Ryoko Nakano

Reshaping the Cultural Heritage Regime:
How Japan and China Engage in UNESCO’s Heritage Programs
Ryoko Nakano
Abstract
Non-Western rising powers wield significant influence in reshaping the direction of theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), ensuring itsalignment with the dynamic global landscape and meeting the expectations of both risingstates and those in the Global South. This article closely examines how Japan and China,
as rising powers in the past and present, have actively engaged with UNESCO to exhibit
their rich cultural legacies and histories while harnessing their influence to challenge
Eurocentric heritage paradigms and assert their distinct Asian leadership positions. The
article also underscores apprehensions regarding Chinaʼs approach, rooted in a discourseof civilization and transregional connectivity, which might be intricately linked to global
geopolitical ambitions and economic interests.

T

Introduction
he United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
has long been recognized as a vital cultural organization whose mission is to fostera culture of peace, eradicate poverty, and facilitate intercultural dialogue througheducation, science, culture, communication, and information.1 The main architectsof UNESCO primarily hailed from Western countries, predominantly Europeans, British, andAmericans. They played a pivotal role in shaping the organization, following in the footsteps of its
forerunners, the International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation and the International Bureauof Education. From standard-setting to social, cultural, and educational campaigning, a wide rangeof UNESCOʼs activities underscore the universal ideal of peace, reflecting the norms, values, andpractices of Western enlightenment and humanist traditions.2
However, as multipolarity and pluralism gain prominence in global governance, UNESCO
must reflect the new global geopolitical dynamics by working in line with the expectations ofdeveloping and emerging states that comprise the Global South.3 This is inevitable for ethical andfinancial reasons. UNESCOʼs moral and expert authorities have so much relied on the support
from its member states (as of 2023, 194 member states and 12 associate members). Financially,
UNESCO severely suffered the loss of funding after the United States decided to halt a planned
payment to UNESCO for the recognition of Palestine as a new member in 2011.4 Although the1

UNESCO, Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/constitution

2

J.P. Singh, United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO): Creating
Norms for a Complex World (London and New York: Routledge, 2010).

3

Willem J. H. Willems, “The Future of World Heritage and the Emergence of Transnational Heritage
Regimes,” Heritage & Society, vol. 7, no. 2, 2014, pp. 105–120.

4

The US also made an of ficial withdrawal from UNESCO in 2019 due to the alleged bias of
UNESCO against Israel. Joe Hernandez, “The U.S. Says It Wants to Rejoin UNESCO after Exiting
during the Tr ump Administration,” National Public Radio, June 12, 2023, https://www.npr.
org/2023/06/12/1181687608/united-states-unesco-return-membership-funding

19
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Reshaping the Cultural Heritage Regime: How Japan and China Engage in UNESCO’s Heritage Programs

