Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage (IPinCH) Project is a seven-year international research initiative based at Simon Fraser University, in British Columbia, Canada.[1] IPinCH's work explores the rights, values, and responsibilities of material culture, cultural knowledge, and the practice of heritage research. The project is directed by Dr. George P. Nicholas (Simon Fraser University), co-developed with Julie Hollowell (Indiana University) and Kelly Bannister (University of Victoria) and is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada's (SSHRC) major collaborative research initiatives (MCRI) program.

IPinCH is a collaboration of scholars, students, heritage professionals, community members, policy makers, and Indigenous organizations across the globe.[2] Our Research Team[3] includes over fifty leading scholars and professionals, nearly one hundred Associates,[4] sixteen Fellows,[5] and over thirty partnering organizations,[6] representing Canada, Australia, United States, New Zealand, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Germany, and Switzerland. Our organizational partners range from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), to Parks Canada, to Indigenous groups including the Penobscot Nation of Maine and the Moriori of Rekohu (Chatham Islands, New Zealand)

The project serves as both a practical resource and a network of support for communities and researchers engaged in cultural heritage work. Topics of research include the theoretical, ethical, and practical implications of commodification, appropriation, and other flows of knowledge about the past, and how these may affect communities, researchers, and other stakeholders.



  • To document the diversity of principles, interpretations, and actions arising in response to intellectual property issues in cultural heritage worldwide;
  • To generate more robust theoretical understandings as well as norms of good practice in heritage work; and
  • To make findings available to stakeholders, from Aboriginal communities to professional organizations to government agencies, allowing them to develop and refine their own theories, principles, policies and practices.


IPinCH is an international collaboration of archaeologists, Indigenous organizations, lawyers, anthropologists, ethicists, museum specialists, policy makers, and others, working to facilitate fair and equitable exchanges of knowledge relating to heritage. The IPinCH Project is concerned with the theoretical, ethical, and practical implications of commodification, appropriation, and other flows of knowledge about the past, and how these may affect communities, researchers, and other stakeholders.


IPinCH provides a foundation of research, knowledge and resources to assist archaeologists, academic institutions, descendant communities, scholars, policy makers, and other stakeholders in negotiating more equitable and successful terms of research and policies through an agenda of community-based research and topical exploration of intellectual property (IP) issues. IPinCH focuses on archaeology as a primary component of cultural heritage; however, this project is ultimately concerned with larger issues of the nature of knowledge and rights based on culture—how these are defined and used, who has control and access, and especially how fair and appropriate use and access can be achieved to the benefit of all stakeholders in the past.

Project Description[edit]

The 7-year project began in 2008 with a $2.5 million grant from the Major Collaborative Research Initiatives program of Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.[7] About one-fourth of the project budget is reserved for student fellowships[8] and research support, and one-fourth for community-based heritage research for case studies[9] related to the project themes.

The IPinCH Project is led by Dr. Nicholas and guided by a steering committee of six team members representing five universities (Catherine Bell [University of Alberta], Joe Watkins [University of Oklahoma], and John Welch [Simon Fraser University], plus Hollowell and Bannister). Team members represent nine Canadian and nineteen international universities, and eleven Canadian and international organizations. A project advisory board will review project activities in addition to advising on strategies for linking with stakeholders and dissemination of results (Michael Brown [Williams College], Larry Chartrand [Métis; University of Winnipeg], Robert Layton [University of Durham, UK], Peter Levesque [Principal Director, KMbW - Knowledge Mobilization Works], Robert K. Paterson [UBC, Faculty of Law], Dame Marilyn Strathern [University of Cambridge, UK], David Stephenson [Rocky Mountain Thunder Law Firm, Boulder, CO]).

The IPinCH project initially had three components:

As of March 2016, eight of the twelve community initiatives have been completed and the final reports are available on the IPinCH website[10] (for details on IPinCH’s Community Initiatives, please see below). To accommodate broadening research interests and developments, IPinCH Working Groups have been reconceptualized as Research Themes[11] (see section below on Research Themes). The knowledge base (KB),[12] an online searchable database and archive containing scholarly and popular articles, documents and tools created by communities, global case studies, research protocols and legislation, and resources created by the IPinCH project, has been retired from the IPinCH website. A selection of KB material is available within Simon Fraser University’s Institutional Repository Summit.

