Indigenous cultural landscapes: Equitably defining the 'authenticity' of the intangible

Over hundreds of generations, indigenous groups around the world have passed down their traditional landscape associations, a number of which are intangible and therefore unquantifiable. Yet, these associative relationships with nature have been, and continue to be, pivotal in cultural evolution. Determining the authenticity of intangible landscape associations has caused much controversy, and in recent decades, indigenous groups have begun seeking protection of their places of significance. In response, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) World Heritage Committee (WHC) developed a criterion that intended to assist in the identification and protection of cultural landscapes. The WHC has therefore become the global authority responsible for determining the authenticity of cultural landscapes, including those with intangible associations rather than material cultural evidence. However, even with the support of the United Nations, UNESCO and the WHC, it is unlikely that every tangible cultural landscape will be sufficiently recognised and protected. Therefore, this research paper explores the effectiveness of current approaches to gauging authenticity in instances where multiple landscapes are valued according to similar characteristics. Further, this work studies the inherent relationship between the indigenous Maori population of the South Island of New Zealand, in particular Kai Tahi peoples, and their significant landscape features, as a means of considering the breadth and depth of historic intangible associations. In light of these findings, this research challenges the appropriateness of the term 'authenticity' when analysing not only the subjective, but more pressingly, the intangible. It therefore questions the role of empirical data in demonstrating authenticity, while recognising that a prolific list of such intangible cultural landscapes has the potential to diminish integrity. This, this paper addresses an urgent need for increased social research in this area, namely in identifying cultural landscape protection methods that empower all local indigenous communities, not just those which are the most critically acclaimed.

Organizational affordances: A structuration theory approach to affordances

Affordance is an important concept in the field of human–computer interaction. There are various interpretations of affordances, often extending the original notion of James J. Gibson. Often the treatment of affordances in the current human–computer interaction literature has been a one-to-one relationship between a user and an artefact. We believe that the social and cultural contexts within which an artefact is situated affect the way in which the artefact is used and the notion of affordance needs to be seen as a dynamic, always emerging relationship between people and their environment. Using a Structuration Theory approach, we conceptualize the notion of affordance at a much broader level, encompassing social and cultural aspects. We suggest that affordances should be seen at three levels: single user, organizational (or work group) and societal. Focusing on the organizational level affordances, we provide details of several important factors that affect the emergence of affordances. - This article provides a new perspective on the discourse of affordance with the use of Structuration Theory. - It shows how affordance can be understood as ‘use’ in situated practices (i.e. ‘technology-in-practice’) - The Structuration Theory approach to affordances is showcased using two case studies.

Directional dominance on stature and cognition in diverse human populations

Homozygosity has long been associated with rare, often devastating, Mendelian disorders1, and Darwin was one of the first to recognize that inbreeding reduces evolutionary fitness2. However, the effect of the more distant parental relatedness that is common in modern human populations is less well understood. Genomic data now allow us to investigate the effects of homozygosity on traits of public health importance by observing contiguous homozygous segments (runs of homozygosity), which are inferred to be homozygous along their complete length. Given the low levels of genome-wide homozygosity prevalent in most human populations, information is required on very large numbers of people to provide sufficient power3, 4. Here we use runs of homozygosity to study 16 health-related quantitative traits in 354,224 individuals from 102 cohorts, and find statistically significant associations between summed runs of homozygosity and four complex traits: height, forced expiratory lung volume in one second, general cognitive ability and educational attainment (P < 1 × 10−300, 2.1 × 10−6, 2.5 × 10−10 and 1.8 × 10−10, respectively). In each case, increased homozygosity was associated with decreased trait value, equivalent to the offspring of first cousins being 1.2 cm shorter and having 10 months’ less education. Similar effect sizes were found across four continental groups and populations with different degrees of genome-wide homozygosity, providing evidence that homozygosity, rather than confounding, directly contributes to phenotypic variance. Contrary to earlier reports in substantially smaller samples5, 6, no evidence was seen of an influence of genome-wide homozygosity on blood pressure and low density lipoprotein cholesterol, or ten other cardio-metabolic traits. Since directional dominance is predicted for traits under directional evolutionary selection7, this study provides evidence that increased stature and cognitive function have been positively selected in human evolution, whereas many important risk factors for late-onset complex diseases may not have been.