Proceedings of2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on
the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

18-19 November 2016
Sakai, Japan
International Research Centre for
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the
Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI)Proceedings of2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on
the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

18-19 November 2016
Sakai, Japan
International Research Centre for
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the
Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI)

Publisher
International Research Centre for Intangible Cultural
Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI)
c/o Sakai City Museum, 2 cho Mozusekiun-cho,
Sakai-ku, Sakai-city, Osaka 590-0802,
Japan
Director of the Publication :Wataru Iwamoto
Editor-in-chief :Misako Ohnuki
Editorial Design :Tetsuya Tanaka
Printed by Okamura Printing Industry© International Research Centre for Intangible Cultural
Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI), 2017
Acknowledgement:This is published by IRCI on the 2016 International
Collaborative Project for the Safeguarding of Cultural
Properties commissioned by the Agency for Cultural Affairs,
Japan.

Table of Contents
Forward.................................................................................................................................................1
Opening Remarks..................................................................................................................................3
Yasue HAMADA..........................................................................................................................3
Himalchuli GURUNG..................................................................................................................5
Wataru IWAMOTO.......................................................................................................................7
Proceedings (Saturday, 18 November 2016)........................................................................................9
Regional Survey Summary Report on ICH Safeguarding Researchin the Asia-Pacific Region (Hanhee HAHM) .........................20
Proceedings (Sunday, 19 November 2016)........................................................................................28
Selected Country Reports:
New Zealand (Sandra MORRISON).............................................................................................34
Palau (Meked BESEBES)..............................................................................................................49
Mongolia (Saruul ARSLAN).........................................................................................................59
Malaysia (Hanafi Bin HUSSIN)....................................................................................................70
Iran (Atousa MOEMENI)..............................................................................................................88
Annexes:
Annex I: List of Participants........................................................................................................108
Annex II: Programme Schedule .................................................................................................. 110
Annex III: Discussion on the Literature Survey (from 2015 to 2016) ........................................ 112
Annex IV: Future Orientation of the Mapping Project ............................................................... 113

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 1
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Foreword
In order to fulfil its principal mandate: “To instigate and coordinate research into the practices andmethodologies of safeguarding endangered ICH elements present in the Asia-Pacific Region”,
IRCI launched a project entitled: “Mapping Research on the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural
Heritage” in 2013.
The 2016 IRCI Experts’ Meeting on the Mapping Project for ICH Safeguarding in the Asia-PacificRegion was held from the 18th to 19th November, 2016, at the Sun Square Sakai, Osaka, Japan.
A total of twenty-five ICH experts from fourteen countries within the Asia-Pacific region attended
this meeting, including observers from the UNESCO Beijing Office and the Agency for Cultural
Affairs, Japan. Based on the insightful discussion of the meeting, I am pleased to publish hereby
the proceedings of the meeting with five selected papers that appropriately follow IRCI’s researchguidelines and somehow present the concept of the Mapping Project.
With the contribution of all participants, especially that of co-chairs Ms Aikawa Noriko-Faure andMs Janet Blake, the Sakai meeting has brought much fruitful output. I take this occasion to express
my sincere thanks to the UNESCO Beijing Office and its Programme Specialist for Culture, Ms
Himalchuli Gurung.
March 2017

Wataru Iwamoto
Director-General
International Research Centre for
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the
Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI)Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 3
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Opening Remarks
Yasue HAMADA*Good morning everyone.
My name is Hamada, and I am here today on behalf of the Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan.
I would cordially like to welcome all participants to the 2016 IRCI Expert Meeting on the Mapping
Project for the Safeguarding of ICH in the Asia-Pacific Region.
From the beginning of the foundation of IRCI, the Agency for Cultural Affairs, as its primary financial
donor, has actively supported and reviewed IRCI’s research activities. We have in particular paid
special attention to the Mapping Project. Since current research on the safeguarding of ICH stillneeds to be developed, the Mapping Project is expected to contribute to further promotion of theConvention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage.
Since 2013, IRCI has been conducting surveys in the Asia-Pacific region with the cooperation of
Ms. Noriko Aikawa, one of the chairs of this meeting. At the same time, IRCI has organized expert
meetings in Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, and Bishkek respectively, to discuss and share various subjects
regarding the Convention within this region. I would like to take a moment to express my appreciation
for all participants’ as well as the organizers’ who contributed to this project. The Agency for Cultural
Affairs in Japan expects that the results of the surveys and the outputs of these experts meetings will
be published and open to the public in the near future.
As we know, the 2003 Convention was created and implemented to support the international framework
to safeguard various intangible cultural heritages in danger of disappearing. Research on ICH has
been conducted in many disciplines such as cultural anthropology and folklore. However, researchon the “safeguarding” of ICH has unfortunately developed neither a network of related experts’ nor
an overall understanding on the current state of research trends. I realize that the facilitation andpromotion of such research is a significant task.
The Mapping Project identifies the current situation of studies on the safeguarding of ICH and theexperts involved through investigations, shares that information widely through the expert meetings,*Deputy Director, Office for International Cooperation on Cultural Properties, Traditional Culture
Division, Cultural Properties Department, Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan

4 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

and accumulates that research data as a database. I believe that this work will contribute greatly to
UNESCO as well as to regions and countries working to transmit ICH.
I learned that, next year will bring a concrete collaboration with a Japanese research institution, andan international conference co-organized by Seijo University, Tokyo. I am told the Mapping Projectwill enter a new phase. I sincerely hope the project will stimulate further discussions on research
related to the safeguarding of ICH in the Asia-Pacific region, and that the new direction will takeshape based on its accomplishments these past three years.
The safeguarding of ICH is not an easy task. It has been more than ten years since the 2003 Convention
was entered into force. Many countries are extremely interested in how to use the Convention andhow to safeguard ICH, and I believe research in those topics is most important.

In this regard,

Japan has been taking initiative in the safeguarding of both tangible and intangible cultural heritageby implementing the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties, which was created and enteredinto force in 1950. The Agency for Cultural Affairs will continue to support IRCI based on such
experiences.
Finally, I would like to conclude my address by expressing my deep gratitude to the National Institutes
for Cultural Heritage, UNESCO, and those who have put so much effort into organizing the Expert
Meeting.

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 5
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Opening Remarks
Himalchuli GURUNG*

Dear experts, ladies and gentlemen,
On behalf of UNESCO, it is my great pleasure to join you here today at the 2016 Experts’ Meetingon the Mapping Project for the safeguarding of ICH in the Asia-Pacific Region.
I wish to take this opportunity to thank our organizer – the International Research Centre for Intangible
Cultural Heritage in Asia and the Pacific Regions (IRCI) category 2 Centre under the auspices of
UNESCO – for hosting this event and I commend them for taking such a significant initiative that
contributes directly to the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage through a resource pool ofknowledge and practices from across the Asia-Pacific region.
I am pleased and encouraged standing here today amidst professionals renowned for their experiencein the field of ICH and for developing and enhancing knowledge on the subject in countries rightacross the Asia-Pacific region. Thank you all for your remarkable work.
As the only UN agency with a specific mandate in the field of culture, UNESCO firmly believes inculture as the key to the creation of mutual understanding and to sustainable development.
As we embark in the implementation of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Agenda for
2030, for the first time, the global community unanimously acknowledged and leveraged the key
values of culture, creativity, and cultural diversity in solving the challenges of development, by
including cultural development in Sustainable Development Goals.
I am therefore delighted at the efforts put forth by our partners in implementing directives that
contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and more specifically, to standards of the2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage, of which 171 countries havebecome States Parties.
Thanks to your hard work in researching methodologies for safeguarding ICH and your cooperationin joint ventures like this one, I am pleased and look forward to the increased realization of intangible*Programme Specialist for Culture, UNESCO Beijing Office, UNESCO Cluster Office to the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Japan, Mongolia, People’s Republic of China and theRepublic of Korea

6 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

cultural heritage as a driver, enabler, and guarantee of sustainable development, an advocacy forpeace, a creator and promoter in the value of places, goods, and services, by infusing them with what
is unique and best about human beings.
I thank all experts/speakers and participants for your support in the safeguarding of intangible cultural
heritage. Let us continue to work together towards safeguarding and promoting ICH as an essential
investment in humanity’s future, and as a driver and enabler for sustainable development for all.
I wish you all, a productive deliberation.
Thank you!

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 7
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Opening Remarks
Wataru IWAMOTO*Good morning,
Ms. Himalchuli Gurung, Representative of the UNESCO Beijing Office who continuously supports
our activities,
Mr. Hamada, the Representative of the Japanese Agency for Cultural Affairs who financially supports
our projects,
Dear chairpersons, dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen.
It is my great honour to say a few words on behalf of the International Research Centre for Intangible
Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI), and at first I would like to express my hearty
welcome with great gratitude to all of you who have come to Japan to participate in Experts’ Meetingon the Mapping Project for ICH Safeguarding. My name is Wataru Iwamoto and perhaps you know
my name through the invitation letter. I am a reality of DG of IRCI and this is the first experts’meeting for me after my arrival at IRCI this April.
As you know, IRCI was established in the Sakai City Museum on the 1st October 2011. Sakai
City Museum is in front of the huge mounded tomb of the 5th Century. Unfortunately this time
you may have no time to see that, and even some Japanese have not seen this tomb of the ancientemperor. Nonetheless, near the tomb, we can actively celebrate our fifth anniversary as a Category 2
Centre under the auspices of UNESCO, and within Japanese legal system, this Centre is a part of the
National Institutes for Cultural Heritage.
Therefore, helping research institutions and researchers in the field of ICH is our main goal andthrough the discussions of these two days, I would like to learn how we can be helpful to the countries
of Asia-Pacific region – not only the countries, but also researchers and all the people who will enjoya sustainable society. And through the mapping project, IRCI has collected systematic informationfrom the existing literature, research institutes, and researchers from twenty-five countries out of theforty-seven in the region. International conferences based on the results of the survey have been held*Director-General, International Research Centre for Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-PacificRegion, National Institutes for Cultural Heritage, Japan

8 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

in Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Bishkek, and this time here.
This year, we conducted more detailed literature surveys according to the result of the Bishkek
Meeting and we organized this meeting with scholars invited from fifteen countries here and I takethis opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to you for finalizing or semi-finalizing your report
within this very short period. Day 1 consists of four sessions in which we reviewed the results of theliterature surveys in eleven countries this year, and tomorrow, Day 2, we will discuss not only the
Guidelines of the Literature Survey, but also the way to improve the future survey as well as various
issues of the Mapping Projects and its future. As the Director-General, I highly expect your active
involvement and participation in the discussions for these two days.
Thank you for your attention.

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 9
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Proceedings
Saturday, 18 November 2016
Opening of the Meeting
The meeting was chaired by Noriko Aikawa-Faure and Janet Blake (Shahid Beheshti University, Iran).
Opening remarks were given by Yasue Hamada (Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan), Himalchuli
Gurung (UNESCO Beijing Office), and Wataru Iwamoto (IRCI, Japan), respectively.

Discussion was held following presentation of each country report.
A summary follows.

Country Report: New ZealandSandra Morrison (University of Waikato, New Zealand) presented the results of her literature survey
on ICH safeguarding in New Zealand. New Zealand has not yet ratified the Convention for ICH andthere is, as yet, no National Register or National Inventory. Although in favour of safeguarding ICH,
there is concern that its definition does not sufficiently respond to the indigenous (Maori) heritage andthat the 2003 Convention is silent on the rights of indigenous peoples. The debate in New Zealandon the protection of its cultural heritage has focused predominantly on examples from the indigenous
Maori experience and within the context of the Treaty of Waitangi (1975) between Maori chiefs andthe government that allowed for settlement of Maori claims. The government has acknowledged thisdocument and says that it will help Maoris actively protect their cultural treasures, which include
intangible cultural heritage. The preservation and protection of cultural heritage in New Zealand has
been partly achieved through the enactment of legislative tools, so that legal discourse and legislation
dominate the discussion. However, tensions have arisen between Western law and Maori concepts.
Maori communities have insisted on and advocated for measures at a number of levels, and theseactions can be seen in the Waitangi Tribunal reports, as well as in academic literature with a broader
focus, much of which concerns intellectual property rights. Many tribal bodies are also strategizing
and planning how to implement an ongoing perpetuation of their culture and language.

Discussion
Discussion focused first on the issue of the documentation of oral heritage and how it may actually10 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

affect a safeguarding strategy. The second focus concentrated on the different ethnicities, inthe breakdown of the country. Morrison referred to issues of cultural diversity in regards to theindigenous people, but this leads to a major debate. Indigenous people say that they are not to betreated as a minority because they are indigenous, which means they should have a special status, andtheir relationship to the government must be given priority. When it comes to the relationship withPacific people, they acknowledge genealogical links and the need for everyone to support each other.
However, this is merely conceptual. When we look at the depth of such involvements, they actually
may not be very good at supporting each other. With regard to research and documentation of oral
heritage, the issue was raised as to how this may impact the heritage and whether can it be regarded
as a safeguarding action.

Country Report: Palau
Meked Besebes (Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation/ Palau Historical Preservation
Office, Palau) presented her literature survey on ICH safeguarding in Palau. Palau in the northwest
Pacific became independent in 1994 and signed the 2003 Convention in 2011. Under the article 2 of
the Palau Constitution where ICH is protected, the indigenous inhabitants of the Palau Islands areformally recognized. And the 1994 Palau National Code (Title 19, Section 4E) gave the indigenous
inhabitants a structure for safeguarding, covering intangible as well as tangible cultural properties.
Safeguarding ICH in Palau works within the community. It has been disseminated to schools and otherinterested educational institutions that are interested in how the government works. In terms of thehistorical preservation initiated by the government after 1994, we now see a search for information ofcultural heritage, particularly in relation to oral traditions, dance, history, and music. The weaknessof safeguarding of ICH in Palau is a lack of close coordination between the libraries, museum, othercultural institutions, traditional societies, and NGOs. Palau needs to find different approaches. If all
the different NGOs, traditional societies, and different sectors work together, inventory making, atleast, will be possible. It was noted that the focus of much research has been on the cultural context
of specific sites, and many other aspects of ICH have been paid less attention. In addition, customarynorms restrict areas of knowledge to Palauans.

Discussion
Palau has signed the 2003 Convention, but has not created an inventory. Palau’s effort including theProceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 11
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

progression of safeguarding and academic study as well as government involvement reflects what
is happening in other Pacific countries, such as Papua New Guinea. Without really being related
to the signing of the 2003 Convention, these are the kinds of things that would have been done
regardless of the signing. There were many kinds of activities going on in Palau that existed prior
to the Convention and are continuing even though they have nothing to do with the Convention
directly. The question here is whether the signing of the Convention has strengthened some of thiswork in Palau. Meked replied that in terms of understanding the Convention and understanding
how it can benefit or strengthen the safeguarding of ICH, some of the works had already been inmotion through traditional leaders and traditional organizations. Again, it was stressed that researchmethodologies for documentation oral heritage need to be developed, as well as an indigenous cadreof ICH researchers. Although the direction of Palau in terms of the economy and the environment is
not entirely clear, the oral traditions are just as important at many levels in terms of the globalized
world. We can see some important examples of this from the cases about safeguarding ICH.

Country Report: Nepal
Yadab Chandra Niraula (Nepal National Library, Nepal) spoke about his literature survey on ICH
safeguarding in Nepal. Nepal has 123 different spoken languages and more than 126 different ethnic
groups. From a cultural point of view, it is necessary to take the appropriate actions to preserve theculture for future generations. Since Nepal suffered a devastating earthquake about twenty months
ago, it was difficult to collect information for a reliable literature survey. Nepal does not have apolitically stable government, and the public and the government have very few opportunities toaccess such materials. The other threat to ICH is that the indigenous people or castes are losing theircultural identities day by day. Nepal ratified the 2003 Convention in 2010, and launched a cultural
policy clearly indicating how to preserve intangible and tangible cultural heritage. However, there
are few works about safeguarding ICH. Three workshops have taken place through the UNESCO
Kathmandu office in collaboration with the Ministry of Culture, Tourism, and Civil Aviation. From
21 to 25, November 2016, a workshop in Kathmandu was held in collaboration with UNESCO andthe Ministry of Tourism on how to preserve, conserve, and nominate documents related to ICH.

Discussion
The challenge for developing countries, particularly with political instability, and developing12 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

countries post-disaster and post-conflict, is that the concept of safeguarding ICH is still not wellunderstood or received. The concept of ICH is still vague in many countries. While ICH is part andparcel of everyday life, there is still confusion about the 2003 Convention, the listing of ICH, theconcept, etc. That is why member states of the Convention have asked for capacity building in every
assembly, general assembly, and committee meeting. Indeed, the need to identify and motivate local
experts in order to localize ICH research was stressed, and to move away from “top-down” model ofusing outside expertise.

Country Report: Sri Lanka
Anura Manatunga (University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka) spoke about his literature survey on ICH
safeguarding in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka acceded to the 2003 Convention in 2008. Thereafter, thegovernment entrusted the National Library and Documentation Services Board to be the main
institutes to implement this Convention. They formed an international committee to conduct thesafeguarding of ICH and formed several capacity-building workshops in Sri Lanka with the help of
the UNESCO Delhi Office. The ICH work was removed from the National Library to the Ministry of
Cultural Affairs in 2012, which then was divided into two parts after the elections in January 2016.
Some departments were in the Ministry of Culture, while others were in the Ministry of National
Heritage. The outcome of the survey discloses that most of the research was undertaken after 2010,
mainly following the UNESCO capacity-building workshop. Most of the titles are not directly
related to safeguarding ICH, but rather address ICH in general and appear to be mainly descriptive.
ICH should be included in school and university curricula. The preservation of old manuscripts andphotographs should be included in ICH, even though they include some tangible elements.

Discussion
What happens in Sri Lanka, and in many Asia-Pacific countries, is that the study of culture tends tofloat between the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Tourism and Commerce. When culture isplaced under the Ministry of Education, it is completely sidelined since other aspects of education are
regarded as more important. Although the 2003 Convention does not require large grants, any grantrequires responsibility on the part of the government for its implementation. Although bureaucracy
certainly exists in this way within the government, universities can play a key role. Since researchis being done by university experts, they can help their own government as advocates throughProceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 13
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

evidence-based research. The Ministry of Education or the Ministry of Culture, whichever represents
the UNESCO delegate, needs to consult with their national counterparts, who can provide them withsuch research.

