iI I I

Copyright:© 2017 University ofTsukuba.

Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without
prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction
ofthis publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permissionof the copyright holder.
The authors are responsible for the choice and presentation of views contained in this work and for opinions
expressed therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.
Citation: lshizawa, Maya, lnaba, Nobuko and Yoshida, Masahito, Eds. (2017). Proceedings of the First Capacity
Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage ConseNation in Asia and the Pacific (CBWNCL
2016). Agricultural Landscapes. Journal of World Heritage Studies, University of Tsukuba, Japan: UniversityofTsukuba. pp. 144
Editorial Board of the journal of World Heritage Studies:
Yasufumi Uekita (Chief editor)
Hiromu Ito, Nobutake Sato, and lkuyo Saeki (Associate editors)
Edited by: Maya lshizawa, Nobuko lnaba and Masahito Yoshida
Editorial assistance: lmme Arce Huttmann
Designed by: lmme Arce Huttmann and Maya lshizawa
Available from:
UNESCO Chair on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage ConseNation
World Heritage Studies, University ofTsukuba
1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, lbaraki
Japan 305-8571
Te\+81-29-853-6344
Fax +81-29-853-7099
office@heritage.tsukuba.ac.jp
http:/ /nc.heritage.tsu kuba.ac.jp/U NESCO-Chair/
ISSN 2189-4728

II I

SPECIAL ISSUE

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIRSTCAPACITY BUILDING WORKSHOP ON
NATURE-CULTURE LINKAGES IN HERITAGECONSERVATION IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC(CBWNCL 2016)

AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

Organized by

the World Heritage Studies andthe Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation
University ofTsukuba

In collaboration with
UNESCO World Heritage Centre
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restorationof Cultural Property (ICCROM)
International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)SEPTEMBER 18-30, 2016
UNIVERSITY OF TSUKUBA, JAPANTable of Contents•

Foreword .. ... .. ........ .. ....................................... ........ ...... .. ................................ ..

•Introduction ................. .... .... ... ..... ... .... .... .......... .. .......... ...... ........ ...... ....... .... ..... .. ......... .. ...... ...... ............... .......... .. .. .. 3.. .... ... .......... ........ ... .. ......... ....... .... 1• Acknowledgements .. ... ......... ...... ............... ... ..... .. ............ ...... ..... ..... .......... .. ....... ... .. .. ...... ..... .. .. ........... .. ........ ... ........ 5• Part one: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation, Asia and the Pacific. AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES
Terraces
The Rice Terraces of lfugao Province, Philippines by Marion M. Marti n . .. ...... ...... .. .. .................. .. ........... ............. 10
A Brief Analysis of the conservation and Management of the Honghe Hani Rice Terraces in China by
Yuxin Li. ......... ... ... ...... ..... ....... ...... .......... ...... ....... ..... ........... ... .... ... ... ...... ... ..... ...... .... .... ..... ..... .. .. ... .... ......... .. ..... .. ..... ..

... 15

Promotion of East Taiwan Organic Agriculture by Cheng-Hua sun, Li Li n, Chung-Yu Hsu, and Mei-Ling Fan. 20

The Significance, conservation Potential and Management Challenges of Traditional Farming Terrace
Landscape in Asian Metropolis: a case Study of Lai Chi wo, Hong Kong, China by Katie H.L. Chick... ....

.. 26

Agricultural Surroundings
The Landscape of Borobudur Temple compounds and its environment by Fransiska Dian Ekarini .... ......

. 34

The Interlinking of Nature and Culture in Goreme National Park by Funda Solmaz ~akar ............. .. .. ... .... .

. 40

The Hinterland of Ancient Anuradhapura: Rema rks about an Ancient Cultural Heritage Landscapeby Nuwa n Abeywardana, Wiebke Bebermeier, and Brigitta Schutt .......................................................................... 47

Indigenous and Traditional Landscapes
Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombia by Cesar Augusto Vela ndia Silva .. ............... .......................................... 56
Symbiosis between Nature & Culture - A case study of Apatani Cultural Landscape, India
by Persis Farooqy ..... ..... ...... ... ..... .. ....... ... ........ ........................ .... ...... ....... ..... ...................... ......... ...... ... ......... ...... ...... .. .. 63
The Kanchendzonga sacred Landscape: Nature-Culture Linkages and Local Associations with Placeby Shweta Wagh....... ......... .. .. .. ........ .......... ........ .......... .. ... ... ...... .. .. ...... .... ......... .. .. .... .. ....... .. .. ..... ............ ... ............ .......... 68

Nature and Agriculture

Heritage of the sundarban: connecting Nature to Culture by Kawshik Saha ......... .. .. ..... ........... .. .. ...... ...... .......... 76
Ghana's Bia conservation Landscape: A convergence between biological and cultural diversity by Yaw Oseiowusu and Vincent Awotwe-Pratt ...... ....... ... .... ... ... ..... ....... .... ....... ..... ...... ... .... ............... ..... ...... .. ......... ... ... ... .... ....... .... 82
Lord Howe Island, Australia- Managing the cultural values of a world Heritage island ecosystem
by Nina Pollock ......... ........ .... ........ .... ... .. ... ... ... ...... .. .... ...... .. ... .... .... .. ... .... ... ........... ... ........ ...... ..... .... ... ....... ................... ... 89•

Part Two: Report on the capacity Building workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage

Conservation, Asia and the Pacific (CBWNCL 2016) AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

Executive summary ... .... ...... .. ......... ..... ........ ..... ......... .... ... ... ......... ... ........... .... .. ... ........ ......... .. .............. ... ............ .. ..... . 96
The Symposium ........ .. .... .... ....... .. .... .................... .. ...... ...... ..... ... ... .. ........ ................. ........ .... ...... ... ......... .. .... ... ..... ..... .. .. 98
The workshop ............... ........... ... ......... ...... .. .... ........ ................... .... ......... ...... ........ ........... ........... ... ...... ... ..... ... ...... ... 123
The Field Visit ... ................................ ..... .. ... ... ...... ........ .. ............... ... ....... ..... .. ..... .......... ...... ........ .... .. .... ..... ...... ....... .... .126
The working Groups ..........

....... ............... ....... .. ..... ...... ....... ... .. .............. .. ... ...... ................................ ..... ..... ...... ... .. 129

Final Reflections ...... .... ... ..

... ... .. ..... .... ........ .... .. ....... ... ... .. .. ..... ..... .. ... ...... ... .. .................. ... .............. ............ ... ..... .. 135•

Annexes

List of Participants ............... ............. .. ...... ...... ........... .......... .................. ........... .... .. ....... ............ ..... ............ .......... .... 138
Programme of the CBWNCL 2016 ........... .................. .. ... .. ... .. ....... .. .... ..... ..................... .. .... ........ .. ... ....

.. ................ 140

Foreword

The 1972 UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection ofthe World Cultural and Natural Heritageis an international legal instrument that brings together both natural and cultural heritage of
Outstanding Un iversal Value. However, its implementation has maintained the divide between
the practice of culture and nature due to the separation of articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.
Efforts have been made in order to reinforce nature-culture lin kages. Nevertheless, more work isneeded. Initiatives such as the includ ing of cultural landscape categories have been an attempt
to bridge the gap, considering the "combined works of man and nature" as be ing of Outstanding
Universal Value.
The contribution to address this gap by the Capacity Building Workshops on NatureCulture Lin kages in Heritage Conservation in Asia and the Pacific organized at the Universityof Tsukuba, is two-folded: it is an international platform for the exchange between heritage
practit ioners from the nature and culture sectors, and it is focused on a region underrepresented
in the World Heritage List. CBWNCL is organized by the World Heritage Studies and Certificate
Programme on Nature Conservation, ten years since the establishment of the PhD programmein World Cultural Heritage Studies. In 2017, we also saw the establishment of a UNESCO Chair on
Natu re-Cu ltu re Linkages in Heritage Conservation, which is a great achievement.
The World Heritage Centre is very pleased to be a partner of this endeavor, together withthe advisory bod ies to the World Heritage Convention, IUCN , ICCROM and ICOMOS. As part of theWorld Heritage Capac ity Building Programme, we consider that training and nurtu ring the skills ofheritage practitioners, site managers and researchers continues to be a priority in orde r to foster
the sustainab ility of World Heritage sites and heritage in general.
An International Symposium on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation in Asiaand the Pacific was held in the context of the Tsukuba Global Science Week 2016 and brought
together internationally renowned experts. The meeting also high lighted the critical importanceof agricultural landscapes in the context of the 2030 agenda and the Sustainable Development
Goals, climate change and biodiversity conse rvation.
This special issue of the Journal of World Heritage Studies of the University of Tsu ku ba
com piles the outcomes of the symposium and workshop, bringing together thirteen case studies
from the participants of the CBWNCL 2016 focusing on agricultural landscapes. Eleven cases arefrom Asia and the Pacific, one from Latin America and one from Africa, showing a variety ofsituations in culturally diverse regions, including 9 World Heritage properties, 1 Tentative list
site and 3 protected areas at national level. Interestingly, these varieties of cases share common
challenges and issues. Through this platform of exchange, they may start sharing best practicesolutions and integrated strategies.

Mechtild Rossler
Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Division for Heritage2

I ntrod uct ion

The First Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservationin Asia and the Pacific, with the theme "Agricultural Landscapes", was organized by the World
Heritage Studies and the Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation (CPNC) at the Universityof Tsukuba, Japan, with the collaboration of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, ICCROM, IUCN,
and ICOMOS. This workshop was the first of a series of four workshops to run from 2016 to 2019,and gathered fourteen heritage practitioners from Asia and the Pacific, and five students f rom the
CPNC. The workshop was inaugurated with an international symposium where five international
experts, representative of the partner organizations - the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, IUCN ,ICCROM and ICOMOS- and one academic specialist on agricultural landscapes from the Gadjah
Mad a University, Indonesia, gave keynote speeches dealing with the international development,
the theoretical development and the local development of the Nature-Culture approach in thefield of heritage conservation. These were joined by representatives ofthe Japanese govern mental
agencies in charge of heritage conservation -the Ministry of Environment and the Agency for
Cultural Affairs- in a general panel discussion where the situations in Japan and the world werediscussed .

The CBWNCL 2016 was divided in four modules:-Module 1: Symposium-Module 2: Understanding Nature-Culture Lin kages in the Context of the Agricultural LandscapeConservation- Module 3: Management, Implementation and Governance in Agricultural Landscapes- Module 4: Reflection on Theory and PracticeIn the first part of this special issue, we have compiled the articles presented by the participantsof the CBWNCL 2016 during the second day of the International Symposium .
Fourteen case studies were presented covering a variety of themes and problematics
ocurrying in agricultural landscapes. Twelve of them are legally protected and nine of them arealready in the World Heritage List. However, the OUV does not necessary rely for all of them intheir agricultural features. Sometimes, the agricultural landscape surrounds a monument, or aprotected area. In some other cases, the agricultural landscape is part of a biosphere reserve.
The case studies were divided in four themes. The first theme was "Terraces", an
important heritage structure characterizing agriculture in many places in Asia and the Pacific.
Terraces combine architectural design , land management, traditional knowledge related toweather and soil, and social organization . They are representative of a society's way of life, andthis was illustrated with the cases of the lfugao Terraces in the Philippines (pp. 10-14), the Hani
Terraces in China (pp. 15-19), the organic farming in Taiwan (pp. 20-25), and the Lai Chi Wo village
in Hong Kong (pp. 26-32). The main problem of maintaining terraces is generational change andthe lack of workforce due to migration , depopulation of rural areas, population aging, and themodernization of agricultural production . Moreover, in the cases of the lfugao terraces and theHan i terraces, they confront infrastructure development (roads, dams, etc.) that menace theintegrity of these outstanding agricu ltu rallandscapes. In the case of Taiwan and Hong Kong, theobjective of institutions like HDARES (Taiwan) or the University of Hong Kong is to rev italize rural
areas and to recover traditional knowledge that is progressively diminishing.
The second theme was "Agricultural surroundings" and the case studies under this
topic illustrated the problem of a limited protection, focused on the cultural or natural heritage(eg. temples and architectural structures - Borobudur (pp. 34-39) and Anuradhapura (pp.4753), or specific geological formations - Capadoccia (pp. 40-46). The presentations showed thatthe agricultural landscape surrounding the World Heritage core areas was also valuable, and3sometimes as valuable as the architectural structures or natural formations, specially for thelife of the local communities and for the significance of the core areas themselves. Nevertheless,these agricultural landscapes are not subject of protection and are not sufficiently recognized as
an important aspect that sustains the OUV of these properties.
The third theme was focused on "Indigenous and Traditional Agricultural Landscapes",
where the examples explained were the Coffee Cultural Landscape in Colombia (pp.56-62),
Kachendzonga National Park in India (pp. 63-67), both already in the World Heritage List, theApatani cultural landscape (pp. 68-73) in the Tentative List of India, and the Cihaalay CulturalLandscape in Taiwan, a non-protected rural area. In these places, traditional agricultural practices
have continued to conserve biodiversity, as well as cultural practices that are representative of
the interrelations between nature and culture.
Finally, the fourth theme was dedicated to "Nature and Agriculture", and the sites
presented are protected due to their natural values: Sundarbans in Bangladesh (pp. 7681), Bia National Park in Ghana (pp. 82-88), and Lowe Howe Island in Australia (pp. 89-93). In
these national parks, agricultural practices are performed by the communities surrounding theprotected areas, which hold the biodiversity of the region. In the case of Lowe Howe Island, thecultural values present in the area are recognized at a national level, even though the World
Heritage site has been inscribed based on natural criteria. In the case of Sundarbans, there aremany cultural values related to the natural values that are not sufficiently acknowledged and dueto the sectorial division of conservation (nature in one institution, and culture in another), theinterrelations between natural and cultural values are difficult to be recognized and conservedin an integrated manner. In the case of Ghana, the linkages between biological diversity andcultural diversity are not sufficiently acknowledged in the conservation measures of the nationalparks. Therefore, it was highlighted that the biocultural approach could help to understand thecomplexity of these sites enabling a more comprehensive conservation system .
The second part of this special issue presents the report of the workshop. In the report,
the symposium content is explained including the presentations and discussions of the firstand second days. Then, the workshop and the field visits are described, and the results of theworking groups are summarized. Finally, the main debates and findings of the CBWNCL 2016 arepresented as conclusions.

4

Acknowledgements

The editors would like to thank the editorial board of the Journal of World Heritage Studies for
accepting publishing these proceedings as their first special issue.
We would like to acknowledge and thank the continuous collaboration of the partnersof this series of workshops, ICCROM, IUCN, ICOMOS and the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, inthe development and implementation of this project. Their constant feedback and kind support
have been fundamental. Moreover, we would like to especially thank Tim Badman, Jessica Brown,
Kristal Buckley and Gamini Wijesuriya for accepting to collaborate as reviewers of this special
issue of the Journal of World Heritage Studies. Special thanks go to Dr. Mechti ld Rossler, Directorof the UNESCO World Heritage Centre for her kind support and collaboration.
We would also like to acknowledge the patient work of the authors who have contributedwith their articles, making this special issue comprehensive, showing the diversity of agriculturallandscapes in the Asia and 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 foraccompanying this project. The cooperation of students from the University of Tsu ku ba involvedin these programs is also appreciated, their support during the symposium and workshop has
been indispensable.
The collaboration of Ai Fukuda, Misako Kikuchi, Masaomi Kurokawa, Yoko Nakai, Anna
Bogdanova, lmme Arce Huttmann, Daisuke Funaki, Manami Watanabe, Yuki Izumi, Ryohei Shoji,
Shaka Kalama Y. Francis, Kimio Sato, Krishna Prasad Paudel, Keiko Takahashi, Kazuhiko Kobayashi,
Zi lai Zheng, Nanae Sh i rakabe, and Sa tom i Mitsui was greatly appreciated.

5

6

Part One:

Proceedings of theInternational Symposium on
Natu re-Cu ltu re Linkages in
Heritage Conservation, Asiaand the Pacific
AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

7

8

Terraces

9The Rice Terraces of lfugao
Province, Philippines
Marlon M. Martin 1( 1) Save the IfiLgao Terraces IVTovernent (SITIVIo)•

Abstract

The Jfugao Rice Terraces in the Philippines is a living cultural landscape, a testimony tohundreds of years of a people's harmonious co-existence with nature. With several hundredyears of trial and error, the Jfugaos were able to come up with a rich body of traditionalf?nowledge which now sustains this magnificent complex of terraced fields, managed forests,
intricate irrigation systems, and villages that come together to forge a distinct way of life, anattendant lifestyle forged from the synergy of an unforgiving terrain and the temperamentof a people determined to survive. The resulting rice culture of the Jfugao is now threatenedby several factors both natural and human-made.

KEY WORDS: Ifugao, rice terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras, Ifugao Archaeological
Project, sacred Ifugao landscape• 1. Introduction
7.7 Overview

lfugao Provi nee is located along the eastern
flank of the Luzon Central Cordillera mountain
ranges with a land area of 251,778 hectares.
The combined area of terraces occupies 17,138
hectares of the total land area. The topography
is marked mainly by rugged mountains andmassive forests. The terraces are located athigh elevation, between 800 to 1,500 MASL, witha slope range of 50% and above. As of the lastcensus in 2010, the population of lfugao stands
at 197,000 inhabitants.
Though the lfugao Rice Terraces (IRT)
have been known to have existed for over 2,000
years (UNESCO N.D.), recent discoveries of thelfugao Archaeological Project also reveal muchyounger dates, as recent as 200-500 years ago.
Historical records indicate an lfugao retreat tomountain refugias to facilitate more effective
resistance to Spanish control (Martin andAcabado 2015). A related study suggests thatthe resultant terracing culture in the lfugao
Province was influenced as well by an adaptive
response to climate change and growing aridity
in the neighboring Cagayan lowlands during
the Little Ice Age, in the 13th to the 19th
centuries (Peterson and Acabado, in press).
Radiocarbon dating from terrace studies place
the antiquity of rice farming no earlier than thelate 16th century and suggest that fields, in the10early settlement of Kiyyangan (Kiangan, lfugao),
were most likely wetland agricultural pond
fields for the cultivation of taro (Acabado andMartin 2015). These pond field systems,
nonetheless, prepared terrain and waterways
for the development of rice terraces.

--

Figure 1. lfugao map (from Acabado, Zones of Refuge 2017(in press)

7.2 Brief Description: the lfugao Rice Terraces
System as a Sacred Agro-Cultural Landscape
The lfugao agricultural system is an "agrocultural complex," a term popularized by
O'Connor (1995) to describe the interlocking
nature of agricultural practices, social systems,
political, historical, and cultural changes. Thisis an apt term because for the lfugao, wet-rice
cultivation is part of a much larger production
system that includes swidden ing and agroforestry (Acabado and Martin, 2015). The rice ismainly planted to be interspersed with taro,
legumes, beans and other crops. Its surrounding
forests, both private and communal, aremanaged us ing an indigenous system ofnatural resources management passed downby earlier generations. Both the sw idden andagro-forest serve as economic supplements
and buffers in case of crop failure in the riceterraces. The maintenance of the living riceterraces reflects primarily a cooperative
approach of the whole community which isbased on detailed knowledge of the richbiodiversity existing in the lfugao agroecosystem, a finely tuned annual system
respecting the lunar cycle, zoning and planning,extensive soil and water conservation, masteryof a complex pest control regime based on theprocessing of a variety of herbs, accompanied
by religious rituals (UNESCO, N.D.).
Notwithstanding
the
mo re
feature of therecognizable ag ricultural
terraces, it is equally important to understandthe intangible and sacred component of thelfugao terraced landscape. The traditional rice
has always been at the center of the lfugao way

Figure 2.

of life. Rice alone merited an entire cycle ofrituals in the old lfugao rel igion . Feasts of merit
sanctified by ritual specialists that elevatedindividuals in the social hierarchy were preconditioned on existing rice field holdings.
Social structure was defined by rice throughrituals that necess itated the invocation of athousand or so agricultural gods. Ritual rice
fields were consecrated to set the pace ofcommunity labor and establish soc io-politicalhierarchy.
The terraced landscape is thus
the setting of a bel ief system whe re gods
and mortals communed, where sacrifices areoffered , and divine providence is manifested.
• 2. Significance of the Heritage Place

Including Natural and Cultural Value: Value Of
The lfugao Rice Terraces
In 1973, the Rice Terraces of Banaue, lfugao
were declared as a National Cultural Treasure,recognizing it as a part of the national
patrimony of the Filipinos.
With the inclusion of five terraced
clusters on the World Heritage List in 1995,
UNESCOsummarizes
theOutstanding
Universal Value (OUV) of the terraces as a living
cultural landscape of unparalleled beauty, an
enduring testimony to how people can exploit
the resources around them without causing
irreparable damage to the en vi ron men t.
UN FAO, in recognizing the terrace s as aImportant Agr icultu ral
Heritage
Globally
System (GIAHS) in 2004, describes the lfugao
Rice Terraces (I RT) as the country's only
rema1 n 1ng high land mountain ecosystem
featuring a remarkable agricultural system. The

The Banaue Rice Terraces (Photo by 5/TMo -IAP)

11

Figure 3.

Rice terraces in Asipulo, lfugao (Photo SITMo·IAP)

continued viability of th e rice terraces is amanifestation of strong culture -n atureconnections, engineering systems, innovation,and the determined spirit of the lfugaos tomaximize use of the mountainous lands forfood production .
To the lfugao people, the ri ce terraces
are a source of sustenance for the comm unities
whose lives revolve around its ancient rhythms.
It is an end uring symbol of a people's resilienceagainst nature's upheavals and resistance tocolonial designs. The history of rice terracesis the history of the lfugaos, one that deli nes
them as a people and as a culture. It is thisidentity value that is first and foremost thereason for maintaining this relic of the ancientpast.
·while the World Heritage inscription
and GIAHS recognition use different standards
in qualifying heritage sites in their respective
lists, both emphasize the cultural heritageand its universal significance in terms of
its contem porary funct ionality, despite its
antiquity. Unprecedented changes in the sociopolitical landscape of a country necessitates
both recognitions as a means of securing- notjust national protection - but also the global
safeguarding of this vulnerable heritage ofhumanity.
• 3. Management
While several government agencies, fromnational to local, are tasked to manage andmonitor the rice terraces, no comprehensive
management plan is in place to ensure thatconservation policies are strictly enforced.
The lfugao Rice Terraces are maintained byfami lies, not merely as production areas fora staple crop but also for the senti mental
reason that these real properties have been
passed down from their venerated ancestors.
In matters of policy, the single most important12

difficulty in coming up with an effective andcomprehensive management plan for theentire landscape is that it is in the realm ofprivate ownership: the lfugao Rice Terraces are
privately owned and managed by hundreds ofindividual owners. Under Philippine laws and as
a general ru le, public funds cannot be spent on
private property and thus, public expenditure
is constrained. Wh ile the government provides
support for the World Heritage listed clusters,
minimal assistance is given to the wider areathat does not have the privilege of a recognizedstatus. The special status of the World Heritage
listed clusters gives them the seeming
character of being properties of the publicdomain and thus in special circumstances they
are beneficiaries of monetary assistance f rom
the government.
• 4. State of Conservation and Challenges forContinuity
In 2001, merely six years after its inscnpttonon the World Heritage List, the five inscribedclusters were put on the List of World Heritage
in Danger due to the deterioration in their
physical integrity caused by various factors,
including natural events, such as extreme
weather conditions. This was compoundedby the changes that were already radicallytransforming the socio-cultu ra l landscapeof the lfugao, such as out-migration, waning
indigenous knowledge application, and theerosion of customary social institutions.
The poor state of conservation of the lfugao
Rice Terraces catalyzed the much-needed
cooperation of public and private stakeholders,both local and international. The needed
fu nding from th e government poured in torepair damaged t erraces while civil society
groups handled grassroots organ izing andpublicity of t he plight of this culturallandscape.
Terrace conservation made it to the priority listof each agency. Under normal circumstances it
would have not stood a chance to compete withother more pressing concerns like health care,education, or public infrastructure. The lfugao
Rice Terraces (officially the Rice Terraces of thePhilippine Cordilleras) were removed from the
List of World Heritage in Danger in 2012. Thisturn of events highlighted the possibility of avery effective publ ic-private partnership, now
if only this can be sustained .

• 5. Recommendations
The threats that put the lfugao Rice Terraceson the List of World Heritage in Danger did notdisappear after its danger listing was removed.
Issues for cultural landscapes do not havesure-fire solutions owing to the unpredictabilityof contemporary socio-political dynamics,
economic issues, and environmental factors.
It has always been our conviction thatthe conservation of the lfugao Rice Terraces
is largely dependent on the continuity of
its indigenous knowledge system, one thatmastered the natural en vi ron ment creating aunique landscape and a distinct way of life.
The indigenous knowledge that evolved withthe lfugao rice culture is one that mastered therhythm of the natural environment to ensure
the survival of a people . Waters from rivers
and springs, conducted to terraces carved
or built on carefully selected slopes, reflect
indigenous hydraulics and soil management.
The maintenance of private and communallymanaged woodlots signify understanding of
the forests' role in nutrient replenishment andsoil and water conservation. Cropping seasons,that are in tune with the movement of sun andmoon, synchronized planting that afforded
effective pest control and ensured availabilityof communal labor, and the wide-ranging
variety of crops planted in both forest andrice fields ensured healthy biodiversity and a
year-round food supply. All these comprise thenature-culture approach that sustained therice terraces for generations, which ultimately
precipitated the formation of value systems,
spirituality, and socio-political institutions of
the lfugao.
Itisratherunfortunate
that
contemporary practices, caused by culturallyinsensitive public policies and inadequate
planning, do not take into equal consideration
the natural and human dimensions ofconserving the lfugao Rice Terraces. Likethe evolving cultural landscape that it has
begotten, the traditional knowledge lifebloodof the terraces must continue evolving througha process that puts into consideration bothnature and human elements.
On matters of government policy, along-term management plan that involves all
stakeholders must be put in place, at the very
least, in the Provi nee of lfugao. Such a planshould not be vulnerable to changes in politics

or shifts in the administration. Legislation on agovernment subsidy for terrace farmers should
also be looked into to address their economic
issues. Mainstream i ng indigenous knowledge
education in the formal school curricula should
also be taken seriously by the education
department and the local governments.
In conclusion, I would like toquote Sven Arntzen, "A cultural landscapeincorporates meaning and identity value inthat it provides a setting or context in whichpeople can view their existence, lives andpractices. When a cultural landscape's identity
value is a reason for its preservation, themeaning associated with the landscape helps
determine the manner in which humans ought
to relate to land" (Arntzen 1999).

13

• Literature Cited
Acabado, S.B. 2012. The lfugao Agricultural Landscapes: Complementary Systems and theIntensification Debate. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 43(3): pp. 500-522
Acabado, S.B. and Martin, M. 2016. The Sacred and the Secular: Practical Applications of Water
Rituals in the lfugao Water Systems. TRaNS: Trans-Regional and National Studies of Southeast
Asia, Available on CJO 2016 doi :10.1017/trn.2016.7
Arntzen, S. 1999. Cultural Landscape and Approaches to Nature: Eco-philosophical Perspectives.
www.eki .ee I km I place I pdf I KP2_03arntzen.pdf [accessed August 14, 2016]lfugao Archaeological Project (website) Publications. http:/ /www.ifugao-archaeological-project.
org/publications.html [accessed 5 March 2017]
Martin, M. and Acabado, S.B. 2015. Community Participation in the lfugao Archaeological Project.
National Museum Journal of Cultural Heritage 1(1): pp. 39-45
O'Connor, R. 1995. Agricultural Change and Ethnic Succession in Southeast Asian states: A case for
Regional Anthropology. Journal of Asian Studies, 54(4): pp. 968-96
Peterson, J. and Acabado, S. (in press). Did the Little Ice Age contribute to the emergence of riceterrace farming in lfugao, Philippines? National Museum Cultural Heritage Journal, 1:1
UNESCO. N.D. Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras. http:/ /whc.unesco.org/en I list/722[accessed, 14 August, 2015]14

A Brief Analysis of
the Conservation andManagement of the
Honghe Han i Rice Terraces
in China
Yuxin Li 1
(1) Chinese Academy of Cultural Heritage, Chinese World Cultural Heritage Centre, Gaoyuan Street 2;100029, Beijing; +86 (0) 18518431257, hhliyuxin@hotmaiLcom•

Abstract

The cultivation of traditional rice has deeply moulded the landscape and shaped the forming culture of
the Hong he Honi Rice Terraces (HHRT). During long-term interactions with their natural environment, theHoni people hove generated a unique forming system that has sustained these terraces for centuries.
The cultural and natural values and their linkages ore exemplary in this system; the Honi people need
to be recognized for the conservation and management of the terraces. However, deep social changes
make the further sustoinobility of the HHRT uncertain. Both the environment and culture ore severely
challenged. This paper examines the relationship between the irrigation systems and water culture
based on the values of the HHRT Through case analysis, this paper suggests that the HHRT con besustained through protecting the linkages between nature and culture. These findings could be used
to broaden the vision and enhance the practical experience of the rice terraces conservation .

KEY WORDS: agricultural landscape, rice terraces, cultural heritage, conservation,
culture and nature linkages• 1. Introduction

1.1 Overview of the Heritage Site

The Honghe Hani Terraces (HHRT) are located in
Yuanyang County, Honghe Prefecture, Yunnan
Provi nee in southwest China. These terraces
are over 1,300 years old. Around the century,
the ancestors of the Hani people, now officiallyrecognized as an ethnic group, migrated andploughed terraces, multi plied, and lived in thisterritory. There are six long-dwelling ethnic
groups in this area, among which the Hani
people have the largest farming population on
the rice terraces.
The rice terraces, created by theHani people, are mainly distributed over four
counties, Yuanyang, Honghe, Lvchun, andJin ping, with a total area of approximately
54,700 hectares. They are located on theeastern border of the Hengduan Mountains,which is known as Mount Ailao, famous for its
high-mou ntai no us landscape, deep valleys,
and rich biodiversity. Rice terraces, within thisarea, are irrigated by the mother river, the Red
River, which is an international river stretching
through China and Vietnam.
7.2 Brief Description of the Landscape

There are many complex components regarding
land use. There are four elements that
constitute the organic components and are
responsible for maintaining the sustainable
development of the agriculture in the HHRT
(Jiao 1999). These four elements are the forest,
the village, the terraces, and the river, which
are all integrated vertically in order to takeadvantage of the environment of highmountainous terrains, tropical climates, and15

ForestFigure 1.

Village

Terraces

Schematic Map of Forest-Villa ge-Te rrace-Wa ter System (Photographed by author; Duoyishu Area, February 2017)

heavy rainfall. The forest plays the role of anatural reservoir, helping to conserve waterand soil. The village is the central focus of thelandscape, providing active labor, livestock,and technology. The terraces are the guarantorsof the agricultural products that sustain life,
and the landscape provides a backdrop
containing the other elements (Jiao 2003). The
principal function of the river, at the bottom, isthat of a climate regulator. Furthermore, due tothe natural surface runoff and artificial
irrigation system, soil, organic fertilizer, andwater flow down from the top of the mountainto the bottom of the valley via the villages andterraces, enabling each element to contribute
fully to the terraces' sustainability through theflow of water (Yao and Cui 2006; Zhu and Wang2005).
The HHRT has been managed andmaintained through the local knowledge ofthe Hani people. The unique environment andlong-term farming practices promoted the Hani
culture to form a set of traditions, with farming
terraces at the core, including belief-systems,
the agricultural calendar, farming techniques,water management systems, folk festivals,
and other aspects. Therefore, activities driven

Hani Traditional
Water Knowledge

by the cultural traditions of the Hani people,
in this terraced landscape, deeply affect theenvironmental stability.

• 2. Significance of the Heritage Place
including Cultural and Natural Values
The rice terraces of Laohuzui, Duoyishu, and
Bad a villages in YuanyangCountywere inscribedas World Cultural Heritage sites in 2013 (undercriteria iii, v), covering a total area of about
17,536 hectares. Compared to the terraces in theother three counties, the terraces in YuanyangCounty are not the largest, but they contain themost representative landscape elements.
This landscape reflects great harmony
between people and en vi ron ment in spiritual,cultural, social, and ecological aspects. A
resilient land management system, integrated
farming and breeding systems, and water
management systems illustrates a conceptof sustainability through the four-element
landscape pattern of " Forest-Village-TerracesRiver" (UNESCO 2013). These systems com priseof a unique agriculture tradition in Asia, witha distinctive style which contains ecologicalbalance, biodiversity, and cultural diversity

HHRT Systems

I Functions I

ForestForests of water resource rules andworship, etc.

Water conservation,
Security, etc.

Water Resources Management

Organic lifestyle, clean
environment, etc.

Water committee,
Water diving woods, etc.
River

Figure 2.

Water System

Links of traditional water knowledge and the landsca pe (Li et al., 2016)

16

Soil and water
conservation, wetlands,
food Supply, etc.

(Deng et al. 2010). This work shown at higher
altitudes and on a larger scale provides
evidence of the Asian traditional rice cultivation
and agricultural civilization .

3. Current Management Arrangements
3.7 Management Institutions
Because of the territorial jurisdiction principle
for cultural relics in China, Honghe Prefecture
is subject to the liability of conserving andmanaging the HHRT. The World Heritage
Management Administration Office, establishedin 2013, is the protection and management
organization for the HHRT at the prefecturallevel; it is also responsible for coordinating
and arranging projects for the management
offices of Yuanyang, Lvchun, Honghe, andJinping counties at the county level.

3.2 Management System
In the overall management system of the HHRT,
state, provincial, and prefectural governments
provide fund s and guidance. In practice,
the prefecture government is the leading
coordination agency that plans and deals
with the comprehensive affairs of the overall
heritage site, the County Terraces Management
Offices are entrusted to implement daily
conservation actions on site and administrative
work. Farmers are responsible for the specificissues, such as forest protection , villages andterrace maintenance, and so on . Planning,
implementation,su perv1s1on,
evaluation,and feedback make up the principal work
procedure.

3.3 Conservation and Management PracticeCase: Protecting culture by reintroducing water
management system
Yakou Village is located in the HH RT property
area in Yuanyang County. Starting in 2010,a continuous three -year drought occurredin the Yunnan provi nee and destroyed
considerable farmland . Even though they had
a well-developed water management system,
drought and the shortage of agriculture water
aggravated poverty in Yakou Village. As a resultof this drought, traditional sacred activities,
related to water management regimes, began
to disappear. The economic, social, andenvironmental situations were under serious
threat.
In order to revive life in this village
and sustain the landscape, a field study was
conducted by the Terraces Management Officeof Yuanyang County in 2012. After investigation,
it was found that the destruction of the water
environment and the loss of traditional water
management, as well as the death of the old
Migu (leader of village in the traditional social
system), were major reasons for the situation.
By reconnecting culture and nature, thevitality of economic, social, and env ironmental
development has started to revert tosustainability. A series of actions, such as
restoring the water environment, reintroducing
the traditional water management regime ofYakou Village, and cultural and sacred activitie s
related to the water resources were conductedby the new leader of the village. Meanwhile, thetraditional water committee was reorganized
in order to execute the regular checks onoo!

Precipitationfoo

Evapotranspirationi

Evapotranspiration

ForestFigure 3.

Terrace

Village

Water Circulation System in the HHRT (Bai, 2013)17

the canal system and terraces. At the sametime, Yakou benefited from a comprehensive
environmental project with priority within thearea of the Honghe prefecture.
The return of a good water environment
gave relief to the effects of the drought. Apartfrom this, the historic scenery and the water
environment are the main attractions fortourists. Com pared with other villages, theunderstanding of nature, culture, and theirlinkages is deeper in this village.

4. Current State of Conservation andChallenges for Sustainability
Generally, the current state of the conservationof the HHRT is good. This is due to the efforts
made by the local community and conservation
departments, in both the ecological and thecultural aspects. The terraces and forests
within the property area have been maintained
well.
However, the conservation efforts are being
challenged by the following problems:(1) The labor: The influences of modern culture
and lifestyles are placing the traditional
knowledge and its transmission in danger. The
young workforce, which is the major providerof labor in the maintenance of the terraces, isgradually moving to the cities, while the farmers
staying in the villages are mainly elderly. It
is unattractive to the younger generation to
engage in the highly labor-intensive work andcomplex activities related to terrace farming.
(2)The environment: Unordered construction,
chemical fertilizers, and plastic pollution, as
well as the increasing amount of tourists, havenegatively impacted the original self-cleaningsystem of this terraced landscape. The qualityof the local ecological en vi ron ment faces a highrisk of damage as the result of pollution.
(3) The knowledge: Although the awarenessof the importance of traditional culture insustaining this cultural landscape is increasing,
there is an absence of an adaptive andeffective mechanism to continuously transmit
indigenous knowledge and skills, which
includes cultural and natural recognition.
(4)The conservation: The conservation plans
and fieldworks, specifically aimed at thewetland function, biodiversity, and cultural
diversity, are still not perfect. Furthermore,
owing to the complex situations of tangible
and intangible heritage, it is difficult to enact
specialised laws and regulations to protect thisenvironment.

18

5. Conclusions and Recommendations
The HHRT is the result of interactions between
people and the environment, it represents
a complex land use system with diverse
ecological and cultural functions. Although it
is challenged by some cultural, natural, andsocial issues, it is believed that protecting thelinkages between nature and culture in the
HHRT is a feasible way to help in sustaining
the landscape and the quality of people's life.
This does not only need to be realized in the
research of values, but also in conservation
practices, as this harmonious interaction
has been developed and achieved between
humans and the environment over centuries.
In order to enhance the protection
and management of the HHRT throughconserving nature-culture linkages, it isrecommended that the ecological preservation
knowledge of the local community be utilized.
From the aspect of cultural promotion, thenecessary steps are investigation, recording,and dissemination of the indigenous culturenature linkages. Subsequently, the current
situation and development trends should beclarified. To increase the interest in farming andmaintaining terraces in the local community,
special farming courses in formal schools,
effective agricultural compensation (Liu etal. 2017), and farming methods that meet theneeds of modern life could be implemented.
Moreover, to enhance protection and promoteawareness of culture-nature linkages, it isnecessary to emphasize traditional socialorganizations and enact specific legislation.
From the aspect of ecological preservation,
training courses and construction guidelines
in the local community are important on site,
as well as a tourism management plan forthe heritage site, to prevent or limit negativeenvironmental changes. The encouragementof ecological tourism could be attempted
to entertain and educate both villagers andtourists as well. To summarize, deepening
research on the culture-nature linkages fromboth traditional and modern perspectives isnecessary in order to enhance the state ofconservation and support the sustainability of
the HHRT.

• Literature Cited
Bai, Y. Y., Min, Q. W., Liu, M. C. 2013. Res ilience of the Han i Rice Terraces System to Extreme Drought.
Jo urnal of Food, Agriculture an d Environment 11(3 and 4): pp. 2376-2382
Deng, L., Zhang, J., Feng, T. H. 2010. Hani Terrace's Sustainable Mechanism and CoordinatedManagement. Industrial Economics 12: pp. 75-81
Jiao, Y. M. 1999. Study on the Cultural Ecology System of Hani Terraced Fields. Human Geology 14:
pp. 56 -59
Jiao, Y. M. 2003. The Feature of t he Han i Cultural Region - The Cultural Landscape of Hani 's Terrace.
Yun na n Geograp hi c Envi ronment Research 15(1): pp. 51-56
Jing, L., Wenjun, J., Qingwen, M., and Wenhua, L. 2016. Effects of Traditional Ecological Knowledge
on the Drought- resistant Mechanisms of the Hani Rice Terraces Systems. Journal of Resources
and Ecology 7 (3): pp.211-217
Liu, M. C., Xiong, Y., Bai, Y., Yang, L., Min , Q.W. 2017. Ecological Compensation Standard for the Hani
Rice Terrace System :an eco -fu nctional-oriented improvement. ACTA ECO LOGICA SINICA 37(7)Min , Q., He, L., Sun, Y., Zhang, D., Yuan, Z., Xu, Y., and Bai , Y. 2012. On the Va lue, Conservation andSustainable Development of GIAHS Pilot Sites in China. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture 20(6):pp. 668-673
UNESCO. 2013. Nomination File of Cultural Landscape of Hon ghe Hani Rice Terra ces. http:/ /whc.
unesco.org/ uploads In om i nations /1111 .pdf
Yao, M. and Cu i, B.S. 2006. The Vertical Characteristics of ecosystem of Hani 's Terrace Paddyfle ld
in Yunnan ,China. Acta Ecologocica Sinica 26(7): pp. 2115-2124
Zhu, Q. X. and Wang, Z L. 2005. Sustainable Development Patte rn of Ethnoecological System-A
Case Study on Hani Terra ces. Resource Development and Market 21(3): pp. 206-2 09

19

Promotion of Organic
Agri culture in Eastern
TaiwanCheng-Hua Sun, 1 Li Lin, 2 Chung- Yu Hsu 2 and lVIei-Ling Fan 3(1) The Hualien District Agricultural Research and Extension Station, Agriculture Exterzsion SectiMz(HDARES), No./50, Sec. 2,ji'an Rd.,ji'an Township, Hualien County; 97365; +886 3 852 1108#191,
swzclt(t.])ltda res.gov. tw(2) Assistant researcher of HOARES.
(3) Directon:f HDARES.