Community-based Initiatives / Special Initiatives[edit]

IPinCH-supported Community-Based Initiatives are located all over the globe. IPinCH funds seventeen initiatives, based in Australia, Canada, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, New Zealand, and the United States, working with groups such as the Inuvialuit, the Penobscot Nation, the Ainu, the Hopi Tribe, and the Moriori.

In IPinCH’s Community-Based Initiatives (CBIs), team members work closely with communities to investigate and address pressing cultural heritage challenges in specific contexts. IPinCH-supported Community-Based Initiatives are located all over the globe. We fund seventeen initiatives, based in Australia, Canada, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, New Zealand, and the United States, working with groups such as the Inuvialuit, the Penobscot Nation, the Ainu, the Hopi Tribe, and the Moriori.

IPinCH values a collaborative approach and employs Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR)[13][14][15] methods that engage the community in all aspects of the research process. In the CBIs, communities determine the research goals, which form for the foundation for the initiative, including the practical and theoretical outputs. After community review, the results of these initiatives will be made available to partner organizations and stakeholders, in order to assist them in refining their own policies and approaches.

Key features of a CBPR methodology include:

  • A collaborative approach that engages the community or organization in all aspects of the research process—from development of research questions and research design to conducting the research, designing outputs, and disseminating results;
  • Research goals that prioritize community needs and result in direct community benefits;
  • Projects that contribute to community capacity building and to sustainable and more equitable relations between the community and outside researchers, promote respect for local values, and address mistrust, inequity, and similar issues in conventional research.

Twelve community initiatives received funding from IPinCH and a further five Special Initiatives have also been approved. The community initiatives address a broad range of pressing cultural heritage topics:

  • A Case of Access: Inuvialuit Engagement with the Smithsonian’s MacFarlane Collection

The MacFarlane Collection is a collection of 550 Inuvialuit items bought by Hudson’s Bay Company trader Roderick MacFarlane in the mid-1800s for the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.[16] Inuvialuit elders, youth, cultural experts, anthropologists and museum curators shared with one another their respective knowledge about the museum collection and documented the process. The project has encouraged interaction and engagement by the Inuvialuit with the objects in the MacFarlane Collection, supported by the creation of a virtual exhibit and searchable archive of the collection. Additional details about the "A Case of Access" Community Initiative are available in the full report and project summary, available on the IPinCH website.

  • Cultural Tourism in Nunavik

In the early 1990s, the first few attempts at cultural tourism in Nunavik saw little success, but there is now support from businesses to include tourism as a facet of economic development. The Avataq Cultural Institute, an IPinCH partner organization, has advocated the development of cultural tourism for some time, but Avataq sees a world’s difference between what it envisions as responsible development and certain economic interests’ vision for cultural tourism. This case study works with local communities to answer several key questions: What part do the Nunavimmiut really play in this development? Are they silent participants or, on the contrary, the driving force behind this development? One of the aims of the research is to re-centre the meaning of cultural tourism as a means of protecting Inuit culture, possibly in tension with the Quebec government’s “Plan Nord” for Northern economic and tourism development.

  • Developing Policies and Protocols for the Culturally Sensitive Intellectual Properties of the Penobscot Nation of Maine

Indigenous communities face legal, social, cultural, and economic challenges when attempting to protect or manage their intellectual property (IP), and often there is a lack of community infrastructure to formalize processes for confronting IP issues. To mitigate this challenge, the Penobscot Nation in Maine established an IP Working Group that developed tribal protocols, tools, and an internal infrastructure to address IP issues particularly related to archaeology and heritage-based places. This involved discussions around what constitutes Penobscot Nation intellectual property, what characterizes intellectual property violations (and how to deal with them), and identifying the community’s intellectual property priorities. The full project report and project summary are available on the IPinCH website.