US declared its return to UNESCO in June 2023, the relative decline of the Western economic
powers makes it imperative for UNESCO to cultivate partnerships outside the West to secure its
funds for operation. In particular, non-Western rising powers that have gained more resources andadvanced technologies hold strategically important positions that no international organizations
can ignore.
Likewise, rising powers also care about international organizations like UNESCO to enhancetheir position in the global hierarchy. As they accumulate economic power, they strive for prestige
and respect in the international arena.5 Culture is a significant platform for those states that want
to showcase their rich history, traditions, civilization, creativity, and achievement. Consequently,
it is not surprising that rising powers are increasingly engaging UNESCO and participating in its
flagship heritage platforms, such as World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage.6
Against this background, this article examines the endeavors of Japan and China to (re-)
establish themselves as culturally and historically prominent nations within UNESCO while
reshaping the international heritage regime in favor of their interests and perspectives. Japan
was the first Asian country to become a major financial contributor to this Western-dominatedorganization, but China swiftly emerged as an influential actor in the twenty-first centur y,leveraging its financial power to the fullest extent. Both countries have actively preserved andpromoted cultural heritage, challenging the Eurocentric view of heritage by emphasizing Asianor non-Western (Global South) perspectives. However, this article contends that Chinaʼs recent
emphasis on a civilizational discourse in the construction of its transregional cultural heritage israising significant concerns due to its apparent connection with the countryʼs political ambitions
to establish itself as a central player in the global order. Moreover, this discourse is seen as ameans to achieve its economic goals, including gaining access to resources and markets on a
global scale. In response to the growing dominance of a Sinocentric historical narrative, major
powers need to ensure UNESCOʼs transparency, accountability, and multilateral decision-making
to better serve the interests of its diverse membership and the broader global community.
The remainder of this ar ticle is organized as follows. First, I will explain the generalcharacteristics of UNESCOʼs World Heritage, the international platform for safeguarding naturaland cultural heritage worldwide. Second, I will examine the efforts made by Japan to expand
the Eurocentric concept of cultural heritage. As one of the main contributors to UNESCO, Japan
has used its economic leverage to instill non-Western perspectives into World Heritage criteria.
Following the changes of UNESCOʼs heritage concept, the third section focuses on China, the
new emerging power that aims to exhibit its presence in UNESCO. Using its financial power,
China has contributed to the emergence of new norms regarding heritage conser vation andinternational cultural cooperation. I conclude that those efforts serve to diversify the cultural
heritage concept per the needs and perspectives of non-Western nations; however, it is necessary
not to confuse cultural diversity with cultural multicentricity. Japan, for its part, should play a rolein deterring forces to eliminate diversity and create another cultural hierarchy.

UNESCO’s World Heritage and Eurocentrism
World Heritage is the most recognized international platform that UNESCO has developed,
gaining in global popularity since its inception in 1972. As of 2023, 195 state parties have signed
the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (known
as World Heritage Convention). World Heritage is the largest international cultural framework
5

Rohan Mukherjee, Ascending Order: Rising Powers and the Politics of Status in International Institutions(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022). Steven Ward, Status and the Challenge of Rising Powers(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017).

6

Ryoko Nakano and Yujie Zhu, “Heritage as Soft Power: Japan and China in International Politics,”
International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 26, no. 7, 2020, pp. 869–881.

20Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Ryoko Nakano

uniting diverse state and non-state entities in the mission to safeguard and preserve natural andcultural heritage worldwide.
European countries dominate the World Heritage List, with one notable exception: China. Asof 2023, Italy, China, Germany, France, and Spain were the top five countries with World Heritage
properties. Europe and North America account for 47.12% of the total properties, followed by Asiaand the Pacific (24.1%), Latin America and the Caribbean (12.43%), Africa (8.59%), and the Arabstates (7.76%).7
It would be hasty to conclude that African and Arab states lack significant heritage comparedto Europe and North America. Whether or not one country has a culturally significant heritage is
not solely determined by the number of properties listed on the World Heritage List. African andArab states have rich and diverse cultural and natural heritage that may not have been extensively
recognized or included on the list. The underrepresentation of certain regions could reflect
systemic biases in the nomination and evaluation processes rather than the lack of outstanding
heritage sites and landscapes.
One perspective for explaining the small number of World Heritage sites in African andArab states is that the criteria of the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) to be recognized as
World Heritage are biased.8 Those who explore heritage as an area of critical inquiry argue that
European heritage experts have shaped UNESCOʼs charters and recommendations.9 As a result,
Eurocentrism within World Heritage criteria accounts for the overrepresentation of European
countries. For instance, if “authenticity” is linked to material and substance based on European
heritage examples, such as brick and stone buildings, wooden buildings may not be authentic
because their materials are usually replaced with new ones over decades and centuries.
Due to differing perspectives, interests, and priorities among member states regarding
World Heritage, the North-South contestation has marked the discussions in the World Heritage
Committee, comprising 21 states that make final decisions on World Heritage inscriptions.10
Developed countries, primarily from the Global North, often have greater financial and technicalresources, which enable them to select sites and to submit more nominations for a World
Heritage status. With the notion that the preservation of high standards, rigorous evaluation
processes, and adherence to technical criteria to maintain the integrity and universal value ofthe World Heritage List, European states may emphasize the importance of expert evaluations
and the need for stringent criteria to protect the credibility and authenticity of the list. However,developing countries, primarily in the Global South, often face challenges due to their limited
resources, capacity, and infrastructure. Some developing countries advocate for greater
inclusivity, fairness, and recognition of their cultural and natural heritage, calling for reforms in
the nomination process, evaluation criteria, and allocation of resources to ensure a more equitable
representation of sites from diverse regions and cultures. Nevertheless, non-Western countries,
joining the platform relatively later, feel compelled to conform to the norms and practices ofWestern heritage conservation and management.
Ultimately, the North-South contestation within the World Heritage Committee represents thecurrent changing global power dynamics in the twenty-first century. In some areas, efforts have
7