•

Abstract

The Hualien District Agricultural Research and Extension Station (HDARES) has actively helped
indigenous tribes to build stable, high-quality crop production systems, develop organic
farming, and adopt the concept of eco-agriculture. In doing so, the HDARES helps locals tomaintain biodiversity, sustain food production, improve their livelihoods, and protect theecosystem.
To protect indigenous traditional wisdom, HDARES focuses on recovering indigenous andorganic farming technology and industry. The community of the Xinshe Tribe recovers andapplies its traditional farming skills, making efforts to maintain the cultural customs of theKavalan ethnic group. The Fushin Eco Farm introduced organic pest control measures toimplement the concepts of the Satoyama Initiative. Thus, the work of HDARES is oriented to
the recovery of nature-culture linkages in agricultural landscapes for the conservation of
biodiversity and cultural traditions.

KEY WORDS: indigenous traditional culture, eco~agriculture, leisure tourism industry

1. Introduction

Agricultural landscapes are expressionsof the interrelations between cultural andnatural heritage; according to research , thecontinuation of traditional systems produces
hi gher biological and cultural diversity (Fanet al., 2013; Yen et al. 2016). Eco-agriculture
is a system that supports both agricultural
production and biodiversity conservation whileworking in harmony to improve the livelihoodsof rural communities (Scherr and McNeely
2002); for example, producing crops with lesspollution or damage to the environment. Thi sapproach enhances the role of traditional
agriculture in food security and ecologicalconservation, increases the competitivenessin the high-quality agricultural industry, andensures its sustainable development.
20

For centuries, many indigenous
peoples have developed, maintained, andadapted different types of eco-agriculture
systems. Their knowledge, traditions, land
use practices, and resource management
institutions are essential to the development of
their viable eco-agricu ltu re systems; however,
due to modernization, migration, and aging
population, decreased emphasis has be enplaced on traditional knowledge, to the pointthat it is disappearing.
The Hualien District Agricultural
Research and Extension Station (HDARES)
is responsible for conducting agriculturalexperiments and research for Hualien and
Yilan counties in Eastern Taiwan as well as
performing multifunctional operations suchas, demonstration and extension, farmers'
education and marketing counselling, andtechnological and technical collaborations.
In addition, HDARES has become a regional
center for agricultural research development
and extension. The work of HDARES is closely
related to farmers' rights and interests as wellas to the construction of rural areas. Therefore,
the functions of HDARES are crucial for the
agricultural development of Eastern Taiwan.
The offices of HDARES are based in the
Hualien and Yilan counties of Eastern Taiwan(see Figure 1). These counties cover 6,772 km, of
which more than 13% is alpine hillside. Amongthe 736 km 2 of arable land (10.9% of the total
land area), paddy fields cover only 293 km 2
(39.8% of arable land) while dry land covers theremaining 443 km 2 (60.2% of arable land).
The main cultivated crops of HualienCounty are rice, maize, tea, pomelo, watermelon,plum, peanut, lily, and sweet potatoes, whilethat ofYilan County are rice, cabbage, kumquat,orange, pomelo, tea, onions, wax apple, Yin Liu,and garlic.
The area of arable land in HualienCounty is mostly covered with calcareous
schist alluvial soil, shallow soil and gravelthat causes poor soil fertility, while that of
Yilan is slate alluvial soil, which causes poor
drainage in some areas. This geographicalarea is characterized by mountainous terrain
and steep slopes, short and rapid rivers,
and frequent typhoons, earthquakes, andother natural disasters. Among the region's
households, 47,188 (15.5% of the total numberof households) live from agriculture and202,000 people (25% of the total population)
are farmers (HDARES 2014).
In this context, HDARES has subscribedto the Satoyama Initiative, an international

100,000
Figure 1.

action plan created by the United Nations
University and the Japanese government,
which aims to encourage the preservation andutilization of biodiversity. At the core of theinitiative is the concept of "socio-ecologicalproduction
landscapesandseascapes,"which encompasses the ecological habitat
formed through the long-term interaction
between humans and nature as well as the
dynamic landscapes utilized by humans. (IPSI
2017) In landscapes and seascapes utilized
for ecological production, natural resources
may be used, then recycled, and used again.
Additionally, the values and importance oftraditional culture should be recognized,
thus striking a balance among sustainable
food production, people's livelihoods, andecosystem protection. In this way, the Satoyama
Initiative promotes the recognition of culturalvalues in productive landscapes, supporting
the interlinkages between nature and culturethat contribute to environmental conservation,
especially biodiversity conservation.
• 2. Strategies of HDARES for the conservationof the agricultural landscape in Eastern Taiwan
2.7 Development of ecological farming andconservation ofthe agricultural landscape

HDARESdevelops
organic
production
technology and techniques for crops andcultivates this knowledge in farmers, helping
Eastern Taiwan to become an organic
production hub in Taiwan. In recent years,
organic research conducted by the HDARES has
further ventured into the field of ecology withstudies performed to identify ways to create

100,000 Km

0

The location of HOARES in Taiwan

21

diverse biological habitats inside organic
farmland, to develop techniques for operating
and managing ridge vegetation, and to teachfarmers to use the principles of ecologicalbalance for pest control. These efforts have
reduced the costs incurred by farmers in pest
prevention and control, elevated their revenue,
and facilitated the sustainable development ofagricultural production .
Also, over the past few years, theHDARES has actively helped indigenous tribes
in building stable, high-quality crop production
systems, developing organic farming, adopting
the concept of eco-agriculture, preserving
wildflowers, and building hedges aroundorganicfarmland ridges. In doing so, the HDARES
helps locals to maintain biodiversity, sustain
food production, improve their livelihoods,
and protect the agricultural landscape (Fan etal. 2013).
2.2 Promotion of the indigenous tribe leisure

tourism industry
Indigenous tribes in Taiwan are often locatedin places with stunning natural landscapes,
with each tribe having its own distinct culture,
which gives them advantages in attracting anddeveloping tourism. HDARES made an inventoryof tribe resources and then customized
strategies for each tribe according to theresults. Counselling tutors provide suggestions
and advice to every tribe and meet with tribe
members regularly to discuss and brainstorm
tour content. The purpose of this resource isto help these tribes in developing mature andFigure 2.

distinguishing tourism industries, revitalizing
the economy of the indigenous tribes (Sun etal. 2016).

• 3. Development of ecological farming andconservation of the agriculture landscape
In general, planting rice requires a large
paddy field and monoculture (i.e., only one
type of crop is grown) which typically leads tolower biodiversity and a higher risk of pests
and diseases. To resolve these problems, theHDARES modified the international conceptof eco-agriculture to include ecologicalengineering methods appropriate for Taiwan.
To protect indigenous traditional wisdom,
HDARES has started researching and promoting
indigenous crops. They focus on recovering bothindigenous and organic farming technologies
and industries. The Xinshe Tribe community
recovers and applies its traditional farming
skills and makes efforts for maintaining thecultural customs of the Kavalan ethnic groupindigenous to Taiwan . Additionally, the Fush in
Eco Farm has introduced an organic pest
control measure to implement the concepts of
the Satoyama Initiative (Tseng et al. 2015).
Thus, the work of HDARES connects
traditional knowledge and cultural values ofindigenous people in Eastern Taiwan to theconservation of biodiversity in the agriculturallandscape.

3.1 In the Xinshe Tribe
Located in the Fengbi n Township on Taiwan 's

The agriculture landscape of Xinshe Tribe (Author: Chung-Yu Hsu)

22

Figure 3.

The agricul tu re landscape of Fushin Eco Fo rm (Author: Li Lin)

east coast, the settlements of the Xi nshe Tribeare surrounded by paddy fields (see Figure 2);rice has been grown there continually for a
century. For the Kavalan ethnic group residingin the area , ri ce harvesting has been theirlivelihood for generations. They have a strong
affection for rice because it is their staple food,and the custom of brewing rice wine is also an
important part of Kavalan rituals.
HDARES first conducted a soil test in
the area from which they found that the paddy
fields have accumulated a wealth of organi cmatter, making them highly suitable for organic
farming. The team recommended the use of
Taikeng No. 2, a rice variety that is not only
suited to the Hualien region but is also delicious
and resi stant to numerous pests and diseases.
In regards to planting techniques, the spacin g
between each row of rice was increased tofacilitate ventilation. Additionally, the amountof nitrogen fertilizer was controlled to preventthe rice tissues from becoming overly soft andsusceptible to pests and diseases.
As part of the implementation of theconcept of eco-agricu ltu re, HDARES planted
specimens of the Asteraceae family as ridge
vegetation to attract natural enemies of pests-a method that disproves the traditional belief
that weeds must be removed from ridges .
As mentioned, paddy field pests, suchas planthoppers, leafhoppers, and snout moths,
can be effectively prevented and controlled byusing their natural predators, such as ladybugs
and parasitoid wasps. These effective pest
killers can be retained by constructing an ecofriend ly en vi ron ment, thus minimizing the needof pesticides. The retention of pests' natural
predators and growing of flowering plants onridges are new methods that challenge thetraditional idea that emphasizes the removal
of weeds on ridges . These new ideas can serve
as a reminder to those in agriculture to thinkoutside the box, such as cons id ering replacing

monoculture with biodiversity which will
increase the prevention and control of pests
and diseases as well as enrich the agricultural
ecosystem .
The concept of ecology extends beyond
paddy fields, it is also a part of life. For example,
farmland can be used to enrich the educational
content of the Municipal Xin she Elementary
School. Students from the Municipal XinshePrimary School and Preschool visit the farm
monthly to perform various farming activities,
enablin g them to learn about the rice -growing
process and agricultural ecosystem. Ricegrowing allows children to connect with theirland. Moreover, for the Kavalan family, rice issomething that brings the family together andallows their family bonds to become stronger.
3.2 In the Fushin Eco Farm

The Fushin Eco Farm primarily focuses on
performing farm - related experiments. Locatedin the Ruisui Township, Hualien County, theFushin Eco Farm is divided into three land
types: public farmland , private farmland, andnatural areas (see Figure 3).
The public farmland is used forexperiments;
variousexperiments
areperformed by the Fush in Eco Farm incollaboration with the National Dong Hwa
University, HDARES, and the Forestry Bureau.
The experiments aim to find the means ofresolving conflicts between farmers andanimals, such as through the exploitation ofpurse nets and the natural predators of pests.
The habitat is composed of wetlands, bustlingwith biodiversity and life. In the future, thisarea may be open to visitors for eco - experience
tours.
The private farmland is divided into
20 equally sized parcels, with local residents
invited to farm the land . The villagers can use
the farmland to grow crops, at no cost for the23

first three years, on one condition: they mustpractice organic farming. Villagers who fail tomeet this requirement lose their access to thefarmland (Tseng et al. 2015).
The Fushin Eco Farm owner explainsthat the purpose behind the provision of
the private farmland is so, that the Fushin
community will learn to accept the practiceof organic farming. The Fushin community
is mostly surroundedby conventional
farmlands and the residents have little organic
farming experience. Therefore, by providing
access to their farmlands, the Fushin Eco
Farm enables villagers to learn, accept, andadopt en vi ron mentally friendly
farming
methods. Additionally, these activities enable
conventional farmland to be transformed into
organic farmland. Promoting organic farming
through practice is an idealistic approachwith the goal that villagers get in contact withorganic farmland, familiarize themselves withit, and ultimately accept it.
The Fushin Eco Farm possesses anobjective identical to that of the HDARES andthe organizations have enjoyed a productive
partnership, especially in the implementationof the concept of eco-agriculture. The farminsisted on using organic materials for planting
even without using Bacillus thuringiensis 1•
Therefore, when faced with an invasion ofcorn borers (Ostrinia furnacalis), the farmsought guidance from the HDARES, which
subsequently introduced them to the conceptof ecological protection and they built a cornborer prevention and control experiment
location for the farm. HDARES also planted
a row of Chinese hibiscus flowers beside thecornfield to prevent and control the corn borers
pest. Additionally, HDARES added a sheet
spread with parasitoid wasps (Trichogramma
ostriniae) during the initial experiment stage,
and planted sunflowers before the hibiscus
blossomed.

4. Promotion of indigenous tribe leisure
tourism industry
Taiwan's indigenous agriculture, cultural,and ecological resources are quite diverse
and interesting. Leisure developments inindigenous areas, combined with the cultural
creativity industry, have not only contributed
to the establishment of leisure features, buthave also helped conserve indigenous culture
and promote tribal economic prosperity.
Topromoteindigenous
tribe's
agriculture industry in Eastern Taiwan, HDARES
assisted tribes in enhancing their strengths
and competitiveness for tourism. Eight tribes
were chosen based on their potential in
tourism: Leshui, Syanox, Tafalong, Fushin Eco
Farm, Kiwit, Ceiroh, Namukang and Cilamitay

tribes. HDARES provides suggestions andadvice for every tribe and meets with the tribe
members regularly to discuss and brainstorm
tour contents.
In the case of Fushin Eco Farm, due
to the fact that the farm is mainly for crop
production, they faced many problems inthe development of the leisure industry.
For instance, the division of labor is unclear,
there is a lack of manpower and a lack ofdesign of experiential activities. HDARES
made an inventory of the tribe resources andthey designed experiential activities for theFushin Eco Farm according to the result. The
most attractive characteristic of the farm isthe use of the concept of eco-agriculture in
their agricultural practices. Therefore, HDARES
recommended that the farm provides visitorswith agricultural tech no logy instruction, ecoguided tours, and farmer's cooking activities.
After the development of the leisureindustry, the Fushin Eco Farm found that thecohesion of the community increased, not only
in restoring the traditional farming model andthe protection of indigenous culture, but also
in enhancing economic benefits.

5. Future research
Ecological farming involves the introductionof symbiotic species to support the ecologicalsustainability of the farm. HDARES will continue
to develop an organically friendly environment
to cultivate and explore ecological agriculture
cooperation and promotion strategies suitable
for rural communities by following theSatoyama Initiative.
With financial support from theCouncil of Agriculture from 2017 through 2020,
HDARES will cooperate with the followinginternational institutions to conduct a 4-year
integrated project, called "Integrated project
for enhancing eco-agriculture and sustainable
development of rural Taiwan": the National
Dong Hwa University (NDHU), National Taiwan
University (NTU), Agricultural Engineering
Research Center (AERC), Miaoli
District
Agricultural Research and Extension Station(MDARES), Chinese Taipei Committee, andthe International Commission on Irrigation
Drainage (CTCID).
The main research strategy is tocombine the efforts of social sciences andnatural science studies with a focus on
enhancing landscape resilience and community
adaptive capacity. It aims to encourage thepreservation and utilization of biodiversity.
There are five research strategies:
i. To increase the diversity and resilience ofagricultural production landscapes.

1 Bacillus thunng1ensis 1s a Gram-positive, soil-dwelling bactenum, commonly used as a biolog1cal
pestic1de24

ii . To increase the agrobiodiversity of paddy
fields and enhance ecosystem services
through habitat restoration within the
farmlands and its surroundings.
iii. To enhance the adaptive capacity of ruralcommunities through collaborative planningand multi-stakeholder participation.
iv. To explore relevant international policies
for promoting eco -agriculture in Taiwan.
v. To learn from innovative international
technologies and practices, and to share
Taiwan's experience withinternationalsocieties.
Following the Satoyama Initiative, HDARES
will continuously support the promotion
and recovery of nature-culture linkages inagricultural landscapes for the conservationof biodiversity, cultural traditions, and toachieve the objectives of increasing foodproduction and improving rural livelihoods.

• Literature Cited
Fan, M. L.; Tsai S. S.; Lin, T. Y.; Ni, Y. T.; Hwang, P. and Lee, K. 2013. The Effects of Agricultural Practices
on Invertebrate Diversity in the Rice Paddy Land of Eastern Taiwan. Bulletin ofthe Hualien District
Agricultural Research and Extension Station 31, 53-64
Hualien District Agricultural Research and Extension Station Council of Agriculture, Executive
Yuan. 2014. http:/ /www.hdares.gov.tw/eng/show_index.php [accessed 20 April, 2016]
IPSI, The International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative. 2017. http:/ /satoyama-i nitiative.org[accessed 12 April2017]
Scherr, S. J. and McNeely, J. A. 2002. Reconciling Agriculture and Biodiversity: Policy and Research
Challenges of 'Ecoagricu ltu re '. UN DP World Summit on Sustainable Development, Equator
Initiative. 2-3
Sun , C. H.; Tai, C. S.; Wang, Y. S.; Liu , H. J.; Yeh, L. W. and Liu, P. Y. 2016. Study on the trend of counselingindigenous tribe leisure tourism industry- case study in Hualien and llan area. The International
Conference of Indigenous Crops and Traditional Culture Industry Development. HDARES Special
Edition No. 141
Tseng, J. M.; Lin , L.; Xu, Z. Y.; LinT. Y.; Huang, A. W.; Li, G. Z. and Fan M. L. 2015. Ecological Farming in
Hualien. HDARES Special Edition No. 129
Yen, A. C., Sun, C. T. and Chen, T. Y. 2016. Multifunctionality of Organic Agriculture- A Case Study of
the Quri Community in Jianshih Township, Hsinchu County. Journal of Geographical Science 82,
59-86

25

The Significance, Conservation
Potential and Challenges of a
Traditional Farming Landscapein an Asian Metropolis: a Case
Study of Lai Chi Wo, Hong Kong
Chick, H. L. 1
(1) Policy fin Sustaina/Jility Lab, Faculty of Social Sciwces, The University of Hong Kortg, Hortg Kong
Special Administrative Region; +852 391 7 4767, ktchick@hku.hk•

Abstract

Lai Chi Wo is a remote farming valley located in the northeast of Hong Kong, China. The
agricultural landscape is the result of more than 300 years of interaction between a
traditional Haf?f?a settlement and its natural environment, which reflects the ancient Chinese
Feng Shui philosophy. Although the site is one of the most intact and authentic vernacular
cultural landscapes in South China, with important environmental and cultural values, there
is no effective protection system available to conserve the landscape as a whole. Its isolation,and the weaf? attachment of the younger generation further threaten the landscape's
sustainability. Since 2013, a collaborative local initiative has been implemented to revitalize
the landscape, the natural and cultural heritage, and the community of this once-deserted
village. The regeneration of this agricultural landscape has provided a portal for wider
society to participate in the environmental and cultural stewardship process.
KEY WORDS: Lai Chi Wo, traditional farming landscape, farming terrace, Feng Shuivillage, Feng Shui forest, rural revitalization•

1. Introduction

At first glance, Hong Kong is a hustle andbustle cosmopolitan city, well known for its
overpowering urban landscape, with high-rises
and high-density development. Only 24.2%
of its area is, in fact, covered by urban landuse (HKSAR 2017a). Beyond the metropolis lies
another, disappearing, rural Hong Kong, wherethe vast farming landscape once supported
the living of most of Hong Kong's population.
Many farmlands, orchards, and terraces still
exist, although most are abandoned. There
are also depopulated villages, that have been
shaped by generations of rural communities
who have designed, constructed, and managed
th e farming landscape for hundreds of years.
Among them is Lai Chi Wo, one of the mostintact traditional farming landscapes still
existing in today's Hong Kong.

26

The traditional farming landscapein Hong Kong is the result of long-term
interactions between human settlements
and their natural environment; the landscapesetting also embodies the ancient Chinese
wisdom of Feng Shui. This paper examines
the spatial setting, the cultural and ecologicalcharacteristics of Lai Chi Wo, and presents Lai
Chi Wo as an example to discuss the significance,
conservation potential, and challenges of
the traditional farming landscapes in Asian
metropolises, such as Hong Kong.

• 2. Lai Chi Wo: a traditional Hakka farming
landscapeHong Kong is situated at the mouth ofthe Pe arlRiver estuary (Figure 1, left) and is characterized
by its rugged topography. Flatlands are scarce,
therefore most of the large, early settlements

Figure 1.

Location map of Lai Chi Wo and Hong Kongare located at the northern and northwesternside of the territory, where extensive flatlands
could be found (Owen and Shaw 2007). The
northeastern part of Hong Kong, on the other
hand, is far more rugged, with fewer flatlands
available for traditional paddy farming. These
hilly landscapes were usually inhabited by thelate settlers, the Hakkas (~*), 300 years ago.
In Hong Kong, the Hakkas are recognized as
one ofthe four major indigenous ethnic groups.
They are a subgroup of the Han Chinese thatoriginated in northern China who began tosettle in the territory after the repeal of the
Coastal Evacuation Order in 1669 (Liu 1999).
Lai Chi Wo is located in the remotevalley of the northeastern shore of Hong Kong
(Figure 1, right) and is about 13 km from theclosest downtown area. It is a natural valley,
with an area of about 1 km 2, embraced by
mountains, with the northern side facing Mirs
Bay. The archeological findings from the site
showed that there has been human activity
si nee 2,000 years ago (H KSAR 2014).
The
village was settled in the late seventeenth
century by two Hakka clans, the Tsangs (~)
and the Wongs (~). Their ancestors adapted
to the rugged topography and modified thehillslopes into terraces for paddy farming. At
its agricultural prime in the 1950s, Lai Chi Wo
fed a few hundred villagers and supported
nearby fishing communities. The farmlands
once covered more than 40 hectares of land.
Today, the site is enveloped and isolated by thestatutory protection areas.
The village was once abandoned in
the 1990s-2000s and most of the villagers
moved abroad. However, the Hakka communityof Lai Chi Wo still demonstrates very strong
community cohesion and attachment to theirmotherland, even when most of the villagers
live abroad. For every traditional festival, suchas the spring and autumn tomb-sweeping
festivals (~t.k=~) and the ten-year Dai )iu
festival (:liM), the overseas villagers return to
Lai Chi Wo to join in the rituals. They still use
their Hakka dialect within their community. Lai
Chi Wo is also the center of Hing Chun Yeuk (~~*'J), a rural alliance of seven nearby Hakka
villages, connecting the Hakka communities ofdifferent villages together.

3. Feng Shui- an ancient Chinese philosophy
and science of co-existence with nature
Traditional farming landscapes in Hong Kongembrace the Chinese notion of humancoexistence with nature. This was expressed
through the ancient Chinese belief system ofFeng Shui. Feng Shui literally means "wind andwater" in Chinese. It is an esoteric set ofgeomancy theories and practices that "allows
humans to comprehend and take advantage ofthe forces of nature that surround them, butalso guides the creation and maintenance oflandscapes" (Watson 2007). People believe
practicing Feng Shui can ensure good fortune,that includes wealth, progeny, good harvests,
and official positions (Knapp 1990). Feng Shuiis deeply rooted in Chinese culture and has
shaped almost every settlement landscape inancient China, including rural villages, such as
Lai Chi Wo.
\"k uf Aoct>tor\\lounlllln of Fomatlltr

~
. I
lk: /
Rtdge~-~

Jlill of Parents
Cart

/:'\
..,__
~

~

..

Best Location

Mounlaln or Grandfather• Bleck T<>rtout
11111

n·altrFlow of Water

Figure 2. An ideal layout and symbolic elements of a Feng
Shui village (Mat? and Ng 2005)

An ideal Feng Shui setting model wasestablished in ancient China to help people
find and modify a site for settlement, as shownin Figure 2. It follows two fundamental
principles, "facing onto water and sunny side"and "backing onto mountain and shading side"(Cheng and Kong 1993). The landforms are
undulating rather than linear, blessed withgentle winds and slow, meandering streams topromote good and gentle circulation (Coggins
2003). Lai Chi Wo village sits northwest, at the27

Figure 3. This aerial photograph, taken in 1956, gives a glimpse of the old farming landscape and Feng Shui setting of Lai Chi Wo
and nearby branched villages. CD=Lai Chi Wo village, @=Hillside Feng Shui forest, ® =Estu ary Feng Shui forest, @=Paddy terraces,® =Mui Tze Lam village, ® =Kop Tong village, 0 =Siu Tan village. (Mapping and Survey Office, Hong Kong SAR Government)

foothill, and facing southeast to the sea. The
settlement lies between two ridges on thesouthern, sunny slope, forming a protective arc
to shield the village from cold winds in thewinter, yet they receive sun through out theyear (Owen and Shaw 2007) (Figure 3). The
village stands above a floodplain and isnourished by slow moving, meandering
streams. The axi al arrangement of village
houses also ensures that the heat of the sun isseasonally captured, or evaded, by thesoutheast-facing front (Figure 4). Between thevillage and the hills, a species-rich, mature,
forestland is maintained, the Feng Shui forest.
It blankets the hills behind, while all otherhillsides were stripped bare for fuel in the olddays. The Feng Shui forest serves as a naturalbarrier to protect the village from landslide sand hill fires, as well as moderating the
microclimate and providing natural resources,
such as foods and fuels (Yip et al. 2004).
Furthermore, the villagers of Lai Chi Wo plantbamboos to block the bad (strong) wind andmaintain an estuary Feng Shui forest near the
shore to protect the village from sea wind andwave, wh ich is unique in Hong Kong. The Feng

28

!I

Figure 4. The layout plan of th e village houses.· all houses
are neatly arranged along three vertical and nine horizontal
lanes with the same facing directio n (southeast) enclosed by
the village wall according to the note given by the Feng Shuimaster hundred years ago to optimize living environmentand control over-expansion which might exceed the carrying
capacity of the landscapeFigure 5. The Hakka traditions preserved in Lai Chi Wo. Upper left= Hakka snack, Cha Kwo (*~). made with rice powder andlocal plant Paederia scandens, upper middle= Traditional rice farming tools displayed in the village exhibition room, upper right=
Bui lding mortared wall using soil, rice straws, raw suga r/s ticky rice and oyster shells, lower left= Earth god worship, lower right =Hakka Unicorn dance (~fi.l'(~)

Shui setting is a characteristic landscapefeature of traditional farming villages in South
China and it ha s been proven that theembracing hills and th e southern exposure
were an ideal spatial configuration for village
settlement and paddy ri ce cultivation (Lovelace1985).
Feng Shui displays the philo sophicalthinking of the ancient Chin ese about theconcept of balance and harmony with naturein the development of traditional settlements,
with many specific manifestations that embody
the rich com prehension of nature's rule s.
It represents a Chinese indigenous form ofen vi ron mental design and management thatbuilds community solidarity (Coggins 2003).
Today, Lai Chi Wo village still endeavors toprotect its Feng Shui, although perhaps notquite so strenuously as befo re; these principles
guide the management and the use of theen vi ron ment by emphasizing elements of thenatural order that have worked for generations.
The traditional belief system protects not only
the site's integrity as a Feng Shui village but
also sacred trees under the earth god as a
tradition of worshipping nature. This strong
belief has made the site the most intact Feng
Shui farming village in Hong Kong, whereas
most other similar landscapes have been
destroyed, fragmented , or intruded in modern
South China upon rapid urbanization (Cheng etal. 2009).

• 4. Farming landscape: a place to incubate
nature-based culture
Historically, most of the villages in Hong Kong
were villages of rice subsistence farmers. Lai
Chi Wo was no exception: two crops of rice and,often, a third crop of winter sweet potatoes,
were grown in the small farming field s. The
warm and humid climate resulted in a
prevailing farming mode of paddy ricecultivation among villages in the South Ch ina
region . The Ha kka ance stors opened thefoothill and upland areas; they terraced thehillslopes alo ng th e contour lines into small,flat farmin g plots to adapt their double - crop
rice tradition into the marginal hilly terrain s
they occupi ed. Som e steeper upland terraces
were used to grow fruit trees. The terrace
importantlandscapedesignwasan
modification feature, associated with the local
Hakka culture, in response to rice cultivationand soil erosion (Fan 1992). The farming terrace
system was supported with an extensive, but
carefully designed, irrigation that directed the
freshwater source from the upper hills to feed
every single terrace field and farmland for thecultivation of rice and other crops .
Natural resources have never been
limited in Lai Chi Wo. A wide application of local
materials could be found in every aspect of theprevious village life. The villagers used stones
collected from the streams and hills to build
retaining walls to support terrace and irrigation
channels. They used local trees, grasses, andbamboos as fuels and for making farming tools
and weaving baskets. Local soil was the basic
building material to produce mud bricks andmortared walls. The local plants provided richresources for making clothes, dyes, foods, etc(Figure 5). The use of local, natural materials,
as well as the way the Hakka ancestors built
their dwellings on slopes, minimized theeconomic input under the previous harshliving conditions. And this close and reliant
relationship with the natural en vi ron ment
incubated the indigenous knowledge of nature,29LegendD
D

Plover Clove Country Park•
Lai Chi Wo Special Area•
Double Haven Marine Park•
Mudflat
Lai Chi Wo Hakka Village~'\.or~ Mangrovec::=:J

Site of Special Scientific Interest #c::=:J Site of Archaelological Interest #D

Hip Tin Temple & Hok Shan Monastery
Grade Ill Historic Buildings#---+ Existing streams---+ Ecologically Important Stream#
Old and Val uable Trees #adaptation, and the mindset for the sustainable
use of natural resources for the sake of longterm self-sufficiency. It has become a form ofa unique natural manifestation of the local
Hakka culture, which can still be seen from thevillage's older generations today.

• 5. Revitalization of deserted landscapeThe rice farming tradition continued essentiallyunchanged in rural Hong Kong until the midtwentieth century. After World War II, however,
the government started to massively develop
the rural areas that, together with the influxof refugees of the Civil War in main land China,
led to an important directional change inlocal agricultural development, which heavily
impacted on the rice farming tradition ofrural communities (Liu 1999). From about the
1960s, rice farming ceased to be practical in
the vi llages because of the ever-increasing
opportunities for better-paid work in towns
and abroad. The young people of the villages
moved to urban areas, abroad to the UK, orother European countries, to seek new job
opportunities, leaving the farmlands lying
abandoned. The last paddy field in Lai Chi Wowent out of production in about the late 1970s.
The original farming community of Hakkas wasgone. On the other hand , the rich environmental
resources of Lai Chi Wo has attracted thegovernment to invest substantially in nature
conservation. The government an nou need theestablishment of the Plover Clove Country Parkin 1979 to protect the water catchment, andlater the designation of the Yan Chau Tong
Marine Park in 1996, to protect the marine
resources in the inn er sea (Figure 6). The
hillside and estuary Feng Shui forests of La i Chi
Wo have been zoned as protected areas
because of the spec ies richness and abundanceas well as its unique com position (H KSA R
2017b). The site is also an integral part ofHong Kong's UNESCO Global Geopark due to its
special geological significance and part of theirrigation streams has been recognized as

30

Ecological Important Streams too. Recent
research further indicates the outstanding
integrity of the subtropical forest-mangrove
system which is associated with a humansettlement, probably the best in China,
dis played in Lai Chi Wo catchment (Morton2016). However, it must be noted that the major
dwelling and farming areas of Lai Chi Wo arestill privately owned and not designated to any
statutory protection but enveloped by astatutorily protected area. The en vi ron mental
protection designation of the surroundings has
successfully protected the enclave, Lai Chi Wo,
from any development so far, including roadaccess, but, further exacerbated the isolationand inaccessibility, which cut-off Lai Chi Wo
from economic opportunities and accelerated
its abandonment. The village was deserted .
Farmlands were left abandoned and overgrownwith trees. The terrace and irrigation structurescollapsed and degraded . Only the village
houses were minimally maintained, relying on
the remittances sent back from the villagers
who were resident abroad or in town. Thissocio-economical change has terminated thelong-term
inti mateinteractionoftheindigenous rural communities with the natural
en vi ron ment, completely detaching the local
community from their homeland.
In 2013, a local initiative, nam ed"Sustainab le Lai Chi Wo," was launched (http:/ I
www.socsc.h ku.h k/ psl/ laich iwo). It is a multiyear, rural revitalization program led by The
University of Hong Kong, in collaboration withthe local indigenous community, NGOs, andthe private sector to revitalize the landscap e,
natural, and cultural heritage as well as torebuild the community network of Lai Chi Wo(Figure 7). This is the first revitalization attemptin Hong Kong for a deserted village. Th e
program implements farming, research, andcapacity training via a collaborative approach,and engages not only the local community but
also the wider society to participate in rural
sustainable development. This program helps
the retired villagers to resettle and attra cts

Initiate whole c:ltchmcnt:1ppru:1ch for bi(xtivc . ity
consen·:t rion

DeYelop the Yill:lge a a n
duc:t ti on hub to build
public awa renes on
hu1113n-n.arure relationship
Creare new mral-urban
community network,
repopul:l ting the Yillage

Re \· i ~ li se f!lrm i ~:tcriYities by :tdopringinnm•:1 ri ve f:lr ming
mer hods

Dnc lo p ]C)c:tl pmducr :md
ser\"ice to re:tctiv:ue

Redi scove r communitY
n:sou n:es a nd f:tcili ra re:1ppropri a tc use

Figure 7.

Sustainable
Lai Chi Wo,·ilbge's economy

The program logic of th e Lai Chi Wo's revitalizatio n

new settlers from the city who have a strong
environmental consciousness to move into Lai
Chi Wo and set up their own farms in order torestore the vibrancy of the farming landscapeand community. So far, the program has
restored the farmlands and irrigation system offive hectares of land and facilitated the setup
of seven community farms by villagers and new
settlers for small-scale organic production .
The village has been repopulated from zero
population to near 20 active, indigenous
villagers and non-indigenous new settlers
regularly living, farming, and running small
tourism - related businesses inside the village
since the program started .

• 6. Conservation challenges andsustainabilityAsacontinuingorganically
evolving
cultural landscape, Lai Chi Wo displays a highlevel of spatial integrity, cultural authenticity,and ecological uniqueness, which is rarely
seen in any modern metropolis under theforce of rapid urbanization . Lai Chi Wo, as acase, exemplifies the interlinking relationshipof natu re-cu ltu ren the context of a
traditional agricultural landscape, in which
the understanding of the traditional system
and lifeway of Lai Chi Wo provides a powerfulreminder of environmental stewardship and its
fragility against urbanization and globalization(Atha 2012). " Rural" has long been absent inlocal mainstream discussions on the city's
development until the recent en vi ron mental
awakening and raised awareness of foodsecurity among the society. The village
revitalization of Lai Chi Wo has brought the
topic of rural sustainability to wider public
discussion (SCMP 2015). Nevertheless, thecurrent heritage protection in Hong Kong ismonument-focused and little attention has
been paid by local government to any historiclandscapes (Atha 2012). The privately owned
dwelling and farming area of Lai Chi Wo
cannot enjoy statutory protection, whereas
the current en vi ron mentally centered country
park and marine park system neglects the1importance of the nature-culture interaction
and under-represents the cultural significanceof the landscape. The recognition of "culturallandscape" in the local heritage protection
system, therefore, would help the developmentof
appropriate
conservation
strategies
to safeguard the fruits of natu re-cu ltu reinteractions.
Moreover, there is a more critical
succession issue. The indigenous participantsof village revitalization are mainly the returned
villagers from overseas who are usually over
60 years of age . They are the last village - borngeneration who know the customs, remember
the traditional knowledge, and have witnessedthe village's changes over time. They provide
the most valuable first-hand information for
the re construction of Lai Chi Wo's genuine
history and culture . However, their next
generation , mostly born abroad, has neverlived in or even visited the village. The young
generation is unlikely to return, but they will
succeed the land and property ownership fromtheir parents. Their weak attachment to Lai
Chi Wo indeed poses considerable uncertainty
about the continuity of the Hakka tradition andthe long-term sustai nabi lity of the privately
owned site in the near future .

31

• Literature Cited
Atha, M. 2012. A neglected heritage: Towards a fuller appreciation of the landscapes and lifewaysof Hong Kong's rice farming past. Asian Anthropology, 11-1 : pp. 129-156
Cheng, J. and Kong, S. 1993. Feng Shui and architecture. Jiang Xi Science and Technology Press,
Jiang Xi. [In Chinese]
Cheng, J., He, F. and Liu, Y. 2009. Progress of the research on geomantic forests of Lingnan villages.
Chinese Landscape Architecture 2009-11 [In Chinese]
Coggins, C. 2003. The Tiger and the Pangolin: Nature, Culture, and Conservation in China. Universityof Hawaii Press, Honolulu
Fan , W. 1992. Village Feng Shui Principles. In : R.G . Knapp (ed.): Chinese Landscapes: The Village as
Place. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu
HKSAR (The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region). 2014. Draft Lai Chi Wo,
Siu Tan and Sam A Tsuen Outline Zoning Plan No. S/NE-LCW/C. http:/ /www.info.gov.hk/tpb/en/
papers/TPB/1059-tpb_9614.pdf [accessed April2017]HKSAR (The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region). 2017a. Land Utilizationin Hong Kong. http:/ /www.pland.gov.hk/pland _en /info_serv/statistic/landu.html [accessed April
2017]
HKSAR (The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region). 2017b. Designation of Lai
Chi Wo Special Area. http:/ /www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/200412/15/1215104.htm [accessed April
2017]
Knapp, R.G. 1990. The Chinese House: Craft, Symbol and the Folk Tradition. Oxford University Press,
New York
Liu , R.H. 1999. Xinjie Jianshi [A Brief History of the New Territories]. Joint Publishing (H.K.), Hong
Kong [In Chinese]
Lovelace, G.W. 1985. Man, land, and mind in early historic Hong Kong. In: K.L. Hutterer, AT Ramboand G. Lovelace (eds.): Cultural Values and Human Ecology in Southeast Asia. Ann Arbor: Center
for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan
Mak, M.Y., and Ng, S.T. 2005. The art and sc ience of Feng Shui - a study on architects'
perception . Building and Environment 40 (3).
Morton, B. 2016. Hong Ko ng's mangrove biodiversity and its conservation within the context ofa southern Chinese megalopolis: A review and a proposal for Lai Chi Wo to be designated as a
World Heritage Site. Regional Studies in Marine Science 8: pp. 382-399
Owen , B. and Shaw, R. 2007. Hong Kong Landscapes: Shaping the Barren Rock. Hong Kong University
Press, Hong Kong
South China Morning Post (SCMP). 2015. Lai Chi Wo enclave sets pace for revival of Hong Kong
villages - but need to ease regu lation s is apparent. http: / /www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/education-community I article /1824699/ la i-ch i -wo-e n clave-sets- pace- revival-hong-kong[accessed April 2017]
Watson, R.S. 2007. Feng Shui, landscape, and history in rural Hong Kong. Symbols, Spring 20 07, 3-7.
Yip, J. K. L., Ngar, Y. N., Yip, J. Y., Liu, E. K. Y. and Lai, P. C. C. 2004. Venturing Feng Shui Forests. Cosmos
Books Ltd, Hong Kong

32

Agricultural
Surroundings

33

The Landscape of
Borobudur Temple
Compounds and its
Environment
Fransiska Dian Ekarini 1(1) Borolnuh1r Conservation Office,Jalan Badmwati, Borobudu1~ Magelang 56553,jawa Tengah,Indonesia; +62 (0)81 7041 2820, frcmsiscadian79(Zi~gmail.com•

Abstract

Borobudur Temple Compounds is a Buddhist temple complex, designated as World Heritage
since 1991, that has become a major tourist destination in Indonesia. This complex consistsof the Borobudur, Pawon and Mendut Temples which are located in a straight line. The
Borobudur region includes rural areas that are characterized by the extent of the existing
agricultural land, especially paddy fields. Over time large areas of farmland have become
urbanized, damaging the traditional agricultural landscape. Therefore, cultural heritage
management of the site must not only be focused on the monuments, but also on thesurrounding environment. One way to maintain the landscape of Borobudur is to raise
public awareness about the importance of preserving both: heritage and environment. The
local communities' awareness could also play an active role to conserve the rural areasof Borobudur. A new master plan is needed for the integrated management of Borobudur
region and for the conservation of the agricultural/and, particularly the paddy fields.
KEY WORDS: rural area, agricultural land, urbanization, new master plan
1. Introduction
7.7 Overview of the heritage site
Borobudur Temple Compounds is located in
Borobudur village, subdistrict of Borobudur,
Magelang Regency, Central Java Province,
Indonesia. Although the Borobudur Temple
Compounds is comprised of three stone
temples - Mendut, Pawon, and Borobudur,
Borobudur is the main temple and the largestof the three. The monument was built ona hill that rises about 46 meters above thesurrounding plain, and measures around thebase about 120 square meters. More than
55,000 cubic meters of andesite stone werecarved to build this massive structure in theform of a low step-pyramid. It consists of six
rectangular terraces, three circular terraces,
and a huge bell-shaped stupa on top. The walland balustrade of the rectangular terraces areadorned with meticulously worked reliefs.
Inside the Borobudur cultural heritage there34

are archaeological remains that must bepreserved, namely the Borobud u r Temple,
the Pawon Temple, and the Mendut Temple
and other ancient remains. The Borobudur
cultural heritage region became a designatedWorld Cultural Heritage Site in 1991, under
the name "Borobudur Temple Compounds."
The Borobudur Temple underwent restoration
twice. The first time was in 1907-1911, by the
Dutch government led by Theodoor van Erp,a military officer. The second restoration was
carried out by the government of Indonesia
and UNESCO in 1973-1983. After the second
restoration, many tourists, both domestic andforeign, visited the Borobudur Temple.
The Borobudur Temple provides a
panoramic view of the beautiful agriculturalland that characterizes this area. The temple
stands on a hill that has a height of about 15
meters from the surrounding area. Surrounding
hills, mountains, and large rivers form the
Borobudur landscape of rural character. Mostof the Borobudur region is a green field of

agricultural land planted with paddy. Originalplants from the Borobudur region are known,
namely banana, bamboo and coconut. Despite
the current rapid development in the Borobudu rarea, these plants are still commonly found.

