal), Dawadawa (Lucus
bean), Onyina (Ceiba), Atweabire (Monkey guava),
Akyee (akee apple), and a variety of palm trees.

■ 2. Significance of the heritage place, including
natural and cultural values
2.1 Cultural Values
Significantly, the attachment of the Forikrom people
to their land and its resources is seen in the value
they gain from it. These natural resources areinterlinked with the culture of the people, in thesense that, when it comes to the celebration of
festivals, the chiefs and priests in the community
visit the Boten shrine to perform rituals and to ask
for ancestral support before the festival commences.
Again, the cultural history of the people is incomplete
without these rocks, as there is a belief that theirvery existence and survival are due to the rocks andcaves and so one cannot talk about the history of
the people of Forikrom and leave out these visible
geological features. Furthermore, many Africans
believe in ancestral worship and veneration, hence
it is not strange that many of the ancient chiefs androyals have been buried in the caves. The caves have

In the forest areas, local medicinal plantsthat local healers harvest for home remedies canbe found. These plants serve a great purpose as the
majority of people still ascribe to local treatments andmedicines. Also, around the forest areas, different
species of monkeys, such as the campbells mona
monkey, stray around but are densely concentrated
in a nearby monkey sanctuary (Boabeng Fiemaa).

68

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 2 (a): Entrance Picture of the Holy Mountain sites; (b) Holy mountain worship yard (Source: CIKOD, 2016/2017).

69

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 2 (c) A section of the holy mountain camp ground; (d) Encroachment of site (Source: CIKOD, 2016/2017).

10

Pictures of this sacred shrine cannot be provided.

70

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

people as well as protect the community resources.
By tradition, no one is allowed to cut down trees
or hunt for game in the forest patchment reserves.
Also, people are prohibited to burn trees from theforest areas for charcoal. Currently, the traditional
leaders are a group made up of a 7-member
committee, comprising of 3 young people, a female
woman leader, a chief, a community elder, and an
agriculturist who oversees the local managmentof the sites and reports to the traditional council.
Periodically, the youth were mobilized by the Unit
commitee (local government representative in thecommunity) to engage in clearing and weeding

Figure 3. Picture of a bat sanctuary.

Figure 4 (a): Picture of the entrance to the magic caves; (b) A view inside the magic caves; (c) A visible rock shaped African
Map.

■ 3. Current management arrangements

thesurrounding bushes of the sites. The preservationand management of these heritage sites are the sole
responsibility of the community so far, though, theyreceive support from external non-governmentalorganizations. These NGOs have been working on
the revitalization and documentation of the site
and are also working with local authorities for theestablishment of a proper management system.
Many young people are attending capacity building
activities provided by these organizations, focused onnatural resources conservation.

3.1 Forikrom Management system
Forikrom, since its permanent settlement aroundthe caves, has remained as a community which isgoverned by a traditional council, made up of the
Chief (cultural head) with his sub divisional chiefs
and queen mothers (female counterparts). The biocultural resources are currently managed by the
traditional council of the community. Until recently,
with the commodification of the heritage site andopening them up to tourists, the elders of thecommunity have instituted a system for revenue
collection. The service fees collected from tourists
are deposited into the community local fund accountand managed by the traditional council. These fees
are not regulated by the district governing body andare used to offset costs such as paying tour guides
and repairing the community water pump. Many
forms of traditional resource management, often
supported by customary law, have been recognizedin the cultural and natural landscapes and havebeen found to be relevant. The local governmentof Ghana has allowed for the existance of locallyenacted by-laws. The elders of the community havetherefore set these by-laws to govern the lives of the■ 4. Current State of Conservation and Challenges
for Continuity
Ghana has developed many conservation
mechanisms over the years. Recently, a Community
Resources Management Area (CREMA) mechanism
was developed as an innovative natural resource
governance and landscape-level planning tool that
authorizes communities to manage their natural
resources for economic and livelihood benefits.
The aim of CREMA is to encourage local people tointegrate wildlife management into their farming
and land management systems as a legitimate landuse option. However, the system is operational for
farmer-management use, though it can be adopted

71

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

promote their own ambitions at the expense of
the community’s conservation plans and violating
the laws that guide the heritage sites. Over time,it has become very difficult for the community tomonitor and collect levies as the people dodge
the small local office and also payment is done tothe so called “new leaders” camping at the sites.
These encroachers are seen putting up personal
places of abodes and altering the nature of theplace. The effect of the unsanitary conditions at thesites have affected the scenery and reduced thecredibility of the place as a sacred natural site. The
Ghana Museums and Monuments Board, which is
responsible for the management and supervision of
the heritage places, plays no role in supporting thecommunity, although traditional roles in conservationis recognised. However, much reliance is soughtfrom external sources, such as non-governmentalorganizations. This puts a heavy burden and strain on
the community and organizations that are helping.
The neglect of the place creates a huge challenge,
especially if the desire of the community is to have it
recognized nationally as a protected area.

for natural resource conservation and heritage
promotion if other measures, such as consideration
for culture, sacredness, and indigenous wisdom andpractices, are included and implemented.
Despite the community’s effort to maintainthe heritage sites, Forikrom’s bio-cultural heritage isfaced with a myriad of challenges. The indigenous
ways that the community tries to use in order toconserve their heritage, which includes enhancing
their spirituality through the practice of their rituals
at the sacred sites and promoting their sociocultural and economic well-being, has been met withchallenging factors. These include the encroachment
and abuse of the site by non-citizens who come tobuild new structures [see Fig 2 (d)], the unsanitaryconditions created as a result of the presence ofvisitors and pilgrims who leave litter everywhere,
and the frequent forest destruction as a result ofagricultural pressure on the landscape despite thelocal laws, coupled with seasonal bushfires that
destroy a lot of indigenous trees. Another challengewith the Forikrom site is the fact that the heritagesite is not yet under the supervision of the Ghana
Museums and Monuments Board (GMMB), thebody in charge of supervising heritage sites, thishas created a burden for the community to solely
manage it. With the era of globalization setting in,
the cultural relevance of the place is facing threats.
A recent research report by a non-governmentalorganization, CIKOD (Centre for Indigenous
Knowledge and Organizational Development),
reports of young people showing more interest in
new technologies and the expertise to inculcate
the essence of protecting such a heritage throughtraditional means is gradually diminishing (Cikod, ED
publication 2017). The rate of technology growthin Ghana has created such a massive urge among
young people to explore rather than to take interestin the tradition of folk music, heritage tales, andconservation issues. At the end of it all there seem tobe a large number of young people moving from thecommunity to the city areas in search of white collar
jobs which not only creates an ageing population
but also the loss of transfer of indigenous wisdom,
customs, and traditions of the community.

Additionally, the technical expertise to put
into place a standardized system for safety measuresand disaster management is lacking. This is a very
alarming situation as this may cause a problem inthe future if such measures are not put into place ascontingencies to manage disasters, such as people
slipping on the rocks or finding it difficult to get afoot hole while climbing, resulting in a fall. Lastly, indeveloping countries such as Ghana, cultural tourism
is a major contributor to its GDP. However, much of
Ghana’s land is covered with sacred groves which
includes significant tracts of land that are not officiallypart of the protected area system or the State forests(Ormsby, 2012).
■ 5. Conclusion and Recommendations
Sacred natural sites are of critical importance to theconservation of biodiversity and, therefore, much
effort needs to be concentrated to develop thesesites sustainably since they have such potential toserve diverse purposes for the nation.
The process required to do so must address
the controversies, tensions, and contradictionsin heritage conservation and socio-economic

It is very alarming to see that the landscapearea have been encroached upon by people whotake portions of the land as a private place to72

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

for that matter, Forikrom can learn from other areas
who have advanced in natural and cultural heritage
conservation and have turned it into sustainable
tourism, as seen with well-structured management
systems at Japanese heritage sites.

development and the involvement of the local
community. The CREMA system is a good step tobegin with and this can be fused with a community
bio-cultural protocol. This protocol identifies the local
systems, traditions, culture, and practices that exist
in the community and formulates laws (protocols)
to safeguard as well as spell out how communities
will deal with external bodies in the management
and conservation of their resources. The protocol
gives rights and responsibilities to the local people, interms of resource management and benefit-sharing,and respects their tradition, culture, and practices
which are lacking in the CREMA system.

Last but not the least, it is very importantthat policy-makers are educated on the importanceof the intrinsic linkages between nature andculture. Therefore, issues in dealing with heritage
conservation and promotion must take into accountthe relationship that nature has with the humanenvironment. Policies to safeguard such places must
recognize local perspectives and the values they haveand include them.

As much as it is important to preserve theheritage place, ensuring that it does not lose its
authenticity, it is also important that heritage ispresented to the public for many reasons, such as
financial and most importantly, educational andsocial reasons (Aplin 2007). There is a need for morework to document the logical and legendary stories
that surround our heritage for the benefit of teachingothers what they must know about our natural andcultural heritage. It is not enough for the citizens
alone to know but also the outsiders who will takeinterest in the place and may not have an idea about
the culture and traditions of the place.

Finally, it should be noted that it is not enoughthat Ghana has an established multidimensionalframework for the protection, safeguarding, andpromotion of heritage sustainability. The degreeof commitment and action taken by Ghanaian
authorities is mixed and varies according to thecomponent of the framework. While many public
efforts have been dedicated to raising-awarenessand creating a national registry for tangible heritage,
there have been persistent calls for additional actions
to improve the framework regarding the updatingof the registries to include elements of intangible
heritage, mechanisms for community involvement,
and stimulating support amongst the private sector.
Many of these issues have yet to be addressed andthere is need for heritage actors in the country tointensify their advocacy for resolution.

Again, in order to have a well-developed
system of heritage management in the Municipality,
it is important that the district level government
participate in the management of the heritage site.
Necessary steps must be put in place to build thecapacities of heritage officers, individuals chosenfrom the local communities to manage such historicplaces. In this way, a well-structured system canbe put in place to monitor the sustainable use anddevelopment of the sites. Government should
also consider the role of the private sector in the
promotion of sustainable cultural heritage tourism.
Budget must be allocated to the management ofsuch places if they (Municipal Assembly) desire toreceive some percentage of the revenue from touristfees.

■ Acknowledgements
I would like to extend my greatest thanks to myorganization, CIKOD, for trusting me to lead such a
project and own the processes as well, especiallyto my executive director, Mr. Bernard Guri. I also
acknowledge the support of NEBF for providing theneeded support as an external organization to help
in documenting the bio cultural resources of the
Forikrom community, especially to Jessica Brown, thedirector at NEBF. Many thanks also go to Universityof Tsukuba, for a well thought plan in carrying out
such a training to draw out the linkages in nature andculture of landscapes in the world. I would like toacknowledge the UNESCO Chair, Professor Yoshida,
Professor Nobuko who provided an enlightening

More so, although cultural conservation
policies may vary among countries, it will be good tofind ways geared towards fostering cultural exchanges
as a determining factor to bringing added value tocultural management and social cohesion. Ghana,73

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

and inspiring experience in Japan. Not forgetting
Maya Ishizawa, who went back and forth with themanuscript to ensure that all facts are right and theright information provided. Thank you to all.

74

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Aplin, G. 2007. Heritage as Exemplar: A Pedagogical Role for Heritage Studies in Values Education. The
Environmentalist, 27: 375–83.
CIKOD TV. 2011. Forikrom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsF_y9FzLP0&feature=c4-overview vl&list=PLVQp3qSX8HhTIlic5sztIehiQz
q31qSk0 [accessed 20 March 2018]
CIKOD. 2017. Community Institutional and Resource Mapping, A heritage conservation project in Forikrom
community. NEBF, US.
Dalglish, C. 2012. Archaeology and Landscapes Ethics. World Archaeology, 44 (3): pp.327-341
Dudley, N., Baghwat, S., Higgins-Zogib, L., Lassen, B., Verschuuren, B., and Wild, R. 2010. Conservation of
biodiversity in Sacred Natural Sites in Asia and Africa: a review of the scientific literature. In Verschuuren, B.,
Wild, R., McNeely, J.A., and Oviedo, G. (eds): Sacred Natural Sites: Conserving Nature and Culture, pp. 19–32.
Earthscan, London.
Guri, Y.B., Banuoko Faabelangne, D., Kanchebe Derbile, E., Hiemstra, W., and Verschuuren, B. 2012. Sacredgroves versus gold mines: biocultural community protocols in Ghana. In Krystyna Swiderska, M.J.O., Kohli, K.,
Jonas, H., Shrumm, H., and Hiemstra, W. (eds) Biodiversity and Culture: Exploring Community Protocols, Rights
and Consent, pp. 121–130. Participatory Learning and Action, IIED, London.
Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G03405.pdf [accessed 29 January 2014].
Ormsby, A. 2012. Perceptions of tourism at sacred groves in Ghana and India. The Power of Place: Heritage,
Archaeological and Sacred 3 (1): 1-18. RASAALA: Recreation and Society in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Pendlebury, J.R. 2009. Conservation in the Age of Consensus. Routledge, Oxon and New York.
Yangmaadome Guri, B. & Verschuuren, B. 2014. Community well-being in Ghana: an African perspective. In
Verschuuren, B., Hiemstra, W. and Subramanian, S. M. (eds): Community Wellbeing in Biocultural Landscapes,
are we living well? Chapter 5, pp. 78-100. Practical Action, Rugby, United Kingdom.

75

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

The Sacred Landscape of the
Yading Nature Reserve

Zhengli Liu

Yading National Nature Reserve Administration Bureau, No.23 Echu Road, 627750, Shangri-La Town, Daocheng County,
Sichuan Province; +86 187 824 20094, 19657172@qq.com.
■ Abstract
The Yading Nature Reserve has been declared a National Nature Reserve in China since 2001 and a UNESCO
Biosphere Reserve since 2003. It is not only a wildlife sanctuary, but also a pilgrim site for believers of different
schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The glaciated landform of Yading is covered with a range of classic glacial
features, such as U-shaped valleys, cirques peaks, horn peaks, and moraines. It is an area surrounding three
awe-inspiring glacier-covered peaks which are believed to be the manifestations of Avalokitesvara, Manjusri,
and Vajrapani, the three most important Bodhisattvas in Tibetan Buddhism. This article is a preliminaryreflection and examination of the sacredness of Yading, its different aspects, and contemporary challenges.
KEY WORDS: Yading Nature Reserve, Sacred Landscape, Sacred Mountains■ 1. Introduction

Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Sichuan
Province, China. It shares a border with the Diqing
Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Yunnan Province
in the northwest and the Liangshan Yi Autonomous
Prefecture of Sichuan in the east. The total areaof the Nature Reserve is 1,457 square kilometers(Qin, 2014). It has been declared a National Nature
Reserve since 2001 and a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve
since 2003. [Fig. 1]

1.1 Overview of The Yading Nature Reserve
In the gnas yig, the guidebook to the sacred
land of Yading, the great Yogi Padmasambhava
prophesied that “anyone who encounters theblessing of the sacred land (of Yading) will escape
the three lower rebirths of Samsara, receive all fourtantric empowerments, and attain all ordinary andextraordinary accomplishments (to Buddhahood)”(Lha Rams Pa, Unknown). Yading, or gnas chen gangs
dkar rigs gsum mgon po in Tibetan, is a pure land
(Tibetan: zhing khams, Sanskrit: Kṣetra), which is an
abode of a Buddha or Bodhisattva. Additionally, agnas mchog, which could be translated as sacredplace, means a physical embodiment of Buddha,Dharma, and Sangha, or a place withgreat historical significance in Tibetan culture (Zhang,1993). To the laymen’s eyes, it is a place with an
awe-inspiring landscape, as well as great natural andcultural attractions.

1.2 Landscape and Biodiversity
Yading is an area of mountains and valleys
surrounding three awe-inspiring glacier-covered
peaks: the north peak Avalokitesvara (6,032m), thesouth peak Manjusri (5,958m), and the east peak,
Vajrapani (5,958m). Cut by three U-shaped glaciervalleys, the straight-line distances between the threepeaks is less than 7km. Geographically, it is locatedin the Hengduan Mountains and has the distinctive
features of high mountains and deep valleys. The
altitude ranges from 2,800m to 6,032m, with 32
peaks above 4,500m, 10 peaks above 5,000m, and1 above 6,000m (Qin, 2014). The glaciated landformYading is located in Daocheng County of the76

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 1: Location of Yading National Nature Reserve, a map from Overall Planning of Yading National Nature Reserve(2013~2025).

Figure 2: One of the three Peaks, Avalokitesvara, taken by Wang Lei from Yading National Nature Reserve Administration.

77

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Ganzi’s population are identified as being of Tibetan
nationality, there are actually many ethnic groups
with significant differences in languages, traditions,and beliefs. The area also belongs to “the Ethnic
Corridor of Southwest China” as called by some
Chinese linguists and anthropologists. Thanks to
the valleys and grasslands forming pass ways, trade,ethnic migration, and cultural exchanges never stopin this ethnic corridor.

of Yading is covered with a range of classic glacial
features, such as U-shaped valleys, cirques peaks,
horn peaks, and moraines. [Fig. 2]
Yading is rich in wildlife species. In flora, 120
families, 431 genera, and 1,200 species of vascularplants have been discovered; among them there
are 20 families, 34 genera, and 103 species of ferns
and 100 families, 397 genera, and 1,023 speciesof seed plants. In fauna, there are 23 orders, 73
classes, and 291 species of vertebrates; 12 of them
are listed as Protection Class I in China, such as snow
leopards (Panthera uncia) and black necked cranes(Grus nigricollis), and an additional 42 are listed as
Protection Class II. (Qin, 2014)

1.4 Local Communities and Stateless Societies
Samuel Geoffrey has argued that Traditional Tibet canbest be regarded as a collection of stateless societies.
(Geoffrey, 1982) This argument is very accurate whenlooking at the traditional Kham region, which was
mostly ruled by different secular leaders politicallyrecognized by the central government of Beijing,
had religious ties with Lhasa, and experienced little
centralized control, historically. Kham, as the land ofpeople, has always been about cultural diversity anddiverse communities.

1.3 Cultural Diversity
In Tibetan traditions, Yading and most parts of theGanzi Prefecture belong to the Kham region, “theland of people,” one of the three major regionsof Tibetan cultural areas, which also includes
the Ü-Tsang “the land of belief” and the Amdo
“the land of horses” regions. The Kham region isfamous for its residents with great talents, such as
the Tibetan Buddhism School founders, brilliant
scholars, and great merchants. Although most of

The population within the nature reserve
is about 1,200 and 9,000 in the surrounding areas,
97% of whom are Tibetan. The area surrounding
the three snow mountains is called gangs dkar gling,

Figure 3: The srin mo Demoness Map, from https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/qvWKr77n7Q8y3RcgAI60

78

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

which literally means the land of snow mountains.
Although it is a relatively small place, there are four
tribes of people around the Nature Reserve: mtsho
thog, gzir ba, ’bong dze, and stong nyen (Lha Rams
Pa, Unknown). Each of them has distinct dialects andcustoms. Most of them believe in the Gelug school ofTibetan Buddhism while some believe in the Kagyu
School. The most important monastic community is
the Gangs Gling Monastery, its branch temple, mTsho’Go Temple, is located within the nature reserve.

whole landscape of Tibet was in the shape of a srin
mo demoness, so they built 13 Buddhist Temples at
focal points to nail down the demoness in a supine
position. After the construction of the temples,
Buddhism was able to spread across the land without
hindrance. The whole natural landscape in this myth
was seen as an autochthonic aspect of Tibetan
culture1. This story can help us see some interestingand dynamic aspects of the sacred landscape of
Yading.

■ 2. The Sacredness of Yading

2.1 The Great Snow Mountains of the Three
Bodhisattvas

We can get a glimpse of the Tibetan sense oflandscape on the map of srin mo, or the supine
demoness, which we can find in most Tibetanmonasteries. Srin is one kind of pre-Buddhist
animistic being which is associated with earth andlater with an autochthonic aspect of Tibetan culture1.
[Fig. 3] The story of the demoness map starts in the
7th century, the time of the legendary king Songtsen
Gampo and supernatural events which happened
frequently to stop Buddhism from propagating.
The king’s wives from China and Nepal saw that theI. The Consecration and Opening of Yading asa Pure Land (zhing khams)
The first aspect of Yading is the Buddhist one. Yading
is like a pantheon of over 40 sacred mountains withhigh and low status. Nearly every one of them isbelieved to be a Buddhist deity. In the two available
traditional guidebooks (gnas yig) of Yading, (Karma,2005) and (Lha Rams Pa, Unknown), it is claimed
that both the consecration (byin rlabs) and the door
opening (sgo phye) for spiritual practices are theaction of the 8th century Yogi Padmasambhava, whois believed to have tamed a lot of Tibetan deities toserve the purpose of Buddhism. The consecrationand door opening are similar to the action of thetwo princesses building the 13 temples; in thismythological way, the autochthonic culture and thenatural wonder of Yading were brought into the
Tibetan cultural world. [Fig. 4]
II. Tibetan Buddhists’ List of Sacred Places
There are inventories, similar to the World Heritage
List, that are put together by monks and scholars,
in which different sacred places (gnas chen or
gnas mchog), such as Bodh Gaya of India or Wutai
Mountain of North China, are ranked as the best
mountains to do a pilgrimage (gnas skor) in a certain
year. In one pilgrim guidebook, Yading is listed as the
11th sacred place of Buddhism and it recommended
the year of the Rooster as the most auspicious time
to do a pilgrimage, while the Bodh Gaya is listed
as the second sacred place and auspicious in theyear of the Dog (Karma, 2005). In this way, Yading
was evaluated and put within the spiritual order ofTibetan Buddhism.
III. The Three Bodhisattvas

Figure 4: Padmasambhava, collection of Rubin Museum of
Art.

1

In one myth, the Tibetan people are said to be the offspring of a male monkey who is the incarnation of Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara and a srin modemoness.

79JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

yogis and put in lower levels of the Tibetan Buddhist
Pantheon, they are of the utmost importanceto the prosperity and spiritual security of local
communities. Within the Yading Nature Reserve,
every village has its own sacred mountains, which
are usually smaller mountains. On the first day of
the Tibetan New Year, families and communities
conduct offering rituals to these mountains. An
example of how the communities care for theirsacred mountains occurred in May of 2016, whena small forest fire broke out in a mountain near thenature reserve; villagers of the dga dbyang village
rushed to put out the fire as if their own houses wereon fire. According to a colleague from this village, thevillagers believe that their village and family have aspiritual bond with this specific mountain. This is anunderlying, unscripted, and indigenous aspect of thesacredness of Yading which needs further study.

In Tibetan, the full name of Yading is gnas chen gangs
dkar rigs gsum mgon po, which means the GreatSnow Mountains of the Three Bodhisattva. Three
awe-inspiring glacier-covered peaks are believed tobe the manifestation of Avalokitesvara, Manjusri, andVajrapani - the three most important Bodhisattvas
in Tibetan Buddhism who represent Lord Buddha’s
compassion, wisdom, and empowerment.
The combination of the three Bodhisattvas(Tibetan: rigs gsum mgon po, Sanskrit: trikulanatha)
is a very important recurrent theme and idea in
Tibetan culture, history, and religion. Some scholars
find that this combination came from the Kriya Tantrain the esoteric tradition of Buddhism2 . The culturaland spiritual significance of the three peaks and theirsurrounding areas brings reverence to the hearts oflocal people and pilgrims from other parts of Tibet.
Because of this, all animals in the Yading Nature
Reserve are guarded by Bodhisattvas, therefore
hunting and killing them has serious spiritualconsequences.

■ 3. Continuity and Challenges“China has long survived its ancient cotemporary,
the Land of Egypt; yet, even after all the centuries,
it cannot be seen itself as a whole. True, its vastlands are known collectively as China; but withthe barriers of confused tongues and difficulttransportation, some of its areas differ from others,
even as Formosa differs from Alaska,” wrote AustrianAmerican explorer, linguist, and botanist Joseph
Rock in his 1931 article “Konka Risumgongba, HolyLand of Outlaws” about his visit to Yading in Juneand August of 1928. Other than language barriers
and inaccessibility as the reasons for China’s cultural
diversity, he also spoke about the chiefs in the Khamregion at that time and thought that before long theywould become things of the past. Now, in the timeof globalization and modernization, they are reallythings of the past. However, different from language
barriers, inaccessibility, and local chiefs or traditional
political powers, the belief in the sacred mountains
continues to live on with remarkable resilience,acquiring new meanings, and contributing to theconservation of Yading’s natural and cultural diversity.

These examples show how sacredness
has been expressed in the written words ofmonks and in the mythology of Tibetan Buddhism,
when it was introduced as a religion and established
as a culture. This is the monastic, or literary, aspect of
the sacredness of Yading.

