The neocolonial political economy of traditional culture

Abstract

There has long been a preoccupation with regulating and safeguarding traditional (particularly Indigenous) culture. These efforts have been underpinned by two competing yet interwoven logics: the logic of property, which emphasizes (private) individual rights, and a connection to the economics of cultural life; and the logic of heritage, which emphasizes (public) collective rights, the nation-state, and a version of culture largely averse to economic life. Both logics have perpetuated colonial logics of exploitation that saw ‘traditional’ knowledge or culture as being available for extraction by nation-states, economic actors, or both. The Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore within the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) sought to marry the two logics. In 2024, it adopted the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge. Despite its promises, the treaty does little to challenge the (neo)colonial logics that have created and sustained both paradigms. I argue that, fundamentally, international law is still beholden to an extractivist and neocolonial logic, and that more needs to be done to break away from existing patterns. Human rights language, which functions as a disruptor and connector of the aforementioned logics, may provide a (limited) pathway.