Country Report: Japan
Hiroyuki Shimizu (Ibaraki Christian University, Japan) made a presentation about his literature
survey on ICH safeguarding in Japan, which was translated by Shigeaki Kodama (IRCI, Japan).
In terms of community participation in research activities, cases in which the community itself
conducted a survey or research could not be found. However, it was reported that a workshop washeld on the highly valued festivals of Yama, Hoko, and Yatai, and researchers were invited to it.
Some people in the Preservation Committee are aware of the importance of research and study insafeguarding ICH. The collected articles were mainly written by university professors, researchersof national research institutions, museum curators, and cultural managers. Some scholars, mainly inthe fields of culture and anthropology were also included, and basically their research methodologies
used participant observation and interviews, which resulted in statistics about ethnology as wellas surveys of historical documents. The author found many cases of those who participated in the
Yama, Hoko, Yatai festivals, but their accounts did not include whether these festivals were knownin neighboring towns. To expand knowledge about these festivals and their cultural transmission,
meetings or workshops are necessary to foster further research.

Discussion
Japan has the most ICH items listed, and so Japan has something very important to offer concerning
ICH inventory-making and the process of safeguarding measures. When UNESCO considers whether
to include the float festivals on the list, the concern is how many people in the communities will feelproud that their cultural properties are approved for inscription. It is important for the transmittersor bearers themselves to feel pride in their ICH. It was noted that the disconnect between Japanese
legal concept of “intangible / folklore properties” and the concept of ICH in the 2003 Convention isa challenge that needs to be addressed, and so conceptual research into what ICH is also needs to be
conducted. In addition, more community involvement in research is necessary.

14 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Country Report: Mongolia
Saruul Arslan (Centre of Cultural Heritage, Mongolia) presented the literature survey on ICH
safeguarding in Mongolia. Since Mongolia ratified the 2003 Convention in 2005, capacity-building
workshops with the support of the UNESCO Beijing office have been conducted. There is no single
independent law focusing on ICH, but safeguarding is regulated under the Constitution, State Policy,
the Law on Culture, and the Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage. The weakness of thesafeguarding of ICH in Mongolia is that most research is paper-based so that accessibility is limited.
To solve this problem, there are ongoing projects to digitalize the reports and the archives in the
National Library. Another weakness is a lack of a network between NGOs, academic institutions, andthe Center of Cultural Heritage. Moreover, the activities of the approximately one hundred NOGs
active in the cultural sector do not appear to include research and they require more financial support.
This weakness is caused by a lack of a well-prepared database of records and old books. To solve thisproblem, all these materials should be centralized under the Center of Information and Documentation
Database for ICH. The strength of research in Mongolia was the effective collaboration between
researchers and various stakeholders and, in some cases, community members are researchers. Most
research thus far is aimed at identification and documentation of ICH elements, as well as awarenessraising and promotion of ICH and its practitioners. Importantly, none of the studies covered the longterm impacts of safeguarding actions and further follow-up research will be required for this. Future
research on ICH safeguarding will survey a number of the ethnic groups, map them, and collaborate
with them to produce more multimedia materials, films, short videos, and websites, showcasing
safeguarding efforts, challenges, and successes in Mongolia.

Discussion
Specifically discussing national programs in terms of structure and support from the government aswell as international support, the question is how ICH has impacted Mongolia after 2005. Mongolia
has requested capacity-building for implementation of the 2003 Convention. A series of four
national capacity-building workshops started in 2012 to discuss the implementation of workshops,
the implementation of the Convention, community-based inventory, nominations, and safeguarding
itself. These four intensive, national-level, capacity-building workshops have been of tremendousinterest in terms of implementing the Convention at the national level.

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 15
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Country Report: Vanuatu
As a proxy for the author, Richard Shing (Vanuatu Cultural Center, Vanuatu), who was unfortunately
unable to attend the meeting due to professional duties, Tetsuya Tanaka (IRCI, Japan) read his paperon the literature survey on ICH safeguarding in Vanuatu. After establishment of the 2003 Convention,
Vanuatu nominated traditional sand drawing to be put onto the list of ICH in 2009, and ratified theConvention in 2010. The weakness of the safeguarding of ICH in Vanuatu is that it is difficult tosecure funding for ICH research, and most of the research carried out in Vanuatu is based mainly on
the interests of the researchers who have secured funds to work in Vanuatu from outside. Time isanother limitation in reviewing the literature ranging from documentation to promotion, awareness,and dissemination. Much research has been conducted concerning the different genres of ICH in
Vanuatu (food culture, language, oral traditions, traditional craftsmanship, performing arts, social
practices and rituals), but there is still much cultural mapping to be considered. There is a lack ofprofessional indigenous researchers conducting and promoting the safeguarding of ICH in Vanuatu,
although the Cultural Center Fieldworkers program seeks to train people living on different island inbasic documentation methods and the concept of safeguarding ICH.

Discussion
Cultural mapping is used very often in the Pacific countries, including Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea,
and Palau. It includes both tangible and intangible heritage, and in reality, there is no distinction
between the tangible and intangible. At the UNESCO level, because tangible heritage is handled
through one convention (the World Heritage Convention), and intangible heritage is handled
through the 2003 Convention, they are treated as separate heritages. This means that the reality isalso separated in the cultural mapping. Another issue is how to educate the youth. As communities
become more urban and youth become more globalized in the Pacific, it is necessary to ensure somesuccession planning when it comes to upholding ICH in the future.

Country Report: Myanmar
Nang Lao Ngin (Ministry of Culture, Myanmar) presented the literature survey on ICH safeguarding
in Myanmar. The Myanmar government has carried out national-level competitions, training, andworkshops, which aim to revitalize cultural heritage and to document the arts and artistic skills for
future generations. The researcher collaborated closely with communities in data collection. These16 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

activities can involve communities in the process of safeguarding ICH and promoting the transmission
to the younger generation. The research activities include awareness raising and capacity building
among the holders and practitioners of ICH in order to allow practitioners to participate actively in
identifying, inventorying, and managing their ICH. The weakness of the research activities on ICH
include a lack of awareness among community members that they are bearers of ICH. Communities
need to know about the value of their daily activities and their traditional customs, but those whoare practicing ICH are not aware that they are practitioners. Very little effort is made by the state orscholars to increase awareness of the value of ICH. In addition, there is not sufficient time to collectfull data. Recommendations for improving future research on safeguarding ICH include encouraging
government officials and scholars to join in data collection.

Discussion
Nang Lao mentioned that the communities are neither responsive nor cooperative in terms of ICH
safeguarding. The same thing happened in the Kyrgyz Republic because not many people actuallyknow about safeguarding ICH, even though they often participate in ICH daily. Therefore, capacitybuilding would be good for community leaders and/or other members of the community. Palau also
faces a similar situation. It is necessary to consider what could influence community members to be
more enthusiastic in terms of community awareness.

Country Report: Cambodia
Sokrithy Im (APSARA Authority, Cambodia) presented the literature survey on ICH safeguarding
in Cambodia. Some of the ICH elements in Cambodia are in danger of disappearing mainly due
to a civil war that has lasted more than twenty years. In 2006, the Cambodian government defined
ICH and took steps to preserve it for future generations by ratifying the 2003 Convention. After the
inscription of Angkor on World Heritage List in 1992, there have been two main national authorities
working in the field of ICH. The Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts works for the whole country,
except for Angkor which is under the control of the Authority for the Protection and Managementof Angkor and the Region of Siem Reap (APSARA). Due to the increase of tourists into the region,
Angkor as a World Heritage Site has faced pressure from the outside. Since so many tourists cometo live inside the World Heritage site, the way of life, languages, and rituals within the region are
disappearing and are not performed as actively as before. There is strong tension between tradition

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 17
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

and progress and a conflict between preservation and development. There is a lack of recognition of
intangible values in the modern “smart phone era”. Unfortunately, the two aforementioned national
authorities working in the area of heritage protection have not worked together on this problem. Mostof the literature on Cambodia’s ICH would appear to be of a descriptive character.

Discussion
Questions were raised on the linkage between ICH and tangible heritage. Angkor Wat allows all
tourists to visit the group central tower every day, except on the day when the monks come to pray.
There is also a regulation for visitors at the central tower to wear appropriate clothes. Local people
believe that God is still in the temple and they come to worship on Sundays. The interaction between
tangible and intangible together can be both positive and negative. There is a conflict between some
who want increasing numbers of tourists, and others who say that more time is required for the actual
worshippers and monks.

Country Report: Malaysia
Hanafi Bin Hussin (University of Malaya, Malaysia) presented the literature survey on ICH
safeguarding in Malaysia. As a response to the 2003 Convention, the Malaysian government adopted
the National Heritage Act in 2005, which interprets ICH as any form of expression, language,
utterances, proverbs, songs produced by music, notes, lyrics, singing, folk or oral traditions, poetry,dance, and acting. This is quite an all-inclusive definition. The number of published materials on
ICH has increased between 2010 and 2016 because of establishment of research universities andrequirements to publish. The two genres of “performing arts” and “social practices, rituals and festive
events” receive most attention due to the easy availability of data compared with the other genres.
The participatory approach to ICH the research funded in the period 2010-2016 is a strength, and it
also shows extensive research activities on ICH. Weaknesses of the current research on ICH are that:
it is time consuming, especially with the numerous ethnic cultures; the data set is not necessarily
reliable or even available/accessible; and the lack of focus on safeguarding as a research topic. The
problem of getting the data or resources reflects involvement with the community. Recommendations
for improving future research on safeguarding ICH include to develop appropriate methodologies
such as documentation and participant observation. ICH conservation through the National Heritage
Act is a good step forward.

18 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Discussion
The issue of funding leads us to take a step back to thinking about policy. When we talk about policymaking in the funding of government bodies, this brings us back to the importance of persuasion
at the government level and, then, at the policy makers’ level. Research on ICH is something that
feeds into various other types of research. In other words, the broader framework within which that
research is going to be encouraged helps to get a project funded. This results in papers published inpeer-reviewed international journals, which can perhaps return to an idea of the future output of thisentire project. ICRI can ideally be an alternative forum for an academic journal that is solely focusedon this topic, thereby encouraging researchers in this area.

Country Report: Iran
Atousa Moemeni (Scientific Studies and International Cooperation Office of Iranology Foundation,Iran) presented the literature survey on ICH safeguarding in Iran. Due to a wealth of ICH in thedomains of oral tradition and cultural expression, and the need for preserving them, Iran has focusedon implementing UNESCO’s instruments and taking advantage of the opportunities they represent.
Several meetings were held to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the 2003 Convention at anational level after its adoption on 17 October 2003. These meetings led the Iranian Parliament
to adopt the Act of Accession of Iran to the 2003 Convention on 13 December 2005. The IranianCouncil of Ministers then issued Executive Regulations for the Act of Accession of Iran to the 2003
Convention, consisting of fifteen articles. The Regulations are a basis for the implementation of
the Convention in which ten cultural organizations are obliged to cooperate with the Iran Cultural
Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization to achieve the goals of the Convention.
The survey shows the strengths and weaknesses of the current research on the safeguarding ICH in
Iran. It also provides the following recommendations for improving future research. Firstly, legalbinding obligations should be created to ensure the preservation and promotion of different aspects of
ICH. Second, funding for research in fields such as archeology, architecture, and the cultural landscapewill enrich the field of ICH safeguarding. Third, TV channels will play a vital role in achieving
sustainable development and maintaining cultural identity. Fourth, the purpose of safeguarding ICH
requires a needs assessment or analysis as well as a plan to develop a national cultural policy in Iranaccording to the 2003 Convention with the participation of groups, communities, and relevant NGOs.
The literature review covered a large number of research studies produced and/or funded byProceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 19
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

research institutes, NGOs, municipalities and university theses. In many cases, these studies were
not contextualized within the framework of the 2003 Convention and there is an imbalance in theattention paid to some domains (mostly social practices) compared with others (least knowledge about
nature and the universe). Recently, researchers have started to undertaken conceptual research in
ICH, including on the relationship of tangible and intangible heritage, and to use a community-based
participatory approach to research. However, given the variety of funding sources, there is a lackof any coherent approach, a heavy focus on identification and description (rather than safeguarding
approaches) and a lack of monitoring and evaluation.

Discussion
The implementation of the 2003 Convention has social and economic consequences in Iran. For
instance, an Iranian NGO has achieved commercial success by supporting local women to produce
traditional dolls, because it really speaks to something that is very close to people’s experience. It
does not only have a direct impact on women’s lives themselves by providing economic resources
which are separate from those who are available by working in the local fields and orchards, but also
have a positive spin-off; namely, social coherence and predominate intergenerational transmissionof these traditions. Another example is the Gilan Rural Heritage Museum Project, an important ecomuseum and a successful research project in Iran. Looking at the research on safeguarding ICH thathas been produced in Iran, we can say that it indeed has turned weakness into strengths due to thefollowing reasons. Firstly, it has established a close relationship between tangible and intangible
heritage. Second, it has provided continuous monitoring, an evaluation process and applicable
results. Third, contextualized research studies produced in this project is accessible, some of which
is translated into French and English. Finally, we can say that the focus of this project has been moreon safeguarding itself rather than identification or awareness-raising.

20 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Regional Survey Summary Report on ICH Safeguarding
Research in the Asia-Pacific Region
Hanhee Hahm*

I. Introduction
The International Research Centre for Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region (IRCI)
launched a project entitled “Mapping Research for the Safeguarding of ICH in the Asia-PacificRegion” in 2013. As a necessary part of the project, in 2015, IRCI began a survey of the literature on
this research in seventeen Asia-Pacific countries. IRCI asked certain experts to carry out the survey
within his/her country. As of 2016, eleven research institutions or researchers have been involved in
the survey. As an analyzer, I have reviewed the reports submitted by eleven countries’ experts. The
following guidelines are provided by IRCI for this regional survey summary report:
1. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the current research activities?
2. What kinds of ICH genres/methodological approaches are predominant in the available
research?
3. What kinds of ICH genres/methodological approaches are not well researched yet?
4. What kind of methodologies or approaches have to be strengthened?
5. How are the communities involved and how do they participate?

This regional summary report has been processed as follows:
1. The survey summary reports from eight countries including literature review sheets werereceived. The eight countries are Cambodia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Palau,
Vanuatu, and New Zealand.
2. The draft of the regional summary reports was supposed to be completed by Oct. 31 originally,
but extended to Nov. 7.
3. Three countries’ reports --- Iran, Japan and Malaysia, arrived on Nov. 9 and 14, respectively,
and the regional report was revised.
*Professor, Department of Archaeological and Cultural Anthropology, Chonbuk National University,
Republic of Korea

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 21
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

4. The analyzer submitted the revised version to IRCI by Dec. 31, 2016.

II. Summary of Reviews
2-1. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Current Research on Safeguarding ICH
The project of mapping for the safeguarding of ICH in the Asia-Pacific region is the first step to“instigate and coordinate research into practices and methodologies of safeguarding endangered
ICH elements” in this region. The mapping is also quite useful in that different backgrounds andthe current situations of safeguarding ICH in each country have become well understood. After
reviewing the eleven countries’ summary reports, the analyzer has discovered that even the conceptsof ‘safeguarding’ and ‘ICH’ are used differently in the varied contexts of collecting and analyzing
the literature relevant to ICH. In particular, the terminology of safeguarding from an operational
perspective must be discussed to arrive at a common ground with respect to its definition.
One of the strengths of the current research on safeguarding ICH is the high level of diversity in
how UNESCO’s Convention of Safeguarding ICH has been accepted. According to the country
reports from Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, and Cambodia, these countries have paid attention to
new concepts of ‘safeguarding’ and ‘ICH’ which were not familiar to these countries and they haveswiftly attempted to establish legal measures and to implement government policies after ratifying
the ICH Convention. New Zealand, however, is still cautious and skeptical about taking part in thesafeguarding framework initiated by UNESCO. Iran, Nepal, Palau, Sri Lanka, and Vanuatu havealready many collections on cultural studies from various disciplines such as history, anthropology,
archeology, linguistics, folklore, and arts. Sri Lanka submitted 179 reviews on the literature, Myanmar
111 reviews, Palau 101 reviews and many of those reviews constitute valuable research papers,
books, and reports. This level of participation shows that each of these countries in this Asia-Pacificregion has a great tradition of history and culture. There are plenty of good ethnographic studies
on indigenous people in Palau, Vanuatu, and Nepal. More than a few minorities’ cultures were
documented by anthropologists, missionaries, and journalists during the last hundred years throughmodernization, industrialization, and urbanization. The collections have been initially received andcompiled in the mapping database. There are many good quality photos and films included in the
documents of early days.
There are, however, several weaknesses from the perspective of safeguarding ICH which are evident
in the summaries of the review. For example, much of the literature was completed before the22 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Convention and therefore the contents of this literature are not closely matched or related to theconcerns and issues brought by the Convention, particularly the methodologies with respect to thesafeguarding of ICH. Some studies focused only on general information regarding a culture, tribes orcommunities. Others are more detailed descriptions of a sub-field of ICH such as traditional rituals,
practices, performing arts, and arts and craftsmanship, for example.
There is another weakness in the review. Some reviewers have selected the collections related to
ICH research from a wider perspective. This leads to a disparity among the reviews. For example,
different areas of research are included, such as archeological and historical studies done in theearly and mid-20th Century in Cambodia, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. In Vanuatu, European settlers,missionaries, anthropologists, linguists, and others wrote about indigenous communities and people.
These are considered to be very valuable texts for scholars, administrators, and those who advocate
for their traditional culture. Some books, reports, and journal papers deal with descriptions of acertain element, excavation of specific sites, a general picture of a culture, a historical overview andexplanation, etc.
There are many pieces of literature written by foreigners whose purposes for writing varied greatly.
Some had a scholarly interest and others did not. Those writers who were involved in administration,business, and religious activities compiled a lot of information about indigenous people, but allfor different purposes. Documents, reports, memoires, and other types of publications are listed in
the reviews. The selection and arrangement of the literature reviewed need to be categorized by
distinguishing those directly relevant to the project from those which have more indirect relevance.