2.2 Sacred Mountains of Communities
The above textual narrative of the monasteries
and Buddhist scholars shows the relationship with
Tibetan Buddhism, or broader Tibetan culture,in the sacred landscape of Yading. However, thecontribution of the sacredness to the conservationof the Yading Nature Reserve can also be found in
the spiritual relationship between local communities,
pilgrims, and sacred mountains. This relationshipcannot only be interpreted in the canon and ideasof Buddhism. The worship of sacred mountains andpilgrimages predated the propagation of Buddhism
on the Tibetan Plateau. A lot of sacred mountains
in Tibet are regarded as abodes of guardian spirits
for certain communities. Although these spirits ordeities are said to be have been tamed by great

3.1 Sacred Mountains of Shangri-La
Since the 1990s，many places within the Sichuan,
Yunnan, and the Tibetan Autonomous Region in2“Three Lords of the World”. Himalayan Art Resources Inc. July 2013. Web. 2 Aug. 2004., www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=1146

80

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

infrastructure inside and outside the nature reserveand the influx of tourists, language barriers andtransportation inaccessibility have really become athing of the past. However, because of these changes,
the cultural diversity and sacredness of the area areat risk. For example, local communities are getting
more involved in the outside world and are subject tooutside evaluation and the yearly pilgrim systems ofdifferent sacred places are now competing to be theone and only Shangri-La.

China have been claiming to be Shangri-La, andYading is no exception. Shangri-La was first describedin James Hilton's 1933 novel Lost Horizon. Becauseof the similar landscapes described in the novel
and the brand awareness of Shangri-La, Yading andother sites are competing to be the “real ShangriLa”. In 2004, a neighboring county of Yading, named
Zhongdian in the Yunnan Province, officially changed
its name to Shangri-La County (now Shangri-La City).
Reacting to this, the slogan “Daocheng Yading, theSoul of Shangri-La” was born. Now with modern andinternational connotations, the concept of ShangriLa participated in the new myth-making or reenchantment of Yading for preservation and tourism.

Secondly, the misinterpretation of local
cultures, its value, and sacredness in tourism
promotion results in ignorant tourists. Because
most tourists are only taking short visits to the area,
they do not know much about the sacred nature of
Yading. This is evident in their insensitivity to customs
such as playing in the water and even occasionallytaking nude photos near sacred lakes. Moreover,not many people know nor appreciate the history,
cultural diversity, and spiritual value of nature in
Yading.

3.2 Current Management Arrangements
The Nature Reserve is now managed by the Yading
Nature Reserve Administration Bureau, a resident
agency of the Government of Ganzi Prefecture,and protected by the “Regulations of the People's
Republic of China on Nature Reserves: Decree of
the State Council of the People's Republic of China(No. 167)”. Stakeholder groups in Yading include: thevillages of Shangri-La town, three other townships,
and the monastic community of Gongga Ling
Monastery. 62% of the staff of the bureau and over
95% of the rangers are from local communities.
As “the soul of Shangri-La” and becauseof her natural beauty and cultural distinction, theYading Nature Reserve has become a popular tourist
attraction in China. Tourism development generates
the most revenue for nature conservation andthe payment for the ecosystem services of local
communities. Local communities’ livelihoods havebenefited greatly from this new tourism.

■ 4. Summary
The primal natural beauty of Yading inspires thespiritual world of pilgrims and local residents, as aresult, its sacredness and traditions have conserved
this place for hundreds of years. The sacredness of
Yading is not one dimensional and static, there areat least two aspects of broader Tibetan culture andlocal culture. In addition to this, historical changes
are shown in the Buddhist mythology of the Srin mo
Demoness and Padmasambhava. From pre-Buddhism
mountain worship to the modern notions of ShangriLa, the continuity and resilience of the sacredness of
Yading should not be underestimated.

3.3 Risks and Challenges
However, Yading still faces the greatest
challenge: how to conserve the spiritual relationshipbetween man and nature under the pressuresof economic development. This article is only apreliminary reflection and examination of thischallenge. A lot of hard works is waiting to be done.

In 2013, the world’s highest in altitude civilian airport,
Daocheng Yading Airport, was opened a 2-hour
drive from the Nature Reserve. Cars can access fromthe Provinces of Sichuan, Yunnan, and the Tibetan
Autonomous Region. Highways and railways arebeing built in nearby counties. In 2017, over 750,000
people, including pilgrims, visited the Yading Nature
Reserve, 55% more than in 2016. With all thesechanges, there are two main challenges for theconservation of the sacred landscape.
Firstly, with the improvement of the81JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Geoffrey, Samuel. 1982. Tibet as a Stateless Society and Some Parallels. The Journal of Asian Studies 41: pp.
215–229.
Gianotti, Carla. 2004. The Srin Mo Demoness and Her Submission to the Buddhist Tibetan Dharma. In Orofino, G.
and Vita, S. (eds.): Buddhist Asia 2, pp. 69–97. Nakanishi Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
Himalayan Art Resources. 2017. Three Lords of the World.
http://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=1146 [accessed 30 September 2017]
Karma, rGyal mTshan. (eds.). 2005. The Guidebooks of 25 Sacred Places in mDo Khams Region. Minzu Press.,
Beijing.
Lha Ram Pa, mDo sNgags. (eds.). Unknown. The Short History of Gangs dKar Gling and the Guidebook of gNas
Chen Gangs dKar Rigs gSum mGon Po. Printed by Gangs dKar Gling Monastery, Ganzi.
Qin, Weihua et al. (eds.) 2014. Overall Planning of Yading National Nature Reserve (2013~2025). Nanjing
Institute of Environmental Science, Nanjing.
Rock, J.F. 1931. Konga Risumgongba, Holy Land of Outlaws. The National Geographic Magazine, July 1931: pp.
1-65.
Zhang, Yisun. (eds.). 1993. Tibetan and Chinese Dictionary. 2nd edition. Minzu Press., Beijing.

82

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Western Tien-Shan World
Heritage Site (Kyrgyz Part):
From Traditional to Modern
Management Challenges
Ilia Domashov

Senior Lecturer, Kyrgyz National University, biologist & ecologist, 23/48 Patrissa Lumumby str., Bishkek, 720076 Kyrgyzstan,
idomashov@gmail.com■ Abstract
The Western Tien-Shan World Heritage Site (WTS WHS) includes sites in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, andUzbekistan, in Central Asia. The Kyrgyz part of the WTS WHS includes the Sary-Chelek Nature Reserve (also
UNESCO Biosphere Reserve), Besh-Aral State Nature Reserve, and Padysha-Ata State Nature Reserve. The
Kyrgyz territory protected areas, that are included in the WTS WHS, are subject to existing management plansdeveloped within the framework of the Environmental Law of Kyrgyzstan. Historically established, local, clanbased governance systems, in natural and cultural heritage sites, began to collapse during the Soviet era and,currently, they are either dispossessed or highly deteriorated. Learning from international experiences, theWTS WHS management can be improved with fresh assessments of the natural and cultural values, greater
oversight to implement international standards, better promotion of tourism and pilgrimage routes, and by
developing effective management at the World Heritage Site.
KEYWORDS: Western Tien-Shan World Heritage, Natural Ecosystems, Biotic Regulation■ 1. Introduction

List for its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) andwas nominated under criterion (x). However, there
are many cultural values that the WTS WHS is
known for (Nomination Dossier Western Tien-Shan2012). For example, there are historical and culturalmonuments (e.g. Mazar St. Padyshaty from the VI to
VII centuries and Koktekshe Burial), petroglyphs (e.g.
Tassharbak, Tanbalytas, Tokturmas, Karazau gorge,and Chinars petroglyphs), paleontological sites, andnatural monuments (e.g. Tashkesken tract, Pulatkhan
plateau, natural walnut fruit forest). The Western
Tien-Shan region is of global importance since it is
the place of origin for a number of fruit tree species
and is distinguished for a great variety of forest types
and a unique flora and fauna (Shukurov, Domashov
2011; Third National Report on the Conservation of
Biodiversity of the Kyrgyz Republic 2005).

1.1 Overview of the heritage site
The Western Tien-Shan World Heritage Site (WTS
WHS) is a transboundary site that includes 13
protected areas (PAs), covering the combined
area of 528,177 ha in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,and Uzbekistan. The Kyrgyz part of the WTS WHS
includes the Sary-Chelek Nature Reserve (SNR, also
designated as UNESCO Biosphere Reserve), the BeshAral State Nature Reserve (SNR), and the PadyshaAta State Nature Reserve (SNR). These PAs arepart of the Central Asian mountain system of TienShan, which is one of the seven largest mountainchains in the world. The altitude of various partsof the WTS WHS ranges from 700 to 4,503 meters
above sea level. This site is replete with a variety oflandscapes, which are characterized by exceptionallyrich biodiversity. This site is on the World Heritage

The WTS WHS covers the areas of the
Tolebi, Tulkubas, and Kazygurt districts in the South83

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Figure 1. Overview map of WTS WHS. On the map: AZNR - Aksu-Zhabagly Nature Reserve; BANR - Besh-Aral Nature
Reserve; ChNR - Chatkal Nature Reserve; KNR - Karatau Nature Reserve; PANR - Padysh-Ata Nature Reserve; SChNR - SaryChelek Biosphere Nature Reserve; SUNP - Sairam-Ugam National Park

instance, in Sary-Chelek SNR there were hermit
areas for Buddhist monks. At the end of the 8th andbeginning of the 9th centuries, Islam arrived in theWestern Tien-Shan, marking the appearance of holy
places for Muslims. The Western Tien-Shan was on
the main trade routes and was the center of cultural
ties of the nomadic pastoralists and sedentary
agricultural tribes of Central Asia. One of the mainbranches of the Great Silk Road passed through thesemountains. From this area, they exported walnuts,
furs, Chatkal silver, ammonia, mercury, cattle, andother trade items.

Kazakhstan region, and the Zhualyn district of theZhambyl region in the Republic of Kazakhstan, theAksiy and Chatkal districts of the Jalal-Abad region
in the Kyrgyz Republic, and the Bostalyk and Parkent
districts of the Tashkent region in Uzbekistan [Fig. 1].
The three specially protected naturalareas included in the Kyrgyz part of the WTS WHS
encompasses unique mountain landscapes andecosystems of the Chatkal range, which represents
the biological and landscape diversity of the Western
Tien-Shan with its rich flora and fauna (Nomination
Dossier Western Tien-Shan 2012).

In the Southwestern part of the Kyrgyz
Republic the world's largest mass of walnutfruit forests are located, which currently provides
sustainable income for the local population,
particularly those living in the Sary-Chelek SNR and
its buffer zone. The sale of nuts, apples, herbs, andhoney provides the local people with a livelihood(Orolbaeva 2003). This is possible thanks to thefavorable water regime and the rich natural resourcesof the territory.

■ 2. The socio-cultural heritage and sacredness ofthe territory
This territory has a rich history and holds important
cultural values. Humans have inhabited the territoryof the Western Tien-Shan since the Neolithic
period. In the area of the river Kyzyl-Suu, there are
structural remains of places where ancient people
lived. Additionally, during different time periods,
the worldviews and ideologies of Zoroastrianism,
Buddhism, and Islam dominated this area. For

The Padysha-Ata SNR is famous for its

84

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

people, they influence and maintain the high qualityof their horses’ pedigree today (Shukurov 2008).
Clans defended their territories in Kyrgyzstan,particularly in the Western Tien-Shan. Conflicts
over the land arose quite often among the clans.
Depending on the level of social organization, land
was distributed among the local population. For

historical sacred places of pilgrimage, in particular theshrines of Padysha-Ata and Baba-Ata [Fig. 2].
■ 3. Management, public access, and protection
3.1 Historical mechanisms for landscape managementin WTS

Figure 2. Padysha-Ata one of sacral Muslim place of WTS WHS (Anna Lodygina https://fotki.yandex.ru/users/ankalodygina/ (5.07.2017))

example, a family relied on only a small piece ofland whereas the clan-based management had alarger territory. In each clan there were traditional
authorities who directed the use of land and its
management, taking into account previous pressureson the grass (i.e. grazing), weather conditions, andother factors (Shukurov 2008, Domashov 2011,
Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge 2012).

For a long time, in the Western Tien-Shan,
there existed a historically established system ofinteractions between humans and nature. Thissystem was closely connected with the social
structures formed in this region.
This social structure is based upon clan grouporganization. Clans not only lived in a certain territory
but also identified with it. In most cases, there wererituals that ensured the unity of human beings,
nature, and the land. For instance, there is a legend
about the Sary-Cherelek lake concerning underwater
horses that descended from a legendary horse
named Tulpar, which belonged to the hero Manas.
These mythical horses not only symbolize the sacredforces of nature, but also, according to the local

These clan-based management mechanisms
were the basis for the interactions between humanbeings and nature before Kyrgyzstan joined the USSR.
The local governance structures partially survived
during the Soviet period in Kyrgyzstan. Now, inthe post-Soviet era, these historical management
mechanisms of clan ownership have been

85

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

WTS WHS there is a problem in that the PAs’ ideology
is still based upon the Soviet’s nature management
approach which holds that nature is primarily forthe expansion of extractive economies. An exampleof this is how science is used to justify incursions,such as mining. Within the new management
systems, the approach is that natural ecosystems
are important and in need of conservation for all of
the ecosystem services that they provide in the local
and global arena. In Kyrgyzstan, as in other countries,
there remains an open discussion about defining
the idea of natural ecosystems and the limits of theirtransformation. According to some researchers,
the widespread definition of the ecosystem, thatit “means a dynamic complex of plant, animal andmicro-organism communities and their non-living
environment interacting as a functional unit”(CBD,
Article 2), needs to be reviewed. Authors Shukurov
and Gorshkov note that the concept of an ecosystemshould be based primarily on the biotic regulation
activities that it provides (Makarieva, Gorshkov 2007,
Shukurov 2008). The concept of biotic regulation
offers quantitative proof supporting the statementthat an environment remains suitable for life owing to
the impact on life itself. The stabilizing environmental
impact of natural ecosystems is proportional tothe area they occupy. It then follows that natural
ecosystems, protected from human exploitation,
should be allowed to operate in sufficiently large
global areas, such that their cumulative impact
is sufficient to keep the global environment andclimate in a stable state. When the stability thresholdof natural ecosystems is overcome by humaninterference, the environment will degrade to an
unsuitable habitable level, irrespective of whether
we humans continue to directly pollute it or not(Makarieva, Gorshkov, Startsev 2017). This newunderstanding of ecosystems will help strengthen theconservation base of the WTS WHS.

completely eliminated in the process of economic
neoliberalization, resulting in the exploitation ofnatural resources and the desacralization of nature.
3.2 Modern protection system of this territory as
natural and cultural heritage
According to the Regulations on PAs in Kyrgyzstan,each area is managed as a whole and indivisible
as a nature conservation area. In addition, there
are national laws on PAs, which also regulates theactivities within the PAs, including those areas thatare part of the WTS WHS.
In these PAs, economic activities are notpermitted. Only activities that are related to theperformance of environmental services are allowed.
In specially selected areas some workers and groups
that live within the boundaries of the PAs are allowed
to develop certain activities related to nature,such as haymaking, harvesting of nuts and berries,
beekeeping, or limited grazing. The scale of any
economic activity in the adjacent territories is limited
by national law. Some concerns include the violationof these protective laws by poachers, who illegallyhunt wild animals or harvest valuable plants, andmining in adjacent territories, which is considered afuture risk.
All PAs in Kyrgyzstan are financed by the State
Agency for Environmental Protection and Forestry
under the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic. Dueto the economic problems of the country, PAs have a
deficiency in financial resources.
Extrabudgetary funding comes frominternational donor organizations and is supported
by a portion of visitor’s entrance fees, which is used
for the management of the natural parks. In addition,
ecotourism and visits to holy places contribute to
the development and financing of the PAs. It is acharacteristic, for example, of the Sary-Chelek SNR
and Padysha-Ata SNR that funding is derived fromtourism. Research organizations and visitors arealso allowed to enter the PAs for environmental
education. The number of visitors is gradually
increasing every year (Nomination Dossier Western
Tien-Shan 2012).

■ 4. Recommendations for strengthening naturaland cultural relations in Western Tien-Shanmanagement
Based on the experiences and knowledge gained
during the Capacity Building Workshop on NatureCulture Linkages in Heritage Conservation in Asiaand the Pacific 2017, a number of recommendations
could be proposed in order to improve theprotection of the natural and cultural heritage in the

In the contemporary management of the86JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

WTS WHS. These recommendations are addressedto the national government, local authorities,
communities, NGOs, and other stakeholders. Such
recommendations suggest that:-The national government promotes theidentification of natural and cultural heritage in the
country and evaluates their state of conservation.
-The national government takes appropriate
measures so that the assessment of ecosystems’
conditions is conducted in the WTS WHS, in order todefine priority areas and determine the necessary
measures for environmental protection, including the
involvement of local people.
-Local authorities, communities, and PA
specialists speed up the process of identificationand certification of the local cultural values of theterritories of the WTS WHS (including sacred values,
recreation, tourism, health and others).
-The government and internationalorganizations take appropriate measures toharmonize national and international management
systems (e.g. to integrate the IUCN vision for PA
management). Currently, the national law is notsensitive to local communities’ needs and thenational environmental law should comply withinternational standards.
-PA administrations, in conjuncture with
NGOs and independent specialists, ensure thedevelopment of pilgrimage routes to some of thesites in the WTS WHS (such as Lake Sary-Chelek or
Mazar Padysh-Ata). Future projects should focus on
the development of a visitors’ management strategy
that are supported with the latest technologies, suchas GPS.
All of the previously proposed efforts are
aimed at improving management efficiency within
WTS WHS which will create favorable conditions forthe development of environmentally friendly nature
usage and ensure the protection of its natural andcultural heritage for future generations.

87

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728■ Literature cited
Bocharnikov V., Laletin A., Domashov I. at al. 2012. Russia, Ukraine, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. In J.A.
Parrotta, R.L. Trosper (eds): Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge: Sustaining Communities, Ecosystem andBiocultural Diversity, pp 251 – 280. Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
Domashov, I.A. 2011. Overview of traditional knowledge for sustainable use of nature of Kyrgyzstan andCentral Asia. In Laletin A., Parrotta JA., Domashov I. (eds.): Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge, biodiversity
conservation and sustainable forest management in Eastern Europe, Northern and Central Asia, IUFRO World
Series 26: pp 21-26. Vienna: International Union of Forest Research Organization (IUFRO)
Makarieva A. M., Gorshkov V. G. 2007. Biotic pump of atmospheric moisture as driver of the hydrologicalcycle on land. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, European Geosciences Union, 2007, 11 (2):pp.1013-1033. <hal-00305066> https://hal-insu.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00305066/document [accessed 10
January 2018]
Makarieva A.M., Gorshkov V.G., Startsev A.A., 2017. New goals for fundamental science. On the occasion of theYear of Ecology 2017 in Russia. / Biotic Regulation for Everyone. http://www.bioticregulation.ru/life/ecol17.php[accessed 20 April 2018]
Nomination Dossier Western Tien-Shan., 2012. (Republic of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic and Republic of
Uzbekistan). Proposal for inscription on the UNESCO World Cultural and Natural Heritage List.
http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1490.pdf [accessed 6 August 2017]
Orolbaeva, L., 2003. Mountain herbs: medicines, dyes, spice, pp. 69. Bishkek: CAMP.
Shukurov E.J., Domashov I.A. 2011. Potential forest vegetation and its geographic distribution in Kyrgyzstan. In
Laletin A., Parrotta JA., Domashov I. (eds.): Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge, biodiversity conservation andsustainable forest management in Eastern Europe, Northern and Central Asia, IUFRO World Series 26: pp 5662. Vienna: International Union of Forest Research Organization (IUFRO)
Shukurov, E.J. 2008. Compositions: Bishkek. 406p.
State Agency on Environment Protection and Forestry under the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic. 2005.
Third National Report on the Conservation of Biodiversity of the Kyrgyz Republic. Bishek.
United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. 1992.
https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf [accessed 20 April 2018]

88

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Part Two:
Report on the Capacity
Building Workshop on
Nature-Culture Linkages
in Heritage Conservation,
Asia and the Pacific
SACRED LANDSCAPES

89

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Second Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation in Asia andthe Pacific (CBWNCL 2017) took place in Tsukuba, Japan, from September 15 to 26, 2017. The workshop wasorganized by the UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation at the University ofTsukuba, in collaboration with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, the International Centre for the Study of
the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Union for the Conservationof Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS).
This workshop, focusing on the theme of Sacred Landscapes, was the second in a series, programmed for
2016-2019. The aim of these workshops is to contribute to the World Heritage Capacity Building Programme;
through promoting and developing the skills of mid-career heritage practitioners, within the Asia and thePacific region.
The workshop was divided in four modules:-

Module 1: Understanding Nature-Culture Linkages in the Context of the Sacred Landscape Conservation
Module 2: Management, Implementation and Governance in Sacred Landscapes
Module 3: Reflection on Theory and Practice
Module 4: International Symposium

Module 1 consisted of three days of intensive lectures, group discussions, and participants’ case study
presentations. The lectures dealt with the international framework, regarding nature-culture linkages andlandscape conservation, from the natural and cultural sectors perspectives, covering the Protected LandscapeApproach from IUCN and the Cultural Landscapes Categories, used in the World Heritage context. Moreover,community-based conservation and traditional knowledge systems were revised; case studies from the region
and beyond, as well as the Japanese experiences on sacred landscapes conservation, were explored. Sixteen
case studies were presented, five World Heritage sites, one on the tentative list, three protected at the national
level and seven relating to the processes of identification of sacred sites and community development withindigenous groups whose traditions are related to sacred places.
Module 2 lasted five days, during which the participants visited the Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in theKii Mountain Range, a World Heritage Cultural Landscape since 2004. There, participants could have a practicalexperience and learn about the nomination process of the three core areas of the property: Koyasan, Kumano
Sanzan and Yoshino and Omine, and the pilgrimage routes that connect them. Moreover, the three sacredsites were explained as centers for three of the most important spiritual practices in Japan: Shingon Buddhism,
Shinto, and Shugendo. The visits included temples, shrines, mountain trails, and waterfalls, as well as
experiencing ceremonies held in these places. Participants were able to understand that this area is protectedunder different legal frameworks and under natural and cultural heritage sectors: at the international level,as Biosphere Reserve and World Heritage, and at national level as a National Park, Places of Scenic Beauty,
Historic sites containing National Treasures, Natural Monuments and Important Cultural Properties. During
the visits, participants were able to learn from monks in charge of some of the area’s temples and discuss withlocal managers at the sites.
Module 3 comprised of two days of reflection on the theory and practice gained during the workshop.
Participants were divided into groups to work on key issues in the conservation of sacred landscapes, reflecting
on both natural and cultural values of the places visited during the field trip. Finally, participants prepared one
90

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

presentation for the whole group in order to give it during the international symposium.
The CBWNCL 2017 concluded with Module 4, which consisted of the Second International Symposium
on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation held on September 26, at the Tsukuba International
Congress Centre within the framework of the Tsukuba Global Science Week 2017, organized by the Universityof Tsukuba. The symposium gathered ten international experts: representatives of the partner organizations –UNESCO World Heritage Centre, IUCN, ICCROM, and ICOMOS- two academic specialists on Sacred Landscapesfrom Keio University, Japan, and the University of Technology, Malaysia, representatives of the University ofMontreal and the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, as well as international consultants representing Terrasana Environmental Consulting and The Mountain Institute. The sixteen participants of the CBWNCL 2017,
heritage practitioners from the culture and nature sectors from Australia, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia,
Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Solomon Islands, Vietnam,
Ghana, and France, presented the outcomes of the workshop, discussing the key issues for the conservationof sacred landscapes. Five students of the University of Tsukuba from five different countries (Australia, Japan,
Liberia, Peru, and Uganda) took part of the process as observing participants.
During the panel discussion and roundtable, it was pointed out that there is a continuous need to develop
synergies between the nature and culture sectors in the heritage conservation context, both at the World
Heritage level, and national levels. Sacred landscapes were considered as very good examples of theinterrelations between nature and culture through spiritual values that are manifested in a very diverse
manner in the Asia and the Pacific region. Furthermore, it was noted that there are language differences, thatrefer to a diversity of worldviews, where nature and culture are not separated and distinct as it is from theWestern Modern perspective.
It was concluded that sacred values are context-dependent, continuously evolving, and that it is important toinclude all stakeholders in the process of their conservation. The main challenge noted was increasing tourism,
especially after a World Heritage inscription, that may affect the sacredness of a place. Moreover, depopulationof rural areas, where these sacred values are strong, is an urgent issue that should be addressed together
with the need of guaranteeing the intergenerational transmission of spiritual values and practices related tosacredness. Gender-framed practices and prohibitions were also raised as an issue, especially in the World
Heritage context, where the access to a site is understood as to be universal.
Participants recognized the need to meet and share with practitioners from different disciplines and sectorsof the heritage practice and think about conservation in a more holistic manner. It was noted that theharmonization of the objectives of conservation needs to be worked out, especially in natural protected areas,
where sometimes the conservation efforts go against the conservation of cultural heritage, especially, in termsof spiritual practices. Even though some of the countries and sites share similar problems, the diversity of casesand spiritual traditions in Asia and the Pacific region was acknowledged, bringing to debate the existence ofan “Asian” approach to conservation. Finally, the CBWNCLs were recognized as playing an important part increating a bridge between nature and culture practitioners in this region, and the role of the UNESCO Chair as
an international exchange platform was commended.