1.2 Brief description
landscapeof theagricultural

The Borobudur region is dominated byagricultural land consisting of sawah (wet rice
farming), kebun (mixed forest gardening) andtegalan (dryland cultivation of food crops).
Types of crops in the wet rice farming include
rice, pulses, and vegetables. Kebun (mixed
forest gardening) are usually located near
the settlement land with crops species suchas ram butan tree (Nepehelium lappaceum),
papaya (Carica papaya), banana (Musa spp),
jackfruit (Ortocarpus heterophyllus), breadfruit(Artocarpus communis), duwet (Syzigium
cumini), kepel (Stelechocarpus burahol),sapodilla(Manikcara
kauki/M.
Achras),coconut trees (Cocos nucifera), teak (Tectono
grandis) and sengon (Albizia falcataria). Typesof plants that are in the tegalan area (Dryland
cultivation of food crops) are cassava (Manihat
utilissima), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum),chilli (Capsicum annum), peanuts (Arachis
hypogaea) and beans (Vigna sinensis). Planting
design on tegalan areas (dryland cultivation offood crops) occurs in the form of interplanting,(tumpang sari) which is a mixture of crops in
one field.
Most of the population are farmers
of wet rice, which can be harvested twice ayear. Wet rice farming with technical irrigation
dominates village land use, with rivers andsprings as the water sources for irrigation.
During the rainy season paddy fields areplanted with rice, while in the dry season crops
such as maize, cassava, peanuts, tobacco andchilli are planted.
Some farmers, working on their land,hire their neighbors in exchange for half ofthe product. When the harvest season comes,
usually several villagers work together tohelp farmers harvest rice, and they share
the product. To harvest rice, farmers are stillusing the traditional method called ani-ani:
cutting the stalks of rice with a bamboo toolclipped on their fingers, even when this is time
consuming. These jobs are usually done by
women farmers. This way of working has been
done by farmers for generations.

2. Significance of The Heritage Place

2.1 Borobudur Temple Compounds as a World
Cultural Heritage Site
In 1991, Borobud u r was inscribed on the World

Heritage List, together with two other smallerstone temples, Pawon and Mendut. These
three stone temples are located in a straightline about three kilometres on east-westorientation, and are regarded as belonging
to a single temple complex. Known as the
Borobudur Temple Compounds, this World
Cultural Heritage Site met three criteria of the
Operational Guidelines for the Implementationof the World Heritage Convention: (i) The

Borobudur Temple Compounds with its
stepped, unroofed pyramid consisting of ten
superimposing terraces, crowned by a largebell-shaped dome is a harmonious marriage
of stupas, temple and mountain that is amasterpiece of Buddhist architecture andmonumental arts; (ii) The Borobudur Temple
Compounds is an outstanding example ofIndonesia's art and architecture from between
the early 8th and late centuries that exerted
considerable influence on an architectural
revival between the mid 13th and early 16th
centuries. (vi) Laid out in the form of a lotus,
the sacred flower of Buddha, Borobudur Temple
Compounds is an exceptional reflection of ablending of the very central idea of indigenous
ancestor worship and the Buddhist concept ofattaining Nirvana. The ten mounting terracesof the entire structure correspond to thesuccessive stages that the Bodhisattva has toachieve before attaining to Buddhahood.1
2.2 Other values

Besides the cultural values (historical,architectural,
spiritual,aesthetical) that
support the inscription of Borobudur Temple
Compounds as a World Heritage property,
the area of the Borobudur Temple has value
as a rural natural environment that ought toberecognized. The Borobudur region has
rural characteristics comprised of numerous
agricultural lands, especially paddy fields. The
value of natural resources that exist aroundthis heritage can be added to increase thevalue of Borobudur's heritage. The study ofcultural landscapes in Indonesia has not been
carried out extensively, although there aremany cultural landscapes.
In 1992, Cultural Landscapes havebeen recognized as subject of Outstanding
Universal Value, with its sub-categories: a)clearly defined landscapes designed andintentionally crafted by man, b) organically
evolved landscapes, and c) associative culturallandscapes. 2 Borobudur and its environment
could be categorized as a cultural landscapecom posed of the existing agricultural land, theculture of rural communities that is stillongoing, the architecture of the region, and its
natural forms. The cultural landscape approach
could more appropriately define the area of

1 http/ /whcunesco.org/en/llst/592
2 http/ /whcunescoorg/en/culturallandscape/35

Table 1. }ICA Zonation of Borobudur Region
1...~.9 -----------···---·----------------------·?2.~-~--------------- ___-____-____-____-____-___-___- - - -__-____-____-____-____-____-____-____-____-____-___-___-____-___-____-__ -____B~.r:n..<3-.r.t______-____-____-___-___-__-____-_____ ::::~=::~~==:=~~=:=-----------~
1. Zone-1: sanctuary areas (Archaeological............ ~n~ i!()~rne.0tP.!~s.e.rv.~tl()n) ..

Zone for protection and prevention of destruction of the physical environment of the archaeologicalmonuments.
...........
.
--- - -~-----····

2.

Zone -2 (Archaeological Park Zon e)

Zone for provision of park facilities for the convenience of visitors and preservat·i-on of the historicalj
env 1ronment.
- -·----········ --------······-------------------- ,3.

Zone-3 (Land Use Regulation)

Zone for regulation of land use around the parks and preservation of the environment while
controlling develo[Jment in areas surrounding the parks.

4.

Z.()_0_E?~~(~ i st() r_i~~-l.?~~n.~_ry P.r es.~.r~a_t_i_(J_n._ Z.() n.e)__Z.().0.E?. f(Jr rn.il.in.t~ n~.n.~~ _()_f_ t~_e__hJ s_~()r_i~_a_l __s_c_e._n_~ry_~ncj__ p_r_e_~~-n.~i()_0 __ ()_f d~sy~_~t_i_ (J n. _()~_t_~_e _~ c_
e0.E?!X.... .

Zone -s (National Archaeological Park Zone)
Zone for undertaking archaeological surveys over a wide area and prevention of destruction of............................. __________u_0_~_iS.~()'.'e.~e.cj_a_r_::~~~-(J_l.CJgic_~ rri.CJil.U.rn_ell.~ ---·
Source: JICA, 1979-,

5.

protection and its values. The natural values in
Borobudur area would benefit from a natureculture approach for conservation andmanagement.
• 3. Current Management Arrangements

3.1 Old Master plan
In response to the request of the government of
the Republic of Indonesia, the Government ofJapan conducted a study on the developmentof the National Archaeological Parks at
Borobudur and Prambanan in Java. JICA
(Japan International Cooperation Agency) has
conducted this study for a masterplan of the
Borobudur and Prambanan area, completed
in 1979. Unfortunately, this masterplan is notsupported by the government law and therefore
cannot be applied, although it is included in
the document proposing Borobudur as World
Heritage. According to the JICA masterplan, theBorobudur region is divided into five zones(table 1, figure 1).
Currently, the JICA masterplan is not
valid because the period of this masterplan

is for 20 years and it ended in the year 1999.
This masterplan could have been useful toconsider the larger environment and othervalues of Borobudur, such as its agriculturallandscape, through zones 1, 2, and 3, which
include the en vi ron ment, the scenery and theland use. The importance of re-arranging the
new masterplan lies in the need to protect
and preserve the values of Borobudur and thewider en vi ron ment.
3.1 Heritage Management
Related to the JICA masterplan, Heritage
management of the Borobudur Temple andits surroundings is currently carried out
by 3 different agencies.
The Borobudur
Conservation Office under the Ministry of
Education and Culture, manages zone 1 (themonument of the temple and its yard). Zone 2,
a tourist park around the temple, is managed
by PT Taman Wisata Candi Borobudur andPrambanan under the State Minister for State
Owned Enterprises. Zone 3, in the form of
settlements surrounding the temple along withthe agricultural land area, is managed by the
MAP OF JICA'S ZONING SYSTEM
OF BOROBUDUR REGIONs
0 0,45 0,9

1,8

2,7

H H E""":-----:3

3,6

E""":-----=JKm

Legend
•
-

Sites
zone1
zone 2__j zone3zone 4
-

zonaS

. J

~~ree s:Bakosurtanal 2001
BorobudlK Con~rvalion Office
Projection· Tranverse MercalOr

Gnd System: U'TM·ZetWt 495
D~tum . WGS54

Figure 1.
Map showing zoning system in Borobudur Region according to the }ICA master plan of 1979 (Source: Prepared by
Fra nsislw Dian Ekarini)

36

I

MAP OF NATIONAL STRATEGIC AREA
OF BOROBUDURs
0 0,45 0,9
1,8
HH~

2,7
3,6
~Km

Legend•Sites-

Preservation Area 1 (SP-1 )-Preservation Alea 2 (SP-2)=..:;,.,.12001

BorobudiX Conservation Office
ProjectX,n · TranverseA.tercator

Gnd System . UTM·Zone 49S
Datum· WGS&1

Figure 2.

Mop showing the Notional Strategic Area of Borobudur (Source: Prepared by Fronsislw Dian Elwrini)

Local Government of the Magelang Regency,
under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Visitors who
go to BorobudurTemple will pass through zone
3 and zone 2 first, and then to the monumentof the Borobud ur Temple.
As for the sustainability of agriculturalland , which characterizes the Borobudur area,
we can only conduct monitoring and evaluation
activities and provide recommendations toother authorized institutions. This is somethingthat makes the preservation of agriculturalland in the World Heritage of the Borobudurarea a difficult task: there is an unclear
management of sustai nabi lity oft he Borobud u r
area, and a lack of coordination between
agencies regarding the implementation of
applicable legislation .
With such a management system, local
people obtain almost no financial or cultural
benefits from Borobudur's heritage. Income
from the tourism sector of the Borobudur
Temple is managed by PT Taman Wisata
Borobudur and Prambanan Temple, which isthe central institution . The local governmentof the Magelang Regency does not get an
important role in the management of the
Borobudur Temple. This is also true for the
local people. Local people around the temple
have not gained an important role in managing
the preservation of the Borobudur Temple.
Most people utilize the tourism in Borobudur
Temple through trading, parking, or cleaning
services. An official Government statistic showsthat Borobudur is the poorest village in the
Magelang Residency. It calculates economic
poverty as an economic inability measured by
the food expenditure approach (equivalent to2,100 kcal per person per day), plus the inability
to fulfill non-food basic needs (education,
basic health, housing facilities, and clothing,
Mage lang Government 2015) 3.
3.2. Spatial Management

The management of a World Heritage property
is not only limited to the monument but also
to the surrounding environment. The areaaround Borobudur Temple is dominated by anagricultural landscape and its management
is coordinated by the Regional Governmentof the Magelang Regency. The land aroundthe monument is owned by the local people.
In order to maintain the regional landscapeof Borobudur as a World Heritage area anda national strategic area, land use in thisregion is governed by Spatial Planning andRegional Planning of the Magelang Regency
and Presidential Regulation Number 58 of 2014(concerning Spatial Planning of Borobudur
Area and its Vicinity).
In this spatial planning regulation, theBorobudur area is divided into 2 zones (Figure2): preservation area 1 (SP-1) and preservation
area 2 (SP-2). Even if with these new spatial
regulations, the Borobudur area was divided
into two zones and management still relies

3 Based on data from Magelang government 1n the year 2012 in Magelang Regency there are 56 villaes
belonging to high poverty level wh1ch 1s worse than the national poverty level Criteria of the poverty
classification uses high, if the poverty rate is greater than 26.23%, moderate, 1f the poverty rate is 1n therange of 1335 and 2623% and low, 1f the pove rty rate 1s smaller th an 1335%.

37

on the old regulations (Presidential Decree
Number 1/1992).

• 4. Current State of Conservation andChallenges for Continuity
Current conditions in the Borobudur area
include land use change from agricultural tonon-agricultural uses. Many sawah (wet rice
farming), f?ebun (mixed forest gardening) andtegalan (dry land cultivation of food crops)
have been urbanized. In the period 2005-2015
the percentage of agricultural land decreasedin the Borobudur national strategic area as
seen in the chart below (F igure 3).
Percentage of the Changes in Agricultural and Non AgriculturalLand in 2005-2015
65.75

70

62.44

60. 14

60
50
40

37.56

34.26

%
30
20
10

39.86

I I I

2005

2009

2015

Yeor

-

Agricultural-

Non Agricultural········· Linear (Agricultural)

Figure 3.
Graph of percentage of land use change fromagricultural to non -agricultural/and from 2005 to 2015
(Source: Elwrini, F.D, 2016)

There are several challenges in the preservationof the Borobudur area such as increasingpressure of development, tourism, weatheringof stone temples, and management of heritage
values, which are not integrated in the strategicplan or the master plan . This is consistent with
global issues of concern to the World Heritage
Committee, such as eli mate change, energy
and mining, tourism, and urbanization (World
Heritage Centre, 2007).
The separation of the institutions incharge of the management of the monuments
and the existing agricultural landscapearound the temple is not optima l for heritage
management. Management of the monuments(temples) is under the Borobudur Conservation
Office, while permission for land use change is
und er the authority of Magelang Government,
without going through the permission of the
Borobudur Conservation Office. For example,
if there are people who would like to sell orchange the use of their farming land, theywi ll just apply for consent to the Magelang
Government without co nsultation with the
Borobodur Conservation Office. This situation
makes it difficult to contro l the preservationof the agricultural landscape surrounding
Borobud u r.

• 5. Recommendations
The preservation efforts of World Heritage
requires strong and clear regulations. The
agricultural landscape around Borobud u r

38

Temple is located in an area outside thetemple monument that is not managed by theinstitutions that deal with the archeological
heritage. Thus, it is difficult for coordinationin case a problem concerning the agriculturalland in the area of Borobudur arises. Providing
incentives to the community who maintain thefarming land has not been able to cover thenecessities of life for the farmers, so the tradeof agricu ltu ralland for urbanization sometimes
becomes unavoidable.
A new master plan is needed toestablish an integrated management of
Borobudur's cultural heritage so that thepreservation of the monument and its
environment can work together. We needto develop a nature-culture approach toconservation that could promote a more
integrated conservation of the monument andthe agricultural landscape by inviting local
people to preserve the agriculture so that theconservation of nature can be maintained andthe culture of the society remains sustainable.

• Literat ure Cited

Ekarini, F.D. 2016. Change in Cultural Landscape in the National Strategic Area of Borobudur, aStudy of Land Use of 2005-2015 (Thesis). Universitas Gadjah Mad a. Yogyaka rta
JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) Study Team . 1979. Borobudur- Prambanan National
Archaeological Parks.
Presidential Decree Number 1/1992 concerning Tourism Park Management of Borobud u r andPrambanan Temple and Its Environment Control
Presidential Regulation Number 58/2014 concerning Spatial Planning of Borobudur Area and its
Vicinity
Regulation of Magelang Regent Number 17/2015 concerning Regional Government Work Plan of
Magelang Regency Year 2016
World Heritage Centre. 2007. World Heritage Challenges for the Mi lllen n i u m. UNESCO World
Heritage Centre

39

The Interlinking of Nature
and Culture in GOreme
National Park
Funda Solmaz $akar 1(1) Research Assistant, Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of 14rchitecture, Tasklsla cad. Sisli, Istanlml I Turkey, solmazJimda @:gmai l. cant

• Abstract

Located on volcanic topography, in the center of Anatolia, Cappadocia has been a World
Cultural and Natural Heritage Site since 1985. The region has also been designated bynational authorities as a National Park, Protected Archeological Site, Protected NaturalSite, Protected Urban Site, and a Tourism Conservation and Development Area. The volcanic
structure and the geological formations of the land constitute the main natural assets of
the region. The human-made physical environment, which is generated by carving out the
tuff masses and tuff ground, form the cultural assets. Thus, nature and culture have an
extraordinary relationship in Cappadocia.
This paper aims to examine the relationship between nature and culture in Cappadocia, witha focus on the agricultural landscape as a significant component of the overall heritage
value. It proposes to consider the agricultural landscape as a link between the cultural andnatural assets.

KEY WORDS: national park, Goreme, nature, culture, culturallandscape,agriculturallandscape1. Introduction

1.1 Overview of the heritage site
Cappadocia is located in Central Anatolia,
Turkey and comprises of the administrative
districts of five provinces: Nev~ehir, Aksaray,
K1r~ehir, Nigde, and Kayseri, which havecommon geological features. Nev~ehir province
is the core area of the region and contains thesettlements that are referred to in this paper(Figure 1).
Cappadocia has a rich historicalbackground and it is known that the region
has been settled since the early ages of humanoccupation; however, the observable heritage
mostly dates back to the Middle Byzantium

period (Rodley 1985). Hittites, Persian s,
Romans, Seljuks, and Ottomans have inhabited
this part of Anatolia 1. Cave dwellings, churches,and monasteries, as well as undergroundsettlements, reveal how this region has been
settled over the course of time. Furthermore,
it is believed that the region was an importantcenter for religious and secular life during the
Middle Byzantine period (Kalas 2004). Today,
several rock-cut churches, decorated withrich frescos, constitute part of the significant
cultural and historic value of the area.
Thed isti net
topographic
andgeological structures of the region have been
generated by the volcanic eruptions of the
nearby mountains, Hasan and Mount Erciyes.
The entire area is covered with layers of tuff,

1 For more information about the history of Cappadocia, see Rodley, L 1985. Cave Monaste ries of
Byzantine Cambridge Cambridge University Press; Giovannini, L. (Ed ) 1971 Arts of Cappadocia Lond on
Bame and Jenkins; Kalas, V 2004. Early explorations of Ca ppad oci a and the monastic myth Byzant1ne
and Modern Greek Studies. V28 (1)101-11940

Figure 1.

Ortahisar Castle and the settlement pattern (Solmaz $akar, 2010)

which have been eroded by the effects ofclimatic factors, such as rain, wind, and flooding(Topal and Doyuran 1998). This process hasformed the unique geological formations thatcan be seen today, called fairy chimneys .
In this region, since the early period of
Christianity, the in habitants have used thisgeological structure to create spectacular
structures. The tuff layers were carved out toform caves, which were used as living spaces
for both people and their animals. Later, overthe carved out spaces, masonry buildings wereconstructed with local stones from the quarries
in the vicinity. Together, these masonry
structures and carved spaces formed theresidential architecture. In this way, an
outstandingarchitectural
patternwasgenerated in which the built environments andthe natural environments are interlocked(Solmaz 2013) (Figure 2).

Figure 2.
Plan layout of the ground floor of a rock carved
house (Erenc;in, 1976)

In the 1980s, the geology of the area became

more widely known and the site began toattract great attention due to its uniquenatural heritage and h istoric/cu ltu ral heritagethat dates back to early ages. Thus, Cappadocia
was declared as a World Cultural and Natural
Heritage Site in 1985.

7.2 Brief description
landscapeof theagricultural

Agricultural landscapes should be consideredof significant value within the Cappadocia World
Heritage site since agriculture is an activity thathas shaped the local people's way of life andthe space in which they lead their daily lives.
Traditional living habits, such as agricultural
production and consumption activities, haveshaped the vernacular architecture. In thisregion, some spaces, such as storage spaces
and cellars, occupying the ground floor of a
traditional building were created according
to the crop types and related to agricultural
production . Courtyards were also designedby taking agricultural practices and livestock
breeding into consideration (Figure 3).
Viniculture is the most significant
agricultural practice, which strongly supports
the heritage values of the region. Every year in
September, grapes are harvested and used for
producingwine,
vinegar,andpekmez(molasses-like syrup made from boilinggrapes). Special places for wine making locatedin the ancient monasteries show that
viniculture has been in progress in Cappadocia
since early times. In addition to the tuff
formations, vineyards are an
essential
component ofCappadocia's cultural landscape.
It is possible to see the impressions ofviniculture, not only in the natural landscape41

Figure 3.

~J ra / 1 f? f ro m the Ortah is ar settlement (Solmaz, 2012)

but also in the built en vi ron ment. Today, somespecial architectural elements and /or spaces
for wine and pef<mez production still exist in
traditional houses in Ortahisar, Urgup, andU~hisar towns and the small villages ofCappadocia (Solmaz 2013). These architecturalelements, created from carving the rock or
built from masonry, include !?lrGilf<, built in
kitchens, aiwans, and storage rooms in
traditional houses (Figure 3). To make pef<mez,
the grapes are squeezed using the stone orrock carved !?lrallf<. The fermented grape juice
is moved to another space, with a hole or a pot,
to rest after squeezing. The mixture is boiled
after the grape juice is blended with marl, acalcium carbonate or lime-rich mud or
mudstone, which contains variable amounts ofclays and silt (Solmaz 2013). These architecturalelements, built in traditional houses areexamples of how agricultural activitie~ andproduction affects the formation of residentialarchitecture. Thus, agricultural landscapes arestrongly
relatedwiththevernaculararchitecture and these two elements should beconsidered as significant in supporting thevalue of each other.
Storehouses, a characteristic of thisregion , must be considered along with
agricultural activities. These undergroundspaces are built by carving out the tuff layers
and adding a ventilation pipe, which allows forthe optimum humidity level to be achieved to

Figure 4. The agricultural landscape behind the settlement in
Ortahisar (Solmaz ~af?ar; 20 16)

maintain the freshness of the produce, mostly
potatoes and lemons. (Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Animal Breeding- MFAAB 2015).
In the Cappadocia region, 65% of the land
can be used for cultivation. There are several
types of crops in the region; the importantones, according to production rates, are wheat,potato, sugar beet, grape, pulse, and pumpkinseeds. In Turkey, 30.6% of the pumpkin seeds,
13% of the grapes for wine, 6.4% of the grapes
for other products, and 5.3% of the potatoes
are produced in Cappadocia (MFAAB 2015).
Extensive vineyards surround Gore me
Open Air Museum, which is an important partof the National Park. The vineyards are
irreplaceable elements of the landscape andthem useu m's "spirit of place 2" would disappear
without these vineyards. Thus, it is crucial toencourage the local people to continue th istype of agriculture in the rural areas of
Cappadocia.
Although it is not the main sourceof income nowadays, agricultural activities
are stil l widely undertaken using traditional
techniques (Figure 5). They are regulated by
the government in the protected sites, suchas the National Park, the World Heritage site,and other nationally listed areas. Sustaining
the existing type s of crops and agricultural
techniques in these protected sites is
encouraged by the governmental organizations
since they represent the values of these ru ral

Figure 5. Vineyards surrounding the Gi:ireme Open Air
Museum (Solmaz ~af?ar; 2016)

2 According to Chr1st1an Norberg-Schulz (New York R1zzoli, 1980, ppS) " Since ancient times the gen1us

loc1, or "sp1r1t of place", has been recogn1zed as the concrete real1ty man has to face and come to terms
w1th 1n h1s da1ly l1fe Architecture means to v1sual1ze the gen1us loc1. and the task of arch1tect is to create
meanmgful places, whereby he helps man to dwell"42

Figure 6.

Vineyards in the Nationa l Park (So lmaz $a kar; 2016)

areas (Figures 4 to 6). The growth of new plant
species is prohibited in these protected sites.
In relation to the agricultural activities of theregion, there are 61 cooperatives, with 3,950
members, and 5 ass ociations, with 4,942
members (M FAAB 2015). Agricultural activities
are the visible traces of the relationshipbetween the people and the landscape. It is
important to keep this relationship alive.
• 2. Significance of the heritage place,including natural and cultural values
In the beginning of 20th century, Cappadocia
was a theme in engravings and drawings byearly travelers (Kalas 2000). By the end of the
1960s, the region began to become a popular
destination for tourists and, in the 1970s, it
received increasing attention .
The conservation act1v1t1es also
arose during the same period . One of the firstlong-term development plans for Turkey was
prepared for Cappadocia in 1967. Unfortunately,
it was not implemented due to the National
Park Law at the time, which covered only theforested areas, not the geological areas, like
Cappadocia. In 1986, a new National Park Law
changed this situation. Protected sites were
defined by the High Council of Immovable
Monuments and Antiquities, in 1976, and they
instigated classification according to the typeof asset, such as archaeological site, naturalsite, and urban site. The first two classifications
are graded as degree I, II or Ill according to theperceived importance and features of the site
(Figure 7). In 1985, UNESCO declared a largepart of Cappadocia as a World Mixed Natural
and Cultural Heritage Site (the formal nameis: Goreme National Par k and the Rock Sites

of Cappadocia). It was one of the first sites
on the World Heritage List from Turkey. The
site complies with the requirements of thecriteria (i) as representing a masterpiece of
post-iconoclastic Byzantine art period , criteria(iii) as having the remnants of Byzantine,
Seljuk, and Ottoman civilizations, criteria (v)as bein g an outstanding example of traditional
human settlement, and criteria (vii) as having
exceptional natural beauty and an aesthetic
importance (UNESCO 2016). In 1986, the Ministryof Forestry declared the area to be a National
Park, and in 1989, the land was designated asa Tourism Development Area by the Ministryof Tourism. Thus, it can be seen that several
govern mental organizations are responsible
for the Cappadocia region, which has bothnatural and cultural values .
The natura l assets are the focal pointin the significance of the region. Not only the
tuff formations and fairy chimneys but also theagricultural areas surrounding the settlements
strengthen the value of the landscape. There
are both large agricultural areas around the
traditional settlements and some smallerareas adjacent to traditional buildings in thesettlements. In the center of the World Heritage
site, Goreme National Park contains significant
relics of the earlier monastic life in Cappadocia
and is encircled by vineyards and orchards.
Thereby, th is spectacu lar cultural landscapewithin the National Park is generated not
only by the relics but also by the surrounding
agricultural landscape, underscoring that theheritage va lues of the site are of both culturaland natural worth.

43

3. Current management arrangements(Legislations, institutions, resources)

current legislation is the lack of communication
between the two main councils . Naturalproperties, which involve the agricultu rallandscapes, are now considered separatelyfrom the cultural properties. As mentioned
above, the agricultural landscape is one of the
key elements ofth is cu ltu rallandscape and theycannot be detached from the cultural assets.
However, separate conservation development
plans for each settlement have been drawn
up by the governmental organizations andlocal municipalities. To safeguard and protect
this heritage site, Cappadocia needs an
integrated and comprehensive plan including
all settlements and agricultural areas.

The Cappadocia World Heritage site does not
currently have a comprehensive management
plan yet. It is a challenging situation due to thefact that it covers a wide area of land, there
are different types of protected sites involved,
five provincial boundaries, and the number ofsettlements in the region.
There are two counc il authorities
engaged in managing the cultural and natural
heritage. All projects related to cultural
heritage in the protected sites are negotiatedand finalized by the Regional Conservation
Council for Cultural Property; natural heritageis overseen by the Regional Conservation
Commission of Natural Property. In addition tothese two main boards, local municipalities
also have a small office, which is in charge ofthe implementation of conservation activities.
Unfortunately,nonon-governmentalorganization currently has an active role in theconservation activities of the region .
One of the negative impacts of the

4. Current State of Conservation andChallenges for Continuity
The legal and administrative aspects of theprocess of preserving the cultural and natural
heritage in Cappadocia have changed several
times. There used to be only one council;
however, the 2011 division into two separate
councils, for these two heritage categories, has)
Goynu Koyu

ca~rMh .

Alaca~arKoyuaraeaOren K6yu

oyu

Maz t Koyii

Ozluce Koyii
Kavak Mh.

~oyii _ _ _ - oorbentba~t Mh .

•-Figure 7.

natura l parl< area
tourism development area•

archeological protect
site (degree I)
natural protected site
(degree I)

Protected sites in centra l Cappadocia (Yandex map us ed as templ ate) (Solmaz $akar, 2016)44

natural protected site
(degree II)
natura l protected site
(degree Ill)led to many situations and problems since it
was not possible to uniformly separate thenatural and cultural assets. In Cappadocia, thecultural and natural heritage is interlocked andcannot be managed without one another. This
legal modification in 2011 may be suitable formany other heritage sites, but it may causesome conflicts in such a site in which culture isembedded with nature. The complex situationin Cappadocia reveals that an integrated
approach needs to be developed for this kindof mixed heritage site.
Tourism is also one ofthe challenges forthe preservation of authenticity in Cappadocia.
Due to the increasing number of tourists, asignificant number of traditional houses havebecome tourist facilities and as a result, they
have been altered in the process of restoration.
Starting in the 1970s, many of the traditionalbuildings in protected sites were abandoned
due to the danger of rock falls. When theregion became popular, these dangerous areas
were renovated and transformed into tourist
facilities; however, these transformations tothe settlements had a negative impact on theauthenticity of the area. Reports on the state ofconservation, submitted to the World Heritage
Centre in 2006 and 2014, reveal the past andcurrent challenges of preservation. In the 2006
report, "pressure by new tourism investments,
development pressure, natural disasters, andvisitor/tourism pressure" were considered asrisks and threats to the site (UNESCO 2006). In
the 2014 report, impacts on the authenticity of
the heritage place are emphasized as "changes
in traditional ways of life and knowledge
system" and "identity, social cohesion, changes
in local population and community" (UNESCO
2014).

5. Recommendations
The Cappadocia World Heritage site isappreciated not only for its natural beauty andunique geologic forms but also for the physicalenvironment, which has resulted from humanactivities; therefore, a nature-culture approachis crucial for this location. This spectacular
cultural landscape area has been created using
the advantages of nature and the abilities of
the in habitants over the centuries. However,conservation approaches in the region mostly
focus on one side of the heritage value and it isimportant to adopt a holistic approach in orderto preserve the relationship between natureand culture.
First, a conservation council should
be founded to manage both the natural andcultural heritage. There needs to be a research
project focusing on the agricultural land inneed of protection in Cappadocia region. The
study should determine the features of theland, types of crops, as well as the relationshipwith the built environment. It is importantto understand how the built environment

and agricultural land affect each other. The
traditional agricultural techniques used in
Cappadocia should be defined and sustainable
development methods of these techniquesshould be sought.
The agricultural landscape needs tobe regarded as a junction between culturaland natural assets. This integrated relationshipbetween culture and nature could be the key
to the sustainable conservation for the whole
Cappadocia region.

•

Literature Cited

Eren~i n,

A. 1979. Kapadokya Yerel Kon utlan nda Tu rizme Yon eli k Yen ileme ~al1~malan na Bi r

Yakla~1 m: brnek Avc1lar Koyu. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Istan bu l Technical University

Giovannini, L. (Ed.). 1971. Arts of Cappadocia. London: Barrie and Jenkins
Goreme Long-term Development Plan . 1968. General Directorate of Forestry, Department of
National Parks. Ankara
Kalas, V. 2000. Rock-cut architecture of Peristreme Valley: society and settlement in Byzantine
Cappadocia (unpublished PhD dissertation). New York University, New York
Kalas, V. 2004. Early explorations of Cappadocia and the monastic myth. Byzantine and Modern
Greek Studies, V.28 (1): pp. 101-119
MFAAB, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Animal Breeding, Statistics of2015.
http: I I nevseh i r.tari m.gov.tr I Belgeler /2015%20G EN EL %20%C4%BOSTAT%C4%BOST%C4%BO K%20
B%C4%BOLG%C4%BOLER%C4%BO.pdf [accessed 5 August, 2016]
Norberg-Schulz, C. 1980. Genius loci: towards a phenomenology of architecture. New York: Rizzoli.
Rod ley, L. 1985. Cave Monasteries of Byzantine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Solmaz, F. 2013. Construction techniques of traditional houses in Nev~eh i r, case study on: Urgu p,
Mustafapa~a and i brah i m pa~a (unpublished master thesis). Middle East Technical University.
AnkaraSolmaz, F., ~ahin Gu~han, N. 2011. General Features of Traditional Houses in Cappadocia. 1.
Uluslararas1 Nev~eh i r Tari h Kultu r Sem pozyu m u Proceedings, Nev~eh i r niversitesi Yay1 n lan,Nev~ehir, V. 3: pp237-364uTo pal, T., Doyuran V. 1998. Analyses of deterioration of the Cappadocian Tuff, Turkey. Environmental
Geology, Volume 34, Issue 1: pp 5-20. (DOl: 10.1007/s002540050252)
UNESCO Periodic Report First Cycle Cappadocia. 2006.
period i crepo rti ng/ EU R/cycle01 I section2 /357-su m ma ry.pdf

http:/ /whc.unesco.org/archive/

UNESCO Periodic Report Second Cycle Cappadocia. 2014. http:/ /whc.u nesco.org/ archive I
period i creporti ng/ EU R/cycle02 I section2 I grou pb /357.pdf
UNESCO, World Heritage List. http:/ /whc.unesco.org/en/ li st/357 [accessed 5 August, 2016]

46

The Hinterland of AncientAnuradhapura: Remarks
about an Ancient CulturalLandscapeNuwan Abeywa-rdana 1} Wiebke Bebenneie-r2 and Brigitta Schiitt 2(l)Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Department (:l Archaeology 0- Heritage ,'vianagernent, Mihintale;
50300 Sri Lanka; +94 (0)7'1 8352394, mLWMlabeywardanaCl:[.yahoo.com(2) Freie Universitiit Balin, Institute ~l Geographical Sciences, Physical Geography, Malteserst1:
74-100, 12249 Berli11, Gennany•

Abstract

The slightly rolling terrain of the North Central Province in, Sri Lanka, is characterized by asemi-arid climate, with a deficiency of rainfall occurring during the summer months. Rice isthe predominant crop, cultivated for the local markets. Irrigation enables rice cultivation andis based on 2,000 years of traditional water harvesting techniques. Reservoirs, locally called
Wewas or tanks, are the basis of this sophisticated system. Approximately 10,000 of the tanks
that originated during the period of the ancient dry zone hydraulic civilization are still in use
today. Most of the tanks are smaller scaled, frequently covering less than 5 hectares, andare generally aligned cascade-like alongside shallow valley courses. Canals and spillways
connect them and build a complex system for floodwater harvesting, water storage, andwater distribution components. The ancient hydraulic irrigation landscape, in the environsof Anuradhapura, with its sophisticated adaptation strategies to the local environmental
conditions, was the economic basis for the flourishing of the Kingdom of Anuradhapura.
Therefore, Anuradhapura can be identified as an example that clearly illustrates theinterrelationship between nature and culture.
KEY WORDS: traditional knowledge, water management, irrigation
1. Introduction

The emergence of water harvesting systems in
Sri Lanka can be dated back to the 3rd century
BCE (Withanachchi 2013 ). In the subsequentcenturies, these systems developed into
unique and integrated structures, spreading
throughout the lowland dry zone ofthe country.
Nowadays, almost all of the river basins
draining the lowland dry zone utilize irrigation
schemes (Withanachch i 2013; Bebermeier et al.
2017).
Anuradhapura, located in the northcentral lowlands of Sri Lanka (so 21' N, 80° 23'
E; 89 meters above sea level), is the capitalof the North Central Province. The bedrock of
the study area is dominated by plutonic rocks,
mostly granitic, migmatitic, and charnockite

gneisses of the Precambrian age. The
topography is composed of a flat terrain withsome gently rolling plains, accompanied by a
few isolated hills (Wagalawatta et al. in press).
Further, An urad hapu ra is located in the dry
zone of Sri Lanka, which has an annual average
precipitation of 1,198mm (Schutt et al. 2013).
Due to the continuous agricultural settlements,
potential natural vegetation growth is scarce;
however, some secondary forests havedeveloped on the slopes of the isolated hills.
Wet rice is the main crop, mostly culti vatedin the valley bottoms. Chena agriculture, a
traditionally shifting cultivation method, ismainly practiced along the plateau divides(Wagalawatta et al. 2015).
In the century BCE, Anuradhapura
started to develop as one of the early urban

47

centers in South Asia (Deraniyagala 1996). Thiscity development was accompanied by asuccessive trans ition of its hinterland into a
unique cultural landscape. The inner city, with
its sacral, administrative, and representativebuildings, is surrounded by agricultural fields
and wood land. Human-made reservoirs, called
tan ks or Wewas , were used for water harvesting,water storage, and water distribution sustained
husbandry by providing irrigation water (Figure1). In this rural area, irregula r occurring
monasteries, frequently accompanied by rural
settlement areas, served as ancillary central

places, providing sacral and administrative
functions (Figure 2). The World Heritage
comprises the ancient Citadel, three majormonasteries, and extends ove r an area of
about 16 square miles (40 km 2) . It also includes
multiple of the surface and near subsurfacemonuments (Democratic Socialist Republic of
Sri Lanka 2003).

00 '10\l '!

0045"0 ~

q

\
"'g
0

~

~

'"'-........

+"'------+

":::!

\

0

()
0
"'

"'g

"·--.

'-···...l

\.',

/)

River
MaAv athu Oya

Dot::::l

'V

0

0

G

~

/"---- .. _

\

~"'

"-

Kanadara Oya 1 J"""'--"

I

~

N

r-A,r-_r·'---....

River

r::::rr'

OO "JirQ "::

0+

"'

L._

D

'

;::

+

"g

I

. •'.:.
/~.. ( \.
.

Ancient capital and• . ~;~cultural ub

,

%

g
~

0 ,#

.i

I

.

%

g

.-'

+

~

+

Tan ksCJ Ta nks (aband oned )4.___ _ _ ___, KM
r.J'25 'E

Figure 1. Distribution ofton!?s and archaeological sites in the environs of Anurodhopuro. (Compiled using survey
deportment 1:50,000 topo sheet numbers 25;26;30;31)

48

A

Major
- - Roads

Foot--------- Paths

Minor
Roa dsOther- - R oads

Dr--------__i____)+
/

rank

-

Abhaya W ewa+
Figure 2. Main heritage area in Anuradhapura, with the ancient fortified city center, the citadel and monasteries)etavanaya, Mahavihara and Abhayagiriya. (Compiled using survey department 1:15,000 town map)

The principle land management system in theancient dry zone of Sri Lanka is the "tan kcascade system" (Figure 3, Figure 4). It assures
the availability of water, which is the mostcritical natural resource for agriculture anddomestic purposes, throughout the year. Thesewater-conveying systems consist of a series ofreservoirs, which alternates alignment withpaddy fields along the thalweg of shallow
valleys. Being interconnected by canals, thewater is routed through the cascade and ismainly utilized for paddy irrigation (Jayasundara
2011; Panabokke 2002; Schutt et al. 2013). The
tank cascade systems are defined as aconnected series of reservoirs, organizedwithin water catchment areas, and used forstoring, conveying, and utilizing water from aperiodical rivulet (Maddumab andara 1985 )_This susta inable natural resource management
system in the ancient dry zone of Sri Lanka has
been functioning since the 3rd century BCE andis still in use today.
When Anuradhapura was inscribedon the World Heritage List in 1982, theancient site, with its architectonical remnants,
was considered in the nomination . The
cultural landscape, which had developed
synchronously with the city, has not yet been
included as part of the value of the site. This
paper will introduce the highly sophisticatedwater management system, which is still in use
in the dry zone of Sri Lanka . By highlighting its
uniqueness, its potential as a World Heritage
cultural landscape is demonstrated .

49

I
~.

Suffolo •ndCallle

-~·

.