2-2. Research Focus, ICH Genres, and Methodology
The focused areas, genres, and methodology executed in the research of safeguarding ICH are
presented in Table 1. Some country reports in the summary make a clear grouping of literature (New
Zealand and Vanuatu) and yet the analyzer counted each grouping in their literature reviews. Due tothis, there might be minor mistakes with respect to the numbers. In addition, the ICH genre to which
the reviewers indicated is at times vague so it is suggested that such groupings be reconsidered. For
example, traditional knowledge of medicine, health, and skills are categorized as social practice inthe case of Sri Lanka. Based upon the brief description of literature as reviewed, the grouping ofgenre seems to be different from the contents of the literature.
Mongol and Myanmar have a good collection of community-based research guided by the Convention

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 23
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Regionin which ICH bearers and practitioners are involved in the inventory and documentation. The benefitof this kind of research methodology is that the accurate safeguarding measures are well-incorporated
into the communities. By doing so, the prospect of transmission of ICH to the next generation has
improved among the community members.
New Zealand has not yet ratified the Convention, but the NZ report presents quite an interesting
point regarding the subjectivity of safeguarding. Many scholars have raised the point critically withrespect to who is the subject when it comes to the safeguarding and transmitting of ICH. Some casestudies show that once authoritative governments control the process, ICH are fully controlled bygovernment officials, experts, and NGOs who side with the government, and not the ICH community
members. The subjectivity issue has been widely discussed and yet the NZ case again provides us
insightful information on the relationship between government and ICH. The Treaty of Waitangi(ToW) is regarded as one of the founding documents in NZ. It forms a part of its constitutionalarrangements. According to the Maori text, the chiefs managed their own affairs, but gave the settler
government the right to manage their own affairs. The chiefs are also guaranteed full authority
over their treasures. Under these constitutional arrangements, the safeguarding of ICH should beunderstood. In consideration of the Convention, Maori chiefs have full control over all of theirtreasures, or what they regarded as precious, or their ‘taonga’. NZ thus abstained from the adoptionof the Convention. Yet, it remains strongly supportive of the concept of safeguarding ICH. There
continues to be some questions in NZ about how to safeguard their taonga. Maori are skeptical about
the benefits of inventories and the loss of control of information. The reviewers indicated that theMaori voice and stance must be considered.
Although NZ has limited literature on safeguarding ICH, some literature is quite interesting. For
example, the literature that deals with the tension and conflict between Western law and Maori law
is of great interest. The literature focusing on legal matters regarding intellectual property is also
important. The biggest concern of the Maori is the threat of losing their knowledge base, ‘matauranga’,
which is the basis of their identity and way of life. Safeguarding intellectual property is a criticalresearch subject in the area of ICH.

24 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Table 1. Research Focus, ICH genres, and the Methodology of Eleven Countries
Country
Research focus
ICH Genres
Methodological andDistinctive Points
Cambodia(49)Documentation,
Performing arts(14),Archeological andCraftsmanship(9),anthropological studies
identification,
Oral tradition (6),(historical studies)
Promotion,
capacity-building,Rituals (6),definition
Traditional Knowledge(TK)(3), others
Iran(30)
Identification,
From a descriptive toSocial practices(12),contextual approach; aDocumentation,
Oral tradition(6),new attempt toPromotion, Awareness Performing arts(5),incorporate tangible
raising
TK(4),
Craftsmanship(3)and intangible heritage
Japan(41)Documentation
ICH in general (37),
No direct community
Performing arts(2),involvement inFestival(1), Ritual(1)research
Malaysia(164)
Identification,
Social practice(69),
Half of Participatory(less safeguarding
Performing Arts(58),studies; holistic *issues than ICH itself) Oral tradition(14),contextual approach is
Craftsmanship(14)increasing.
Mongolia(41)Identification,
Oral tradition(19),Community-based
documentation,
Performing arts(4),research
Rituals(4), others
transmission,awareness raising
Myanmar(111)
Identification,
Rituals(44),Studies based on
documentation,
Craftsmanship(25),fieldwork andTransmission,
Oral tradition(7),observation
education
Performing arts(5),others
Nepal (42)
Identification,
Oral tradition(13),Many anthropologicaldocumentation,
Rituals(11), TK(6),and historical studies
capacity-building
Performing arts(5),othersPalau(101)Not-specified
Oral tradition(29),Many ethnographic(holistic approach)
Rituals(15),studiesEthnographic
work(26), others
Sri Lanka(179)
Awareness raisingSocial practice,
TK is categorized associal practice. Many
Traditional
knowledge, Performing ethnographic studies
arts, craftsmanshipArcheological studies
are also included
Vanuatu (47)
Identification,
Oral tradition(20),Many anthropological
Social practice(10),studies.
documentation,
Language(9), Food(4),transmission,
traditional
education,
revitalizing, awareness craftsmanship(3),raising, definitions
TK(1), performing arts
New ZealandIntellectual Property of Laws, Performing arts, Legal and policy
Maori ICH,
generalstudies, intellectual
property issues aredealt with.

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 25
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

2-3. W hat kind of ICH genres/methodological approaches are not well researched yet?
The literature reviewed under the IRCI project were written with various purposes and before
the Convention as indicated above. Therefore, clarification of the research object is necessary
for preventing confusion between ICH research and ICH safeguarding research. Many pieces ofliterature are not directly concerned with safeguarding. As indicated in Table 1, the research focusof the eleven country reports tends to skew towards identification, documentation, and awarenessraising. Promotion and revitalization are far less dealt with.
ICH genres are more diverse than the research focus within each country. The ICH genres that are
predominant include: performing arts in Cambodia, oral traditions in Mongolia, traditional ritual
practices in Myanmar, oral traditions and rituals in Nepal, oral traditions and rituals in Palau, social
practice and traditional knowledge in Sri Lanka, oral traditions in Vanuatu, and legal matters in New
Zealand. The less indicated genres in the reports are unexpectedly that of traditional knowledge
concerning nature and the universe. The reason why TK is not listed and/or not well researched isrelated to the matter of grouping. Another reason is that customarily, in the pre-Convention period,
TK was not considered ICH. Research on education of ICH is definitely important for the future, butless researched in all the countries reported.
Much of the literature is quite descriptive. It tends to be less interested in ICH safeguarding researcheven when dances, songs, arts and crafts, and food and medicine are described. The ICH elements arestudied and documented within the context of people’s lives.

2-4. What kind of methodologies and approaches have to be strengthened?
Some countries’ reports indicate that there is a lot of ethnographic literature done by Westernand Japanese anthropologists. The ethnographic research methods are useful for improving themethodologies for ICH safeguarding research particularly because of the diversity in the approaches
such as participant observation, interviews, questionnaires, oral history collection, the drawing ofmaps, taking pictures, and films. The community-based research for safeguarding ICH should be
carried out with similar types of anthropological fieldwork. In addition, anthropologists usually
collect and document data and information, but they attempt to connect each individual data andinformation to the lives of the whole community, which is called the holistic or syncretic approach.
There are some commonalities in the eleven countries: diverse ethnic groups, colonial experience,and modernization. Under colonial regimes, much research had been done by foreign missionaries,

26 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

anthropologists, and other travelers. The reviewers in Cambodia, Myanmar, Nepal, Palau, Sri Lanka,
and Vanuatu mentioned that the old and historical materials are plenty and useful. Because thesecountries have been facing the rapid disappearance of traditional ICH, they list old publications
recording the traditional culture as precious reference materials. Yet, those works are less usefulin establishing a new framework for safeguarding ICH. New research is strongly needed. Local
researchers who have a good command of the language are the ones who can employ appropriate,
reliable, and precise methods of research.
Mongol has started the active digitalization of ICH using digital devices in ICH research. As the
Malaysian review indicated, new digital technology will pave new ways to safeguarding ICH by thecommunity. Non-material features of ICH are known to be difficult and/or impossible to keep staticand such characteristics of ICH are frequently cited as impediments to the process of recording.
Through the use of various forms of digital technology such as audio devices and video tools, it ispossible to record such dynamic characteristics of ICH.

2-5. H ow are the communities involved and how do they participate in the research activities?
There are some misunderstandings or different interpretations among the reviewers in regard
to community involvement in safeguarding ICH. The Japanese reviewer confines community
involvement only to activities such as surveys, research or reports by the communities themselves,
while those of Mongol, Myanmar, Cambodia, Malaysia, and Iran have adopted a broader interpretationof community involvement and therefore include within community involvement inventory making
and documentation by researchers from academia. The definition of ‘community involvement’ in thesafeguarding of ICH should be clarified prior to the review process.
The Convention, in fact, specifies what constitutes community involvement. It is a clear concept
if one looks at the role given to communities regarding ICH matters. Community involvement isrequired in the preparation and implementation of safeguarding programs such as the drawing of
inventories, and the preparation of nomination files and other registries. The community should be
willing to cooperate with government, research institutes, and NGOs for the establishment of thesafeguarding of programs of ICH.
In some country reports, the evidence of community involvement is presented as community-based
research in which researchers carry out fieldwork with the help of community members. There aresome cases indicated by the reviews of Mongol and Myanmar in which ICH bearers and practitioners

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 27
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

are involved in their ICH inventory and documentation. These cooperative research activities instigate
an awareness of ICH values. By doing so, the safeguarding and transmission of ICH to the next
generation is ensured among the community members.

III. Conclusions and Recommendations
UNESCO’s 2003 Convention has given a broad scope to safeguarding and ICH. It does not direct orcommand that there is only one way to conceptualize intangible cultural heritage and safeguarding.
UNESCO acknowledges the existing systems of safeguarding ICH, especially legal institutions andcustomary laws, ethics, and moral codes. The eleven country reports show that there are different
ways to conceptualize cultural heritage and that there are different methods for the protection andpreservation of heritage. Accordingly, the concepts of intangible cultural heritage and safeguarding
are interpreted and used differently depending upon historical and cultural backgrounds. Some
reviewers respect their tangible historic monuments and sites, while others consider the old historic
books and ethnographies as research on the safeguarding of ICH.
Due to the different interpretation of the terms, and the different ways of groupings as well asinconsistent standards of assessment, the reliability of the reviews has been reduced. Yet, the analyzer
sees a positive side of the newly activated countries in safeguarding ICH. Cambodia, Mongolia, andMyanmar are in the early stages of ICH research. However, a new group of research done after theConvention presents an experimental method of documentation and inventory at the community
level. Researchers visit ICH communities, meet ICH bearers, and sometimes make documentation
working with the members of the community. The methodology for the safeguarding of ICH isencouraged to a great extent with the further development of an appropriate, precise and reliableapproach to the ICH community.
There are some urgent research areas for the safeguarding of ICH. Minority group languages in Nepal
and in other countries are on the verge of extinction. Endangered language studies are imminent sothat recording and documentation as a first step are recommended as the first priority.

28 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Proceedings
Sunday, 19 November 2016
The meeting was chaired by Noriko Aikawa-Faure and Janet Blake.
1. Discussion on the Literature Survey (from 2015 to 2016)
Tetsuya Tanaka presented the results of an assessment of the survey methodology from 2015 to2016. Before this meeting, IRCI requested the 2015 and 2016 surveyors (in total 27) to assess IRCI’s
literature survey, and twelve surveyors replied (see Annex III). Based on the results of the survey
assessment, the participants provided with us following suggestions for the literature survey.

Suggestions for the Literature Survey● A PDF of each item, or at least a photo of the front page of each book, should be included for thecollection of literature.
● For digitization, the literature survey should include scans of any conference materials, especiallymaterials that are not published, for public reference.
● In the survey guidelines, the categorization of each kind of ICH is left up to each surveyor.
● It is preferable to define what ICH safeguarding means for each country.
● It is preferable to assess the impact of the 2003 Convention on research activities, especially before
and after the Convention.
● The promotion of increased visibility of the ICH database to other research institutions is necessary,
which may improve future collaborations between these institutions.
● To standardize the quality of the literature survey, IRCI should organize a small workshop forcandidate surveyors to share ideas before they start each survey.
● Survey summary reports should concentrate on the analysis of collected literature and not on a
description of the legislation and history of ICH in each respective country.
● Collections of the Field Survey Report, published by ICHCAP, can be useful items to use as anappendix for the descriptive part of each summary report.
● Each summary should contain from 100 to 300 words and a few keywords to explain the content
of the literature.
● A definition clarifying the meaning of ICH in each country should be included in the analyticalquestions.

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 29
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region● Public awareness towards ICH should also be discussed in the analytical questions.
● The impact of the Convention, before and after the introduction of the 2003 Convention, isalso critically important in the analytical questions; for example, what kind of impact does theintroduction of the Convention have on the literature regarding ICH safeguarding in the respective
country?
● Since IRCI has not yet conducted a literature survey for all countries in the Asia-Pacific region, it
should continue this work with the remaining countries.

It was recommended that a surveyor should focus on analytical explanation on ICH safeguarding in
his/her targeted country rather than description of its background information in the summary report.
For instance, the guidelines will be revised as follows:
Review process should begin with:
Introductory section providing briefly the following information:
1. Definition of ICH in the country
2. Legal and institutional measures of ICH safeguarding
3. The status of inscription of ICH
4. Signatory status of the 2003 Convention
5. Public awareness toward the ICH and ICH safeguarding
Main part of the report
1. Describe the Contractor’s own methodology and approach to the survey, including
limitations,
2. Summarize the current research trends and analyse the collected information
addressing the following points:i) What is the strength or weakness of the research activities in the country?
ii) What kind of ICH genres are predominant in available researches?
iii) 	What kind of methodological approaches for ICH safeguarding are predominant
in available researches?
iv) How the communities are involved and participated in the research activities?
v) What kind of methodologies or approaches have to be strengthened?

30 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

2. 2017 International Symposium on ICH
Tomiyuki Uesugi (Seijo University, Japan) made a brief announcement about an international
symposium on ICH entitled ‘Glocal Perspectives on Intangible Cultural Heritage, Local Communities,
Researchers, States and UNESCO’ that could be a future research project co-organised by IRCI and
the Center for Glocal Studies (CGS), Seijo University.
CGS was established at Seijo University in 2008 to carry out and promote the study of globalization as
well as glocalization. A British sociologist, Roland Robertson, appropriated the word, “glocalization”,
from Japanese business sectors. Glocalization occurs between the global and the local (i.e., theexternal and the internal), and globalization and glocalization occur at the same time and affect eachother. In other words, globalization in a particular localization is glocalization. CGS focuses on thesesocio-cultural phenomena. In a sense, ICH experts are focusing on the globalization of the conceptof safeguarding, and people, in local communities have been accepting and sometimes interpretingthese findings locally. In this way globalization is occurring at the center of localization in the world.
For this reason, IRCI and Seijo University have decided to jointly organize this symposium in July2017.

3. Future Orientation of the Mapping Project
Wataru Iwamoto delivered his presentation entitled “The Future Orientation of the Mapping Project”(see Annex IV). After the presentation, a free discussion was conducted through which the following
suggestions were made by participants. Acknowledging the significance of safeguarding ICH as an
emerging research theme, after the introduction by the 2003 Convention, several countries (such as
Kyrgyzstan, Sri Lanka, Mongolia, Vanuatu, and Palau) also launched a project to map researchers
and research activities at the domestic as well as the regional level. To accommodate these efforts,
IRCI will promote further cooperation among researchers and research institutes and establish abridge between each institute by creating a shared academic platform. The experts’ meeting will
hopefully be a hub for the new stream of the ICH-safeguarding studies.
IRCI will also continue to conduct the literature survey in those countries in the Asia-Pacific region
where it has not yet been undertaken. Although the 2003 Convention has brought a new academic
impulse by creating new research topics such as ICH-safeguarding studies, most country reports
reveal that research activities on ICH in general can be traced back to the pre-convention periods,
or much earlier. Therefore, IRCI’s literature survey will also include research activities undertaken

Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding of 31
Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

before the Convention.
As noted above, since the Convention has created new academic concepts such as ICH safeguarding
and community involvement, these terms are used as analytical tools in mostly post-convention
studies. However, most country reports reveal that ICH was continuously protected and preserved
before the Convention. In periods after ratification, the individual country reports provide us with
examples of the safeguarding of ICH not only through implementation of the Convention, but also by
national legislation and local or traditional procedures. As a research institute for ICH that covers the
Asia-Pacific region, IRCI will not overlook both contemporary and traditional safeguarding activities
and will therefore enlarge the scope of the targeted literature to include ethnographic reports on ICH,
digital archiving, and the conventional documentation of music, dance, artisan’s works, traditional
knowledge, local narratives, and so on.

Closing
The meeting was concluded with closing remarks by Wataru Iwamoto.

32 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Closing Remarks
Wataru IWAMOTO*

Dear participauts,
As Ms. Aikawa has clearly stated, the discussions about research policy linkage and how to clarify thequestionnaires has been fruitful, and all these suggestions from your side are important and something
I will study very much. The mission of the Centre is to instigate research on the safeguarding of ICH.
Of course in this context, we can discuss how various stakeholders interact on all the other thematic
issues, such as education and ICH or ICH for the sake of sustainable development. These themes canbe discussed, but always for the sake of encouraging the research on the safeguarding of ICH.
As Ms. Gurung has clearly mentioned, there is a burden sharing on capacity building. CRIHAP in
China is specialized for capacity building. As Ms. Gurung has also clearly mentioned, it is up to
you or your State as to even whether we will have a discussion on the relation with your National
Commissions. I personally want to encourage the Japanese National Commission to think more about
ICH safeguarding, because ICH is not only about cultural issues in a strict sense, but also about thebasis of our lives and welfare.
And, after saying that, thank you, Ms. Aikawa and Ms. Blake for your excellent chairpersonship and
Ms. Gurung, Representative of UNESCO and Ms. Hamada from the Japanese Agency for Cultural
Affairs and Ms. Hahm for your wonderful meta-analysis and your advice. All the participants gave
us very valuable ideas and advice. And I take this opportunity to reiterate my thanks to all of you andI hope you enjoy the afternoon’s symposium.
Thank you very much.

* Director-General, International Research Centre for Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-PacificRegion, National Institutes for Cultural Heritage, Japan

Selected Country Reports

34 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

An analysis of responses to Safeguarding Intangible Cultural
Heritage in Aotearoa/ New ZealandSandra L. MORRISON*, Erana WALKER, Dr Timote VAIOLETI, and Penengaru DELANEY

1. definition of ICH in the country
2. legal and institutional measures of ICH safeguarding
3. the status of inscription of ICH
4. signatory status of the 2003 Convention

I. PREAMBLE
Purposes of the Convention
The purposes of this Convention are:(a) to safeguard the intangible cultural heritage;(b) to ensure respect for the intangible cultural heritage of the communities, groups and individuals
concerned;(c) to raise awareness at the local, national and international levels of the importance of the intangible
cultural heritage, and of ensuring mutual appreciation thereof;(d) to provide for international cooperation and assistance.

1-1. Definition of Intangible Cultural Heritage
1. The “intangible cultural heritage” means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge,
skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that
communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.
This intangible cultural heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreatedby communities and groups in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and their
history, and provides them with a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural
diversity and human creativity. For the purposes of this Convention, consideration will be given
solely to such intangible cultural heritage as is compatible with existing international human rights* Associate Professor, Faculty of Maori and Indigenous Studies, University of Waikato, New ZealandSelected Country Reports 35

instruments, as well as with the requirements of mutual respect among communities, groups andindividuals, and of sustainable development.

