Working towards a Convention

Intangible Cultural Heritage

intangible Working towards a Convention on

The main goal of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage is to safeguard the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge and skills thatcommunities, groups and, in somecases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.

e cultural heritage

UNESCO’s conventions in the field of culture were drafted and adopted following therequest by Member States to develop international standards that could serve as abasis for drawing up national cultural policies and strengthen cooperation amongthem. The eight normative instruments created over a period of 55 years reflect thepriorities of the international community in the field of culture at the time of theiradoption. By comparing them, they also reflect the evolution of cultural policies andthe role that different governmental and non-governmental actors play. Theycomplement each other in so far as they deal with different subjects and provide astandard reference for national cultural policies. Moreover, newly adopted instrumentsenable us to better understand existing ones, since they reflect the impact of pastpolicies and new needs. Taken together, they constitute a set of tools aimed atsupporting Member States in their efforts to preserve the world’s cultural diversity in aconstantly changing international environment. Their effectiveness is based on thecommitment taken by Member States to implement them once ratified.

The General Conference of UNESCO adopted in 2003, at its 32nd session, theConvention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. The adoption ofthe Convention became a milestone in the evolution of international policies forpromoting cultural diversity, since for the first time the international community hadrecognized the need to support the kind of cultural manifestations and expressionsthat until then had not benefited from such a large legal and programmatic framework.

Complementary to other international instruments dealing with cultural heritage, suchas the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and NaturalHeritage, the main goal of this 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the IntangibleCultural Heritage is to safeguard the practices, representations, expressions, knowledgeand skills that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part oftheir cultural heritage. Such heritage may be manifested in domains such as oraltraditions and expressions, performing arts, social practices, rituals, festive events,knowledge and practice about nature and the universe, and traditional craftsmanship.This definition provided in Article 2 of the Convention also includes the instruments,objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated with intangible cultural heritage. Thedefinition is the result of long-standing intergovernmental negotiations that tuned-upconcepts and lead to the approval of the current text.

This brochure aims to provide a background to the Convention by highlighting thoseactions and programmes that, often indirectly, contributed to developing the ideas andpolicies that eventually led to the adoption of the Convention text as its stands.

Phot

o ©

inst

ituto

Nac

iona

l de

Cultu

ra /

D

ante

Vill

afue

rte

Phot

o ©

Nat

iona

l Com

mis

sion

of U

zbek

ista

n

L Taquile and its Textile Art, Peru

J The CulturalSpace of theBoysun District,Uzbekistan

4 . INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE

and homogenous category of objectsconsidered worthy of protection due totheir unique cultural value. The termwould also be used later in theConvention on the Means of Prohibitingand Preventing the Illicit Import, Exportand Transfer of Ownership of CulturalProperty (1970), to which the HagueConvention, and its 1999 SecondProtocol are complementary.

Already in 1953, UNESCO published thefirst volume of a new series entitled‘Unity and Diversity of Cultures’, whichwas drawn up from a survey on thecurrent conception of the specificcultures of different peoples andmutual relations between thosecultures. The aim of the publication wasto offer an insight into the world’sdifferent cultures and their mutualrelations. This would be followed by aproject on ‘Mutual Appreciation ofEastern and Western Culture’, launchedin 1957, which would last for nine years.In 1966, the General Conferenceadopted the well-known Declarationon the Principles of InternationalCultural Cooperation. The Declarationestablished the essential features ofUNESCO’s international cooperationpolicies in the field of culture by statingthat each culture has a dignity andvalue which must be respected andpreserved, and that every people hasthe right and duty to develop itsculture and that all cultures form part ofthe common heritage belonging to allmankind, giving the basis for the

1946 1981: first stepsUNESCO’s first programmes in the fieldof culture reflected the political andsocial situation of the world in a post-war and decolonisation period.Considering the Organization’smandate to contribute to peacethrough education, science and culture,attention was focused on promotinginternational cooperation in the field ofthe arts and on studying the way ofrecognizing the variety of culturalidentities of the world. Several actionswere taken related to traditionalcultural domains such as literature,museums, music and languages.