-~-

Figure 3. Schematic representation of the components oftan!? cascade system (a fter }ayasundara, 2011)

Figure 4. Schematic representation of the Wewa ecosystem (after}ayasundara, 2011)• 2. Significance of the Anuradhapura dry zone
hydraulic landscape, including natural andcultural values
Anuradhapura was inscribed as a UNESCOWorld Heritage site in 1982 based on theevaluation of the architectural and artistic
characteristics that meet the living heritage
values. When defining the Outstanding
Universal Value (OUV) for the Anuradhapura
World Heritage site, the important interchangeof human values in the development ofarchitectural tradition played a pivotal role
(criterion ii). According to the definition in theStatement of Significance (SOS), "The sacredcity exerted a considerable influence on thedevelopment of architecture during several
centuries. It includes remarkable monuments,
particularly the Dagobas of colossal size,
placed on circular foundations and surrounded
by a ring of monolithic columns, characteristicsof the Sinhalese stu pas" (Democratic Socialist
Republic of Sri Lanka 2003 p. 7, 8).
Based on criterion iii, the exceptional
testimony to Sinhalese culture is acknowledged:"Anuradhapura attests in a unique andspecific way to the Sinhalese civilization. On
numerous occasions, the city was submitted tothe assaults of invaders from southern India:
the Tamils, Pandyas, and Cholas. It stands asa permanent manifesto of the culture of Sri
Lanka - impervious to outside influences"(Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lan ka
2003 p.7, 8).
Finally, criterion vi, which demonstrates
the attributes of living heritage values, wasconsidered as a reason for inscribing
Anuradhapura as a UNESCO World Heritagesite. "The city is one of the principal shrines of
Buddhism . A cutting from the fig tree of Buddha,
brought there in the 3rd century, has flourishedand, today, the Bodhi -tree spreads out overthe center of the site from a sanctuary near tothe "Brazen palace". The relics of Siddhartha
have,moreover, shapedthereligious
topography of An urad hapu ra, where theDagobah Thuparama was built by the king Tissa

50

in the 3rd century B.C. to house the clavicle of
Buddha, and important religious relicpresented by Asoka" (Democratic Socialist
Republic of Sri Lanka 2003 p.7, 8).
Naturalvalues,andtheinterrelationship between nature and culture,
have been neglected in den n i ng the OUV of
this site, even though the majority of cultural
heritage sites within the property have been
nested with rich natural values. In addition, theBuddhist monastic architecture in Sri Lanka
always demonstrates a rich interplay between
nature and culture. For instance, the higher
elevated rock shelters, associated to i nselbergs,
were enhanced to construct dwelling places
for monks (Wagalawatta et al. 2017). The entire
landscape, surrounding An urad hapu ra, could
be understood as a cultural landscape thatis of high value in regards to natu re-cu ltu rei nterli nkages.
The hydraulic irrigation landscape,in the area of Anuradhapura, illustrates an
early adaptation to the local en vi ron mental
conditions . It can be understood as a resultof a complex technical, socio-economic, andpolitical interplay occurring in the last two
millennia. Consequently, the hinterland ofAnuradhapura can be understood as partof the sensitive cultural heritage of ancientAn urad hapu ra. In terms of a cu ltu rallandscape,it developed as a co-evolutionary product ofreciprocal human-environ mental interactions
during the last 2,000 years. Therefore, it is
crucial to identify the entire landscape asa cultura l landscape, demonstrating theinterrelationship between nature and culture,for sustainable management in the future.
• 3. Current management arrangements ofAnuradhapura and the challenges for thecontinuity of the agricultural landscapeTh e management of the heritage site is focusedon its cu ltural assets. The Govern mental
Department of Archaeology, estab lished in
1890, is the apex institution for the protection
and management of archaeological heritage

in Sri Lanka (Government of Sri Lanka 1940).
Besides that, the Central Cultural Fund,founded in 1980 under an Act of Parliament
as a semi-government institution, carries
out archaeological research, conservation,
presentation, and management of principal
heritagesites,
includingAnuradhapura(Government of Sri Lanka 1980). Further,thetemple's
religious
authorities
aredirectly involved with the maintenance andmanagement activities of the living heritage
sites.
Laws
andregulations
control
the protection and management of thecountry's natural and cultural heritage. Thebase legislation, for the protection of thearchaeological heritage of Sri Lanka, is the
Antiquities Ordinance, which was enacted in
1940, followed by a major Amendment (No. 24)
in 1998. This legislation protects the island'sarchaeological sites and monuments, focusing
on two scales: the site and monument-specificprotection and the protection of the setting or
landscape in which a site is embedded. The
ordinance categorized sites and monuments inthe following three categories: archaeologicalreserves, ancient monuments, and protectedmonuments. Management of archaeologicalreserves is exclusively the obligation of theArchaeological Department, by order of theCommissioner of the Department of Lands,
on the request of the Director-General ofArchaeology. These archaeological reserves
are strictly protected against theft, destruction,
encroachments, construction of unauthorizedbuildings, and other interventions, such as

the cutting of trees. A site or monument thatis over 100 years-old, which is located on
property of the State, which is not vested in the
Archaeological Department, may be declaredan ancient monument. This is announced by
the Hon'ble Minister for Cultural Affairs andNational Heritage in a gazette notification,
thus affording protection from destruction,
encroachment, unauthorized alterations, andadditions etc. The procedures, and the resulting
protections pertaining to ancient monuments,
applies similarly to privately owned sites
and monuments, that are over 100 years-old,once declared as protected monuments by
the Hon'ble Minister for Cultural Affairs andNational Heritage.
In general, human resources for theconservation and management activities areprovided by the Department of Archaeology,
with financial support from the government.
Additional funds are obtained from the temple
collections and used in the maintenance of the
major monastic sites. Very recently, the Central
Cultural Fund has taken over conservation andmaintenance work, under the supervision of
the Department of Archaeology, in Colombo.
The Urban Development Authority, in Colombo,
supervises infrastructure development projects
around the site.
The Department of Archaeology is
responsible for the planning of conservation
activities, on an annual basis, and for theirimplementation. Very recently, integrated
plan n i ngapproaches have gained in importance;
for instance, the Mahamevnawa development
plan consolidates the perspectives for the

Figure 5.
Minor tank close to the town of Mihintale as an example the Sri Lankan dry zone hydraulic agricultural landscape(photograph taken by Nuwan Abeywardana, December 2008)51

Mahavihara monastery site (Figure 2) from the
Department of Archaeology, the Central CulturalFund, the Urban Development Authority, temple
authorities, and numerous other stakeholders.
However, the surrounding agriculturallandscape, in which most of the archaeologicalproperties are em bedded, has been neglectedin the previously illustrated management
processes. This is especially deplorable forareas where ancient monuments can only beunderstood through their interplay with theenvironment. In the dry zone ofSri Lanka, to thisday, c. 10,000 small village tanks, built during
ancient times, are still in use (Panabokke 2002;
Tennakoon 2001). These systems are jointly
managed by different stakeholders, such as the
Departments of Agriculture and Irrigation, andon a local scale, by community-based farmerorganizations, which are responsible for the
management of the agricultural landscapelinked with the tank cascade systems.
In the coming decades, it isexpected that the Sri Lankan society will face
rapid socio-economic and en vi ron mental
transitions. Corresponding to the IPCC climatechange scenarios, Sri Lanka will be affected byrising temperatures and can expect a higher
variability of monsoonal rainfall coinciding
with an increase in floods and droughts(Ministry of Environment 2013). This will affectthe functionality and management of the water
harvesting systems and the related traditional
knowledge. Rapid development processes will
also change the traditional land use practices.
Loss of the traditional systems, a potential
adoption of new systems, and varying interestin agricultural activities are raising issues forthe protection of landscape values.

4. Recommendations
Anuradhapura,anditshinterland, areconsidered as the center of the ancienthydraulic civilization in Sri Lanka. During
past decades, the management process of
its heritage focused on its archaeologicaland cultural attributes. The cultural valuesof the surrounding cultural landscapes, withits multiple reciprocal human-environmental
interactions
andsophisticatedwater
harvesting systems, being rooted in the ancientAnuradhapura period, is not yet the focus ofheritage management.
The development of an integrated
management approach, to protect this
2,000-year-old cultural landscape, would bea great challenge for future interdisciplinary
research and heritage management. Fromthe perspective of landscape archaeology,
the major objectives are: to enhance theunderstanding of the development of theancient water harvesting systems and its effects
on the landscape and cultural development, toinvestigate traditional management aspects
and traditional knowledge related to these52

systems, and to adopt the management
strategies of these systems to handle thepossiblychangingsocio-economic
andenvironmental changes in the future.

Acknowledgements
This research was undertaken in the frameof the project "Tanks as Ancient Measure ofIntegrated Watershed Management in the Dry
Zone of Sri Lanka," kindly supported by theVolkswagen Foundation (Az. 88578).

• Literatu re Cited
Bebermeier, W., Meister, J., Withanach i, C.R., Middelhaufe, 1., and Schutt, B. 2017. Tank Cascade
Systems as a Susta inab le Measure of Watershed Management in South As ia. Water 9: pp.231. do i:
10.3390 I w9030231
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. 2003. Periodic reporting exercise on the application of
the World Heritage Convention. The Sacred City of An urad hapu ra. http:/ /whc.u nesco.org/ archive I
period icreporti ng/ APA/cycle01 I secti o n2 /200 .pdf
De ran iyagala, S.U. 1996. Pre -and protoh istoric settlement in Sri Lanka. In XIII UISPP Congress
Proceedings, pp. 277- 285 http:/ /www.lankalibrary.com/geo/deralhtml [accessed 23 February,
2016]
Geiger, W. 1908. Mahavamsa: Great Chronicle of Ceylon. H. Frowde
Jayasu ndara, J.M.S. 2011. Potentials of Reservoir Cascade Ecosystem in Adoption to Climate Change.
Samodhana: journal of Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities 2
Madd umabandara, C.M. 1985. Catchment Ecosystems and Village Tan kCascades in the Dry Zoneof Sri Lanka A Time -Tested System of Land and Wat er Resource Management. In J. Lundqvist, U.
Lohm, and M. Falkenmark (eds) Strategies for River Basin Management.The GeoJournal Library,99-113. Springer Netherlands. http:I I lin k.spri nger.co m /chapter /10 .1007/978-94-009-5458-8 _11[accessed 12 February 2016]
Ministry of Environment. 2013. Enable climate resilient and healthy human settlements.
Climate Change and Vulnerability Data Book. Strategic Thrust - 2. http:/ /www.cli matechange.lk/
adaptation I Index.htm l [accessed 16 December 2013]
Oldenberg, H. 1879. Dipavamsa. Asian Educationa l Services
Silva, R. 2000. Development of Ancient Cities in Sri Lanka with special reference to Anuradhapura.
Reflections on a Heritage: Historical Scholarship on Pre-modern Sri Lanka, pp.49-81
Schutt, B., Bebermeier, W., Meister, J., and Withanachchi, C.R. 2013. Characterisation of the Rota
Wewa tank cascade system in the vic inity of Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. Die Erde, 144/1: pp. 51-68
Waga lawatta, T. , Beberme ier, W., Hoe lzmann, P., Knitter, D., Ko hlmeyer, K., Pitawa la, A., andSchutt, B. in press. Spatia l distribution and functional re lationship of local bedrock and stone
constructions in the cultura l landscape of ancient Anuradhapura; (377 BCE-1017 CE), Sri Lanka.
journal of Archaeological Science: Reports . dx. doi.org/10.1016/j .jasrep.2017.03.060
Withanachchi, C. 2013. Socio archaeo logical identification of ancient hydraulic civilization in Sri
Lanka. The journal of Archaeology & Heritage Management, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka 1(1)53Indigenous
and Traditional
Landscapes

The Coffee CulturalLandscape of Colombia
Cesar Augusto Velandia Silva 1(1) University of Ibagw£, Arcltitect~Lre Program, Carrera 22 Calle 67 Barrio Am/Jala; 730002 Ibagu.e,
Toli:ma, Colombia; +57 (8 )2709400, +57 3153353542, cesar.velandia@_.Lmi/Jague.edu.co•

Abstract

The Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombia (CCLC), inscribed in the UNESCO World Heritage
List in 2011, is the largest productive designated cultural landscape in Latin America. The
CCLC is a complex territory where cultural, social and productive institutions encounter richbiodiversity, granting the area a national policy for its preservation. The CCLC encompasses
six farming landscapes, equating in 340,000 hectares of surface, in a unique, sustainable,and productive landscape that represents the Colombian coffee tradition. The physiographyof valleys and steep slopes, with glaciers and volcanoes on the tops of ridges and native
forests and biological corridors, are strategic for the conservation of its biodiversity. Natureculture linfwges are represented in a tradition lasting over 100 years and illustrated throughthe adaptation of small cultivation plots, the smart use of water sources, the developmentof building materials, the symbolic understanding of the landscape, and coexistence withdisasters risks.
KEY WORDS: coffee cultural landscape, World Heritage List, UNESCO

1. Introduction

production across its territory. This generated acultural identity related to its cultivation which
was sustained by the hard work of Colombian
farmers.

1.1 Overview of the heritage site

The Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombia(CCLC) is a unique, sustainable, and productive
landscape that represents the Colombian
coffee tradition. The exceptional combinationof the urban and rural landscapes reflects
a centennial tradition of coffee growing on
small farms following innovative natural
resource management practices challenging
geographical conditions. The high biodiversityof the CCLC is the result of the physiographyof valleys and steep slopes, with glaciers andvolcanoes on the tops of ridges, native forestsand biological corridors, which are strategic for
its conservation .
Coffee represents a cultural tradition
in Colombia. More than 100 years ago it was
introduced to the country and the crops wereadapted to an environment surrounded bythree cordilleras of the Andes. The volcanic
soils, altitude, and the temperature of theequatorial zone provided an appropriate
environment for the development of coffee

56

1.2 Brief description
landscapeof theagricultural

For more than a hundred years, Colombianfamilies, surrounded by harsh environmental
conditions, have accumulated knowledge toadapt their coffee crops by cultivating themin small plots. Since the second half of thenineteenth century, the tradition expanded
to other regions of Colombia, across the area
formerly known as the Old Caldas. Coffee
farmers have developed models of collective
action through time, forging social, cultural,and productive institutions, and generating
an innovative natural resource management
system.

• 2. Significance of the heritage place
including natural and cultural values
On June 25, 2011, the UNESCO World Heritage

<Figure 1.

f.

Location of the CCLC. Source: Google maps, 2075. Notional Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia 2076

Committee, in its 35th sess ion inscribed the
CCLC in the World Heritage List based on
criteria (v) and (vi). The CCLC was inscribedbecause of its continuing land-use where
farmers generated innovative natural resource
management practices producing tangible andintangible
culturalmanifestations
characterizing the region.
Furthermore,thestatementof sign iflcance den nes its integrity andauthenticity values on the one hand, basedon the singularity and high cohesion level ofthe social adaptation elements of cultural andsocial traditions according to a sustainablehuman development; and on the other hand,
represented by the rich tangible and intangible

cultural features, and "harmonious integrationof the production process and socialorganization and the coffee farms typology."(UNESCO 2011).
• 3. Current management arrangements

After being included on the World Heritage
List, on August 13, 2011, the Presidential
Agreement for Prosperity No. 43 mandated thedevelopment of the CONPES 1 document, theinclusion of the CCLC in the Land Management
Plans 2, the definition of the zones of mining
exclusion and the CCLC's national decree.
On October 7, 2011, Resolution 2079, from the
Ministry of Culture of Colombia, recognized the

1 The Nat1onal CounCil for Econom1c and Soc1al Pol1cy (CON PES) of the CCLC was signed by the M1n1ster

Council on February, 13th, 2014.
2 The Land Use Management Plan 1s a techn1cal and pol1cy plann1ng instrument of long-term
management It 1s a set of actions and poliCies regarding administrative and physical plann1ng, which
will gu1de the development of municipal areas. occupation and transformation of urban and rural
physical space The 1998 Law of Land Management requires mayors to update local plans, and the
Nat1onal Plann1ng Department launched a program on technical gu1ding http//k1temtorialco/

57

GENERAL LEGEND-

Municipal H@ad

C:=J

Mun ic ipality

Provi nce

SPECIFIC LEGEND-!Cet'fJ:On

tTl!

Figure 2. Area of CCLC and buffer zone with superposed threat area of Cerro Machin Volcano. Drawing: Luis Manuel Reales
Maestre (Ministry of Culture of Colombia, 2015)

CCLC as Cultural Heritage of the Nation and as
a property inscribed in the World Heritage Listof UNESCO, consisting of a territory composedof areas of special archaeological, historical,
and cultural interest.
3.1 The CONPES document

According to the "Poli cy for the Preservation of
the Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombi a"(National Planning Department 2014), th e
factors threatening the nature-culture linkagesof the CCLC are: a low resilience to the effect s
of climate change and environmental pollution,
vulnerability to extractive activities and large
infrastructure proj ects, and the negative effects
and losses due to risk and disaster threats.
To address the above, the CONPES aims at
formulating a policy specific to the CCLC inorder to ensure the preservation of its
Outstanding Universal Value and improveconditions for the en vironmental, cultural, an d
58

social su stainability, and the economy of theterritory. It defines strategies, programs,
actions, and the funding required to ensure thesustainability of the lands cap e as acommitment of the Colombian government.
Specific objectives of the policy to strengthenconservation are: first, to design and implement
the necessary mechanisms to develop risk
management
plans
so
that
threats,
vulnerabilities, and risks are recognized .
Second, to include a strategy for the
management of mining activiti es and third, tost rengthen the susta inability acti on programfor coffee production (N ational Planning
Department 2014:48).
Another serious problem in the CCLC isgenerational change. Coffee farm ers, averaging
55 years old, are affected by the influence ofmodernization and poor local comp etitivenessof the coffee business in the global market,
as t he youth does not want to wo rk as coffee
farm ers .

3.2 Guidelines for Land Management Plans

According to the "Guide to Enactment of the
CCLC in the review and adjustment of Land
Management Plans" (Ministry of CultureNational Federation of Coffee Growers 2014),
environmental and cultural factors need to be
included in the municipalities' land use plans,
coordinating with the Ministry of Housing, Cityand Territory, MASD, and the Ministry of Culture.
The guide was developed simultaneously withthe obligatory process of review and adjustmentof 51 municipality land management plans. The
development of the guide involved the GIS
mapping of land use, preserved areas andinfrastructures, and the verification of urbanterritorial implications of cultural attributes
related to land management. Technical andpolicy-mapping were required, translatingthem into landscape standard controls for its
conservation, especially in areas experiencing
urban development pressure, land usechanges, the impact of tourism, and mining
activities. 3

act1v1t1es, establish criteria to evaluate new
projects, and support the authorization ordisallowing of projects.
Resolution 2963 enacted on December
22,2012, amending Resolution 2079. It delimited,with precision, the CCLC main area and bufferzone (Figure 2). When the area was determined,
and declared as restricted by mining cadastre
in 2013, the MME concluded that 65% of themining activity in the CCLC is related to the
exploitation of stone used for the production ofbuilding materials and roads and the remaining
35% are precious minerals. Currently, a process
is being developed to determine the feasibilityof issuing new mining titles in the CCLC. It is
taking into account the need to review thetitles issued before the inscription on theWorld Heritage List (not included in UNESCO's
nomination file) and to evaluate the complex
matter of improving mining with respect
to the landscape and its values. The World
Heritage Committee, in its 35th session in 2011,
recommended that Colombia "not authorize
any mining activity within the property and its
immediate surroundings" (UNESCO 2011).

3.3 Guidelines for mining activities
Through coordinated work with the M1n1stryof Mines and Energy (MME), the National
Mining Agency (NMA), MASD, and the local
environmental authorities in the region, an
action plan was undertaken to identify existing
mining areas in the CCLC, identify existing
mining titles, 4 characterize the type of mining

Figure 3.

• 4. Current State of Conservation andChallenges for Continuity

Despite the CCLC's progressing state ofconservation, the cha llenges for its future aremany. The CCLC's sustainable practices of coffee
cultivation are being applied to mitigate theeffects of eli mate change, such as wastewater

Coffee form. © Notional Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia

3 CON PES document diagnosed some of these 1m pacts. on the 1mpact of mining act1v1ties, see Velandia(2015)
4 The min1ng title granted the right to explore and exploit the soil and subso1l. The Mining Law ofColombia allows the cultural authority to evaluate, authome or disavow m1nmg projects 1n restricted
areas
59

Figure 4.

Coffee landscape © National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia

management, crop renovation, and more
controlled planting to capture more sunlightwithout losing plant density. That is because
the National Coffee Growers of Colombia areapplying the "Sustainability matters" program 5
with the principles, guidelines, and indicatorsof the Global Reporting Initiative. The actionsof the program are aimed at the renovationof competitiveness by granting credits andfinancial services, improving en vi ron mentalandmanagement
betweenproducers
en vi ron mental authorities, strengthening coffee
growing through international sustai nability
protocols, and maintaining connectivity andtech no logy with coffee farmers.
The CCLC was affected by the Armero
disaster in 1985 and by the earthquake thatoriginated in the city of Armenia in 1999; these
events left deep social and cultural problems.
Despite this, the imminent risk of Cerro Machin
volcano (VCM) is virtually unknown . Due to its
characteristics, the VCM has the potential effectof an explosive building; its map of threats andrisks extends to the pyroclastic tide westwards,
hypothetically, rampaging the Coffee CulturalLandscape of Quindio and Valle del Cauca
provinces completely. INGEOMINAS (2003)
forecasted hemispheric, regional, and local
impacts of the VCM's imminent eruption andcompare them to the 1993 events of Mount
Pinatubo in the Philippines.
In order to address the problem of
the change of agricultural land use in the
CCLC, the conservation of agriculture is being
promoted as a national food security policy
linked to the CONPES policy. Also, there is adefined capacity of territory for cropping andfood security that is improving the articulation

with land management. Likewise, tourism
activities are being directed to ecotourism,
agro-tourism, ethno-tourism practices, andthe certification of high-quality services in aquest for the sustainable use of the potentialof the natural and cultural landscapes.
Despite the strong generational change, earlychildhood and youth education is promoting
awareness about the CCLC values. Moreover,financial and technical training is being
directed to young coffee growers in order toattract them to stay on the coffee farms. It
has been necessary to diversify economic
practices by participating in the production of
specialty coffees and promoting coffee with adesignation of origin.
Finally, one of the characteristics oft he
CCLC is the application of advanced scientificresearch to obtain coffee varieties that are
more resistant to diseases and to the humidity
generated by climatic variability. Necessarily,
the deep scientific study of natural values willcontribute to the cultural value also to remain
for future generations, like deciphering thecoffee genoma by Cen icafe 6 (National Centre
for Coffee Research), or obtaining varieties ofColombian coffee better adapted for altitudinal
adaptation to climatic variability.
5. Recommendations

There is a need to strengthen the CONPES
policy within the National Development Plan
and achieve a comprehensive link with thepeace agreement,? Also, it is needed :· To strengthen preservation in the National
Land Use Policy and to continue CCLC

5 https: I /wwwfederaciondecafeteros org/ static/files/ sosten 1b1l1dad-2012-engpdf
6 http/ /wwwcen 1cafe org/
7 With the signmg of the Peace Agreement with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in
2016, one of the ma1n po1nts were the Agreement on "Comprehensive Agricultural Development Policy
Towards a New Colombian Field Integral Rural Reform (RRI)" Th1s agreement establishes the bases forthe transformation of the countrys1de and creates the condit1ons of well-bemg and good l1v1ng for therural population It seeks to erad1cate extreme rura l poverty and reduce rural poverty by SO% ove r aperiod of 10 years, promoting equal1ty, closing the gap between the countryside and the city, reactivating
the countrys1de and 1n particular the development of peasant, family and community agriculture.
(http/ I wwwa ltocom ISIOnadopa rala paz govco/ Documents I lllformes-espec1a les I abc-del- proceso-de paz/indexhtml)
60

harmonization in the land use- adjustmentof Land Management Plans 8 at municipal(POT) and regional (POD) levels;· To set risk and disaster management
municipal and regional plans;·To improve control and supervision of
infrastructure projects;·To continue work controlling extractive
activities;·To continue with the strategic tourism plan;and overall· To strengthen the leadership of the
Ministry of Culture due to the commitments
made to UNESCO, supported by the
National Federation of Coffee Growersof Colombia 9 improved by an associative
mechanism of collective participation of
the representatives and stakeholders of theregion.

for their preservation through time. This is verysignificant of the agricultural landscape: for aneffective integration of heritage and sustainable
development, it is necessary to systematically
explore nature-culture complexity features toestablish a creative dialogue between the past,
the present and the future.

The strategies and objectives of landscapemanagement instruments (land management
and mining guidelines, the management planof the property, and CONPES national policy)
are very relevant, because they are an example
of 'maintaining living models of sustainable
land use and natural resources.' (Rossler, 2003).
Based on sustained work in committees at
local level, there is a progressive valuation of
the dynamic layers of the landscape as a 'living'model.
This refers to the understanding of
the CCLC management as a living expressionthat must rema1n exposed for social
apprehension and development of the actions

Figure 5.

Coffee crops and Guadua woods © National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia

8 Called "Modern POD-POT Program"
https //colaborac1on dnp govco /CDT/Viviend a%20Agua%20 y%20D esarrol lo%20Urbano/
Presentaclones/01-Colom bia_pla neacion _temtorios_modernos pdf
9 https//wwwfederaCiondecafeteros org/ particu lares/en I61• Literature Cited
Colombian Coffee Growers Federation. 2012. FNC Sustainability Report. FNC, Bogota.
INGEOM INAS. 2003. Explanatory Memory of Volcanic Hazard Map of Cerro Machin. INGEOMINAS,
Bogota.
Ministry of Culture-National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia. 2013. Coffee CulturalLandscape: Exceptional fusion between Nature, Culture and Collective Work. Bogota.
Ministry of Culture- National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia. 2014. Guide to Enactment
Coffee Cultural Landscape in the Review and Adjustment of Land Management Plans (POT-PBOTEOT). Second ed ition . Bogota.
National Planning Department. 2014. Conpes 3803: Policy for the Preservation of the Cultural
Coffee Landscape of Co lombia, Bogota.
Rossler, M. 2003. Linking Nature and Culture: World Heritage Cultura l Landscapes. World Heritage
Papers 7, 10-15. UNESCO: World Heritage Centre. http:/ /whc.UNESCO.org/documents/publi_wh_papers_07_en .pdf [accessed 7 Aug 2017]
UNESCO. 2008. Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention.
Intergovernmental Group of protection of cultural and natural heritage. World Heritage Centre,
Paris.
UNESCO. 2011. Convention concerning the protection of the World Cultural and National Heritage,
World Heritage Committee, 35th Session, Paris. WHC-11/35.COM/20. http:/ / whc.unesco.org/
archive /2011 /whc11-35com-20e.pdf [accessed 22 June 2016]
Velandia Silva, C.A. 2015. Impact of Mining on the Coffee Culture Landscape of Colombia 2011-2015.
(Technical report).
https : I I www. resea rchgate. net/pub li cation /274075213_1 nfo rm e_so b re_e l_i m pacto_d e_la_m i neria_en_el_paisaje_cu ltu ral_cafetero_de_colom bia_2011-2015. [accessed 26 May 2017]62

Symbiosis Between Nature& Culture A Case Study of
the Apatan i CulturalLandscape, India
Persis Farooqy 1( I) World Heritage Assistant, UNESCO Category 2 Centre, Dehradun, India• Abstract

The Apatani cultural landscape is well-f<nown all over the world for its unique and traditional
practice of paddy-cum-fish cultivation. It is located in the Ziro valley, in the Lower Subansiri
district of Arunachal Pradesh, India. This remarkable practice of yielding rice as well as fish,by the Apatani tribe, has been sustained over generations and has not been influenced byany modern techniques. Due to their sustainable usage of natural resources, the fertilityof the soil has remained the same over the years, securing the livelihoods of the locals.
This landscape also has bamboo and pine plantations in the undulating hills surrounding
the valley. The traditional practices of the Apatanis are based on a rational use of natural
resources. Hence, this relationship between nature, culture, and humans mutually supporting
each other has been recognized and regarded as one of the best examples of nature-culture
linkages in the world. Currently it is on India's Tentative list for World Heritage sites.

KEY WORDS: cultural landscape, paddy~cum~fish cultivation

1. Introduction

The Apatani cultural landscape is located in theZi ro Valley (N27° 32- 2JO 37; E93° 48- 93° 52) of theLower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh,part of one of the three recognized biodiverse
hotspots in India (Munilkumar et al. 2007).
This landscape is inhabited by the Apatani
tribe, considered one of the most advanced
among the 26 tribal communities in Arunachal
Pradesh (Singh et al. 2008). The Zi ro valley issituated at a range of 1,564 meters to 2,900
meters above sea level. Due to its remoteness,
it is still untouched by modernization such asaccessible roads and supporting infrastructure.
This valley is surrounded all around by pinemantled hills. It is famous for the practiceof paddy-cum-fish cultivation (Munilkumar
et al., 2007). Irrespective of other tribes ofArunachal Pradesh, who practice slash-andburn agriculture, the Apatanis practice wet-rice
cultivation in a unique manner.
As mentioned by Kaning in his bookentitled The Rising Culture of the Apatanis,
historically, the original place of the Apatanis
was lipyo Lembyan, which may be termed
as modern day Mongolia. Later, this groupof people migrated to a place called Miido
Lembyan (probably Tibet) and further migrated
to Nyme Lembyan (probably the area ofpresent Arunachal and China). Finally, theyreached a place called Biirii, presently known
as Ziro, where they settled permanently. There
are several folktales related to the settlementin the Ziro valley. A well-known legend tellsthat the valley was once a swampy area andwas inhabited by large amphibian reptiles
known as buru. These reptiles used to disturb
63the villagers and destroy their agricultural
fields by making big holes that water would
come out of. It is said that after the eliminationof the reptiles, the swamps were drained, theApatanis established the villages, and they
made the entire valley arable (Kaning 2008).
Since 2014, the Apatani culturallandscape has been on India's Tentative list to
be nominated , under criteria (iii) and (v), as a
World Heritage Cultural Site. In its statement of
Outstanding Universal Value, it has been
declared that the site is an exceptional example
that is linked to the cultural traditions of theApatani tribe. They are regarded as theguardians ofthe landscape and are responsible
for maintaining the landscape over generations.
It is their unique, and highly evolved, settled
agricultural practices that the Apatanis are
known for. The significance of such immense
ecological and cultural value, in an erstwhilehigh seismic zone, is a peerless specimen of
nature and human symbiosis (UNESCO 2016). It
has been more than 3 years, however, and thedossier for the Apatani cultural landscape has
yet to be submitted . The nodal agency
responsible for this site, at the state level, isthe Department of Cultural Affairs; at the
district level, the District Research Office is
responsible. The Department of Cultural Affairs
is based in ltanagar, the capital of Arunachal
Pradesh, which is 111 km away.
Making a dossier is a technical taskthat takes expertise in drafting the text,
describing, and defining the OUV of the site
along with a good repository of images. The
officials from ltanagar make visits to the site
on a weekly or fortnightly basis. The need of
the hour demands a unit from the departmentthat is exclusively engaged in this task.

Figure 2.

A view of Apatani Cultural Landscape © Tage Kanno

64

India

Aru nachal PradeshA

Figure 1.
Loca tio n of Apatani Cultura l Landscap e; Sou rce:
Google Maps

2. The Apatani cultural landscape: naturaland cultural values•

In the context of exploring the Apatani culturallandscape by the UNESCO Category 2 CentreIndia, the author collected information fromthe Ziro Valley in July 2016, interviewed 40
local people, between the ages of 18 and 60
years old, and observed the practices of theApatani people during monsoon season . There
are seven main villages in the Ziro valley Bula(consisting of Kalung, Reru and Tajang villages),
Hari, Hong, Michi-Bamin, Mudang Tage, Duta,and Hija. The total population of these villages

is approximately 30,000, out of which 90%
belong to the Apatani tribe. The Apatani's
traditional houses are built on wooden piles,
mainly bamboo, and thatched with paddy straw on the roof, which are locally available
materials.
The findings show that the primarysource of livelihood for the Apatanis is paddycum -fish and the plantation of bamboo andpine trees . Their cultivation is very laborintensive. Fish is an important part of theApatani diet and is consumed daily. During
January and February, dykes are made along thepermanent terraced fields; there is a provisionof inlets and outlets for water irrigation, withbam boo screens to avoid the loss of fish . In
each plot, small dams, local ly called Kiile, aremade for irrigation purposes and are locatedin different areas to manage irrigation water intheir respective agriculture fields .
The flow of water, through humanmade chan nels, is regulated by the locals sothat no bloc kage occurs. Common carp
(Cyprinus carpio), an omnivorous fish, is rearedalong with rice seedl ings in the paddy field in
the months of April and May. They feed onwater plants and scavenge insects and worms
found in the field . After being reared for 3 to 4
months, the fish are sold at the local market.
Almost all aquatic animals, including snails,
crabs, and frogs are eaten and nothing isallowed to go to waste. During this season,
weeds and unwanted grass are removed fromthe fields . The agricultural fields are welldemarcated with elevated boundaries where
barley and finger millet are grown . They areused in making a loca l brew. After harvest,
straw is burnt down, or left on the floor of the
field to decay, which also helps in theprevention of the growth of weeds. Thus, theFigure 3.

f ertility of the so il in the Apatani rice fie lds andgardens is always intact and results in theyielding of abundant harvests.
It was observed by the author thatthe artific ial irrigation channe ls, bui lt using
the available water streams, made wet ricecultivation possible in Ziro. This is possible
because of the efficient conservation of theforests surrounding the valley, which form
the crucial watershed flowing down into thefields. Water supply is perennial, particularly,
during the agricultural season (February
to September). The Apatanis are known for
their rational utilization of limited land thatevolved based on experimentations. There are
separate areas for human settlements, wetrice cu ltivation, dry cultivation, community
burial grounds, pine and bamboo gardens,
private plantations, and community forests .
It is an example of highly successful humanadaptations to the rigor and constraints of theupland regions .
The areas of gentle or steep slopesthat are not suitable for crops are used todevelop the bamboo and pine groves, fromwhich the valuable trees are then used asbuilding material and fuel. Thus, there is nowasteland in the Apatani valley; every inchof land is used for some purpose. Individua lfamilies maintain this plantation . Once thegrove has been cleared, it is the duty of therespective family to plant new bamboo andpine saplings so the next generation, the ir
children , can use them in the future. Thi s is apractice carried out by the forefathers of theApatan is. With such efforts, the biodiversity of
the landscape has continued to remain i ntact
over the decades.

Paddy field during monsoon period in Ziro Valley © Tage Kanno

65• 3. Customary management of the agriculturallandscapeAll of the villages in the Ziro valley are governedby a traditional village council, called bulyan,
which supervises, and has legal oversightof, individual's activities that can affect thecommunity as a whole. They work efficiently
by addressing the conscience of the people,
rather than instilling fear of the law, and bypromoting the prevention of unlawful activities,
rather than through punitive actions .
The Apatanis believe in Donyi Polo,the ancient form of animistic religion, where
the sun and moon are worshiped as gods.
They continue to worship nature and are very
conscious about en vi ron mental hazards, which
occur when the environment is disrupted. It isdue to their traditional customs and practices
that the Apatanis are able to maintain theirlandscape in a sustainable way. In thisera of rapid development, when modern
society is struggling with finding strategies tomobilize communities to support sustainable
development, the system followed in the Ziro
valley has already set an example.
About 70% of the population of the
Ziro valley depends on agriculture; whereas
the rest of the population is involved in
ecotourism , plantation of commercial crops,
and timber. Their management of the land
and its uses, for various purposes, are basedon their age-old practices. As a part of thecustomary system, the houses are built on land
higher than the paddy fields in the villages. The
house sites have further advantages to enrich
the paddy fields with human waste, animal

Figure 4.

waste, and other forms of garbage washeddown by rainwater. This type of rainwaterdrainage is called supyu, which adds manure
to the nearby paddy fields. On the other hand,the villages are quite hygienic places to live
and leave no place for stagnant water; hence,
there are decreased chances of waterborne
disease outbreaks. The irrigation channels also
carry loads of loam and silt into the fields, by
washing away decayed leaves and trees.

• 4. Current state of conservation andchallenges for the continuity of the landscapeThe unique paddy-cum-fish agriculture has
been practiced over generations and is able towithstand the adverse effects of development.
Modernized techniques have not influenced
their agricultural practice in pursuit of higher
yield . There is no use of fertilizer, except fororganic manure. The entire processes of the
agricultural cycle are completed manually
by each individual household . It is unlikelythat hired labor is engaged to work on the
agricultural fields .
There is a fraction of villagers,
belonging to a younger generation, that are
moving out of this area, in search of better
education or employment, but the dedicationand importance of their agricultural practices
remain close to their hearts. During the harvest
season, all of the family members, from youth
to elderly, whether residing in Ziro or outside,
get together to work in their fields. It is also
observed that locals are growing commercial
crops instead of laboring in their agricultural
field. Though this trend has not overridden

Apatani woman practicing agriculture in Ziro Valley© Tolih Megu

66

their traditional agricultural practices, there is
likelihood that there will be a shift from labor
intensive agriculture to less labor intensive
sources of livelihood . Also, in the processof nomination of their landscape as a World
Heritage site, there is not much involvementfrom the locals.

5. Recommendations
Traditional practices of harvesting forest
resources of the tribal people, well-known for
their sustainability, while quickly dwindlingin other parts of the world, are still seenamong the Apatanis. It is due to the continued
existence of strong customary laws and spiritualbeliefs that these practices remain alive today.
Stringent regulations laid by official authorities
have often failed to yield the expected results.
However, the Apatani traditions have not only
helped in the optimal harvesting of resourcesfrom the forest, but also have improved theireffective conservation . This is regarded as an
example of the sustainable management of
natural resources.
Presently, the process of elaborating
the nomination file is being handled by thestate government under the Department ofCultural Affairs. Villagers are not taking a majorpart in the process of making their landscapea World Heritage site. Since it represents theirtraditional practices, the role of the Apatani
local communities will need to be greaterthan it is presently. During the field visit in
July 2015, the meeting between stakeholders
and the author revealed that there is no clear
understanding of the process for nomination.
It is mostly being handled by the Department
of Cultural Affairs, Government of Arunachal
Pradesh. Talking to one of the officials revealed
that it might take 5 to 10 years to come up withthe final nomination dossier for the Apatani
cultural landscape. Currently, the UNESCO
Category 2 Centre-India is not playing any rolein this nomination.
The footfall of tourists is expected
to escalate, once the property attains thedesignation of World Heritage. Hence, it isimportant that the appropriate measures areplanned before the massive boom of tourism
brings negative impacts to the site. The
future of this region lies in the hands of thehigher authorities - the Cultural Department,
the Fisheries Department, the Agricultural
Department, the Irrigation Department, andthe Education Department. In order to keep thepractice of paddy-cum -fish cultivation lucrativeand profitable, different state departments
should collate and plan strategies to ensure
this practice . Initiatives taken will assist in
decreasing the shift away from their traditional
practicesof
paddy-cum-fish
cultivation,
leading to its viable and sustainable future. In
order to retain the youthful population, better
infrastructures, like colleges and employment
opportunities, will be needed. At the village
level, committees can be formed that will linkthese departments, and their policies, to the
locals. Also, an exclusive committee for thenom ination of the Apatani cultural landscapeshould be formed. It should be an inclusivecommittee of government officials, local
stakeholders, researchers, experts in the fieldof World Heritage, and NGOs. They should holdmeetings regularly and make the drafting of thedossier, for this landscape, their first priority.
With all of these tiny efforts of conservation,
the viability of the Apatani cultural landscapecan be seen in the future . In India, there is noother place like this landscape; therefore, theimportance of the Apatan i cultural landscapeshould be preserved.

• Literature Cited
Dollo, M., Sa mal, P.K., Su nd riyal, R.C. and Kumar, K. 2009. En vi ron mentally sustainable traditional
natural resource management and conservation in Ziro Valley, Arunachal Himalaya, India . Journalof American science, 5(5): pp.41-52
Kan i ng, M. 2008. The Rising Culture of the Apatan is. Arunachal Pradesh: Hi malayan Publisher
Munilkumar, S. and Nandeesha, M.C. 2007. Aquaculture practices in Northeast India: Current status
and future directions. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry, 33(4): pp.399-412
Singh, A.K. and Varaprasad, K.S. 2008. Criteria for identification and assessment of agro-biodiversity
heritage sites: evolving sustainable agriculture. Curr Sci, 94(9): pp.1131-1138
UNESCO 2016. Apatani[accessed 5 August 2016]

CulturalLandscape

http:/ /whc.unesco .org/en/tentativelists/5893/

67

The Kanchendzonga
Sacred Landscape: NatureCulture Linkages and Local
Associations with Place
Shweta Wagh 1(1) Kamla Raheja Vidyanidhi Institute c:f Architect~1re and Environ-mental St~tdies, Vidyanidhi Marg,]VPD Scheme, MwnlJai 49. +91 9821925974, slnveta. wagh@_;gmail.com• Abstract

This paper looks at cultural landscapes, including settlements and agro-ecological systems,
which lie beyond the domain of the protected natural core of the Kanchenjunga National Park(a World Heritage site and Biosphere Reserve). These landscapes have evolved, over time,through a long history of interactions between culture and nature, with the assimilation andcoexistence of diverse traditions, belief systems, and rituals related to land. This makes thema repository of biological and cultural diversity. Dominant discourses about the environmentand heritage often tend to commodify nature or culture, undermining the multiplicity ofvalues, meanings, and practices in these multi-layered, multi ethnic and contested terrains.
There is a need for a paradigm shift, towards an alternative conservation praxis, that
acknowledges and explores nature-culture linkages in landscapes and the local perceptionof heritage while affirming the stewardship role of communities and their engagement indecisions concerning their land, forests, and waters.

KEY WORDS: sacred landscape, nature~culture, intangible heritage, indigenous
rights

1. Introduction

Over the years, the global conservation
discourse has experienced a gradual, but
significant, shift from monument-centric andexpert-oriented to community-based andpeople-centric approaches. Yet in practice,conservation continues to be a top-down
process, as typical conventional approaches
lead to the isolation of nature from culture.
For instance, the natural area that immediately
surrounds Mount Kanchendzonga is designatedas a National Park and was recently inscribed
as a World Heritage site under the Mixed
Cultural and Natural Heritage category; but, thehuman inhabited agricultural landscapes andsettlements, which constitute a part of thelarger sacred geography, have been excluded
from the core area of the designated heritagesite. The Kanchendzonga sacred landscape, a68

notional landscape, can be described as aconfluence of place and mythology. There are
multiple interpretations of this mythicallandscape, which broadly en com passes Mount
Kanchendzonga and its adjacencies, but does
not have any definitive boundaries. This paper
attempts
tounderstandnatu re-cu ltu re

Figure 1. The sacred landscape: a confluence of place andmythology; Prayer Flags at Dzongri in West Sit?t?im (image
courtesy: Hussain lndorewala)Figure 2. Natural and Human Inhabited landscapes belonging to th e Kanchenjunga Biosphere reserve (pictu res in the left); themap in the right shows the core (yellow), buffer(red) and transition zones (white) of the Biosphere reserve and World Heritage site(boundaries shown with a red line); images: Shweta Wagh, Map sourced from the Dossier for the Nomination of Khangchendzonga
National Parh for Inscription on the World He ritage List

linkages and local perceptions of nature insemi-natural and human inhabited landscapesthat lie beyond the domain of the protectednatural core, broadly coinciding with the buffer
and transition zones of the inscribed World
Heritage site or the Kanchenjunga 1 Biosphere
Reserve (Figure 2).
1.1 Overview of the heritage site

Mount Kanchendzonga, the sacred summit, isrevered by local communities as their guardiandeity. Shamanic worldviews persist among theindigenous inhabitants, such as the Lepchas,
who have a cosmology intricately interwoven
with the land . They trace their lineage to sacred
mountains and peaks, believed to be places
where life originates and where the souls of
their ancestors reside. Their conception of
Mayel Lyang is as a hidden paradise, inhabitedby immorta l beings that cater to their needs
and well-being. With the establishment of the
Buddhist Kingdom in the seventeenth century,
indigenous conceptions of the landscape wereassimilated into a "Buddhist rendition of
Si kki m's sacred geography as a beyu l (sbas yu l)or sacred hidden land " (Balikci 2008). The
mythical geography of the landscape thus
seems to have emerged out of these two
distinct hidden land narrative constructs. Overthe years, there is evidence of an interchange
between these diverse cultures and, today, theregion has a mixture of religious and ethnic
identities.
The physical landscape of the

Biosphere Reserve spans across four altitudinal
regions, including the trans-himalayan, alpine,
temperate, and subtropical. It consists of adiversity of habitats ranging from snowfields,
glacial lakes, alpine forests, and meadowsto temperate broadleaved, evergreen, andsub-tropical valley forests. Deep gorges andsteep, densely vegetated, valleys contain thetributaries and basins of the Rangit and Teesta
rivers, fed by melti ngglacial snows and torrential
monsoon rains. At lower elevations, agrarianand pastoral landscapes are interspersed withnatural habitats. The landscape, dotted withsettlements, monasteries, and symbolic relics,
contains a multitude of sacred natural sites(Figure 3).

