Abstract
Whilst the Intellectual Property law world is focussed on developing the next international instrument
towards protecting indigenous and local communities’ traditional knowledge and cultural expressions,
the United Kingdom has been evidently absent in its awareness of its own wealth of Intangible Cultural
Heritage. Although ratification of the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible
Cultural Heritage was finally achieved in June 2024, over twenty years after its entry into force, the
plight of many ICH practices in the devolved UK is still unknown.
This paper seeks to acknowledge the lacuna in legal and political considerations of ICH within the UK,
acknowledging that a gap exists in this context requiring further consideration. By utilising the examples
of tartan and Harris Tweed, two of the most infamous traditional fabrics within Scotland, these two
beacons of Scottish culture have a bifurcated history of appreciation and safeguarding measures, with
one left to wilt, entering the public domain whilst the other has been safeguarded by its own piece of
legislation for over the last 100 years. This variance in attention requires a delve into the historical
conflicts that have shaped this wide variance in safeguarding measures for two distinctive Scottish ICH
practices. Considering the Harris Tweed Act 1993 and its precursors, as well as the most recent Scot
towards protecting indigenous and local communities’ traditional knowledge and cultural expressions,
the United Kingdom has been evidently absent in its awareness of its own wealth of Intangible Cultural
Heritage. Although ratification of the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible
Cultural Heritage was finally achieved in June 2024, over twenty years after its entry into force, the
plight of many ICH practices in the devolved UK is still unknown.
This paper seeks to acknowledge the lacuna in legal and political considerations of ICH within the UK,
acknowledging that a gap exists in this context requiring further consideration. By utilising the examples
of tartan and Harris Tweed, two of the most infamous traditional fabrics within Scotland, these two
beacons of Scottish culture have a bifurcated history of appreciation and safeguarding measures, with
one left to wilt, entering the public domain whilst the other has been safeguarded by its own piece of
legislation for over the last 100 years. This variance in attention requires a delve into the historical
conflicts that have shaped this wide variance in safeguarding measures for two distinctive Scottish ICH
practices. Considering the Harris Tweed Act 1993 and its precursors, as well as the most recent Scot
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 69-79 |
| Journal | Queen Mary Law Journal |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published (VoR) - 1 Oct 2024 |