In 1946 the International Council ofMuseums (ICOM) was founded,followed in 1949 by the InternationalMusic Council (IMC). The first volume ofthe Index Translationum was publishedin 1949, while the first worriesconcerning artistic production werediscussed in a conference in 1952 inVenice. This meeting led to theadoption of the Universal CopyrightConvention, which came into force in1955 and was subsequently revised in1971. As a result of increased awarenesson the need to protect built heritage intime of war, following the devastatingconsequences of the Second World War,the Convention for the Protection ofCultural Properties in the Event ofArmed Conflict was adopted in TheHague, the Netherlands, in 1954. Thisconvention introduced the expressionof ‘cultural property’ as a comprehensive

J The Maroon Heritage ofMoore Town, Jamaica

I Vanuatu Sand Drawings

II Processional Giantsand Dragons in Belgiumand France

L The Chopi Timbila,Mozambique

Phot

o ©

Cris

tiana

Per

eira

/ U

NES

CO

Phot

o ©

And

rew

P. S

mith

/ U

NES

CO

WORKING TOWARDS A CONVENTION . 5

further development of culturalheritage policies within UNESCO.Although the Declaration did mostlikely not use the concept of heritage inits legal sense, the expression ‘heritageof mankind’ became a key element ofthe Organization’s policies in the field ofcultural heritage.

The need for policies aiming atdeveloping the concept of ‘heritage ofmankind’, at least for tangible heritage,was strongly felt following the Nubiacampaign in Egypt, launched in 1960,which was the most striking example ofa successful exercise in alertinginternational public opinion in favour ofa safeguarding operation. Two yearslater the Abu Simbel temples,reconstructed 64 metres above theiroriginal site, were officially unveiled.Another activity aimed at protectingmonumental cultural heritage was theCampaign for safeguarding Venice,launched in 1962, or the adoption on19 November 1968 by the GeneralConference of the Recommendationconcerning the Preservation of CulturalProperty Endangered by Public orPrivate Works, followed in 1970 by theConvention on the Means ofProhibiting and Preventing the IllicitImport, Export and Transfer ofOwnership of Cultural Property.

Most certainly these legal-effectcampaigns and actions raisedawareness about the role that cultureplays in economic development.

Against a political background ofdecolonization and the Cold War, anIntergovernmental Conference on theInstitutional, Administrative andFinancial Aspects of Culture wasconvened in Venice, Italy, from 24August to 2 September 1970. Thisconference marked the emergence ofthe notions of ‘cultural development’and of the ‘cultural dimension ofdevelopment’, and stimulateddiscussion on how cultural policiescould be integrated into developmentstrategies. The conference affirmed thatthe diversity of national cultures, theiruniqueness and originality are anessential basis for human progress andthe development of world culture. Itrealised that indigenous cultures inmany countries were threatenedbecause, for lack of resources, traininginstitutes and trained personnel, verylittle was being done to preserve theircultural heritage. The basis forcooperation with non-governmentalorganizations in the field of culture wasthereby established by stating thatMember States should associate non-governmental organizations as closelyas possible with the elaboration andimplementation of their culturalpolicies.

In addition to its action in the fields ofcopyright and protection of culturalproperties, as referred to in theconventions of 1952, 1954 and 1970,UNESCO was also ready to promoteheritage and cultural industries policies

as a positive means for development inall Member States regardless of theirdegree of development.

In 1972, UNESCO adopted a ten-yearplan for the study of African oraltraditions and the promotion of AfricanLanguages, the first Festival of the Artsof the Pacific was held in Fiji and twoseries of cultural studies on LatinAmerica were launched. The concept ofcultural heritage was not yet strictlyrestricted to the tangible field. However,on the basis of the 1966 Declaration, thesuccess of the Nubia campaign and theprinciples established in Venice in 1970,the most important action undertakenby UNESCO in 1972 was the adoption ofthe Convention concerning theProtection of the World Cultural andNatural Heritage. This Convention,which is probably the most universallegislative instrument in the field ofcultural heritage today, strengthenedthe identification of cultural heritage astangible heritage since it limits its scopeto monuments, groups of buildings andsites, all instances of tangible heritage.Like the Hague Convention, it focuseson immovable cultural property – in thiscase, of outstanding universal value –but it also introduces the notion of‘heritage of mankind’. With itsprogrammatic approach, based on alisting system and the use of revisableoperational guidelines for itsimplementation, the 1972 Conventionstrengthened heritage conservationpolicies, and became the standardreference for including conservationpolicies as a means of development,largely through tourism.