UNESCO, “World Heritage List Statistics,” https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/stat

8

OUV means cultural and/or natural significance which is so exceptional as to transcend nationalboundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity.

9

Laurajane Smith, Uses of Heritage (London and New York: Routledge, 2006). Denis Byrne, “Western
Hegemony in Archaeological Heritage Management,” History and Anthropology, vol. 5, no. 2, 1991, pp.
269–276.

10

Christoph Brumann, “Slag Heaps and Time Lags: Undermining Southern Solidarity in the UNESCOWorld Heritage Committee,” Ethnos, vol. 84, no. 4, 2019, pp. 719–738.

21Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Reshaping the Cultural Heritage Regime: How Japan and China Engage in UNESCO’s Heritage Programs

been made to bridge this divide through dialogue, capacity-building initiatives, and collaborative
projects to address the concerns of developing countries and promote a more balanced andinclusive representation of World Heritage. A noteworthy example of this is the increasing
influence of the Global South within UNESCO, prompting UNESCO ʼs secretariat to prioritize
the development of a sustainable development framework, given that development is a primaryconcern of the Global South.11
In this context, the engagement of rising powers in UNESCO has become key. In particular,
the emergence of Japan and China as major economic powers has significantly influenced themodifications of UNESCOʼs heritage concept and institutions. In the following sections, I will
examine those two cases as essential steps for diversifying UNESCOʼs heritage platforms.

Japan and the expanding scope of cultural heritage
Japan joined UNESCO in 1951, before signing the San Francisco Peace Treaty to formally end
World War II.12 At that time, Japan faced limited opportunities for membership in internationalorganizations due to its role as an aggressor during the war. However, UNESCO emerged as
the first organization to approach Japan under the US occupation (1945–1952), initiating “reeducation activities” aimed at eliminating the causes of war and aggression.13 A group of Japanese
professors and educators welcomed UNESCO ʼ s initiatives and created a mass educational
movement to promote the understanding of peace, human rights, and justice, as advocated by
UNESCO. Consequently, UNESCO played a pivotal role in Japanʼs re-entry into the international
arena during the postwar era.
As time progressed, Japan actively participated in UNESCO ʼ s initiatives, leveraging its
expertise, sharing its cultural resources, and contributing to numerous programs and projects led
by the organization. As early as 1954, a group of Japanese archeological experts and historians
prepared an extensive report on the Silk Roads as part of the contribution to UNESCOʼs “Major
Project for Mutual Appreciation of Cultural Values of East and West. ”14 At the ascendance ofJapanese economic power, the Silk Roads captured the Japanese imagination when NHK, asemi-governmental television network, produced and aired a documentar y series about the
Silk Roads in the 1980s. The program ignited the Japanese peopleʼs romantic fascination withancient regional history.15 With significant interest by society, the Japanese government decided
to participate in UNESCOʼs ten-year project of the “Integral Study of the Silk Roads: Roads of
Dialogue” in 1988. Japan supported the expedition known as “the Maritime Route from Venice
to Osaka,” involving Japanese scientists, researchers, and journalists. As a result, Japan has
emerged as one of the proactive participants in UNESCOʼs endeavor to rekindle the Silk Roads
memories and heritage during the 1990s.
11

Dobrosława Wiktor-Mach, “Cultural Heritage and Development: UNESCOʼs New Paradigm in a
Changing Geopolitical Context,” Third World Quarterly, vol.40, no.9, 2019, pp. 1593–1612.