II. INTRODUCTION
New Zealand has not ratified the Convention for ICH and there is no National Register or National
Inventory. There also appears to be no intention in the immediate future for ratification either.
Conversations and the debate in New Zealand on the protection of its cultural heritage has focussed
predominantly on examples from the indigenous Māori experience. This is because Māori place highvalue on the protection of taonga (treasures) and have been active in upholding the integrity of its use.
Māori cultural heritage embraces the spiritual as well as the physical dimensions as part of a holistic
inter relationship. It is not so easy to divide the physical/tangible heritage from the natural andintangible; the intangible cannot be separated from the tangible or the natural. They are bound together
as one. The tangible and the natural heritage holds the intangible. While the term Intangible Cultural
Heritage (ICH) may be unfamiliar, the principles and tenets of what is required to protect cultural
heritage has a high level of engagement from Māori communities including tribal communities.
This report will scope the New Zealand literature which refers to ICH as provided for under theConvention. The literature is actually very sparse. Nevertheless, this review will report on what
information exists and where it overlaps with other aligned literature. It is set out to firstly be madeaware of the context of New Zealand and its position on the Convention. Then the report moves tohow safeguarding of ICH occurs currently and some analysis of the strengths of the current literature.
Important documentation is referenced within relevant sections of this report. It will explore thetypes of ICH genres which are predominant in available researches (if any) as well as assessing themethodological approaches predominant in safeguarding ICH. This report also asks the questions as
to how do the communities become involved and participate in the research activities.

III. THE CONTEXT OF AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND AND ICHFirstly it is important to understand the context. New Zealand is a small nation located in the South
Pacific. With a population of 4.5 million of which 15.6% are Māori the indigenous people, 12.2%
are Asian and 7.8% are Pacific (New Zealand Statistics, 2015). British settlement was assisted andformalised through an 1840 document known as the Treaty of Waitangi (ToW) also known by its
Māori name, Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The Treaty is regarded as one of the founding documents of

36 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

this country and it forms part of the constitutional arrangements. It is an agreement entered into byrepresentatives of the Crown and Māori chiefs. It is a contentious document because there are two
versions, an English version and a Māori text and they are substantially different in meaning. In
the English version, Māori cede the sovereignty of New Zealand to Britain; Māori give the Crown
an exclusive right to buy lands which they wish to sell and, in return, are guaranteed full rights ofownership of their lands, forests, fisheries and other possessions; and Māori are given the rights andprivileges of British subjects (Walker, 2004). In the Māori text, the Chiefs would manage their own
affairs but gave to the settler government the right for them to manage their own affairs. The Chiefs
are also guaranteed ‘tino rangatiratanga’ (full authority) over ‘taonga’ (treasures).

Article Two of the Māori text is an important article and captures the intent to safeguard treasures.
Specifically, it says “The Queen of England agrees to protect the chiefs, the subtribes and all thepeople of New Zealand in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages andall their treasures….” (Article Two, Te Tiriti o Waitangi)

Its message is very clear. It promised Chiefs full control over all of their treasures or what they
regarded as precious, their taonga. Taonga or treasures is more than what the English version of
the Treaty of Waitangi references which is ‘lands, estates, forests and fisheries.’ Taonga can beboth tangible and intangible. It may include language, cultural traditions, visual and creative andperforming arts as well as Māori values including spirituality. As stated earlier, Article Two of
the ToW captures the intent of the ICH Convention which says that intangible cultural heritage ismanifested in the following domains:● oral traditions and expressions, including languages, as a vehicle of the intangible cultural
heritage;● performing arts, such as traditional music, dance and theatre;● social practices, rituals and festival events;● knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; and● traditional craftsmanship

The Convention and the ToW therefore has synergies with Article Two in providing a mechanism

Selected Country Reports 37

which seeks to safeguard ICH through the protection of taonga. The ToW also calls on the Crown to
work in partnership with Māori and to be active participants in the protection of their taonga and setsa key reference point for the ICH discourse.

VI. THE STATUS OF THE ICH CONVENTION
The Ministry for Culture and Heritage or Te Manatū Taonga records the current New Zealand positionon the Convention for ICH. New Zealand abstained from its adoption because of concerns it has on
its provisions. It does however remain strongly supportive of the concept of safeguarding intangible
cultural heritage. It concerns are listed as being conceptual as well as structural. There is the problem
of definition and how to safeguard saying that Māori are sceptical about the benefits of inventories
and there also possibly exists the potential loss of control of information. There would need to bebroad consensus on how to classify and arrange an inventory should an inventory be approved (http://
www.unesco.org/culture/ich/doc/src/00324-EN.pdf).
The Convention is silent on the rights of indigenous peoples and in the context of New Zealand,
the Māori voice and stance must be considered. In a paper written by Sullivan (2012) he writes
that while New Zealand agrees with the purpose of the Convention, New Zealand signalled it will
withhold its support due to the perceived significant investment needed to comply with obligationsof the Convention. It also considered a question of the appropriateness of creating such a register
given the nature of its Māori heritage and the sensitivity in which the guardianship of cultural
heritage is treated. (http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/doc/src/00324-EN.pdf). Several government
departments consulted on the Draft Convention raised concerns over the desirability of adopting
a single, legally binding instrument to protect intangible heritage. Myburgh notes that the statutes
are administered and enforced by different authorities or entities and enforced at different levels ofgovernment, all make for a rather complex and uneven patchwork of cultural heritage protection.
Yet he says that aspects of intangible cultural heritage are safeguarded in New Zealand law to somedegree (2008, p16).

The domestic statutes that specifically protect cultural heritage to encompass the tangible are the:● Historic Places Trust 1993(http://www.legislation.co.nz/act/public/1993/0038/latest/DLM300511.html),● Resource Management

38 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region(http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html)● Projected Objects Act of 1975. (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1975/0041/latest/
DLM432116.html)

The Ministry of Culture and Heritage or Manatū Taonga was established as a formal entity by an
Act of Parliament and works to enrich the lives of all New Zealanders by supporting culture andpreserving heritage (http://www.mch.govt.nz/). It has the following responsibilities in regards toculture which include:● the provision of policy advice on arts, culture, heritage and broadcasting issues (in particular
non-commercial broadcasting), as determined in consultation with Ministers, including
legislation, major policy proposals, and developments and initiatives which have significanceto the sector;● the management and disbursement of payments to a number of arts, heritage, broadcasting andsports sector organisations, and the monitoring of the Crown’s interests in these organisations;● the provision of other negotiated services to Ministers, including the preparation of replies to
Ministerial correspondence, and general services which assist Ministers in discharging theirportfolio obligations to Parliament;● the research, writing and publication of New Zealand history; the administration of grants andthe provision of advice about New Zealand history;● the management of national monuments, war and historic graves; the administration of theProtected Objects Act 1975;● the administration of legislation relating to the symbols and emblems of New Zealandsovereignty (including the administration of the New Zealand Flag, New Zealand National
Anthems and the New Zealand Coat of Arms) and to commemorative days;● the administration of the Regional Museums Policy for Capital Construction Projects andGovernment Indemnity to Museums policies.
● The development, production and maintenance of a number of websites focusing on New
Zealand culture including Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand and NZ History.

Selected Country Reports 39

It is in charge of administering a range of legislations to protect culture including the following Actsof Parliament:● Anzac Day Act 1966
● Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Act 2014
● Broadcasting Act 1989 (Parts I-IV and Section 81)● Cultural Property (Protection in Armed Conflict) Act 2012
● Flags, Emblems and Names Protection Act 1981
● Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014
● Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa Act 1992
● National War Memorial Act 1992
● National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Act 2012
● New Zealand Film Commission Act 1978
● New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Act 2004
● Protected Objects Act 1975
● Radio New Zealand Act 1995
● Radio New Zealand Act (No 2) 1995
● Seddon Family Burial Ground Act 1924
● Sovereign’s Birthday Observance Act 1952
● Television New Zealand Act 2003
● Waitangi Day Act 1976

V. SAFEGUARDING ICH THROUGH THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL
The Waitangi Tribunal is a permanent commission of inquiry and was set up under the Treaty of
Waitangi Act 1975. It makes recommendations on claims brought by Māori relating to Crown
actions which breach the promises made in the Treaty of Waitangi. The Waitangi Tribunal, in its roleof assessing Māori grievances, has openly acknowledged in many of its reports, intangible cultural
heritage that has either been lost, desecrated or is at risk of extinction.
Central to the Waitangi Tribunal process is the basic elements of a settlement such as the nature of
the historical account, a commercial redress and equally as important, the cultural redress process.
The cultural redress process in part acknowledges the traditional, historical, cultural and spiritualtaonga or treasures that came under the guardianship or kaitiakitanga of the tribe which were

40 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

desecrated or lost during colonisation. Sometimes it is associated with the tribes site of significanceor waahi tapu or tangible heritage. However, the tribes’ intangible heritage also can form part of thecultural redress package eg. language revival, performing or creative arts revival. Having redress canenhance the mana (prestige) and spiritual connection that the indigenous people have to these placesof significance regardless of the asset value. The following is an example of a clause from Treatyof Waitangi legislation where the Crown recognises the tangible and intangible connection a tribal
people has with the natural resource:“The Crown recognises that Te Arawa value the Te Arawa lakes and the lakes’ resources astaonga. The Crown acknowledges the spiritual, cultural, economic, and traditional importanceto Te Arawa of the lakes and the lakes’ resources.” (Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act 2006)

Recent settlements which have moved to include a cultural redress package and ownership rights toareas of cultural significance and there ICH include:● Te Aupōuri Deed of Settlement, 2012
● Te Rawara Deed of Settlement, 2012
● Tūhoe Deed of Settlement, 2012
● Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims Settlement Act, 2010

Further written literature may be found amongst the plethora of Māori governance entities whichhave been created to deal with their tribe’s Treaty settlement. Such entities have created strategicplans and policies to address these issues of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage although they
may not have called it such. These plans have evolved over time and involve several layers. At one
level there are the oral records which are maintained through oral practise and rituals. On anotherlevel the historical trauma of colonisation involving the loss of land, the degradation of culture andknowledge has resulted in a journey through the Waitangi Tribunal or the Courts where the history
has been publicly told and is publically available. These often serve as repositories of knowledge andan acknowledgement of intangible cultural heritage which Māori and tribal groupings are intent on
actively protecting.
For information on the Waitangi Tribunal (http://waitangitribunal.govt.nz/).

Selected Country Reports 41

Research institution: Waitangi Tribunal
Its mandates: A permanent commission of inquiry that makes recommendations on claims brought
by Māori relating to Crown actions which breach the promises made in the Treaty of Waitangi.
Specialized fields: Legal and Māori centred; a bicultural commission
Location: Wellington
Contacts
Administrative filiation
Weblink: http://waitangitribunal.govt.nz/

VI. SAFEGUARDING ICH AND MĀORI KNOWLEDGE, MĀTAURANGA MĀORI
The regard that Māori have for their knowledge base or mātauranga has been tested over time as they
have dealt with observing their mātauranga being inappropriately expressed, its integrity and its use
being compromised and in many instances been commodified.
In particular, there are two landmark Waitangi Tribunal claims worthy of comment:

WAI 11: Te Reo Māori claim asserted that the Treaty of Waitangi, obliged the Crown to protect Te
Reo Māori and given that the Crown had failed to do this, they were therefore in breach of the Treaty.
The claimants asked that the Crown officially recognise Te Reo Māori, particularly in broadcasting,education, health and the public service.

The Waitangi Tribunal found in favour of the claimants urging the Crown to remedy the breaches of
the Treaty in relation to Te Reo Māori. One of the most significant aspects of mātauranga Māori is
Te Reo Māori which was also identified as a domain under the ICH Convention. Consequently there
is a plethora of Māori language strategies that Māori communities have themselves put together asa means to not just safeguard but also to revitalise Māori language in their communities and homes.

WAI 262: Flora and fauna claim. This significant claim covered the protection and retention of
mātauranga Māori as regards ngā toi Māori (arts), whakairo (carving), history, oral tradition, waiata(songs), Te Reo Māori, and rongoā Māori (Māori medicine and healing). It sought protection against
exploitation and misappropriation of cultural taonga and cultural property for example traditionalartefacts, carvings, mokomokai (preserved heads) namely in highlighting:42 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Māori intellectual and cultural property rights: as affected by New Zealand’s intellectual property
legislation, international obligations and proposed law reforms.
Environmental, resource and conservation management: including concerns about bio-prospecting
and access to indigenous flora and fauna, biotechnological developments involving indigenous genes.
Central to the claim is the importance of whakapapa or geneaology and tino rangatiratanga or control
over knowledge and who owns it. Whakapapa is what connects the claimants to their taonga andtino rangatiratanga (in all its dimensions of rights and obligations). These are forms of ICH and areessential to the culture and identity for Māori.
Reference to these claims can be found at:Title: Ko Aotearoa tēnei: te taumata tuarua: a report into claims concerning New Zealand law andpolicy affecting Māori culture and identity
Author: Waitangi Tribunal
Year of publication: 2011
Publisher: Waitangi Tribunal
Place of publication: Wellington, NZ
Website Link (if there is)
Research focus (3): Intellectual property and Māori cultural heritage
ICH genre (4); Māori cultural heritage and intellectual property
A summary of the main arguments: This report addresses the Wai 262 claim concerning New Zealandlaw and policy affecting Māori culture and identity.
The theory(ies) and/or disciplines: The tension between kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and legal
ownership.

VII. OTHER LITERATURE ON SAFEGUARDING ICH
For Māori, the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage was traditionally conducted through oral
and artistic methods.
These include:● The use of song or waiata● The use of proverbial sayings or whakataukī● The use of carving or whakairo and weaving or rāranga

Selected Country Reports 43● The use of storytelling or kōrero pūrakau● The use of geneaology or whakapapa

This knowledge or mātauranga Māori have allowed generations of intangible heritage to transcendtime and continue to live throughout the many generations of the social units of Māori society namely
the family (whānau), the subtribe (hapū) and the tribe (iwi). These social structures are very cohesiveand coordinate well if they consider that the Government is not being active in supporting their efforts
to safeguard and protect their treasures and if they consider that their treasures are being exploited.
A case in point is the tribe of Ngāti Toa Rangatira who sought to have exclusive composition rights
for the haka (war dance) called Ka mate Ka Mate. The Haka Ka Mate Attribution Bill (2014)
requires that where the haka is used in certain circumstances, for example in a commercial context,
the authorship of the Ka mate haka by Ngāti Toa Rangatira chief, Te Rauparaha is acknowledged.
This case also highlights how far Māori communities are prepared to go to ensure the integrity andthe protection of their treasures. Intellectual property rights is an important issue for Māori in terms
of protecting Māori knowledge (Mātauranga Māori) thus there are many examples in the literature
which reference their legal rights to the control and use of their treasures including ICH.
At conferences held by the ACCU, over the years on ICH, reports show attendance by New Zealandrepresentatives who have presented country reports to the conference. Two case studies presented
have named kapa haka (performing arts) and traditional arts and crafts as worthy of safeguarding
under the Convention although there is no registry. Refer http://www.accu.or.jp/ich/en/events/
events1.html

Title: Case Study Report: New Zealand A Case Study of KAPA HAKA
Author: Ministry of Culture and Heritage
Year of publication: 2008-09 International Partnership Programme for Safeguarding of Intangible
Cultural Heritage
Publisher: Asia/Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU)
Place of publication: Japan
Website Link (if there is): http://www.accu.or.jp/ich/en/training/casestudy_pdf/case_study_report_newzealand.pdf
Research focus: the sustainability of kapa haka under the ICH Convention

44 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

CH genre; Performing arts
A summary of the main arguments: Kapa haka through the Te Matatini festival aids the sustainabilityof the art.
The theory(ies) and/or disciplines: performing arts

Title: Case Study Report: New Zealand, Safeguarding of the Traditional Māori Arts, Te Puia
Author: New Zealand Māori Arts and Crafts Institute (NZMACI)
Year of publication: International Partnership Programme for Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural
Heritage 2009-2010
Publisher: Asia/Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU)
Place of publication: Japan
Website Link (if there is): http://www.accu.or.jp/ich/en/training/casestudy_pdf/09_10/case_study_report_nz.pdf
Research focus: the sustainability of traditional Māori arts and crafts
CH genre; arts and crafts
A summary of the main arguments: Te Puia helps perpetuate traditional Māori arts and crafts throughits teaching and tourism activities
The theory(ies) and/or disciplines: the holistic nature of a tangible art form and the presence of an
intangible form

Other agencies of the Crown which promote and document culture include:● The Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa (known as Creative New Zealand) whichis required by statute to “encourage, promote and support the arts in New Zealand for the
benefit of all New Zealanders”. It was convened after the passing of The Arts Council of New
Zealand Toi Aotearoa Act 2014
● The New Zealand Film Commission is responsible for encouraging the making and distributionof New Zealand films and the development of New Zealand films.
● The New Zealand Symphony Orchestra is New Zealand’s national, full-time professional
touring orchestra.
● The Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, now known as Te Papa, was establishedby statute in 1992. Its purpose, as stated in its Act, is to “provide a forum in which the nation

Selected Country Reports 45

may present, explore, and preserve both the heritage of its cultures and knowledge of thenatural environment in order to better understand the past, enrich the present and meet thechallenges of the future”.
● The Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act (2014), whose purpose is to promote theidentification, protection, preservation, and conservation of the historical and cultural
heritage of New Zealand. The Act allows Government agencies to support and encourage thesafeguarding of heritage.
● Ngā Taonga Sound & Vision collects, preserves and exhibits New Zealand’s moving image
heritage.
● NZ On Air promotes and foster the development of New Zealand’s culture on the airwaves
by funding locally made television programmes, public radio networks and access radio, andpromotes New Zealand music by funding music videos, recordings and radio shows.
● The Māori Language Commission (Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori) was set up under the
Māori Language Act 1987 to promote the use of Māori as a living language and as an ordinarymeans of communication both within and outside government. Māori has the status of an
official language of New Zealand.
● Te Māngai Pāho is a Crown Entity established under the Broadcasting Amendment Act 1993
in recognition of the Crown’s responsibilities regarding the Māori language and Māori culture
in broadcasting.
● Te Matatini Society Incorporated: The Ministry for Culture and Heritage are also tasked withsupporting the role of executing the functions of Te Matatini Society Inc. which operates andexecutes the Matatini Kapa Haka Festival every two years. It hosts the top Kapa Haka teams
from both Aotearoa and Australia.