91

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

MODULE ONE:UNDERSTANDING NATURE-CULTURE LINKAGES IN THE CONTEXT OF
THE SACRED LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION

Module One consisted of three days of intensive lectures, group discussions, and participants’ case study
presentations, from September 15 to 17 at the University of Tsukuba. The lectures dealt with the internationalframework regarding nature-culture linkages and landscape conservation, from the natural and cultural
sectors’ perspectives, covering the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention, the Protected LandscapeApproach from IUCN, and the Cultural Landscapes Categories used in the World Heritage context. A totalof sixteen case studies were presented in the three sessions: five World Heritage sites, one on the tentative
list, three protected at national level, and seven related to processes of identification of sacred sites andcommunity development with indigenous groups whose traditions are related to sacred places.
The first day, Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, from ICCROM, presented the work being done by this organization,in the training of heritage practitioners and specialists in conservation techniques and management. He
mentioned how the work of ICCROM, and other bodies related to World Heritage, are working towards a newparadigm, where nature, culture, and people would be integrated into a single concept of conservation, withno boundaries. He explained the basic concepts of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention, and thepillars of the outstanding universal value (OUV): criteria, integrity, authenticity, and management plans. He
also explained the concept of outstanding universal value, and the processes for nomination. He clarified theconcepts of authenticity and integrity as well as the importance of management plans for nominating a site to
the List.
Finally, he gave some examples of sacred landscapes on the List, such as the Okinoshima islands, a Japaneseproperty recently inscribed in 2017. He explained how sacred landscapes are good examples of natureculture linkages, how their importance is being discussed, and how these values need different management.
Furthermore, he mentioned the initiative of “Heritage of religious interest”, as part of ICCROM’s efforts torecognize spiritual values of cultural heritage sites.
The next lecturer, Ms. Jessica Brown, the Executive Director of New England Biolabs Foundation and Chair of
the IUCN Protected Landscapes Specialist Group, explained the Protected Landscape approach promoted by
IUCN. She explained that the understanding of IUCN Protected Landscapes is that they are shaped throughthe interactions of people and nature over time and can be rich in biological diversity because of the presenceof people. These are seen as living models. She gave many examples of landscapes and different ways to see
them, from indigenous perspectives as well as artistic perspectives, which both captured their natural andcultural values. She also presented cases of sacred landscapes and how indigenous and community conserved
areas may be the oldest protected areas on the planet. She clarified the IUCN definitions of protected areas
and that management intends to establish a common language, a common framework, in order to exchange
and define guidelines. Ms. Brown also said that the paradigm of conservation is changing: from national tointernational, run by people and not against, based on partnerships, developed as networks and not islands,
seen as systems, managed in collaboration with scientific, economic, and cultural values, and are not only
for visitors and tourists. Moreover, she explained that conservation is more effective at larger scales, basedon connectivity, and working with all kind of stakeholders. She pointed out the importance of the fifth C in
the context of the World Heritage Convention, including ‘Community’, such as the case of community-based
protected areas, and that, currently, management is moving towards governance. She added the importanceof safeguarding the interactions and not freezing the place in time. Ms. Brown also mentioned challenges, suchas the integration of the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, but also opportunities, such as the governanceframework proposed by IUCN, and the progress in bridging nature and culture and participatory approaches aswell as the recovery and use of traditional knowledge.
92JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Left: Dr. Gamini WIjesuriya (ICCROM) giving a lecture about the World Heritage Convention and its implementation.
Right: Ms. Jessica Brown (IUCN/New England Biolabs Foundation) giving a lecture about Protected Landscapes.

After the lectures, the session was chaired by Ms. Carolina Castellanos and Professor Masahito Yoshida and five
participants presented their case studies:1) Tu Vuong, a researcher at the Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources (IEBR), Vietnam Academy of
Science and Technology (VAST) in Vietnam, presented “Nature conservation and protection of spiritual andcultural values in sacred landscapes in Vietnam: a case study of bats in the Huong Son Complex of Natural
Beauty and Historical Monuments, Hanoi”. He explained that the Huong Son area is on the Tentative Listand it is managed by two governmental agencies because the site contains natural heritage, such as caves,and cultural heritage, such as temples and pagodas, as well as intangible heritage, represented by the
religious festivals. He said that, currently, this site faces problems related to tourism management. Mr. Vuong
stressed that tourism has negative effects in the conservation of natural heritage – specifically regarding
the bats’ population and the maintenance of the caves. He mentioned that there is a threat of bat-borne
disease and he reflected on how bats can be protected while maintaining cultural values. He considers
educational programs, promoting the coexistence between nature and culture, to be important.
2) Jun Cayron, Assistant Professor at Palawan State University in the Philippines, presented “The Puerto
Princesa Subterranean River National Park”, a World Heritage site since 2012. He explained that the parkis appreciated for its natural values, such as the karst formations, and especially how it is promoted as a
tourist destination because of the beautiful beaches. However, he noted that the area is considered sacredfor indigenous groups, called the Tagbanwa and Batak. But, he said, that these groups have been evictedfrom the land and their practices banned. Mr. Cayron added that these groups consider the air as sacredand a whole component of living with the nature, the forest is viewed as a source of energy, and the land asburial grounds of the ancestors and archaeological sites. He said that tourism is a major threat to the site,
menacing the caves, bringing pollution, contributing to the loss of traditions, and being a disturbance for
local people. He suggested that the site be declared as a sacred landscape, getting additional protection,
where both natural and cultural values, as well as traditions, are protected.
3) Nara Chan, deputy head office of community ecotourism development from the Department of Ecotourism,at the Ministry of Environment in Cambodia, presented “Preah Chey Voroman Norudom ‘Phnom Kulen’93JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

National Park”. He explained that Phnom Kulen National Park has natural values that are mainly represented
by the diversity of species and habitats as well as cultural values connected to Buddhism. He said that there
are places of pilgrimage and archaeological sites and that this area is very important for the conservation of
the temples of Angkor Wat. He presented the situation of the population surrounding these areas and how
these are dedicated to agricultural practices that generate deforestation. Moreover, Mr. Chan mentionedthat there is forest degradation and loss, primarily due to illegal logging. The main challenge discussed forthis heritage site was to find a balance between nature conservation and sustainable development for thecommunities surrounding or inhabiting the protected areas, as illustrated by the conflict between local
agricultural practices and forest conservation.

Professor Jun Cayron, from Palawan State University, Philippines, presenting the case of Puerto Princesa National Park in
the Philippines. (Photo: Maya Ishizawa)

4) Shamodi Nanayakkara, a Ph.D. student at the Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka presented “Reinforcing
conservation with faith and beliefs: the potential of Peak Wilderness Sanctuary in the Central Highlands
World Heritage site, Sri Lanka”. She explained that this area is worshipped not only by Buddhists, but also by
Muslims and Hindus. She said that the main cultural value of this place is that in the peak of the mountain
there is a footprint that Buddhists believe is the Buddha’s footprint, while, for the Hindus, it is Lord Shiva’s,
and for the Muslims, it is Adam’s and also why it is world-known as “Adam’s Peak.” She asserted that thestories surrounding these legends have maintained regulations about hunting, collecting, and fishing, andthat these stories need to be remembered because they are useful as conservation strategies. She said that
the Nature Reserve and Sanctuary in charge of the Forest Department became a World Heritage location in2010. Currently, she explained, the threats to the site are over-visitation during the pilgrimage season, a lackof boundary demarcation, land encroachment, and furthermore, there is a hydroelectric plant and smallscale mining. Of these threats, the main challenge to this site is the seasonal pilgrimages and over-visitation.
5) Upma Manral, a Ph.D. candidate at the Wildlife Institute of India, presented “Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary:a Himalayan Jewel”. She explained that this protected area has villages inside and surrounding it, thatare typical Himalayan villages, where inhabitants depend on natural resources. She said that, according
to Hindus, the Himalayan landscape is a work of God and that Shiva is one of the principal deities. She
explained that lakes are associated with stories and that there are sacred alpine meadows and forests. She
does not think that people can be removed from these areas and community-based conservation is working
better than governmental conservation efforts.

94

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

During this first day of the workshop, all case studies presented belonged to the nature sector. Challenges
discussed were how to control tourism in places of pilgrimage and how to harmonize nature conservationand cultural values conservation in sacred natural sites. Moreover, an issue debated was how to maintainlocal practices and traditional knowledge that may be positive for conservation but may hinder the economic
development of communities surrounding the protected areas.
After the presentations, participants discussed the following questions in groups:● Why are nature-culture linkages important to heritage conservation?
● How does this relate to sacredness?
● How does the existing international frameworks either enable or constrain holistic approaches that linknature, culture and people?
Each group expressed their ideas resulting from their discussion. They all agreed that heritage policies should
aim for an integration of culture and nature, following an approach of sustainable development. In regards
to sacredness, they reflected upon the importance of local traditions and systems of beliefs as mechanisms
supporting identity and community life, sustaining the spiritual and religious values found in the nature andculture of places. Finally, they shared their thoughts about international frameworks, clarifying both benefits
and limitations. They considered the idea that these frameworks provide general guidelines under the
principles of human rights, but they cannot address each country’s issues. In that sense, it is important toreflect on possible ways to build bridges between the international framework and national systems. Moreover,they expressed the need to listen to the voice of indigenous communities in order to bring alternatives for local
management and nature-culture linkages.
On the second day of the workshop, Ms. Carolina Castellanos, an independent consultant and former World
Heritage Advisor for ICOMOS, explained the work of ICOMOS in the context of the implementation of theWorld Heritage Convention. Furthermore, she presented the concept of Cultural Landscapes as it has been
conceived in the Operational Guidelines of the World Heritage Convention. She discussed the concept ofheritage and clarified that heritage is a social construction that is relative and changes over time. She explained
how the concept of cultural landscape, accepted at an international level, may not have national or local
legal frameworks that allow for the protection of cultural landscapes. Moreover, she clarified the concept ofsacredness and mentioned that this is a concept that has been accepted by some indigenous groups but it
is mostly related to Western, monotheistic religions. She also made participants aware that it is necessary toreflect on to whom the heritage belongs to, who are the decision-makers regarding it, who are the stewards,
and to question if authenticity is a relevant issue. After this, she introduced the case of Rapa Nui National
Park, formerly part of Chile, but located in Melanesia, closer to the Pacific Islands than to South America.
She explained that this is one of the most remote islands in the world, a product of extinct volcanic cones.
After introducing the geography of the site, the history, and socio-economic characteristics of the island, she
presented the process of elaboration of a management plan for the archaeological park- a World Heritage site
since 1995 under criteria (i), (iii) and (v)- involving the local people. Ms. Castellanos explained that even though
the whole island contains cultural values, it cannot all be protected under the archaeological park systembecause this would implicate the eviction of the Rapa Nui population. Contrary to this understanding, she
explained how the Rapa Nui understands the landscape as a whole, composed of many layers, that interact in
a complex manner, and that the island is a biocultural system that implies agriculture, fishing, communal work,and sacredness. She introduced the resulting management plan conceived as a stellar map, a concept properto the worldview of Rapa Nui population.
The second presenter of the day, Dr. Edwin Bernbaum, from the Mountain Institute and Co-chair of the IUCN
Specialist Group on Cultural and Spiritual Values of Protected Areas, presented on the concept of Sacred
Mountains. He explained his research on understanding why mountains have been chosen as sacred symbols
by many religions around the world. He has proposed several categories to explain the spiritual values assigned
to mountains: height, centre, power, deity or abode of deity, temple or place of worship, garden or earthly
paradise, ancestors and the dead, identity, source, inspiration, revelation, transformation, and renewal. He
illustrated these categories by presenting several mountains around the world that are considered sacred bydifferent cultures, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and other faiths. Subsequently, he focused on the case of95

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Mount Kailash, which he considers to fulfill most of the categories previously presented, and the work that isbeing done in nominating this mountain to the World Heritage List. He presented the values of Mount Kailash
and compared it to other similar sacred mountains of the world that are already on the List. He suggested thecriteria under which it could be nominated and explained the steps to follow in order to achieve a nomination.
Dr. Bernbaum said that one of the challenges is to have the three State Parties, namely India, Nepal and China,
involved in this project. The area is not being protected at the moment, therefore, national legislation toprotect the Mount needs to be put in place. Moreover, he mentioned that it is important to have the consent
and support of the local communities involved in such a project.

Left: Ms. Carolina Castellanos presents the issues of the World Heritage Convention and the concept of Outstanding
Universal Value. Right: Dr. Edwin Bernbaum presents about sacred mountains. (Photos: Maya Ishizawa)

After these lectures, the next session was chaired by Ms. Jessica Brown and Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya and six
participants presented their case studies:1) Stephen Manebosa, a senior field officer at the Solomon Islands National Museum, presented “Ngaguenga(Pagan Temple Site) at Magama Ubea”. He explained that the East Rennell island has been inscribed on theWorld Heritage List since 2013. He said that Christians arrived to this area in the 1900s and called the native
deity “Pagan God” which is why the name of the site is Pagan Temple. He mentioned that Christian influence
damaged the site and that the main challenges for conserving the location are subsistence farming, logging,and mining.
2) Florence Revelin, a pedagogic coordinator at the French National Museum of Natural History, France,
presented “Sacredness in Laponia mixed World Heritage site”. She explained that this site had been
inscribed on the List in 1996 by Sweden, even though the Laponia area, home of the Saami people, used
to include territories in Norway, the Russian Federation, and Finland. She said that the Saami are the only
indigenous people living in continental Europe. The area includes 4 national parks and 2 natural reserves, aswell as a diversity of landscapes, and notably, it is home to the Saami reindeer. She mentioned that, while
the whole area is sacred to the Saami, the concept of sacredness was not a core issue in the nomination
process. She explained that this area was also occupied by Christians who prohibited the traditional
shamanistic religion and banned the use of its places of worship. She asserted that, even though this area
has been seen as natural heritage by the Swedish government, for the Saami, this is a cultural area. She
mentioned that these issues were discussed in the management plan conceived in 2011.
3) Emma Lee, a research fellow at the University of Tasmania, Australia, presented “Sacredness in the
Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area”. She explained how relationships and family are very
important within her community, explaining the history of this area, where she comes from, and how it has
been colonized and the local people mistreated. She presented how the community has been involved in
the management process for the area, how the cultural values have been included in the statement of OUV96

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

of this property, and how important it has been to create a joint management within the communities. She
mentioned the importance of the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent of indigenous peoples living in World
Heritage sites.

Dr. Emma Lee, University of Tasmania, presenting a case study on the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area,
Australia. (Photo: Maya Ishizawa)4) Nukila Evanty, a scholar activist from the University of Mahendradatta, Indonesia, presented “Cultural
Heritage, Nature and Sacred Places of Talang Mamak Indigenous Peoples, Riau”. She talked about the
Talang group and their worldviews. She explained how they maintain their sacred places and how theircultural values and way of life are challenged by modernization.
5) Xavier Forde, a national coordinator for Maori Heritage Sites at Heritage New Zealand, presented “Kapiti:
Sacred landscape”. He explained the story of this island, that is now a bird sanctuary, but also a sacred place,and home, for the Maori people. He said that, currently, there is tension between the government
protected area management and the local Maori people, who live on the same island.

Dr. Xavier Forde, Heritage New Zealand, presenting a case study of the Kapiti Island, a sacred island for the Maori people.
(Photo: Maya Ishizawa)
97

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

6) John Kuange, an assistant Country Director from the World Conservation Society in Papua New Guinea,
presented “Identifying sacred heritage sites in a very bioculturally diverse nation?”. He explained how
Papua and New Guinea is a very diverse country, with many different indigenous groups that use different
languages and have different ways to express sacredness. He said that traditional knowledge and traditional
practices are still carried out by the communities on the islands. However, Christianity entered in the late
19th century, with European missionaries, and this event created tensions with the local pre-establishedtraditions, that the Christians described as “pagan”. He stated that, currently, the challenge is modern
education which does not allow for the integration of the native’s ways of life because traditional customs
do not bring material wealth. Furthermore, he explained how the diversity of beliefs and worldviews canmake it difficult to identify large areas of a sacred site, for example, what is sacred for one group might beconsidered “mundane” by another.
Following the second day of the presentations, the debates focused on indigenous and local knowledge andits relation to sacredness. It was found that there has been a common practice in Asia and the Pacific, and alsoin Europe, of eviction and disdain for indigenous cultures and local communities. Moreover, one common
situation encountered in the different case studies was the imposition of values from the government or amainstream, foreign, religion over indigenous, and native, beliefs. This led to discussions over colonizationand local communities’ identities and their empowerment through mechanisms such as the Free, Prior, andInformed Consent. It was discussed how it is important to recognize how modern education plays a role in theloss of traditional knowledge and how channels of intergenerational transmission of traditions and local beliefs
need to be found.
Participants discussed the following questions in groups:● What makes a place sacred? For whom is it sacred?
● Who defines and recognizes sacredness and what are the implications of this for the stewardship of a place?

(note: management and governance = stewardship)
The groups considered “sacredness” as a concept validated by people through time and space, definedby social restrictions for accessibility, practices or behaviors, and certain unique physical aspects in nature.
They concluded that the significance of the sacred places is sustained by the people, or communities,
attached to them through traditions or spiritual beliefs. In that sense, they asserted that these systems need
to be respected when implementing policies for the management of their local heritage. Participants alsocommented on issues related to the preservation of sacred places, resulting from colonization, and how
legislation deals with minority religious groups.
During the third day of lectures, Professor Masahito Yoshida, Chair of the World Heritage Studies Programat the University of Tsukuba, explained the importance of the mountains and how nature is worshippedin Japan. He showed participants how the topography of Japan was formed and how this influenced theimportance of certain mountainous areas, where the population decide to settle. He explained that in theJapanese archipelago there are many natural events, such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis,
typhoons, and tornadoes, as well as floodings, that formed the terrain and influenced the relationship of thehuman communities with their environment. He said that Japanese people pray to waterfalls, giant trees,
big rocks, and high mountains in order to avoid disasters. Professor Yoshida explained the formation of fourWorld Heritage sites, namely, Yakushima island, Mount Fuji, Ogasawara islands, and the Kii Mountains. He
argued how the Kii Mountains became a prominent sacred area for Japanese people and how the three majorreligions formed in the three sacred sites, inscribed as World Heritage: Koyasan, Kumano Sanzan and Yoshino
and Omine. He presented the relationship between history and political changes in Japan that were also
influenced by the development of the different religions: Shinto, Shugendo, and Shingon Buddhism. Later on,
he talked about the mountains that are World Heritage sites in Japan and their management problems, suchas Mount Fuji, and Yakushima island. He also pointed out the issues related to the Nature-Culture divide in the
management of these sites at a national level.
After this presentation, Professor Nobuko Inaba, from the World Heritage Studies Program, explained the
management issues at the Mount Fuji World Heritage site and presented the process of nomination and thechallenges it faced. She explained why Mount Fuji could not be nominated as a Mixed Cultural and Natural

98

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Participants’ report on the second day of group discussions. (Photo: Maya Ishizawa)

World Heritage site. She said that the natural criterion that could have been used was criterion (vii) that
relates to natural beauty. However, the Ministry of Environment of Japan could not assure the sustainability ofthis criterion because of the proximity of Mount Fuji to Tokyo and the rapid urban development around thearea. In order to conserve the integrity, the whole mountain should have been nominated and this was not
feasible. However, she pointed out that Mount Fuji was already protected as a cultural property, as a Place of
Scenic Beauty in charge of the Agency for Cultural Affairs, hence, Mount Fuji was inscribed as a World Cultural
Heritage site in 2013. After talking about the management issues of this site, she presented the relationshipof the heritage system in Japan and the development of heritage protection in Europe. Professor Inaba
introduced participants to the Law for the Protection of Cultural Property of Japan and explained some of its
categories, which includes the protection of Natural Monuments and Places of Scenic Beauty. She asserted
that these categories imply the linkages between nature and culture. She also presented the categories ofPreservation Districts and Cultural landscapes and how they relate to the Satoyama landscape, characteristicof Japanese rural areas. Moreover, she explained the relationship between architectural development andreligious development in Japan and how this has been studied by historians and architects looking for Japaneseoriginal or indigenous architecture. Then, she clarified the different religions and their relationships, pointing
out that Shinto is the local religion, indigenous to Japan, and Buddhism has been the foreign religion, adopted
and adapted to Japan. She made it clear how these different currents of faith influenced the development ofarchitecture and sacred sites in the mountains.
Dr. Maya Ishizawa, CBWNCL Programme Coordinator, explained the itinerary and content for the field trip to
the Kii Mountains. She presented information about the area and mentioned the different layers of protectionthat converge at the site: a World Heritage Cultural Landscape since 2004, it overlaps with the Yoshino-Kumano
National Park and the Mount Odaigahara and Mount Omine Biosphere Reserve. The sacred sites Koyasan,
Kumano Sanzan and Yoshino and Omine contain National Treasures in their temples, as well as Important
Cultural Properties, that are protected under the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties of Japan.
99

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Moreover, the area contains Historic sites, Places of Scenic Beauty, and Natural Monuments protected under
the same law.
After these lectures, the session was chaired by Professor Nobuko Inaba and Dr. Edwin Bernbaum. Fiveparticipants presented their case studies:1)Mingxia Zhu, a researcher at the Tsinghua University in China, presented “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands:
Cultural Landscape of Taoism Worldview”. She introduced a case comprising of a circuit of caves in lands
considered as sacred, according to local beliefs, for over 1,400 years. She explained that such places areintegrated into a system of beliefs that, besides the influence of traditions such as Taoism and Buddhism,
consider the mountains as tangible representations of deities and ancestors. She said that the caves are
divided into major and minor caves, called “blessed lands,” which symbolize the gates of heaven and thelands for common people, respectively. She mentioned that this type of cave system, conditioned inside forsacred rituals, are also present in Malaysia and in Japan.

Left: Professor Masahito Yoshida, Chair of World Heritage Studies at the University of Tsukuba, explains the significance of
mountains in Japan. (Photo: Maya Ishizawa) Right: Professor Nobuko Inaba, from World Heritage Studies at the Universityof Tsukuba, explains the Japanese system of cultural heritage protection and its relation to sacred and religious values.
(Photo: Nukila Evanty)

Dr. Maya Ishizawa, CBWNCL Programme Coordinator, explaining the contents of the field trip to the World Heritage
Cultural Landscape “Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes of the Kii Mountain Range.”(Photo: Sonya Underdahl).