12

Takashi Saikawa, “Returning to the International Community: UNESCO and Post-War Japan, 1945–
1951,” in Poul Duedahl, ed., A History of UNESCO: Global Actions and Impacts (Basingstoke and New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), pp. 116–130.

13

Aigul Kulnazarova and Poul Duedahl, “UNESCOʼs Re-education Activities in Postwar Japan andGermany: Changing Minds and Shifting Attitudes towards Peace and International Understanding,”
in Aigul Kulnazarova and Christian Ydesen, eds., UNESCO without Borders (London and New York:
Routledge, 2016), pp. 52–75.

14Japanese National Commission for UNESCO, Research in Japan in History of Eastern and Western
Cultural Contacts: Its Development and Present Situation, Japanese National Commission for UNESCO,
1957.

15

Marie Thorsten, “Silk Road Nostalgia and Imagined Global Community,” Comparative American Studies:
An International Journal, vol. 3, no. 3, 2005, pp. 301–317.

22Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Ryoko Nakano

Japanʼs support for UNESCOʼs efforts to preserve World Heritage predates its ratification of
the World Heritage Convention. In 1989, Japan financed the establishment of UNESCO/Japanʼs
Funds-in-Trust for the Preservation of the World Cultural Heritage. This was consistent withJapanʼs interest in international cultural cooperation, which came to be a dominant theme foran economically developed Japan.16 After the ministerial discussion and coordination over thedifference between the codes and discourse of the World Heritage Convention and Japanese
domestic law on cultural property, Japan finally ratified the World Heritage Convention in 1992.
Since then, as a major financial contributor to UNESCO, Japan has significantly challenged theorganizationʼs Eurocentric heritage concepts and norms. As mentioned earlier, World Heritageand its related discourse were predominantly shaped by European scholars and practitioners
in heritage conser vation and management and European-based organizations in the field.
Japan encountered such European-dominated discourse when the Hor yuji temple and other
Buddhist monuments were assessed for World Heritage inscription in the early 1990s. While the“authenticity” of the wooden temple was questioned due to the view that replaced materials were
not original, Japan started exploring the meaning of authenticity.17 Consequently, Japan supported
expertsʼ initiatives for acknowledging non-Western heritage concepts in relation to the OUVcriteria. The Nara Document on Authenticity (1994), the outcome document of this meeting,had a major impact on UNESCOʼs understanding of heritage, as it emphasized cultural contexts
in determining authenticity.18 The document also legitimized the Japanese claim that wooden
monuments and buildings whose materials are replaced with new ones also should be consideredauthentic.
Another milestone for Japan in UNESCO was the election of Koichiro Matsuura, a Japanesediplomat who ser ved earlier as the Chair of the World Heritage Committee, as the DirectorGeneral of UNESCO in 1999. By that time, UNESCO had adopted a nonbinding Recommendationon the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore (1989), a Living Human Treasures
System (1993), and a Proclamation of Masterpieces of the Oral Heritage of Humanity Program(1998). These documents reflect the interest of non-Western countries that have rich nonmaterial cultural assets and resources. However, Matsuuraʼs leadership, backed by Japanʼsfinancial and diplomatic support, made it possible to upgrade the Masterpieces program to
the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) Convention (2003) and institutionalize a non-Westernconcept of intangible cultural heritage.19 Having Natsuko Aikawa from Japan as a developer of theintangible cultural heritage program, Japan further reinforced its commitment to UNESCO byactively shaping and influencing the organizationʼs agenda.20 Given Japanʼs rich cultural traditions,foods, cultural practices, and handicraft skills, creating a new international heritage platform in
UNESCO made sense. The launch of the ICH program was also timely as UNESCO adopted the
Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity in 2002, which defines “culture” broadly and urges
all nations and institutions to preserve culture in all forms. Although this achievement was notentirely Japanʼs success, having involved a bottom-up initiative, Japanʼs financial and diplomatic
16

Natsuko Akagawa, Heritage Conservation and Japan’s Cultural Diplomacy: Heritage, National Identity
and National Interest (London: Routledge, 2014).