Figure 3. Th e lan dscape is dotted with settlements, symbolic
relics and sa cred natura l sites: Th e sacred river Ron gyong (left),
Buddh ist Chortens (centre), a village in Dzon gu-the Indigenous
Lepcha reserve in West Sihhim (righ t) ©Shweta Wagh

1.2 Description ofthe agricultural landscape

A wide range of landscape types are sustained
through the practices of the local communities

1 The site is referred to by various names as per local or regional dialects. for eg Kanchendzonga,

Kanchenjunga or Khangchendzonga In this paper I have used these names Interchangeably, as
applicable or accord1ng to how the s1te has been referred to as part of vartous national/internationalframeworks or designations

69

and their inti mate relationship with nature.
The buffer and transition zones of the National
Park consist of agro-ecological systems (Figure4) and land use practices that have evolved
over 600 years, in response to the terrain andclimate, through a series of innovations andadaptations (Ramakrishan 2008; Subba 2008;
Bhasin 2011). The landscape is the result of acumulative process of accretion of successive
layers and the continuous shaping andreshaping of nature by the region 's inhabitants.
Earlier systems of shifting cultivation were
supplemented with sedentary farming. Overthe years, a mi xed mountain ga rde n-based
farming system has emerged, which consists ofa range of practices including agroforestry,
forestry, livestock, and agricultural land (Subba2008). There are different kinds of fields at
different elevations, which include dry fields,
orchards, agroforestry, house gardens, andterraced paddy fields .
The upper slopes of the hills andlands, where irrigation is not possible, areused for the temporary dry cultivation ofgrain such as millet, buckwheat, and dry rice.
At lower elevations, there are terraced rice
fields, irrigated by bamboo channels. The
bu nds of the fields are often planted withlegumes, fruit and fodder trees, and bamboo.
Hill slopes are planted with tapioca, grain,
vegetables, cardamom based agro-forests, ororange plantations intercropped with legumes.
The house gardens use intensive multicropping with cereals, legumes, vegetables,
tubers, medicinal herbs, spices, and aromaticplants (Sub ba 2008; Bhasin 2011). Fields areinterspersed with forests, natural or seminatural landscapes, and are often governed bycustomary rights. Agriculture is supplemented
with livestock farming, fishing, and foraging
for non-timber forest resources. The local

collect
bam boo,
firewood,com mu n 1t1es
fodder, medicinal and edible plants, such as
mushrooms, ferns, and tubers, from the forestsand groves in the settlements vicinity. These
practices constitute the traditional ecologicalknowledge of the local communities whichmakes the region a repository of bio-cultural
diversity (Ramakrishnan 2008).

2. Intangible values and linkages between
culture and nature.

•

Buddhist and shamanic worldviews, deeply
ingrained in the local belief systems, have theirbasis in a mystical reverence for nature andthey place several restrictions, and taboos, on
the inhabitants of the landscape. Natural sites,such as hills, peaks, glaciers, rivers, forests,
trees, groves, rocks, caves, lakes, and springs,
are believed to be sacred and inhabited bymalevolent or benevolent supernatural beings(Figure 5). It is feared that any kind of pollution
or defilement of these areas would release thedestructive entities that the land had subdued
or invoke the wrath of local deities, manifesting
as epidemics, famines, disputes, and naturalcalamities (Scheid 2014). The Lepchas believethat ritual appeasement and pacification isrequired to ensure the deities' benevolence,
which will guarantee their fertility, health,prosperity, and security (Bentley 2014).
Similarly, rituals of the land , common among
the Lhopos [Bhutias], are an expression of awell rooted relationship with the sacred land
and its harvests (Balikci 2008). The Lepcha tribe
believes that the loss of their traditional wayof life, language, and ritual practices will sever
their connection with Mayel Lyang. Similarly,
the Lhopos people believe that only those who
can purify their own minds can experience thesecret beyul, whic h also implies an inner state

Figure 4. Agro-ecological systems in the region of Dzongu include farmlands interspersed with forests, bamboo plantations(left), orchards and house gardens (centre), and natural forests (right) ©Shweta Wagh70

Figure 5. Sacred relics and natural sites: Th e sacred river Rongyong in Dzon gu (left), Sacred sto nes in Dzo ngu- the indigenous
Lepcha reserve (ce ntre) and a sacred grove attached to a mon astery (right) ©Shweta Wag hof transcendence (Scheid 2014). Customary
practices, that involve the dedication of sacredgroves and landscapes to ancestral spirits,
embody their culture and indigenous identities(Arora 2006).

• 3.Cu rrent state of conservation andchallenges for continuity
State policies and development schemes in
the region are geared towards sustainable
development; however, they tend to adopt
conventional
approaches
which
isolatenature from culture. In recent years, agrarianand pastoral landscapes, which lie beyond
protected area networks, have experienced
cultural and demographic changes and an
onslaught of development pressures . With
scientific or biodiversity values prioritizedover cultural values, the role of the local
communities as custodians of the sacred sites
and landscapes has been undermined.
Archaeological sites and monuments
are protected but agricultural landscapes withvernacular heritage are rarely acknowledged.
The processes for heritage identification isdriven by dominant discourses, with little
consideration, or em ph as is, on the intangible
or local values. For instance, the Sacred Spaces
Special Provisions Act recognizes sacred
natural sites of Buddhist worship and includes
peaks, caves, rocks, lakes, chortens, and hot
springs, but intangible values, associatedwith sacred rivers and other sites of local
significance, are not protected under thisact. Nature and culture are also packaged, orcommodified, for the growing tourism industry.
These development programs are often in
conflict with local needs or priorities. For
example, in the region of Dzongu, as part ofan ecotourism initiative, an ancient grove oftrees, which sheltered a sacred spring, was cut
down in order to construct public bathhouses
for tourists. Another example of insensitive
development is the Chief Minister's Rural
Housing Mission, which aimed to achieve a
Kutcha House Free State in the year 2013; itproposed to replace all traditional houses withmodel prototypes in reinforced concrete. There
were serious concerns that the scheme would
erase the diversity of the vernacular heritageof Sikkim.
No culture is static or devoid ofcontemporary
realities;
academics
have
critiqued tendencies to idealize or romanticize
indigenousor
traditional
associations
with nature (Arora 2006). On one hand,modernization,
education,andexternal
influences have led to an erosion of culture;
conversely, the threat of destruction, thecom mod iflcation of nature brought on by
these development forces, and the increasing
marginalization faced by these communities,
has resulted in the revival of the notion of thesacred landscape, its reiflcation acts as a formof resistance to unsustainable development.
This revival of beliefs was evident when theresidents attributed cases of sickness anddeath in the community to the destruction oftrees and rocks during a road construction
project in Tashiding, which was considered
to be one of the most sacred sites in theregion (Scheid 2014). Similarly, a hydroelectric
project proposed on the Sacred Rathong Chu
River, in west Sikkim, and several other suchprojects across Sikkim were opposed as they
threatened to divert the course of rivers,
considered sacred by the local communities,
by channelizing them underground.
An increasing awareness of thecontemporary significanceof traditional
values has made local inhabitants assume

71

simultaneous roles as "keepers oftheirtraditionand culture" while also being promoters ofchange and modernity (Bentley 2011). In thiscontext, intangible associations with thelandscape, in the forms of ancient religious
beliefs, stories, and myths, carry a renewed
ecological relevance. The inhabitants of thecontested and precarious landscape resort
to a reassertion of their mythical association
with the landscape, and their identities as theoriginal inhabitants of the region, in orderto establish territorial claims over natural
resources and ecological commons, suchas mountains, rivers, and forests that they
revere as sacred. Even today, the notion of
the sacred landscape is alive and continues
to be reinforced in public memory through aconstant juxtaposition and interplay of local
and regional narratives.

4. Bridging the nature-culture divide: aparadigm shift in conservation praxis
In recent years, there is an increasingawareness that "areas in which people live,
work, forage, and worship ... play an importantrole in biodiversity conservation" (Sharma2008). This has resulted in a move awayfrom "protectionist" exclusionary approaches
to "livelihood-linked" inclusive landscapeapproaches (Ibid). A few initiatives in thisdirection include the State Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan, Joint Forest
Management (JFM), and the Kanchenjunga
Landscape Conservation Initiative, which
advocates an integrated trans-boundary
landscape approach with the identification ofpotential conservation corridors that provides
landscape connectivity between Protected
Areas (ICIMOD 2008). The limitation, however, isa lack of adequate institutional and legislative
support. The presence of categories such as"Cultural Landscapes" and "Mixed Cultural andNatural Heritage Sites" in the World Heritage
Convention can be seen as significant attempts
in bridging the nature-culture divide; however,there are gaps in their application. This wasapparent in recent studies, which showed thatthese typological categories had been underrepresented in previous Tentative lists for World
Heritage sites in India. In response to this, in2012 an extensive participatory stakeholder
consultation process was initiated by theAdvisory Committee on World Heritage Matters(ACWHM) for the revision of the Tentative list.
The Kanchendzonga National Park
had earlier been nominated, under the
Natural Heritage category, a proposal which
undermined its tangible and intangible culturalvalues. Local communities collectively decided
to influence the revision of the nomination bypresenting a more comprehensive alternative
and argued for the inclusion of the buffer
and transition zones as part of the core zone.
Upon reviewing their suggestion, the ACWHM

recommended that the site be renamed as
the "Kanchendzonga Sacred Landscape" andnominated under the Mixed Cultural andNatural Heritage category, with an extension ofboundaries to include its buffer and transition
zones. Although the final nomination did notincorporate these suggestions, the category
was changed from a Natural to a Mixed Site.
Human inhabited, agricultural landscapes andsettlements thus remain excluded from thecore area of the World Heritage site.
This raises some critical questions
regarding current conservation praxis thatnecessitate a paradigm shift. Conservationneeds to be re-conceptualized with anemphasis on landscape frameworks, theincorporation of nature-culture linkages, andan understanding of local perceptions andvalues in the documentation or identificationof heritage. The recent inscription of theirsacred landscape as a World Heritage site has
raised both hopes and apprehensions amongst
the local communities. While their future lies
uncertain, they would like to see an inclusive
approach aimed towards a participatory
management of change. A pluralistic view ofheritage with an emphasis on people-centred
approaches, biocultural rights, community
stewardship, and democratic control could bea few significant steps in that direction.

•

Literature Cited

Arora, V. 2006. "The Forest of Symbols Embodied in the Tholung Sacred Landscape of North Sikkim,
India." Conservation and Society 4 (1): 55
Balikci, A. 2008. Lamas, Shamans and Ancestors: Village Religion in Sikkim . Vol. 17. Brill
Balikci, Denjongpa A. 2014. "Lamas and Shamans of the Sacred Hidden Land ." Marg 65 (4): 50-61
Bentley, J. 2011. "Ambivalence of Change: Education, Eroding Culture, and Revival among the
Lepcha of Sikki m." In Buddhist Himalaya: Studies in Religion , History and Culture (Vol. 1: Tibet andthe Himalaya; Vol. 2: The Sikkim Papers).
Bentley, Jenny. 2014. "Negotiating Lepcha Identity in Multi-Ethnic Sikkim ." Marg 65 (4): 50-61
Bhasin, Veena . 2011. "Settlements and Land-Use Patterns in the Lepcha Reserve-Dzongu Zone in
the Sikkim Himalaya, India." Journal of Biodiversity 2 (1): 41-66
Chettri, N., Shakya, B., Sharma, E. 2008. Biodiversity Conservation in the Kangchenjunga Landscape.
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.
Ramakrishnan, P.S., Saxena, K.G., Rao, K.S., and Sharma, G. 2012. "Cultural Landscapes the Basis for
Linking Biodiversity Conservation with the Sustainable Development." New Delhi , India: UNESCO
Ramakrishnan, P.S. 2008. "Demojong: A Sacred Landscape within the Sikkimese Himalaya, India."Protected Landscapes and Cultural and Spiritual Values. Volume 2 in the Series Values of Protected
Lands-Capes and Seascapes, IUCN , GTZ and Obra Social de Cai xa Catalunya, 159
Scheid, Claire S. 2014. "Hidden Land and Changing Landscape: Narratives about Mount
Khangchendzonga among the Lepcha and the Lhopo"
Sharma, Eklabya. 200 8. "Developing a Transboundary Biodiversity Conservation Land scapeand Conservation Corridors in the Kangchenj unga Complex." Biodiversity Conservation in the
Kangchenjunga Landscape, 3Subba, J.R. 2008. History, Culture and Customs of Sikkim . Gyan Publishing House
Gol, "Nomination of Khangchendzonga National Park for Inscription on the World Heritage List."
Government of India. http:/ /whc.un esco.org/uploads/nomination s/1513.pdf [accessed 25 August
2016]

73

Nature andAgricultureHeritage of the
Sundarban: Connecting
Nature to Culture
Kawshile Saha i(1) Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Departmel!t of Architecture, 3114, Sylhet,

Bangladesh; +880 1712852564, kawsl!ik.salw(ij:'gmail.com• Abstract

The Sundarban is the largest mangrove forest on earth, jointly shared by two countries:
India and Bangladesh. The Bangladesh part of the Sundarban was enlisted as a UNESCOWorld Heritage site. The Sundarban, as a mangrove ecosystem, is home for a large variety offlora and fauna, providing a number of ecosystem services for this region. Besides natural
resources, Sundarban has significant cultural and economic values connected to indigenous
communities. During the past few years, Sundarban has been facing rapid biodiversity loss
due to growing anthropogenic pressures. Hence, there is the need for effective conservation
efforts. This study is an attempt to identify a frameworf? for adapting a nature-culture
approach for the conservation and management of the Sundarban by rethinf?ing the
traditional sectorial conservation initiatives.

KEY WORDS: Sundarban, conservation, nature-culture linkages, sustainable heritage
management

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview of the heritage site

The Su ndarban, literary meaning 'beautiful
forest,' is considered the largest mangrove
forest on Earth and one of the major agriculturallandscapes of Bangladesh. Conservation
efforts have been carried out in Sundarban
for the last 150 years. In 1997, UNESCO
declared Sundarban as a World Heritage site.
Besides agricultural and natural biodiversity,
Sundarban is substantially rich in ecosystemservices which made it one of the foremost
agricultural landscapes of Bangladesh . Due
to numerous anthropogenic pressures andthe effects of eli mate change, Su ndarban 's
biodiversity is under threat of extinction.
There is a need of a paradigm shift in current
conservation efforts to rethink traditi ona lsectorial conservation in order to propose
holistic approaches that consider both naturaland cultural values together. This study tries
to develop a framework for a comprehensive
approach to preserving Su ndarban by linking
nature and culture in a holistic manner.
76

Bangladesh, a low lying deltaic plain, wasconstituted by the combined river systems of
the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Meghna rivers.
The river system in Bangladesh is carrying an
enormous amount of sediments every year andemptying them into the Bay of Bengal (Iqbal
2010). This process of land making, between the
Bay of Bengal and the Bengal delta, generated
the growth of vegetable and plants that evolved
into the largest mangrove ecosystem on Earth,
known as the Sundarban (lqbal2010).
The Sundarban is situated in the southwest districts of Bangladesh, lying between
latitudes 21°39' and 22°30 ' N and longitudes
89° 01 ' and 89°52'E (IUCN 1997). The total areathat the Sundarban covers is 10,000 km 2, fromwhich 60% of it lies in Bangladesh, covering
6000 km 2• The land area of the Sundarban
occupies 414,259 ha (70%) with water bodies
covering the remaining 187,413 ha (30%).

:~\~,~ ~/.....

t ..... , ,/ "\BANGLADESH:...,'t·-.~.,...,
r- ·- ·,\.....,/·5}~ ( !...~. ,.-~·-·--·-..:-· '~.,~;')/BAY OF BENGALSUNDARBAN-·-·· International Boundary~ RiverB A Y

OF

89:"00'Figure 1.

D

BENGALoo·oo

89:"40'Source: IUCN

Mo p showing the distri bution of the mangrove forest of Sundorbon in Bangladesh (Bonglopedio 2011)

1.2 Brief description of thelandscape of Sundarban:

agricultural

The Sundarban is a highly productive
agricultural landscape and it has an enormous
economic impact on the micro -economy of
Bangladesh. This ecosystem produces morethan 50 percent of the revenue for the forestry
sector (Ali 1994). The Sundarban is connectedwith intensively cultivated agricultural land on
the north and with the Bay of Bengal on theSouth. At present, four major types of livelihood
activities are practiced : agriculture, fishery,wood collection , and honey collection. Paddy,
potato, green chili, and pumpkins are the major
crops cultivated here. Other resources ofSu ndarban's ecosystem include timber, fuelwood, honey, Neepa palm tree, wildlife, andaquatic fauna.

Figure 2.

o Range Headquerters·-·---· Range Boundary--- · Reserved Forest Boundary
Wildlife Sanctuaries[[]] Approximate Boundary of·the World Heritage Site

• 2. Significance of the Sundarban:
and Cultural Values

Natural2.1 Natural valu es of Sundarban
The Sundarban mangrove eco system is alandscape with enormous natural values andwith a great diversity of flora and fauna. The
floristic composition of Sundarban is highly
rich compared to many other mangrove
ecosystems in the world. The Sundarban
supports 25 mangrove species that are confinedto land with salt or brackish water flow (Gopal
B. and Chauhan M. 2006). Heining (1892)
recorded 69 species, under 34 families, in thewhole of the Sundarban (Bangladesh andIndia) territory. Karim (1994) reported 123 plant
species, belonging to 22 families, representing
30 genera in the Sundarban mangrove forest.

Th e Sundo rbon: Floro and Fau na, photographs by So rongi b (2016, re trieve d under Creative Common License)77

8M'Gt.AOESH
Klrlllru

SU DAROAN

s

0

s

'
''

I

\'!''Cth>l· ~ ~\

r~

~·
I
I

I

I
I

'

I
I

I
I
I
I

Ba

Figure 3.

BAY

of Be,.flal

OF

BFNGAlDistribution of wildlife and location of sanctuaries in Sundarban (Go pal B. and Chauhan M. 2006)

The Sundarban is dominated mostly by threemajor tree species, namely Heritiera fomes,
Excoecaria agallocha, and Ceriops decandra
covering 21%, 29% and 14.46% of the total area
respectively.
The faunal composition of the
Sundarban is also very rich and varied. About
50 species of mammals are reportedly foundwithin Sundarban. Some of the importantanimals are the tiger (Panthera tigris), spotteddeer (Axis axis), wild boar (Sus scrofa), andrhesus macaque (Macaca Mulatto) . Sundarban
is the biggest reserve of the royal Bengal tiger,
which is considered the most precious animalof this region. The Sundarban is also home
to 300 species of birds, around 50 species ofreptiles , and eight species of amphibians.

forest is divided by two territorial divisions(East and West) where Divisional Forest Officers
are responsible for managing forest, tourism,
and fishery resources in their respective
territory. Moreover, the Divisional Forest Officerof the Wildlife Management section is
responsibleforwildlifeandnaturalconservation activities (I UCN 1997).
Mi nh.trvofE nvi ronmt"ntand f~st

2.2 Cultural values of Sundarban
The Sundarban is a landmark of ancient
heritage of mythological and historical events.
Interactions of humans, nature, and wildlife
have given rise to a new dimension of culturallandscape in Sundarban, including bothtangible and intangible heritage (for example
honey collection, religious festivals, myths,
music and dance, and traditional mask making).
Nearly 3.5 million people directly depend on theprovisional and cultural services of Sundarban
for their livelihood .

• 3. Managing Sundarban: Current
Management Arrangements
Historically, the Sundarban has been managed
for a period of 150 years based onrecommendations by a number of foresters .
The Sundarban is currently managed by the
Forest Department (FD) under the Ministry ofEnvironment
andForests.
Management
measures are sectorial, including forest
resource management, fisheries resource
management, and wildlife management. The

78

Figure 4. Administrative structure of FO for the Sundarban
Reserve Forest (IUCN 1997)

In 1977, three wildlife sanctuaries, known as'hot-spots' (the Sundarban West, Sundarban
East, and Sundarban South), were formed by
Bangladesh, protecting about 23.5 % of theremaining area under the Bangladesh Wildlife
Act of 1974 (Gopal and Chauhan 2006). Under
this Act, various activities are forbidden within
the wildlife sanctuaries, including building
residence, cultivation of land , damage tovegetation, hunting, and setting of fires (IUCN
1997). Through this approach, core habitat
areas are surrounded by restricted-use bufferzones to ensure the survival of communities
and speci es, which depend upon the area 's
resource s, such as food or nesting, andbreeding sites (Gopal et al. 2006).

Table 1. Human-Environment-Culture relation in Sundarban
Human-Environment-Culture Relationship in Sundarban
Tangible
Small scale Fishing

Mixed
Cultural Heritage

Values and Identity

Farming

Music and Dance

Community family

Honey collection

Local Myth

Sacred practice

Wood collection

Food preparation

Sense of ownership

Community gathering

Medical Plants

Traditional Knowledge System

Place and Architecture

Intangible
Spiritual connection

Religious Festivals

4. Significances of Nature-Culture
Interactions in the Sundarban

and traditional knowledge systems.

In recent years, there has been a growinginterest of connecting practices, both inmanagement and conceptual terms, by linking
nature and culture for better conservationof World Heritage sites (Trzyna 2017).
Hence, understanding human-environment
interactions plays a crucial role to narrow thegap between natural and cultural dynamics(Peter and Wijesuriya 2015). Nearly 3.5 million
people living around Sundarban depend on
ecosystem services for their livelihood. This
interaction has given birth to a unique culturallandscape, with both tangible and intangible
heritage (Table 1), whereas the effective linkage
between natural and cultural values depends
on how these values (tangible and intangible)
can be incorporated with the ongoingconservation management. Moreover, action
measures and management tools need to be
developed by incorporating local community

5. Threats and Conservation Challenges for
the Sundarban
Even though the mangrove ecosystem
has immense ecological value in terms of
biodiversity, the Su ndarban is under continuous
threats of destruction. All these threats include
both anthropogenic and natural factors. Major
problems are associated with issues like climatechange, oil spill, deforestation, marine traffic,
wildlife conflict, invasive species, unregulated
tourism and lack of involvement from locals.
The most threatening concern for Sundarban
is climate change induced sea level rise. It
has been predicted that the most biodiverse
areas in the Su ndarban will be reduced from
60% to 30% by the year 2100 (Uddin et al. 2013).
Additionally, coastal disasters like cyclones andstorms cause serious damage to both flora andfauna, which is a key reason for the mortalityof the spotted deer (Rahman et al. 2010).

Table 2. Prospective measures for reducing threats by linking nature and culture
Threats & Conflicts

Prospective action measures and management tools for nature-culture linkage

Man-wildlife conflict•Training young villagers with nylon net fencing production technique to protect livestock.
and distribution method to protect households fromSea Level Rise

Cyclone and tides

reduce potential risk.

Oil Spill Control•

Environmental Stewardship should be promoted, ensuring quick removal of oil from the land and water in oil
spill incidents.

•

Traditional wooden boat buildings and water routing systems should be encouraged to reduce water based

Deforestation

Invasive Species
Adverse effect of
tourism

operator.
among
management coordination team should be formulated.

Poor Conservation
managementmarlagE!ment should be replaced by a bottom-up approach. This approach should beresource

Governance Gap
in Land Management•

There is need of a strong regulatory and institutional network, including participatory approaches, andimplementation of a sound property rights structure.

Environmental Justice79

Unfortunately, disaster m1t1gation measures
are too slow to have an effective impact on
habitat and biotic reconstruction in Sundarban.
Man-wild life conflict is another major threat
towards the integrity of Sundarban. Scarcity offood often drives tigers towards nearby humansettlements, causing damage to available
livestock. Moreover, increasing number ofoil spill incidents due to the port associatedmarine traffic are severely damaging mangrove
ecosystem every year. Frequent moving traffics
are causing underwater noises which have an
adverse impact on sweet water mammals, likeriver dolphins, who also suffer from collision
injuries. In recent years, the increasing numberof tourists and the unsustainable tourist
management is one of the major growing
concerns for Sundarban. A top-down approachto tourism activities causes a lack of integration
with the local people.
Deforestation is considered as theoldest threat acting on Sundarban. Making
room for agricultural land and the exploitationof Su ndari trees for commercial industrial use
are the key reasons for deforestation. However,
local people mostly collect timber and leaves
for making boats, fuel, and house making.
Attack of invasive species, is one of
the biodiversity problems which has not been
explored yet. Invasive species include bothinvasive plants and aquatic fauna, causing
damage to ecosystem integrity. In every
harvesting monsoon, villagers collect a hugeamount of baby shrimps from the rivers. This
intake of baby shrimp has a negative impact
on the ecosystem by breaking the food chain
cycle.
From the governance perspective,the existing conservation management of
Sundarban is mostly forestry-based, lacking
integration with other sectors like wildlife
conservation and water management. The
lack of involvement of local people with theconservation management is also a big flaw
in the current conservation efforts. Economic,
political, and institutional frameworks in theSu ndarban are weak in terms of property
rights and land governance. This gap in thegovernance system is influencing illegal
activities and corruption in land management,
forcing disparities in resource distribution.

6. Concluding Remarks
From the above discussion, it is obvious thata nature-culture approach can be useful toidentify conservation problems and conflict
management in Sundarban. Major conservation
challenges for Sundarban mostly depend on
the sustainable management of resources byreducing conflicts. This can only be achievedby an integrated conservation approach, byconnecting both cultural and natural elementsof the Sundarban landscape. In summary, byaddressing the overall issues, which have been80

identified in this paper, a few generic concepts
can be formulated that would be useful
methods for connecting nature and culture for
Sundarban's conservation:i. Adopting a community-based governancesystem, with the current management
practicesof Sundarban,
canensurecommunity participation in conservation
efforts. Community Forestry Management(CFM) can help forest-dependent inhabitants,
living near Su ndarban, raise their voice andconcerns for sustainable forest resource
management and conservation.
ii. Engaging the Traditional Knowledge System(TKS) as a tool for natural conservation is a
way to integrate culture and nature.
iii.
An
Environmental
Stewardship
Programs (ESP) can be used to create
trained volunteers who can do small-scaleplanning, implementation, and monitoring ofconservation areas focusing both on naturaland cultural heritage.
iv. Replacing the sectorial conservation
approachof Sundarban
withcrossscale,cross-sectoral,
ecosystem-based
management can make a linkage between
nature and culture. An integrated spatialplanning approach for land, coast, andmarine areas will make the bridge between
socio-cultural wellbeing, economic needs,
and environmental conservation.
v.
Adopting
alternative
conservation
approaches, such as a bio cultural approach,and a cultural landscape approache could
be more useful than traditional approaches
to establish a more integrated frameworkfor sustainable conservation by connecting
nature and culture.

7. Acknowledgments
The author wants to thank the organizing teamof the Capacity Building Workshop on NatureCulture Linkages in Heritage Conservation,
University of Tsukuba for their generous
support throughout the workshop.

•

Lit erat ure Cited

Ali, S. S. 1994. Su ndarbans: its resources and ecosystem. Proceedings of the national seminar on
Integrat ed Management of Ganges Flood Plains and Sundarbans Ecosystem, pp. 38 -49
Banglapedia. 2011. Sundarban. From www.en.banglapedia.org. [accessed 25 July 2017]
CEGIS. 2006. Coastal Land Use Zoning in the Southwest: Impact of Sea Level Rise on Land use,
Suitabi lity and Adaptation Options. Dhaka: Center for Environmental and Geographic Information
Services (CEG IS)
Getzner, M. and Muhmmad, S. I. 2013. Natural resources, Livelihoods and Reserve Management: aCase St udy from Su ndarbans Mangroves Forests. Internationa l Journal ofSustai nab le Development
and Planning, 8(1): pp. 75-87
Go pal, B. and Chauhan, M. 2006. Biodiversity and its conservation in the Su ndarban. Aquatic
Sciences 68 (2006): pp. 338 -354
Heining, R. L. 1892. Working plan of Sundarbans government forest, Khulna and 24-Parganas
district. Bengal,Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press
Hossain, M. K. 2001. Overview of the forest biodiversity in Bangladesh. Montreal,Canada: SCBD
Iqbal, I. 2010. The Bengal Delta: Ecology, State and Social Change,1840-1943. London: Palgrave
Macmillan
Islam, M. S. 2011. Biodiversity and livelihoods: A case study in Sundarbans Reserve Forest, World
Heritage and Ramsar Site (Bangladesh). Klagenfurt: A Master thesis submitted of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Science (M.Sc.) in Management of Protected Areas at the Un ivers ity ofKlagenfu rt, Austria.
IUCN. 1997. SUNDARBAN WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES. World Heritage Nomination - IUCN Technical
Evaluation Report
Karim, A. 1994. Physical en vi ron ments. In: Mangroves of the Su ndarbans. Volume two: Bangladesh.
(Z. and. HUSSAIN, Ed.)
Melissa, R. P., Karma, C. N. and Ph illip, S. L. 2013. Cultural Dimensions of Socioecological Systems:
KeyCon nections and Guiding Principles for Conservation in Coastal En vi ron ments. Conservation
Letters, pp. 166-175
Peter, L. and Wijesuriya, G. 2015. Nature-cu lture interlinkages in World Heritage: Bridging the gap.
WORLD HERITAGE No. 75: pp. 04-15
Rahma n, M. R. and Asaduzzaman, A. 2010. ECOLOGY OF SUN DAR BAN, BANGLADES H. J. Sci . Foundation,
8(1and2): pp. 35-47
Trzyna, T. 2017. Connecting people, nature, and culture through metropolitan conservation
al liances. George Wright Society, (pp. Conference on Parks, Protected Areas, and Cultura l Sites).
Virginia.
Sarangib, B. 2006. Image collection, from www.pixabay.com/en/users/sarangib-37542. Under
Creati ve Common License. [accessed 27 Ju ly 2017]
Uddin, M. S., Shah, M. A., Khanom, S., and Nesha, M. K. 2013. Climate change impacts on t he
Sundarbans mangrove ecosystem . Asian Journal of Conservation Bio logy, 2 (2): pp. 152-156

81

Ghana's Bia Conservation
Landscape: A Convergenceof Biological and Cultural
Diversity
Yaw Osei-Owusu i and Vincent Awotwe-Pratt 2(1) Country Director, Conservation Alliance International, Ghana, yosei-owHs!i@·:conservealliance.org(2) Se11ior Partner, BI-IA Africa, Ghana Office, 5 OdHm Street, North Dzonvulu-Accm, Ghana,vawotwe-pratt@~conserveallia1tce.mg•

Abstract

Most rural communities in Ghana have protected places because they are considered sacred,unique, or were recognized as aesthetically beautiful. The Bia Conservation Landscape ismade up of both reserved and off-reserve lands. While the ownership of the reserved areas
is vested in the President of Ghana, the Sefwi Traditional Stool exercises jurisdiction over
the off-reserve areas. The Sefwi landscape is one of the few where Western and traditionalreligious practices are given equal prominence. Taboos, customs, and other traditional
norms purported to regulate the use of natural resources are observed to show reverence
to the forests. The landscape is considered the cocoa production hub of Ghana, accounting
for about 40% of the national cocoa output. This landscape is the meeting point for richbiological diversity and a traditional ecological !?now/edge system, passed on throughlanguage and practices by the indigenous communities. The unique natural, cultural, andhistorical features constitute enormous potential for ecotourism development and justify theinvestment into the continued protection of the landscape.
KEY WORDS: biodiversity, culture, heritage, natural resources
1. Introduction

During the past decade, progress has been
made in understanding the complementarityof cultural diversity and biodiversity. A
significant number of areas with high cultural
diversity are also areas of high biodiversity; theconvergence of biological and cultural diversity
extends far beyond the so called 'biodiversity
hotspot' areas. It is not only the quantity, butalso the quality of biodiversity, that depends
on the presence of cultural diversity andvice versa (Poker and MacDicken 2016). Maffi
and Woodley (2010) confirmed that age-old
traditional ecological knowledge has been ofsignificant importance in the management of
the rich biological resources of landscapes.
Cultural practices therefore draw on a definedsuite of resources within a local en vi ron ment ina manner that is both efficient and sustainable.

82

Ghana is endowed with rich biological andcultural heritage. The country's forest zone
is part of the Guinean forests of West Africa,
one of the world's 34 biodiversity hotspots. It
harbors rich floral and faunal species, including
over 2,974 indigenous plant species, 504 fishes,
728 birds, 225 mammals, and 221 species ofamphibian s and reptiles. Three species offrogs, 1 lizard, and 23 species of butterflies havebeen reported to be endemic (CI-Ghana 2002).
The interpretation of nature by thevarious ethnic groups not only determined
local interaction s with the environment but
also
fashioned
thepracticesforthemanagem ent of natural resources (SarfoMensah and Oduro 2007). Ghana has about
three score ethnic groups, each characterized
by peculiar cultural values and traditions thatgive each a specific identity. The strong senseof identification with the environment provides

the communities wi t h the tools to define theirculture. Recognizing the value of integrating
biodiversity and culture, Ghana establishedsystems such as the Community Resource
Management Area (CREMA), Community Forest
Committee (CFCs), and the National Community
Water and Sanitation Program to enhance theuse of traditional knowledge and practices innatural resource management at the loca l level(World Bank 2016; Wildlife Division 2000).
7.7 Overview of the heritage site

The Bia Conservation Landscape 1 consists ofa network of forest reserves and off- reservelands (Figure 1). The landscape has a total areaof 7,745.5 km 2 and lies between longitude 3° 02'
and 3° 10' West and latitudes 6° 32' and 6° 40'
North in the Juaboso and Bia districts of theWestern region of Ghana (Forestry Commission2007). Bia was created in 1935 and named
after the Bia River which drains the area. As amove towards conserving one of Ghana's lastremaining remnants of relatively untouchedforest, with its full diversity of wild life, the Bia
forest, covering an area of 77.7 km 2, becamea National Park in 1974 (Forestry Commission2007). The park was later designated as a
Biosphere Reserve in 1995, by UNESCO, tofurther secure the forest's rich biologicalresources and the culture of the neighboring
communities, expressed in the reverence forthe forest (Forestry Comm ission 2007). This
forest ecosystem hosts significant populationsof unique floral and faunal species, including
exceptionally high emergent trees, over 62
species of mammals, and 160 bird species(CI-Ghana 2002). The integration of some ofthe elements of the rich cultural practices ofthe fringe communities, including adherence
to taboos and norms, into the managementof the forest largely account for its continued
protection .

Figure 1.

7.2 The agricultural landscape

Agriculture is currently the dominant economic
activity, which engages about 72.4% of the
population (MOFA 2012). In recent times,
however, the service and commerce sectors
have assumed considerable importance, due
to the number of people moving to the area.
There are about 380 towns and villages, withan estimated population of 573,020 persons,fringing the forest (MTDP 2001) and thesepeople hold a stake in the continued existenceof the forest.
The ecosystem services from theforest, the bimodal rainfall pattern, andthe fertile soils largely account for the highagricultural production within the landscape(Asare 2016; Aju 2014; Asare 2005). As a result,the area is considered the cocoa production
hub of Ghana, accounting for about 40% of
the national cocoa output (GoG 2010). There
are an estimated 300,000 smallholder farmers,
who cultivate about 1-2 hectares of land using
traditional practices to cultivate cocoa andfood crops (MTDP 2001).
Traditionally, cocoa is planted inside
forest areas where logging previously occurred .
The remaining trees provide shade to the cocoa
trees, composing a general ly biodiversity-richagroforestry system . Food crops are often
intercropped with cocoa until the canopy isformed. In addition to improving the soil andwater conservation, agroforestry systems havethe potential to maintain higher levels of
biodiversity and greater biomass than lower
diversity crop or pasture systems (Sistla et al.
2016). The age-old cocoa agroforestry practice,that is common among the Sefwi people, an
ethnic group that is part of the Akan, one of the
major ethnic groups in Ghana, largely accounts
for the sust ainability of the cocoa sector in thearea.

Locatio n of the Bia Conservation Landscape (Conservation Allian ce, 2015)

1 This includes the Bia Conservation Area (made up of the Bia National Park and the Resource Reserve),
the Bia North Reserve, the Krokosue Hills Forest Reserve and the neighbouring off-reserve areas.

83

Figure 2.

Thatched roof housing (left Conservation Alliance 2002 and right Kicl< off Ghana 2012)

2. Significance of the heritage place,including natural and cultural values•

Today, protected landscapes are increasingly
expected to deliver a wide range of cultural,social, ecological, and economic benefits inaddition to maintaining ecological processes
and providing space for natural evolution(CBD 2008). While the importance of the Bia
landscape has been acknowledged, the agreed
upon extent of its significance differs widely.
At the national level, the forest is recognized
for its high biodiversity and the unique species
it harbors, while at the local level, the fringe
communities depend on the forest for watersupply, food, medicines, firewood, household
equipment, and building materials. Although
the extent of the forest's resource values
varies, there is a general agreement on theecological, cultural, and spiritual significanceof the forest (CA 2013). The diverse, but critical,
services delivered by Bia justifies its continued
protection.
2.1 Ecological significance of the landscape
A closer look at the Bia National Park reveals
a thick, green, closed canopy consisting of
the three strata of a pristine forest. All of thestories provide the habitat and conditions that
ensures the continual survival of the diverse
life forms in the reserve. Recent studies haveestablished that the landscape has a fairly
stable elephant population density of about
130 elephants (CA 2013). This is in addition to
the presence of a diverse population of otherFigure 3.

faunal and floral species, that have contributed
to making the landscape a favorable site forresearch and a nature loving destination. The
range of non-timber forest products (NTFPs),
which provides an important source of
livelihood to the rural communities, includes
mushrooms and snails. The physiology of theforest enhances the en vi ron mental resi lieneeof the surrounding areas, in terms of its ability
to withstand environmental stresses, suchas droughts and unfavorable temperatures(Cowling 2008; FC 2007).
2.2 Cultural and spiritual significance of thelandscapePhysically and mystically, forests have defined
the environment of communities in this region
throughout time (Tabush 2010). Tangible andintangible, forests feature in all aspects ofculture, such as language, history, art, religion,
medicine, politics, and even social structure,
it actually defines the Sefwi people's sense ofidentity.
The Sefwi state is one of the few
landscapes within Ghana where Western andtheir traditional religious practices are given
equal prominence (Kwekudee 2013). The peopleof Sefwi Wiawso traced a call for a "return" to
by Aaron Ahomtre
normative Judaism
Toakyirafa, a community le ader who is said tohave had a vision in 1976. In response to this'vis ion', the Sefwi state strictly adhered to theJewish form of worship, where Saturdays are
considered sacred (Sabbath) and set aside as a
day of rest from farming and other human

A Cocoa form and harvested cocoa (Conservation Alliance, 2012)84act1v1t1es. This was their religious practice
before the arrival of the missionaries to theGold Coast in the 15th century. Community
members who violated this practice were often
sanctioned. The significance of this religious
practice was to allow the natural recuperationof the environment.
Additionally, the forest has traditionallybeen regarded as the home of their ancestral
spirits and gods, who provide protection to
the area. The people, therefore, worship thetutelary deity, Sobore, and celebrate the annual
yam festival, Alluolie (Eluo) to express their
gratitude for the good harvest (Roberts 1983).
Some wild animals 2 are regarded as totems (CIGhana 2002). The 'Tree of God', reckoned to beover 150 years old, is regarded as the home of
the god of the forest. The 'Abombirim Sacred
Tortoise Forest' is preserved because of theirbelief of the existence of a giant tortoise, which
is supposed to be a god. It is said that anyone
who picks up the tortoise may not find his/herway back home because the entire forest will
be engulfed in total darkness. Additionally, theroyal family of Bosomoiso is believed to haveoriginated from a bottomless hole, called the'Ancestral Hole.3 'The imposing highlands present
a unique landscape of scenic beauty. The
Nsesereso plateau is dominated with shorttrees and beautiful flowers. These flowers arelikely to have been introduced into this natural
ecosystem by a Briton, Mr. Reynolds, who wasnicknamed by the locals as Kwaku Ti because
he had a very big head (FC, 2007).
The reverence for these cultural sites
and features accounts for the taboos andnorms that prohibit activities, such as hunting
sacred animals, pollution of the rivers, and thedestruction of vegetation. The landscape also
provides a range of products for traditional
ceremonies, from food and beverages tocostume and musical instruments (CA 2013).