  • Education, Protection and Management of ezhibiigaadek asin (Sanilac Petroglyph Site)

For the Saginaw Chippewa Tribal Nation of Michigan, ezhibiigaadek asin is a sacred place where teachings from their Anishinabe ancestors are embedded in the rock as petroglyphs. Amidst concerns over the inappropriate use of the teachings, this case study explores issues around cultural commodification with the goal of working with the Saginaw Chippewa's Ziibiwing Cultural Society to create a plan to protect and control the use of the ezhibiigaadek asin site. The full project report is available on the IPinCH website.

  • Grassroots Resource Preservation and Management in Kyrgyzstan: Ethnicity, Nationalism and Heritage on a Human Scale

This case study began a public conversation among both urban and rural people about intellectual property and cultural heritage in Kyrgyzstan, a post-Soviet nation where ties to the past have been attenuated and even severed. In Kyrgyzstan, local communities have little or no awareness of the heritage resources in their midst, and damage to sites is common. This case study had three components all with the shared goal of encouraging a national dialogue on cultural heritage and intellectual property. The first project involved developing a new foundation for an endangered archaeological structure. The second project focused on preserving oral traditions for younger generations of Kyrgyz, while the third initiative was centered on creating a photographic record of local archaeological sites.

  • Moriori Cultural Database

Located on Rēkohu (Chatham Islands, New Zealand), this project involved research and community-building related to Moriori identity, indigenous cultural heritage and resource management and protection. A key component of this study was the development of a multi-layer database to integrate research on Moriori identity, cultural heritage protection, land use, and resource management in culturally sensitive ways. The full project report and project summary are available on the IPinCH website.

  • Secwepemc Territorial Authority – Honoring Ownership of Tangible / Intangible Culture

This initiative brought together Secwepemc community leaders and knowledge holders from Neskonlith, Adams Lake, and Splats’in Bands of interior British Columbia with a group of social, legal, and political scholars. This community initiative will outline approaches to cultural heritage encounters within Secwepemc territory, examining what it would look like were we to fully accept and act upon the premise that Secwepemc Peoples’ have economic, political, and legal authority within their territory. At the heart of this project is a desire to develop fruitful scholarly and economic collaborations, while fully honouring Secwepemc peoples’ assertions of territorial authority.

  • The History and Contemporary Practices of the Hopi Cultural Preservation Office

What are the differences between Hopi notions of navoti (“traditional knowledge”) and Euro-American understandings of intellectual property? What are the implications of this in terms of managing cultural knowledge resources? This case study is working towards developing an official cultural heritage management guide for the Hopi Cultural Preservation Office and the Hopi Tribe.

  • The Journey Home - Guiding Intangible Knowledge Production in the Analysis of Ancestral Remains

In the Journey Home project, the question was not whether ancestral remains should be repatriated from the University of British Columbia Lab of Archaeology to the Stó:lō Nation, but rather how to do things right, regardless of timeframe. This study developed mutually acceptable guidelines for repatriation, addressing complex questions related to the production of knowledge, authority, control, and ongoing relationships with ancestors. The full project report is available on the IPinCH website.

  • The Ngaut Ngaut Interpretive Project: Providing Culturally Sustainable Online Interpretive Content to the Public

Indigenous groups around the world are struggling to come to terms with the issues that an online environment poses to the presentation of the Indigenous past and present. In this initiative, the Mannum Aboriginal Community Association Inc. countered offensive and incorrect online information about the Ngaut Ngaut heritage complex in South Australia by creating their own interpretive content in which they shared community perceptions and values about this significant cultural landscape. The full project report and an interpretive guide for the Ngaut Ngaut site are available on the IPinCH website.

  • Treaty Relations as a Method of Resolving IP Issues

This case study examined the political relationship established between First Nations and Canada through historical treaties. Did the treaty relationship include, either directly or indirectly, a shared understanding of how the cultural heritage of Indigenous peoples would be treated by Settlers and by the governments they established? How might this historical relationship serve Settler-First Nations relations today? Based on a careful examination of published primary and secondary materials related to treaty negotiations in central Ontario and the Northwest Territories, the study applies historical, oral-historical, and anthropological methods and attempts to identify aspects of these historic treaties which have resonance for current IP debates around topics such as property, ownership, and jurisdiction. The full project report and project summary are available on the IPinCH website.