VIII. STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE LITERATURE
Aotearoa/New Zealand has only limited literature on safeguarding intangible cultural heritage.
The preservation and protection of cultural heritage in today’s society has been partly achieved throughthe enactment of legislative tools so the legal discourse and legislation dominates the literature andthe discourse. However what is created, as has already been mentioned, is the tension that can arise
between western law and Māori concepts demonstrated in the Wai 262 claim. The biggest threat that
Māori perceive is the threat of losing their knowledge base, their mātauranga, this being fundamental

46 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

to their identity and ways of life.
In any society while legislation helps as a methodological tool to protect ICH then other tools arealso needed. As noted by Sullivan (2012), the domestic mechanisms which seek to protect ICH
straddle a number of legislative frameworks and policies so there is no targeted strategy. In addition,
protection cannot just be Government led. Māori communities have certainly insisted and advocatedfor measures through a number of levels and these actions can be seen in the Waitangi Tribunal
reports as well as academic literature with a broader focus, much of which is intellectual property
rights. Also many tribal bodies are now strategizing and planning on how to give effect to the ongoing
perpetuation of their culture and language.
To ensure that the efforts made by both iwi governance entities and government organisations are
sustainable, there needs to be a future focus and planning so that an education and training strategy is inplace. Post settlement tribal governance entities are displaying long term and short term strategies onprotecting their assets and resources and through the enactment of kaitiakitanga, Māori communities
are preparing future generations. The same concept of preservation and protection should be applied
today by both Māori and non-Māori to preserve the cultural heritage of Aotearoa New Zealand.

Selected Country Reports 47

Bibliography
Bowmen, J. (2011). Coping with Culture: Copyright, cultural expression and inadequacy ofprotection for Māori. (Dissertation University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand). Retrieved fromhttp://www.otago.ac.nz/law/research/journals/otago036340.pdf
Haka Ka Mate Attribution Act (2014). Retrieved from http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2014/0018/latest/DLM5954403.html?search=qs_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_
ka+mate_resel_25_h&p=1
Heritage New Zealand. (2016). Protecting Māori Heritage. Retrieved from http://www.heritage.org.
nz/protecting-heritage/Māori-heritage/protecting-Māori-heritage
Lai, J. C. (2014). Indigenous cultural Heritage and intellectual property rights: Learning from the
New Zealand experience?. Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02955-9
Ministry of Culture and Heritage. (2016). Te Matatini Society Inc. Retrieved from http://www.mch.
govt.nz/funding-nz-culture/agencies-we-fund/art-music-film/te-matatini-society-inc
Ministry of Culture and Heritage. (2008). A Case Study of Kapa haka. Retrieved from http://www.
accu.or.jp/ich/en/training/casestudy_pdf/case_study_report_newzealand.pdf
Ministry of Culture and Heritage. (2015). Auditor-General’s report published, Effectiveness ofgovernance in the arts, culture, and heritage sector. Retrieved fromhttp://www.mch.govt.nz/news-events/news/auditor-generals-report-published-effectivenessgovernance-arts-culture-and-heritag
Ministry of Culture and Heritage. (n. d). INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE CONVENTION:ISSUES FROM A NEW ZEALAND PERSPECTIVE. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/doc/src/00324-EN.pdf
Sullivan, B. (2012).Intangible Cultural Heritage in New Zealand/Aotearoa: A National Perspective.
Retrieved fromhttps://www.baldwins.com/news/intangible-cultural-heritage-in-new-zealand-aotearoa-a-nationalperspective
Te Tiriti o Waitangi, 1840. Retrieved from http://www.treaty2u.govt.nz/the-treaty-up-close/treatyof-waitangi/
UNESCO. (n.d). Ethics and Intangible Cultural Heritage. Retrieved fromhttp://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/en/ethics-and-ich-00866
Waitangi Tribunal. (2011). Ko Aotearoa tēnei. Retrieved from https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/48 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Documents/WT/wt_DOC_68356606/KoAotearoaTeneiTT2Vol2W.pdf
Walker, R. (2004). Struggle without end: Ka whawhai tonu matou. Auckland, N.Z: Penguin

Selected Country Reports 49

Survey Summary Report: Palau
Meked BESEBES*

I. Definition of ICH in Palau
Under the Palau National Code, Title 19, section 4e, Intangible Cultural Property refers to “those
aspects and manifestation of traditional Palauan culture, including music, dance, and art skills
employed in applied arts, storytelling, and similar activities.” Thus, Title 19, section 4e calls for thepreservation of all aspects of traditional culture. In Palau, historical and cultural knowledge is theprimary intangible property.

II. Legal and institutional measures of ICH safeguarding in Palau
The Palau Constitution states that traditional laws (Palau ICH) have equal authority as statutory laws.
Under the Palau Constitution, Article 5 (Traditional Rights) states: 1) The government shall take noaction to revoke the role or functions of traditional leaders…and 2) Statutes and Traditional law shallbe equally authoritative.
Palau National Code Title 19, Cultural Resources, Chapter 1 “Historical and Cultural Preservation
Act (RPPL 1-48 1995)” is the legislation to safeguard Palau ICH. The purpose of this legislation is
to create as public policy a strong regulatory framework to ensure that historical sites and historicaland cultural properties (including ICH) in Palau are protected and preserved from destruction. Under
the same legislation the Title aims to support the creation of a strong program of protection for
intangible cultural properties and activities that have been threatened through foreign contacts andinteractions. Thus, the following agencies were established under this legislation that has a direct
impact on preserving Palau ICH:
● Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation● Belau National Museum● National Archive● Palau Lagoon Monument*Cultural Anthropologist/ Ethnographer, Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation/ Palau
Historical Preservation Office, Palau

50 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region● Environmental Protection● Cultural and Historical Preservation activities of the State .
Additional acts which have been passed in support of Palau ICH are:● Education Act Palauan Language –RPPL 5-15 section 31 (e)- Stating that written Palauan Language shall be a mandatory part of the core curriculum forthe first through twelfth grade for every school chartered in the Republic or funded by publicfunds.
● Copyright Act – RPPL No. 6-38 (amendment RPPL No.6-53)- This copyright legislation provides a protection of original works; performers’ rights; andother related purposes.
● Palauan Language Signage (RPPL No. 8-50): To promote the use of Palau’s official languages
in outdoor advertising signs.
● Language Commission-RPPL No 8-53
- This established the Palau Language Commission, which is tasked to provide the preservationand development of Palauan language● State Legislation: As mentioned above under Title 19, each State must draft and promulgate
laws addressing historical and cultural preservation and thus all identified, surveyed, andregistered historical and cultural sites are protected under each State law. Ten out of thesixteen states have duly enacted legislation addressing historical and cultural preservation:(Ngarchelong –NSGPL No. 89 2000; Melekeok – No.15 (1985); Ngeremlengui – Public
Law No. 21-89 (1989); Angaur – A.P. L. No. 13-03 (2007); Ngchesar – Ngchesar State
Public Law No. 34 (1986); Hatohobei-HSPL No.6-55-06; Aimeliik-ASPL No.3-18 (1989);
Airai- ASPL No.ASPL No. A-2-27-97 (1997); Peleliu-Peleliu State Public Law No.09-83(1983); Ngaraard-NSPL No.2-15 (1987).

Pending bills yet to be passed that have been proposed for the preservation of Palau ICH include:● The Palauan Money registry (Senate Bill No.9-88) seeks to register Palauan money. In thisregistry, persons, family, or clans who own Palauan money shall register their money andprovide photographs and a written history (Palau ICH).
● Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Culture Bill (House Bill No. 9-103-10s) proposes
to establish a new form of intellectual property identified as “traditional knowledge andSelected Country Reports 51

expressions of culture,” to vest ownership of this new property in the appropriate traditionalgroups, clans, and communities, and to provide a means to allow the owners to transfer certain
ownership rights for non-customary use in a manner that will assist in the preservation ofPalau’s cultural heritage, allow for appropriate promotion of Palauan culture, and provide
compensation to Palauan owners for the use of these cultural resources.
● Palau Research Review Board (Senate Bill No.9-108) establishes a board to regulate research
conducted in Palau. This proposed bill creates this Board that will conduct an oversight ofscientific, historic, anthropological, and other types of research that take place in Palau.

III. Status of inscription of Palau ICH
With the creation of PNC Title 19, the Historical and Cultural Preservation Act of 1995, efforts havebeen made to document and create an inventory list of Palau ICH. The report has been conducted tocompile potential ICH for its inscription under the 2003 Convention. However, no nomination has
been drafted and reviewed. Therefore, Palau has no inscription of its ICH under the 2003 Convention.

IV. Signatory status of Palau for the 2003 Convention
Palau became a signatory to the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage
in 2011. According to Article 29 in this Convention, all State Parties shall submit Committee reports
on legislative, regulatory, and other measures taken for the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage
in their territories. Therefore Palau is due to submit its report on December 15, 2017. In 2011, acultural mapping of Palau was completed and reported that provided an overview of Palau’s current
cultural heritage protection and promotion as the means to the development of a culture policy.

V. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research activities in Palau?
PNC Title 19 is a legislative title that gives strength to Palau’s ICH research activities. The Bureau of
Cultural and Historical Preservation (formerly the Bureau of Arts and Culture) under PNC Title 19 is
mandated to collect information about tangible and intangible heritage. It carries out annual surveys
of Palau’s 16 states by mapping important cultural and historical sites. Along with this survey is acompilation of the oral history of all sites identified in each state. Oral histories of places, migrations,and specific features are collected and compiled into a report. A literature review of previous works
is also conducted and used as background information or point of reference in carrying out interviews

52 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Regionof a particular state. The Palau Society of Historians was established in 1979 and is composed of 16
knowledge holders who represent each state of Palau. They work with the Bureau of Cultural andHistorical Preservation’s oral history staff to compile a series of Traditional and Customary Practices
booklet that is distributed to schools.
The Belau National Museum is also a semi-autonomous cultural institute (also under PNC Title 19)
which promotes and preserves Palauan culture through collection, curating, and exhibitions. It has
a Natural History department that does regular surveys on birds, insects, and plants. In an attempt
to document important plant use, the Museum carries out regular plant collections that they store in
their herbarium and also send to partnering institutions in New York and Japan.
The Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation and the Belau National Museum are two recognizedcultural institutions involved in preserving Palau’s ICH. However, many community organizations
carry out many ICH projects which remain undocumented and unreported. Several registered
non-profit organizations involved in promoting Palau ICH have begun to document, publish, anddisseminate their products to schools and libraries. A weakness in this endeavor is that there lacksa national guideline or policy in which government cultural institutions as well as community andnon-government organizations can follow to compile a more comprehensive research depository for
Palau ICH.
Since the 1960’s the Palau Ministry of Education has been producing booklets focused on Palauan
language, stories, and related materials to help build its Palauan studies resource center. The booklets
produced have covered many topics including cultural practices, chiefly titles, place histories,alphabets, language structures, and place specific histories.
In late 1970’s the Palau Community Action Agency (PCAA) conducted research on Palau culture
and history which produced three volumes on Palau history and one on legends and stories. Thiseffort was led by Katherine Kesolei a Palauan activist who later became a senator in Palau’s 9th Olbiil
er a Kelulau (Legislative branch of Palau).
One weakness recognized through this survey is the uncoordinated efforts between the cultural
institutions (the Belau National Museum and Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation),educational and community agencies (the Ministry of Education and the Palau Community Action
Agency). These agencies have different missions and objectives which influence the products they
produce. The Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation is most concerned with research towardsafeguarding cultural properties; therefore, extensive surveys are taken utilizing anthropological andSelected Country Reports 53

archaeological methods. Moreover, local and outside funding surveys are done consistently. This is
not necessarily the case for the other agencies mentioned above.
The major weaknesses in research toward Palau’s ICH are the under-documented activities that
community organizations and non-government organization carry out daily, monthly, or on anannual basis. Traditional organizations and NGOs play an important role in safeguarding Palau
ICH; however, very little research is conducted on their activities. Moreover, documentation andidentification is seldom part of their activities. ICH pertaining to performing arts continues to evolveand in most cases is at risk of being lost for lack of continuation or documentation; however, there isno national effort to systematically record them.

VI. What kind of ICH genres are predominant in available research?
The most predominant Palau ICH researched genres are the oral traditions, particularly oral histories
and legends. It is almost impossible to conduct ICH research without understanding the backgroundstories of why such a practice, event, or site was constructed the way it was. Such oral histories
recount the creation and origins of many beliefs which inform many cultural practices today. Anothergenre that has been document is Palau’s social organization.

VII. What kind of methodological approaches for ICH safeguarding are predominant
in available research?
The predominant method for Palau ICH safeguarding has been through anthropology, archaeology,
and history. Palau ICH were traditionally passed down orally, by experience, and by participatingin community feast and events. Early researchers of culture (Semper, Kubary, and Kramer),with the aid of interpreters, were able to collect important ethnographic information about social
practices, organizations, architecture, and to some extent languages. By interviewing, mapping,and observing, they were able to make written documents as a result of their surveys and time spent
in Palau. Sketches, charts, water color drawings, and photographs were also created as part of the
documentation process.
During the Japanese Administration in Palau, ICH documentation increased as the number of
researchers in different fields visited Palau to survey and report to the Japan government and associatedinstitutions. Hisakatsu Hijikata is one of the most notable anthropologists and artists who spent time
doing research in Palau and he wrote five volumes that captured Palau society and lifestyle.

54 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

In the Post war era (1945), Palau ICH were documented through the field of applied anthropology
which was focused on the acculturation situation of the Pacific islands, such as Palau, under colonial
and post-colonial rule. Reports by anthropologists John Useem; Harry Uyehara, Shigeru Kaneshiro,
Homer Barnett (1951-1953), and Robert K. Mcknight documents topics such as social organization,
crop cultivation, land tenure, proverbs, and analyses of the changes of traditional ways of life brought
about by outside influences.
With the concern of rapid cultural loss in Palau, a group of individuals founded the Belau National
Museum in 1955. They began by collecting objects and ethnographic information. The Museum
became a depository for old objects which were at risk of being lost. The Museum has an exhibition
space that showcases aspects of Palauan culture and history. Its Natural History department collects
information of important animal and plant species important to Palau’s ICH.
From 1960’s to the ‘80’s Palau’s ICH continued to be documented through anthropologists seeking
to fulfill their doctorate studies.
The Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation Oral History section employs three components
in its ethnographic interior state survey methods: literature review, fieldwork, and presentation offindings. Previous BCHP survey report/s are consulted first to understand what has already been
documented including the reviewing of other ethnographic volumes written in the early to mid1900s. A list is compiled, providing information to assist the team in developing a scope of work
and in revising its state survey instruments. This listing is further used when conducting interviews,
allowing the interviewer to verify the previously gathered oral accounts as well as document variant
versions, or document that variant versions occur.
The Palau Resource Institute Inc. is a nonprofit organization established in the late 80’s to address theneed for local researchers to document the oral history for archaeological surveys on development
projects. A monumental work, it was carried out to conduct an oral history survey of the constructionof Palau Compact Road, a 53 mile roadway build on Babeldaob, the main island of Palau. The
survey documents the oral histories of the ten states of Babeldaob.

VIII. How are communities involved and how do they participate in the research
activities?
In most of anthropological research, communities have served as informants for specific topics in theinvestigations. In most cases, they have served as knowledge holders of oral traditions and specificSelected Country Reports 55

skills. Cultural context is an important aspect in investigating cultural and historical sites; therefore,
communities from those specific sites are sought for oral histories, legends, and other ethnographic
materials.
In an attempt to provide community representation in historical and cultural preservation work
BCHP works closely with the Palau Historical and Cultural Advisory Board (PH and CAB) and the
Palau Society of Historians (PSoH). Both bodies are comprised of sixteen members representing thesixteen states of Palau. These members serve as informants as well as reviewers for work pertaining
to their states.

IX. What kind of methodologies and approaches have to be strengthened?
While the office of the Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation has been involved in the
research and documentation of Palau tangible and intangible cultural properties, they have limited
their focus to information that pertains to the cultural context of specific cultural and historical sites.
Large areas of Palau ICH such as the performing arts, material culture, culinary arts, and traditionalart remain under- represented in the available literature. Another area of approach that needs to beaddressed is the recordation of the knowledge and lives of the Palauan elders. This knowledge is an“irreplaceable resource” in Palau that time will slowly take away. It has been recommended that theirlives must rank as one of the highest priorities for the work that BCHP conducts (Smith 1997:38).
Similarly, there are certain principles in Palauan culture that must be taken into consideration
when conducting research in Palau. Katherine Kesolei (1977), a Palauan activist with training inanthropology, offers five attributes that impede research conducted by non-Palauans:● Information restriction● Palauans are unwilling to make their knowledge public● It is necessary to ask the appropriate persons● In areas familiar to Palauans, the opinions of Palauans are more important than the opinions
of foreigners● Locality and Relatives influence the characteristics of the information.

Kesolei’s main argument was that there are protocols foreign researchers much take into consideration
when conducting research in Palau. More importantly, there is certain knowledge that is restricted for
Palauans to discuss and maintain within themselves that is not subject to the criticisms and analyses

56 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Regionof outside researchers.
Along with establishing a national guideline for recording ICH, a different approach in researchmust be utilized to produce detailed and useful information for formal and informal education. In a
cultural mapping survey respondents identified certain areas that need to be addressed to strengthen
ICH education (Kloulechad-Singeo 2011:28-29):● Education should reinforce cultural learning and preservation.
● Resources should be provided to strengthen cultural education.
● Homes should provide early discipline, values, and a sense of responsibility as preparation
for school entry.
● Hands-on training to reinforce classroom education about culture should be developed.
● Museums and interpretation centers should develop and become more accessible for education
purposes. Community programs should revive cultural knowledge of general and specialty
fields.
● Klechibelau (way of doing things) should be strengthened through educational reinforcement.
● Culture should be taught through practice, such as by using historical sites to complement social
studies; strengthening and supporting community programs to revive cultural knowledge ofgeneral and specialty fields; and reviving natural science knowledge (Moon, tides, forests,
birds, fish, applying natural science in architecture and engineering, etc.).
● Palauan history should be taught in the classroom.
● Palauan orthography should have an official status

These points above support the recommendation that more Palauans should be involved in
documenting Palau ICH. Government agencies, non-government, community organizations, andprivate institutions should make an effort to document Palau ICH.
Palau Community College launched a Palauan Studies degree in 2014. This associate degree equips
students with knowledge of Palau history and culture. More importantly, it aims to equip students(Palauan and non-Palauan) with skills, methods, and appropriate approaches to conducting culturalresearch in Palau and other Pacific islands.
Lastly, it is important to strengthen the relationship between agencies involved in cultural preservationand stakeholders including community leaders, organizations, and NGOs. There are methods which

Selected Country Reports 57

have been developed and proven to increase the engagement of the stakeholder in the research andpublication process. Furthermore, cultural institutions need to carry out capacity building training tohelp stakeholders document and research their own ICH activities.

1

Palau consists of 16 states; each state has a separate state government and legislative body.

58 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Acknowledgements
This paper is based on a literature survey on the safeguarding of ICH in Palau conducted by thefollowing survey team: Meked Besebes (Principal Investigator), Julita Tellei (Research – Palau
Resource Institute), Maderchoduch Jerome Ramarui and Ikloi Kirah Rabelkuul (Data Entry
Personnel). The survey team would like to acknowledge the following reference: Goetzfridt,
Nicholas, and Peacock, Karen M., 2002, Micronesian Histories: Analytical Bibliography and Guide
to Interpretations, Greenwood.