17

Aurélie Élisa Gfeller, “The Authenticity of Heritage: Global Norm-Making at the Crossroads ofCultures,” The American Historical Review, vol. 122, no. 3, 2017, pp. 758–791.

18

Ibid.

19

Aurélie Élisa Gfeller and Jaci Eisenberg, “UNESCO and the Shaping of Global Heritage,” in Poul
Duedahl, ed., A History of UNESCO (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), pp. 279–299.

20

Natsuko Akagawa, “Intangible Heritage and Embodiment: Japanʼs Influence on Global Heritage
Discourse,” in William Logan, Máiréad Nic Craith, and Ullrich Kockel, eds., A Companion to Heritage
Studies (Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell, 2016), pp. 69–86.

23
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Reshaping the Cultural Heritage Regime: How Japan and China Engage in UNESCO’s Heritage Programs

contribution made a significant impact, enhancing greater inclusivity in UNESCO.21
These initiatives highlight Japan ʼ s proactive approach to reshaping the discourse on
heritage and promoting its own cultural perspectives. For non-Western powers engaging with
UNESCO, the Eurocentric discourse creates a pressing need to assert their national and regional
characteristics in heritage conser vation and management. It also presents an opportunity topotentially revise existing platforms to better ser ve their own interests. Japan has sought tobridge the gap and ensure that its unique heritage perspectives and practices are duly recognized
and incorporated into the global heritage discourse. By doing so, it aims to contribute to a more
inclusive and balanced approach to heritage conservation that acknowledges the diverse culturallandscapes and traditions of non-Western societies. The scope of UNESCOʼs cultural heritage has
expanded following the new voices of non-Western countries, particularly Asian.

China and the creation of a new cultural platform

Chinaʼs engagement with UNESCOʼs heritage regime can be traced back to its ratification of the1972 World Heritage Convention in 1985. Initially, China concentrated on its domestic agenda,
including capacity-building and raising peopleʼs awareness of World Heritage. Unlike Japan, whichaccumulated knowledge and experiences regarding heritage conservation and restoration overdecades, China experienced a social and educational disruption during the Cultural Revolution(1966–1976), which destroyed material cultural properties and the persecution of “intellectuals”
in various cultural, professional, and educational domains. China therefore pursued expertise in
the field of heritage conservation. With the successful outcomes of Chinaʼs reform and openingup policies in spurring economic development, the Chinese government also participated in three
Advisory Bodies of the World Heritage Committee: International Council on Monuments andSites in 1993, the International Union for Conservation of Nature in 1996, and the International
Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property in 2000.
China gradually accepted the concept of World Heritage while actively learning the languageof the World Heritage nomination.22 This is a top-down process in which government bodies, suchas the State Administration for Cultural Heritage, the Ministry of Construction, and the Ministryof Education, have participated. This integration of various government bodies and expertise
underscores Chinaʼs commitment to actively participate in the World Heritage Committee andengage with heritage-related matters on a national and international level. It demonstrates acoordinated effort to combine diplomatic and cultural heritage perspectives within Chinaʼsdelegations, emphasizing the importance the country places on heritage preservation and its
recognition by international organizations like UNESCO.
As China ʼ s economic ascendance has gained prominence, and tourism became popular
activities among Chinese citizens, Chinaʼs heritage policy entered a new era. Like many otherdeveloping countries, the Chinese government was keen to increase the number of World
Heritage sites both for inbound and domestic tourists. As has been called “heritage fever,”even Chinese local officials made restless efforts to obtain World Heritage recognition in theircorresponding sites.23
After Xi Jinping came in power, China reinvigorated its commitment to UNESCO and the21

J.P. Singh, “Cultural Networks and UNESCO: Fostering Heritage Preservation betwixt Idealism andParticipation,” Heritage & Society, vol. 7, no. 1, 2014, pp. 18–31.

22

Rouran Zhang, “World Heritage Listing and Changes of Political Values: A Case Study in West Lake
Cultural Landscape in Hongzhou, China,” International Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 23, no. 3, 2017,
pp. 215–233.