Since legal aspects of collectiveintellectual property rights were not yetclearly defined, it was decided not toinclude intangible cultural heritageexpressions under the scope of the1972 Convention. Therefore, theGovernment of Bolivia proposed in1973 to add a Protocol to the above-mentioned Universal Copyright

Phot

o ©

Van

uatu

Nat

iona

l Cul

tura

l Cou

ncil

Phot

o ©

Mai

rie d

e D

ouai

6 . INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE

1982 - 2000: from Mondiacult toOur Creative Diversity The cycle of conferences that followedthe Venice meeting was rounded off bythe World Conference on CulturalPolicies in Mexico City in 1982, known asMondiacult. The Conference wasattended by 960 participants from 126States out of the 158 Member StatesUNESCO had at the time. The success ofthe 1972 Convention and theimportance attached to the protectionof immovable cultural and naturalproperties had overshadowed thesignificance of other forms of heritageand of cultural production as means ofdevelopment. The purpose of theconference was to review knowledgeand experience gained on culturalpolicies and practices since the Veniceconference in 1970, to promote researchabout the fundamental problems ofculture in the contemporary world, toformulate new guidelines to promotecultural development in generaldevelopment projects and to facilitateinternational cultural cooperation.

The conference unanimously rejectedany hierarchy between cultures, sincenothing could justify discriminationbetween ‘superior cultures and inferiorcultures’, and reaffirmed the duty of eachto respect all cultures. It stressed thatcultural identity was the defence oftraditions, of history and of the moral,spiritual and ethical values handeddown by past generations. It suggestedthat present and future cultural practices

were just as valuable as past ones andemphasized that both governments andcommunities should participate in thedevelopment of cultural policies.Therefore, governmental institutions aswell as civil society should participate inthe development of cultural policies.

One of the main achievements of theConference was its redefinition ofculture. It stated that heritage now alsocovered all the values of culture asexpressed in everyday life, and growingimportance was being attached toactivities calculated to sustain the waysof life and forms of expression by whichsuch values were conveyed. TheConference remarked that the attentionnow being given to the preservation ofthe ‘intangible heritage’ may beregarded as one of the mostconstructive developments of the pastdecade. It was one of the first times thatthe term ‘intangible heritage’ wasofficially used.

The Conference, besides redefining theconcept of culture (by including in itsdefinition not only arts and letters, butalso modes of life, the fundamentalrights of the human being, valuesystems, traditions and beliefs),approved in the Mexico CityDeclaration on Cultural Policies a newdefinition of cultural heritage whichincluded both tangible and intangibleworks through which the creativity ofpeople finds expression: languages,rites, beliefs, historic places andmonuments, literature, works of art,archives and libraries. The MexicoDeclaration furthermore stated thatevery culture represents a unique andirreplaceable body of values since eachpeople’s traditions and forms ofexpression are its most effective meansof demonstrating its presence in theworld. In this sense, it also remarkedthat cultural identity and culturaldiversity are inseparable and that therecognition of the presence of avariety of cultural identities wherever

Convention as revised in 1971, in orderto provide a legal framework for theprotection of folklore. The proposal wasnot accepted but one year later, agovernmental experts meeting,organized with the assistance ofUNESCO and WIPO in Tunis, startedworking on the draft of a model lawreferring to the protection ofintellectual property rights applicableto such cultural manifestations.

In the meantime, as follow-up to theVenice Conference of 1970, severalregional seminars were organized. Inone of these meetings, the AccraIntergovernmental Conference onCultural Policies in Africa (1977), expertsadvocated that the definition of culturebe extended beyond fine arts andheritage to include worldviews, valuesystems and beliefs. A year later, the‘Bogotá Declaration’, adopted by theIntergovernmental Conference onCultural Policies in Latin America andthe Caribbean, stressed that culturaldevelopment had to improve thequality of life of communities andindividuals. It also stated that culturalauthenticity is based on recognition ofthe components of cultural identity,whatever their geographic origin andhowever they have mingled, and thatevery people or group of peoples hasboth the right and the duty todetermine independently its owncultural identity, based on its historicalantecedents, its individual values andaspirations, and its sovereign will.

Phot

o ©

Lui

z Sa

ntoz

/ U

NES

CO

WORKING TOWARDS A CONVENTION . 7

various traditions exist side by sideconstitutes the very essence of culturalpluralism.