Bibliography
Kesolei, Katherine, 1977, Restrictions to Freedom of Inquiry: Palauan Strains. Paper presented at a
Workshop on the Role of Anthropology in Contemporary Micronesia. Trust Territory of the PacificIslands.
Kloulechad-Singeo, Ann, 2011, Cultural Mapping-Republic of Palau. Secretariat of the PacificCommunity on behalf of the Ministry of Culture and Community Affairs, Government of the
Republic of Palau. Koror.
Smith, DeVern R. 1997, Palau Ethnography Volume 2: Recommendations for the Preservation ofHistoric and Cultural Resources in Palau. Micronesian Resource Study, Micronesian Endowmentfor Historic Preservation-U.S. National Park Service, Republic of Palau, Koror

Selected Country Reports 59

Survey Summary Report: Mongolia
Saruul ARSLAN*

I. Background: Mongolia and the UNESCO 2003 Convention for the Safeguardingof Intangible Cultural Heritage
The intangible heritage practices and expressions of Mongolian traditional culture are closely
associated with nature and the environment of the wide expanse of grassland and the Great Steppesof Mongolia and animal husbandry and livestock herding life. The people of Mongolia have adapted
to these environments while developing the unique nomadic culture.
In the beginning of 1990, Mongolia joined the common path of human development and began to open
to the outside world, thus laying the groundwork for joining international treaties and conventions,and actively working towards their effective implementation. Since then Mongolia has gradually
started taking steps towards establishing a system for safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage(ICH).
Mongolia ratified the UNESCO Convention for safeguarding ICH in 2005. Since the ratification,
Mongolia has been implementing measures for safeguarding ICH in its territory.
To safeguard ICH elements existing in the territory of Mongolia and to promote their bearers, theGovernment of Mongolia and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science have ratified the“National Representative List of ICH”, “The National List of ICH in Need of Urgent Safeguarding”
and the “National List of ICH bearers possessing the high level of skills and knowledge” and areworking to enhance and enrich ICH elements annually.

1-1. National Law/Act
There is no specific national law or act particularly focusing on ICH in whole, although there arenational laws regarding the protection of cultural heritage. The fundamental legislative act on thegiven theme is the “Law on the Protection of the Cultural Heritage, approved by the Parliament ofMongolia in 2001 and amended in 2014”. This law is based on other previous legislative instruments,
such as The Constitution of Mongolia (1992), the State Policy on Culture (1996), the Law on Culture* ICH Specialist, Centre of Cultural Heritage, Mongolia

60 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region(1996), and in connection with the other laws in the field of culture, education, and the arts as well asinternational agreements to which Mongolia is involved as a party state.
The Presidential decrees on the protection, promotion, and transmission of the traditional culturalelements show a significant influence on the public opinion. For example:● Decree on the introduction of a subject “Fundamental to the Mongolian traditional mentality
and thoughts” in the secondary school curricula from 2010, and● Decree on some measures to increase the official usage of Mongolian classical script in 2010.

1-2. State Policy on Culture
The State of Mongolia:
1) Considers the importance of the role of culture in building a humanitarian, civil, and democraticsociety,2) Emphasizes the Mongolian culture as one of the demonstrations of its independence and security,
as well as the origin of the national identity, unity, and a vital impetus of progress and development,3) Designates the State Policy on Culture to be followed constantly for the purpose of expanding the
public cultural service, developing all types of arts, perceiving the culture in a broader way andconnecting it to the other socio-economic fields and sectors.

1-3. Definition of Intangible Cultural Heritage
The definition of ICH in Mongolia was deliberated after the ratification of the 2003 UNESCO
Convention. Not only the definition, but also many other aspects and measures of this Convention
were adapted in Mongolia’s system of safeguarding ICH.
ICH refers to the customs, representations, expressions, traditional knowledge and methods, as wellas associated artefacts, instruments, art work, and cultural spaces that communities, groups, andindividuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage. /Article 3.1.5/
The following cultural heritage shall be considered ICH:
1. Modern language, scripts, and their cultural spheres;
2. Oral literature traditions, and their expressions;
3. Performing arts;
4. Making and playing traditional musical instruments, and the methods of noting melodies;
5. Traditional craftsmanship schools and methods;

Selected Country Reports 61

6. Folk customs and rituals;
7. Traditional folk knowledge and techniques;
8. Tradition of folk well-wishing;
9. National festivals, traditional games and associated rituals;
10. Traditional folk technology;
11. Tradition of recording a family tree;
12. Best tradition of ger school as form of apprentice training;
13. Customs, rituals of traditional religion and faith;
14. Traditional names of land and water;
15. Other ICH (Article 7.1).

1-4. The Mongolian National ICH Inventory
The Centre of Cultural Heritage of Mongolia is one of the key institutes for the safeguarding of ICH.
In 2009, the CCH launched a national project to establish an extensive database and inventory on theintangible cultural heritage of Mongolia.
The Primary Registration work of ICH was held in 2010 and covered 85 percent of all theadministrative units in Mongolia. 283 out of 329 soums of 21 provinces and 9 districts of Ulaanbaatar
city were involved. Overall, 88 ICH elements were identified and registered, and 3,339 individuals
were identified as ICH bearers.
Since 2010, CCH has annually organized the registration work and has covered 329 soums and 9
districts, and increased the number of individuals identified as ICH bearers to 7,923 with over 1240
ICH elements.
In 2009 the National Committee was established. It is a special expert committee for each of thefive domains according to the UNESCO Convention, whose task is to select elements of intangible
culture for nomination into the National Lists, as well into the UNESCO Lists.
The results of the registration census are a valuable asset gathered as a source to further elaborate
the short- and long-term objectives, policies, and programs for safeguarding and transmitting ICH.

62 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Figure 1. Registration Census of ICH bearers by domains by 2016

Figure 2. Registration Census of ICH elements by their domains by 2016

1-5. The National Lists of ICH
The National Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Mongolia incorporating
88 intangible heritage elements and the National List of Intangible Heritage in Need of Urgent
Safeguarding of Mongolia incorporating 16 ICH elements, were elaborated by the key stakeholders
in the field of ICH, and were approved by the ordinance No.A41 from the Minister of Culture, Sports

Selected Country Reports 63

and Tourism of Mongolia, on February 08, 2013 (date of most recent update).
In 2009, the National Committee for selecting and designating ICH and its bearers consisting of 25
individuals was established, and its drafts of the structure, rules, and operational directives were
elaborated. The National Committee, pursuant to the directives of the 2003 UNESCO “Convention
for Safeguarding the Intangible Cultural Heritage”, is in operation with the aim of researching andidentifying the original forms of ICH elements existing in Mongolian territory, of designating andrecognizing the ICH bearers, and further, of regulating the relations with the government, in its
cooperation and support for registering ICH and its bearers, by selecting accurate safeguarding
measures, and documenting and transmitting the elements to the next generation.
Accordingly, with the need to implement the objective to conduct the primary registration workof ICH and its bearers, the Sub-committees for selecting and designating ICH and its bearers at
the local level were established in the Departments of Education and Culture in each Province andeach District of Ulaanbaatar city. The Subcommittees, consisting of local representatives of experts,
professionals, and cultural activists, who were well experienced and able to conduct the evaluations on
ICH, including the local administrative individuals, were thought to be the main basis for successful
implementation of the primary registration work of ICH and its bearers.
128 individuals with high level skills were designated and acknowledged as the “Intangible Cultural
Heritage Bearers” and were awarded with certificates. These individuals were designated as ICH
Bearers by the following criteria:
1. The bearer should be recognized and acknowledged in his or her community as holding theICH element.
2. The bearer should possess a high level skills of the original forms of ICH, its distinct character,technique, repertoire, and school.
3. The bearer should possess the ICH element in connection to its livelihood and traditionalcustoms and rituals.
4. The bearer should be experienced in training and transmitting his/her knowledge and skills
and have the ability to conduct training.

1-6. The Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists of UNESCO
Since ratification of the UNESCO Convention, 13 intangible cultural heritage elements were inscribedon the UNESCO Lists from Mongolia, including 7 of them on the UNESCO Representative List of

64 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity and 6 of them on the UNESCO List of Intangible Cultural
Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding.

1-7. The National Program on Intangible Cultural Heritage
Since 1999, the Government of Mongolia has effectively established and implemented various
National programs on several specific ICH elements for the promoting, safeguarding, and supportingof the intangible cultural heritage bearers and practitioners, and their transmission activities. Thus:● National Program on the Promotion of Traditional Folklore, 1999-2006● National Program on “Mongolian Traditional Folk Long Song and Horse-head Fiddle”, 20062014● National Program on “Mongolian Traditional Art of Khöömei”, 2008-2014● National Program on “Mongolian Biyelgee: Mongolian Traditional Folk Dance”, 2009-2014● National Program on “‘Mongol Tuuli: Mongolian Epic”, 2012-2015● National Program on “Traditional music of the Tsuur”, 2013-2016
The ICH elements above are all inscribed in the UNESCO Lists and are bearers of the elements
folded up 3-4t times during these years.

II. Current ICH Research in Mongolia
There are number of projects and activities for the safeguard, promotion, and transmission of ICH in
Mongolia, implemented by governmental, non-governmental, academic institutions, and international
interventions.
Since 2009, the Center of Cultural Heritage has organized public forums and meetings, workshops
and launched the National Primary Inventory of Intangible Cultural Heritage. CCH annually funds
1-2 field -based research projects, which also deal with the issues of safeguarding.
Looking at the research on safeguarding ICH that has been produced in Mongolia, first , most of
the research has been funded by the state body delegated to operationalize ICH, namely the Centerof Cultural Heritage /CCH/. Also, there have been numerous studies done by the leading academic
institutions, such as the Ethnography Section of the Department of History and Archeology, and theLanguage and Literacy Institution of the National Academy of Science, Culture and Art ResearchInstitution under the University of Culture and Arts.
In the safeguarding of ICH, the contribution of civil society should be highlighted. There are aroundSelected Country Reports 65

100 NGOs operating in the cultural heritage sector. 30 of them are actively involved and carry out
projects on the safeguarding of ICH. They have tkaen considerable initiatives in the safeguarding,promotion, and transmission of different elements of ICH, but they all face a similar problem: lackof financial support.

The Foundation for the Protection of Natural and Cultural Heritage, Mongolian Cultural
Studies Association, for example, is conducting long-term research, documentation, and training on
ICH and is engaged in the preparation of work for the proclamation of the ‘Mongolian Traditional
Folk Long Song’ as a Masterpiece of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. Since Mongolia
joined to the ‘2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage’in 2005, it has played an active role in the procession and implementation of projects for identifying,safeguarding, and transmitting ICH and its bearers. In recent years, the Foundation has been involved
in field surveys in the four regions of Mongolian territory in order to identify the bearers andpractitioners of ICH. In 2008 and 2009, the Foundation for the Protection of Natural and Cultural
Heritage, Mongolian Cultural Studies Association co-organized an international festival of traditional
Mongolian music of the Morin Khuur (a two-stringed fiddle) and Khuumei (throat singing) with the
MECS (Ministry of Education, Culture and Sciences), and published ‘Mongolian customs and festive
events’ in 2006. Mongol Khuumei and Mongol Naadam, a Mongolian Traditional Art Festival havealso been nominated to the Representative list of the Intangible Cultural Heritages of Humanity inclose cooperation with the Mongolian National Commission for UNESCO. Also, the Foundation has
taken relevant measures to create a database of the Mongolian long song-singers and to develop theirrepertory in cooperation with the Association of Mongolian Long Song. Experts from the Foundation
are engaged in field surveys on the current status of ICH and its bearers throughout Mongolian
territory. The field survey trips aim to identify the bearers and practitioners of ICH in the Central,
Eastern, and Gobi regions, as well as to conduct on-site registration and documentation of their skills,
wisdom, knowledge, manners, accomplishments, and other values of intellectual culture of greatscientific and artistic importance.
The Foundation for the Protection of Natural and Cultural Heritage has close cooperation with thebearers of ICH, such as long song-singers, throat singing-singers, and epic singers. The Foundation
has conducted case studies on the bearers of intangible cultural heritage in 2006-2007 and has
published the report, ‘Mongolian rituals, manners and festivals’.

66 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

The Mongolian Cultural Studies Association’s objectives are: to conduct research, training, andpropagation on cultural issues at both theoretical and practical levels, to promote foreign relations
and publishing, support citizens in solving issues and facilitating state and civil relations in cultural
fields. Also, to safeguard ICH nationwide, an elaborate legal framework, which propagates ICH at
the international level and promotes its transmission are the objectives of the Mongolian Cultural
Studies Association.
The Mongolian Cultural Studies Association is engaged in the project, ‘Mongolia-Korea the firststrategy meeting on the application of the living human treasure system’ in 2008, which is rooted
in the UNESCO 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Within
the framework of the Project, research is conducted on the situation of the intangible heritage ofMongolia about 40 traditional customs and manners have been described. A monograph has also been
produced which contains information and a list on the documentation of intangible cultural heritage
as well as a case study on public, civil servant, and officials’ opinions on ICH. The Mongolian
Cultural Studies Association is one of the key implementers of the Project: “Implementation of
UNESCO ‘Living Human Treasures’ System in Mongolia”, and the Association has an active
involvement in the initial steps to develop creative industries in Mongolia. Within the framework of
the project ‘Introduction of UNESCO Living Human Treasure System in Mongolia’, the Association
conducted field research in the Western, Eastern, Central and Gobi regions of Mongolia in order
to identify, survey, determine, and document locations and distribution of certain bearers of ICH.
Representatives from the Mongolian Cultural Studies Association have actively taken part in theseminars and meetings organized in China (2006) and Mongolia (2008) in the field of safeguardingof ICH and they have gained significant experience for further activities. The Mongolian Cultural
Studies Association participated in the elaboration of the nomination dossier of the Bii biyelgee: theMongolian Traditional Folk Dance for the inscription on the UNESCO List of Intangible Cultural
Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding. The Association also elaborated on draft proposals for‘Regulations of State Support for Determining, Registering, Safeguarding, Transmitting, Developing
and Promoting Intangible Cultural Heritage and Its Bearers’, the ‘Rule of National Council for
Determining Intangible Cultural Heritage and Its Bearers’, and the ‘List of Types and Forms ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in Mongolia’ and submitted the proposals to the Ministry of Education,
Culture and Science of Mongolia. Moreover, the Association has conducted training and publicity,and has produced publications based on case studies and research on ICH. The Mongolian Cultural

Selected Country Reports 67

Studies Association has elaborated on a long-term project plan, ‘Ugsaatny Uran Biyeleg’ (EthnicGraceful Dance: Biyeleg), which has been implemented for 4 years.

III. How are communities involved and who participate in the research activities?
Communities have served as informants for specific topics being investigated. In addition, they havebeen actively engaged in the elaboration of policy documents and action plans on the Safeguardingof ICH. There are also new trends from the community to study ICH at the academic level.

IV. Strengths of Current Research on ICH Safeguarding
The research on safeguarding describes effective collaboration between researchers and different
stakeholder groups in the community, including culture bearers and local government agencies. For
example, in some cases, researchers are members of certain communities and groups, or are bearers
themselves. In the latter case, it is very productive to involve these researchers in the safeguarding
measures. For example, researcher/bearers were involved in the following projects:● National Program on “Mongolian Traditional Folk Long Song and Horse-head Fiddle”, 20062014,● National Program on “Mongolian Traditional Art of Khöömei”, 2008-2014,● National Program on “Mongolian Biyelgee: Mongolian Traditional Folk Dance”, 2009-2014,● National Program on “‘Mongol Tuuli: Mongolian Epic”, 2012-2015,● National Program on “Traditional music of the Tsuur”, 2013-2016.
Most of the research aimed to identify and document ICH elements to raise public awareness andpromote the ICH practitioners, and was effectively implemented.
Moreover, selecting accurate safeguarding measures, by documenting and transmitting the elements
to the next generation is helpful. For instance, the field-based research results endorsed the national
programs implemented during 1999-2016.
The Law on the Protection of the Cultural Heritage of Mongolia was adopted in 2001, but the Law
does not indicate any standards or regulations (domestic or international) for documentation materials.
As a result of the Primary Inventory of ICH, its 2014 amendment / has more detailed regulations andstandards for Archival procedures and materials in order to preserve the comprehensive materials andrecordings for purposes of transmission, dissemination, and distribution to the public.
According to the above-mentioned Law, Chapter 4 is a mandated to register, document, and collect68 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

information of tangible and intangible heritage at all government levels. Also, Chapter 5, Article 27,
gives strength to ICH research activity.
During the last few years capacity-building efforts have been carried out within the framework of
the UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust Project, “Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage throughStrengthening National Capacities in Asia and the Pacific”:
Implementation of the 2003 Convention (2012),
Community-based inventorying (2013),
Elaboration of nomination files (2015)
Safeguarding plans (2016).
Most recently the UNESCO Beijing Office has carried out workshops on the “Training of Trainers
on Digitizing Mongolian Intangible Cultural Heritage”. All the workshops involved cultural workers
from the local government, NGO’s, and community members and academics.
There is also an ongoing project under the Center of Cultural Heritage to develop geographical andhazard maps of Mongolian Intangible Cultural Heritage for the purpose of developing the basic
guidelines for policy makers to plan safeguarding policy, risk management, and to indicate and create
a database of impact assessments, such as natural, geographical, and the economic and social impacts
of ICH.
In conclusion. Current Research on ICH Safeguarding in Mongolia recently has shown an effective
collaboration between communities, NGOs, local government, and researchers. Increased publicawareness of the importance of participatory approaches in safeguarding are among the recent
strengths.

V. Weaknesses of Current Research on ICH Safeguarding
Mongolia has24 ethnic groups. Some ICH items fall into different genres according to the different
ethnicities. Therefore, it would be essential to conduct surveys in the regions possessing different
ICH elements.
While the increased awareness of the importance of participatory approaches in safeguarding is
encouraging, none of the research studies were able to report on the long-term effectiveness andimpact of ICH safeguarding initiatives. Given the recent listing and implementation of safeguarding
activities, further follow-up research would be required to assess the long-term sustainability of ICH
safeguarding initiatives.

Selected Country Reports 69

The research on safeguarding ICH in Mongolia is limited to the accessibility of research reports, andmost reports are paper based. To improve the accessibility of the research reports to the public, it isessential to digitalize them.
In Mongolia, there is a single Ministry in charge of four large sectors: Culture, Education, the
Sciences, and Sports. Education is crucial to the general policy and the education budget, particularly
for the cultural sector in the safeguarding of ICH, is undervalued. Consequently, there is not enoughfinancial, professional, and technical support for the safeguarding of intangible heritage. Therefore, alarge number of safeguarding programs only survive by outside resources and international support.