23

Celine Lai, “UNESCO and Chinese Heritage: An Ongoing Campaign to Achieve World-Class Standards,”
in Poul Duedahl, ed., A History of UNESCO: Global Actions and Impacts (Basingstoke and New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), pp. 313–324.

24
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Ryoko Nakanopreservation of cultural heritage. Xiʼs profound dedication to UNESCO was evident, with his initial
visit to a UN organization being to UNESCO. Embracing the “China Dream” as the cornerstone ofhis policy, President Xi directed his attention toward the renaissance of Chinese heritage, culture,and civilization. Together with the Belt and Road Initiative, a massive infrastructure development
assistance project that Xi launched, China began to express its willingness to promote not only its
economic relationship but cultural and social relationships with other countries.
During Xiʼs period, China transformed itself from a passive observer to an active contributor
within UNESCO. Chinaʼs financial contribution to the UNESCO annual budget overtook theamount of Japanʼs contribution, making China the biggest contributor to UNESCO after the US
withdrawal from the organization in 2019.24 In the World Heritage Committee, China has become
one of the most vocal and influential countries in decision-making.25 China has also managed tohave placed its own officials in top management positions: Xing Qu as Deputy Director-General
and Qian Tang as President of the UNESCO International Bureau of Education.26 Viewed throughthe lens of shifting power dynamics, these developments signify the culmination of Chinaʼswillingness to take a lead in UNESCOʼs programs.
One of the themes over which China actively aligns itself with UNESCO is the linkage
between culture and development in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Building on its previous emphasis on UNESCOʼs role in development and its own domestic
experiences, China backed Director-General Bokovaʼs agenda to enhance UNESCOʼs involvementin the UNʼs Post-2015 Development Agenda. This support had already appeared when China
hosted the International Congress “Culture: Key to Sustainable Development” convened by
UNESCO in Hangzhou in 2013, marking the initiation of the agenda to connect culture with
development.27 Chinaʼs engagement in this agenda serves its domestic interests in developmentfocused approaches to culture. While some warn that such a policy has destroyed local cultural
heritage in Xinjiang, Tibet, and other regions of ethnic communities, this initiative has legitimized
the stateʼs utilization of cultural heritage in the name of development. The ultimate outcome ofthis endeavor was dependent on a broader international network. By connecting the multilateral
culture–development agenda and Chinaʼs own domestic cultural development, China exhibited its
central role in promoting the interest of the Global South to the international audience.
Moreover, Chinaʼs promotion of the Silk Roads heritage in UNESCO has indicated Chinaʼsdesire to champion the field of international cultural cooperation. Notably, Chinaʼs involvement
is comprehensive, with both the central government and regional entities actively participatingin the promotion of Silk Roads narratives, resulting in increased recognition and reputation.
The Municipality of Xiʼan, recognizing its historical role as the “east terminus of the historic
Silk Roads,” has actively used its historical legacy and aligned its urban development plansaccordingly.28 Additionally, Xiʼan has hosted several subregional meetings and ceremonial events
related to the Silk Roads. At the launch of the collaborative “Silk Roads programme” in UNESCO
in 2015, it was not only the Chinese National Commission for UNESCO, but commercial actors,
24

This might change as the US decided to return to UNESCO in 2023.

25

Enrico Bertacchini, Claudia Liuzza, and Lynn Meskell, “Shifting the Balance of Power in the UNESCOWorld Heritage Committee: An Empirical Assessment,” International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 23,
no. 3, 2017, pp. 331–351.

26

Grace Guo, “Should China Now Lead UNESCO?” The Diplomat, September 22, 2017. Hwa Young
Nam, “The UNESCO Unveiled,” Investigative Journalism Reportika, 2023. https://ij-reportika.com/
download/9308/?tmstv=1694065301

27

Wiktor-Mach, 2019, p. 1594.

28

Yang Yang, “Producing Multiple Imaginations of the Silk Road in Xiʼan, Chinaʼs Urban Development,”
International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 26, no. 6, 2020, pp. 854–866.