The Conference asked UNESCO to notonly develop its programme for thepreservation of the cultural heritageconstituted by monuments andhistorical sites, but also its programmeand activities for the safeguarding andstudy of the intangible cultural heritage,particularly oral traditions. Theseactivities were to take place at bilateral,sub-regional, regional and multinationallevels and were to be based onrecognition of the universality, diversityand absolute dignity of peoples and ofcultures. While recognizing theimportance of the cultural heritage ofminorities within States, the Conferencealso emphasized that with regard tocultural and spiritual values andtraditions, the cultures of the Southcould do much to revitalize the culturesof the rest of the world.

The Conference invited Member Statesand international organizationsworking in the field of culture toexpand their heritage protectionpolicies to cover the whole body ofcultural traditions, which is not limitedto its artistic heritage but comprises thewhole of past heritage expressions,including folk arts and folklore, oraltraditions and cultural practices. It alsoconsidered that the preservation anddevelopment of a people’s traditionalculture constitutes an essential part ofany programme aimed at affirming itscultural identity and that folklore, as afundamental component of a nation’sheritage, should also take in suchaspects as languages, oral tradition,beliefs, celebrations, dietary habits,medicine, technology, etc., andtherefore recommended that MemberStates accord the same recognition tonon-recognized aspects of culturaltraditions as to historic or artistic goods,and provide technical and financialsupport for activities aimed at their

preservation, promotion anddissemination.

Two years after the MondiacultConference, in 1984, a meeting washeld in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to discussthe preservation and development ofhandicrafts in the modern world. Then,on the basis of the Model Provisions forNational Laws on the Protection ofExpressions of Folklore against IllicitExploitation and Other PrejudicialActions adopted in Tunis, a draft treatywas prepared by UNESCO and WIPO in1984, which did not come into force.The legal protection of folklore wouldhave to wait another five years. Someactivities in the field of intangiblecultural heritage were neverthelesstaken, such as the preparation of abook on Arctic languages and thelaunch, in Mali, of an experimentalproject combining tradition andcultural innovation in ruraldevelopment in 1987. The year beforethis, in 1986, the Economic and SocialCouncil (ECOSOC) recommended thatthe UN General Assembly take adecision on the question of theproclamation of a world decade forcultural development, based on thedraft plan of action submitted by theDirector-General of UNESCO.

In 1989 an international meeting ofexperts was held in Hammamet, Tunisiaon the development of a Ten-Year Planfor the development of crafts in theworld for the period 1990 to 1999. Inthe same year, that is seven years afterMondiacult, the General Conferenceadopted the Recommendation on theSafeguarding of Traditional Culture andFolklore, which was the first legalinstrument of its kind oriented towardsthe safeguarding of intangible culturalheritage and therefore reflecting thewishes which had been expressed inthe Mondiacult Conference. In order topromote the Recommendation overthe following years, UNESCO organizedtraining courses, gave assistance for the

LL Kabuki theatre, Japan

L The Uyghur Muqam ofXinjiang, China

l The Samba de Roda ofRecôncavo of Bahia, Brazil

Phot

o ©

Bun

ka-c

ho, A

genc

y fo

r Cul

tura

l Affa

irsPh

oto

© L

iang

Li

establishment of inventories, for thedrafting of plans for the safeguarding,revitalization and dissemination of theintangible cultural heritage of minorityand indigenous groups, and for theorganization of a number of festivals oftraditional cultures. A network offolklore activities was established; CDsof the UNESCO Collection of TraditionalMusic of the World were published, aswere a handbook for Collecting musicalheritage, the Atlas of the World’sLanguages in Danger of Disappearing,the Methodological manual on theprotection of traditional culture andfolklore against inappropriatecommercial exploitation, and thedocument ‘Ethics and TraditionalCulture’. Eight regional seminars on theimplementation of the 1989Recommendation were organized butdid not lead to long-lasting results.