  • Yukon First Nations Heritage Values and Heritage Resource Management

This community initiative seeks understandings of heritage values from three participating Yukon First Nations: the Champagne & Aishihik First Nations, the Carcross-Tagish First Nation, and the Ta'an Kwach'än Council. This project will explore how the values of Yukon First Nations towards heritage resources differ from Western understandings, and will articulate and document what Indigenous heritage management practices look like on a practical level.

Special Initiatives[edit]

Research Themes[edit]

Integrating research findings and knowledge from our Community-Based Initiatives and other sources, the IPinCH Research Themes explore unique questions relating to intellectual property and heritage. Each group is led by at least two team members, as Research Theme Co-Chairs. Membership in these groups is open to all associated students, partnering organization representatives, co-investigators, associates, collaborators, research assistants, steering committee members, and community representatives.

  • Bioarchaeology, DNA, and Indigeneity

How is genetic information being used to define—or redefine—identity, ancestry, and diversity? What are the ensuing social, ethical, and practical implications of DNA research for descendent communities, First Nations peoples, and other stakeholders? What are the intersections of genetic and cultural identities? What can research examples such as that of Kwäday Dän Ts'ìnchi (Long Ago Person Found) or the Clovis period child from the Anzick site teach us about moving forward with genetic studies through collaborative research? As archaeologists and anthropologists increasingly turn to genetic information to provide insights into the past, there are important implications for Indigenous peoples today. From genetic ancestry tests that purport to identify “Native American ancestry,”[17] to the potential application of ancient DNA analysis to assist with the repatriation of human remains, DNA is changing the way in which identity is constructed—both for ancient and present-day peoples. Research theme chairs: Daryl Pullman (Memorial University), Alan Goodman (Hampshire College), and Dorothy Lippert (Smithsonian Institution).

  • Commodifications of Cultural Heritage

How can processes of commodification be both harmful and beneficial? What tools and strategies can Indigenous communities and scholars use to deal with commodification concerns and opportunities? This theme covers complex topics such as the role of government and legislation in regulating cultural commodification, whether commodification can benefit disempowered communities, and the impact of treating human remains as commodities, whether in medical science or museums. Research theme co-chairs: Sven Ouzman (University of Pretoria) and Solen Roth (University of British Columbia).

  • Community-Based Cultural Heritage Research (CBCHR)

Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) methods engage communities in all aspects of the research process. In IPinCH’s Community Initiatives, the communities determine the research goals, which form for the foundation for the initiative, including the practical and theoretical outputs. These IPinCH-supported initiatives may serve as positive examples of CBPR methods being put to use to investigate and address pressing cultural heritage needs. There is an ongoing need for background information and case studies to help students and scholars think through the implications of community-based work. This theme also amalgamates resources to help foster balanced and mutually beneficial relationships between academic and community researchers and promote fair and culturally-appropriate uses of intellectual property. Research theme chairs: Kelly Bannister (University of Victoria), Julie Hollowell (Indiana University), Ian Lilley (University of Queensland), and John R. Welch (Simon Fraser University).

  • Cultural Tourism

The diversity of the world’s cultures, both past and present, is one of the key attractions of travel. Governments, the tourism industry, and communities work hard to create unforgettable cultural products and experiences. But are the economic benefits of these experiences shared equally with communities? Are they sustainable environmentally, are they culturally appropriate experiences to share, and do communities have control over how their culture is represented? These questions are at the heart of the Cultural Tourism research theme. Research theme co-chairs: Lena Mortensen (University of Toronto - Scarborough) and David Schaepe (Sto:lo Nation)

  • Indigenous Peoples, Cultural Heritage, and the Law

The Indigenous Peoples, Cultural Heritage, and the Law Research Theme investigates the application of intellectual property law to the realm of cultural heritage, as well as alternative models to protect, promote, and maintain cultural and heritage goods. A number of legal systems coexist and often intersect with conventional intellectual property protections, including customary law, international law, informal or “vernacular” intellectual property, and moral economies. Many stakeholders thus face an inter-jurisdictional geography of cultural rights, consisting of indigenist social movements, NGOs, development agencies and institutions, multilateral institutions, and the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples. This theme addresses these complex legal and political landscapes. Research theme co-chairs: Rosemary Coombe (York University) and Patricia Goff (Wilfrid Laurier University, Ontario).

