Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-06-03T20:48:47.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Seven Years of Implementing UNESCO’s 2003 Intangible Heritage Convention—Honeymoon Period or the “Seven-Year Itch”?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2014

Janet Blake*
Affiliation:
Reader, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

Abstract:

This article aims to examine how far our experience of implementing UNESCO’s Intangible Heritage Convention, which was adopted in 2003 and entered into force in April 2006, over the last seven years has transformed our understanding of intangible cultural heritage and of its safeguarding. There have been, of course, both positive and negative impacts thus far as well as both unexpected and, thus far, unknown outcomes. The Convention broke new ground, introducing new terminology and new definitions of existing terms and requiring a reexamination of some approaches to international and national law making and policymaking. When considering the impact of the 2003 Convention internationally, we need to look, inter alia, at its impact on international policymaking (including cultural policy, the sustainable development agenda and indigenous rights), related developments in other areas of international law (including human rights and environmental law), and the way in which states treat shared heritage that crosses international frontiers. On the national level, we should consider how the Convention may have contributed to creating a new paradigm for identifying and safeguarding intangible cultural heritage (ICH), shifting the focus of significance, redefining the role of non-state actors vis-à-vis state authorities in this process and, even, moving the idea of national heritage away from a purely state-driven concept. Important questions to consider include whether the Convention has resulted in the development of new national policy strategies for (a) promoting the function of ICH in society and (b) integrating ICH into planning and development programs and how effectively Parties have managed to engage communities, groups, and individuals in the aforementioned activities.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arantes, Antonio. “Chapter 6: Cultural Diversity and the Politics of Difference in Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage.” In Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage—Challenges and Approaches, edited by Blake, Janet. Leicester: Institute of Art and Law (2007): 8192.Google Scholar
Blake, Janet. Commentary on UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Leicester: Institute of Art and Law, 2006.Google Scholar
Bouchenaki, Mounir. “The Interdependency of the Tangible and Intangible Cultural Heritage.” International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) 14th General Assembly and Scientific Symposium, Victoria Falls, Zambia, 2003.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society. CETS No. 199, 2005 October 27.Google Scholar
Kuruk, Paul. “Cultural Heritage, Traditional Knowledge and Indigenous Rights: An Analysis of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage.” Macquarie Journal of International and Comparative Law 1 (2004): 111–34.Google Scholar
Lixinski, Lucas, Lusa, Fernando, and Schmitz, Maite de Souza. “Identity Beyond Borders: International Cultural Heritage Law and the Temple of Preah Vihear Dispute,” ILSA Quarterly 20, no. 1 (2011): 3037.Google Scholar
Malanczuk, Peter. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law, 7th revised edition. New York: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar
Munjeri, Dawson. “Tangible and Intangible Heritage: From Difference to Convergence.” Museum International 56, no. 1-2 (2004): 1220.Google Scholar
Smith, Laurajane. Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge, 2006.Google Scholar
U.K. National Commission for UNESCO (UKNC) Scotland Committee. Scoping and Mapping Intangible Cultural Heritage in Scotland. Edinburgh, 2009.Google Scholar
van Den Broucke, Dries, and Thys, Arlette, eds. La politique de l’Autorité flamande pour la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel et immatériel. Brussels, Belgium: Arts et Patrimoine, 2012.Google Scholar