2) Portia Bansa, a cultural heritage manager at the Centre for Indigenous Knowledge and Organizational
Development (CIKOD) in Ghana, presented “Forikrom bio-cultural heritage”. First, she explained thecategories of protected areas under the current system in Ghana. She said that the case of Forikrom is ofa farming-based community, preserving their ancestral system of beliefs which are attached to sacred,

100

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

natural, sites. She described the complex of caves within the surrounding environment, containing the burial
location of ancestors, royal chiefs, and queens, and how these have held a treasured, spiritual, significancefor generations. She stated that these are considered the heart of the community and that there are also
access restrictions. She also explained that, even though there is a bio-cultural protocol protecting thelandscape, the sacred places of Forikrom are facing the problem of desecration due to the influx of tourism.
3) Zhengli Liu, a researcher at the Yading National Nature Reserve in China, presented “Sacred Landscapeof Yading Nature Reserve”. He explained that this site, located in the Tibetan Autonomous prefecture of
Sichuan, is related to Buddhist narratives, reflecting the sacredness of the mountains. He said that in thelast 100 years it has been seen as a mythical place, inspired in the conceptions of the “Shangri-la”. He statedthat the main challenges he has identified for the management of the site include commercialization, theloss of traditional values, and exogenous influences. Yet, he asserted that, in order to preserve its sacredvalues, two layers of civil participation have been actively working for the continuity of the local traditions,sustaining them: on the one hand, the academic endeavors of the Buddhist institutions and on the other
hand, the local community.
4) Mie Mie Kyaw, a lecturer from Mandalay University in Myanmar, presented “Effective assessment on
cultural and natural values, and socioeconomic development of Indigenous Group; Kayan race”. She
introduced her experience working on the Upper Paunglaung Hydropower Project, in which she conducteda heritage impact assessment of the area. She said that the main challenges she has identified are related
to the preservation of sacred elements in the environment, the sustainability of natural resources, and theconflicts between stakeholders.
5) Ilia Domashov, a senior lecturer at Kyrgysz State University in Kyrgyzstan, presented “Sacred Natural World
Heritage ‘West Tien Shan’. Kyrgyz National Component”. He talked about the case of a Serial Natural World
Heritage site, featuring a transboundary partnership. He explained that the Western Tien Shan mountain
range is home to a long-standing oral tradition of epic narratives, transferred for generations, centered on
figure of the Kyrgyz hero, Manas. He said that desecration, or even new forms of sacralization, as well as
the disconnection between nature and culture affecting the land use, are some of the main issues he has
identified in the area.
At the end of the day, participants reflected on the following question:● How does this (sacredness and previous reflections on stewardship, management, and governance) relate to

the specific context of the Asia-Pacific region?
After reflecting upon all the case studies presented and the core topics, the participants came up with their
final remarks, characterizing the Asia-Pacific context. They pointed out that the region shares the particularfeature of having long-standing spiritual traditions attached to sacred natural sites. They considered that,
although these sacred places are safeguarded under legal protection systems applied at different levels by eachcountry, their management should not overlook the relationship with the local or traditional communities, as
they are the primary actors sustaining and treasuring the spiritual values. They added that since these realities
are connected to the effects of globalization, policies need to handle these problems, such as modernizationand generational changes, and at the same time, they need to ensure that the local people are able to meettheir needs and rights.

101

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

MODULE TWO:MANAGEMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND GOVERNANCE IN SACRED LANDSCAPES

Module 2 lasted for five days, where the participants visited the Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii
Mountain Range, a World Heritage Cultural Landscape since 2004. There, participants could have a practicalexperience and learn about the nomination process of the three core areas of the property: Koyasan, Kumano
Sanzan, and Yoshino and Omine, and the pilgrimage routes that connect them. Moreover, the three sacredsites were explained as three centers for three of the most important spiritual practices in Japan: Shingon
Buddhism, Shinto, and Shugendo. The visits included temples, shrines, mountain trails, and waterfalls, as wellas the ceremonies held in these places. Participants could better understand that this area is protected under
different legal frameworks and under natural and cultural heritage sectors: at international level, as a Biosphere
Reserve and a World Heritage, and at the national level as a National Park, Places of Scenic Beauty, Historicsites containing National Treasures, Natural Monuments, and Important Cultural Properties. During the visits,
participants were able to learn from monks in charge of some of the temples in the area and discuss with local
managers at the sites.
The first stop of the field visit, across the Kii Mountain Range, was Koyasan, the sacred mountain area chosen
1,200 ago by the monk Kobo Daishi (Kukai) to become the headquarters of the Esoteric Shingon Buddhism
in Japan. The area of Koyasan or Mount Koya, which is home to over a hundred monasteries and temples, istraditionally known as a place for spiritual retirement, religious practices, and study. It encompasses a valley
surrounded by eight peaks, which Kukai envisioned as the eight petals of the lotus, representing the Buddhist
conception of the universe under the form of a sacred circle or mandala. For two days, the participants could
learn about Shingon and its founder, from Mr. Kurt Genso (a shingon monk), who guided the visitors throughthe Reihokan Museum, the Kongobu-ji, the Danjo Garan’s main complex, the Konpon Daito pagoda andOkunoin cemetery. The latter is known as the largest cemetery in Japan where the Mausoleum of Kukai, who isbelieved to rest in eternal meditation, is located. The Mausoleum marks a point of departure and ending for apilgrimage route that goes through the island of Shikoku.
Even in present day the town of Koya has become an important attraction for both Japanese and internationals
tourists, where services for the visitors have been progressively developed, the spiritual significance of thesacred places remains.
Participants were able to learn about the different layers of legal protection operating, from the internationalframework to the state, the prefectural and the local government in this area. They understood that aphilosophy of respect to these sacred landscapes existed prior to the implementation of any legal protection
system. Due to their spiritual values, there were strict regulations for the forests and for the maintenanceof the pilgrimage routes. Furthermore, in the surrounding places of deep spirituality, such as Okunoin, local
people have organized cleaning days for generations. In addition, the presence of religious institutions allowed
for the conservation of these places to be considered sacred.
The following stop of the field trip was the region of Kumano, an important point for the ancient pilgrimage
routes, known for being home to several shrines dedicated to Japanese Shinto tutelary deities, included
Amaterasu. On the second day, participants walked the route of Kumano Kodo Kohechi and visited the shrineof Kumano-Hongu Taisha. An officer from the World Heritage Kumano-Hongu Center and Professor Nobuko
Inaba provided the participants with explanations about the sites, the routes, and how the management isbeing conducted. They explained that the shrine was originally located in the sand plains of Oyu no Hara,
between the rivers of Kumano and Otonashi, and that in 1889, due to flooding, it had to be relocated to its

102

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Participants visit Okunoiin, the largest cemetery in Japan Participants visit Okunoiin, the largest cemetery in Japanand emblem of mysticism in Koyasan, with the guidance of and emblem of mysticism in Koyasan, with the guidance of
Mr. Kurt Genso (Photo: Xavier Forde).
Mr. Kurt Genso (Photo: Xavier Forde).

present position. The shrine had to be reconstructed, keeping its original appearance, and some parts of its
former structure. Subsequently, Mr. Hiroshi Tsujibayashi at the World Heritage Kumano-Hongu Center gave alecture to the participants.
On the third day, participants moved to the area of Kumano Nachi, in the southeast portion of the Kii Peninsula.
On the way to the south, they visited the small shrine of Kamikura, located halfway to Mount Gongen. Thisshrine features the Gotoniki Rock, believed to be the sacred place where the gods of Kumano first descended.
The main ground is located on a platform, surrounded by forests, with a panoramic view of the Shingu area.
In order to arrive at the top, it is necessary to climb nearly 500 stone steps. To ensure the shrine’s state ofconservation, the structures are periodically maintained.
Next, the participants arrived to the Nachi area, located in the deep mountains of Kumano, to start the journey
to Kumano Nachi Taisha Shrine and the Nachi Waterfall. A group of local guides joined them at the Nachi
Daimon Saka Entrance to hike up the sacred trail, featuring stone pavements and evergreen trees surrounding.
Once on the main ground of the Nachi Taisha Shrine, the participants could appreciate an example of theharmonious coexistence of the Shinto and the Buddhist traditions, where a Shinto Shrine is located next to thetemple of Seiganto.
In the Buddhist temple of Seiganto, the participants were accompanied by a priest and could enter the mainhall, where they were able to see the certificate of the inscription of the site on the World Heritage List. Then,they were invited to the special reception area of the temple to ask some questions about the managementof the site and see the panoramic view of the surrounding landscape with the Nachi Falls, which the Japanesesystem also recognizes as a Place of Scenic Beauty. Later, the participants followed the route until the final
stage of the Nachi Falls, where they paid their respects to the sacred ground of the tallest waterfall in Japan.
On the fourth day, the participants traveled to the area of Yoshino in Nara Prefecture, known as theheadquarters of Shugendo, a spiritual tradition rooted in the ancient Japanese worship of the mountains. Mr.
Riiten Tanaka, a priest of the temple of Yoshino, and two yamabushi (shugendo monks), received participantsat the Yoshino Visitor Centre to give a lecture about Shugendo and the spiritual importance of Yoshino. They
explained that Shugendo is based on the concepts of the Japanese indigenous religion of the worship of kami

103

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Group photo at Kamikura shrine, featuring the Gotoniki rock. (Photo: Fumihiko Ito)

(Shinto gods) and nature, and that it developed a particular emphasis on ascetic practices. They added that
Taoism and the Buddhist esoteric school of Shingon influenced Shugendo as well, with the concept of attaining
illumination in the present life. Hence, they asserted that Shugendo practitioners understand both kami and
Buddha as coexisting in the sacred figure of the mountains.
Mr. Tanaka shared his experience on the nomination of Yoshino for the World Heritage List, explaining to theparticipants how the community worked together with the authorities throughout the process. Then, Mr.
Tanaka and the yamabushi monks guided the participants on a spiritual walk through the Shugen Trail from
Kimpu-Senji to Aonegamine. They taught them the religious chants used by the monks during this journey andmade stops along the shrines of the path in order to offer prays to the deities.
Through this visit, the participants could learn that for the yamabushi, nature represents a place for spiritual
practice and the purpose of climbing mountains, such as Mount Omine, is to purify their souls, and acquire
spiritual powers.
Later, participants had a meeting with Mr. Tanaka, in which they could ask and reflect together on some of
the issues they had identified in the site. They exchanged ideas about the risks of inscribing sacred sites on
the World Heritage List. Participants were concerned about the increasing tourism and the problems thismay cause for the interpretation and continuity of religious practices. Furthermore, concerns about religious
restrictions were expressed, especially in regards to the prohibition of the entry of women to certain areas ofthe mountains, that are supposed to be universally accessible, according to human rights agreements.
During the final day, participants visited the temple of Kimpu-Sen, the headquarters of the Shugendo priests.
They were invited to participate in a ceremony and a fire ritual of purification called Goma. In addition, theylistened to a lecture about Shugendo Zao-do and visited the wooden building where they could learn about its
construction and materials, and also could appreciate its relationship with the surrounding landscape.

104

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Group photo at the reception area of the Seiganto temple, with a view of the sacred landscape of the Nachi Falls (designatedas “Place of Scenic Beauty”). (Photo: Fumihiko Ito)

Mr. Riiten Tanaka giving a lecture about Shugendo at the Yoshino Visitors Centre. (Photo: Fumihiko Ito)

105

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Participants’ visit to Kimpu-Sen temple in Yoshino, Nara Prefecture (Photo: Xavier Forde)Group photo in the entrance of Kimpu-Sen temple. (Photo: Fumihiko Ito)106

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

MODULE THREE:REFLECTION ON THEORY AND PRACTICE

Module 3 comprised of two days of reflection on the theory and practice gained during the workshop.
Participants were divided into groups to work on key issues for the conservation of sacred landscapes,
reflecting on both natural and cultural values of the places visited during the field trip. Finally, participants
prepared one presentation for the whole group in order to give it during the international symposium.
The presentations were structured according to three core issues:●The Significance and Sacredness of the Kii Mountains●How the sacredness of the Kii Mountains reflects the Nature, Culture, and people interlinkages●Management and Governance

The final reports were delivered as 20 minutes presentations followed by discussions with other groups,
resource persons of the workshop, and guest speakers of the symposium. The resulting statements arereported below.

Group 1
Members:
Jun Cayron- Philippines
Nara Chan- Cambodia
Shamodi Nanayakkara- Sri Lanka
Florence Revelin- France
Shoma Jingu- Japan
ReflectionsFirstly, the group found that the landscapes of the Kii Mountains are considered sacred due to the values
expressed and sustained by the concept of Chinju no Mori, the unique landforms, the place of rituals, and theantiquity of their history. They understood that sacredness is a notion that is continuously evolving.
Secondly, they recognized that the interlinkages of nature, culture, and people in this context can be identified
in many forms, such as:● Faith and protection: Respect for the kami (gods) as a source of protection for the community● Beliefs and livelihood: Direct income sources, irrigation, and agriculture● Practices and sustainability: Immortality and avatar forms, sponsorships from ancient times● Aesthetic and sacredness: Architecture, landscape, human life and evolution

Thirdly, given the fact that the management, governance, conservation, and tourism are the core issues in theKii Mountains, the group proposed a “stakeholders mandala” structured based on the following groups: 1)
Local and regional government; 2) Priests and monks; 3) Local tourist companies, tourist bureau; 4) Tourists,
the local community; 5) Local pilgrims and private owners.
In addition, they provided a list of main challenges identified at the sites. According to them the first challenge
is the diversity of ownership in the Kii Mountains, since the area listed on the World Heritage List includes
107

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

territories in three different prefectures. The second challenge is disaster management and restoration work,
as it was shown in the case of Kumano-Hongu shrine. The third challenge is tourism development, consideringthat the increasing number of visitors can cause the problem of seasonal frequentation, as well as affect thevalue of sacredness and the balance between people and nature. Finally, they emphasized that the fourthchallenge is the depopulation of rural areas as seen in Kumano Sanzan.
Conclusions
The group concluded that spiritual practices like Shugendo, dating back to ancient times, are essential fornature-culture-people interlinkages. They considered that in order to safeguard the diversity of values of thelocal heritage, natural or/and cultural, these practices involving an intangible dimension should be maintained.
Moreover, they stated that, it is important to understand the religious practitioners’ perspective whenaddressing management issues.
As for the issues raised by the site’s inscription on the World Heritage List, the group established that the
management of this World Heritage property should consider:●Bringing together diverse stakeholders (local, national, and international levels) in a common stewardshipsystem●Reflecting on their perception about the meaning of sacredness and the heritage of the Kii Mountains foreach one of them and for those coming from outside (the Glocal process).
●Evaluating the benefits and risks related to a nomination onto the World Heritage List. For instance, in thecase of the Kii Mountains, on the one hand, there were benefits, as the pilgrimage routes were restored, buton the other hand there is a new challenge represented by the increasing number of visitors.
Finally, the group reflected on the process they engaged in as a team and the learning experience during theworkshop, emphasizing:●The value of diversity, given the international background and interdisciplinary approaches brought by eachmember of the group.
●The importance of fieldwork and meeting of local people to improve their understanding of the internal

perspective and local challenges related to the site’s management.
●The understanding of the interlinkages existing beyond the frame and categories of an international

convention (the Glocal perspective).
● The notion of “sacredness” as context-dependent and evolving through time.
● Local commitment as a key for the management of the area.

Group 2
Members:
Nukila Evanty- Indonesia
Xavier Forde- New Zealand
Stephen Manebosa- Solomon Islands
Upma Manral- India
Claudia Uribe- Peru
Tokpah Yeanga – Liberia
ReflectionsFirstly, the group stated that the sacredness in the Kii Mountains cannot be understood without firstconsidering its long history. They noted that when referring to this concept, it is important to go back to theancient Japanese worship of the kami and nature, and to important figures, like Kobo Daishi, who developed
spiritual centers in these mountains. Thus, they declared that in this area, the physical features and thesymbolic dimension of nature sustain the notion of sacredness.

108

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Secondly, they asserted that these sacred landscapes are reflecting the historical linkages between nature,
culture, and people. They noticed that this relationship can be demonstrated by some characteristics in theplaces of worship like:● Subject of worship (kami or deity): Natural elements and the representation of deities and their association

with nature.
● The role played by nature (or natural elements) to communicate the sacredness, as occurs in the case ofsymbols (lotus buds, stupas, temple logos), ceremonies (fire ceremony), and spaces for worship (shrines,
altars, or mausoleums in forests, routes).
● Cyclical inclusion of natural elements in cultural practices and rituals, as is shown by the use of incense sticks,
tree barks, and the pilgrim’s cherry trees planting tradition.
Thirdly, referring to the management and governance of this type of heritage place, they stated that, there arethree core aspects to take into account:● The active and diverse stakeholders’ communities.
● The challenges, such as mass tourism (threat to sacred values), conflicting interests, migration of steward

communities, and natural disasters.
● The merits of the World Heritage designation, as inspiring neighbor regions to promote the restoration ofroutes and to involve local communities in the conservation of cultural heritage.
Conclusions
The group concluded that:● The co-existence of religions- Kami worship, Shingon, and Shugendo- make the Kii Mountains a place ofspecial and unique value.
● The involvement of steward communities in the management and conservation of the cultural heritage, as
well as in tourism development, contribute to the sustainability of the sites.
● The ways people associate, assimilate, and use these sacred places are constantly evolving, and it is important
to consider the possible conflicts emerging between international, or external, values and local practices.

Group 3
Members:
Ilia Domashov- Kyrgyzstan
Emma Lee- Australia
Tu Vuong- Vietnam
Mingxia Zhu- China
Paul Ayella- Uganda
Reflections
The group said that the landscapes of the Kii Mountains contain a variety of natural and cultural values
expressed in the geographical features and the historically developed systems of beliefs. They understood thatsome spiritual and religious key personalities shared a connection around the concept of sacredness in thisarea.
They considered that the governance, in this context, is measured on three levels: local, national, andinternational. They stated that at the local level, the key agents are the local communities and the religious
institutions, at the national level, the government institutions and authorities, and at the international level,organizations like UNESCO. They found that the management has addressed the public’s participation, theresearch, and the planning. Moreover, they recognized that the promotion has been geared towards thegrowth of tourism, the inscription of the site on the World Heritage List, and the balance between nature andculture.

109

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

They identified some of the challenges, such as the ageing population, the need of inclusive services in theheritage sites, and the prevention of the loss of customary skills against the commodification.
Conclusion
The group concluded that all these concepts are interconnected in a system in which the nature, the cultural
creations, and beliefs interact together, fostering the sense of sacredness.

Group 4
Members:
Portia Bansa- Ghana
Mie Mie Kyaw- Myanmar
John Kuange- Papua New Guinea
Zhengli Liu- China
Sonya Underdahl- Australia
Reflections
The group understood that the notion of sacredness is related to people’s cultural and spiritual responses tothe natural environment with unique features. They said that sacredness is authenticated by people, theirbeliefs related to deities, places, and objects, restrictions and prohibition, practices as rituals, and pilgrimages,
all of which are evidenced by historical records.
They realized that the link between nature and culture is expressed in a variety of ways, including: nature andculture in kami worship, sacred and mundane aspects in pilgrimage, as well as local and global processes.
They considered that this long-term relationship has been grasped by modern societies, creating benefits like:publicity, socio-economic options, boosting nationalism and cultural identity, and management of the sites andenvironment.
In addition, they identified some challenges as:● Finance● Globalization● Social Population Dynamics● Additional pressures on the governance structures● Increase in visitor numbers● Environmental conservation● Cultural adaptation and changes● Preservation of spiritual values● Socio-economic development● Pressure on local community and resources● Survival of sacred sites against risk of destruction●Monitoring●Natural disasters/reconstruction
Conclusions
The group concluded that:( i ) Sacredness may be, or could be, lost if tourism is not controlled or regulated.
( ii) The relationship between nature, culture, and belief systems is inextricably linked. It cannot be separated.
(iii) International frameworks for heritage legislation and policy-making should consider the different local
cultures and traditional contexts in regards to sacredness.

110

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Mingxia Zhu (China), Ilia Domashov (Kyrgyzstan), Emma Lee (Australia), Tu Vuong (Vietnam) and Paul Ayella (Uganda)
preparing their presentation during the working groups session. (Photo: Maya Ishizawa)

Portia Bansa (Ghana), Mie Mie Kyaw (Myanmar), Sonya Underdahl (Australia) and Zhengli Liu (China) preparing theirpresentation during the working groups session. (Photo: Maya Ishizawa)

111

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Group photo of participants, resource persons, and symposium guest speakers after they received their Certificate ofCompletion of the Workshop.

112

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

MODULE FOUR:
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM

On September 26, 2017, the Second International Symposium on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation, Asia and the Pacific, Sacred Landscapes took place within the framework of the Tsukuba Global
Science Week 2017, which general theme was “Science for Social Innovations”.
The President of the University of Tsukuba, Professor Kyosuke Nagata, gave an opening address and especiallywelcomed the honoured guest speakers Dr. Thomas Schaaf, Mr. Tim Badman, Professor Masataka Suzuki,
Professor Amran Hamzah, and the roundtable guests: Dr. Mechtild Rössler, Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, Ms. Carolina
Castellanos, Dr. Edwin Bernbaum, Professor Christina Cameron, and Professor Michael Turner. He also
congratulated the Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation and the World Heritage Studies Programme
for the establishment of the UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation, whichorganizes the CBWNCL (Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Asia and the Pacific). He
pointed out that the University of Tsukuba is working closely with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, IUCN,ICOMOS, and ICCROM in the development of this novel curriculum.
Subsequently, Dr. Mechtild Rössler, Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Division of
Heritage, gave an opening address. She talked about the emergence of the nature-culture linkages approach inthe context of the World Heritage Convention, explaining that this work has come a long way. She recognized
the importance of the people working on the ground and she added that the UNESCO network of chairs
supports this new endeavour, established by the University of Tsukuba. Furthermore, she acknowledged
the contribution of this new UNESCO Chair for the World Heritage Capacity Building Strategy. She also
congratulated Japan on the inscription of Okinoshima island onto the World Heritage List in July 2017 as asacred landscape.

Professor Kyosuke Nagata, President of the University of Tsukuba, inaugurating the International Symposium. (Photo:
Fauziatul Fitriyah)

113

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Group photo of participants, resource persons, and symposium guest speakers after they received their Certificate ofCompletion of the Workshop.

Professor Masahito Yoshida, Chair of the World Heritage Studies Programme at the University of Tsukuba
and chair holder of the newly established UNESCO Chair, gave an opening address, where he talked about
the characteristics of the World Heritage Studies program at Tsukuba, where graduate students fromboth sectors –cultural and natural heritage – work together. Moreover, he presented the objectives of theCertificate Programme on Nature Conservation (CPNC): the CPNC is focusing on the training of Master’s andPh.D. students in the importance of the conservation of nature, through a diverse combination of theoreticalcourses and practical activities, including internships and workshops. He explained that the CBWNCL is partof this endeavour, where the focus is placed on linking the conservation of cultural and natural heritage.
Finally, he talked about the theme and programme of the CBWNCL 2017, which this year focused on “Sacred
Landscapes.”
Next, Dr. Thomas Schaaf, Director of Terra-sana Environmental Consulting, presented “Sacred Natural Sites as
the manifestations of Nature-Culture Linkages and their potential for Multi-designation”. He told the audiencethat he used to work with UNESCO, in the Natural Sciences Sector, where he was the director of the Man and
the Biosphere Programme (MAB). He explained that currently, his consultation group works with governments,
advising them about the establishment and monitoring of biosphere reserves. In his talk, he combined two
topics: nature-culture linkages and multi-international designation with case studies of sacred landscapes.
He explained how he became interested in the topic of sacredness, by telling a story of a visit to Ghana,where he witnessed environmental degradation in the savannas and areas of beautiful wilderness with lush
vegetation in sacred groves. He learned that the latter were sacred and served as sanctuaries, halting hunting
and other detrimental activities for the ecosystems. In a visit to the North-East of China, near the border with
North Korea, he visited the Heaven Lake in Changbaishan. There, he experienced the conservation of an areasurrounding a volcano, which preserved an intact environment because of a legend. He stated that similar
mechanisms work for conserving the environment in many places, where sacred mountains are protected.
He realized that there were areas, other than government designated areas, being conserved, and that theirconservation was founded on bottom-up approaches based on traditional belief systems. He said that fromthis experience, a pilot project on sacred groves was started in Ghana and expanded to the rest of the worldin the context of the UNESCO MAB Programme, as an initiative to promote a culture-based environmental
conservation. He mentioned that another interesting UNESCO programme addressing this issue is the World
Heritage Convention that, in 1992, became the first international legal instrument to recognise and protect
cultural landscapes. He said that the category of associative cultural landscapes can be applied to the sacredlandscapes. Moreover, he talked about the importance of Sacred Natural Sites (SNS) as linking nature andculture in the landscape. He explained that these areas express the cultural identity of the people and often
these sites hold an important biodiversity.
He presented four characteristics of sacred sites. Firstly, based on a temporal scale, he said that sacred sites
are probably the oldest form of nature conservation, before legal issues became important. Secondly, he
explained the importance of their geographical settings. He said that sacred sites are encountered within
114

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

water sources, and, in that way, groves and caves are important sacred places. Thirdly, he said that they
are special trascendental areas, that link the spiritual world with the human world. Dr. Schaaf mentioned anumber of symposia and workshops that dealt with SNS in the past, one having been held in Japan in 2005. He
furthermore mentioned that many World Heritage Sites, as well as Biosphere Reserves, contain sacred naturalareas.