  • Indigenous Research Ethics

The Indigenous Research Ethics theme explores the dynamic intersection of policies, procedures, practices, and philosophies of contemporary Indigenous research ethics. The research contained within this theme represents a useful resource for practitioners who grapple with intellectual property ethics and issues. Emphasis is placed upon the special demands and rewards of collaborative research practice. Research theme co-chairs: Alison Wylie (University of Washington) and Sonya Atalay (Indiana University).

  • Safeguarding Indigenous Heritage

In 2014, the long-standing conflict over Grace Islet, off Salt Spring Island, B.C., a well-documented Coast Salish burial islet, reached a boiling point as construction began on a private residence.[18][19] Following protests by First Nations, scholars, and members of the public, construction was halted and the province of British Columbia eventually purchased Grace Islet from the private landowner.[20] IPinCH believes that the critical issue in the Grace Islet case is the absence of respect for First Nations laws, values, and practices relating to burial sites and ancestral remains, and the need for descendant communities to have a say in how their ancestral sites are managed and protected.[21] Grace Islet is one of many such cases in British Columbia and, indeed, around the world, that demonstrate the limited legal protections available to protect Indigenous burial grounds. This research theme seeks to examine current challenges in protecting Indigenous ancestral burial sites within the province and to propose a new approach that meets the needs of all parties.

Full descriptions of each research theme are available on the project's website.[22]

Awards and recognitions[edit]

The Intellectual Property Issues has been the recipient of numerous notable awards and recognitions:

  • 2013 Connections Grant for "Indigenous Peoples, Cultural Commodifications, and Self-Determination." Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.
  • 2013 Partnership Impact Award for "Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage Project." Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council[23]
  • 2015 Connections Grant for "Exploring the (Re-) Construction of Identity at the Interface of Biology and Culture." Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council[24]
  • 2015 Simon Fraser University President's Dream Colloquium Award for "Protecting Indigenous Cultural Heritage: Emergent Policy and Practice"[25]


Resources from the IPinCH Project are available on the website

See also[edit]

Further reading[edit]

