The Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) has been advised by the Office...
Improving governance and policy frameworks for ICH safeguarding
1. Improving governance
and policy frameworks
for ICH safeguarding
13th UNESCO SEE
network meeting
Cremona, June 2019
Session 2
Picture: Cultural District, Cremona
2. In this presentation
ICH governance and policy frameworks: what and why
Different levels of governance and policy
Examples of policy frameworks, consultative
mechanisms, governance models encouraging
community engagement
3. ICH policy frameworks and consultative mechanisms:
what and why
Picture: Cultural District, Cremona
4. What does the Convention say?
Preamble
Recognizing that communities,
in particular indigenous
communities, groups and, in
some cases, individuals, play
an important role in the
production, safeguarding,
maintenance and re-creation
of the intangible cultural
heritage, thus helping to enrich
cultural diversity and human
creativity,
Cultural space of Boysun District
Some rights reserved
5. The Convention prioritises
community involvement in
safeguarding
Article 15- Participation of communities, groups
and individuals
Within the framework of its safeguarding
activities of the intangible cultural heritage,
each State Party shall endeavour to ensure the
widest possible participation of communities,
groups and, where appropriate, individuals that
create, maintain and transmit such heritage, and
to involve them actively in its management.
Some rights reserved
6. Ethical Principles
EP1: Communities, groups and, where applicable, individuals should
have the primary role in safeguarding their own intangible cultural
heritage
EP4: All interactions with the communities, groups and, where
applicable, individuals … should be characterized by transparent
collaboration, dialogue, negotiation and consultation, and contingent
upon their free, prior, sustained and informed consent.
EP 7: The communities, groups and individuals who create intangible
cultural heritage should benefit from the protection of the moral and
material interests resulting from such heritage …
Some rights reserved
7. Inventorying
Article 11 – Role of States Parties
Each State Party shall:
… (b) … identify and define the various
elements of the intangible cultural heritage
present in its territory, with the
participation of communities, groups and
relevant non-governmental organizations.
Some rights reserved
8. Policy and administration
Article 13
To ensure the safeguarding, development and
promotion of the ICH present in its territory,
each State Party shall endeavour to:
(a) adopt a general policy …
(b) designate or establish one or more
competent bodies for the safeguarding of
the intangible cultural heritage present in its
territory;
Some rights reserved
9. Policy and administration (cont’d)
Article 13
To ensure the safeguarding, development and promotion of
the ICH present in its territory, each State Party shall
endeavour to:
(d) adopt appropriate legal, technical, administrative and
financial measures aimed at:
(i) fostering the creation or strengthening of institutions
for training in the management of the intangible
cultural heritage and the transmission of such
heritage through forums and spaces intended for the
performance or expression thereof;
(ii) ensuring access to the intangible cultural heritage
while respecting customary practices governing
access to specific aspects of such heritage;
(iii) establishing documentation institutions for the
intangible cultural heritage and facilitating access to
them.
Some rights reserved
10. Governance
and policy
frameworks
Developed by or within
States Parties
May be developed
independently by
communities themselves
Elements of such
frameworks may already
exist in the State
Others may be developed
after ratification of the
Convention
12. WHY THIS
DIVERSIT
Y?
Regional and international
influences
Approaches before
ratification
Interpretations of the
Convention
Reasons for ratifying the
Convention
Socio-political, historical
and economic contexts
13. Different levels of governance and policy
Picture: Cultural District, Cremona
14. Governance and policy frameworks:
different levels
International level
• ICH Convention and
others
• Human rights instruments
• IPR guidance (WIPO)
• Regional agreements
• International NGOs, C2Cs
Local level
• Provincial or municipal
laws, regulations,
subsidies
• Community-based
organizations
National level
• Constitution or Bill of Rights
• ICH policy
• ICH legislation
• Subsidies
• Networks
• IPR regimes
• Universities, archives,
museums
Some rights reserved
15. Encouraging community engagement
for safeguarding (international level)
• Community involvement and consent in nominations
and periodic reporting (e.g. OD 16,17,24,157,160)
• Multinational nominations (OD 13,14)
• Communities may propose a nomination directly to
UNESCO in emergencies (OD 32)
• Opportunities for community representatives to be
invited by the Committee (OD 67,89)
• Sub-regional or regional networks including community
representatives (OD 86)
• Documentation sharing across borders (OD 87)
• Regional cooperation with community involvement (OD
88)
Some rights reserved
16. International Frameworks
Safeguarding ICH with
communities concerned
ICH Convention
Human rights instruments
Other international instruments, e.g. on sustainable
development and rights of indigenous peoples
Intellectual property regimes
17. Encouraging community engagement
for safeguarding (national level)
• ICH-related policy, regulations and legislation
(Article 13; ODs 103–105);
• Bodies to assist in safeguarding with communities
(Article 13(b-c); OD 109);
• Consultative bodies or coordination mechanisms
with community representation …(OD 80);
• Encouraging cooperation and networking between
communities, and between communities and other
stakeholders (ODs 79–80, 86 and 88);
• Protection of the rights of the communities
concerned (OD 104, etc.);
• Capacity building (Article 13(d)(i), 14, ODs 82, 86,
107(k) and 109)
Some rights reserved
18. Some challenges in achieving community
participation
Different interpretations of “community participation“ by
communities, States Parties, officials, the Committee and other
stakeholders
Limited opportunities for community and NGO participation at
the international level (although this is changing)
Participation of communities dependent on the structure of
government agencies at the national level
See Sousa 2018
20. Issues to consider
See Ruddolff and Raymond (2013)
What mechanisms are in place to ensure that community
representatives have an appropriate mandate and
opportunities to voice their opinions?