3. Nature-Culture Linkages in Management
and Governance
There are specific management regimes forvarious sections of these reserved lands, eventhough generally management follows the
IUCN Protected Areas management framework,
which has, over the years, influenced theecological health of these forests. Under the

IUCN classification, the Bia National Park4
and its adjourning Game Production Reserve
are managed as Category 11 5 protected areas,
where the management objective is toprotect the natural biodiversity, along with its
underlying ecological structure and supporting
environmental processes.
A number of key statutory andcustomary institutions play various roles in
the management of the landscape. Thesearrangements are all rooted in a number oflegislations, including the 1994/2012 Forest andWildlife Policy of Ghana.
Under Act 571, enacted in 1999, theForestry Commission is charged with the
responsibility of protection, development,
management, and regulation of the forest andwildlife resources of Ghana. The Bia National
Park and the Game Production Reserve aremanaged by the Wildlife Division whilst the Bia
North and Krokosua Hills Forest Reserves aremanaged by the Forest Services Division.
Even though the jurisdiction of theForestry Commission is restricted to on-reserveareas, the law allows for the commission
to collaborate with local communities 6 andauthorities to manage the off-reserves areasthat bring value to local communities andlessens the pressure on protected areas.
Asa way
of deepening theconvergence of biodiversity and culture, the1992 constitution of Ghana made provision forthe state to endeavor to preserve and protect
places of historical interest and artefacts,
including forests. Through the 2012 Forest andWildlife Policy, the government incorporated
some traditional practices into the national
resource
management
system(Wildlife
Division 2000). One of the key objectives of the2004 Cultural Policy was the need to enhance
the cultural heritage through the preservationand the conservation of natural resources.
Additionally, traditional leaders have been
given the opportunity to participate in thegovernance of the country (GoG 1992). The
President of the National House of Chiefs isa member of the Council of State, a body ofprominent citizens which advises the President
on important national issues.
Most rural communities in Ghana
have protected places because they wereconsidered sacred, unique, or were recognized
as aesthetically beautiful. While the ownership

2 Animals regarded as totems mclude the crowned eagle, dog, Nile mon1tor and buffalo
3 The hole IS surrounded by a dense vegetat1on that is bel1eved to have some healmg powers
4 B1a Nat1onal Park 1s a habitat for over 130 elephants, 62 spec1es of other mammals mcludmg 10
primates and over 160 spec1es of b1rds
5 Category II refers to Nat1onal Parks, namely
natural or near natural areas set as1de to protect
large-scale ecolog1cal processes, along w1th the complement of spec1es and ecosystems charactenst1cof the area, wh1ch also prov1de a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible spiritual,
SCienti"Ac, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities" (IUCN
https/ /wwwiucnorg/
theme I protected -areas I about/protected -areas-categories I category- i 1- national-park)
6 Th1s collaborative effort has been mstitut1onal1zed in the form of a Community Resource Management
Areas (CREMAs), four of which are fully functional within the landscape85

of the Bia landscape is vested in the Presidentof the Republic of Ghana, the Sefwi Traditional
Stool exercises jurisdiction over the entire
area.
The Sefwi Traditional Area has asophisticated traditional system of governancestructure, made up of the Paramount chief,and councils of elected chiefs, sub-chiefs,
councilors, and elders. The Stool is made upof three mutually independent paramounts,
Anhwiaso, Bekwai, and Wiawso, and theircommon dialect is Sefwi. It originated from thewithering of the Twi (dialect of Akans) phrase,"Asa awie" which translates to "War is over",by immigrants who settled on the territories
of Aowin (modern-day Sefwi) escaping the
century wars. The chiefs exercise executive,
legislative, and judicial functions over the area,
including the management of the forests (CIGhana 2002).
The forests have, traditionally, been
regarded as the home of their ancestral spirits,
who provide protection, success, and progressto the Sefwi people. It, thus, represents asource of spiritual value and cultural identity
to the Sefwi Traditional Area. Traditional
festivals, rituals, and ceremonies which draw
on forest symbols serve to link the people
with their cultural heritage, as well as theirancestral past (Calame-Griaule 1970). The forest
provides diverse goods and services to thefringe communities and therefore a number oftaboos, customs, and other traditional norms
are observed by the state to show reverence tothe forests through the regulation of the useof the forest's resources. The forest is thus asource of stories, myths, and local traditions
which provide a strong justification for its
continued protection.

4. Current State of Conservation andChallenges for Continuity.
While the Sefwi Traditional Council has upheld
the cultural heritage of the state to date,manifestations of modernism displayed by
the majority of the young generations pose agreat threat to the continued protection of the
traditional system. For instance, the increasing
preferences for foreign foods, especially by
the youth, is leading to the loss of a numberof traditional dishes of the different ethnic
groups. Due to changes in education, politics,
technology, and economic development, as
well as the ever-growing international tourism
market, the Sefwi state is facing a variety ofcultural challenges.

5. Recommendation
The Sefwi Traditional Council must come toterms with the fact that cultures are everevolving and that change in cultures is anatural phenomenon. In view of this, the statemust adopt innovative ways of insulating the86rich cultural heritage of the Sefwi people
from undue external influences. Byng (2017)indicated that "the appeal of the Western
way of life, coupled with the demand fortech no logy and travel, are on track to render
traditional cultures unsustainable". This state
must, therefore, sustain community education,
especially for the young, drawing lessons
from the positive values of the traditional
practices that define the cultural identity ofthe people and the ecological health of thelandscape. Additionally, the state must sustain
the communities' interest in the traditional
practices by transforming the landscape, with
its unique natural, cultural, and historicalfeatures, into a world class ecotourism
destination. This has the potential to enhancethe economic and touristic value of thelandscape.

Literature Cited

Arhin, K. 1980. The Economic and Social Significance of Rubber Production and Exchange on theGold and Ivory Coasts, 1880-1900. Cahiers d'etudes africaines, pp. 49-62
Asare, R. 2005. Cocoa agroforests in West Africa: a look at activities on preferred trees in thefarming systems. Copenhagen: Forest and Landscape Denmark (FLD)
Asare, R. 2016. The relationships between on-farm shade trees and cocoa yields in Ghana.
Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen.
Aju, P. C. 2014. The role of forestry in agriculture and food security. American Journal of ResearchCommunication, 2014, 2(6): pp. 109-121 www.usa-journals.com, ISSN: 2325-4076
Byng, X. 2017. Does globalization pose a threat to cultural diversity? Monash University.
http:/ /www.academ ia.ed u /4770279/ Does_globalisation_pose_a_th reat_to_cu ltu ral_d iversity[accessed 14 February 2017]
Calame-Griaule, G. 1970. Pour une etude ethnolinguistique des litteratures orales africaines.
Langages 18: pp. 22-47
CI-Ghana 2002. Handbook of Totem in Ghana - A Traditional Mechanism for Biodiversity
Conservation. Conservation International, Accra-Ghana.
CA (Conservation Alliance). 2013. A Biological Survey of Juaboso-Bia Biological Landscape in
Ghana- Towards the development of monitoring protocol for the TFCA Project.
CCBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). 2008. Protected Areas in Today's World: Their Values andBenefits for the Welfare of the Planet CBD Technical Series No. 36. Secretariat of the Convention
on Biological Diversity.
Cowling, R.M., Egoh, B., Knight, A.T., O'Farrell, P.J., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Raux, D.J., Welz, A. andWilhelm-Rechman, A. 2008. An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for
implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(28): pp. 9483-9488
Daaku, K.Y. 2012. The History of my people Sefwi. https:/ I kofi man u.wordpress.com /2012/06/22/
the-h istory-of-my-people-sefwi I [accessed 14 February 2017]
Ghana Statistical Service. 2012. Population Census 2010.
GoG (Government of Ghana). 1992. Constitution of Ghana. Ministry of Information. Accra Ghana
Forestry Commission. 2007. Krokosua Globally Significant Biodiversity Area Management Plan
2007-2011.
Forestry Commission. 2007. Bia North Forest Reserve Management Plan 2007-2011.
Kwekudee. 2013. Sefwi People: Ghana's Number One Agricultural People. http:/ /kwekudeetri pdown memorylane.blogspot.com /2013/09/ sefwi-people-ghanas-n u mber-o ne.htm l [accessed
29 November 2016]
Maffi, L., and Woodley, E. 2010. Biocultural diversity conservation: a global sourcebook. Routledge.
MDTP. 2001. Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, Juabeso- Bea District Assembly.
February. (2001). Second Five-Year Medium Term Development Plan: 2001-2005. First Draft Report.
MOFA. 2013. Ghana Agricultural Production Survey. Ministry of Food and Agriculture. Accra- Ghana
Poker, J., and MacDicken, K. 2016. Tropical Forest Resources: Facts and Tables. Tropical Forestry
Hand book, pp.3-45.
Prussin, L. 1969. Architecture in northern Ghana. University of California Press.
Roberts, P.A. 1983. The Sefwi Wiawso Riot of 1935: the deposition of an Omanhene in the Gold
Coast. Africa, 53(02): pp. 25-46.
87

Sarfo-Mensah , P and Oduro, W. 2007. Traditional Natural Resources Management Practices
and Biodiversity Conservation in Ghana: A Review of Local Concepts and Issues on Change
and Sustainability Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei . Corso Magenta, 63, 20123 Milano (l),http:/ Iageconsea rch.u m n.ed u I record /7440 /files /wp070090.pdf
Sistla, S. A., Roddy, A. B., Williams, N. E., Krame r, D. B., Stevens, K., and Allison , S. D. 2016.
Agroforestry Practices Promote Biodiversity and Natural Resource Diversity in Atlantic Nicaragua.
PLoS ONE, 11(9), 0162529. http:/ /doi .org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162529
Tabush, P. 2010. Review of the Cultural Values of Trees, Woods and Forests. The Research Agencyof the Forestry Commission. http:/ /www.forestry.gov.uk/ pdf /Cultu ral_value_woods_fu ll_report_
March201 O.pdf I $file I Cu ltu ral_value_woods_fu ll_repo rt_March201 O.pdf.
Wildlife Division . 2000. Collaborative Wildlife Management, Accra
World Bank. 2016. An Integrated Approach to Managing and Restoring Landscapes. The WorldBank Group http:/ / www.world ban k.org/en /topic /environment/ brief I landscapes

88Lord Howe Island,
Australia- Managing the
Cultural Values of a World
Heritage Island Ecosystem
Nina Pollock 1(1) Senior Heritage Assessment ()_fficer, Heritage Division, ()_ffice of Environment and Heritage 10 Valen-tine Ave Parranzatta; +61 (2)9873 8500, ni~w.pollock@environment.nsw.gov.au• Abstract

Lord Howe Island is listed on the World Heritage List in recognition of its natura/landscapesand scenery and as on outstanding example of on island ecosystem developed fromsubmarine volcanic activity. The island is also listed on the State Heritage Register (SHR) for
its cultural heritage significance to New South Wales, Australia, a Iorge port of which relates
to the island's earliest people and their agricultural practice.
The role of the Senior Heritage Assessment Officer is to assist the managers with the island's
protection, conservation, and promotion of the island's cultural heritage. However, theisland 's globally recognized natural values currently greatly outweigh the recognition andprotection of its cultural values. I aim to improve interlinkoges between the management of
its cultural and natural heritage values through inter-governmental collaboration between
state, notional, and World Heritage agencies.
KEY WORDS: Lord Howe Island, Australia, volcanic, State, World Heritage• 1. Introduction
7.7 The heritage site
The Lord House Island Group consists of agrouping of small islands in the Tasman Sea,
600 kilometers (370 miles) directly east ofAustralia, between Australia and New Zealand.
Although they lie outside ofthe normal boundsof state territorial waters, the islands areclassified as part of the state of New South
Wales (NSW), Australia .
The main island of the Lord Howe
Island Group is an irregularly crescent-shaped
volcanic island with two spectacular sheersided mountains on the northern side, a flatsandy center, and a coral reef on the westernside. The settled part of the island, which
is located in the center, has a population of360 residents. The other islands in the group:

Admiralty Island, Mutton Bird Island, Gower
Island, and Blackburn Island, are all smaller
and uninhabited.
The first known discovery of theisland was by Europeans in 1788, during theircolonization of Australia. It remained an
untouched natural landscape until 1833 when
it was settled as a provisioning station forwhalers; there is no evidence of indigenous
occupation or Polynesian visitation prior tothis, possibly due to its location outside of thetypical Polynesian voyaging routes .
The island has become a popular
tourist destination due to its unique andrelatively untouched natural beauty, with about
14,000 tourists visiting each year. The maineconomic activity on the island is currently
associated with tourism, although agriculturalindustries also make a significant contribution.

89

Figure 1.
View from Kim's Lookout, towards the settled part of Lord Howe Is land, facing north towards the mountains, (David
Stanley, [1/?r, 2016 https:/lwww.flichr.comlphotosldavidstanleytravel/)

1.2 The agricultural landscapeThe soil, water, and climate of the island
provides favorable conditions for market
gardening and agriculture on the island. The
fl rst settlers were able to sustain themselveswith their own resources using a unique
combination of Polynesian and European
farming techniques. The island, which was flrst
used as a stopover for boats to collect waterand fresh provisions, began to produce andexport an abundance of resources, including:mangoes, ginger, apples, onions, potatoes,
cedar, tobacco, poultry, and pork to passing
whaling ships (Betteridge 2012).
The island also contains a uniquespecies of native palm trees, including theKentia Palm (Howea forsteriana), which grows inabundance on the island due to its remarkable
tolerance to the cool, temperate, climate of
the island. The Kentia Palm was known to theearly islanders as the 'Thatch Palm' because
the tough leaves could be used for thatching
the roofs and walls of their houses. When
the whaling industry declined in the 1870s,
Lord Howe Island's main industry became theexportation of Kentia Palm seeds.
Kentia Palms are grown on plantations.
Traditionally, once they reached maturity, theseeds were collected by a "seeder" using acircular hessian strap to climb the trunk andwrench the spikes from underneath the crownof palm leaves, they would then be shelledfrom their spikes, and packed for exportation.
During the 1970's and 1980's, the Lord Howe
90

Island Board established their own onsite Kentia
Palm nursery, and by 1981, palm seed exports
had ceased entirely, with only live plants being
shipped from the island. A group of islanders
also formed an island palm growers cooperative, to which the Board agreed to sell anannual quota of its seed. Kentia palms are now
one of the most popular indoor plants worldwide. International producers have emerged,
which has reduced the local income from thissource, although the Lord Howe Island Boardand co-operative rema ins the largest supplierof Kentia Palm seeds in the world (Lord Howe
Island Board 1988).

Figure 2.
Kentia farm plantation at Lord Howe Island
7948 (Farmstead- Lord Howe Island [1948], from https:/1
record sea rch.naa.gov.au I Search NRetrieve I Interface I
OetailsReportslltemDetail.aspx 7 Barcode=11842607&isAv=N)

Most islanders can trace their ancestry backto the flrst settlers and continue to produce
resources using their traditional agricultural
methods. However, the recent increases inimportation and tourism have resulted in
the introduction of foreign pests, includingthe fruit-fly, which has affected the ability tocontinually farm the island. Knowledge ofthese
traditional farming practices continues to passdown through the small community, although
there is some risk that over time the knowledge
and practice will be lost.

2. Significance of the heritage place
including natural and cultural values
World Heritage Values - Natural
The heritage significance of Lord Howe Island
Group is rich and diverse. It includes places ofnatural and scientific value as well as culturalvalues.
The Lord Howe Island Group was
inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1982 for
its Outstanding Universal Values under criteria(vii) and (x) as "an outstanding example ofoceanic islands of volcanic origin containing
a unique biota of plants and animals, aswell as the world's most southerly true coral
reef It is an area of spectacular and scenic
landscapes encapsulated within a small
land area, and provides important breeding
grounds for colonies of seabirds as well as
significant natural habitat for the conservationof threatened species." (UNESCO 2017).
The assessment of the island's
Outstanding
Universal
Value
also
acknowledges that it is of some cultural valueas "an interesting example of a restricted island
settlement pattern;" however, it also specificallystates that the island's cultural heritage values
are not considered to merit a World Heritage
listing (Biosis 1998).

State Heritage Values -Natural and Cultural
Places that are considered of heritage value
to the state of NSW are listed on the SH R and
are administered under the NSW Heritage
Act 1977. The Act den nes state heritage
significance as "significance to the State inrelation to the historical, scientific, cultural,social, archaeological, architectural, natural or
aesthetic value of the item."
The Lord Howe Island Group waslisted on the SHR in 1999 and was the first
World Heritage listed place located in NSW.
It was included on the SHR primarily for its
outstanding natural values, although thestate listing merely acknowledges that theisland possesses cultural heritage value to thestate of NSW (NSW Office of Environment andHeritage 2017).

been sufficiently explored.
The island's cultural significance may
not possess Outstanding Universal Value,
however, it provides a cultural landscape that
presents a unique example of the successful
modern human settlement of a naturallandscape as well as a rare insight into thedevelopment of an island community inisolation. The island also demonstrates strong
community esteem in the conservation of
its natural and cultural values, traditions,and lifestyle. These values should be further
assessed, formalized, and protected at a statelevel.

3. Current management arrangements(Legislations, institutions, resources)
3.1 Management of the Natural Environment
The administrative arrangements for theisland are unique in Australia. The islands
are administered by the Lord Howe Island
Board, responsible to the NSW Minister for
Environment under the Lord Howe Island Act
1953. The Board administers civic issues and is
the main authority with a permanent presenceon the island, although UNESCO, the Australian
Department of Environment, the NSW Heritage
Division, and National Parks and Wildlife
Service also play roles in its management.
Tourism
is currently the maineconomic driver on the island; however, whilst
this is acknowledged by the community, there
is also strong concern for the protection of theenvironment.
Development on the main island isstrictly controlled by a Development Control
Plan (DCP) and there are restrictions on who canhold leases for residential or other purposeson the island, resulting in zero population
growth. The total population is strictly limited
to a maximum of 360 residents, with limits on
the amount of tourist accommodations capped
to 400 visitors on the island at any one time.
The DCP sets out appropriate building heights,
styles, and setbacks as well as specifications
regarding the landscaping around buildings
to ensure that they recede into the landscape.
These controls, which are directed towards
the conservation of the natural environment,
inadvertently act to also protect the island's
cultural values.

Cultural Heritage Values
While the natural values of the island arerecognized and protected via its World Heritage
status, the highest level of protection of its
cultural heritage value is at a state level, where
the broader cultural landscape values have not

Figure 3. Development guideline diagrams from theDevelopment Control Plan (Lord Howe Island DCP 2005, Lord
Howe Island Board)

91

Figure 4. View of Lord Howe Island in 1910 (Hurley, Frank.
1910). [Lord Howe Island, 7] Retrieved April10, 2017, from http:/ In la.gov.au I n la.obj-157818947)

Figure 5. View of Lord Howe Island in 2016, (Roger Wong,
2016 [http: / / www.flickr.com / rogertwong]

3.2 Management of the Cultural Environment

low scale, architecture that is sensitive to its
environment and, today, the broader physicalappearance of the island remains substantiallythe same as before the growth in tourism. Thisis largely a result of the effective restrictions
and controls resulting from its World Heritage
listing.
Additionally, the popularity of theisland generally provides a viable economy
which further funds and sup ports conservation
incentives. It also provides a lucrative market
for local farmers, which
benefits thecontinuation of traditional farming practices.
However, other changes to the landscape, suchas substantial new power facilities and small
scale additions such as shops and offices, aregenerally being constructed with less regard
for the aesthetic and cultural values of theisland. Whilst the need to protect the natural
en vi ron ment is broadly recognized andrespected by the community, the state heritage
regulations are regarded as another layer of"red tape" that slows down the economic
progress of the island .
One main concern is that the cultural
heritage values of the island are only recognizedand protected at a state level through its listingon the SHR. My role as a State Heritage Officer
is to administer approva l of development on
the island that maintains its cultura l heritage
values. However, the current method of listing
locations on the State Heritage Register isa tangible, site-based, proce ss that only
provides for the protection of individualsites. Th e current provisions only protect
tangible links to historical occupations, suchas individual historic buildings. There is a riskthat impo rtant agricultural practices as well as
the relationship between places, the cultural
va lues associated with broader settings, andhistoric views will not be sufficiently protected
unless the management of cultura l heritageis strengthened to meet the rigor of the
management of its natural heritage.

Under the usual provisions ofthe NSW Heritage
Act 1977, state government approval is required
for any changes to a place listed on the NSW
SHR. Given that the listing includes the entire
group of islands, this would typically mean thatany change would require state government
approval. However, given that the area ofcultural value is limited to the small settledarea within the broader group of islands, a
special provision was enacted to allow
development to occur without state government
approval, unless the site has been identified as
an item of cultural value by the Lord Howe
Island Board .
This approach is beneficial in thatit reduces the various levels of regulatory
authority required, especially in the unsettled
areas, however it is problematic in that onlya small number of historic buildings are
identified and protected. Any impacts to theheritage values of these places are therefore
assessed in isolation rather than in the context
of the broader tangible and intangible valuesof their surrounding cultural landscape, which
has not been clearly defined .

4. Current State of Conservation andChallenges for Continuity
With an early population growth from just
9 residents to over 100 residents in 1911, theisland has currently reached its allowab lemaximum of 360 residents. As a result it has
maintained extremely slow population growthover time with no further growth expected.
Thestrictcontrols
surrounding
tourism have led to the island being regarded
as an exclusive, lu xury destination. Tourist
amenities, such as the airport and golf course,
have removed some physical evidence of theformer, predominantly agricultural, landscapebut there is pressure for the ongoingdevelopment of lu xury resorts as well as anincreased demand for imported food andproducts.
However, the development of resorts
has generally been comprised of high quality,92• 5. Recommendations
Further research is required to understandall of the aspects of cultural heritage values
associated with the island, including anyintangible and archaeological values, toensure that the impact can be appropriately
considered in light of any change. The
SHR statement of significance and listed
curtilage (or boundary) should be revised toacknowledge the importance of the culturallandscape, particularly in the development of
human settlements and farming of the island,
as well as its natural landscape.
Once established, these cultural
heritage values should be integrated into one
consolidated Management Plan, providing
guidelines for the protection of its varying
levels of cultural and natural values, andadopted by all relevant government agencies.
This would ensure a consistent and linked
understanding of natural and cultural values,
improve cross-governmental collaboration,and provide a framework to resolve situations
where there may be conflicting values.

•

Literature Cited

Betteridge, C. and Betteridge, M. 2012. The Last Paradise: A Community-Based Heritage Study ofLord Howe Island. MUSEcape Pty Ltd, Sydney
Biosis. 1998. World Heritage Values and Other Values of the Lord Howe Island Group. Biosis
Research Pty Ltd ., Melbourne
Brown, S. 2008. Cultural landscapes and park management: a literature snapshot: A report forthe cultural landscapes: connecting history, heritage and reserve management research project.
State of NSW and Department of Environment and Climate Change, Sydney
Commonwealth of Australia .1981. Nomination oft he Lord Howe Island Group by the Commonwealthof Australia for inclusion in the World Heritage List. Aust. Heritage Commission, Canberra
Howard Tanner and Associates. 1985. Heritage: Lord Howe Island Board . Lord Howe Island: Regional
Environmental Study. Lord Howe Island Board, Sydney
Lord Howe Island Board . 2005. Lord Howe Island Development Control Plan 2005. Lord Howe
Island Board, Sydney
Lord Howe Island Board. 1988. Lord Howe Island: 1788-1988 A Bicentennial Publication . National
Library of Australia, Can berra
Lord Howe Island Board. 2017. Lord Howe Island Board : LHI Act and Regulation. http:/ /www.lhib.
nsw.gov.au I board I lh i-act-and-regu lation [accessed September 21 2017]
NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, 2017. State Heritage Register: Lord Howe Island Group
http: I I www.e nvi ron ment.nsw.gov.au I heritageap p /ViewH eritage Item Deta i ls.aspx?l D=5001478[accessed January 29 2017]
Owens, K. A. 2008. Farmers, Fishers and Whalemen: The colonisation landscapes of Lord Howe
Island, Tasman Sea, Australia and reserve management research project. Australian National
University, Can berra
UNESCO World Heritage Convention. 2017. World Heritage List: Lord Howe Island Group. http:/ I
whc.u nesco.org/en I list/186 [accessed January 1 2017]93

Part Two:
Report on the Capacity
Building Workshop on
Nature-Culture Linkages in
Heritage Conservation, Asiaand the Pacific(CBWNCL 2016)
AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

95

Executive Sum mary

The First Capacity Building Workshop on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage Conservation in
Asia and the Pacific (CBWNCL) took place in Tsukuba, Japan, from September 17 to 30, 2016. The
workshop was organized by the World Heritage Studies and the Certificate Programme on Nature
Conservation (CPNC) at the University of Tsukuba, with the collaboration of the UNESCO World
Heritage Centre, the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration ofCultural Property (ICCROM), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (IUCN) and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS).
This workshop, with the theme "Agricultural Landscapes", was the first of a series
programmed for four years (2016-2019). The aim is to contribute to the World Heritage Capacity
Building Program me in promoting and developing skills of heritage practitioners of the Asia andthe Pacific region to deal with the interlinkages between nature and culture in the conservationand management of heritage sites.
The CBWNCL 2016 was inaugurated with an International Symposium held on September
18 and 19 at the Tsukuba International Congress Centre in the framework of the Tsukuba Global
Science Week 2016 organized by the University of Tsukuba . The symposium gathered fiveinternational experts, representative of the partner organizations- the UNESCO World Heritage
Centre, IUCN, ICCROM and ICOMOS- one academic specialist on agricultural landscapes from theGadjah Mada University, Indonesia, and representatives of the Japanese governmental agencies
in charge of heritage conservation - the Ministry of Environment and the Agency for Cultural
Affairs. The fourteen participants of the CBWNCL 2016, heritage practitioners from the culture
and nature sectors coming from Australia, Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, thePhilippines, Taiwan, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Ghana and Colombia, presented their case studies, giving ageneral panorama of the region and beyond .
During the general panel discussion and closing remarks, several key points were raised,such as the need to develop more synergies between the nature and culture sectors, both at theWorld Heritage level and at national levels, especially in terms of legal systems. Furthermore,international guest speakers pointed out the importance of governance for the sustainability ofheritage agricultural lands capes.
The main challenges noted were the depopulation of rural areas and the urgency tocommit the youth to the continuity of these traditional agricultural landscapes, the need forguaranteeing the intergenerational transmission of indigenous and local agricultural practices,the development of strategies for resilience and adaptation to climate change and disaster risk
management, and the importance of safeguarding the intangible cultural heritage and traditional
knowledge involved in the maintenance of agricultural landscapes.

The workshop was divided in four modules:·Module 1: Symposium·Module 2: Understanding Nature-Culture Linkages in the Context of the Agricultural LandscapeConservation·Module 3: Management, Implementation and Governance in Agricultural Landscapes·Module 4: Reflection on Theory and Practice
Module 2 consisted of thre e days of intensive lectures and roundtable discussions about theinternational context regarding nature-culture linkages and landscape conservation, the Japaneseexperience on agricultural landscapes' conservation, and community-based conservation andtraditional knowledge systems.

96Module 3 lasted five days during which the participants visited selected rural areas ofJapan and its agricultural landscapes protected or managed under different international, national
and local programs. The visits included the Historical Villages of Shirakawa-go and Gokayama,a World Cultural Heritage property since 1995; one site under national designation (Shiroyone
Senmaida) and two projects (Maruyama Gumi and Shunran no Sato) in the Noto Peninsula,an area designated as GIAHS (Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems) since 2011 by
the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). In these visits, participants
discussed and shared information with local communities and local managers at the sites.

Finally, Module 4 comprised two days of reflection on the theory and practice gained
during the workshop. Participants were divided into groups to work on statements of significance,
identifying both natural and cultural values of the agricultural landscapes visited during the fieldtrip.
Participants recognized that the workshop made them aware about the need ofthinking
beyond their disciplines and heritage sectors. They agreed that nature-culture linkages werenecessary for improving the conservation and management of agricultural landscapes in theirsites. Moreover, they acknowledged the importance of local communities and their traditional
knowledge systems, while recognizing similar challenges in the different countries of the region:
economic sustainability of rural areas and intergenerational transmission of indigenous and local
agricultural practices that are fundamental for the continuity of heritage agricultural landscapes.

97

The Symposium
The symposium was held in the context of the Tsukuba Global Science Week (TGSW) in which
the theme was "In novation and Collaboration among Industry, Government and University". The
World Heritage Studies program was celebrating 10 years from the inauguration of the Ph.D.
Programme (2006), and together with the Certificate Programme on Nature Conservation (CPNC),
i naugu rating the series of Capacity Building Workshops on Nature-Culture Linkages in Heritage
Conservation in Asia and the Pacific, initially planned for four years (2016-2019).
The President of the University of Tsu ku ba, Professor Kyosu ke Nagata, and Mr. Takamasa
Saito, Councillor for Cultural Properties of the Agency for Cultural Affairs, gave opening addresses
emphasizing the relevance of the topic to be discussed during the Symposium: Nature-Culture
Linkages in Heritage Conservation and Agricultural Landscapes.

Guest spea!?ers and participants in the Symposium at the TGSW,
September 18

The organizing team presented the objective of the CBWNCLs: to collaborate with the World
Heritage Capacity Building Programme by forming and training young and mid -career heritage
practitioners from Asia and the Pacific in the Nature-Culture Linkages approach to heritage
conservation . The core of the first CBWNCL was a field trip to Japanese rural areas, Satoyama
and Satoumi, in the Noto Peninsula, designated as a GIAHS area since 2011, and the Historical
Villages of Shirakawa-go and Gokayama, a World Heritage property since 1995, part of the bufferzone of the Hakusan Biosphere Reserve since its extension in the last session of the International
Coordinating Council on Biosphere Reserves in March 2016.
The first day was composed of three thematic panels and a General Panel Discussion.
The second day was composed of four panels where the fourteen participants of the workshop
presented their case studies.1

1 The case studies have been peer-reviewed and comp1 led 1n the part one of th1s spec1al1ssue 2017 of
the Journal of World Hentage Studies, Un1vers1ty of Tsukuba.

98

DAY1
• Panel1: International Development
This panel was chaired by Professor Nobuko lnaba, from the World Heritage Studies programme
and CPNC. She introduced Dr. Mechtild Rossler, Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre andDivision for Heritage, promoter of the cultural landscapes concept in the World Heritage context
where she has been working for more than 25 years. The title of her presentation was "NatureCulture Linkages in the World Heritage Convention" and she focused on the development of theConvention and its implementation, as the only international legal instrument that includes theprotection of both natural and cultural heritage. She reviewed all of the initiatives in the heritage
field to protect landscapes, and how these evolved into the inclusion of the concept of culturallandscapes in the inscriptions to the World Heritage List. The Nara Document on Authenticity(1994), the adoption of the Global Strategy policies (1994), and the Recommendation on Historic
Urban Landscapes (2011) are some examples of the developments towards a more inclusive World
Heritage List and World Heritage system . She pointed out the importance of the Convention as an
example for the development of other regional and local initiatives (e.g. the European Landscape
Convention), and she stressed that whether sites have Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) or not,there is the need to consider nature-culture linkages in their daily management. She mentionedthat even though many advances have been made towards natu re-cu ltu re i nterli n kages andcultural landscapes conservation , there is still much improvement to be done, for example, with
Mixed Cultural and Natural Heritage sites. Finally, she emphasized that agricultural landscapesplay a key role in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and that their maintenance must
be ensured for the benefit of future generations, which is the fundamental mandate of the World
Heritage Convention .

Dr. Mechtild Ross ler, Director of th e UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Divisio n of Heritag e

The second presentation entitled "Connecting Practice, Linking Culture and Nature" was deliveredby Tim Badman, Director of the IUCN World Heritage Programme, who introduced the work
being done by IUCN in terms of nature-culture linkages. He explained how the work of nature
conservation has intended to integrate culture already for decades, giving space for the conceptof cultural diversity to evolve. According to him, culture is very important in protected areas and
IUCN has been doing research on these issues, especially in terms of languages, threatened
languages and spiritual matters related to natural en vi ron ments. He presented the Connecting
Practice Project, a joint effort of IUCN and ICOMOS that addresses the challenge of the separation
between natural and cultural criteria in the World Heritage context. He recalled how difficult it
is to separate cultural from natural criteria and that the project intends to bring culture andnature practitioners together to reflect on the World Heritage assessment process. The idea
is that these reflections could also be transmitted to local managers in order to improve theunderstanding of nature-culture interactions in heritage sites. He mentioned that in culturallandscapes the interaction between humans and nature represents the OUV, but that every place
has these interactions, so every site is mixed Culture-Nature in a way. He emphasized that thisunderstanding is fundamental for effective management. He finally pointed out the importanceof the CBWNCL being done in the Asia and the Pacific region, which is underrepresented in theWorld Heritage List.
In their presentations and later discussions, both speakers mentioned the importance99

of the recent World Conservation Congress held in Hawaii (September 1-10, 2016), where for the
first time the nature-culture linkages in conservation were discussed, with professionals fromthe culture sector joining an event from the nature sector. Of special note is the fact that it was
the first time for members of ICOMOS to join such a Congress where they discussed issues likethe relevance of the use of the concept of authenticity for natural sites. Moreover, Dr. Rossler
pointed out how the Congress in Hawaii was instrumental in the discussion with site managers
and practitioners, NGOs, indigenous peoples and human rights advocates, who were expressing
fundamental issues for conserving landscapes. Mr. Badman later added that the main challenge
is to move forward toward further change and implementation, linking the nature-culture
approach to the new policies of the Sustainable Development Goals and adapting the World
Heritage Convention to these new developments.

100Panel2: Theoretical Development
This panel was chaired by Professor Masahito Yoshida, Chair of the World Heritage Studies and
CPNC. He introduced Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, Project Manager at the Sites Unit of ICCROM, whose
presentation title was "People-Centered Approaches to Conservation of Nature and Culture". He
expla ined the work of ICCROM in the World Heritage Capacity Building Strategy as part of the 5Cs (Credibi lity, Conservation, Capacity Building, Communication and Communities) adopted by
the World Heritage Committee (Budapest Declaration, 2002, with the last "(" of Communities
added later in Christchurch in 2007) where two main paradigm shifts have been triggered : a single
strategy for culture and nature sectors, and moving from training to capacity building. He said
that this is generating a transformation in the heritage field, and he pointed out the importanceof the concept of cultural landscapes in this change since it has made evident the need for amore integrated system for assessment, management and conservation . He added that ICCROM
has developed a curriculum in Nature-Culture Linkages that has been tested in 2014, using the
Vesuvius volcano as the site of analysis. He mentioned that the University of Tsu ku ba has agreed
to continue this activity with the CBWNCL.
Dr. Wijesuriya stated that ICCROM is developing the People-Centered Approach (PCA),
because culture, nature and people are indivisible. He noted that the course on PCA was
implemented with practitioners from both sectors, under the topic "Engaging Communities" as
one of the 5Cs, referring also to human rights and traditional knowledge systems, acknowledging
that some sites cannot be managed without considering traditional knowledge.

Dr. Gamini Wijesu riya, ICCROM Sites Unit Project Manager

The presentation that followed was given by Ms. Kristal Buckley, lecturer at Deakin University
and a distinguished member of ICOMOS Australia. Her talk was entitled "Applying bioculturalconcepts to practices for natural and cultural heritage", and she discussed the problems of thedivision between nature and culture from a conceptual/philosophical perspective, showing how
this affects the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, especially in places wheresuch a divide is not appropriate to the cultural background of the communities inhabiting thesites. She stressed that this separation is not only limited to culture and nature but also totangible and intangible issues, and she pointed out how the concept of cultural landscapes tried
to bridge these divides but that still much work needs to be done.

101She explained that, firstly, biodiversity has been used as a concept to explore new ways
inside the World Heritage context, and the biocultural approach stresses the ideas of diversity
and coevolution. She said that even though both culture and nature are included in theConvention, it is still divided in the text and in the practice by the separated evaluations and workof IUCN and ICOMOS. She expressed that agricultural landscapes have become a priority of thework of these two advisory bodies. Moreover, she added that addressing the diverse cultural
worldviews that do not present the culture/nature divide which includes working with indigenous
peoples, the rights-based approach, and the prior and informed consent have become an
important focus of the advisory bodies' work.

s~ /POS M o ~AT RE-CULTURE LINKAGES\J r!ERI-AG ECONSERVATION

Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, Ms. Krista/ Buckley and Professor Yoshida in the Panel Discussion on Theoretical
Development

She also manifested that these remarks are valid for urban areas, and that the Habitat
Ill Congress in Quito that year (October 17-20, 2016) would be a turning point by adopting the
New Urban Agenda, following the Sustainable Development Goal 11: "Make cities inclusive, safe,
resilient and sustainable" (http:/ /www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/cities/) where heritage
practitioners need to collaborate.
She summarized the work of ICOMOS in four areas on this debate: first, the rethinking
approach, where cu ltu re-nature should be rethought all together; second, the integration
approach, recognizing the divide; third, the synergy approach, taking them as two separate entities;
and fourth, the cri tical approach, using elements of the previous three but also exploring how
heritage is in stitutionalized and how power relations are in play. She remarked the initiative of
ICOMOS US th at has established the Nature-Culture Journey which will be continued in India nextyear, the discussions on authenticity in nature, and the importance of including sustainability asa major framework.
The discussion following these presentations revolved around the concept of OUV andthe imp ortance of local and regional values, as well as national values. Both speakers stated thatmanagement is the key for including all values and not limiting discussion to the OUV. Moreover,they in sisted that the involvement of local comm unities is critical. Professor Yoshida asked the
speakers about how to engage local managers in linking nature and culture, following the ideas ofthe people-centered and biocultural approaches. Ms. Buckley pointed out that local communities
are not one single group, and that these communities have knowledge about their sites and canteach the government about them. She expressed the point that experts' values are important, but102that the local situation should guide them. Dr. Wijesuriya asserted that agricultural landscapes
are the best examples of interactions between local communities and nature. He pointed outthat the management of agricultural landscapes, especially landscapes surrounding heritage
sites, impact the sites through activities outside the core areas. In this context, he stated thatthe people's livelihoods need to be considered so that heritage protection can work. Moreover,he affirmed that different designations, international and local, bring different stakeholders thatneed to join the dialogue according to the reality of the site.

103• Panel3: Local Development
This panel was chaired by Dr. Maya lshizawa, researcher at the World Heritage Studies/CPNC and
Programme Coordinator of the CBWNCL. The first panelist was Ms. Jessica Brown, Executive Directorof New England Biolabs Foundation and Chair of the IUCN WCPA Protected Landscapes Specialist
Group. Her presentation was entitled "Stewardship of protected landscapes by communities:
Diverse landscapes, diverse governance models" and she talked about the protected landscapeapproach to conservation as an important tool for understanding and managing linkages between
nature and culture.
She said that protected landscapes and seascapes represent one type of protected areasin the IUCN guidelines. She pointed out that even though National Parks such as Yellowstone andYosemite are understood as the first protected areas, we do not know how long ago indigenous
peoples started protecting certain landscapes and natural en vi ron ments through customary laws
and taboos. Moreover, she stressed that there are different terminologies used in different
contexts and countries, and therefore there is a need for standardization. She affirmed that the
IUCN categories intend to fill this gap by giving a key framework for protected areas around theworld.

Ms. Jessica Brown, Exec utive Director of New England Biolabs Foundation and Chair of /UCN Specialist Group on
Protected Landscap es

She pointed out the importance of differentiating management and governance andpresented four types of governance that can be cross-cutt in g: governance by the government,by private entities, by communities and shared governance. After giving some exa mples ofdiverse governance systems in diverse protected areas, she presented the challenges of an
inclusive approach. The opportunities that she finds are the growing understanding and use of
the governance framework, the progress in bridging the nature-culture divide, the partnerships
and participatory approaches to conservation and connectivity conservation. She also noticed
the progress in the recognition of indigenous communities, traditional knowledge and practices,and the continuous intergenerational transmission of these values, especially for agriculturallandscapes. She pointed out that the participation of youth is very important, and she gave the104example of the Potato Park in Peru, where young people are recording the knowledge of theirelders.
Following this presentation, Dr. Yoyok Subroto, Professor at Gadjah Mada University,
introduced "The Subak System: The Indigenous Symbiotic Harmony of Culture, Human andNature in Bali, Indonesia". This example of an agricultural landscape on the World Heritage List
presents some of the issues being confronted for agricultural landscapes' conservation and theimportance of the nature-culture linkages. He explained the situation in Indonesia, where theland conversion is increasing very fast, and where the number of farmers is decreasing. He said
that the Subak system in Bali has also a symbolic meaning: Subak is a concept and philosophy
and also an agricultural planning unit, with an autonomous legal status. He described how threespirits compose the Hita Karana: 1. The cultural spirit, Parahyangan, represented by Pura Bedugal,
the temple in the rice fields, that shows the relationships between the community and ritual
activities related to gods, water, spirit, and the relationship of the community to nature; 2. The
community spirit, Pawongan, related to social justice, in charge of establishing the distributionof water and the conflict resolution strategies; 3. The nature spirit, representing the harmonious
relation between the community and nature through the assistance system for irrigation andsupport for agriculture. He said that this traditional system has 1,000 years of continuity and that
it is maintained through traditions and rituals. He explained that social and cultural resilience
have developed, and that the Subak system involves a complex system of culture, nature andcommunity, as well as tangible and intangible values.
During the discussion, it was clarified that the Su bak System follows a shared governancebetween the government and the communities reflected in the concept of public partnership.
Professor Subroto clarified that the initiative to become a World Heritage site came from thegovernment but that the community supported it. Ms. Brown pointed out the similarities between
the Subak System and the Potato Park in Peru, where intricate norms are rooted in spirituality.
She said that in Peru as well there are different spirits responsible and that these are different
in each community. She stressed that progress in including communities and their traditional
knowledge will be made at the local level. Professor Subroto stressed that the government needs
to know the problems in the lives of the communities, otherwise it is difficult to implement a
conservation program. In the case of the Su bak System, he said that the government and thecommunity are working together in a common effort. Dr. lshizawa asked about what would be therole of heritage practitioners at the local level and in what way they could help the governanceof culture and nature. Ms. Brown expressed that heritage practitioners could already be present
in the community, being among its members. She added that sometimes the definitions used
at international or governmental levels are not appropriate for applying at local levels where
communities are very diverse. Basically, she recommends that heritage practitioners listen tocommunity members so that they can better understand the local systems; to be flexible tounderstand the spectrum of issues; and to understand that one solution does not fit all places.
She stressed that capacity building with local institutions may also be important and thatworkshops like the CBWNCL will be useful as well.