Dr. Thomas Schaaf, Director of Terra-sana Environmental Consulting, presenting on Multi-International Designations andNature-Culture Linkages in sacred landscapes. (Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)

He clarified why multi-international designations present an interesting situation for the sites. The first idea hementioned is the marketing of sites as tourist destinations, with more labels, the site gets global visibility. He
said that the problem with this idea is that uncontrolled and damaging tourism can be triggered. He warned
that with more labels and visibility, the more visitors will attend, therefore, this needs to be anticipated andplanned for. He explained that another idea is that it helps in engaging local communities in the conservationand sustainable development. However, he mentioned that local communities and visitors may be confusedby multi-designations and they might not know what these actually mean. A third idea he found is thatinternational designations help secure national and international funding. Nevertheless, he clarified that alack of institutional coordination at the national level may turn into a fight over money. Lastly, a fourth idea
he noted is that multi-designations may increase the resilience to threats and reinforce protection, since withmore labels the easier it will be to justify conservation. But, he alerted that this can also cause different siteboundaries, according to specific designations, thereby creating additional difficulties for management andgovernance.
Dr. Schaaf said that IUCN requested a study on the management of Multi-Internationally-Designated Areas(MIDAs). He explained that in this study, funded by the Korean government, it was found that 263 sites have
two or more designations. He introduced the study of Jeju island, in Korea, a site that has 4 international
designations: Biosphere Reserve, Global Geopark, Ramsar, and World Heritage. He informed that IUCN
issued guidelines for such sites, and based on the similarities and differences of all 4 designations, benefits ofmultiple designations were elucidated. Dr. Schaaf continued on to explain that MIDAs bring more challenges
than benefits and that each government needs to weight the advantages and disadvantages of such situation,
especially if there is a lack of institutional cooperation. He introduced an example in China, where an area
falls under different governmental offices, challenges of institutional cooperation and coordination emerge.
He said that the study outlined some recommendations, for example improving staff capacity and revise andupdate management plans in order to adapt them to the different objectives of each designation. Moreover,he explained that there is a need to improve the reporting on such sites. He concluded by saying that the mostimportant point to remember is to choose the most significant designation for the site and ensure an effective
legal framework.
Professor Yoshida commented that this presentation reminded him of last year’s UNU-OUIK (United Nations
University – Operating Unit Ishikawa-Kanazawa) symposium on cultural and biological diversity, where MIDAs
were discussed. He explained that in Japan there are such cases, like the Kii mountains for example, that are115

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

enlisted on the World Heritage List and also as part of a Biosphere Reserve. Subsequently, he invited Mr.
Tim Badman, Director of the IUCN World Heritage Programme, to present “The World Heritage Leadership
Programme”. Mr. Badman first congratulated the University of Tsukuba for the establishment of the UNESCO
Chair. He said that they are building a network on nature-culture in significant collaboration between IUCN andICOMOS. He explained that the aim of the World Heritage Leadership Programme is to foster a new approachto capacity building and a new attitude towards World Heritage. He talked about sites, that are sometimes
inscribed for either their cultural values or their natural values only, however, they are all actually mixed
heritage sites, containing nature, culture, and relationships with the people. He mentioned that evaluations
have been separated and this has created negative results, especially in nominations that have been advanced
by indigenous peoples. He added that currently there has been a shift from the advisory bodies responding
to this problem, with the aim to improve conservation practices. In this sense, he said that the network needs
to be based on the experience at the sites and from the practitioners-up, rather than top-down. He explainedthat there are five focus areas: effective management, resilience, impact assessment, learning sites, andleadership networks. He stated that the main outcome would be to create a single manual on how to manage
World Heritage Sites without separating cultural from natural. He talked about the first course, that was held in
Røros, Norway, where the World Heritage Site is inscribed on the base of cultural values related to the mining
tradition, but he explained that large areas of nature conservation surround the site. Moreover, he clarified
that these landscapes have been inhabited by the Saami people, for reindeer herding, for a long time. He
mentioned that an important topic discussed during the course was the use of the language. He indicated thatthe problem of the World Heritage Convention is that it has been written by Anglophones and Francophones.
He put forward that we need to integrate other languages and reduce the power of the English language,by using the words from other languages to express nature-culture linkages. He provided the example ofa Norwegian word, used to refer to society linked to a place. Besides that, he said, the workshop focusedon giving practical experience to their trainees, with nature people doing cultural heritage activities andviceversa, getting a hands-on experience. Also, he said that they are promoting People-Centred approaches,with a second course being held in October 2017, and the idea that these two courses will become one in
the future. Regarding the sacred and spiritual topic of the symposium, he mentioned that it is important torecognize the spiritual values in all places, wherever they exist, and bring together nature and culture in theWorld Heritage Convention implementation. He recalled the Nature-Culture Journey in the Hawaii World
Conservation Congress, and the so-called “Hawaii commitment” that is the recognition of the need, from theside of the nature conservation sector, to look beyond their practice and embrace an ethical perspective thatconsiders the role of belief and faith. Moreover, he stressed that a key point in this practice connection is theadvancement of conserving biodiversity. He pointed out that the work on conserving cultural diversity needs toalso recognize spiritual values and languages.

Mr. Tim Badman, Director of the IUCN World Heritage Programme, presenting the World Heritage Leadership
Programme. (Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)
116

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

After the coffee break, Professor Masataka Suzuki, Emeritus from Keio University, gave a keynote speech
on “Sacred Landscapes in Japan: Special Reference to Mountain Worship”. Professor Suzuki explained why
mountains are so important to Japanese people. He referred to the geographical characteristics of Japan thatshow the high presence of mountains. He explained that people in Japan feel very close to mountains because
mountains are sources of water. Moreover, he asserted that, as embedded in an agricultural country, Japaneseculture is related to the cycles of rice cultivation and this too relates to mountains as providers of water, timber,and other resources.
He explained that there is respect, but also fear, connected to mountains because it is believed that themountain can take the life of a person. He said that in Japanese, the word kami, refers often to female gods,
gods of rivers, mountains, and others. He pointed out that often we can see small shrines inside mountains andthat the mountain is a perfect venue of syncretism between Shintoism and Buddhism. He added that there aremany legends of people who wandered into the mountains and became kami. He informed the audience, thatin Japan, there was a time called the “opening of the mountains,” when the capital was moved to Nara andthe legal system was introduced. He explained that during the Nara period the practice of climbing mountains
developed into worshiping and pilgrimage. He recalled that such tradition existed until the Meiji Period (150years ago), when the government decided on the separation of Buddhism and Shinto, and with modernization,
mountain worshiping was forbidden.

Professor Masataka Suzuki, Emeritus Keio University, presenting about the Japanese tradition of sacred mountains.
(Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)

He explained that Buddhism and mountain worship in the Heian period went through a transformation: theShingon sect was established, based on the idea that all living creatures go through reincarnation and canbecome Buddha. He said that Shugendo, a combination of esoteric Buddhism (practiced by the Shingon sect)and Shinto animism, emerged. Professor Suzuki explained that one unique characteristic of Japan is that thepilgrimage does not imply only climbing one mountain, but rather, it requires walking the whole mountain
range. He indicated that monks were half priest and half secular people, they had families and the shrines wereclosely connected to the family system. He said that a unique characteristic of Shugendo is the mandala, not
as a drawing, but as the mountain itself, so, symbolically, walking through the mountain is like walking througha mandala. He mentioned that this applies to Mount Koya, which is seen as a mandala. He explained thatin the Shugendo practice, the cycle of life and death is re-enacted in the mountain by Shugendo Yamabushi
practitioners during their pilgrimage. He said that the stages of mountain pilgrimage (e.g. 10 stages of Mount
Fuji) are related to 10 stages of purification and rebirth through asceticism. He added that the mountain isconsidered to be a womb, the pilgrim becomes an embryo, when ascending and descending one is born
again, like a baby goes down the natal tube. He explained that the idea is that at the end of the pilgrimage, the117

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

practitioner becomes united with Buddha, symbolically, by becoming one with nature. He mentioned that thelinear chronology of life and death is reversed in the mountains, from death to birth.
In relation to the World Heritage designation, Professor Suzuki pointed out the need for connecting culture andnature, to respect the beliefs of people while meeting the criteria of the Convention. He thinks it is necessary
to find out how concepts can be universally applied and how more native points of view can be introduced.
He suggested rethinking what concepts mean and listen to the voice of nature. He finalized his presentation
by saying that, in Japan, there is no concept equivalent to the concept of nature existing in Western Modern
thinking, where a monolithic way of thinking about Nature has been fostered.
Next, Professor Amran Hamzah, from the University of Technology of Malaysia, presented “The Asian
Philosophy of Protected Areas in the Context of Nature-Culture Linkages”, where he introduced the philosophy
and the challenges of its incorporation into current policies. He started talking about the colonial model ofprotected areas, based on displacement, non-compliance, provoked encroachment around protected areas,and contestation from local communities.

Professor Amran Hamzah, University of Technology of Malaysia, presenting about sacred landscapes in Asia. (Photo:
Fauziatul Fitriyah)

He said that in Asia, the “traditional” protected areas have been sacred natural sites, held with reverence,protected by taboos, and without formal legislation, but well respected. He mentioned that, in Malaysia, theirphilosophy is based on harmony between humans and nature. Professor Hamzah wondered if this is shapedby necessity due to the fact that, in Asia, there are 4 times more natural disasters than in Africa and it is 25
times more susceptible to natural disasters than Europe and North America. He believes that this means thatthe people need to respect and worship nature.
He explained that, in China, the Shan Shui or Fengshui philosophy also reflects the harmony between culture
and nature. He mentioned that what we see in the paintings depicts mountains and that mountains were
worshiped. He said that there are more than 1,000 Fengshui forests remaining in China, even in areas wheremost of residents left, because they provide protection for the villages. He pointed out that India is also famous
for its sacred groves, with more than 100,000, and they are attracting millions of pilgrims. He mentioned thattraditional rules and prohibitions work well to maintain them, despite the lack of legal protection. He explained
that, in Japan, there is the Chinju no mori, and, in South Korea, there are 6 different forms of sacred forests,
with different functions, organized with the Baekdu-daegan mountain system. He added that, in Bhutan,
protected areas cover more than half of the country. Then, he mentioned that, in Mongolia, the mountains
surrounding the capital are viewed as sacred mountains. He said that, in Malaysia, forests are believed to be118

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

inhabited by gods and, where they have built tourist trails, local people don’t walk in respect of the spirits. He
pointed out that the people believe bad things will happen if natural areas are disrespected.
He asked himself why there is a sudden increased interest in sacred natural sites, not only among researchers,
but also among governments. He replied that this is because research has proven their importance as beingrich in biodiversity. Especially, since the Aichi targets have been set up, he said that there has been therealization that formally protected areas are not enough for environmental protection. Besides, he said, the useof traditional models is popular for sustainable resource management, as seen in Satoyama in Japan, the Tagal
fishery in Malaysia (prohibition on fishing), and the Subak system in Bali (integrated water temple system).
He has found that the challenges are, firstly, a decreasing emotional attachment to traditional beliefs andtaboos. He said that young people have a simplistic view of nature and do not connect to it. Secondly, hesaid that, the homogenous global community focuses on the use of technology and social media, which
he considers to be positive, but somehow this affects the maintenance of traditional knowledge. Thirdly,
he mentioned that, the modern interpretations, by mainstream religions in Asia, are slowly erasing ancient
wisdom. Fourthly, he talked about the influx of domestic tourists, who have an irresponsible touristic behavior.
He gave the example of Singapore, where architecture, mimicking nature, functions as trees, absorbing carbon.
He wondered if this is a new form of human-made national parks for the new Asian generation. He alsomentioned the human-made cloud forest, that, according to him, is very attractive due to the fact that there
are no insects or dangerous wildlife. He asserted that we can have a very controlled environment, with the useof technology, something that the government of Singapore is very serious about.
He ended his presentation with an example that he said it is very close to his heart: Mount Kimbalu, a natural
World Heritage site in Sabah, Malaysia. He said that it is a sacred mountain and that it was inscribed in 2000.
He mentioned that Aki na ba lu is a local word used to describe the perpetual resting place for spirits. He said
that, unfortunately, the nature-culture linkage was ignored at the time of the nomination and the dossier
regarded the surrounding communities as a threat to biodiversity. He continued, saying that, after 45 years ofprohibition, in 2010, the local communities were granted the right to ascend the mountain, once a year, for apilgrimage on Community Day. He added that, in 2015, there was an earthquake that killed several climbers
and locals claimed that a student, who posed naked in a picture at the top of the mountain, angered themountain gods. He stressed three lessons learned from these experiences: one, there is a thin line between
sacred and profane, the second is that local pride and stewardship keep sacred values alive, and the third
is that governance reforms need to be made in order to keep private initiatives, such as Community Day,sustainable.
He finalized his presentation by wondering where to go from here and how to use the Asian concepts asopportunities. He concluded that, while the Asian philosophy may be currently declining, it could be revitalized
by providing better solutions for megacities.

■ PANEL DISCUSSION
Professor Yoshida directed the first question to Mr. Badman and Dr. Schaaf which was about how natureculture linkages could be integrated in the international frameworks, such as World Heritage and Biosphere
Reserves, as well as in the evaluation and management processes.
Mr. Badman replied that there are two issues. He said that the first one is the disjointed criteria applied toWorld Heritage sites, where there is a strong focus on Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and that all of theother local values are often forgotten. Therefore, he claimed that, there is a need to rethink the evaluation
process for World Heritage sites. He added that it is important to revisit the management manuals, as
he explained in his presentation, and, instead of having two separate manuals, one for natural heritage
management and the other for cultural heritage management, there should be one comprehensive manual
for both types of heritage. He stated that his broader observation is that the more we look at the issues ofCulture and Nature, the more issues become obvious, especially in regards to the language that it is being

119

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

used. He wonders if the Convention would have been drafted in Japan, in the Japanese language, how it would
differ. He hypothesized that there would probably not be article 1 (defining cultural heritage) and article 2(defining natural heritage). He wonders about what a Japanese convention would look like. He asserted thatpeople should be empowered to work in their own languages and with their own concepts.
Dr. Thomas Schaaf replied that indeed there can be linkages between Culture and Nature in conservation. He
considers that the notion of cultural landscapes created the entry point for this thinking. He said that, also,
the Biosphere Reserves have been conceived as “man and environment”, they are linking people and nature.
Nevertheless, he affirmed that, the dichotomy remains and he also wonders how this can be bridged. He
mentioned that, over the last couple of years, there has been a new way of thinking emerging, as we have seenin Asian philosophy, that nature and culture are not a dichotomy, particularly regarding sacred natural sites.
He said that as Professor Suzuki pointed out, the Kii mountain sites are also included in a Biosphere Reserve.
Moreover, he said that, it is great that this symposium chose this name because he and others in the panel, as
Westerners, can learn from Asian philosophy.
Subsequently, Professor Yoshida asked Professor Suzuki and Professor Hamzah about how they perceived thesituation from the Japanese or Asian point of view. Professor Suzuki addressed 3 difficulties that Japan faces,
regarding natural sacred sites. Firstly, he mentioned, the ban of women and its encounter with modernism.
He said that there is the necessity to draw a line between them. Secondly, he mentioned, the invention ofheritage, where there are multiple designations, and he stressed that there is a need to control the inflation ofdesignations. He wonders if we imagine the situation 30 years from now, what kind of new designations Japan
will have and how are these going to be managed. Thirdly, he thinks that, it is a problem to see sacred as the
opposite of profane, which contradicts traditional wisdom. He considers ‘sacred’ to be too strong of a wordand doesn’t like the word ‘animism’ because it makes everything sound the same, when in reality there is great
diversity. He asserts that there is a need for more local knowledge to be presented and debated. He considers
that the local knowledge from Japan needs to be connected to local knowledge from other cultures, so thatparticularism can become the foundation of globalism.
Professor Hamzah said that there are many developmental pressures in Asia, due to the rapid economic
development. He added that there is also pressure from tourism, both domestic and international. He
considers that in response to these challenges, he offers 3 S’s: 1) Special planning for Culture and Nature; 2)
Scale, he considers that most sites are culture-nature sites and, in the future, will be transformed; therefore, heargues for adaptive planning; and 3) Sustainability.
Finally, Professor Yoshida closed the session by thanking the guest speakers and announcing the lunch break.
After the lunch break, Professor Nobuko Inaba from the World Heritage Studies, gave an overview of theworkshop and introduced the program, which began on the 15th of September, with 3 days of discussions
in Tsukuba, followed by a 5-day tour in the Kii mountains. She pointed out that, before the tour, participants
could not understand how Buddha could be in the mountain but, after the tour, it became much clearer andthey were able to understand it. She presented the 16 participants, from 15 countries, and invited Dr. Maya
Ishizawa, from the World Heritage Studies, to present an overview of the program. Dr. Ishizawa gave a brief
introduction, where she explained the background of the CBWNCL’s project. She noted that the purpose
was to contribute to the World Heritage Capacity Building Programme, in developing new comprehensive
approaches to natural and cultural heritage conservation. She presented two themes already covered by the
program, “Agricultural Landscapes” and “Sacred Landscapes,” and the two themes for the following years,“Disasters and Resilience” and “Mixed Cultural and Natural Sites”. She introduced the participants, who camefrom diverse backgrounds in Asia and the Pacific, including two participants coming from other regions,
Europe and Africa. She gave an overview of the Kii mountains, that besides being a World Heritage site, isalso covered by other systems of protection, such as being deemed a Biosphere Reserve and National Park,
as well as contains National Treasures and Places of Scenic Beauty protected by Japanese law. She explainedthat participants were guided through the Kii mountains by monks and they also participated in Shingon andShugendo rituals. She invited 4 of the participants to present their final outcomes.
Dr. Xavier Forde, a participant from New Zealand, started the presentation by greeting the audience with some120

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

words in Maori that meant, “who are you to tell us about our sacred places?”, as a way to apologize for talking
about Japanese sacred places after such a short visit.
Dr. Tu Vuong, from Vietnam, presented a graph developed by the participants. In the image, he showed theearly stage of human evolution where ancestors believed that everything was sacred. He explained that nature,
culture, and humans lived together. However, he stressed that along with human society development, people
created various religions. He explained that the ancestors’ view continued until the 17th century, stating theKii mountains as an example. However, he said, now we are facing many problems, because of economic goals
and urbanization, and natural and cultural values are under threat. He asserted that this is the reason why they
are gathered, during this symposium, to talk about these challenges.
Next, Ms. Portia Bansa, from Ghana, talked about sacredness and how participants reflected on this concept.
She explained that they considered that sacredness is people’s cultural and spiritual response to naturalenvironment, with unique features, and sacredness is not only based on religion because there are very
different beliefs and cultures. She added that they realized that sacredness is authenticated by people andbeliefs associated with a place, historical records, objects, and practices, such as rituals and pilgrimages. She
continued saying that, through the experience of Shugendo rituals, they realized that pilgrimages are a part ofthe sacred lives of people. She mentioned that in Papua New Guinea the relationship between humans andanimals is very strong, even animals are regarded as sacred. She said that they believe that the spirit of theanimal comes after one when one dies. She stated that they have seen similar examples in Sweden, Ghana,
China, and India. Moreover, she pointed out that they realized that restrictions and prohibitions give people
the idea that a place is sacred. She said that people hold such places in respect and this helps keeps themfrom contamination. She added that they concluded that sacredness is valued because there is always someform of authenticity in it, it builds strong resilience, and it is practical. She mentioned that, when people havethe chance to engage in spiritual practices, it contributes to the sacredness and brings value to the lives ofcommunities.

Representatives of the participants of the CBWNCL 2017, presenting the outcomes of the workshop. From left to right: Dr.
Tu Vuong (Vietnam), Dr. Xavier Forde (New Zealand), Ms. Portia Bansa (Ghana) and Dr. Florence Revelin (France). (Photo:
Fauziatul Fitriyah)Then, Dr. Forde added that there is interdependency between sacredness and the community because
sacredness is sustained by the community. On one hand, he said that, some of these places come under theprotection of a community and the community becomes its steward, in charge of conserving the naturalelements. Yet, on the other hand, he said that local communities depend on the natural sites and thevisitors that natural areas attract. He added that sacredness is a living heritage and influences the modes of121

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

expression of the community. He gave the example of the Shugendo priests, how the mountains received
different influences starting with Kobo Daishi, and how the practices evolved. He also mentioned that there
is an interdependency between ritual practices and sustainability. They believed that the continuation ofthese practices is what sustains the sites. He added that, in terms of the management, they found several
challenges: 1) natural disasters are frequent, there is a need to maintain a body of experts for recovery; 2) the
threat of tourism, it is something that impacts sacredness, whilst allowing communities to benefit in terms of
the livelihood; 3) the World Heritage designation has an impact on the lives of local communities because it
brings restrictions; 4) emigration and aging of the communities. He recalled that, in Wakayama city, they weretold that they expect that the inscription on the World Heritage List will cause the return of emigrants back to
the city. Hence, he stressed that, there are also opportunities. For example, he explained that, the restorationof more routes might attract more people, which could keep them in a good state for the future, this would
also result in more community involvement in the restoration of sites, thereby, creating sustainable heritage
conservation.
Finally, Dr. Florence Revelin, from France, presented the main conclusions of the group. Firstly, they found thatthe integration of religions makes the Kii Mountains a unique place, where people can understand a peacefulcoexistence between Shinto, Shugendo, Shingon, and other forms of Buddhism. She mentioned that this isa relevant example for the rest of the world. Secondly, she indicated that they found that the relationships
between nature, culture, people, and belief systems are inextricably linked and are sustained by ongoing ritual
practices that are attached to places. She added that they concluded that, as heritage practitioners, they must
consider the intangible dimensions of a site. Thirdly, she said that the integration of steward communities into
management is very important and brings opportunities. Then, she presented the lessons that they want tobring back to their countries and sites. Firstly, she stressed the multidisciplinary and multicultural dimensionof the workshop, that sometimes provoked great debates, like the one they experienced preparing thispresentation. She mentioned that this diversity of perspectives brought about a unique environment. Secondly,
she mentioned that they realized the importance of working with local people in preparing the management
plan of the sites. She recalled that Professor Inaba said that they could not really understand the Kii mountains
before they went there, so the importance of the fieldwork and working with local people is essential tounderstand the internal perspectives and local challenges related to the management of the sites. Thirdly,
she asserted that they understood that the notion of sacredness is context-dependent, and evolving throughtime, so it is important that the World Heritage Convention is flexible enough to adapt to change. Fourthly,
she mentioned that they found out that the education of tourism practitioners and tourists, in the respectof sacred sites, is very important because tourism can be a challenge for maintaining sacred values. Finally,
she said that the inclusion of the concept of sacredness, into legislation and management, can lead to better
environmental conservation through the community. She concluded by thanking the attendants and, on behalfof all participants, she thanked the organizers of the workshop for creating this opportunity.
Furthermore, Dr. Forde thanked the organizers and the supporting staff of the workshop. He stressed that
it was a wonderful experience for all and that they have a lot of things to reflect on, and implement, in the
management of their sites.
After this presentation, Professor Inaba invited the resource persons, that accompanied the development of
the workshop, to provide feedback to the participants and give their reflections and opinions on the topic.
Firstly, Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, the representative of ICCROM, remarked that Japan was the right place todiscuss these issues and congratulated Japan for the inscription of Okinoshima islands, as a sacred site, in July.
He thanked the organizers and congratulated Professor Yoshida for the establishment of the UNESCO Chairon Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation at the University of Tsukuba. He also congratulated
the participants for their work and efforts. He said that, in talking about interlinkages, nature and culture areinterlinked by nature and it is we, the people, who divide them. He mentioned that the groups have been
discussing this topic for the last 10 day, and the presentations this morning helped to enrich and consolidate
what was discussed and observed. He pointed out that linkages are being recognized; particularly, he notedthat these are important for management and he stressed the importance that practitioners of natureand culture keep reflecting on how the work can be integrated. He stated that it is a very slow process. He
commented on the participants’ presentation, that they characterized the sacredness very well and theimportance of intangible values. He pointed out that participants had also highlighted the importance of122

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

prohibitions, taboos, the potential of sacredness for conservation, as well as traditional systems. He stressedthat guidelines need flexibility to absorb these reflections. Finally, he mentioned the presentation of Mr.
Badman and the work that ICCROM and IUCN are doing in creating a platform for all practitioners to get
together. He encouraged participants to continue developing questions and join discussions of the World
Heritage Leadership Programme.
Then, Ms. Carolina Castellanos thanked the University of Tsukuba for the invitation and congratulated theparticipants for their work. She considers the workshop to be more like a transfer of experience, an exchange
where everyone had the privilege to learn from each other. She recalled that during the fieldwork they had
the chance to witness how things can and should work and that continuing sacred practices can coexist. She
said that, as Dr. Wijesuriya mentioned, this workshop has clearly illustrated that heritage practitioners need tobreak this artificial divide in the way they think and talk about heritage. She said that in Tsukuba it is possible tosee a culture person sharing the desk with a nature person and that this is not seen anywhere else. Moreover,she said that heritage practitioners are able to come to the realization that the divide is artificial, when they
face the reality in the field, and that the divide only exists in their minds. She stated that the participants
expressed this clearly. She mentioned that when practitioners go to the field and ask the people what to doabout the divide between nature and culture, the people ask, “what divide? It does not exist.” She pointed outthat heritage practitioners have to think about how they understand heritage and how they strive to protect
it for the future in face of many challenges. She considers that heritage can, and should, be a driving force
for change, stressing that it is the one thing that can bring societies together and help to build a just world.
Professor Inaba thanked Ms. Castellanos and asked Dr. Bernbaum to give his opinion on how to break this
divide.

Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, Project Manager at ICCROM, giving feedback to the participants. (Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)

Dr. Bernbaum also thanked the organizers for the invitation and the opportunity to join in the fieldwork.
He said that he agreed with his two colleagues and that he wanted to focus more on the participants. He
congratulated them on their fine presentations. He said that they did a great job in distilling four presentations,prepared by four different groups, into one. He mentioned that he was delighted to work with them and that
he found a marvelous spirit of collaboration and enthusiasm. He stressed that everyone understood that
there is no division between nature and culture. He added that, as the co-Chair of the IUCN Specialist Groupon Cultural and Spiritual Values of Protected Areas (CSVPA), he knows from experience that sacredness canbe a great motivation to conserve nature. He said that sacred values represent the highest inspiration thatpeople have, therefore, it is a natural path to take in going forward. He stated that the fieldwork in the Kii
Mountains was like a homecoming for him. He recalled his first visit, in the 1970s, when he encountered very

123

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

rich experiences. He asserted that it was a great experience to return to some of these places after the World
Heritage designation. He said that he was struck by the fact that the values of the places were really wellpreserved and no values were degraded as a result of tourism. He referred to the importance of the point thatthe participants made about sacredness, being context-dependent. Moreover, he said that the discussions inthe symposium were really stimulating and very enlightening, as it clarified how everything linked together andhow it is linked to the UNESCO programmes. He added that he was also very interested in the presentation
about sacred mountains in Japan, asserting that Shugendo is a unique tradition, as it is the only example in theworld that views mountain-climbing as a religion. Finally, he expressed that participants are going back to theircountries very enriched and he invited them to join the group of IUCN CSVPA.

Center, Ms. Carolina Castellanos gives feedback to the participants. On the left, Dr. Edwin Bernbaum, on the right,
Professor Christina Cameron. (Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)■ ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION
Professor Inaba invited the roundtable guests to join the general discussion. She suggested moving from the
topic of management issues to conceptual issues. She mentioned that in the audience there were Japaneseparticipants, some of them from government agencies and consultant agencies, all involved in preparing
management plans. She said that for them there is no divisions between Culture and Nature, but that in Japan,
there is a Ministry of Culture and a Ministry of Environment. She added that these agencies have different
initiatives, so the question to the roundtable discussants was how practitioners should implement these ideas
and what is the current progress on those issues.
Dr. Schaaf said that when we speak about the problem of dividing Culture from Nature, we have to go back to
the history of Western philosophy. He mentioned that René Descartes set the principles of scientific thinking
and, at that time, it was a good way, for Europe, to simplify the complexity of the world. However, he addedthat the human evolution went beyond the shallow categorizing, towards seeing interconnections; therefore,
we can learn from Asian philosophy, or the example of Ghana, where the environment and the people areseen as interlinked. He said that this is the benefit of globalization, learning from other cultures. He stressedthat we have to see the world as interrelated and not divided into categories. He hoped that participants, andthe audience in general, could take this message back and that a major step forward has been made.
Mr. Badman mentioned that there are a lot of trends of practices in nature conservation. For example, a lotof work is being done on the issue of indigenous people’s rights, in the recognition of religious and cultural
knowledge, on sacred natural sites as a type of protection, and the recognition of biological diversity, as seen in
the Aichi target 11. He pointed out three main issues: firstly, he mentioned the issue of localism; secondly, thechallenge of change; and thirdly, the impact of tourism. He said that tourism is a big indicator of whether or notthere are good results because sustainable tourism is challenging. He noted that authentic relationships withplaces were very often turned into cheap, and fake, versions of these experiences. He added one last point,

124

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

about language; that words could be imported from different languages, other than English. For example, hementioned that during the presentations and discussions, the word “profane” was used, besides being the
opposite of sacred, he stressed that this word has another negative connotation that might be offensive tosome people. Therefore, he stated, it is better to use the word “secular.”
Professor Hamzah said that he was pleased to see the presentation of the participants and agreed that all of
the issues they mentioned were not something new. He said that this reminded him of another symposium,
where 42 countries presented their issues, all of them had colonial legacies, and that this is a difficult task forsite management. He mentioned that he started the research on Asian philosophy with a small grant, based ona desk study, and that this study grew up and he received many letters. He said that by listening to participants
he was amazed that, in just 10 days, it seemed a seamless effort for participants to understand and connect
with sacredness. He added that, when he gives presentations about the Asian philosophy, people from manydifferent countries say that it is that kind of philosophy which is needed. He finds that it is no longer a foreign
concept as long as people manage to grab the essence of it.
Dr. Rössler said that she always thought that the World Heritage Convention was the instrument needed tobring Culture and Nature together. But she asks herself why it has been so difficult. She said that she sees, now,that time is running out and that there is the need to break down barriers between international institutions.
She mentioned that experts spend too long evaluating sites and there is a huge knowledge loss, in terms ofclimate change mitigation, because the local people know how to deal with it. She recalled that communities
are ageing and that there is no transmission of knowledge. She added that, already, some languages aregone. She strongly believes that the World Heritage should always consider the locals, that there would be no
heritage sites without the them. She stressed that they have to be involved in the process.
Professor Christina Cameron, from the University of Montréal, said that she worked for 25 years with Parks
Canada, the institution that, by definition, has cultural and natural compounds. She said that Parks Canada
has been bounced back and forth between departments and, depending on what Ministry it went under,
their focus changed. She mentioned that, within the park service, there was always a divide between thetwo sectors. She added that there is a governmental structure that needs to be looked at; but, she suggested
that this problem is also related to institutions of learning. She said that she thinks it is broken down and she
doesn’t know how to fix it, but, that this is a reason to congratulate Tsukuba for doing it. She said that we tend
to see the world through our disciplines and that the way the university is structured, in terms of disciplines,
has to change.
Professor Michael Turner, from the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Sciences, said that we need to harmonize, notstandardize, because we still need people that are specialists in their field. He considers that we share somelanguage so that there must be something that is general for humanity. He said that Mr. Badman’s idea about
language, and the way we use it, is something that we should take into consideration. He said that landscapesbring together poetry and music. He noted that he took many notes during the discussions, which means, hesaid, that he has learned a lot in these days in Tsukuba.
Ms. Castellanos said that we have to think about what profile we want for the new students. She stressed that
we continue to train biologists and ecologists, but that we also need heritage professionals, instead of having
highly specialized professionals. She added that we can see examples, from many countries, on how to bridge
this institutional divide. Moreover, she said that we see the creation of many joint task forces. Stressing that
we have made progress, trying to integrate our approaches, but that we have made very little progress in
the integration of our values. She asserted that it is a challenge in reality, the challenges of conflicting values
and the continuation of practices. She added that she thinks that this is something we are, currently, very illequipped to deal with.
Dr. Bernbaum added some observations. He said that the word ‘nature,’ in English has many meanings.
He commented that if one looks at how it is used by poets, it has more of a spiritual and cultural meaning,similar to the meanings in Asia. He added that the environmental movement of national parks came from thewritings of people, like Mill. He said that Yosemite, and other parks, were established as places one would go
for spiritual recreation. He stated that we have to recover these meanings. Moreover, he said that there is a

125

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

tendency to have a Eurocentric view of things, for example, there is an idea that mountain-climbing began
in the Alps. But, he said that in fact, mountain-climbing began in Asia, more precisely in China, in the 3rd
millennium, BC, when the emperor climbed 4 mountains in 4 corners of the country to make sacrifices. Evenfrom a recreational point of view, he added, that it began in China in the 4th century BC. In Japan, he said that
we know climbing Mount Fuji began by at least the 11th century. So, he pointed out the need to recognize thediversity within the traditions. He added that even the tradition of cultural landscapes originated in Asia. He
thinks that, rather than looking on how to bring Nature and Culture together, we have to go deeper and lookat the roots of where the divide started. He said that participants mentioned that sacredness is maintained
through ritual but he pointed out that this is true about all sacred sites.
Dr. Wijesuriya said that we have a problem with a one-size-fits-all approach. He mentioned that at ICCROM, he
met Joseph King (Director of ICCROM Sites Unit) and Tim Badman, who said there is a Western way of looking
at culture. He sees this as a good sign. He said that, to give one example, in Sri Lanka, they have a word fornature, as something that was given by Buddha, so it means it is something sacred.
Professor Suzuki said that the most important thing today is linkage, but, that the concept of nature is different.
He stated that nature has a transcending value, that it is a cultural apparatus that has been artificially created.
He added that the relationship also changes and, within the framework of a discipline, the meaning canchange too. The meaning is diverse in time and age and, because of the spread of the Western lifestyle, it
has become externalized and materialized. He said that there is a strong notion of a Christianity-led conceptof nature and that Copernicus and Newton started to look at nature as a source of law. Nature becomes a
subject of the cultural apparatus and that, further, in contemporary times, the rule of nature and order leads
to the practice of nature protection. He noted that nature ended up being seen as a resource and, in a uniform
manner, people fell under the illusion that they can control nature. He suggested that the concept of Nature
and Culture is different and that the concept of Nature has been created in a cultural way. He wonders what
the power is, that lies behind it, and that he would like to reflect on this. He thinks that this is the key to bridge
Nature and Culture together. He believes that there is no Asian wisdom that can serve as counterweight andthat there are concepts that are impossible to translate into English.
Mr. Badman said that he wanted to revisit three points that he raised in the beginning of the discussion. He
said that, regarding Professor Turner’s point, that we need new words, he thinks that, as practitioners, weshould understand different words, phrases, and ideas. He added that we need to bring these ideas together.
For example, he thinks that it would help to imagine the Convention written in Japanese, or in another Asian
language, and try to define the problem in a language other than English. He thinks that taking this step backwould help us a lot. About the second point, he said that in regards to what Ms. Castellanos mentioned on thepractice, there have been discussions, about site-level practice, and that we need multi-skilled individuals withsocial skills. He added that there is a step before, in which practitioners should be able to understand different
values and do their work in a way that will not lead us to different institutional models. He considers experts
to have bad manners, going about their work in a way that ensures that no one but the expert can understandthe work.
Professor Yoshida responded in regards to the comment about the institutional divide. He said that this is oneof the big reasons why Japan had not ratified the World Heritage Convention for 20 years. He explained that, in
1992, Japan decided to ratify it and held a symposium, where the director of the Agency for Cultural Affairs andthe representative of the Ministry of Environment shook hands for the first time. But, he said, that the divide
still remained. He added that, in 2012, when Japan was celebrating 40 years of the Convention, in Kyoto, thepeople were surprised that we used different languages. He explained that the IUCN used the word ‘steward’
but ICOMOS used the word ‘custodian.’ He said that he was never involved in management and that, in 2013,
when Mount Fuji was inscribed, he joined the Scientific Committee. The site was designated as a cultural site
but they needed natural heritage management. He stated that this was an opportunity to communicate witheach other, the communication between institutes was very important. He added that, in 1992, at the sametime, the criteria for the selection of National properties was adapted in Japan, to include combined worksof man and nature. He said that looking at the domestic level, the combined works can be observed in bothnatural and cultural properties.

126

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Professor Inaba said that she wanted to focus more on conceptual issues, and invited Professor Cameron totalk about it.
Professor Cameron said that she appreciated Professor Suzuki’s concept of “universalized localism” and Dr.
Wijesuriya’s plea for more flexibility. She added that, in Canada, they are working on the new Tentative List forWorld Heritage, and she chairs the Committee that advises the Ministry. She said that one of the things thathas become clear in this process is that indigenous sites may not work as World Heritage, in terms of how
World Heritage is interpreted and applied. She said that they have 634 First Nations and, for each one, there
are sacred places. She added that this is their territory, their understanding, and that each nation has different
interpretations. She noted that she cannot imagine how they could recommend only a few sites, as the
Ministry requires, because, each group has its specific sacred places that do not relate to other groups' places.
She expressed that she doesn’t know how this will be managed, when the First Nations want to be recognizedat the international level. So, she was really struck by Professor Suzuki’s definition of “universalized localism.”
She said that this issue was already a question in the first and second meetings of the Convention, there wasalready a discussion on how culture can be universal.
Professor Turner said that this is a really complex issue. He is in favor of the ambiguity and that, sometimes,
we need a position of ambiguity which allows us to look at things in different ways. He quoted that the more
identities people have the less violent they are. He thinks that this is a very Japanese way of looking at things,
for example, you can be shinto and you can be buddhist. Moreover, when we look around China, witnessing
cultural tensions between Korea and Japan, China and Vietnam, he said that, we must try to understandcommon universality and, in that way, diffuse some of our differences. He recalled the history of the creationof UNESCO, after the second World War, when people came together and talked about the importance ofunderstanding other people. He said that we began to understand each other and the importance of empathy.
Professor Inaba announced the coffee break before the final session of conclusions.
Then, Dr. Ishizawa invited the participants, and the audience, to provide comments or ask questions.
Dr. Xavier Forde, from New Zealand, commented on what Professor Cameron pointed out, about the World
Heritage recognition of indigenous sites, and also, what other speakers were discussing about the use ofterminology from other languages, rather than just English. He said that, in New Zealand, they are fortunate
that, in 1993, a legislation included the Maori definition of sacred sites such as “taboo place” and “sacredplace.” He explained that this obliges managers to ask people what their places mean when interpreting World
Heritage. He said that even if there is a definition in English, it is important that, if the site is sacred to Maori
people, they are the ones who decide the values. He stressed that the people who have authority over theland are the people who can speak about it.
Ms. Mie Mie Kyaw, from Myanmar, said that this workshop was a great opportunity for all communities’
development.
Ms. Emma Lee, from Australia, thanked all participants for bringing the international world closer. She wanted
to ask the roundtable discussants how the process of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent was working with theindigenous communities in different countries.
Professor Cameron said that Free, Prior, and Informed Consent is a concept included in Canadian law.
She asserted that the government is doing much better, in that sense, and that there were few decisions
made without consent. She explained that when the issue is about pipelines, for example, sometimes thegovernment would make a decision that not everybody would agree with. She stated that a problem that shesees is that there are many different First Nations and some of them agree and some of them disagree. So, she
thinks it is not about consent, but that it is about consensus. She mentioned that some First Nations are morebusiness-oriented than others, so it is a mixed picture.
Professor Turner added that there is a commitment in the involvement of all stakeholders, not just indigenous
communities. He wanted to add one thing, he explained that, at the debate that took place in Dresden

127JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728(regarding the delisting of the site), there were three levels of decision-making: federal, state, and local. He
indicated that the signature of the World Heritage Convention was only done by the Federal government.
He suggested that there should be signatures at all levels yet, a representative of Australia said that if thiswere required, nothing would be on the World Heritage List because of the aboriginal nations. Professor
Turner concluded that we have to see it as a much more dynamic situation and not only about the rights ofindividuals.

Professor Nobuko Inaba, University of Tsukuba, moderating the discussion. (Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)

Professor Inaba invited the audience to ask questions.
Alexandra Macedonio, a student from Germany, asked how to protect sacred landscapes if they are not sacredanymore. She wondered who we are to say what should be protected and what not.
Professor Hamzah responded that sacred sites are traditionally protected and that most of them do not have
any legal protection. He explained that these obtain legal protection only if the community wants, that it isreally a bottom-up approach and must be supported by the local people.
Dr. Rössler answered that provisions have been made so that evolution may stop at some point, so it is possible
to protect under a World Heritage designation, as a landscape associated with the past. However, she clarified
that the local community is very important, a good example is the Bamiyan Buddhas, where none of thepeople in the valley has relation to Buddhism anymore.
Professor Turner stated that culture does not belong to people anymore but to places. He mentioned thatmost of the people want to live in a city where they were not born. He said that sacred places or heritage
belong to the culture that created them and to the culture that is managing them. Therefore, the communities
become the custodians.
A person from the audience wanted to share his impressions and comments. He said that he is from Hokkaido,
working on an environmental conservation project to protect the Ainu culture. He stated that connecting
nature and culture is a lot of work and that he learned a lot from the symposium’s discussions. He shared histhoughts. Firstly, he finds that cultural landscape is a meaningful framework for the Ainu culture. Secondly, hesaid that, in Japan, the Agency for Cultural Affairs created a framework where nature and culture can learn
from each other. Thirdly, he mentioned that what Professor Suzuki said struck him. He explained that in the
Ainu culture, as well as what he described as shamans and animism, there is a way of looking at things that
we need to learn from. Fourthly, he said that in the Ainu’s spiritual culture, people think there is a deity or
god living in each object. He explained that this means that even around the conference hall there is a sacred
128

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

space, the PC has a power that human may not understand, and there is a spirit that lives in each object.
He added that, if we believe this, then this area might also be a sacred place and, therefore, each individual
element in this place has to be agreed upon. Fifthly, he said that the current Ainu association of tribes had thisculture in the past, but the people, recently, had not grown up in this environment, so there is an effort to bringit back. He said that there is a sense of loss. Finally, he mentioned that the content of the symposium was very
meaningful to him because we had the chance to hear the opinions of many different professionals.
Professor Inaba added that the cultural landscape concept was introduced into the Japanese national systemof protection and we are now in an experimental mode. She said that we have to explore what issues need tobe fixed.
Another person from the audience said that she works on the management of the hidden Christian sites in
Nagasaki. She explained that there are many challenges in recognizing such sites, where the sacredness is not
as evident. She wondered how the concept of hidden Christians can be continued if Christians are no longer
hiding. Then, she said we have to administer it as a historical site. She stated that if the culture disappears, thesite has to be administered as a fossil landscape.
Dr. Tu Vuong, a participant from Vietnam, said that recently there have been many discussions on new
approaches of how to keep nature before it disappears. He mentioned that there are new approaches, basedon photo and video technology, to document it. He considers that if we do not hold the beliefs (sacred values
towards nature), we still need to find out a way to conserve nature and that, maybe, using technical tools could
support this.

Professor Masahito Yoshida, University of Tsukuba, making the closing remarks. (Photo: Fauziatul Fitriyah)

Professor Inaba said that the question is, if hidden Christian culture is disappearing, does it need to be kept as
tradition or if it should be treated as a fossil site.
Dr. Rössler responded that we should consider, not only stakeholders on the ground, but that there may beother communities who migrated somewhere else and still relate to a place. She said that she lives in Paris,
surrounded by six monasteries, four of which were desecrated. She said that there are many monasteries thatneed to find other uses and that there are some uses that some stakeholders will never accept. Hence, sherecommended the need to be extremely careful regarding this issue.
Professor Inaba said that there are many points to discuss and that the conversation could last forever, but thatthe time is running out. So, she invited Professor Yoshida to close the meeting.
Professor Yoshida said that closing a one-day discussion, in several minutes, is hard work, but, he had prepared
four points. Firstly, he recalled that the World Heritage Convention is a single legal framework that brings
129

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Nature and Culture together. He stressed that many initiatives exist to bring Nature and Culture together,
however, he said that further efforts are required for capacity building and for incorporating these values into
site management. Secondly, he said that sacredness holds a strong significance for heritage conservation,
especially in the Asian context. He said that he loved the definition that the participants gave, that sacredness
is people’s cultural spiritual response to natural environment and unique features. He added that sacredness
can be evaluated as linkages between Nature and Culture. Thirdly, he said that management and governanceof sacred landscapes needs to be based on the living heritage, where people continue their spiritual practices.
Moreover, he added that management requires the involvement of various stakeholders, managers are invited
to promote communication between them. Fourthly, he stated that cultural change, caused by globalization,and environmental change, caused by tourism, needs to be addressed with careful planning, regularmonitoring, and the cooperation of all the stakeholders. He concluded that the discussion will continue nextyear, under the theme of “Disasters and Resilience”, which is also an important subject. He thanked all theparticipants and the distinguished guests, announcing the closing of the CBWNCL 2017.

Group photo of the Second International Symposium on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation during the
Tsukuba Global Science Week 2017.

130

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

Annexes131

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 1 : CBWNCL 2017 PARTICIPANTS ABSTRACTS

Annex 1: CBWNCL 2017
Participants Abstracts
Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage in the Huong Son Complex of Natural Beauty andHistoricalMonuments, Northern Vietnam: A Case Study on Bats by Vuong Tan Tu, Chu Thi Hang, and Nguyen
Truong Son
The Huong Son Complex has long been recognised as an important sacred landscape in Vietnam due to its
spiritual and cultural values. The area also retains many aesthetic and biological values. Unfortunately, its
cultural and natural treasures are currently at risk due to anthropogenic impacts, mainly associated withincreased spiritual tourist activities. Some urgent solutions have been implemented, but they give priority
to protecting cultural values and sometimes conflict with nature conservation efforts. This problem wasencountered during our recent bat conservation research in Huong Son. Our preliminary findings revealed
symbiotic relationships between natural and cultural heritage in Huong Son; thus, linking nature and culture inconservation planning and management is critical for the sustainable development of the site. However, theapplication of this approach in Huong Son, and other sacred places in Vietnam, is challenged by gaps in basic
research and the inadequate attention of local stakeholders.
The Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park: A case study for the training on nature-culture linkages
by Jun Cayron
The Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park is one of the most important areas for biodiversity
conservation in the Philippines. The park is also one of the major tourist attractions in the province of Palawan.
It is inhabited by two indigenous groups, Tagbanwa and Batak, who consider the site as sacred since time
immemorial. Various legislations including the inclusion of the site on the UNESCO World Heritage List,
provided the needed protection for its environment. However, mass tourism and other activities within thepark continue to be a threat to the conservation of its fragile ecosystem. Though nothing concrete has been
done yet, declaring the park through legislation as a sacred area would further help protect not only thenatural but the cultural landscape as well. This would also empower the indigenous groups in the area, making
them stewards of their ancestral domain.
Preah Chey Voroman Norudom “Phnom Kulen” National Park by Nara Chan
Phnom Kulen National Park (PKNP) is well known for its history, its cultural heritage sites, its natural habitats
and its importance as a water source for the Siem Reap Province. A popular place of pilgrimage, this “Mountainof Lychees” is considered by Khmer to be the most sacred mountain in Cambodia and the birthplace of
the Cambodian Kingdom. More than 50 sacred sites have been identified across the high plateau of Kulen
Mountain. PKNP’s forest ecosystem, though fragmented at many sites, provides critical habitat for a numberof globally threatened species and plays as the main water source for Siem Reap town and the aquifer thatmaintains the stability of the Temples of Angkor. The large waterfalls, the Wat Preah Ang Thom with its giant,
reclining Buddha statue, the River of the “One Thousand Lingas”, and the Kbal Spean archaeological site attract
hundreds of visitors a day, even thousands during the annual celebrations.

