ABSTRACT

This article argues that since genetic resources carry cultural significance to many Indigenous communities, the protection of genetic resources should be considered in relation to the protection of Indigenous cultural heritage. It compares international regulations of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge to those of traditional cultural expressions, focusing particularly on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its implementation through the Nagoya Protocol. The article discusses how attempts to decolonise the regulation of genetic resources are impeded by two dilemmas that have also affected UNESCO and WIPO’s attempts to safeguard traditional cultural expressions. The first dilemma concerns the problems of promoting Indigenous self-recognition within a system of governance based on national agency and sovereignty. The second dilemma concerns how international regulations are based on a Western ontology that polarises natural and cultural resources, which has resulted in a reluctance to address intellectual property rights within the CBD. Exploring parallels between the regulation of genetic resources and traditional cultural expressions provides new perspectives on the difficulties facing the decolonisation of the protection of Indigenous resources and the implementation of Indigenous data sovereignty.

摘要

本文认为，由于遗传资源对许多土著社区具有文化意义，因此应将遗传资源的保护与土著文化遗产的保护联系起来。它将遗传资源和相关传统知识的国际法规与传统文化表现形式的法规进行了比较，特别侧重于《生物多样性公约》（CBD）及其通过《名古屋议定书》的实施. 文章讨论了对遗传资源的非殖民化监管的尝试如何受到两个困境的阻碍，这两个困境也影响了教科文组织和产权组织保护传统文化表现形式的努力。第一个困境涉及在基于国家机构和主权的治理体系内促进土著人自我认可的问题。第二个困境是关于国际法规如何基于将自然和文化资源两极分化的西方本体论，这导致人们不愿在 CBD 内解决知识产权问题。