01570nas a2200265   4500000000100000000000100001000000100002008004100003260000800044653003300052653002100085653002300106653002200129653001800151653002000169653002100189100001500210700002300225245006500248856014600313300001200459490000700471520080600478022002001284       2021                            d  cnov10aIntangible cultural heritage10aHeritage studies10aBinary oppositions10aBio-morphic terms10aDance studies10aEthnochoreology10aPost-colonialism1 aEgil Bakka1 aGediminas Karoblis00aDecolonising or Recolonising: Struggles on Cultural Heritage  uhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85119291686&doi=10.3366%2fdrs.2021.0345&partnerID=40&md5=463131e0cf653330efc1234e4f3780f2  a247-2630 v393 aThis article directly responds to an article authored by Iacono and Brown published in Dance Research (2016), and considers issues emerging since its publication. The core topic is the UNESCO Convention from 2003, and in our view, criticism in the 2016 article is based on misinterpretation. We address the claims that the Convention is marked by binarism and provide in-depth background for the concept of intangible cultural heritage. We also caution against using the biomorphic term  living cultural heritage  as its application stands in an ambiguous relation toward essentialist, organicist and totalitarian ideologies. We end with a discussion on attitudes toward globalisation and the concept of innovation. These, we argue, have profound implications for recent discussions on decolonisation.  a02642875 (ISSN)