However, the Recommendation itselfraised awareness of the need to devotespecial attention to intangible culturalheritage related domains. In 1990, theUNESCO Crafts Prize was awarded forthe first time at an International CraftsFair held in Ouagadougou, BurkinaFaso, and the International Fund for thePromotion of Culture launched a pilotproject for safeguarding the corn-millsongs of Haharashtra, India, aimed atdemonstrating that supposedly extinctforms of oral tradition can be revivedand even be given fresh culturalimpetus. Following the success of theproject at local level, it was extended tothe whole of the state of Maharashtra.In 1992, at an international meeting inJog Jakarta, Indonesia, a new UNESCOvideo collection of the performing artswas launched under the title‘Traditional Dance, Theatre and Music ofthe World’. In November the same year,a regional seminar on The CulturalDimension of Development in Africa:Decision-making, Participation,Enterprises, was jointly organized byUNESCO, the World Bank and UNICEF, incooperation with the Ivorian Ministry of

Culture, in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. In1993 a project called UNESCO Red Bookof Languages in Danger ofDisappearing was launched which wassubsequently followed by the set up ofa database on this issue by TokyoUniversity in 1995. In 1993, the LivingHuman Treasures system was launched,following a proposal by Korea at the142nd session of the Executive Board.

In 1991, the General Conference hadadopted a resolution requesting theDirector-General to establish, inconjunction with the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations, an independentWorld Commission on Culture andDevelopment. This commission wouldbe responsible for drawing up a reporton ‘Culture and Development’, and forputting forward a set of proposalsconcerning urgent and long-termactivities to meet cultural needs in thecontext of socioeconomicdevelopment. The World Commissionwas created in December 1992,presided by Javier Pérez de Cuéllar,former Secretary General of the UnitedNations.

This report, called Our Creative Diversity,highlighted the wealth of tangible andintangible heritage that has beentransmitted from generation togeneration. It recognized that thisheritage is embodied in the collectivememory of communities across theworld and that it reinforces their senseof identity in times of uncertainty. Whilefollowing UNESCO’s traditional lineconcerning the need of safeguardingculture and cultural diversity, it alsohighlighted that physical objects(monuments, works of art, handicrafts)were the main beneficiaries of thepolicies for preserving cultural heritage.It noted that the very fragile intangiblecultural heritage did not receive thesame attention, and recalled that non-physical remains such as place namesor local traditions are also part of thecultural heritage.

LL Tapestry work, Turkey

L The Wayang PuppetTheatre, Indonesia

Phot

o ©

Dav

id S

tehl

/ U

NES

COPh

oto

© Y

oshi

Shi

miz

u, w

ww

.yos

hi-s

him

izu.

com

The Commission also stressed theimportance of heritage preservationpolicies as part of economicdevelopment. Considering that intangiblecultural heritage had not yet been takensufficiently into account, the expertsrecalled that the heritage in all its aspectsis still not being used as broadly andeffectively as it might be, nor as sensitivelymanaged as it should be. The Commissionunderlined that the Conventionconcerning the Protection of the WorldCultural and Natural Heritage as a legalinstrument that is only applicable totangible heritage, reflects the concernrelated to a kind of heritage which ishighly valued in developed countries butnot appropriate for the kinds of heritagemost common in regions where culturalenergies have been concentrated in otherforms of expression such as artefacts,dance or oral traditions. Subsequently, theexperts called for the development ofother forms of recognition to match thetrue range and wealth of heritage found across the world.

Our Creative Diversity also elaborated on the problems encountered insafeguarding heritage from political,ethic and monetary points of view. Itwarned against political conjuringcapable of transforming thecomplexities of material culturalevidence into simplified messagesabout cultural identity. Such messagestend to concentrate exclusively onhighly symbolic objects at the expenseof popular forms or cultural expression

or of historical truth. From an ethicalpoint of view, anthropological studiesspill over into less specializedcategories as tourists interested in‘ethnic arts’ in general contribute to anincreasingly artificial demand fordramatizations and ritual enactments ofcultural traditions, which are oftencelebrated out of context in the form ofdress, music, dance and handicrafts.Concerning the monetary implicationsof recognizing intellectual propertyrights to specific manifestations of theintangible cultural heritage, theCommission presented four linkedissues, or risks, to be taken into account:

a. authentication, concerning theregulation of replication oftraditional craft;

b. expropriation, concerning theremoval of valuable artefacts anddocuments from their place oforigin;

c. compensation, concerning the factthat individuals or communities atthe source of folk items are notcompensated;

d. the fear of commodification, whichwill have a disruptive impact on folk-culture itself.