105

• General Panel Discussion
During the general panel discussion, the questions to be addressed referred to how the capacity
building of heritage practitioners should be done in order to acquire the expertise of natureculture linkages: what are the skills required and how should these be applied in the protection,
management and conservation of natural and cultural heritage sites? How can a didactic
curriculum for the training of heritage practitioners in this new approach be developed? The
panel was composed of all guest speakers, 2 the panels' chairs and two representatives of theJapanese agencies in charge of heritage conservation: Mr. Naohisa Okuda, Director of theConservation Planning Division of the Nature Conservation Bureau of the Ministry of Environment
and Mr. Fujio lchihara, Senior Specialist for Cultural Properties, Monuments and Sites Division,
Agency for Cultural Affairs.

General Panel Disucssion, September 18

The panel started with the intervention of Mr. lchihara, who presented the situation in
Japan, from the side of the culture sector, in relation to the interlinkages of nature-culture inconservation. He explained that there are different perceptions of the landscape in Japan, andthat the case of rural landscapes is special because these are living landscapes, but that these
are also observed as sce nery. He mentioned that the category of cu ltural landscapes was added
to the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties only ten years ago, and currently there are
50 cultural landscapes designated. He explained that in the case of the World Heritage sites,such as the case of the Kii Mountains Range, there is cooperation between the Ministry of theEnvironm ent and other ministries in terms of eva luation, information sharing and the promotionof conservation .
Subsequently, Mr. Okuda talked from the side of the nature secto r about the conservationof World Heritage in Japan, as well as about the National Park System. He mentioned that themain struggle is for park rangers to build consensus and to communicate the significance of
National Parks to the people of the region. Since many national parks cover private land and not
only the primeval landscape but also the rural land sca pe, management is highly complex.

2 Except of Mr. Tim Badman who had jo1ned the sympos1um remotely v1a Skype106

He mentioned that ideas are now changing from seeing agriculture and other local usesof resources (fishing and forestry) in natural areas as negative, to seeing them more as beneficial
for conservation, especially as promoted by the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Aichi
Targets established in 2010. He noticed that this trend is also found in the development of theWorld Heritage Convention, especially with the recognition of cultural landscapes in 1992.
Following these interventions, participants of the CBWNCL were invited by Professor
lnaba to submit questions and offer comments. Some referred to the lack of a divide between
nature-culture understanding at the local level in agricultural landscapes (the Philippines), and to
the similarities between their case studies and the Subak System or the Potato Park, and that themain challenge is to involve young people in continuing these practices (Ghana). Another issue
mentioned was the change implied in agricultural systems where communities adapt to thesechanges, and the question of how the World Heritage Convention looks at these adaptations.
Moreover, regarding the governance systems, the questions referred to how conflicts arising fromthe diversity in local communities are managed and how the perceptions of the state towards thesites are reconciled with the local perceptions (India).
Dr. Rossler replied that the case of the Rice Terraces in the Philippines Cordilleras was
exemplary for the World Heritage System in regards to the continuity of agricultural landscapes.
She explained how the problem of involving the youth surfaced after the inscription of thesite because young people find more comfortable life living in the cities or working in tourism
rather than farming the terraces. She expressed that there is a need to consider adaptation
to change in the management system for the nomination to the World Heritage List. On theother hand, regarding the different agencies in charge of the conservation of nature and culture,
she mentioned that what happens is that agricultural landscapes are not nominated to the List
because of the added complexity of dealing with the Ministry of Agriculture. However, she statedthat the work does not start in the listing, but rather much earlier. Currently, some nominations
have required twenty years of preparation which, as she considers it, is not long. She asserted
that governments need to inform communities so that there are no problems after the listing ofa site and that this implies work that takes time.
Ms. Brown clarified that the World Heritage process is moving away from only informing
communities. She explained that in some cases, communities are taking initiatives whichlead to less conflict. However, she noticed that communities are composed of many layers ofrepresentations. For instance, she mentioned the case of the Potato Park where there is a bottomup approach, and where the pursuit of upstream involvement is necessary.
Dr. Wijesuriya explained that the work with traditional knowledge systems is just startingin the World Heritage system, so there is much work to be done. Moreover, he said that the systemis still being ruled by old documents such as the Venice Charter, so in order to understand the
dynamism of cultural landscapes and the need for adaptation to change, these documents still
have to be amended.
Ms. Buckley stated that the World Heritage system is not static and has been a learning
context that has been progressing slowly. She also agreed that the involvement of younger
generations is important and that the solutions are not clear. She agreed that Intangible Cultural
Heritage and Biodiversity Conservation are programs that give space for innovation and that theybring with them the discussion about the transmission of culture. However, she said that young
people cannot be told to continue doing what their parents do, and that change is unavoidable
in cultural landscapes. She considers that what need to be identified are the attributes thatcarry the values, since often tangible qualities are not the ones to be preserved and culturallandscapes cannot be frozen.
Mr. Okuda pointed out the importance of the evaluation of ecosystem services and theeconomic efficiency. He gave the example of Ishikawa Prefecture in Japan, where they are focusing
on the diversity of food and the food culture of the region. He thinks that now we need to think
about the socio-ecological sphere which includes nature and culture, and which is supported by
local ecosystems and socio-ecosystems.
A question received from the audience touched on the topic of the OUV and other values,
how traditional knowledge is connected to OUV, and if OUV is inclusive or exclusive of othervalues. Dr. Rossler replied that OUV and other values go together. However, she said that, forexample, OUV is present in the 1972 Convention but not in the 2003 Convention, because the OUVis related to a site. She pointed out that even though the concept is mentioned thirteen times in107the Convention, it is not defined in the text and that it was only defined in 2005. She explainedthat what is nominated is a physical space and in order to define the OUV, it needs to transcend
local, regional and national importance, something that has to be defined in the global context.
She mentioned that communities may see their own values in a different way and therefore it is
a complex relationship.
Dr. Wijesu riya differentiated the technical aspect, where attributes can be tangible andintangible, and where processes such as the agricultural process can be part of those attributes.
Also, he said that OUV is constructed not just of values but that it also has aspects of integrity
and authenticity. He thinks that traditional management can be included in the framework ofauthenticity. Ms. Brown added that people living in the sites should be involved in the governanceand management because it is necessary to look at what people value on the sites. Professor
Yoshida suggested that all government officials who would like to nominate a site should checkthe special value to the nation or to local communities, before considering the OUV, and then pickup some important values that can meet the OUV. He pointed out that most domestic processes
do not reflect on the special value to the nation or local community, and that once the site is
inscribed, the local values are forgotten.
Mr. Cesar Velandia, participant from Colombia, raised the question regarding disaster risk
management that affects agricultural landscapes, as well as the social-economic view ofsustainability. He mentioned that the economy of coffee (the case ofthe Coffee Cultural Landscape,Colombia), the price is defined by international stock markets affecting the local production.
Moreover, he mentioned the problem of climate change, which can result in the displacement ofcrops, therefore changing the landscapes. To this, Dr. Rossler replied that these are two issues
that affect cultural landscapes the most: the stock market I global market, and climate change.
She said that the first affects cultural landscapes making them dependent on the global economy,
and the latter is already being mentioned in some nominations which explain how the sites will
have to move in the future due to climate change impacts -- and therefore they will need toextend their boundaries. Ms. Brown mentioned the importance of agro-biodiversity, and explained
how this creates resi lien ce in the context of climate change. She asserted that maintaining genetic
varieties through seed banks is part of the answer, being used in some communities, for example
in the Andes. Furthermore, Professor Subroto added that in the case of the Subak system local
people improved the quality of their rice, bringing economic benefits.

Questions from participants during the General Panel Discussion

From the audience, Mr. Kazuyuki Yano (cultural heritage expert I ICOMOS Japan) expressed how108cultural heritage is an integration of nature and culture everywhere, and how the governanceand management systems are divided. He said that they used to be integrated, but now they are
divided. He thinks that there is a need for collaboration between ministries, local governments,
the public sector and the communities. He said that modern society tends to separate but weneed collaboration. To this, Professor lnaba indicated that it is clear to the managers that culture
and nature are divided. However, she mentioned that the current system follows a top-down
approach. She clarified that in Japan there are separate agencies for agriculture, culture andnature. Dr. Rossler stated that this depends on the willingness of the governments, and gave
the example of Bhutan, which has declared the whole country as a cultural landscape. She
added that Bhutan does not have World Heritage sites but that they are using this integrated
approach. Moreover, she added that there are examples of integration in countries like Norway
where there is one single law for natural and cultural heritage. Dr. Wijesuriya mentioned thecase of New Zealand where the department of conservation looks at 90% of the natural heritage,
and there is one umbrella: Heritage New Zealand. Another example mentioned was the Parks
system of the United States that looks at nature and culture, as well as the system in Canada. Ms.
Brown added the case of Australia. She explained that in the United States there was the idea ofpartnership parks, but now all parks work with partnerships, and they work with mapping network
partnerships and network governance, but mostly at the site level. Mr. Okuda said that in Japannatural heritage is in charge of the Ministry of Environment and the Forestry Agency, and that the
Agency for Cultural Affairs is partly engaged. He mentioned that in the cases of the Kii Mountains
and the Ryukyu Islands, these agencies have worked together. But he pointed out that what ismore important is to start at the local level by building consensus on the ground, determining
what is important for the community.
Ms. Buckley expressed that it is encouraging that in some places they are breaking theinstitutional divisions, but that in many places that ICOMOS site-visits, this is not the case. She
observed that it is necessary to work on good governance models, connecting the practice fromnature and culture sectors. She said that we cannot change the Convention or the government
structures, but we can change ourselves as heritage practitioners and advisors. She stressedthat after 40 years, having less than 40 mixed sites shows very little representation on theWorld Heritage List. But she clarified that governments have already decided whether the site isnominated as natural or cultural before they get the assistance of ICOMOS or IUCN. She asserted
that time is a constraint since preparing a nomination is a long process, and this is the reason
why the decisions by the people in charge at national levels are very important for working on
the linkages of nature and culture.
Mr. Nuwan Abeywardana, participant from Sri Lanka, questioned the use of the term
"cultural landscape", and asked why it is not simply referred to as "landscape". He said that
communities do not use the concept of landscape, and that this is not a static environment
but a dynamic process. So he wondered how we can identify a dynamic process as a property.
He stated that Sri Lanka does not have a declared category of cultural landscape, but 2/3 ofthe country could be identified as cultural landscape; however, the values of the agriculturallandscapes are starting to decay. He considers that we need to think about landscape processes.
Instead, he recalled that when inscribing a heritage landscape, we artificially try to stop it anddefine regulations. Yuxin Li, participant from China, pointed out that in the Hani Terraces without
the landscape, Hani people would stop being Hani people. She confirmed that the landscape isevolving and dynamic, but she asked what to do if the culture is changed or affected by strong
external cultural influences.
Professor lnaba reminded the audience that during the workshop these questions would
be worked on in depth for the next ten days. She mentioned that this is the first experimental group.
and a very important one, for the three next years to come. She pointed out that participants arebringing fourteen case studies that are all different and that there is no one single solution for all.
She said that mutual learning is an important process, and in the next several days discussions
will revolve around the concept of landscape, how to deal with communities and also about themeaning of OUV and the issues arising from this. She indicated that World Heritage is not the only
instrument to protect heritage, but that it is a powerful instrument, and that just being on the list
is not the end of the process. Then she invited the guests to give their final comments.
Dr. Rossler expressed how much she learns every time she meets students. Referring to
the question about the use of the term "landscape" or "cultural landscape", she considers thatwhen one works in the framework of the Convention, it is not possible to use only "landscape",and that the inclusion of "cultural landscapes" was already a major change. She mentioned that
there are also places where there is no distinction between nature and culture, and that there arelanguages where the word landscape does not exist (e.g. Farsi), or where there are many words
109

that could be used to translate landscape (China). In relation to the question from China, she said
that if the traditions disappear, then the landscape becomes relict, and this is also a category
considered in the World Heritage List (e.g. St. Kilda in the UK).
Dr. Wijesuriya promoted the People-Centered Approach, and in order to expand theknowledge he recommended keeping an open-minded attitude and exploring issues while sticking
to the Operational Guidelines. He said that agricultural landscapes are the best example fordiscussing nature-culture interlinkages, because they imply also traditional knowledge systems,
people and their identity. He recalled that the World Heritage system adds requirements andanother layer of stakeholders for the conservation process, and if the country keeps the divide
at the governmental level, policy-makers are essential for making changes. At the local level, hestressed that people and their livelihoods define the conservation.
Ms. Brown came back to the theme of language. She said that language overlaps greatly
as a proxy of cultural and biological diversity. She mentioned that there is a dual extinction of
languages and species. After exploration with the Board of Terra lingua, she explained that they
defined the concept of biocultural diversity. Moreover, she indicated that with the project ofConnecting Practice, "the road is being made while walking".
Professor Subroto suggested that if we want to understand the community and culture,
as heritage practitioners, we should listen and pay attention to the social and spatial terminology.
He shared that in Bali he learned the community terminology, where there are three names forcommunity in the Balinese language. So he recommended not to instruct but to learn about andfrom the community itself.
Mr. lchihara alluded to the variety of agricultural landscapes in Japan, but he mentionedthat the value is not seen as something to be examined in order to have it become universal
value. Mr. Okuda recommended thinking about cultural landscapes as a context for linking natureand culture, and also thinking about how to use the World Heritage Convention, and at the sametime, other instruments and tools, such as GIAHS. He stressed that it is important to clarify
definitions and confirming approaches regarding how to make a site sustainable. However, he
noted that we need to look at all issues case by case.
Professor Yoshida closed the session highlighting that even though many questions
remained unanswered, participants of the CBWNCL would have the chance to visit sites inJapan, meet local people and exchange ideas with them. He mentioned that some of them haveinnovative ways of communicating the concepts of landscapes. Finally, he hoped that participants
will have the chance to learn more during the workshop.

110

DAY2
Panel 1: Terraces
This panel was chaired by Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, Project Manager at the Sites Unit of ICCROM.
The first speaker was Marlon Martin from the Philippines, Chief of Operations at the NGO Save thelfugao Terraces Movement, and native to lfugao, whose presentation was entitled "The Rice
Terraces of lfugao Province". He explained that even though the entire province is covered withrice terraces, only five sites are inscribed as part of the World Heritage property. He said that
there are archaeological records of rice harvesting in the area since the 16th century, a practicebased on a social system that follows agro-forestry. He mentioned that the main crop is rice andthat communities follow a traditional forest system based on the lunar cycle. However, he pointed
out that since the Green Revolution, rituals have been disappearing, and the rice variety ischanging. Consequently, terraces, that he considers the soul of the landscape, are disappearing.
He mentioned that they were recognized as national cultural treasure in 1976, and they were
inscribed in the World Heritage under criteria (ii) and (v) in 1995, because these are historicalstructures that promote ecological balance and that are also part of a continuous tradition.
Nevertheless, he suggested that these values may not exist any more due to all the development
projects in the region where the OUV is not being considered . He pointed out that the governmentchanges, and that the local governmental office is not permanent, and that therefore, officers
need to be re-educated constantly about the value of this property. In 2004, the terraces received
the GIAHS recognition, which he said gave a stronger emphasis on the nature-culture linkages of
the terraces.

Marlon Martin from the Philippines presenting the ifugao Terraces case study

He asserted that currently, the conservation of the terraces is menaced by infrastructuredevelopment, mainly, by the construction of roads because there are not conservation guidelines
for public works. He described how the Agriculture Department gave machinery for the riceterraces but that it is not possible to use these machines in the rice terraces because of theirshape, sizes and slopes. Hence, he suggested that the management should be based on theindigenous traditions since lfugao people are the main stakeholders. Moreover, he argued that
there need to be more education at schools so younger generations can be involved in themaintenance of the terraces.
111

The second presenter was Yux in Li from China who introduced the topic "Thinking ofTraditional Rice Culture Conservation in the Management Practice of the Han i Terraces". Native
to this area, she explained that the area of the World Heritage property is smaller than thatof the rice terraces containing cultural and biological diversity, where Hani people are main
cultivators. She said that there is a cultural spirit of the rice terraces where the three importantcomponents are the ancestors, nature and culture. She mentioned that the main values areencountered in the agricultural heritage system: the abundance of rice species, especially red
rice, and cultural diversity. Most of the culture focuses on how to cultivate and how to celebrategods and how to harvest. She explained that the conservation is in the hands of the prefecture
and the counties, that are the main bodies in charge of managing this landscape, as well as thefarmers who cultivate it. She stated that the main problems confronted by this site are culturaland ecological. On the one hand, she mentioned the influence of the modern lifestyle and on theother hand, climate change that is turning the weather very dry. Moreover, she said that tourism,
construction, and pollution are gradually changing the landscape. She asserted that the redrice is an important element of the culture but there is no regulation to protect or promote its
production and consumption. She suggested that ecological tourism should be implemented in
the area, also connecting traditional culture and development.
The third presentation was entitled "Promotion of East Tai wan Organic Agriculture" given
by Cheng Hua Sun from Taiwan, assistant researcher at the Huanlien District Agricultural Researchand Extension Station (HDARES). She explained that in Taiwan, 160,000 people are farmers who
own less than 1 hectare. Among these, there is a diversity of groups: Minan people, Haga people
and more than ten indigenous groups. 25% of the production is organic, especially organic rice,which is 50% of Taiwan 's production . Her working station is dedicated to recover the traditional
knowledge offarmers and to promote organic farming, organic research, ways to create biologicallyrich vegetation, and to teach farmers to practice ecological balance. She explained that thestation started a research on aboriginal farming, recovering indigenous farming tech no logy. She
argued that the problem is that the price of the rice is low, not adequate to maintain livelihoods,
and farmers feel obliged to give up agriculture and sell their land . Moreover, she said that many
people do not want to be farmers, and that they just build houses on their plots to enjoy the viewof the landscape. She described how the population is aging and that the elderly cannot farm bythemselves. She explained that the team of HDARES assists them in growing organic rice, making
them conscious of the importance of ecosystem services and that organic products can havebetter prices, making it possible for people to stay on their land. She suggested re-establishing
the tribal industries to bring young people back to the rural areas.

Panel Discussion: Katie Chick, Hong Kong; Cheng Hua Sun, Taiwan; Yuxin Li, China; Marion Martin, Philippines,
moderated by Dr Gamini Wijesuriya

112

The fourth presentation was entitled "The significance, conservation potential andmanagement challenges of traditional farming terrace landscape in an Asian metropolis: a casestudy of Lai Chi Wo, Hong Kong, China" given by Hiu Lai Chick, Project Manager at the University ofHong Kong. Trained as an ecologist and conservationist, she said she has ten years of experienceon the farmland. She presented the case of Hong Kong, the famous metropolis whose financial
center affects 7.3 billion people, and receives over 40 million visitors per year. But she explainedthat the city also houses 450 species of wild birds, dragonflies, fish and mammals- over 600 ruralvillages, that most visitors are not aware of. She recalled that Hong Kong has a colonial history,
and that the park system was created under the British Government. However, she stated thatthe history of metropolitan Hong Kong is recent. She argued that before the 1980s most of theland was paddy fields, managed by villagers, usually using the same family name. Villagers used
to manage natural resources together. She explained that the Chinese belief system- Feng Shuiis practiced even today, and it gives guidance to people about the appropriate location of theirvillages and the orientation of their houses. She said it is an important theory that guides therural life.
She asserted that Lai Chi Wo village corresponds to the Feng Shui system, and that it has
existed since 1970, but that all the farmlands were abandoned in 2010. She considers that it is avery unique site for conservation, with a large number of species. But she explained that it has
been abandoned due to the park system and now over 90% of its population is living in the UK.
So, she explained how a group of local scholars conceived a revitalization project following aninterdisciplinary collaboration in order to help the farmers to move back to the village to work
together. She mentioned that currently, there are twenty people working on a conservation plan,and that they look at innovative farming. Moreover, she said that they are trying to develop thesite as an education hub, for developing the local economy.
Regarding nature-culture linkages, she argued that the site is useful for learning fromthe community about how to utilize the surrounding resources. But she said that there are many
problems: the private ownership of the land, the fact that the land is not very productive, theloss of traditional knowledge, and the very high price of the land, - and even though the local
community is rich, they do not want external intervention and do not support conservation, eventhough it is a very good site for the wider society to learn about sustainable management. She
mentioned how different experts recognize that the site could be a World Heritage site because
the resources are very high, but she thinks that integrating all expertise together is a challenge.

Discussion
Dr. Wijesu riya opened the floor for questions. Firstly, the audience asked about the transformationof the land use by construction of energy facilities. Mr. Martin explained that in the case of thelfugao Terraces, the use of electricity has brought about the construction of mega-dams, but that
the Secretary of Environment is against this plan. He clarified that now the local government
intends to fund and implement solar energy. In the case of the Hani Terraces, Ms. Li explainedthat construction problems arise when villagers want to build on their agricultural land, but thatthe most serious problem of the area is the lack of water.
Secondly, the audience asked about the engagement of younger generations. Ms. Chickexplained that in the case of Hong Kong, the BBC is trying to promote among the community in
the UK, the idea of learning about their origins by interacting with the elderly in order to relatewith their history and tradition. Ms. Sun said that in Taiwan, in order to engage young people,
the government helps them to cultivate organic farming. Ms. Li said that in China, one example
is a project focused on the creation of traditional farming schools for young generations. Mr.
Martin talked about a proposal in the Philippines to include traditional knowledge in the formal
education program launched in 2004. He said that just recently, in 2015, the national government
finally made it mandatory to include traditional knowledge in the formal curriculum, and they are
now working on approppriate textbooks.
Thirdly, the audience asked about the multi-designations in the Hani Terraces: how thesework together, and if there is a proactive utilization of biological cultural resources. Ms. Li repliedthat in China, the prefectural government plays a key role in collaborating with the different
sectors. She explained that the different sectors cover different areas of the World Heritage site,
and that there is also a program to develop it. Moreover, she mentioned that every year there isa conference bringing together the different institutions in charge of the different aspects of the113site to discuss how to collaborate.
Thereafter, Dr. Rossler made some comments. Firstly, regarding the loss of traditional
knowledge, she referred to the example of the Canary Islands, where in one generation thelanguage was lost. She suggested the possibility to use the internet to help in the documentation
oftraditional knowledge, by compiling information about traditions that young people can access.
Then, she referred to the case of lfugao, and the relationship between agriculture and astronomy,
and how much of the knowledge of this connection is missing. Regarding the infrastructuredevelopment, as in the case of dams, she explained that every new project needs a heritage
impact assessment. Even though these projects may be accepted in the nominations to theWorld Heritage list, she clarified that there are strict conditions. In terms of organic production,
she pointed out that it is important to rely on marketing, and that the models used in Europe
should be shared in other regions, such as in Asia. Finally, concerning multiple designations, shementioned that there is a new publication by IUCN that was launched in the World Conservation
Congress (WCC) in Hawaii, where the recommendations are worth looking at (https:l lportals.iucn.
orgl library I node I 46176).

Panel2: Agricultural surroundings
This panel was chaired by Ms Kristal Buckley, lecturer at Deakin University and representative of
ICOMOS Australia.
The first presenter was Fransiska Dian from Indonesia who introduced "The Landscapeof Borobudur Temple Compounds and its Environment". Three temples comprise the compounds
surrounded by an agricultural landscape where it is possible to find species of local tropical fruits.
She explained that springs are used by local communities that follow Tegalan farming, because
the land cannot be irrigated continuously. She mentioned that local communities still follow
traditions in farming life, mixing crops together on the same plot of land, and using traditional
tools. She said that different institutions manage the area assigned by the Presidential Decreeof 1992, and that there is a map indicating the zoning regulations of the whole area. She argued
that the problem now is the land use change where many agricultural areas have been urbanized,
to become places for residences, hotels, restaurants and sports facilities. Consequently, theagricultural landscape is changing into urban settlements. Her suggestions are to raise awarenessof the values of the World Heritage property and its surroundings as well as of the traditional
knowledge and the culture of the communities living in these areas.
The second presenter, Funda Solmaz from Turkey, talked about "Nature and Culture
lnterlinkages in Goreme National Park". She presented herself as a native of the area where
the mixed cultural and natural site is located, Anatolia. She explained that the agriculturallandscape of the area is not appreciated, although traditional farming techniques are still used.
Nevertheless, she affirmed that tourism is becoming the main source of income. She described
the agricultural landscape as being composed mainly of vineyards, where the production processcarries intangible values. She said that the farming culture gives special characteristics to thearchitecture and the landscape. She asserted that, currently, tourism is affecting the site: many
houses are being transformed into hotels and roads are being constructed. She said that there is
still no comprehensive management plan, so her suggestion would be to elaborate a management
plan that considers a holistic approach that considers both natural and cultural values.
Nuwan Abhayawardana from Sri Lanka presented "Tanks as an ancient measurement
for the nature-culture interlinkages in ancient agricultural landscapes: A Case Study on theAnuradhapura dry zone hydraulic landscape". He explained how the landscape is formed by old
irrigation systems, one of them being the tanks, artificial lakes that may be 2,000 years old. He
affirmed that this is the landscape where the World Heritage site is located. He said that the system
is very sustainable and sophisticated, based on the natural characteristics of the environment,
and that it is still functioning. He asserted that the management also deals with components
of indigenous knowledge, rituals and performances. He stressed that in order to understandthe landscape it is necessary to know its evolution, and for this they use geo-informatics andtopographical data. He argued that the problem is that the archaeological site is conserved basedon certain regulations and the tanks are under the mandate of the Agricultural Department.
Therefore, these elements of the landscape are being managed separately, but he declared thatthe architecture, the irrigation and the agriculture should not be separated. He stated that a more
integrated approach to management and conservation is needed.

Discussion
Ms. Buckley said that it was interesting to hear about these three very famous cultural properties
and learn something new about them. She invited the audience to intervene.
The first question from the audience referred to the existence of worship or festivals
that could connect modern people to the archaeological sites. In regard to the Sri Lankan case,
Mr. Abhayawardana explained that the Stu pas are pilgrimage sites and people come to visit themduring the Full Moon Festival in June. He said that the property is inscribed under criteria (ii), (v)and (vi) but there are values that relate to the interaction between nature and man, that should
also be considered. In the case of Turkey, Ms. Solmaz said that there are no festivals, and there
is not an indigenous local population. Ms. Dian, explained that in the case of Indonesia, the site
is a Buddhist temple, but now people in the area do not follow the Buddhist religion, they are
Muslim. However, she said that Buddhists pray once a year in Borobudur Temple. Moreover, sheclarified that the farming system is traditional but some people do not continue the traditions.

115

The second question touched on the methodology of the study in Sri Lanka, where the useof GIS improves the understanding of the landscape, and it is more precise. Mr. Abhayawardana
answered that it is important to think through time and space and join different parameters,
identifying the different layers, and forth is GIS is very useful, using elevation data and 3D analysis,
quantitative and qualitative descriptions as well as historical sources.
The third question related to the tourism facilities in Goreme, and inquired whether
the operators of these facilities were local communities, following development plans for rural
tourism. Ms. Solmaz replied that ten years ago, tourist facilities were made available by the locals,
who adapted their houses, but that currently, there are famous hotel chains that are taking over
the area, with the economic resources to buy the ruins and refurbished them.
Ms. Buckley invited other speakers to also comment on this topic. Ms. Dian said that inIndonesia, the tourism organization is different from the ministry in charge of conservation. She
argued that if the management could be under one roof, it would facilitate conservation. In thecase of Anuradhapura, Mr. Abhayawardana said that this is the most famous tourist attractionin Sri Lanka. Because of this, four to five million people visit the place every year. He statedthat its most important value is religious, and therefore, a people-centered approach should
be applied, with an appropriate coordination among stakeholders. Ms. Buckley pointed out that
tourism is one of the reasons why national governments are very interested in the World Heritage
designation. Dr. Rossler added three points: in the case of Sri Lanka and Turkey, she mentionedthat these are cultural landscape cases, and she wonders if a renomination would make sense,
and what would be the benefits of it. Regarding management plans, she agreed that integrated
management is needed. Regarding tourism, she pointed out that it is a crucial issue because, inmany cases, local people do not get the benefits.
Dr. Wijesuriya highlighted the case of Bangladesh where there have been huge conflicting
pilgrimage cases, similar to the ones in this discussion. Ms. Brown commented on an ethical point
and the importance of vernacular architecture, referring to the case of Goreme in Turkey: theissue of the use of vernacular architecture is important because some people do not want to livein these structures anymore. In the case of the US, she said that vernacular architecture is often
not used in its original functional context but is converted to other uses. She agreed that the link
between nature and culture is very clear in vernacular architecture. Ms. Solmaz replied that she
is working in management systems that connect landscape and vernacular architecture. Finally,
Ms. Buckley closed the panel and announced the lunch break.

116

• Panel3: Indigenous and traditional landscapesThis panel was chaired by Professor Yoyok Subroto from Gadjah Mada University.
The first presentation was given by Persis Farooqy from India about the "Apatani CulturalLandscape", a site on the Tentative list as an organically evolved cultural landscape. She presented
a video of the site and explained how the agricultural work is being done with traditional
techniques, by hand, by clans and families of the Apatani people who are helping each other. She
mentioned that the area is in a biodiversity hotspot, and it is nominated under criteria (iii), due
to the continuity of the culture and the settlements, and criteria (v) because of the traditional
land use.

URE-cULTURE
CONSE ATO

Panel Discussion : Shweto Wogh, Indio; Lomeru Kofww, Taiwan; Cesar Velondio, Colombia; Persis Forooqy, Indio,
moderated by Professor Subroto (right)

The second presentation of this panel was in the charge of Cesar Velandia from Colombia, who
explained about the "Foundations for the reconstruction of the coffee Cultural Landscape ofColombia, CCLC', inscribed under criteria (v), five years ago in the World Heritage List. He explainedthat it is part of a national park and that it contains natural heritage, rural and architectural
heritage, as well as urban and archaeological heritage. He said that the challenges in this site are
the need to strengthen the policy in national development, the need of funding, and the need fordisaster risk management, especially represented by the threat of a volcano eruptions.
The third presenter was Lameru Kacaw from Taiwan who talked about "Working with
Indigenous Knowledge and Resilience: A Case Study of Agricultural Landscape Conservation
in a Taiwan Indigenous Tribe". He works in an NGO dedicated to the community development
of Cihalaay, which is his hometown . The tribe inhabiting this landscape has a history of only
150 years of occupation in this area. He said that their way of life is similar to the Japanese
Satoyama, but that the people there do not know this concept. He described the landscape as
being composed of the mountain and the traditional hunter culture, nurturing natural resources
and rice terraces. He explained that they use a complex system of canals for irrigation, whichfunction as focuses for conserving biodiversity. He indicated that the community was encouragedby academics to create an institution to protect the landscape and its biodiversity, as well as
to generate community development. He added that the local government, the association andacademics now work with the concept of the cultural landscape, but that this concept does not117exist in the language of the indigenous people, so they need to discuss what this term means. He
stated that the community focuses on the conservation of the Hala fish, an indicator of clean water,
and therefore they have replaced the use of chemicals with organic rice farming. He mentionedthat now the community sells the Hala organic rice, which also promotes agricultural tourism.
He added that the funds obtained are used for educating of younger people regarding how to
be a farmer, and learn to tell the stories of other farmers. Moreover, he explained that they havecreated a tourist program to teach how to raise the Hala rice, for which the community prepares
workshops about traditional techniques, identification of wild vegetables and traditional fishing.
As suggestions, he mentioned the need to create resilience through building social capital, tofoster knowledge adaptation, to build shared-knowledge, and to learn to translate the concepts
into local languages and worldviews.
The fourth presentation was in the charge of Shweta Wagh from India who introduced"The Kanchendzonga Sacred Landscape". Her focus was on indigenous identities and culturalvalues. She explained that the landscape lies beyond the protected area, and the idea of thepeople is that their ancestors reside in the mountains. She added that they follow indigenous
shaman ic conceptions that relate to a sacred geography. She recalled that the site was designatedas national park in 1977 and was inscribed as World Heritage in 2016. She mentioned that the
population is located in the buffer and transition zones of the Biosphere Reserve, designated in
2000. She continued by explaining that the Biosphere Reserve covers four eco-climatic regions
and a diversity of habitats. She explained that in the lower elevations at the buffer zones there
are agrarian and pastoral landscapes and a variety of sacred natural sites. She stressed thatcurrently it is in these areas where there is more pressure for development. She indicatedthat State regulations isolate nature from culture, and that agricultural landscapes are notacknowledged as part of the heritage. She said that originally, the site was going to be nominatedas natural heritage, but that local communities advocated for considering the tangible andintangible cultural values of this landscape, achieving its inscription as a Mixed Cultural andNatural heritage site in the World Heritage List.

Discussion
Professor Subroto invited the audience to intervene. The first question referred to the site in India,
where Ms. Wagh mentioned that traditional lifestyles should not be idealized. Ms. Wagh repliedthat the landscape cannot be described as purely traditional, and that agricultural practices
evolve over time, like agro-forestry which has been introduced as a government policy. She
asserted that traditions cannot be considered as static. She mentioned that younger generations
that get educated do not want to follow traditional practices, and there is a sense of loss of theappreciation of local practices and language. However, she stated that the notions of sacredness
continue, in new ways, and that young people have connections to their lands so it is importantto reflect on identity interpreted in a modern way. Dr. Rossler mentioned that this is the firstmixed site in India, but that it is not inscribed as a cultural landscape. She added that in the caseof the Coffee Cultural Landscape in Colombia, there is a lack of attractiveness to draw typical
tourists and other types of tourists need to be explored.

Mr. Velandia from Colombia explained that there is an increase in tourism, but that
local people expect that the World Heritage status would attract even more visitors and increase
their hotel businesses. In the case of Taiwan, Mr. Kacaw said that there are two issues, firstly
the cultural landscape facing an open economic system, and secondly, that the tribes do notunderstand what is local knowledge or local tradition, and that whatever is done is based on
instructions from the government. In India, Mr. Wagh said that how Kanchendzonga became amixed site is not very clear, but there has been an unprecedented stakeholder consultation, bycertain departments, academics, community, local people, individuals, and monks who cameto the meeting of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee. But she argued that the area has notbeen extended because it does not have OUV, even if it is a national park. She commented thatthe landscape has agricultural features but hydroelectric dams are being developed in areas
surrounding areas to the core, and people are protesting this development. She criticized thatthe management currently only considers the core and that instead it should also include thesu rrou ndi ng areas.

118

Panel4: Nature and Agriculture
This panel was chaired by Ms. Jessica Brown, Executive Director of the New England Biolabs
Foundation and Chair of the IUCN WCPA Protected Landscapes Specialist Group, who welcomedback the speakers and audience to the last panel of the symposium.
The first presentation was given by Kawshik Saha, Assistant Professor at the Shahjalal
University of Science and Technology in Bangladesh and it was entitled "Heritage ofthe Sundarban:
Connecting Nature to Culture". He explained that this site was declared World Heritage in 1997,
and that it is a biodiversity spot, as well as a Ramsar site. He considers that a spatial approach
can help the local approach. He asserted that the site is the largest mangrove forest in the world,
and that it contains some of the country's agricultural areas. He later mentioned that the areaof mangroves is shared between India and Bangladesh, containing a large biodiversity of faunaand flora. He said that the tiger is a very important species in the site that also influences in thecultural expressions and traditions of the seven million people living in the area. He described
the activities as agriculture, fishery and honey collection, and he added that recently eco-tourism
is increasing. He indicated that the main threat to the site is climate change and he suggested
that these issues and the conservation of the site could be addressed using spatial planning.
The following presentation was entitled "The interplay between culture and nature in
the protection of the Kakum and Bia natural heritage in Ghana" and was given by Yaw OseiOwusu, Country Director of Conservation Alliance International, Ghana, who has a background in
agriculture and environmental management. He explained that in precolonial times there were
customary laws and cultural practices to conserve and manage the natural resources. After thecolonial period, he said that the power was taken from the chiefs and given to national agencies.
He explained that Kakum and Bia are two very important reserves: Bia is World Heritage and it isa forest where there are elephants, and Kakum is an iconic place for tourism. He said that cocoa
is the main agricultural product in the area. Around these protected areas, he mentioned that
70% of the people are engaged in agricultural activities and 20% of the area is covered by cocoa.
He commented that forest land has also been taken over by agriculture and he stressed thatcurrently the challenge is to remove part of the forest to raise crops. He stated that the problem
is that the government promotes the use of chemicals for cocoa production and that some ofthese have negative impacts on the resilience of the forest. He claimed that there is weak law
enforcement. Nevertheless, he ensured that work is being done with the communities in order toinvolve them in heritage management and conservation.
The last presentation was given by Nina Pollock, Senior Heritage Assessment Officer ofthe Heritage Division at the Office of Environment and Heritage in Australia who introduced "Lord
How Island, New South Wales, Australia". She explained that this is a volcanic island and that it
was untouched nature until1788. She said that the first human settlement dates from 1834, andthat now the site receives 14,000 tourists a year. She mentioned that it is protected as a nationalpark and that it has agricultural landscapes and settlements. She added that now there is palm
industry being developed in the area. She stressed that cultural values exist but that they are notconsidered for the World Heritage designation. Moreover, she mentioned that the development isstrongly controlled, and although there is an act to protect its cultural values, basically connectedto the first European settlers, the focus is stronger on the protection of the environment. She
stated that the challenge is that even though cultural values are recognized at a national level, thefocus is only on monumental structures, and not on the landscape perspective. Her suggestion
was to work towards a collaborative conservation approach where both nature and culture could
be conserved together.

Discussion
Ms. Brown remarked that the three sites have very strong natural values and invited the audience
to come forward with questions.
Dr. Rossler commented on each case. In the case of Bangladesh, she noted that the
government said that UNESCO is blocking development, but the IUCN monitoring mission was veryclear about the questions concerning conflicts between development and nature conservation.
In the case of Ghana, it would be interesting to look at why they would not nominate Kakum
National Park to the World Heritage List. And in the Australian case, she noted that it is clear that
there is a distance between the World Heritage values and the state level values.
119Ms. Chick asked about the owners of the land in the case of Australia, and how thegrowth of the population is being regulated by the government. Ms. Pollock replied that it is a very
complicated process, land ownership is written in Lowe Island Act and it is owned by the Crown.
In the audience, they asked about the case in Bangladesh, about how to apply the
integrated approach with spatial planning in a heritage site. Mr. Saha replied that the method is
not limited to a heritage site, but to a designated area and the aim is to look at the managementof other uses and to try to reduce the conflict between different land use categories. Professor·Yoshida asked about how the involvement of communities in the management of the nationalparks is. Mr. Saha said that in the case of Bangladesh, communities are involved throughmeetings in all decision-making processes, from planning to implementation, and that these aremanaged by many NGOs and government departments. Mr. Osei-Owusu replied that in the caseof Ghana, community involvement is done at the national level and the community level, throughthe community forest committee, and that now there is the new concept of community resource
management area. In the case of Australia, Ms. Pollock said that nature is the main driver of
support for the local economy, so the communities are very keen on nature.
A question regarding the case in Ghana referred to the use of generating income in order
to avoid the overexploitation of natural resources. Mr. Osei-Owusu replied that this is the main
challenge, since the elephants are being killed for their economic value. He agreed that there is aneed to ensure resources for eco-tourism, and that because the revenues are not so high, locals
need to receive support from NGOs since adequate support is not coming from the government.

120• General Discussion and Closing Remarks
Professor lnaba, who chaired the final discussion, invited the audience to reflect on what are themain challenges and problems that all fourteen case studies share. Dr. Wijesuriya said that the
key message was that this overview of case studies and discussions set the tasks for the next tendays of the workshop, and invited the chairs of the panels to make comments.
Ms. Buckley highlighted the rich experience of hearing all of these case studies andnoted four main points. Firstly, she mentioned that presenters talked about the positive effect offarmers' organizations. She said that there is a tendency to see the community and the government
in a dualistic way, but the creation of this type of organization can be creative. Secondly, sherecognized that the rights-based approach was not mentioned and she hoped that in the nextdays it would be possible to discuss more about gender and about women in societies, because
in some cases, these have a unique situation. Thirdly, she noticed the impact of World Heritage
listing results in some cases in making people surrounding the sites as very poor in a way they
were not before. She said that it is necessary to track the flow of benefits from designation.
Finally, she suggested that local people should not be put in a box where they cannot change. She
stressed that it is necessary to revise what tradition means, that it appears as supporting manyof the World Heritage properties, so it is necessary to see how to deal with it and make sure thattraditions are recognized.

Dr. Mechtild Rossler commenting in the final discussion, Professor Subroto (left) and Ms. Krista/ Bucf?ley (right).