25
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Reshaping the Cultural Heritage Regime: How Japan and China Engage in UNESCO’s Heritage Programs

such as the Tang West Market Cultural Industry Investment Group of China, and local agents
such as the Provincial Government of Shanxi Province, were also involved.29 Chinaʼs National
Commission for UNESCO has provided support for initiatives such as the Silk Roads YouthResearch Grant scheme, while the Beijing International Peace Culture Foundation has funded
projects such as the development of an Interactive Atlas of Cultural Interactions along the Silk
Roads and the Youth Eyes on the Silk Roads Photo Contest.30
Chinaʼs wide-ranging activities in the Silk Roads heritage field has broader geopolitical
implications. China positions itself as the focal point of civilization, with multifaceted connections
to the Middle East, Europe, and Africa, entails Chinaʼs active involvement in constructing a
heritage discourse aligns with its geopolitical and economic agenda. 31 In contrast to Japanʼs
promotion of the Nara Convention and its initiative for establishing the Intangible Cultural
Heritage, Chinaʼs emphasis on its pivotal role in development and culture, and its promotionof a new Silk Roads heritage platform, is directly related to the discursive construction of
the Sinocentric national narrative that China aims to spread across the globe. Fearing such adominant historical narrative, voices in Southeast Asia are advocating for the acknowledgment
and reclamation of their regionʼs historical contributions to the maritime Silk Roads.32 Japan andSouth Korea also share concerns that their historical ties to the Silk Roads may be overshadowedby Chinese initiatives, leading to potential oblivion.33
In the aftermath of the zero-COVID policy in 2023, China organized the Alliance for Cultural
Heritage in Asia, reviving the ambition to develop “ Asian approaches ” to conser ving andpreser ving cultural heritage.34 Closely obser ving Chinaʼs Silk Roads diplomacy and heritage
promotion, Tim Winter, the author of Geocultural Power (2019), warned that Chinaʼs grandinitiative for creating a matrix of cultural cooperation, or what Xi Jinping calls a new Global
Civilization Initiative, could be a disaster for communities and cultures throughout Asia. 35
Mistakes have been made in the past, with the excesses related to the promotion of cultural
heritage and development destroying peopleʼs livelihoods and natural and cultural environment.
For China to be a champion of both development and cultural heritage conser vation andpreservation in Asia, communities, cultures, and people in the Silk Roads corridors should not
be sacrificed for being commodified and commercialized for tourism and state-led infrastructuredevelopment projects.
29

UNESCO, “The First Meeting of the International Network for the Silk Road Online Platform: A New
Phase in UNESCOʼs Silk Roads Initiative,” https://en.unesco.org/silkroad/content/first-meetinginternational-network-silk-road-online-platform-new-phase-unescos-silk-roads

30

UNESCO, “Youth Eyes on the Silk Roads: Beijing International Peace Culture Foundation,” https://
unescosilkroadphotocontest.org/en/node/41

31

Giulia Sciorati, “ʻConstructingʼ heritage diplomacy in Central Asia: Chinaʼs Sinocentric historicisationof transnational World Heritage Sites,” International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 29, no. 1, 2023, pp.
94–112.

32

Kwa Chong Guan and Han Fook Kwang, “Southeast Asia in the Forgotten History of the Maritime Silk
Road?” RSIS Commentary, October 13, 2023, https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/rsis/southeastasia-in-the-forgotten-history-of-the-maritime-silk-road/?doing_wp_cron=1697589997.59777402877807617
18750

33

Ryoko Nakano, “A Geocultural Power Competition in UNESCOʼs Silk Roads Project: Chinaʼs Initiatives
and the Responses from Japan and South Korea,” Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, vol. 52, no. 2, 2023,
pp. 185–206.