The report also highlighted problemsrelated to the recognition of intellectualproperty rights, and proposed that thenotion of ‘intellectual property’ might

not be the right concept to be usedwhen dealing with living creativetraditions. Instead it launched the ideaof developing a new concept based onideas inherent in traditional rules. Thereport also discussed problems relatedto knowing what cultural heritage mightbe saved and to deciding what shouldbe saved, as very few countries hadinventories of their cultural patrimonieswhich would allow one to establishsome order of priority – and selectivity.

The year following the publication of OurCreative Diversity, after a series of regionalforums on the protection of folklore,jointly organized by UNESCO and theWorld Intellectual Property Organization,and an Intergovernmental Conferenceon African Language Policies, theDirector-General of UNESCO put forwardtwo parallel actions: launching theprogramme of the Proclamation ofMasterpieces of the Oral and IntangibleHeritage of Humanity, which representeda major step set towards raisingawareness on a worldwide scale on theneed of safeguarding such form ofheritage, and conducting a study on thepossibility to develop a standard-settinginstrument for the protection oftraditional culture and folklore.

The aim of the Proclamation was toraise awareness of the importance ofintangible heritage by establishing anew form of international distinction. In2001, 2003, and 2005, 90 elementswere proclaimed Masterpieces of theOral and Intangible Heritage ofHumanity, creating a worldwidemovement for the safeguarding ofintangible cultural heritage.

2000 onwards and the drafting ofthe conventionDespite the good intentions of theMexico Declaration, it took more than20 years for the international

J The Tradition of VedicChanting, India

WORKING TOWARDS A CONVENTION . 9

Phot

o ©

Indi

ra G

hand

i Nat

iona

l Cen

tre

for t

he A

rts

� intangible cultural heritage befundamentally safeguarded throughcreativity and enactment by theagents of the communities thatproduce and maintain it;

� the loss of intangible culturalheritage can only be prevented byensuring that the meanings,enabling conditions and skillsinvolved in its creation, enactmentand transmission can be reproduced;

� any instrument dealing with intangiblecultural heritage facilitate, encourageand protect the right and capacity ofcommunities to continue to enacttheir intangible cultural heritagethrough developing their ownapproaches to manage and sustain it;

� sharing one’s culture and having acultural dialogue foster greateroverall creativity as long asrecognition and equitableexchanges are ensured.

Following the recommendations of theWashington Conference, the reportproposed the use of the term‘intangible cultural heritage’ instead ofthe term ‘folklore’ which was no longerappropriate, drafted a first definition of theterm and suggested a series of domains inwhich such heritage is manifested. TheExecutive Board of UNESCO (theconstitutional organ that ensures theeffective and rational execution of theprogramme and budget approved by theGeneral Conference) called for a moredetailed discussion about theconceptual aspects and the definition ofintangible cultural heritage, aimed at, inparticular, making the retained definitionconsistent with the one used by theProclamation of Masterpieces of the Oraland Intangible Heritage of Humanity. Italso noted that the protection of suchheritage should not be limited to thenormative action and it underlined theneed of working closely with WIPO andstudying the limits of protection.

community to develop normativeinstruments addressing cultural identityand cultural diversity as main elementsof a development policy.

At the end of the ‘90s expertsconcluded, after a long series ofregional meetings, a conferenceentitled ‘A Global Assessment of the1989 Recommendation on theSafeguarding of Traditional Cultural andFolklore: Local Empowerment andInternational Cooperation’ which wasjointly organized in Washington by theSmithsonian Institution, the UnitedStates and UNESCO. The Conferencecame to the conclusion that a legallybinding instrument was needed in thefield of the safeguarding of theintangible cultural heritage. Experts alsofound that the 1989 Recommendationfocused too much on documentationand not enough on the protection ofliving practices and traditions, or on thegroups and communities who are thebearers of these practices andtraditions. They underlined the need touse a more inclusive methodology inorder to encompass not only artisticproducts such as tales, songs, etc., butalso knowledge and values enablingtheir production, the creative processesthat bring the products into existenceand the modes of interaction by whichthese products are appropriatelyreceived and appreciativelyacknowledged. The Conference alsorecommended that the term ‘intangiblecultural heritage’ be retained for the

new normative instrument instead ofthe term ‘folklore’ which was felt asdemeaning by some communities. Theterm ‘intangible cultural heritage’ wasput forward as being more suitable fordesignating the peoples’ learnedprocesses – along with the knowledge,skills and creativity that inform and aredeveloped by them, the products theycreate, and the resources, spaces andother aspects of social and naturalcontext necessary to their sustainability– that provide living communities witha sense of continuity with previousgenerations and are important tocultural identity, as well as to thesafeguarding of cultural diversity andcreativity of humanity.