VI. What kind of ICH genres are predominant in available research?
The most predominant Mongolia ICH researched is the oral tradition and performing arts. Oral
histories and legends, dance and song are the most well researched. ICH is relatively new trend in
Mongolia and therefore the terminology is not up-to-date.

VII. What kind of methodological approaches for ICH safeguarding are predominant
in available research?
Since 1950, the Mongolian Academy of Science has intensively conducted ethnographical
expeditions. In terms of the documentation literacy there are a numerous number of studies that havebeen conducted under these ethnological studies.
Recently a lot of research has been conducted on the Safeguarding of ICH, and these studies mainly
report action plans on certain ICH elements.

VIII. Recommendations for Improving Future Research on Safeguarding ICH
It is highly recommended that the relevant agencies (CCH) and academic institutions collaborate with
communities to produce more multimedia materials (films, websites) showcasing ICH safeguarding
efforts, challenges, and successes in Mongolia.
Online ICH resources are valuable tools for ICH transmission and promotion; therefore, digitalizing
documentation and inventory as well as research archives will improve access to broader audiences.

70 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Survey Summary Report: Malaysia
Hanafi Bin HUSSIN*

I. Introduction
For research on the literature of safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) programs or
projects in Malaysia, I have selected the articles as safeguarding articles which met the criteria givenin the UNESCO’s definition of safeguarding. Therefore, criteria to select articles was based on thecharacteristics andelements given in the definition of intangible heritage provided by UNESCO, i.e.,(1) the criteria for the 1. Preservation (2) Documentation (3) Promotion (4) Protection (5) Performing
Arts (6) Oral traditions (7) Social practices.
UNESCO’s definition of safeguarding is as follows:“Safeguarding” means measures aimed at ensuring the viability of the intangible cultural heritage,
including the identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion,enhancement, transmission, particularly through formal and non-formal education, as well as therevitalization of the various aspects of such heritage” (UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguardingof the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Article 2 (3))”.
This report presents the literature that according to the ICH UNESCO Convention on safeguarding
has been before 2005 and implemented in 2016. Therefore, awareness of the Safeguarding of ICH
started earlier, and awareness of it enhanced after UNESCO’s convention on the ICH ratfieid byMalaysia in 2013.

1-1. Background: Malaysia and the UNESCO 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of ICH
The National Heritage Act (2005) (Act of 645) of Malaysia was a response to the UNESCO’s
Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (CSICH); however, Malaysia
ratified the CSICH in 2013. The NHAprovides for the protection, conservation and preservation ofnational heritage, natural heritage, cultural heritage, tangible and intangible heritage, underwater
cultural heritage and treasures, to include other matters pertinent thereof. The NHA repealed the* Associate Professor, Department of South East Asian Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences,
University of Malaya, Malaysia

Selected Country Reports 71

two (2) previous Acts; namely, the Antiquities Act of 1976 and Treasure Trove Act of 1957. The
NHAcontains 17 sections, comprising 126 sections related to the conservation and preservationof heritage. It provides power to the Minister to formulate policies related to the conservationand preservation of heritage, the appointment of the Commissioner of Heritage, a Council, andEnforcement Officer and the appointment of officers to assist the Commissioner of Heritage. In
addition, the functions and responsibilities that a Member of the National Heritage Council should
exercise are also outlined in the said Act. Accordingly, all matters relating to the conservation andpreservation of heritage is subject to Act 645. Any non-compliance with any of the provisions of the
NHA is an offence, which may result in fines or imprisonment.
ICH as indicated in the NHA (indicated as Intangible Heritage) is defined as follows: “Intangible
heritage is a legacy of priority areas that include a heritage that is ‘not an object’ to be enjoyed by thehuman senses”. Strictly speaking, Intangible Heritage represents an act or gesture of man that can beseen, touched, felt, smelled, or heard when it is done or exists, but no longer can be enjoyed when
it is missing or expired. The NHA reinterprets ICH as including any form of expression, language,
utterances, sayings, songs produced by music, note, the lyrics, can be heard, singing, folk, oral
traditions, poetry, dance, acting as produced through the performing arts, theater, changing soundand music, martial arts, which have existed or exist in relation to the Heritage of Malaysia or any partof Malaysia or Malaysian society in relation to UNESCO.
The ICH in Malaysia is conserved and protected by the NHA. ICH belonging to various ethnic
groups in Malaysia such as folk songs, oral traditions, poetry, music, dance, and the performing arts
have produced cultural heritage, which is then translated into tourism products. Changing times andinsufficient attention have led to the loss and in some cases, the demise of Malaysia’s ICH. The NHA
and agencies also refers to aspects of the conservation of ICH. It can be said that attention given to
ICH in Malaysia is still low compared with the attention given to tangible heritage. This situation
gave rise to the need for ICH preservation and safeguarding. Thus, theNHA and the conservation ofheritage law enforcement agencies concerned should stay relevant and responsive to the needs of thetimes so that the legacy of ICH can be enjoyed by future generations.
On 23 July 2013, Malaysia handed the Director-General its instrument of ratification of theConvention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. The instrument contains thefollowing declaration:

72 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

The Government of Malaysia declares that the application and implementation of the provision ofthis Convention shall be subject to, and in accordance, the applicable domestic laws of Malaysia andthe applicable administrative and policy measures of the government of Malaysia.” (WIPO, website:
August 4, 2015).

1-2. Progress towards UNESCO’s ICH Convention Ratification
To date, UNESCO has only recognised one ICHin Malaysia, the Mak Yong. It was ratified on 25
November 2005. This ancient theatre form was created by Malaysia’s Malay communities, and is acombination of acting, vocal and instrumental music, gestures and elaborate costumes. Specific to thevillages of Kelantan in north-west Malaysia, where the tradition originated, Mak Yong is performed
mainly as entertainment or for ritual purposes related to healing practices.
Raising national heritage to the world is the task of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture (MoTC)
Malaysia, formerly the Ministry of Information Communication and Culture (MICC) through the
National Heritage Department (NHD), which is tasked to preserve and maintain the heritage ofMalaysia. MICC is Malaysia’slatest effort in line with the Convention Safeguarding Intangible

Cultural Heritage 2003, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO). Following the goal, the National Heritage Department organizes the Heritage, which
specifically introduced national intangible heritage, at UNESCO headquarters recently.
There were many items declared, to include 24 sites, 10 tangible heritage, 164 intangible heritage(as of 2016), and the nine leaders of the living National Heritage. UNESCO is also working with
Sarawak under the “Endangered Languages” to implement two projects to preserve two languages inthe state, Kelabit and Bidayuh to save them from extinction. Also, the National Heritage Department
also has a tight one-year calendar which continuously provides exposure to the country’s heritage tothe people, especially the young people, as a step to encourage them to respect our national treasures.
The younger generation should be encouraged to preserve and protect the national intangible heritage.
Along this line, the NHD should take on a responsible and committed part in the conduct of researchand documentation of ICH that includes research in the performing arts, visual arts, and artistic
expression in Malaysia. The department is intensifying efforts to introduce and promote national
intangible heritage to ensure that modernization does not render it into oblivion. Society, especiallythe younger generation, is exposed to the wide range of intangible heritage of the country, such as
old Malay writing (Jawi), seloka, poetry, weaving, stitching, sounds, music, and dance. They can beSelected Country Reports 73

nurtured through activities, information, and dissemination of information about the uniqueness andpower of national intangible heritage.
Therefore, in 2016, NHD organized many programs and activities such as seminars and workshops
on Intangible Heritage (April 27 to 28, Terengganu), a Heritage Festival in conjunction with
UNESCO (May, Kuala Lumpur), the East Coast Heritage Carnival and Values (August, Kota
Bharu, Kelantan), the Workshop on the Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage. NHD is also
actively participating in International Seminar events, meetings, seminars, workshops, and festivals.
There have also been other relevant activities such as the Malaysia Cultural Week in Amsterdam(Amsterdam, Netherlands), the General Assembly of the States Parties to the Safeguarding of theIntangible Cultural Heritage (UNESCO, Paris), an Ethiopia’s 11th Session of the Intergovernmental
Committee of The Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (Addis Ababa, November 2016).
Malaysia, specifically the MoTC, is continuously taking steps on the Safeguarding of ICH byformulating cultural heritage policies and programs. These steps are categorized into following: 1)
formulation of Laws, Rules, and Regulations (promulgation of NHA, setting criteria for rating of
hotels, compulsory usage of the National Language, the Teaching of Ethnic Languages in Schools,
and the Registration of Traditional Medicine Practitioners). 2) Increased Research, Documentation,
and Publication on ICH. Grants were disbursed to institutions of higher learning as well as toindividual experts to embark on research work not only for documentation purposes, but to seek new,as well as further or validate previous findings (documentations are in the form of written works andaudio-visuals where applicable). These are then publicised and distributed to the public, institutionsof higher learning, and public libraries. As an effort to further document the vast intangible heritagesof this country, the Ministry has embarked on a continuous cultural-mapping exercise as a prelude to
inventory making of such heritages. It is hoped that such exercises, though time-consuming, will set
the path for the right direction towards safeguarding the ICH. 3) efforts have also been extended on
promotion of ICH (for example, the Arts Acculturalization Program for the Masses, Competitions,Campaigns, and the Arts Market). 4) Capacity Building programmes (for example, The Young Sports
Program, The School Cultural Club Program, The Youth Cultural Club Program, The Self Defense(or Martial Arts) Program, and the Compulsory Education of Traditional Theatres. 5) Infrastructure
has been built (for example, the Building of Cultural Centres, the Establishment of Museums, and the
Building of Craft Centres. 6) National Arts Awards. 7) Allocation of funds for all the above statedinitatives.

74 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

1-3. The Malaysian National ICH Registry
The ICH Expert Committee recommends that the customs, language and literature, culture and crafts,
food, traditional games and martial arts, traditional medicine and performing arts are recognised
as national heritage. This is in line with the National Heritage Act 2005, and there is much moreintangible heritage unique to Malaysia, which can potentially attract the world’s attention because thesaid heritage covers a different, whole way of life. Malaysia is a melting pot of ethnicity, race, andreligion. NHD encourages and supports anyone who actively pursues the preservation and protectionof intangible heritage, by providing guidelines on the authenticity of traditional heritage.
As updated by National Heritage Department (January 2016) there are 241 National Intangible
Heritage (Objects, which are listed without using the seven domains of UNESCO Intangible Cultural
Heritage. All of these items can be retrieved from the NHD website under these domains; performing
arts (Theatre, dance and music), culture and custom (custom, traditional games, martial arts, traditional
food, and traditional medicine), Language and Literature (oral tradition, Malay manuscripts), finearts (weaving, embroidery (tekad), etc).
The NHA was enacted as a response to the situation and needs of the country, as well as a response
to aspects and responsibilities of the various parties, including the State and Federal Government
related to the Joint List, Schedule 9, (Norliza Rofli & Eddin Khoo 2009: 25). The formulation of the
NHA was meant to protect and promote national treasure.
Normally, intangible cultural heritage listed as national heritage is the legacy of various ethnic andimmigrant groups that symbolizes the identity of ethnic and immigrant groups. Based on the records
documented by the National Heritage Department, intangible heritage related to the life of thesegroups can be divided food, clothing, customs and dances. Among the subcategories of food listed in
the list of national heritage are: nasi lemak, pulut kuning, nasi dagang, lemang, ketupat, teh tarik, roti
canai and dan asam pedas. The following are types of traditional cloth: ikat samping, pua kumbu,
baju kurung, songket, baju Melayu, and destar, dan batik. Customs of ICH include: Buka kampung,adat pijak tanah, adat perpatih, adat temenggung, and adat melenggang perut dan cukur jambul.
ICH dance includes: Boria, Tarian zapin, Main Puteri, Ulik Mayang, Sewang, Topeng Mah Meri,
Bharata Natyam, and tarian Bhangra. All of the ICH has been protected under the NHA. Among
those appearing in the list of categories of heritage, they can be divided into the following subcategories: dance, music, customs, and folk games. Among the dances listed under this subcategory
are Menora, Asyik, Tarinai, Canggung, and Khatak.

Selected Country Reports 75

1-4. The Malaysia National Heritage
The National Heritage Act 2005 (Akta Warisan Malaysia 2005) is an Act aimed at providing for theconservation and preservation of National Heritage, natural heritage, tangible and intangible cultural
heritage, and underwater cultural heritage such as treasure troves. The Act received Royal Assent on
30 December 2005 and was published in the Gazette on 31 December 2005. The NHAcame into effecton 1 March 2006. According to the NHA ICHincludes: “Any form of expressions, languages, lingual
utterances, sayings, musically produced tunes, notes, audible lyrics, songs, folksongs, oral traditions,
poetry, music, and dances as produced by the performing arts, theatrical plays, audible compositionsof sounds and music, martial arts, that may have existed or existed in relation to the heritage ofMalaysia or any part of Malaysia or in relation to the heritage of a Malaysian community” (Uytsel,
2015). In this Act, references to the State Authority in relation to the Federal Territory of Kuala
Lumpur, the Federal Territory of Labuan and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya shall be construed
as references to the Minister responsible for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, the Federal
Territory of Labuan and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya (University Science Malaysia, undated:
Online). Policy about conservation and the preservation of heritage are (1) Subject to subsection (2),and the Minister shall be responsible for providing or issuing policies, statements or directives inrespect of any matter, business, strategy or conduct on the conservation and preservation of heritage.
(2) The Minister shall not provide or issue any policies, statements or directive under subsection(1) where the matter, business, strategy, or conduct of the conservation and preservation of heritage
concerns the power or jurisdiction of a State unless the relevant State Authority has been consulted.
For the conservation of ICH as indicated in Act 60, (1) The owner or custodian of a heritage object in
the form of an intangible cultural heritage shall take all necessary steps to develop, identify, transmit,
cause to be performed and facilitate the research on the intangible cultural heritage according to
the guidelines and procedures as may be prescribed. (2) The Commissioner may enter into any
arrangements with the owner or custodian of the intangible cultural heritage for the compliance withguidelines and procedures as prescribed (University Science Malaysia, undated: Online).

II. ICH Research Trends in Malaysia, 2001-2016
2-1. ICH Research and publication in Malaysia“Safeguarding” in the NHA means the identification, protection, conservation, restoration, renovation,
maintenance, documentation, and revitalization of historical or traditional matter, artefacts, areas

76 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

and their environment. Many researchers, scholars, postgraduate students, government agencies
and NGOs have come forward to conduct research on many items of ICH of Malaysia. There area few universities in Malaysia, which have established Heritage studies units or research teams.
Among them are the National University of Malaysia (UKM), Universiti Malaysia Kelantan (UMK),
Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), and Universiti Sains Malaysia.
The survey (Table 1-1a and 1b) from 2001-2016 shows that the amount of literature included as
ICH are quite extensive: 171 books, journal papers, chapters in books, research report, etc. From2010 – 2016 there was an increase compared to the previous years (Table 1a and graph 1). This isprobably the result of the establishment of research universities in Malaysia, such as the Universityof Malaya, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Universiti Putra Malaysia,
and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. One of the most important requirements of obtaining a research
grant is a publication in a respected and high-impact journal or publication. Most of the higher
ranking journals or publications are international. A lot of publications regarding ICH in Malaysia
are published in international publications, journals, or books as can be seen in the 70 publications
published by international publication houses (43%) (Table 1b and graph 2).
The survey (Table 1a) shows that the two ICH genre which received the most attention for researchand publication are in the performing arts and social practices, in ritual, and in festive events. Among
the reasons why these two genres received more attention for research and publication is the easy
availability of data for collection, observation, including participant observation and interviews(with the informants and respondents). Less attention is given to the field of Oral Traditions andExpressions, Food Heritage, and Traditional craftsmanship. A lack of information and available datain these genres make it quite a challenge to carry out research.

Selected Country Reports 77

Table 1
1a: ICH Literature of Malaysia, 2001-2016
Category/Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Social Practices,
Rituals & Festive Events 2

-

1

2

2

2

4

5

4

8

8

12

9

9

8

2

78

Performing Arts

-

-

-

-

2

-

1

1

5

4

7

10

5

8

5

6

54

Oral Tradition &Expression

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

3

3

-

-

5

-

2

2

16

Traditional
Craftsmanship

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

1

2

1

4

3

3

15

Food Heritage

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

1

1

-

3

2

8

Total

2

-

1

3

4

3

5

6

12 16 16 25 21 21 21 15 171

Table 1b: ICH Literature of Malaysia published in Malaysia and Internationally
Category/Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Malaysia

-

-

1

1

2

1

1

3

7

9

12

7

10

7

11 11

83

International

2

-

-

2

1

3

4

3

3

4

4

17 11

7

10

4

75

Not identifiable

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

3

-

1

7

-

-

13

Total

2

-

1

3

3

4

5

6

12 16 16 25 21 21 21 15 171-

In 2007, Malaysia introduced the concept of University Research and strengthened the status offour local universities-Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM),
Universiti Malaya (UM) and Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) - as Research universities. This
resulted in many publications in the form of books, journals, reports etc. Literature is one of the main
outputs of the research conducted by the researchers of members of the Research Universities. Thiscan be clearly seen in Graphs 1 and Graph 2: 2012-2016 shows the increasing number of publicationsin the domain of Social Practices, Rituals and Festive Events, Performing Arts, Oral Traditions andExpressions, Traditional Craftsmanship, and Food Heritage. Since the research is conducted byuniversity professors, one of the requirements is that the publications should appear at international
venues such as International Journal publications, International book presses, etc. This can be seen in
the Graph 2, where the total number of international publications is almost the same as the numberof local publications.