What mechanisms are in place to ensure free, prior and
informed community consent in implementing the
Convention?
What processes and collaborative structures could ensure
community consultation and consent in all safeguarding
measures and activities?
24. Circles of Living Heritage (Finland)
Circles of living heritage are at the centre of the
implementation process of the Convention in Finland.
They act as coordinating organs and hubs where the
communities from each field practicing, transferring,
teaching, researching and documenting can meet. They
organize seminars or events or create new partnerships
and projects. They also play a role in inspiring proposals
from their own field for the national inventory.
So far four circles have been established with
communities and actors in the respective fields: in crafts,
nature, folk dance and folk music and oral tradition.
http://www.aineetonkulttuuriperinto.fi/en/implementatio
n/circles
Some rights reserved
25. Cultural policy
foregrounding
communities
the Government of Belize
commits itself to … make
provisions to ensure the full
participation of all our ethnic
communities in cultural
expression and cultural
development.
[National Culture Policy Draft 2013]
26. Belize National Cultural Policy, 2016-26
• Bill of Cultural Rights emphasises those rights and privileges already
enshrined in the Belize Constitution
• The Belize Culture Model promotes collective participation of
cultural groups, councils, organisations, individuals and government
entities.
• Establishment of a national platform for coordinating the
comprehensive inventorying of all Belize’s intangible cultural
heritage with the effective participation of concerned communities
of custodians and practitioners
• National Institute of Culture and History (NICH) (includes local
Houses of Culture) coordinates implementation of policy with
relevant stakeholders.
https://www.dgft.gov.bz/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Copy-of-National-Cultural-Policy-Final-Policy-Document-1.pdf
27. Creating contexts in which communities
exert control and feel respected
http://localcontexts.org/tk-labels/
https://youtu.be/uPzneao_3rQ
28. Guidelines and codes of ethics
HTTP://WWW.TERRIJANKE.COM.AU/INDIGENOUS-CULTURAL-
PROTOCOLS-AND-ARTS
31. Some suggestions: community engagement
• Develop standards and guiding principles through consultation
• Find out how to reach the unengaged or disengaged
• Use multiple engagement strategies to achieve desired goals
• Use technology, arts and media in new and different ways
• Develop partnerships with local organisations
• Support community leaders and recruit volunteers, especially
youth
• Organize formal and informal engagement
• “Reporting back” and follow-up should be part of all
engagement processes
• Make the engagement process transparent
https://www.academia.edu/9577661/Developing_Innovative_Approaches_for_Community_Engagement_in_the_Grand_Falls-
Windsor_Baie_Verte_Harbour_Breton_Region
34. GROUP WORK
QUESTIONS
Note: refer to this case and others you know
1. How can governance and policy frameworks support community engagement in
safeguarding?
2. What different agencies and organizations help promote community
participation? What do they do?
3. What can go wrong? For example, how might lack of coordination or different
aims of different levels of government create challenges for safeguarding and
engagement with communities?
4. What can be done to identify and prevent such problems?
Notes de l'éditeur
Legislation specifically for ICH safeguarding (e.g. Japan, China, Georgia, Niger), or integrating it into overall culture legislation (e.g. France, Morocco, Serbia, Viet Nam)
Legislation promulgated and enforced at the sub-national level (such as in provinces or counties in a federal structure) (e.g. Austria, Brazil, Belgium, Italy, Mongolia, Switzerland, Spain, UAE);
Institutions responsible for ICH (e.g. the Dominican Republic, Gabon), others have expanded the mandates of existing institutions (e.g. Burkina Faso)
Legal instruments aimed at protecting particular ICH elements inscribed on their national ICH inventory/register and/or the Representative List
How is the framework created? And how do state parties use that framework when
the convention does not prescribe a particular way
There are different choices that can be made by states and they can take different approaches. Why are they taking those different approaches
For instance: in Eastern Europe, NGOs were historically not as prominent as in western Europe. In eastern Europe, a greater role was played by universities and research institutions. This affects the governance of the ICH elements.
Therefore, “governance” means who the state decides to involve.
So when a state designs a governance framework, the state designs it based on what exists already on the ground.
This affects how the convention is being interpreted.
For instance: countries that already have a very strong emphasis on community engagement, have responded differently than countries where community engagement is not so developed.
Therefore, the social economic context influences how states respond to the convention, encouraging participation of communities in governance frameworks.
It is a good example of how any governance framework that helps with community engagement has to make sure that it doesn’t take away the power that that community has to make its own decisions.
Irrigators’ tribunals: good example of how government mechanisms, that really empower communities, by recognizing that they have a legal right to make their own decisions. Not just acknowledging that communities may have a voice in government decisions.
Irrigator’s Tribunal: strong example, community-led example. Not governance over ICH; but governance that assists community engagement