At the request of Member States, theDirector-General submitted in 2001 areport on the preliminary study on theadvisability of regulating internationally,through a new standard-settinginstrument, the protection of traditionalculture and folklore. The report came tothe conclusion that intellectualproperty does not give appropriateprotection to expressions of intangiblecultural heritage and a sui generisregime specific to this purpose needsto be developed. It also concluded thatsince the instruments that had alreadybeen adopted in the field of culturalheritage were principally concernedwith the tangible cultural heritage anddid not refer specifically to theintangible cultural heritage, they couldnot provide a satisfactory framework forprotection, partly on account of thevery nature of the intangible culturalheritage. Therefore the reportrecommended that a new normativeinstrument be prepared on the basis ofthe Universal Declaration of HumanRights (United Nations, 1948) andpropose the main principles on whichthis instrument should be based. Thesebasic principles might be that:

10 . INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE

J The Kihnu Cultural Space,EstoniaPh

oto

© M

arc

Soos

aar

In September 2001, the GeneralConference adopted the UniversalDeclaration on Cultural Diversity, whichin its Article 7 remarks that heritage in allits forms must be preserved, enhancedand handed on to future generations asa record of human experience andaspirations, so as to foster creativity in allits diversity and to inspire genuinedialogue among cultures. Thisdeclaration served as basis fordeveloping the normative instrumentfor safeguarding intangible culturalheritage. In the Action Plan attached tothe Universal Declaration, the MemberStates decided to take steps forformulating policies and strategies forthe preservation and enhancement ofthe cultural and natural heritage, notablythe oral and intangible cultural heritage.They also referred to the need to respectand protect traditional knowledge, inparticular that of indigenous peoples,and recognized the contribution oftraditional knowledge with regard toenvironmental protection and themanagement of natural resources, aswell as to fostering synergies betweenmodern science and local knowledge. Inview of this, the General Conference alsodecided to work towards a newinternational normative instrument,preferably a convention, in the field ofintangible cultural heritage.

That same year (2001), the GeneralConference adopted the Conventionfor the Protection of the UnderwaterCultural Heritage, which established astandard of protection comparable tothat granted by other UNESCOconventions to land-based culturalheritage, now specific to underwaterarchaeological sites. Its regulations arelinked to the 1970 UNESCO Conventionand the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention,since it contains detailed provisionsconcerning the prevention of the illicittrafficking of cultural propertyrecovered from the sea. However, thisinstrument does not contain arestitution-claim.

In 2002, the United Nations Year forCultural Heritage, the role that culturalheritage policies, and in particularintangible heritage policies, play indevelopment, reinforced the need todevelop a framework for this form ofheritage. In September 2002,representatives from 110 MemberStates, among them 72 cultureministers, participated in a roundtableon Intangible Heritage and CulturalDiversity, in Istanbul, Turkey. Theyadopted the Istanbul Declaration inwhich they recognized the value ofintangible cultural heritage andrecommended the adoption of a newinternational convention.

During the same month of September2002 the first Intergovernmentalmeeting of experts on the preliminarydraft convention for the safeguarding ofthe intangible cultural heritage wasconvened in Paris. Experts discussedwhether or not a broad definition ofintangible cultural heritage should beused, since they were afraid that vastand vague interpretation of the termwould weaken a rigorousimplementation of the Convention. Theydecided to include a reference tointernational instruments of humanrights and to keep the terms‘communities’ and ‘groups’ without anykind of qualifying terms that might giverise to different interpretations. Expertspreferred the term ‘cultural space’ ratherthan ‘cultural site’ since the first alsoincluded the possibility of referring tobuildings. Since intangible culturalheritage is a constantly evolving livingheritage, experts decided to add‘transmitted from generation togeneration’ to the definition. Concerningthe inclusion of languages as one of thedomains in which intangible culturalheritage is manifested, a compromisewas reached between the pros and conswith the wording ‘language as a vehicleof the intangible cultural heritage’. Also, itwas decided by consensus not toinclude any reference to religion within