34

Xinhua, “Xi Greets Conference of Alliance for Asian Cultural Heritage,” China Daily, April 25, 2023,
https://www.chinadailyhk.com/article/327459

35

Tim Winter, “Whatʼs behind Chinaʼs New Alliance for Cultural Heritage in Asia?” The Diplomat, May 4,2023, https://thediplomat.com/2023/05/whats-behind-chinas-new-alliance-for-cultural-heritage-in-asia/

26
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Ryoko Nakano

Concluding thoughts
The history of international cultural cooperation in UNESCO reflects the aspirations of countries
seeking to bolster their international standing. By actively engaging in UNESCO, these nations
aim to contribute to shaping the international cultural landscape, exert influence, and establish
narratives of their national histor y and culture, and contributions within the organizationʼsframework. Through UNESCO, rising powers in particular aim to leverage their cultural heritage
and resources to enhance their soft power and assert their presence on the global stage. Japanʼs
aspiration to become a cultured nation is no exception, as it seeks to overcome WWIIʼs negative
legacy and move beyond economic power to cultivate its moral standing. Similarly, China
launched an endeavor to work within the Western-dominated international order in the 1970s.
As its economic power grew, it also aimed to cultivate a new terrain of cultural cooperation andpresent its national legacy and historical connectivity with the world.
For UNESCO, ensuring a fair and equitable approach to the recognition and preservationof diverse culture and heritage worldwide remains an ongoing challenge. Greater transparency
ensures that decisions and actions are accountable and open to scrutiny, reducing the potential
for favoritism or biased decision-making. Efforts have been made to address the imbalances inheritage lists/registers and promote a more inclusive representation of heritage from different
regions. These measures need to be upgraded to reshape international cultural cooperation tocater not only to the interests of a select few but to many without power.
However, there is a risk that UNESCO will become a platform for specific countries topromote and legitimize their historical narratives and expand their influence beyond the cultural
terrain. In particular, China apparently uses UNESCO and its cultural programs to promote its
agenda and influence. China combines heritage with development. The inclusion of development
attracts developing countries that prioritize economic growth rather than cultural conservation.
Under the name of culture and people-to-people connections, Chinaʼs initiatives can create majorsocial and physical upheavals and destructions, justifying infrastructure projects that may benefit
the tourism industry but displace populations.
For those who want to retain their cultural distinctiveness and historical significance, thegrowing dominance of a Sinocentric historical narrative regarding the Silk Roads is a source ofapprehension. Other major powers, including Japan, may be responsible for further enhancing
UNESCOʼs improvement by ensuring transparency, accountability, and multilateral decisionmaking in the organization. It is also important to support the capacity-building for heritage
conservation and protection in other countries, like Japanʼs recent assistance to the Silk Roads
heritage nomination by Central Asian countries.36 By encouraging other UNESCO members
to focus on cultural heritage matters, Japan should contribute to creating a more inclusive anddemocratic environment within the organization, enhancing fairness, inclusivity, and equal
representation in UNESCO. By doing so, Japan may serve the original mission of UNESCO andthe broader global community.
The recent news of the US rejoining UNESCO is potentially positive.37 Having the US actively
participate in UNESCO discussions could help counterbalance Chinaʼs influence and its pressureson other UNESCO member states. However, the US must assume a constructive role to gain the36

For example, see UNESCO, “Silk Roads World Heritage Serial and Transnational Nomination in Central
Asia: A UNESCO/Japanese Funds-in-Trust Project,” https://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/825/.
UNESCO, “Expert Meeting launches Phase III of the UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust Project: Support
Silk Roads World Heritage Nomination(s) process,” February 23, 2022, https://whc.unesco.org/en/
news/2416

37

UNESCO, “The United Statesʼ Return to UNESCO Celebrated with a Flag-Raising Ceremony,” July26, 2023, https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/united-states-return-unesco-celebrated-flag-raisingceremony

27
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023

Reshaping the Cultural Heritage Regime: How Japan and China Engage in UNESCO’s Heritage Programs

trust and backing of countries in the Global South. This involves offering timely and proficientassistance to developing nations regarding culture and development and advocating for essential
reforms within UNESCO. Without these efforts, the journey toward a more diverse and inclusive
global community may result in the establishment of a multipolar hierarchy instead.

28
Japan Review Vol.6 No.2 2023