  • Anderson, Jane 2009 "Law, Knowledge, Culture: The Production of Indigenous Knowledge in Intellectual Property Law" Edward Elgar, UK
  • Brown, Michael 2003 Who Owns Native Culture? Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Brush, S. B., and D. Stabinsky (editors) 1996 Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous People and Intellectual Property Rights. Island Press, Covelo, CA
  • Daes, E. I. 1998 Some Observations and Current Developments on the Protection of the Intellectual Property of Indigenous Peoples. WIPO Roundtable on Intellectual Property and Indigenous Peoples, 23–24 July 1998, Geneva, Switzerland. [1]
  • Dutfield, Graham 2006 Intellectual Property, Biological Resources, & Traditional Knowledge. In Intellectual Property & Information Wealth: Issues & Practices in the Digital Age, edited by P. Yu. Greenwood, Portsmouth, N.H.
  • Ellen, R., P. Parkes, and A. Bicker 2000 Indigenous Knowledge and its Transformations: Critical Anthropological Perspectives. Harwood Academic, Amsterdam
  • Farah, Paolo Davide, Tremolada Riccardo, Desirability of Commodification of Intangible Cultural Heritage: The Unsatisfying Role of IPRs, in TRANSNATIONAL DISPUTE MANAGEMENT, Special Issues “The New Frontiers of Cultural Law: Intangible Heritage Disputes”, Volume 11, Issue 2, March 2014, ISSN 1875-4120 Available at:
  • Farah, Paolo Davide, Tremolada Riccardo, Intellectual Property Rights, Human Rights and Intangible Cultural Heritage, Journal of Intellectual Property Law, Issue 2, Part I, June 2014, ISSN 0035-614X, Giuffre, pp. 21–47. Available at:
  • Greaves, T. (editor) 1994 Intellectual Property Rights for Indigenous Peoples: A Source Book. Society for Applied Anthropology, Oklahoma City, OK
  • Janke, Terri 1998 Our Culture: Our Future. Report on Australian Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights. Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, and Michael Frankel & Company, Surrey Hills, NSW
  • Nicholas, George 2005 Four Examples of Research Agreements Concerning Intellectual Property with Applications to Archaeological Research. Discussion paper, "Open Content and 'Community Heritage': Bridging the Divide." Alexandria Archive Institute, San Francisco
  • Nicholas, George, and J. Hollowell 2006 Intellectual Property Issues in Archaeology? In Archaeological Ethics, 2nd ed., edited b K. D. Vitelli and C. Colwell-Chanthaphonh, pp., 206-211. AltaMira Press, Lanham, MD
  • Nicholas, George, and K.P. Bannister 2004a Intellectual Property Rights and Indigenous Cultural Heritage in Archaeology. In Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights in Archaeology, edited by M. Riley. AltaMira Press, Walnut Grove, CA
  • --- 2004b Copyrighting the Past?: Emerging Intellectual Property Rights Issues in Archaeology. Current Anthropology 45(3): 327–350.[2]
  • Posey, Daryl A., and Graham Dutfield 1996 Beyond Intellectual Property: Toward Traditional Resource Rights for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa
  • Solomon. M. 2004 Intellectual Property Rights and Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Responsibilities. In Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights: Legal Obstacles and Innovative Solutions, edited by M. Riley, pp. 221–250. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek
  • Strathern, M. 2006 Intellectual Property and Rights: An Anthropological Perspective. In Handbook of Material Culture, edited by C. Tilley, W. Keane, S. Kücheler, M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer, pp. 447–462. Sage, London
  • Zuckermann, Ghil'ad et al. 2015 ENGAGING - A Guide to Interacting Respectfully and Reciprocally with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People, and their Arts Practices and Intellectual Property, Australian Government: Indigenous Culture Support


  1. ^ "Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage | Theory, Practice, Policy, Ethics". Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  2. ^ "People & Partners". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  3. ^ "Research Team | Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage". Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  4. ^ "Associates | Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage". Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  5. ^ "Fellows | Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage". Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  6. ^ "Partnering Organisations | Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage". Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  7. ^ Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
  8. ^ student fellowships
  9. ^ case studies
  10. ^ "IPinCH Community Initiatives". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  11. ^ "Working Groups". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  12. ^ "The IPinCH Knowledge Base". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-02. 
  13. ^ Minkler, M., and N. Wallerstein (editors) 2003 Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
  14. ^ Springett, J. 2003 Issues in Participatory Evaluation. In Community-Based Participatory Research for Health, edited by M. Minkler and N. Wallerstein, pp. 263–288. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
  15. ^ St. Denis, V. 1992 Community-Based Participatory Research: Aspects of the Concept Relevant for Practice. Native Studies Review 8 (2): pp. 51–74
  16. ^ Morrison, David. Painted Wooden Plaques from the MacFarlane Collection: The Earliest Inuvialuit Graphic Art. ARCTIC VOL. 59, NO. 4 (DECEMBER 2006) P. 351– 360
  17. ^ TallBear, Kim (2013). Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Promise of Genetic Science. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. 
  18. ^ "An Open Letter on Grace Islet". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-04. 
  19. ^ "Home on sacred B.C. aboriginal cemetery to be demolished". Retrieved 2016-03-04. 
  20. ^ "Grace Islet burial site saved as province steps in". Retrieved 2016-03-04. 
  21. ^ "Declaration on the Safeguarding of Indigenous Ancestral Burial Grounds as Sacred Sites and Cultural Landscapes". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-04. 
  22. ^ project's website
  23. ^ "IPinCH Receives First SSHRC Partnership Award!". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-04. 
  24. ^ "Bioarchaeology and Genetics Working Group Receives SSHRC Grant". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-04. 
  25. ^ "SFU President's Dream Colloquium on Protecting Indigenous Cultural Heritage". Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage. Retrieved 2016-03-04. 

External links[edit]