132

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 1 : CBWNCL 2017 PARTICIPANTS ABSTRACTS

Reinforcing Conservation with Faith and Beliefs: The Potential of Peak Wilderness Sanctuary in the Central
Highlands World Heritage Site – Sri Lanka by Shamodi Ireshika Nanayakkara and Enoka Priyadarshani
Kudavidanage
The cultural, spiritual, and historical beliefs revolving around the Peak Wilderness Sanctuary, in the Central
Highlands of Sri Lanka World Heritage Site, attracts millions of pilgrims. The symbolic footprint on the peak isworshiped, by various religions, as a sacred footprint of: Lord Buddha by the Buddhists, Adam by the Muslims(hence the name “Adam’s Peak”), St. Thomas by the Christians, and Lord Siva by the Hindus. The area is a
designated sanctuary under the jurisdiction of the Department of Wildlife Conservation. It includes some of theleast disturbed submontane and montane rain forests of Sri Lanka and is considered as a “super biodiversity
hotspot” within the Western Ghats and Sri Lanka biodiversity hotspot. Although the sacredness of the peak,as held by three major religions, has afforded some degree of protection to the site, it is still threatened bymultiple issues that hinder effective conservation management. The Peak Wilderness Sanctuary provides agreat potential to understand the influence of religious beliefs and practices on biodiversity conservation as
well as develop and implement a management approach that takes these influences into account.
Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary: Nature-Culture Linkges in a Sacred Landscape in Indian Himalayan Region
by Upma Manral
Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary is among the largest protected areas in Western Himalaya. The vast variability inclimate, geology, and topography results in a rich biological diversity with varied floral and faunal assemblages.
The landscape has many sacred elements, which includes the famous Kedar circuit, comprising of five Shiva
temples and many other Hindu shrines. Forest patches, alpine meadows, and trees associated with shrines or
local deities are also considered sacred. The landscape has around 172 villages with local communities holding
traditional rights of phyto-resource use from the area; 12 villages are located inside the Sanctuary. In recent
decades, various natural and anthropogenic challenges have been threatening the nature-culture mix that
forms the foundation of sacredness of the landscape. It becomes imperative that policies and action programs
to enhance ecological sustainability are appropriated and local cultural beliefs, with embedded conservation
ethics, are integrated in the environmental governance and management of the landscape.
“Ngaguenga (Pagan Temple Site) at Magama Ubea” by Stephen Manebosa
The conservation of the natural and cultural heritage of Solomon Islands is not easy due to several reasons.
One of the most important reasons is the remoteness of many islands. Other threats are in relation to religion,
subsistence farming, and coconut (Cocos nucifera) plantations. However, the two major threats, considered as
the “two great evils”, are logging and mining operations. This case study focuses on Rennell and Bellona Temple
site, located on Lake Tegano, East of Rennell Island, Rennell and Bellona Province. This paper presents thedescription of the sacred landscape and its importance, the significance of its natural and cultural values andthe role of sacredness in relation to the conservation of the site. It also explains the current management andlegal frameworks that are in place to protect the site and the challenges faced. Finally, the paper discusses theunderstanding of the interdependency of nature and culture in relation to the sacredness of this landscape.
Sacredness in the Laponian Area Mixed World Heritage Site by Florence Revelin
In the Laponian Area, a Mixed World Heritage (WH) Site in Northern Europe, sacred sites are notable as
outstanding components of the landscape. These places are important in the traditional Saami culture andare called sieidi in the Saami language. They relate to rock formations and reliefs that the Saami indigenous
people -who traditionally live on reindeer herding and from the land- encounter when they move or migrate
within their lands for reindeer transhumance. Sacred values associated with these sites are inherited from thetime when the traditional shamanist religion was practiced by the Saami. Sieidi are still of great importancein understanding the Saami’s cultural perception of landscapes. Some of these spectacular places are also
133

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 1 : CBWNCL 2017 PARTICIPANTS ABSTRACTS

valued for their aesthetic and ecological values since the beginning of the 20th century, when the area started
to become a tourist destination, and were included in the first national parks created in Europe (1909). Today,
they are part of the mosaic of protected areas listed as the Laponian Area WH Site in 1996, and crystallise partof the cultural and natural values of Laponia’s landscapes.
Sacredness in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area by Emma Lee
In the 1980s Aboriginal Tasmanian heritage helped shape the declaration of the Tasmanian Wilderness World
Heritage Area and clarified environmental powers of the Australian government. The rediscovery of sacredcave markings in the Southwest National Park was a focal point for both actions. Since then, in Tasmania, theinfluence of the sacred has waned. In 2016 a new plan of management for the Tasmanian Wilderness was
designed to include Aboriginal Tasmanian inputs, which latterly resulted in the creation of a joint management
framework to act as a new governance arrangement. The use of free, prior and informed consent conditions
for Aboriginal engagement led to a re-awakening of the sacred in planning for a world heritage area, which inturn led to a collaborative process of designing joint management.
The Sacred Places of Talang Mamak Indigenous People, Indonesia by Nukila Evanty
The protection of cultural heritage in Indonesia is regulated by the Law No. 11 of 2010 on Cultural Heritage,
while the protection of nature is regulated by the Environmental Law No. 32 of 2009. Therefore, thisnormative separation poses challenges in the protection of the cultural heritage in Indonesia, particularly forthe inclusion of sacred places, where nature and landscape are integral elements. Furthermore, sacred places
that are synonimous of the nature-cultural heritage are under the ownership and stewardship of indigenous
people. These sacred places are generally located in remote forest landscapes or mountains which have notbeen specifically managed for conservation purposes, lacking access restrictions. This paper presents thepreliminary findings of research based on observations and dialogues with the Talang Mamak people regarding
the protection of their cultural heritage and sacred places as well as its challenges.
Kāpiti Island: A Sacred Landscape by Xavier Forde
Te Waewae Kāpiti o Tara rāua ko Rangitāne is a 20 km2 island just off the coast of Te Ika ā Māui in Aotearoa
New Zealand. For centuries it was a plentiful source of food and a strategic defensive position for many Māori
tribes, and is covered with ancestral and sacred places. At the time of European arrival in the early 19th
century, it became a stronghold of the Ngāti Toa Rangatira tribe, who used it for as a base for conquest, trade,
and whaling. The majority of the island was confiscated by the government from 1897 in order to create a bird
sanctuary. The northern end remained in the ownership of Māori, who have established a lodge and nature
tours company. The Māori concept of kaitiakitanga, or traditional custodianship, is examined as a useful term
to negotiate the tension between the protection of natural and cultural values on the island.
Identifying sacred heritage sites in a very bio-culturally diverse nation? by John Kuange

How can one define sacredness when there are more than 800 plus languages grouping and associatedcultures and customs in just one country? These inevitably means there are thousands of sacred places, butthese are largely invisible because they are only known to the local land owners. What may be sacred to one
group may be mundane to others. Regardless, these sites are being lost as a result of loss of culture broughton by Christianity and absorption into a global culture. Lured by the promises of material wealth and trappingsof modern life, the people of Papua New Guinea have turned their backs on their past. When a sacred site
loses its name and its stories, it becomes mundane. While the tangible sacred areas are in a process of being
lost, the intangible sacredness of landownership remains strong with 97% of land remaining under customary
ownership. Despite stories being lost, institutional memories remain intact within the elders of the wider tribe.
If this knowledge can be tapped, and made relevant, then sacredness can to some extent be restored.
134

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 1 : CBWNCL 2017 PARTICIPANTS ABSTRACTS

Feasibility Study on the Nomination of “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands: Cultural Landscape of Taoism
Worldview” by Mingxia Zhu“Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands” are a unique Taoist conceptual system of sacred places in China. These
sacred spaces, located in spectacular and abundant landscapes where immortals dwell in legend, reflect the
Taoist worldviews about the balance of nature, society, and belief in immortality. The system was first recordedin the 2nd century and came to maturity in the 7th century, during which 118 locations across China were
established by 2 Taoist masters as the official components of the system. This system had a profound impact
on rituals, literature, painting, and gardening art in China and other countries in East Asia. Taoists have kept
these places as spiritual and natural sanctuaries for over 1,000 years. In the context of a Feasibility Study for
the Nomination of “Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands: Cultural Landscape of Taoist Worldview” on to the World
Heritage List, this article aims to give a brief introduction and analysis of the sacredness of the Cave Heavens
and Blessed Lands.
Forikrom Bio-Cultural Heritage, Brong-Ahafo Region, Ghana by Portia Ama Bansa
Nature and Culture are two components of the ecological world that cannot be separated. The connection
between people and their environment drives them to make certain decisions that may either harm or protect
it. In our African region, most of our concept of our natural environment goes beyond the aesthetics, taking
into consideration the intangible elements of our culture in order to preserve it. Our belief systems, traditions,rituals practices, and indigenous wisdom stem from the natural environment and, as such, shape the mannerin which humans live. This paper highlights key issues about the Forikrom community cultural heritage andtheir bio-cultural resources which cut across both the natural and cultural elements of the community. Itemphasizes the sacredness conferred to the place and how that has supported its conservation. Detailedsite information is given as well as their significance and the challenges that arise in the bid to manage andconserve them. Finally, a section is dedicated to discussing the interdependency of culture and nature in
relation to the Forikrom cultural landscape and what recommendations can be brought forward to strengthen
the conservation and promotion of such assets.
The Sacred Landscape of the Yading Nature Reserve by Zhengli Liu
The Yading Nature Reserve has been declared a National Nature Reserve in China since 2001 and a UNESCO
Biosphere Reserve since 2003. It is not only a wildlife sanctuary, but also a pilgrim site for believers of different
schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The glaciated landform of Yading is covered with a range of classic glacial
features, such as U-shaped valleys, cirques peaks, horn peaks, and moraines. It is an area surrounding three
awe-inspiring glacier-covered peaks which are believed to be the manifestations of Avalokitesvara, Manjusri,
and Vajrapani, the three most important Bodhisattvas in Tibetan Buddhism. This article is a preliminaryreflection and examination of the sacredness of Yading, its different aspects, and contemporary challenges.

Protection and Safeguarding of Cultural and Natural Values while Promoting Socioeconomic Development ofIndigenous People in Myanmar: A Case Study of the “Kayan” by Mie Mie Kiaw
The “Kayan” indigenous people, who live in Kan Hla village, feature a unique culture shaped by their beliefs
and lifestyles. Mostly Buddhist, their community has a strong sense of unity and the ways they strictly
cultivate their characteristic traditions make them distinguishable among other 23 villages in the region. Their
restrictions and prohibitions with strict rules, unique regulations, behavior, and dress are established by thecommunity, protecting their valuable objects, sites and even individuals. They also maintain sacred sites, holyenvironments containing culture in nature as well as nature in culture. Furthermore, these sacred sites have ahigh biodiversity that interrelates with their cultural values. Because these landscapes are mixing both culturaland natural values, conservation efforts should also involve community development.

135

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 1 : CBWNCL 2017 PARTICIPANTS ABSTRACTS

Western Tien-Shan World Heritage Site (Kyrgyz Part). From Traditional to Modern Management Challenges
by Ilia DomashovWestern Tien-Shan World Heritage Site (WTS WHS) includes sites in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan,
Central Asia. The Kyrgyz part of the WTS WHS include the Sary-Chelek State Biosphere Nature Reserve, BeshAral and Padysha-Ata State Nature Reserves. The Kyrgyz territory protected areas that are included in the WTS
WHS are subject to existing management plans developed in the framework of the Environmental Law of
Kyrgyzstan. Historically established, local clan-based governance systems in natural and cultural heritage sites
began to collapse during the Soviet era and, currently, they are either dispossessed or highly deteriorated.
Learning from the international experience, the WTS WHS management can be improved with fresh
assessments of the natural and cultural values, greater oversight to implement international standards, better
promotion of tourism and pilgrimage routes and by developing effective management at the World Heritage
Site.

136

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 2 : List of participants

Annex 2: List of participants
International Participants
・Cayron, Jun (Culture), Assistant Professor and Curator, Palawan State University Museum, Philippines
・Chan, Nara (Nature), Deputy Head Office, Department of Ecotourism, Ministry of Environment, Cambodia
・Domashov, Ilia (Nature), Senior Lecturer, Kyrgyz State National University, Kyrgyzstan
・Evanty, Nukila (Culture), Scholar, Activist and Researcher, University of Mahendradatta, Indonesia
・Forde, Xavier (Culture), National Coordinator for Maori Heritage Sites, Heritage New Zealand Pouhere
Taonga, New Zealand・Kyaw, Mie Mie (Nature), Lecturer, Mandalay University, Myanmar
・Kuange, John (Nature), Assistant Country Director, World Conservation Society, Papua New Guinea
・Lee, Emma (Culture), Research Fellow, University of Tasmania, Australia
・Manebosa, Stephen (Culture), Senior Field Officer, Solomon Islands National Museum, Solomon Islands
・Manral, Upma (Nature), Researcher, Wildlife Institute of India, India
・Nanayakkara, Shamodi (Nature), Researcher, Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka
・Revelin, Florence (Culture), Pedagogic Coordinator, French National Museum of Natural History, France
・Vuong, Tu (Nature), Researcher, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology, Vietnam
・Portia Bansa (Culture), Project Manager, Centre for Indigenous Knowledge and Organizational Development,
Ghana・Zhengli Liu (Nature), Researcher, Yading National Nature Reserve, China
・Mingxia Zhu (Culture), Researcher, Tsinghua University, China
Nature Sector: 8 (50%) – Culture Sector: 8 (50%)- Total: 16 (100%)Students from the University of Tsukuba
・Ayella, Paul (Nature), Master student, Life and Environmental Sciences, Uganda
・Jingu, Shoma (Nature), Doctoral student, Life and Environmental Sciences, Japan・Underdahl, Sonya (Nature), Doctoral student, Life and Environmental Sciences, Australia
・Uribe, Claudia (Culture), Research student, World Heritage Studies, Peru・Yeanga, Tokpah (Nature), Master student, Life and Environmental Sciences, Liberia
Nature Sector: 4 (80%) – Culture Sector: 1 (20%)- Total: 5 (100%)137

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 2 : List of participants

Guest speakers and resource persons
・Badman, Tim, Director, IUCN World Heritage Programme
・Bernbaum, Edwin, Senior Fellow, The Mountain Institute, Co-chair IUCN CSVPA
・Brown, Jessica, Executive Director, New England Biolabs Foundation/Chair IUCN WCPA
・Cameron, Christina, Professor, University of Montreal
・Castellanos, Carolina, Independent Cultural Heritage Consultant
・Genso, Kurt, Monk, Koyasan Muryokoin Temple
・Gojo, Ryoichi, Monk, Kimpusen-ji, Yoshino・Gojo, Eikyo, Monk, Kimpusen-ji, Yoshino・Hamzah, Amran, Professor, University of Technology, Malaysia
・Ito, Fumihiko, Protection Engineer, Mie Prefecture Buried Cultural Properties Center/Doctoral Student,
World Heritage Studies
・Naka, Katsuyuki, Wakayama Prefecture Education Board・Rössler, Mechtild, Director, UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Division for Heritage・Schaaf, Thomas, Director, Terra-Sana Environmental Consulting
・Suzuki, Masataka, Professor Emeritus, Keio University
・Tanaka, Riiten, Chief Priest, Kimpusen-ji, Yoshino・Tsujibayashi, Hiroshi, Director, Wakayama World Heritage Center
・Turner, Michael, Professor, UNESCO Chairholder, Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, Jerusalem
・Wijesuriya, Gamini, Project Manager, Sites Unit ICCROM
・Yamauchi, Namiko, Lecturer, Keisen Jogakuen University

Organizing Team・Inaba, Nobuko, Professor World Heritage Studies and Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation,
CBWNCL Programme co-Director
・Ishizawa, Maya, Researcher World Heritage Studies and Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation,
CBWNCL Programme Coordinator・Yoshida, Masahito, Chair World Heritage Studies and Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation,
CBWNCL Programme co-Director

Staff of the World Heritage Studies/Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation
・Arce Hüttman, Imme, Research Assistant, World Heritage Studies
・Nakasendo, Miyuki, Administrative Assistant, World Heritage Studies
・Suda, Maiko, Research Coordinator, Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation
・Yasojima, Chitose, Administrative Assistant, Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation

138

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 3 : Program of the CBWNCL 2017

Annex 3: Program of the
CBWNCL 2017
MODULE 1: Understanding Nature-Culture Linkages in the Context of the Sacred Landscape Conservation
Venue: Humanities and Social Sciences Building Seminar Room B218
Friday, 15 September
THEME: GENERAL CONCEPTS
10:00 		Participants self-introduction
10:30 - 11:30
World Heritage Management
		Lecturer: Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, ICCROM
11:30 - 12:30
IUCN Protected Landscapes and Community-Based Governance		Lecturer: Ms. Jessica Brown, New England Biolabs Foundation/IUCN WCPA
12:30 - 13:00
Q&A + Discussion
13:00 - 14:00
Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:45
Presentations by participants
14:00 - 14:30
The Conservation issues in the Cave Huong Son, by Tu Vuong, Vietnam
14:30 - 15:00
Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park, by Jun Cayron, Philippines
15:00 - 15:30
Preah Cheyvaraman-Norodom National Park, by Nara Chan, Cambodia
15:30 - 15:45
Break
15:45 - 16:15 	Reinforcing conservation with faith and beliefs: The potential of Peak Wilderness Sanctuary
in the Central Highlands, by Shamodi Nanayakkara, Sri Lanka
16:15 - 16:45
Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, by Upma Manral, India
16:45 - 17:15
Participant’s report
17:15 - 17:30
Wrap-up
Saturday, 16 September
THEME: CULTURAL LANDSCAPES / SACRED LANDSCAPES
10:00 - 11:00
		
11:30 - 12:30
		
12:30 - 13:00
13:00 - 14:00
14:00 - 16:45
14:00 - 14:30
14:30 - 15:00
15:00 - 15:30
15:30 - 15:45
15:45 - 16:15
16:15 - 16:45
16:45 - 16:15
17:15 - 17:30
17:30 - 17:45

Cultural Landscapes
Lecturer: Ms. Carolina Castellanos, Independent Consultant
Sacred Mountains
Lecturer: Dr. Edwin Bernbaum, The Mountain Institute, IUCN CSVPA
Q&A + Discussion
Lunch Break
Presentations by participantsNgaguenga at Magama, by Stephen Manebosa, Solomon Islands
Sacredness in Laponia, Mixed World Heritage Site, by Florence Revelin, France
Sacredness in Tasmania, by Emma Lee, Australia
Break
Cultural and Natural Heritage of the Talang Mamak, by Nukila Evanty, Indonesia
Conservation in the Kapiti Island, by Xavier Forde, New Zealand
Sacred heritage sites in Papua New Guinea, by John Kuange, Papua New Guinea
Participant’s report
Wrap-up139

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 3 : Program of the CBWNCL 2017

Sunday, 17 September
THEME: JAPANESE EXPERIENCE
10:00 - 12:00
Worship of Nature in Japan		
Lecturers: Professor Masahito Yoshida, Professor Nobuko Inaba, University of Tsukuba
12:00 - 12:30 	The Kii Mountains
Lecturers: Professor Masahito Yoshida, Professor Nobuko Inaba, Dr. Maya Ishizawa,
University of Tsukuba
12:30 - 13:00
Q&A + Discussion
13:00 - 14:00
Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:45
Presentations by participants
14:00 - 14:30
Cave Heavens and Blessed Lands, by Mingxia Zhu, China
14:30 - 15:00
Protected areas in Forikrom, by Portia Bansa, Ghana
15:00 - 15:30
Yading Nature Reserve, by Zhengli Liu, China
15:30 - 15:45
Break
15:45 - 16:15
Upper Paunglang Hydropower Project, by Mie Mie Kyaw, Myanmar
16:15 - 16:45
Serial Natural World Heritage “West Tien Shan”, by Ilia Domashov, Kyrgyzstan
16:45 - 17:15
Participant’s report
17:15 - 17:30
Wrap-up
MODULE 2: Management, Implementation and Governance in Sacred Landscapes
Venue: The Kii Mountain Range
Monday, 18 September
THEME: KOYA-SAN
08:00 		09:00		10:00 - 12:33
14:30				17:00				

Departure from Tsukuba by bus
Expected arrival at Tokyo Station
Bullet train from Tokyo Station to Shin-Osaka Station
Visit to Kongobu-ji, Danjo-garan, Konpon-Daito
Lecture on Esoteric Buddhism by Mr. Kurt Genso
Arrival at accommodation
Overnight at Fukuchi-in, Koya-san
Tuesday, 19 September
THEME: KOYA-SAN – KUMANO

07:30 		08:00		10:00 - 12:30
12:30				
		16:00 - 16:30
		

Leave accommodation
Walk along Okuno-in Trail to Okunoin
Bus from Koya-San to Kumano-Hongu
Lunch at Kumano-Hongu
Visit to Kumano-Hongu, and the World Heritage Kumano Hongu Center
Lecture by Mr. Hiroshi Tsujibayashi
Bus from Kumano-Hongu to Yunomine-Onsen
Overnight in Yunominesou, Yunomine-Onsen

140

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 3 : Program of the CBWNCL 2017

Wednesday, 20 September
THEME: KUMANO
09:30 		11:15		11:4513:00		14:00		15:30		16:00 - 17:30
		Departure from Yunomine-Onsen to Kamikura-Jinja
Departure from Kamikura-Jinja
Lunch at Nachi
Nachi Daimon Saka Entrance- Walk Daimon Saka Trail to Nachi Waterfall
Kumano Nachi Taisha Shrine
Conversation with Mr. Naka, Wakayama Prefecture Officer
Nachi Waterfall
Bus from Nachi to Yunomine-Onsen
Overnight in Yunominesou, Yunomine-Onsen
Thursday, 21 September
THEME: YOSHINO

08:30 - 11:00
12:00		13:00		15:00 - 16:30
17:00				Bus from Yunomine-Onsen to Yoshino
Lunch
Kimpu Shrine (“Kimpu-Senji”)
Lecture about Shugendo by Mr. Riiten Tanaka
Walk Shugendo Trail from Kimpu Shrine to Aonegamine
Arrival at accommodation
Overnight at Yoshino
Friday, 22 September
THEME: YOSHINO

06:00		08:00		09:00		12:00 		13:00 - 14:00
15:03 - 17:33
18:00 - 19:10

Leave accommodation for the morning service at Kimpu-Senji
Breakfast at accommodation
Second visit to Kimpu-Senji
Lecture of Mr. Gojo about Zao-do
Lunch
Bus from Yoshino to Shin-Osaka Station
Bullet train from Shin-Osaka Station to Tokyo Station
Bus from Tokyo Station to Tsukuba Center
Saturday, 23 September
Free Day
MODULE 3: Reflection on Theory and Practice
Venue: Humanities and Social Sciences Building Seminar Room B218
Sunday, 24 September
THEME: KEY ISSUES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF SACRED LANDSCAPES

10:00 - 13:00
13:00 - 14:00
14:00 - 17:00

Working groups
Lunch
Working groups

141

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 3 : Program of the CBWNCL 2017

Monday, 25 September
10:00 - 11:00
11:00 - 13:00
		
13:00 - 14:00
14:00 - 17:00
17:00 - 18:00

Presentations of Participants
Q&A + Discussion
Feedback from Resource Persons and Guest Speakers
LunchWorking groups
Delivery of Certificates
MODULE 4: International Symposium
Venue: Tsukuba International Congress Center

Tuesday, 26 September
THEME: II INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON NATURE-CULTURE LINKAGES IN HERITAGE CONSERVATION IN
ASIA AND THE PACIFIC. SACRED LANDSCAPES
09:30 - 10:00
10:00 - 10:05

Open doors
Opening Addressby Professor Kyosuke Nagata, President of the University of Tsukuba
10:05 - 10:10	Opening Address
by Dr. Mechtild Rössler, Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Divisionof Heritage
10:10 - 10:15 	Opening Addressby Professor Masahito Yoshida, UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation, University of Tsukuba
10:15 - 10:40	Sacred Natural Sites as manifestations of nature-culture linkages and their potential
for multi-international designation by Dr. Thomas Schaaf, Director Terra-Sana Environmental
Consulting
10:40 - 11:05	World Heritage Leadership Programme
by Mr. Tim Badman, Director of IUCN World Heritage Programme
11:05 - 11:25
Coffee Break
11:25 - 11:50	Sacred Landscapes in Japan: Special Reference to Mountain Worshipby Professor Emeritus
Masataka Suzuki, Keio University
11:50 - 12:15	The Asian Philosophy of Protected Areas in the Context of Nature-Culture Linkages
by Professor Amrah Hamzah, University of Technology, Malaysia
12:15 - 12:45
Panel Discussion
Chaired by Professor Masahito Yoshida, University of Tsukuba
12:45 - 13:45
Lunch Break
13:45 - 14:10
14:10 – 16:00

Presentation of Key Issues for the Conservation of Sacred Landscapes in Asia and the Pacific
by Participants of the CBWNCL 2017
Roundtable Discussion with
Tim Badman, IUCN World Heritage Programme
Edwin Bernbaum, The Mountain Institute
Christina Cameron, University of Montreal
Carolina Castellanos, ICOMOS
Amran Hamzah, University of Technology, Malaysia
Mechtild Rössler, UNESCO
Thomas Schaaf, Terra-Sana Environmental Consulting

142

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 3 : Program of the CBWNCL 2017

16:00 - 16:20
16:20 - 17:00

Masataka Suzuki, Keio University
Michael Turner, Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design
Gamini Wijesuriya, ICCROM
Chaired by Professor Nobuko Inaba, University of Tsukuba
Coffee BreakConclusions and Closing Remarks

143

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

Annex 4:The Role of Indigenous andCustomary Knowledges in
Nature-Culture Linkage
Emma Lee (1)*, Ilia Domashov (2), Upma Manral (3)(1)

Research Fellow, Centre for Social Impact, Swinburne University, c/- John Street, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122 Australia, ejlee@swin.

edu.au(2)

Senior Lecturer, Kyrgyz National University, biologist & ecologist, 23/48 Patrissa Lumumby str., Bishkek, 720076 Kyrgyzstan,

idomashov@gmail.com(3)

Research Fellow, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248001, India, upmamanral2@gmail.com■ Abstract
This paper reports some reflections on our participation in the Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture
Linkages in Heritage Conservation in Asia and the Pacific, Sacred Landscapes, in September 2017, at the
University of Tsukuba. The workshop explored the nature-culture linkages for integrated conservation as partof the World Heritage Capacity Building Programme. The learning framework revolved around, among otheractivities, a fieldtrip to the Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range, World Heritage
Cultural Landscape since 2004. In contemplating the capacity building process, we present our reflection
regarding three areas relevant to Indigenous and customary practices - governance, language and stewardship- in order to contribute to strengthening nature-culture linkages in the Asia-Pacific region. We also present
some challenges for the integration of the sacred into the management of World Heritage sites. We conclude
that a greater understanding of Indigenous and customary knowledges and their historical development within
World Heritage processes will enable more effective management of heritage sites in the Asia-Pacific region.
KEY WORDS: Nature-culture linkages, ecosystem, Indigenous, traditional knowledges, Kii Mountains■ 1. Introduction
1.1 Overview of traditional and customaryknowledges in World Heritage Sites
For this paper, while we recognise that natureculture linkages are found across many tenure andgovernance types, from protected areas declared asnational parks to local community-based conserved
areas declared as Indigenous1 territories, we focus

on World Heritage to reflect the content of thelearning experience undertaken in the Kii Mountains
Range World Heritage Cultural Landscape, Japan.
In November 2015, the World Heritage Committee
adopted a Policy on the integration of a sustainable
development perspective into the processes of theWorld Heritage Convention (hereafter the ‘Policy’)to provide guidance and future vision on integrating

*Emma Lee from Research Fellow, Centre for Social Impact, Swinburne University, c/- John Street, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122 Australia, e: ejlee@swin.edu.au
1

We capitalise ‘Indigenous’ to reflect self-determining rights, such that in Australia and Canada it is offensive to refer to Indigenous peoples without it (seefor an Australian example the NSW Department of Education and Training 2005 and Canadian example from International Journal of Indigenous Health2018).