LL The Gule Wamkulu,Malawi, Mozambique andZambia

L The Moussem of Tan-Tan, Morocco

WORKING TOWARDS A CONVENTION . 11

Phot

o ©

UN

ESCO

/ M

iche

l Rav

assa

rdPh

oto

© M

alaw

i Nat

iona

l Com

mis

sion

for U

NES

CO

2003: the 2005 Convention on theProtection and Promotion of theDiversity of Cultural Expressions. Whilethe 2003 Convention deals primarilywith the processes of transmission ofknowledge within the communities andgroups that bear this heritage, the 2005Convention is devoted to theproduction of cultural expressions, ascirculated and shared through culturalactivities, goods and services. Itcomplements the set of legalinstruments deployed by UNESCO tofoster diversity and a globalenvironment in which the creativity ofindividuals and peoples is encouraged intheir rich diversity thereby contributingto their economic development and tothe promotion and preservation of theworld’s cultural diversity.

Culture has thus, for the first time in thehistory of international law, found itsplace on the political agenda, out of adesire to humanize globalization. In thisproactive context, culture has becomea genuine platform for dialogue anddevelopment, thereby opening up newareas of solidarity.

the domain of ‘social practices, ritualsand festive events’.

Almost all of the experts supported theproposal of States playing a prominentrole in safeguarding intangible culturalheritage. Their main obligation wouldbe to identify and define intangiblecultural heritage present in theirterritories in consultation andcooperation with the concernedcultural communities, non-governmental organizations and otherinterested parties. It was also decidedto create an international register ofintangible cultural heritage suppliedwith inventoried heritage at thenational level. This register (the futureRepresentative List) would aim atensuring the visibility of intangiblecultural heritage and would contributeto promote cultural diversity.

Several other intergovernmentalmeetings followed in charge of draftingthe Convention. Consensus wasreached on the main topics, inparticular concerning the importanceof the role to be played by MemberStates, the importance of theinternational principles of cooperationand solidarity and the establishment ofa flexible and effective mechanism ofsafeguarding, of an intergovernmentalcommittee subordinated to the GeneralAssembly of the States Parties and of aFund for the Safeguarding of theIntangible Cultural Heritage.

In November 2003, the CultureCommission of UNESCO’s GeneralConference recommended that theplenary of the General Conferenceadopt by consensus, as a UNESCOConvention, the InternationalConvention for the Safeguarding of theIntangible Cultural Heritage. TheConvention for the Safeguarding of theIntangible Cultural Heritage wasadopted on 17 October 2003, with 120votes in favour, 8 abstentions and novotes against. The Convention entered

into force on 20 April 2006, threemonths after the deposit of the thirtiethinstrument of ratification. (See theupdated list of States Parties atwww.unesco.org/culture/ich). Morethan half of UNESCO’s Member Stateshave already signed up. Theexceptionally rapid ratification of theConvention reflects the great interest inintangible heritage worldwide. It alsoshows a widespread awareness of theurgent need for the Convention’sinternational protection, given thepossible threat posed by contemporarylifestyles and the process ofglobalization. The innumerable activitiesalready being carried out at the nationallevel, and the many (intergovernmental)meetings organized at the internationallevel, show that the adoption of thisConvention and its swiftimplementation are a milestone inUNESCO’s long-standing campaign tosafeguard the world’s living heritage.

The 2003 Convention for theSafeguarding of the Intangible CulturalHeritage, whose structure is also basedon the programmatic approach of the1972 Convention, places emphasis onthe equal recognition of expressionsand traditions with no hierarchicaldistinctions among them. The conceptof ‘outstanding universal value’embodied in the 1972 Convention doestherefore not apply to the safeguardingof intangible cultural heritage.International recognition is based onthe importance of this living heritagefor the sense of identity and continuityof the communities in which it iscreated, transmitted and re-created.Such recognition is given by providingvisibility to their heritage, which is themain purpose of the list foreseen in itsArticle 16. The Convention focusesprincipally on safeguarding activitiesand the exchange of good practices,rather than the listing system.

Another legal instrument within the fieldof culture has entered into force since

Intangible Cultural Heritage

Intangible cultural heritage, transmitted from generation togeneration, is constantly recreated by communities and groups,and provides them with a sense of identity and continuity, thuspromoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity. K

The

Cultu

ral S

pace

of S

osso

-Bal

a, G

uine

a Ph

oto

© P

hilip

pe B

orda

s /

UN

ESCO

With the support of the Government of Norway