Dr. Wijesuriya added that nobody believes that traditions are static, and everyone agrees thatthey change and advance. Ms. Brown pointed out that it is important to acknowledge ecosystemservices as part of the values in the protected areas, such as ancient irrigation systems protecting
water sources, capturing carbon and providing microclimate services and soil stabilization. Also,
she noticed the influence of the market affecting the varieties of crops such as rice, and theimportance of wi ld diversity. Dr. Subroto added that most of speakers focused on the problems
related to the cultural heritage, and not on the opportunities. He also mentioned that there isa gap in the use of the language between officials, experts and the locals. He stated that timeis needed in order to understand the local people, and that it is not easy to see the real value
from the perspective of local people. However, he stressed that local values are essential for the
maintenance of the cultura l landscapes. Dr. Wijesur iya pointed out three cases that reflected
the conservation of nature and culture with people at the center: the case of the Hani farmers
who are at the center of the management, the terraced landscapes group that are the mostvulnerable, and the case of the NGOs, whose role is the most welcomed and which is something121we need to explore further.
Then, Professor lnaba invited people in the audience from other organizations to express
their views. An attendee mentioned that landscape is a new concept for the field of development
projects. However, she said it is important for communities, and also that it would be importantfor heritage practitioners to have more positive views toward development activities. Professor
lnaba mentioned that landscape is sometimes only understood from a visual perspective butthat it should be understood also as a way of life.
Professor Yoshida pointed out that many speakers talked about the involvement ofyounger generations. He agreed that conservation management needs participation but regarding
cultural landscapes, he pointed out that younger generations are encouraged by their parents
not to stay in rural areas. He mentioned the experiences of Taiwan and the Philippines in the
education of parents and children about traditional knowledge and customs so that people cantake pride in their way of life as positive. He added that the World Heritage nomination has given
the opportunity for communities to see their traditional customs as an important value for the
next generations. Someone in the audience commented that it is a good way to encourage young
people to work with communities. He said that it is a good educational experience and it makes
a positive impact on youth. He added that it would be important for conservation programs toinclude international volunteers or educational studies.
Dr. Rossler closed the discussion with some personal remarks about her commitment toprotect cu ltu rallandscapes. She mentioned that inti mes of war in South East Europe, one person
told her that "we cannot reconstruct a cultural landscape, we can do it differently but we cannever get it back". She said that species are being lost, so it is fundamental to raise awarenessabout agro-biodiversity. Moreover, she stated that volunteers also play an important role. She
asserted that listening to local people and using their creativity for conservation is an importanttask for heritage practitioners. Also in relation to eli mate change, she mentioned that there are
local stories of adaptation. She added that in the process of nomination of cultural landscapes,
we need to be careful and to think about how to bring all stakeholders together. She stated thatmanagement is very important and that there are different institutional levels and a bottom-up
approach is key. She recalled that before, in the guidelines for inscription, local communities
were not engaged in order not to give false hope for inscription, but now, this guideline haschanged. She said that it is essential to involve the locals. She explained that the beauty of thisworkshop is that there is a global network, and with all of these case studies, participants can talkto each other and share.

122

The Workshop

The workshop continued with three modules: the lectures (Module 2), the field visit (Module 3) andthe working groups (Module 4). The lectures were given at the University ofTsukuba, Humanities
and Social Sciences Building, Seminar Room B218. Students from World Heritage Studies and theCertificate Programme on Nature Conservation could also participate in this part of the workshop.

• Lectures• International Context
The first day of lectures (Module 2: Understanding Nature-Culture Linkages in the Context of
the Agricultural Landscape Conservation) was composed of three lectures and a roundtablediscussion. The first lecture was given by Ms. Kristal Buckley, who talked about the culturallandscape approach, especially in the World Heritage System. She explained the different
disciplinary approaches to the concept of landscape and how these influence the understanding
and communication of the values of a site. From theory to practice, she said that there is a gap
with this interdisciplinary concept that is understood differently not only by different academic
disciplines but also by different cultures.
The second lecture was given by Ms. Jessica Brown who explained the IUCN Protected
Landscapes approach . She presented the evolution of the use of this concept for protected areas,
basically, in the conservation of nature. However, she brought up a point about how the landscapeapproach brings together a variety of stakeholders, promoting the discussion of governance,and more specifically, "good governance" for protected areas. Furthermore, she referred to thestewardship of indigenous and local communities who bring about the discussions on traditional
knowledge and biodiversity conservation, an especially important issue for agriculturallandscapes.
The third lecture was given by Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya who introduced part1c1pants tothe work of ICCROM. Afterwards, he focused on the World Heritage system. He explained thefundamentals of how the system works, what Outstanding Universal Value is and how it is linked
to the authenticity and integrity of heritage. Moreover, he explained how the statements ofsignificance should be prepared for a nomination to the World Heritage List. He presented many
examples to illustrate the arising management issues.
The discussions in the roundtable dealt with the different understandings of landscapes,
where participants realized the need to go beyond their own discipline but at the same time
understand how the concepts of landscape and cultural landscape are being used in thecontext of World Heritage. Moreover, it was clarified that the culture sector and the nature sector
manage different concepts and different languages that also contribute to the gap and create
difficulties for communication. Furthermore, it was discussed that the language issue also
confronts understandings of heritage practitioners, government officials and local communities.
The conclusion was that the target is collaboration and synergy among all stakeholders in theheritage sites.
Another important topic discussed was the issue of values, and the confrontation
between OUV and local values. It was mentioned that this also relates to the dynamism oflandscape and traditional knowledge that are in a constant state of change. It was made clearthat landscapes need an approach different from that of the traditional conservation systems ofnature and culture.

123

So, wH

Ms. Krista/ Buckley, Deakin University/ICOMOS lecturing on Cultural Landscapes in the World Heritage• Japanese Experience
The second day of lectures was composed of four lectures focused on the situation of agriculturallandscapes in Japan.
The first lecture was given by Professor lnaba who focused on the evolution of theconservation of landscape in Japan from the perspective of the culture sector. She clarified
characteristics particular to Japan and also the influences received from European countries inthe development of its conservation system. Moreover, she pointed out how elements of nature
are also protected under the Law for Cultural Properties, blurring the distinction between theconservation of nature and culture.
Professor Yoshida, in the second lecture, focused on explaining the concept of Satoyama
and the protection of agricultural landscapes from the nature perspective. He explained thecharacteristics of a Satoyama landscape and its importance for its biodiversity and ecosystembalance, as well as its cultural importance. He presented the natural park system in Japan andits evolution, as well as the international influence in its development. Furthermore, he showedcommun ity projects that are local initiatives to maintain the Satoyama while educating theyounger generations about it.
In the afternoon, Tomoki Homma from the Nara National Institute of Cultura l Properties
explained the implementation of the protection of cultural landscapes in Japan, and William
Dunbar from the UNU-IAS explained the idea and concept ofthe International Satoyama Initiative.

• Local Initiatives
The third day of lectures focused on local initiatives for the conservation of agri cu ltu ra llandscapesand it was composed of three lectures. The first lecture was given by Dr. Wijesuriya who talked
about traditional knowledge systems, focusing mostly on the Asian region . He made it clear thatmuch more work needs to be done in order to collect and identify traditional practices that may
be useful for the conservation of landscapes and sites in general, but also that it is important tobe aware that not all traditions are necessarily positive or useful and therefore there is a needto develop a critical approach.

l24

The second lecture by Dr. Yoshihiko lida from UNU-IAS/OUIK dealt with the sites visitedin the Noto Peninsula designated as GIAHS area and the Sho River historical villages that hold
World Heritage status, and belonging to the buffer zone of the Hakusan Biosphere Reserve. He
presented the values of the sites and clarified the different roles and objectives of the GIAHS
program and the Biosphere Reserve program and how these are being implemented in theseregions.
Later, Ms. Brown presented case studies of community-based governance and theprocesses and results from the COMPACT project. She explained how in this project, World Heritage
sites were taken as learning laboratories and the conceptual model was biocentric. She statedthat the main audience attendees at the workshops were site managers, working with the ideaof supporting community-based stewardship of landscapes and seascapes in diverse regions ofAmerica, Africa and Asia.
Ideas for engaging communities were taken from participants such as the use of theinternet, the use of schools as repositories of traditional knowledge, the exploration of theeconomic value and branding of products of protected areas, and the combination of scientificand traditional knowledge in order to advance societies.
Finally Professor Yoshida introduced the participants to the sites of the field visit andexplained the logistics of the trip.

125

The Field Visit

The field VISit (Module 3: Management, Implementation and Governance in AgriculturalLandscapes) was the field trip to the Historical Villages of Shirakawa-go and Gokayama, World
Heritage property since 1995; Shiroyone Sen maida, Place of Scenic Beauty since 2001 in Wajima
City, Noto Peninsula; Maruyama Gum i, a project focused on biocu ltu ral diversity conservationand Shunran no Sato, a Green Tourism project, both in Oku Noto. The last three case studies
are located in the area designated as GIAHS in 2011. The objectives of the field visit were toexperience the situation of agricultural landscapes in Japan, to meet the local population livingin the heritage sites, and to meet local professionals and managers in charge of their protection
and conservation.
Participants visited the World Heritage property "Historical villages of Shirakawa-go and
Gokayama", that consists of three main villages, of which the group visited two : Ogi mach i village
and Ainokura village. Ogimachi village was visited first, and participants could discuss and learn
from Mr. Matsumoto, in charge of cultural properties in the Shirakawa village office. This village
can be described as a Satoyama landscape, and the linkages between nature and culture areshown in various aspects such as the architecture of the Gassho style, with a distinctive roof form
which developed in response to heavy snowfall and to the need for sericulture production space(a traditional indus try of this a rea), constructed of materials used to beta ken from the surrounding
forests (co-managed between community and private owners). The buildings and the agricultural
fields are protected and no new constructions can be erected, but some buildings without
protection can be modified. It was explained that now people are mainly living mainly fromtourism (B&B and handicrafts). Participants learned that one important aspect of the community
management of the village is the Yui, the mutual cooperation system that functions for thatching
the roofs that is the basis for other social activities of the community.

Group photo at Ogimachi village

126

In Gokayama, in the village of Ainokura, participants experience the Autumn festival ina Shinto shrine, while a municipal officer in charge of cultural and natural heritage explained
them the tradition, designated as Intangible Cultural Heritage in Japan. Later they met withlocal leaders in the Sonenji Temple: Mr. lkehata, Mr. Hiroshi Yamazaki and Mr. Nakatani . They all
form part of the "Ainokura Preservation Fund". Participants could ask them questions regarding
the process of nomination of the site as World Heritage and the impacts after inscription. The
fund is complementary to the resources given by the government. It was clarified that currently
the population of Ainokura continue agriculture for self-subsistence, but have diversified theiractivities with tourism and other professions in companies or schools. Also, they explained
the relationship with the surrounding forests that is protected because they function as "snowholding woods" to prevent damages in the settlement, and for taking thatching materials andvegetables.
Moreover, they pointed out that there is an increase of tourism since the World Heritage
designation, but even World Heritage sites cannot resist the trends of the society and Japanese
population is declining, so from the 24 houses that were there at the designation, only 16 remain.
Another issue is that younger generations leave because houses cannot be altered andways of living are changing and three generations cannot share a house. Nevertheless, living
in rural areas is becoming popular, and the access has improved. They continue the Yui, like in
Ogimachi vi llage. Finally, they recommended to think first about preservation, and second about
tourism, since tourism is only possible because places are preserved.
The next day, participants visited the village, guided by Professor lnaba and Professor
Yoshida.

Participants Yuxin Li from Hani Terraces, China and Mar/on Martin from !fugao Terraces, Philippines, harvesting riceat Shiroyone Senmaida, Nato Peninsula

As an introduction to the GIAHS designation of the Noto Peninsula, participants visited
one site and two projects, where they could observe and discuss issues with local managers.
In Shiroyone Sen maida in Wajima city, participants worked as volunteers in the harvestingof the rice terraces, an event organized by the Terrace Conservation Execu tive Committee of
Wajima City. They could experience the tough work of the fields and they realized the difficulties
of maintaining this landscape in the context of depopulation of the rural areas. They learned
about the work of the volunteers group "Aiko ukai", that works together with the Shiroyone
Sen maida Landscape Conservation Council, and are responsible for the sponsorship system that127

supports the maintenance of the terraces by funding the rice production through memberships.
They visited the Hagino Family, which is responsible for the project Maruyama-Gumi (MaruyamaTeam) in Oku Noto. Ms. Hagino, who followed the Noto "Satoyama Meister Training Program"at the University of Kanazawa, started monitoring biodiversity in a small village of the region,
ca lled Mii . They have invited people of different ages and backgrounds in order to understandthe changes in the landscape by relating local knowledge and scientific knowledge. Members of
the Team share with villagers and learn the variety of species that are also related to culturalexpressions such as the "Aenokoto" festival, or to food preparation in general. Participants
listened to presentations from the members of the Maruyama Team, and among them, Professor
Ito of Kanazawa University who talked about the biodiversity in the area.

Lecture from the Maruyama Gumi project at Hagino House

In Shunran no Sato, participants stayed in traditional houses and learned about theGreen Tourism project to revitalize the depopulated rural villages of the area. The manager, Mr.
Tada, explained that in order to attract young people to repopulate the area, cash income isneeded, and for this, they have made calculations for receiving visitors during the weekends
and have been able to achieve a decent monthly income for the families. He pointed out that
revitalizing agriculture is different than revitalizing an agricultural village. For the village, people
are needed and that is why they also need visitors. He explained in detail their struggles for thesurvival of their rural villages and de-idealized the Satoyama landscape. He stressed that there
is much work to be done, and that even though the government is sup porting them with different
funding sources, the main challenge is to find ways to involve young people in these endeavors.

128

The Working Groups

Participants were assigned a task before leaving for the field visit, which consisted of forming
groups of four to five people to create a hybrid (culture - nature) heritage consultancy firm thatspecializes in providing strategies for heritage conservation and management of large landscapes
which contain both natural and cultural values, including agricultural landscapes.
Their assignment was :1. To undertake four field visits guided by the organizers of the workshop which would
include stakeholder meetings, managerial and technical discussions.
2. The development of a draft statement of significance that incorp orates nature-cultureinterlinkages taking into account the variety of heritage present, and the multiplicity ofvalues.
3. Based on the above, develop 5 recommendations for the improved management of
nature-culture interlinkages in the respective sites (currently being managed separately)
taking into account the current local management contexts.

The final reports were delivered as 20 minutes presentations followed by discussions with othergroups and resource persons of the workshop.

Presentation of Wort?ing Groups

The groups' composition, the resulting statements of significance and the recommendations forthe sites assigned are reported in the following pages.

129Group A: Kaya Heritage Consultancy

Members:• Yaw Osei-Owusu -Ghana• Nuwan Abhayawardana- Sri Lanka• Cheng Hua Sun- Taiwan• Manami Watanabe- Japan• Daisuke Funaki- Japan

Historical villages of Shirakawa-go and Gokayama
Statement of SignificanceDespite the vulnerability to harsh environmental conditions including heavy snowfalls and difficult
morphological conditions and developmental pressures such as construction of hydro-electric
power dams that led to loss of many Gassho style settlements, the inhabitants of Shirafwwa-go
and Gofwyama have upheld the harmonious lifestyle, maintaining a sustainable resource use
pattern which links nature and culture, leading to the preservation of the Satoyama landscape.
The sites were noted for ascetic religious practice devoted to Mt. Hakusan, which combined
ancient, pre-Buddhist belief with esoteric Buddhism.
The Gassho-style buildings, unique to the area, were developed for accommodating silk
production, gunpowder production, and Japanese paper making, which were all essential for the
livelihoods of people in the remote mountain settlements. The traditional structures laid out in a
Satoyama landscape demonstrate centuries of the history of people's efforts to survive.
Utilization of natural resources for construction materials, the unique fire prevention
measures, sophisticated traditional maintenance protocols and forest management, and thesocial cohesion represented by Yu-i, the mutual cooperation system largely account for the
maintenance of the physical and natural environments making the landscape significant.
While the landscape is inscribed as national heritage and as a World Heritage site,the management process is the joint responsibility of the government agencies and the local
communities. Although rice cultivation is an important activity mainly to provide food forhouseholds, tourism is the major economic activity which is crucial for sustained protection of
the Satoyama landscape, and respecting traditional practices, and spiritual wisdom. "Gasshozukuri" villages are a perfect example of the sustainable nature-culture linkages and the peoplecentered management approach for the heritage. However, there is a need to adapt to emerging
issues or current realities to ensure the continued preservation of values and the well-being of
the community.

Recommendations+To provide support services and infrastructure to attract more people, especially the young
people, to live within the landscape.
+ To identify and train young generations from the villages in providing services to visitors
including international visitors, to create more livelihood opportun ities.
+To establish coordinating body to integrate local community associations, and other stakeholders
including culture and nature authorities (e.g. the forestry authority) in decision -m aking processes.
+To adopt an adaptive and flexible management system that takes on board the needs andaspirations of all stakeholders.
+ To promote private secto r participation in the management of the heritage sites including thebranding of agricultural commod ities.

130

Group B: International Cultural Landscape So lutions

Members:• Kat ie Ch ick- Hong Kong
• Marlon Martin- Philippines• Lameru Kacaw - Taiwan• Nina Pollock- Australia• Yuki lizumi - Japan

Shiroyone Sen maida
Statement of SignificanceThe rice terraces ofShiroyone Sen maida, in the Noto Peninsula, represent an outstanding example
of complex human modification of the landscape within a unique natural context. Regarded as
the "thousand rice terraces'; the terraces comprise an impressive 3.8 hectares formation of overa thousand rice paddies set into the steep, rocky terrain along the foreshore of the Sea ofjapan.
The irregular terrace plots of Shiroyone Sen maida are wisely interlinked by a plot-to-plot
irrigation system, and their striking appearance as a collection of steep terraces along the coastreflects its historical use for both rice and salt production . The history of human interaction at
Shiroyone Senmaida has both shaped, and been shaped by its natural environment, and the site
provides a unique prototype of the successful coexistence between humans and nature.
The warm and cold ocean currents around the Nato peninsula provide a rich environment
for terrestrial and marine biodiversity, and the rice fields provide habitats for many small water
plants, including endangered species Asian marshweed (Limnoph ila sessiliflora) and duct? lettuce(Ottelia alismoides), as well as rare amphibians such as the Hot?urit?u salamander (Hynobiu s
tat?edai), Japanese fire bellied newt (Cynops pyrrhogaster), and forest green tree frog (Rhacophorus
arboreus).
The agricultural system of Shiroyone Senmaida is connected to both the forest andthe sea. This process, as well as its rich biodiversity, is reliant on and integrally linked to thesurrounding mountains and forest activities, as well as coastal marine activities. It provides a
microcosm of a trad itional rural Japanese Satoyama and Satoum i landscape.
Shiroyone's people utilized forests, salt fields and rice paddies according to the needsof the times, and the distinctive evolution of the socio-cultural and natural environment createda body of loca l !"? now/edge in so il conse rvation, hydraulics, crop science, and forestry combinedwith the deep understanding of the seascape, that has shaped the landscape into what it is today.
The terraces provide a physical demonstration of how several generations have successfully
adapted to and modified their landscape to meet the demands of the times, while maintaining asustainab le ba lance between human activities and the natural environment.
The recognition of the Shiroyone Senmaida as a Special Place of Scenic Beauty may
only emphasize its aesthetic features; however, traditional !"?now/edge, community values andhisto ric events present a vast amount of !"? now/edge wo rth pass in g down to the new generations.
Traditional customs and festival based on indigenous Shinto and Buddhist traditions such as
planting and harvesting festivals, and 0/"?u -noto Aenot?oto, an agricultural ritual unique to theNato region, continue the !"?now/edge of traditional agricultural practices and way of life for theNato peop le, and successfu lly educate and pro mote awareness of these trad itiona l practices tothe broader comm unity.

Recommendations+ To al locat e a percentage of the parking fees and merchandise sales towards conservation .
Donat ions are we lcome .
+ To intro duce eco -farm in g courses as paid acti vities t o promote know ledge of Sat oya ma pract ice

131etc. Include traditional agricultural practices, Satoyama and "Aenokoto" in the educational
curriculum.
+ To prepare a long-term tourism management strategy, including development controls toensure that new tourism facilities do not exceed the carrying capacity of the site.
+To invite the younger generation to the village to run homestays and farming or eco-agricultural
educational activities. lshikawa-wide, or nation-wide online request for expressions of interest
in moving into empty houses to install local crafts stores and traditional farming practice mix(forestry, paddy farming, salt making and fisheries).
+To establish government support for new cultural and creative industries in the region to attract
young people.
+To create a membership system to provide direct financial sponsorship of new farmers - adirect link between these farmers and sponsoring members.
+To redefine a contemporary concept of"commu n ity" for the terraces. Update heritage designation
to include community/collaborative values and broader site description- ensure management ofcommunity values and conservation of the full extent of the terrace (above the roadway).
+To reconsider how land ownership structure can be more inclusive of the community.

132

Group C: ).ffi!~~D Til Looking into the Past for a Better FutureMembers:• Yuxin Li- China• Kawsh i k Saha - Bangladesh• Shweta Wagh- India• Ryohei Shoji - Japan• Shaka Francis - Antigua & Barbuda

Maruyama Gumi
Statement of SignificanceThe Maruyama landscape is on ogro-ecologicol landscape located in the Noto Peninsula which
has been sustained by the values and practices of the local community. It is characterized bywoodland, grassland, paddy fields, farmland, irrigation ponds and canals, and human settlements,
which hove been maintained in on integrated manner and which comprise of a mosaic of diverse
land uses and habitats which hove been shaped and managed by people over time. The Maruyama
Gumi initiative is on excellent illustration of nature-culture linkages in landscape conservation,of how nature has affected the doily life, culture and spirit of the local people, and how it in turnhas been sustained through their continuing practices and beliefs. It is on excellent example of
how cultural practices of natural forming and foraging for natural resources, local food cultures
and traditional recipes, local crofts and building practices, ceremonies and rituals as well as
intangible values and associations of communities with the landscape ploy on important role inthe conservation of the bio-cultural diversity of a region. In this case, landscape con be better
understood as a dynamic process which is based on on understanding of traditional practices
but which continues to survive through present-day actions and deeds, aimed towards using andpassing on nature's gifts and values to future generations. It is a confluence of different ideas andexperiences and on attempt to form a bridge between traditional wisdom and modern practice,
between local experience and scientific knowledge, between cultural practice and biodiversity
conservation . Maruyama Gumi is thus on outstanding illustration or physical manifestation of
the concept of the Sotoyomo, and on ongoing effort to transmit the beauty and biodiversity andthe values embedded in the Sotoyomo to the next generation through a continuing process ofshoring, taking action and learning.

Recommendations
1. Link scientific and traditional knowledge+Long-term and formal educational program support+ Comprehensive research, understanding and monitoring+ Capture traditional knowledge by community involvement+ Encourage community awareness in heritage conservation+Propose biodiversity conservation through species management plan
2. Maximize returns for sustainable development+Encourage migration to rural areas+Improve farming efficiency through diversification of agriculture and improved technology+Community-based farming of common lands
3. Stimulate community's revitalization+Identify alternative source of income+ Agro-tourism, sustainable organic farming and agro-based industry+Activities, such as nature trails, foraging for forest foods, community cooking, etc.
+Amenities, such as multi-functional community center, library, school, etc.
4. Community-based governance+National and local protection policies, OECM Conservation Mechanism+Improve networking between Sotoyomo management agencies+Legal protection through designation as Community Conserved Area
+Communication with other community sites

133

Group D: Shun ran Experience Corporation Ltd.

Members:• Persis Farooqy- India• Funda Solmaz- Turkey• Fransiska Dian- Indonesia• Cesar Velandia- Colombia

Site/Project: Shunran no Sato
Statement of SignificanceShun ran no Sato, an initiative in the form of a collective cooperation of elderly locals residing inNoto, lshifwwa prefecture, is an excellent example of organized and developed social structure, withdeep appropriation ofSatoyama and Satoumi practice. Their daily lifestyle is dependent on natural
resources found in the area. Use of forest edible vegetables (mushrooms and medicinal) fruits lif?eberries, af?ebi, and local marine products are part of their everyday diet. The site is surrounded
by a rich biodiversity that they maintain with the sustainable management of ecosystem services
through their adaptation to diverse climatic conditions. This local wisdom organization showsa close relationship between human culture and nature and a rich manifestation of intangible
cultural heritage expressed in lacquer ware, songs, "f?irif?o " rice harvest celebrations, traditional
food, the architecture and the use of space for living, prayer and burial.

Recommendations
Our strategy finds relevance in providing a redirection of the Shunran no Sato initiative, to bringthem a true concept of 'Green Tourism'. The aspects for the conservation of the site shouldemphasize the sustainability of tourism. Sustainability should be achieved not only by using
accommodation facilities but also by focusing on nature itself.
Green Tourism can be considered along with the notions of "Agro-tou rism I Bio-tou rism I
Eco-tourism". Activities related to these tourism types should be adequate for the carrying
capacity of the place and should consider the effects of climate-change.
Shu nran no Sa to has a huge potential based on its social values, led by the community's
strengths and opportunities. This encourages them to find a continuing process through which areal green development can be achieved in harmony with their cultural and natural features.
Based upon their social network, it can be feasible for them to handle and to face thechallenges of the pre sent and the future and to guarantee the conservation of the Satoyama
landscape and its implications related to appropriation, tourism management, material andimmaterial manifestations, economical benefits and en vi ron mental sustai nability.

134

=Final Reflections
II
From the symposium, we could conclude that cultural landscapes are a key for understanding
the nature-culture linkages and the evolution of the World Heritage Convention. Even if the
document cannot be modifed, there are possibilities and opportunities to adapt it and make it
more inclusive and contemporary through the Operational Guidelines and the implementation ofprograms. Much progress has been achieved, but there is still work to do in regards to the natureculture divide and the processes of nomination and evaluation. Agricultural landscapes are good
examples to explore these challenges.
In terms of the nature-culture linkages, more synergies need to be worked out at thenational level in governments agencies, but because it is difficult to influence these structures,
heritage practitioners must act at local levels.
Improvements towards a more inclusive and contemporary World Heritage System arebeing accomplished gradually, and it is in the hands of young professionals to continue theseendeavors. Capacity building is therefore fundamental.
An important issue that every speaker agreed on is that the OUV of a World Heritage sitemust be based on local values, otherwise, the conservation cannot be sustainable.
Finally, disciplinary and cultural language differences need to be understood andovercome in order to approach nature and culture sectors and their practitioners.
In terms of agricultural landscapes, it was evident that heritage sites face common
problems and challenges in the different case studies presented by the participants of theworkshop. Some of these are :Infrastructure development eroding heritage sites' surroundings and menacing the sites
themselves
Complex communication between heritage practitioners, government officials and local
communities
Language barrier between officials, practitioners and local communities
Sustainable transmission and continuity of the traditional and local practices related
to agriculture
Loss of traditional knowledge
Loss of biodiversity
During the workshop sessions, field trip and discussions, some strategies were proposed andexplored for solving these issues:
Programs for the involvement of younger generations in the maintenance ofagricultural landscapes
Expansion of the concept of community to wider audiences (visitors, neighbor villages,
related urban areas)
Clear definition of conceptual frameworks
Governance and not only management
Promotion of fluid communication between officials and locals
The cases brought by participants and the cases experienced in Japan clarified that agriculturallandscapes need a People-Centered Approach (PCA), since an agricultural landscape cannot
continue without the people that work it and shape it by living. Any other idea of conservation
could not be effective. This can be complemented by the bio-cultural approach by helping
identifying the linkages between cultural and natural cycles in the agricultural practices (festivities,

135beliefs, rituals, communal organization, etc). Biodiversity is instrumental for the resilience ofcommunities and their landscapes. Moreover, community-based governance empowers identity
and community cohesion .
Finally, the sustai nabi lity of agricu ltu rallandscapes will depend on the continuity of thepractices that shaped them, but it is necessary to understand that landscapes are dynamic andthe focus should be put in understanding change, adaptation and resilience.

Group photo of participants after they received their Certificate of Completion of the Workshop.

136

Annexes

137

Ann ex 1: List of Pa rti ci pants*
I nt e rnat iona l pa rt icipa nts· Abhayawardana, Nuwan (Culture), Lecturer, Rajarata University, Sri Lanka· Chick, Hiu Lai (Culture/Nature), Project Manager, Kadoorie Institute, University of Hong Kong,

China· Dian Ekarini, Fransiska (Culture), Staff, Borobudur Conservation Offlce, Indonesia· Farooqy, Persis (Nature), World Heritage Assistant, Wildlife Institute of India, India· Kacaw, Lameru (Culture), Executive Secretary, Fengnan Community Development Association,

Taiwan· Li, Yuxin (Culture), Assistant, Honghe Hani Terraces, China· Martin, Marlon (Culture), Chief Operating Officer, Save the lfugao Terraces Movement (SITMo),

Philippines· Osei-Owusu, Yaw (Nature), Country Director, Conservation Alliance International, Ghana· Pollock, Nina (Culture), Heritage Assets Officer, Heritage Division, New South Wales Office ofEnvironment and Heritage, Australia· Saha, Kawshik (Culture/ Nature), Assistant Professor, University of Science & Tech no logy,

Bangladesh· Solmaz, Funda (Culture), Research Assistant, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey· Sun, Cheng Hua (Nature), Assistant Researcher, Hualien District Agricultural Research andExtension Council of Agriculture, Taiwan· Velandia, Cesar (Culture), Professor, Technological University of Bolivar, Colombia· Wagh, Shweta (Culture/Nature), Assistant Professor, Kamla Raheja Vidyanidh i, Institute ofArchitecture, India

Nature Sector: 3 (21.5%)- Culture Sector: 8 (57%)- Culture/ Nature: 3 (21.5%)
Total: 14 (100%)Students from the University of Tsu l<u ba· Funaki, Daisuke (Nature), master student, World Heritage Studies, Japan·Francis, Shaka Kalama (Nature), doctoral student, Life and Environmental Sciences, Antigua &Barbuda· liizumi, Yuki (Nature), master student, Life and Environmental Sciences, Japan·Shoji, Ryohei (Culture), doctoral student, World Heritage Studies, Japan·Watanabe, Manami (Culture/Nature), doctoral student, World Heritage Studies, Japan
Nature Sector: 3 (60%)- Culture Sector: 1 (20%)- Nature/Culture: 1 (20%)
Total: 5 (100%)* By alphabetical order138

Guest speal<ers and resource persons· Asano, Tomoya, Wajima City
· Badman, Tim, Director IUCN World Heritage Programme·Brown, Jessica, Executive Director New England Bolas Foundation/IUCN WCPA
·Buckley, Kristal, Lecturer Deakin University/ICOMOS· Dunbar, William, Communications Coordinator UNU-IAS· Hagino, Kiichiro, Project Leader Maruyama Gumi
· Hagino, Yuki, Project Leader Maruyama Gumi
· Homma, Tomoki, Fellow Researcher Nara National Research Institute of Cultural Properties· lida, Yoshihiko, Associate Researcher UNU-IAS/OUIK·Ito, Koji, Assistant Professor Kanazawa University· Konoo, Harukaza, Nanto City
·Matsumoto, Keita, Cultural Properties, Shirakawa village·Rossler, Mechtild, Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Division for Heritage· Subroto,Yoyok, Professor at Gadjah Mada University· Tada, Kiichiro, Manager Shunran no Sato
·Weise, Kai, World Heritage Advisor/ICOMOS Nepal· Wijesuriya, Gamini, Project Manager, Sites Unit ICCROM·Yamauchi, Namiko, Keisen Jogakuen University

Organizing Team· lnaba, Nobuko, Professor World Heritage Studies and Certificate Programme on Nature
Conservation, CBWNCL Programme co-Director· lshizawa, 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

139

Annex 2: Program of the
CBWNCL 2016
MODULE 1: SYMPOSIUM ON NATURE-CULTURE LINKAGES IN HERITAGE CONSERVATION IN ASIA AND THE PACIFICAGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES
Venue: Tsukuba International Congress Center
Sunday, 18 September
9:30-10.00 Open registration desk and doors
10:00-10:05 Opening addressby Prof. Kyosuke Nagata, President, Un iversi ty of Tsukuba, Japan
10:05-10:10 Ope ni ng add ress
by Mr. Takamasa Saito, Counci llor for Cultural Properties, Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan
10:10-10:20 Opening and presentation of the "Capac ity Building Workshops on Nature-Cu lture Linkages in Heritage
Co nservation in As ia and the Pacific Region"
by Prof. Masahito Yoshida, Chair World Heritage Studies, University ofTsukuba
Prof. Nobuko lna ba, World Heri tage Stud ies, University ofTsukuba
Dr. Maya lshizawa, World Heritage Stud ies, University of Tsukuba
PANEL 1: International development
Chair/Discussant: Nobuko lnaba

10:20-10:45 Nature-Culture Linkages in the World Heritage Convention
by Dr. Mechtild Rossler, Director UNESCO Wo rld Heritage Centre
10:45-11:10 Connecting Practice, linking Cu lture and Nature
by Mr. Tim Badman, Director IUCN World Heritage Programme
11:10-11:20 Panel1 Discussion
11:20-11:30 BreakPANEL 2: Theoretical development
Chair/Discussant: Masahito Yoshida

11:30-11 :55 People-centered approaches to Conservation of Nature and Cu lture
by Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya, Project Manager ICCROM
11:55-12:20 Applying biocu ltura l concepts to practices for natural and cu ltural heritageby Ms. Kristal Buckley, Deakin Unive rsity, ICOMOS Austra lia
12:20-12:30 Panel2 Discussion
12:30-13:30 Lunch break
PANEL 3: Local development
Chair/Discussant: Maya lshizawa

13:30-13:55 Stewardship of protected landscapes by commun ities: Diverse landscapes, diverse governance models
by Ms. Jess ica Brown, Executive Director New England Biolab s Foundation I IU CN WCPA
13:55-14:20 The Subak System: The Indigenous Symb iotic Harmony of Cu lture, Human and Nature in Bali, Indonesia
by Prof. Yoyok Subroto, Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia
14:20-14:30 Panel3 Discussion
14:30-14:50 Break
14:50-17:00 General Panel Discussion
Chair: Nobuko lnaba, Masahito Yoshida, Maya lshizawa"Trends and challenges in the conservation of Agricultural Landscapes following the Nature-Culture
Approach"140

Monday, 19 September
9:30-9:40 Introduction to the presentations of participants of the First Capacity Building Workshop
Panel1: TERRACES
Discussant: Gamini Wijesuriya
9:40 - 9:55 The Rice Terraces of lfugao Province, by Marlon Martin, Phi lippines
9:55 -1 0:10 Thinking of Traditional Rice Culture Conservation in Management Practice of Hani Terraces, by Yuxin Li, China
10:10-10:25 Promotion of East Taiwan Organic Agriculture, by Cheng Hua Sun, Taiwan
10:25-10:40 The sign ificance, conservation potential and management challenges of traditional farming terrace landscapein Asian metropolis: a case study of Lai Chi Wo, Hong Kong, China, by Hiu Lai Chick, China
10:40-11:00 Panel1 Discussion
11:00-11 :10 Break
Panel2: AGRICULTURAL SURROUNDINGS
Discussant: Kristal Buckley
11 :10-11:25 The Landscape of Borob udur Temple Compou nd and its En vironme nt, by Fransiska Dia n, Indonesia
11:25-11 :40 Nature and Culture lnterlinkages in Gbreme Nationa l Park, by Funda Solmaz, Turkey
11:40-11:55 Tanks as an ancient measurement for the nature-culture interlinkages in ancient agricultural landscapes: A

Case Study on Anuradhapura dry zone hydrau lic landscape, by Nuwan Abhayawardana, Sri Lanka
11:55-12:15 Panel2 Discussion
12:15-13:15 Lunch Break
Panel3: INDIGENOUS AND TRADITIONAL LANDSCAPES
Discussant: Yoyok Subroto
13:15-13:30 Apatani Cultural Landscape, by Persis Farooqy, India
13:30-13:45 Foundations for the reconstruction of coffee Cultura l Landscape of Colombia, CCLC, by Cesar Veland ia,

Co lombia
13:45-14:00 Working with Indigenous Knowledge and Resi lience: A Case Study of Agricultural Landscape Conservation in

Taiwan Indigenous Tribe, by Lameru Kacaw, Taiwan
14:00-14:15 The Kanc hendzonga Sacred Landscape, by Shweta Wagh, Ind ia
14:15-14:35 Panel3 Discussion
14:35-14:45 Break
Panel4: NATURE AND AGRICULTURE
Discussant: Jessica Brown
14:45-15:00 Heritage of the Sundarban: Connecting Nature to Culture, by Kawshik Saha, Bangladesh
15:00-15:15 The interplay between culture and nature in the protection ofthe Kakum and Bia natural heritage in Ghana,by Yaw Ose i-Owus u, Ghana
15:1 5-15:30 Lord How Island, New South Wales, Australia, by Nina Pollock, Australia
15:30-15:50 Panel4 Discussion
15:50-17:00 General Discussion and Closing Remarks
Chair: Nobuko lnaba

141

MODULE 2: UNDERSTANDING NATURE-CULTURE LINKAGES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPECONSERVATION
Venue: Humanities and Social Sciences Building Seminar Room 8218, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba
Tuesday, 20 September
THEME: INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
10:00-10:30 The cultural landscape approach in the World Heritage Convention
Lect urer: Kri st al Buckley, Deakin University/ ICOMOS
10:30-13:00 Management of cultural and natural values in Cultural and Natural Heritage Sites of the World Heritage List
Lect urer: Ga mini Wijesuriya, ICCROM
13:00-14:00 Lunch Break
14:00-15:30 IUCN Protected Landscapes
Lecturer: Jessica Brown, New En gland Bio labs Foundation/IUCN WCPA
15:30-17:00 Roundtable
Wednesday, 21 September
THEME: JAPANESE EXPERIENCE
10:00-10:30 Landscape conservation in Japan
Lecturer: Nob uko lnaba, University of Tsukuba
10:30-13:00 Satoyama landscape and its protection in Japan
Lecturer: Masahito Yos hi da, Uni versity ofTs ukuba
13:00-14:00 Lunc h Break
14:00-15:30 Managing the conservation of agricultural landscapes in Japan Part 1 (Culture)
Lectu re r: Tomoki Ho mm a, Nara Nati onal Researc h Institute of Cultu ral Propert ies
15:30-17:00 Managing the conservation of agricultural landscapes in Japan Part 2 (Nature)
Lect urer: Willi am Dunba r, UNU -I A
Thursday, 22 September
THEME: LOCAL INITIATIVES
10:00-11:30 Traditional Knowledge Systems
Lecturer: Gamini Wijesuriya, ICCROM
11:30-13:00 Satoyama and Satoumi in Noto Pe ninsula
Lecturer: Yos hihiko lida, UNU-OUIK
13:00-14:00 Lunch Break
14:00-15:30 Community-based conse rvation: Examples of the world
Lecturer: Jessica Brown, New England Biolabs Foundation/IUCN WCPA
15:30-17:00 Introduction to the field trip
Lecturers: Nobuko lnaba, Yoshida Masahito, Maya lshizawa, University ofTsukuba
MODULE 3: MANAGEMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND GOVERNANCE IN AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES
Ven ue: Ainokura Village, Gokayama, Toyama Prefecture
Friday, 23 September
9:00 Departure from Tsukub a Station
13:00 Arrival to Ainokura Village, Gokayama, Toyama Prefecture
13:00-14:00 Lunch
14:00 -17:00 Site Visit
Meet ing loca l comm uniti es Part 1: World He ritage design ati on -th e cas e of the community of Ainokura in
Gokayama
Facilitator: Nobuko ln aba, University ofTsukuba
Ove rni ght in Ainokura village

142

Venue: Ogimachi village, Shirakawa-go, Gifu Prefecture
Saturday, 24 September
9:00 Departure from Ainokura village
9:30 Arriva l to Ogimachi Village, Gi f u Prefecture
9:30-13:00 Site Visit
Meeting local communities Part 2: World Heritage designation -the case of the community of Ogimachi in
Shirakawa-go
Faci litator: Nobuko lnaba, Un iversity of Tsukuba
13:00-14:00 Lunch
14:00 Departure to Noto Peninsula
17:00 Arrival to Shunran no Sato
18:00 Dinner at Tada-san's house
Overnight in Shunran no Sato
Venue: Various
Sunday, 25 September
8:00 Departure from Shunran no Sato
9:00 Arriva l to Shiroyone Senmaida, Wajima City
9:00-12:00 Rice harvest with loca l commun ity
Meeting local professionals and managers Part 1
Mr. Tomoya Asano, Wajima City
12:00-13:00 Lunch
13:00 Departure from Sh iroyone Sen maida to Maruyama
13:00-15:00 Meeting local professionals and managers Part 2
Ms. Yuk i Hagino, Ma ruyama-Gum i
Ko ji Ito, Ass istant Professor Ka nazawa Un iversity
Mr. Hiroshi Arai, Organ ic Farmer
Ms. Natsumi Motoguchi, Organic Farmer
15:00-15:30 Tea and loca l snacks with Maruyama-Gum i
15:30-17:30 Monitoring biodiversity in agricultural landscapes
Lecturers: Ms. Yuki Hagino and Mr. Koji Ito
17:30 Departure to Shunran no SatoOve rn ight in Shunran no Sato
Venue: Kobushi House, Shunran no Sato, Noto Peninsula
Monday, 26 September
9:00-12:00 Meeting local local professionals and managers Part 3: Green Tourism
Mr. Kiichiro Tada, Shunran no Sato
12:00-13:00

Lunch at Kobushi House

13:00-17:00 Disc uss ions
Evaluation of Fi eld t ri p
Formation of working groups
Overn ight in Shunran no Sato
Tuesday, 27 September
9:00 Departure to Tsukuba
Free afternoon
Wednesday, 28 September
Free day143

MODULE 4: REFLECTION ON THEORY AND PRACTICE
Venue: Humanities and Social Sciences Building Seminar Room 8218, University ofTsukuba, Tsukuba
Thursday, 29 Septembe r
10:00-1 3:00 Working groups
13:00-14:00 Lun ch break
14:00-17:00 Working groups
Friday, 30 September
9:00-13:00 Presentati on of wo rking groups
13:00-14:00 Lunch break
14:00 -15:30 Rou ndtable
15:30-17:00 Fi nal discussions, wrap-up and closi ng remarks
18:00-20:00 Farewe ll144145