144

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

World Heritage into the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable
Development (UNESCO 2015). An approach
integrating sustainable development can enhance
the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage
Sites, nevertheless it is imperative to involve people
and local communities in the policy implementation,such that paragraphs 21 and 22 of the Policy are
dedicated to “respecting, consulting and involving
indigenous peoples and local communities” (UNESCO
2015, p. 6-7).
The Policy also states, under Paragraph
11, that the "linkages between the conservationof cultural and natural heritage and the various
dimensions of sustainable development will enable
all those concerned tobetter engage with World
Heritage” (UNESCO 2015 p. 3). The University ofTsukuba have helped to underscore the importanceof Indigenous and customary knowledges - the living
bodies of generational knowledge gained throughconnections to natural, bio-physical, spiritual andcultural resources (Raymond-Yakoubian, RaymondYakoubian & Moncrieff 2017 - and their contribution
to World Heritage Sites. By this, the UNESCO Chairon Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation
at the University hosted the Capacity Building
Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation in Asia and the Pacific (CBWNCL) on thetheme Sacred Landscapes, in September 2017. The
CBWNCL contributes to the World Heritage Capacity
Building Programme by training heritage practitioners
from the natural and cultural heritage sectors inAsia and the Pacific on integrated approaches toconservation.
Despite the focus on inclusive methodologies toincorporate Indigenous and customary knowledges,
there is still a global trend towards narrowing or
inhibiting understanding of what those knowledgesare (Wilk 1995). For instance, under Aichi Target
18 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)traditional knowledges and knowledge-holders areto be respected and integrated into the participatory
functions of implementation of the Convention
outcomes 2. However, while highlighting theimportance of, for example, linguistic diversity inconservation knowledge production, indicators are
yet to be finalised to gauge progress (Secretariat of
the CBD 2014).
Furthermore, the 2015 joint IUCN-ICOMOS
2

https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/rationale/target-18/

145

publication, Connecting Practice, (IUCN and ICOMOS
2015) highlights the gap between nature-culture
sectors and recommends greater awareness of
Indigenous and customary practices that contributeto World Heritage management and governance.
Therefore, the role of the CBWNCL is even morevital to strengthen the capacity of Indigenous andcustomary peoples, where traditional knowledges
have been “empirically-tested, applied, andvalidated…by peoples and local communities…andare being revitalized through contemporary problemsolving” (UNESCO 2016, n.p.) to engage in World
Heritage management. The CBWNCL can also deeply
engage with those parallel processes that contributeto the conservation of landscapes on a vast scale(Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2012).
1.2 Brief description of the CBWNCLThe CBWNCL 2017 was dedicated to Sacred
Landscapes from the Asia-Pacific region in particular,
with a visit to the Kii Mountains Range World Heritage
Cultural Landscape in south-east Japan as a corecomponent. The CBWNCL is a four-year programmethat promotes the training of multidisciplinary
aspects of World Heritage management, tied throughnature-culture linkages and aimed at strengthening
research capacity in the Asia-Pacific region (Universityof Tsukuba 2016). The CBWNCL also acts as a lever
to develop the skills of heritage practitioners on“community-based, or people-centred, approaches
to conservation, whereby local communities play
the central role in heritage conservation” (Ishizawa,
Inaba & Yoshida 2017, p. 156). The themes of
the workshops are diverse and encompass sacredlandscapes, agricultural landscapes and mixed naturaland cultural World Heritage, among others. The
course places high value and emphasis on attracting
Indigenous and customary peoples and knowledges
to participate in sharing multiple worldviews.
■ 2. Significance of Indigenous methodologies tonatural and cultural values
Indigenous and customary knowledges overconserved territories and areas are some of
the world’s oldest knowledge systems (BorriniFeyerabend et al. 2012). Therefore, we use
Indigenous methodologies to reflect on thelearning process of participating in the CBWNCL.

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

Indigenous methodologies are grounded in an
emic perspective of storytelling and make central
Indigenous and customary worldviews. Principles
of Indigenous methodologies include the need for
Indigenous voices to be central, to retain an integrity
to Indigenous political struggles and work towards
emancipation of knowledges (Rigney 1999).
Indigenous methodologies are either
strategic, which are aimed at decolonising Western
structures of oppression, or convergent, which
work towards knowledge co-productions andvaluing Indigenous and customary experiences
as equal to other knowledge forms (Ray 2012).
Underpinning Indigenous methodologies are
traditional knowledges, which the CBD interpretas the “knowledge, innovations and practices ofindigenous and local communities embodying
traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity” (CBD 2018).
Traditional knowledges are core toconvergent Indigenous methodologies andallow us to highlight Indigenous and customary
peoples’ strengths and basis of claims and rights
to conservation management and governanceparticipation. Governance is particularly importantfor peoples as it is the participatory mechanism fordecision-making, the means to understand how
power is exercised and the rights to fairness, equity
and transparency within accountable structuresand institutions (Graham, Amos & Plumptre 2003).
Majid (1996) reflects that conservation theory andpractice, such as governance, is still premised uponsecular, Western foundations usually in the handsof non-Indigenous academics. Thus, Indigenous andcustomary peoples are still the “known” and neverthe “knowers” (Moreton-Robinson 2004, p. 75).
Indigenous methodologies, informed by traditional
knowledges, instead allow Indigenous and customary
peoples to be core to research and foregroundnew conservation foundations through valuing andreclaiming Indigenous epistemologies (Swadener &Mutua 2008).
Through engaging more Indigenous andcustomary practitioners in governance and capacity
building, the World Heritage system would be able
to address past failures in recognising and valuing
Indigenous and customary peoples and traditional
knowledges in nominations and management
regimes (Logan 2013). Natural and cultural values,
146

then, can take on additional and deeper significancewhen Indigenous methodologies are applied toWorld Heritage nominations, governance andmanagement to produce convergent approaches
for inclusion. Finally, Indigenous methodologies
of incorporating traditional knowledges reflect the
lived experience of a people-centred approach toconservation, where endemic processes are “internal,
place-bound and culturally-specific” (Mustonen
2017, p. 6) and translate into conservation practice.
■ 3. Inclusion of Indigenous and customary
governance, language and stewardship knowledges
In light of the broad-based definition of traditional
knowledges, we chose to focus on three areas ofIndigenous and customary practices – governance,
language and stewardship - that may contribute
further to strengthening nature-culture linkages
in World Heritage Sites of the Asia-Pacific region.
The fieldtrip component of the CBWNCL to the Kii
Mountains Range revealed that these practices areshared globally between Indigenous and customary
peoples, although have diverse expressions, such as
the difference between sacredness within formal
religions of Japan and sacredness within localised
Indigenous connections to territories throughancestral creators and beings.
Indigenous and customary governance is
not of the boardroom with random members andinterests (tebrakunna country, Lee & Tran 2016),
but rather a family-based collective of Elders andknowledge-holders who share connections toterritories through kinship, identity and politics(Natcher et al 2005; Sutton 2003). The Kii Mountains
reflected customary governance where authority
resides with spiritual Elders who look to local
processes of inclusion to manage local territories andsacred sites. Furthermore, the Kii Mountains Range
World Heritage property’s connections between
sacred sites are articulated through the peoplecentred and localised management of shrines, suchas Shugendo temples, and natural elements, suchas the Nachi waterfall, which represent examples ofintegration of natural and cultural values that are thebasis of its Outstanding Universal Value.
Language is a vital component of traditional
knowledges (Wilder et al. 2016) and loss of local
languages has often been correlated with loss of
biodiversity (Loh & Harmon 2014). Therefore,

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

continuous use of traditional languages can support
the safeguarding of the natural and cultural values
for World Heritage Sites where Indigenous andcustomary interests are significant. Co-productionof knowledges that incorporate local languages area potent symbol of the inclusion and legitimacy ofIndigenous and customary knowledges (Gapps &Smith 2015; Smith 2000). For Japan, the sacredis expressed as ‘kami’, where stories of creator
beings have influenced the development of theJapanese language (Ohnuki-Tierney 1991). In theKii Mountains, various chants and rituals performedby the spiritual Elders imparted local knowledges
through local languages.
During presentations within the CBWNCL,
participants often drew on their own local languages
to reflect on learning experiences and present casestudies of their own home territories. Localised
traditional knowledges have many concepts thatcannot often be translated and must retain local
language use, such that for the Anishinaabe ofOntario, Canada, where baamaadziwin is a life
practice of connecting nature and culture to an ethicof “living in good and respectful ways” (Holtgren,
Ogren & Whyte, 2015, p. 55). Therefore, language
assists in promoting and interpreting the specificvalues of the Outstanding Universal Value.

disturbance and ecological surprise”. Therefore,
Indigenous and customary stewardship is based
upon the generational connections and knowledgesof experiencing, living and connecting with peoplecentred knowledges.

Traditional knowledges incorporate, among
other things, non-human agency and spiritual
governance into stewardship and conservation of
territories (Verschuuren 2017). The holistic nature of
traditional and customary conservation practices giverise to a multitude of nature-culture linkages that are
not well understood within management practices(Johnson & Murton 2007). Traditional knowledges
translate into stewardship practices as they embody
a “web of relationships within a specific ecologicalcontext” (Battiste 2007, p. 117). For example, forests
have been conserved surrounding the Koyasan
Buddhist Temple, Kii Mountains Range, due to strict
religious taboos on entry and use of the resources(Monotaka 2006). Further afield, taboos are used
to conserve sacred groves across Asia, Europe,
South America and Africa, while species-specifictaboos have aided in the protection of threatened
plants and animals (Colding & Folke 1997). Berke,
Colding and Folke (2000, p. 1260) suggest that
resilience to change and adaptation to variable
environments comprise much of the traditional
knowledges that govern stewardship practices andis a “consequence of historical experience with

As was observed in the Kii Mountains,
the shared values of language, governance andstewardship for the conservation of nature andculture were widely represented within theframework of various spiritual practices. This ishighly appropriate for a World Heritage Site listed for
cultural Outstanding Universal Value. At the sametime, if the pendulum swings too far, so that the
Outstanding Universal Value is viewed only through anatural lens, then the cultural contributions towards
conservation can be obscured or devalued, suchas the case for Mikisew Cree First Nation peoples
and Wood Buffalo National Park World Heritage
Site, Canada, and the lack of cultural recognition
towards its values (Mikisew Cree First Nation 2017).
The focus on ‘ecosystems’ as the dominant modefor conservation of natural Outstanding Universal
Value can become fractured and reduced to its
components of ‘functional units’ (Gorshkov, 1995;
Gorshkov, Gorshkov & Makarieva, 2000), rather thancommunity-based relationships of people, place andenvironment that, for Mikisew Cree and Endorois
peoples, removes a cultural complexity and localised
meaning.

147■ 4. Reflections of practicing and understanding
nature-culture linkages
One of the key contributions of the CBWNCL for
participants’ understanding was demonstrating thetensions in recognising what constitutes nature orculture depending on the viewpoint. The presenceof Indigenous peoples as participants revealed thatwhile Western knowledges have progressed nature
conservation there has been occasions where
cultural traditions and values, which contribute to themaintenance of natural values of a World Heritage
Site, have been ignored. One example is the World
Heritage Committee’s 2011 acceptance of a naturalvalue nomination over Lake Borgoria, Kenya, without
consent or consultation from the Endorois peoples(Disko, Tugendhat & Garcia-Alix 2014). While there
are synergies between nature and culture sectorsof heritage conservation, it is also important tounderstand that there is also antagonism between
these conservation trends.

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

Another area of tension is found within
the concept of sacred. When a sacred landscapeis reduced to its parts as a matter of accounting,labelling or sorting, sacredness is often then applied
only to individual animals or plants or discrete
geographic locations. Such an approach can leadto transformation of landscapes that favour one
sacred species or place over another, where these
efforts can distort the original aim of communitybased conservation, such as the problems inherent
in monoculture forests that predetermined thedevelopment of European forestry science practices(Domashov 2010; Lowood 1991). For example,
Guichard-Anguis (2011) notes the far-reaching effects
and changes to biodiversity and customary forestry
management practices of the Kii Mountains with theintroduction of modern technologies, such as thechainsaw. However, the World Heritage designation
has gone some way to reform Kii Mountain practices(Guichard-Anguis 2011) and curtail the processes ofdegradation of natural values in favour of recognising
the cultural contributions inherent within a culturallandscape. The problem of massively transformed
landscapes, such as European forestry monocultures,is not simply to exclude them from conservation
where they are devalued for not being pristine or
aesthetic or sacred, but in shifting perceptions so that
we recognise their contributions as part of a changing
nature that has revolved around human interactions,
whether favourable or not (Gorshkov, Gorshkov &Makarieva 2000). Therein lies the key to inclusionof traditional knowledges – the linkages between
nature and culture depend on whose points of view
and perceptions as to what is significant, sacred andworth conserving.

both research and capacity building efforts” andhighlighted University of Tsukuba’s programme ofworkshops (UNESCO 2017, pp. 22-23). The creationof Cultural Landscape categories, mixed naturaland cultural property listing and trends towards
recognising nature and culture linkages, together
with the Policy for sustainable development (UNESCO
2015), are incrementally improving the conditions
for engagement and participation by Indigenous andcustomary peoples. Therefore, we conclude that the
CBWNCL is a vital conduit for peoples to generate
research towards World Heritage Convention
aims of understanding Indigenous and customary
governance, stewardship and retention of languages
for better management of sites. We also recommendthat the CBWNCL programme gain support fromthe World Heritage Convention to expand theprogramme beyond its four-year remit and continue
to strengthen the outputs and contributions to AsiaPacific conservation.

■ 5. Recommendations
Indigenous methodologies underpin the articulationof Indigenous and customary peoples’ examinationof the CBWNCL’s efforts to understand sacredness
and natural and cultural values of the Kii Mountains
World Heritage Cultural Landscape. However, while
traditional knowledges have contributed towards
maintenance of Outstanding Universal Value ofWorld Heritage Sites, these knowledges are poorly
integrated into the governance, management
and promotion of those sites. The 41st sessionof the World Heritage Convention in 2017 notedthat for integrated approaches “their systematic
examination…is only beginning to emerge”,
although universities can be “valuable partners in
148

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage■ Literature cited
Battiste, M. 2007. Research ethics for protecting indigenous knowledge and heritage: institutional andresearcher responsibilities. In N.K. Denzin (Ed.): Ethical futures in qualitative research: decolonizing the politics
of knowledge, pp. 111-132. Left Coast Press, CA.
Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive
management. Ecological Applications 10: pp. 1251-1262
Borrini-Feyerabend, G. et al. 2012. Bio-cultural diversity conserved by indigenous peoples and local
communities— examples and analysis. Cenesta for the ICCA Consortium, IUCN, UNDP GEF SGP and GIZ on
behalf of BMZ, Tehran.
Colding, J. and Folke, C. 1997. The relations among threatened species, their protection, and taboos.
Conservation Ecology [online]1(1): 6. <http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art6/> [Accessed 15 February2018].
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2018. What the Convention says about traditional knowledge,
innovations and practices. <https://www.cbd.int/traditional/what.shtml> [accessed 23 May 2018].
Disko, S. Tugenhadt, H. and Garcia-Alix, L. 2014. World heritage sites and Indigenous peoples’ rights: anintroduction. In S. Disko, and H. Tugenhadt (Eds.): World heritage sites and Indigenous peoples’ rights, pp. 3-38.
: IWGIA, Forest Peoples Programme, Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation, Denmark.
Domashov I.A. 2010. Modern approaches to ecosystem management: international achievements andnational challenges, pp. 394-408. Vestnik KNU im. J. Balasagyn: Series 5. Natural and technical sciences. Bishkek: KNU.
Gapps, S. and Smith, M. 2015. Nawi – exploring Australia’s Indigenous watercraft.AlterNative: An International
Journal of Indigenous Peoples 11(2): pp. 87-102.
Gorshkov V.G. 1995. Physical and Biological Bases of Life Stability. Man, Biota, Environment. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin.
Gorshkov V. G., Gorshkov V. V., and Makarieva A. M. 2000. Springer-Praxis Series in Environmental Sciences.
Spring-Praxis, Chichester and Berlin.
Graham, J., Amos, B. and Plumptre, T. 2003. Governance principles for protected areas in the 21st century.
Institute on Governance, Ottawa.
Guichard-Anguis S. 2011. Walking through world heritage forest in Japan: The kumano pilgrimage. Journal Of
Heritage Tourism 6(4): pp. 285-295.
Holtgren, M., Ogren, S. & Whyte, K. 2015. Renewing relatives: one tribe's efforts to bring back an ancient fish.
Earth Island Journal 3: pp. 54-56.
International Journal for Indigenous Health 2018. Defining Aboriginal Peoples within Canada:terminology guidelines: author submission guidelines, <https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/ijih/about/submissions#authorGuidelines> [accessed 23 May 2018].
Ishizawa, M., Inaba, N. and Yoshida, M. 2017. Building capacities on Asia and the Pacific: the experience of the
UNESCO Chair on nature-culture linkages at the University of Tsukuba, Japan. The George Wright Forum 34(2):pp. 154-167.
149

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

Johnson, J.T. and Murton, B. 2007. Re/placing native science: Indigenous voices in contemporary constructionsof nature. Geographical Research 45(2): pp. 121-129.
IUCN and ICOMOS. 2015. Connecting practice: final report. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and ICOMOS,<https://www.iucn.org/downloads/connecting_practice_report_iucn_icomos_.pdf> [accessed 23 May 2018].
Logan W. 2013. Australia, Indigenous peoples and World Heritage from Kakadu to Cape York: State Party
behaviour under the World Heritage Convention. Journal of Social Archaeology. 13(2): pp. 153–176.
Loh, J. and Harmon, D. 2014. Biocultural diversity: threatened species, endangered languages. World Wide
Fund for Nature, Netherlands.
Lowood, H.Е. 1991. The Calculating Forester: Quantification, Cameral Science, and the Emergence of Scientific
Forestry Management in Germany. In Frangsmyr, T., Heilbron, J. L., Rider, R. E. and Berkeley, P. (Eds.): The
Quantifying Spirit in the Eighteenth Century, pp. 315-342. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Mikisew Cree First Nation. 2017. Wood Buffalo statement (Canada) to 41st session on the World Heritage
Committee – Poland, July 5th 2017. < http://mikisewgir.com/projects/> [accessed 23 May 2018].
Motonaka, M. 2006. Sacred sites and pilgrimage routes in the Kii mountain range. In T. Schaaf and Lee, C. (Eds):
Conserving cultural and biological diversity: the role of sacred natural sites and cultural landscapes, pp. 34-39.
Proceedings of the Tokyo Symposium. UNESCO, Paris, France.
Moreton-Robinson, A. 1998. When the object speaks. A postcolonial encounter: Anthropologicalrepresentations and Aboriginal women’s self-representations. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of
Education 19(3): pp. 275–289.
Mustonen, T. 2017. Endemic time-spaces of Finland: From wilderness lands to ‘vacant production spaces.
Fenia 195(1): pp. 5-24.
Natcher, D. C., Davis, S. and Hickey, C. G. 2005. Co-management: managing relationships, not resources.
Human Organization 64(3): pp. 240-250.
NSW Department of Education and Training 2005. The terminology of Aboriginal Australia. Curriculum Support
for Primary Teachers 10(4): pp. 1-16
Ohnuki-Tierney, E. 1991. The emperor of Japan as deity (kami). Ethnology 30(3):pp. 199-215.
Ray, L. 2012. Deciphering the "Indigenous" in Indigenous methodologies. AlterNative: An International Journalof Indigenous Peoples 8(1): pp. 85-98.
Raymond-Yakoubian, J., Raymond-Yakoubian, B., and Moncrieff, C. 2017. The incorporation of traditional
knowledge into Alaska federal fisheries management. Marine Policy 78: pp. 132-143.
Rigney, L.I. 1999. Internationalization of an Indigenous anticolonial cultural critique of research methodologies:
a guide to Indigenist research methodology and its principles. Wicazo Sa Review 14(2): pp. 109-121.
Ross, H., Cuthill, M., Maclean, K., Jansen, D. and Witt, B. 2010. Understanding, enhancing and managing forsocial resilience: opportunities in Far North Queensland. Marine and Tropical Science Research Facility, Reef
and Rainforest Research Centre, Cairns, Queensland.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2014. Global Biodiversity Outlook 4. Montréal, pp. 115–
118.

150

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728

JOURNAL OF WORLD HERITAGE STUDIES・SPECIAL ISSUE 2018・SACRED LANDSCAPES ISSN 2189-4728
ANNEX 4 : The Role of Indigenous and Customary Knowledges in Nature-Culture Linkage

Smith, L.T. 2000, Kaupapa Māori research. In M. Battiste (Ed.): Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision, pp. 225247. UBC Press, Vancouver, Toronto.
Sutton, P. 2003. Families of polity. In P. Sutton (Ed.): Native Title in Australia: an ethnographic perspective, pp.
206-231.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Swadener, B.B. and Mutua, K. 2008. Decolonising performances: deconstructing the global postcolonial. In N.K.
Denzin, Y.S. Lincoln, and L. Tuhiwai Smith (Eds.): Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies, pp. 31-44.
Sage Publications, California.
tebrakunna country, Lee, E.and Tran, T. 2016. Boardroom to kitchen table: shifting the power seat of Indigenous
governance in protected area management. Australian Aboriginal Studies 2: pp. 81-93.
UNESCO 2017. Item 7 of the provisional agenda: State conservation of World Heritage properties, WHC/17/41.
COM/7. Forty-first session Krakow, Poland, July 2017.
< https://whc.unesco.org/archive/2017/whc17-41com-7-en.pdf> [accessed 23 May 2018].
UNESCO 2016. Indigenous and local knowledge(s) and science(s) for sustainable development. Policy
brief by the Scientific Advisory Board of the UN Secretary-General. <http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0024/002461/246104E.pdf> [accessed 22 May 2018].
UNESCO 2015. Policy document for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into theprocesses of the World Heritage Convention. UNESCO. < https://whc.unesco.org/en/sustainabledevelopment/>[accessed 23 May 2018].
University of Tsukuba 2016. Certificate programme on nature conservation. <http://www.conservation.
tsukuba.ac.jp/?lang=english> [accessed 5 November 2017].
Verschuuren, B. 2017. Creating common ground: the role of Indigenous Peoples’ sacred natural sites inconservation practice, management and policy. Unpublished PhD thesis, Wageningen University.
Wilder, B. T., O’Meara, C., Monti, L. and Nabhan, G. P. 2016. The importance of Indigenous knowledge incurbing the loss of language and biodiversity. BioScience 66(6): pp. 499-509.
Wilk, R. 1995. Learning to be local in Belize: global systems of common difference. In D. Miller (Ed.): Worlds
apart: modernity through the prism of the local, pp. 110-133. Routledge, London.

151

University of Tsukuba,
Graduate School of Comprensive Human Sciences
World Heritage Studies
1-1-1 Tennodai ,Tsukuba,Ibaraki
Tel:029-853-7099

http://nc.heritage.tsukuba.ac.jp/Unesco-Chair/