78 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Graph 1: ICH Literature of Malaysia, 2001-2016 (by domain)

Graph 2: Literature of ICH-Malaysia – Published in Malaysia and Internationally2-2. Safeguarding and non-safeguarding ICH Research and Publications in Malaysia
As discussed in the Introduction, this report presents the literature that according to ICH UNESCO
Convention on safeguarding has been collected before 2005 and implemented in 2016. Therefore,awareness of the Safeguarding of the ICH started earlier, but awareness of the safequarding ofliterature was enhanced after the ratification of the UNESCO’s Convention on the ICH in 2006. The

Selected Country Reports 79

spirit of safeguarding among researchers from the government and from non-government agencies
existed in their research concepts and plan. However, the implementation of the research projects
resulted in the forms of a report, a model for sustaining the tradition, publication in the form ofbooks, journal papers, report, etc. By taking this consideration and tracing the aim and objectivesof the research and publications, from 2001 until 2016, more than 90% of the publications show
the awareness of safeguarding. There were 171 literatures items on different aspects of Malaysian
heritage, and of these 163 items of literature were on the ICH safeguarding (Table 2a).
Table 2a: Literature on ICH Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016
Category/Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Social Practices,
Rituals & Festive Events 2

-

1

2

2

2

4

5

3

8

3

12

9

8

8

2

71

Performing Arts

-

-

-

-

2

-

1

1

4

4

7

10

5

7

5

7

52

Oral Tradition &Expression

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

5

3

-

-

5

-

2

2

18

Traditional
Craftsmanship

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

1

2

1

4

3

2

14

Food Heritage

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

1

1

-

3

3

9

Total

2

-

1

3

4

3

5

6

12 16 11 25 21 19 21 16 163

Table 2b: Paper Publications on ICH Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016
Category/Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Malaysia

-

-

1

1

2

1

1

3

6

9

12

6

9

6

11 11

79

International

2

-

-

2

1

2

4

3

3

4

4

15 11

7

10

4

72

Not identifiable

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

3

-

1

7

-

-

12

Total

2

-

1

3

3

3

5

6

10 16 16 22 20 20 21 15 163-

There are three domains of the ICH of Malaysia that have always been targeted for the research
projects among researchers, i.e., social practices, rituals and festive events, the performing arts andoral traditions and expressions. This phenomenon can be seen from Graph 3. Graph 4 shows the
publication of Malaysias ICH both internationally and locally.

80 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Graph 3: Literature on Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016

Graph 4: Publication of Literature on ICH Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016

This report is based on the criteria of UNESCO’s CSICH. It finds that there were many kinds ofliterature that did not meet the “safeguarding” criteria. There were only eight kinds of literature
considered “non-safeguarding” ICH literature in this survey (2001-2016) as can be seen in Table 3a.
Those eight kinds of pieces of literature were published both at international and local publication
houses can be seen in Table 3b. Graph 5 shows the trend and the domains for the ICH Nonsafeguarding projects through Literature from the year 2001 until 2016. Graph 6 shows the venue forSelected Country Reports 81

the publication of ICH Non-safeguarding project awareness. It shows that both local and international
publication venues are equally important.
Table 3a: Literature on ICH Non-Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016
Category/Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Social Practices,
Rituals & Festive Events

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

1

-

-

3

1

-

-

-

6

Performing Arts

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Oral Tradition &Expression

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Traditional
Craftsmanship

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

1

Food Heritage

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Total

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

-

-

3

-

1

-

-

8

Table 3b: Paper publication on ICH Non-Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016
Category/Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Malaysia

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

1

1

1

-

-

4

International

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

2

-

-

-

-

3

Not identifiable

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Total

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

2

-

-

3

1

1

-

-

8

82 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Graph 5: Paper Publication on ICH Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016

Graph 6: Paper Publication on ICH Non-Safeguarding in Malaysia, 2001-2016

III. Strengths of Current Research on ICH Safeguarding
3-1. Participatory Approaches to ICH Research
The NHA clearly lays down the responsibilities and roles of the government and the releavant
institutions for the protection, conservation and preservation of Malaysian heritage. The NHA also
urges for generating research and promoting various aspects related to heritage (Abdul Aziz Hussain
2011). The findings of the survey as seen in Table 1 clearly show that there is a growing awarenessamongst the heritage scholars, researchers, postgraduate students, government agencies, and NGOs,

Selected Country Reports 83

etc. to conduct research and publish their research findings. With all the encouragement and supportof research and publication, rapid change can be observed from 2010 until 2016.
The provisions of Section 60(1) describe how the owner of intangible heritage should take appropriate
action to develop, identify, send, and to facilitate the ease of research on ICH by the guidelines andprocedures in the provisions. This is directed at the community or the beholder of the intangible
heritage, to participate and own the safeguarding process.
Half of the survey shows that the community is involved in the research process. In some researchin the genre of music, dance, and theatre, academics and researchers have been working closelywith key community members in the process of data collection, data processing, analysis, and reportwriting. The community is also involved in the process of developing and protecting their ICH,
which can easily be transmitted to the younger generation. The research among this focus group is themost effective method for selecting important informants and provides ease in the documentation,
analysis, and interpretation of the data. The research process, in other words, can be properly andeffectively carried out. The academic research by the scholars proves to be high quality because thedocumentation, data analysis, and report writing were done scientifically, with proper methodology
and within a clear theoretical framework. This will ease the process of transmitting ICH to the younger
generations. The high quality of research output, especially those works published internationallywill reach larger local and international audiences as shown in Table 2.

3-2. Holistic and Contextual Approaches to ICH Research and the availability of Research
Findings
The years from 2010-2016 showed extensive research activities on ICH. Overall, this particularresearch evolved to fulfill the requirements of a research grant, specifically to have an output that
contributes to the country. Consequently, more and more research is trying to meet this demand. The
need for a holistic approach to research has been emphasized to avoid the pitfall of generalizations.
The findings should be included in a larger theoretical framework, and the research should be molded
into a broader study, based on a holistic research approach. This phenomenon also parallels with theneed for papers to be published in journals. The journal publications normally require extensive study
to make the papers readable. This will make it easy for the papers to get citations, and it will ensurethat the researcher will receive merit through a good ranking.

84 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

IV. Challenges to the Current Research on ICH Safeguarding
4-1. Time consuming
Since Malaysia has many ethnic cultures, safeguarding of the ICH is not easy job, though not
impossible. Although Malaysia has just embarked on cultural mapping as a prelude to the process ofinventory, this exercise is time-consuming.

4-2. Validity of the data/resources
Most of the elderly and knowledgeable respondents are aged, which is a factor to because some ofthese repondentsmay not be around for the whole duration of the research. To rectify this matter, theNational Heritage Department should embark on a proper five-year action plan to identify the ICH tobe safeguarded and draw programs for development as well as for inventory purposes.

4-3. Relevance of the significance or impact of the Research on Safeguarding
Almost all of the research on ICH were conducted with a special purpose, that is, as academic
research, or postgraduate theses, etc. The trajectories of this type of research is mainly to produce
papers for publication in a journal, book, or thesis. These high-quality research papers, however, did
not solely concentrate on safeguarding matters. Therefore, more research should be done specificallyon safeguarding ICH as a priority and the impact on a safeguarding program.

4-4. Raw Data Limited Accessibility
Another challenge in safeguarding the ICH is the availability of data. Data from other studies arealso needed by other researchers to be used for other research purposes. Researchers can only accessother studies through final reports and publications. Those materials sometimes do not reflect the realstate of ICH.

V. Recommendations for Improving Future Research on ICH Safeguarding
5-1. Improvement on methodology
As discussed in 4.3, all research projects about the ICHshould be addressed to the aim and objectives tosafeguard particular the ICH. This aim and objectives can be achieved by identifying and performing
suitable methodologies, especially data gathering and research results dissemination. Inventorymaking methodologies are another area to be addressed as each intangible heritage is different, andSelected Country Reports 85

therefore needs a distinctive treatment. Appropriate methodologies have to be invented, developed,
and adapted to suit the situation, as needed. However, such exercises may be lengthy and timeconsuming, immense value can be brought to humankind by such efforts in the preservation of ourvast intangible cultural heritage.

5-2. Assessment Research on Safeguarding Initiatives
The purpose of research on the ICH varies. Some research is on lighter topics, very and some is onserious academic research. It will be good if the country has a centralized database for literature andraw data. This way, all the data and literature could be accessed by all researchers for their further
research. It would help the planning and strategy of future National ICH safeguarding programs.

5-3. Audio-Visual, Multimedia, and the Sharing of ICH
ICH belongs to the beholders of a particular community. Audio-visual material should be properly
recorded from the beginning of the research program and can be shared with the public. It is
recommended that all researchers, agencies, and academic institutions work together to produce
comprehensive audio-visual documents. This agenda should sit well with the community. Sharing
necessary audio-visual clippings with the public through multimedia (audio, video, film, websites)
could help to sustain the program. This will make the community aware of the traditions of theircommunity, which will be a valuable tool for the transmission of the ICH to the beholder. This may
also keep traditions alive among the younger generation. This shared knowledge through multimedia
will also enable other researchers to understand particular traditions very well. Furthermore, this willsustain the traditions within and among the members of the community.

86 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

VI. Conclusions
In the NHA, conservation of the ICH is a good step towards a right direction. The need for conservation
through legislation is crucial that will safeguard and protect theICH. The ICH sustains tradition as
people change over time. The government should formulate complete and comprehensive legislative
help and support toward the conservation and protection of heritage. Comprehensive and holistic
provision has indirectly been raised and strengthened the position of safeguarding the ICH eventhough the death of the practitioners and community attitudes of the heritage fans changes. The NHA
and the of heritage law enforcement agencies conservation regarding protection should not become
extinct and destroyed so that it can be enjoyed by future generations. Enforcement of the NHA should
also supported and assisted by the authorities of the agencies related to heritage. Assistance andsupport provided to add more firmness to the NHA will provide the conservation of intangible culture
heritage in facing conflicts, and claims regarding property.

Bibliography
Abdul Azizi Husin ed. 2011. Pemuliharaan dan Pemeliharaan Warisan di Malaysia. Pulau Pinang:
Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage 2003.
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=17716&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_
SECTION=201.html
Jacqueline Pugh-Kitingan, Hanafi Hussin, Judeth John Baptist. 2005. Dance as Ritual, Dance as
Celebration–Tradition and Change Amongst the Bajau of Semporna, Sabah, Malaysia. Global andLocal: Dance in Performance (Proceedings of the Asia Pacific International Dance Conference 2005.).
Md. Aripin Said. 2005. Intangible Cultural Heritage: Safeguarding The Traditional Songs Of
Malaysia. Sub-Regional Experts Meeting in Asia on Intangible Cultural Heritage: Safeguarding andInventory-Making Methodologies (Bangkok, Thailand, 13-16 December 2005).
Ramlah Amir. 2005. Government Mechanism for Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage. SubRegional Experts Meeting in Asia on Intangible Cultural Heritage: Safeguarding and InventoryMaking Methodologies (Bangkok, Thailand, 13-16 December 2005).
Norliza Rofli & Eddin Khoo pngr. 2009. Kebudayaan Malaysia: Satu Pengenalan. Kuala Lumpur:
Jabatan Kebudayaan dan Kesenian Negara.
Mohd. Yuszaidy Mohd. Yusoff. 2010. Pembangunan Warisan di Malaysia: Tinjauan Umum Tentang

Selected Country Reports 87

Dasar. Jurnal Melayu 5, 277-283
WIPO. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage.
University Science Malaysia. Undated. National Heritage Act, Malaysia. Retreived from http://www.
hbp.usm.my/conservation/laws/nationalheritageact.htm. Accessed 12 November, 2016.
Uytsel, S. V. 2015. The Complexity of Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage - An Inconvenient
Truth in the Philippines and Malaysia Retrieved fromhttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2692443

88 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Survey Summary Report: Iran*
Atousa MOEMENI**

I. Background: Research on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture, Folklore, andIntangible Cultural Heritage in Iran
Available resources in Iran indicate quite a long history in conducting research on preserving popular
culture. As all scholars of anthropology affirm, studies on folklore began with influence from theWest since the 6th Century B.C. when new ground was broken for developing such ideas. Homerand Herodotus attracted the world’s attention to the importance of cultural forms and differencesin their customs, rituals, and beliefs; thus, early encyclopedic knowledge about different cultures
was acquired. More than one thousand years later in the early 8th Century A.D., the mighty Islamic
civilization stretched from Andalusia to Central Asia, confronted Christian Europe, and revolutionizedknowledge about ethnic groups due to its huge expansion. Abu Reihan Biruni, Ibn Battuta, and Ibn
Fadlan began to introduce intangible heritage, which was referred to as forms of popular culture(Persian:) at that time, of nations of the known world as well as that of Iranian people.

In the 13th century, Venetian merchant traveler Marco Polo traveled to China and his souvenir was
his memoirs through which Europeans got to know Oriental civilizations. He broadened the horizonsof those who were unfamiliar with the Eastern world. In 17th and 18th Centuries, European travelers
kept venturing forth into the distant and unknown lands, and it was then that a desire for describing
the morality of the inhabitants increased dramatically.
While colonization was extensively spreading all over the world and anthropological and ethnologicalstudies were in their early stages, European archeologists and anthropologists visited Iran in the
Safavid and Qajar eras and recorded information about its culture and history, thus anthropology likeother social sciences entered Iran more or less.
Iranian contemporary intellectuals have also studied their own culture from an anthropological point* This is the result of a literature survey in Iran in 2016 done by Ms. Atousa Moemeni. Producing or
copying this document, in whole or in part, is prohibited without the express written consent of the
copyright holder.
** Director General, Scientific Studies and International Cooperation Office of Iranology Foundation,
IranSelected Country Reports 89

of view. Ali Hanibal dedicated his life to collecting traditions, expressions, songs, myths, Ta’ziah
and Zoorkhāneh rituals and he had had an active role in establishing the Museum of Anthropology in
Tehran in 1935. Sadegh Hedayat was a pioneer in the field of anthropology in Iran; he has recorded
some of the oral traditions and expressions in his book, “Avsaneh and Neirangestan”, published in
1931.
Anthropology and what we today refer to as intangible heritage have been introduced to Iranianacademics through the course of Elm al-Ejtema’ in 1934 at Daneshsaray-e Ālee for the first time. The
state soon took another step forward and established a responsible government agency, the Departmentof Anthropology, but changed its name to The National Institution of Anthropology shortly afterward.
Training of young researchers initiated in 1958 and thus systematic anthropological studies of Iranbegan with their investigations. When these investigations were planned, there already existed a
discipline of anthropology, with an organized body and two journals (Journal of Anthropology and
Journal of Arts and Humanities) in Iran. Another government agency, The National Research Center
for Anthropology and Folklore developed from a department of the Ministry of Culture and Arts in1973 and drew international attention as an academic center. It had conducted research projects on
biological and historical anthropology (particularly on Iranian nomadic tribes and urban populations)in collaboration with foreign researchers before the Islamic revolution of 1979. The most importantachievements of this center were: (a) it succeeded in publishing many books and articles aboutanthropology in Iran, such as those published in the “Journal of Anthropology and Folklore”, (b) itcollected oral traditions and expressions from different regions of Iran, and (c) it gave hundreds ofIranian students grants to study abroad.
The Ministry of Culture and Arts was dissolved due to fundamental reforms after the Islamic
revolution and The National Research Center for Anthropology and Folklore changed its name to
The National Center of Anthropology that was affiliated to newly-founded and short-lived Ministryof Culture and Higher Education. It then kept on functioning as a department of the Ministry of
Culture and Islamic Guidance until the establishment of the Iran Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts
and Tourism Organization (hereafter ICHHTO). The Iranian Parliament, the Islamic Consultative
Assembly, adopted the Constitution of ICHHTO in 1988. Three years later, the Council of Higher
Education agreed on changing the National Center of Anthropology to a research center in 1990,
thus, the Iranian Institute of Anthropology and Culture (IIAC) was established as a department of
ICHHTO and has been functioning so far. Briefly, I would like to mention the status quo of ICH

90 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

safeguarding before and after joining CICH, separately.

1-1. A Brief Overview of ICH Safeguarding in IranIn this section, the most important events related to what we today refer to as intangible heritage arehighlighted in chronological order.

1-1-1. Before The Ratification of the CICH
At the beginning of 20th Century, on the verge of the Iranian Constitutional Revolution, popular
culture drew public attention due to the need for encouraging people to participate in protests. There
was a large number of non-governmental newspapers such as Sūr-e-Esrāfil, Soraya, Keshkūl, etc.,
which were publishing articles about rituals, oral traditions and expressions, myths and narratives.
Inspired by European scholars, pioneer researchers such as Kūhi Kermāni began to collect Iranian
myths and narratives. Independent experts such as Sādigh Hedāyat began to record traditional rituals(Avsaneh and Neirangestan).
Under a directive of the Ministry of Arts in 1937 (Persian:) teachers invillages and cities were obliged to collect paintings of traditional instruments and clothes as wellas know-how, myths and narratives with the help of students and send them to the capital. The
National Center of Anthropology was established in 1938 and rituals, know-how, skills, manners
and customs related to food and clothing, dances, traditional performing arts etc. were collectedin the archives. A Museum of Anthropology was established in every province in 1938. National
Iranian Radio and Television (NIRT) organized a special group for popular culture.1 The National
Archives Organization of Iran was established in 1970, aimed at collecting and preserving national
Iranian records. An eighteen-year ethnological research project was started in 300 counties across thecountry in 1986.2 Records of languages and dialects which were dying out and gradually left aside
were documented and collected in archives in 1986. Iranian artefacts and crafts were documented
and collected in archives in 1987.

1-1-2. After The Ratification of the CICH
The act of ratification to CICH was adopted by the Iranian Parliament in 2005 and Iran was accededto the CICH as the fortieth country. The Tehran Intangible Cultural Heritage Center was established
as a regional center with the approval of UNESCO in 2011. A total of 10 ICH items were registered

Selected Country Reports 91

in UNESCO's lists from 2009 to 2012. Training courses were organized to build the skills andknowledge of preserving ICH at a national level in 2010. Guidelines were drafted as a set of methods
for preserving ICH in 2011. Activities related to the identification, documentation, and promotion of
ICH items were undertaken in different provinces of Iran in 2014.
Multinational candidature files (Nowruz, Chogān, Lavash, Kamanche etc.) have been prepared andprogrammes, projects, and activities for safeguarding ICH items (Nowruz, dolls and puppets, Chogānetc.) have been undertaken with collaboration of other countries in the region since 2011.

II. The Ratification Process of the CICH
Due to a wealth of ICH in the domains of oral tradition and cultural expression and the need forpreserving them, Iran has focused on implementing UNESCO’s instruments and taking advantage ofthe opportunities they represent. Several meetings were held to evaluate the impact and effectivenessof CICH at a national level after its adoption on 17th October 2003. These meetings led the IranianParliament to adopt the Act of Accession of Iran to the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguardingof Intangible Cultural Heritage (i.e. CICH) on the 13th of December 2005. As a result of theAct, the Islamic Republic of Iran was acceded to CICH as the 40th country and committed to theimplementation of the 2003 Convention. The Iranian Council of Ministers then issued Executive
Regulations for the Act of Accession of Iran to CICH, consisting of 15 articles. The Regulations is abasis for the implementation of CICH in which ten culturally competent organizations are obliged tocooperate with ICHTO to achieve the goals of the CICH.
Despite all efforts at the inscription of ICH items in national inventories and UNESCO’s lists,
safeguarding methods and cultural rights are still underdeveloped as far as their efficacy, legal
content, and enforceability are concerned. Since 2015, the Legal Division of ICHTO has set an
agenda for dealing with the underdevelopment of these rights and methods in the hope that it will leadto adoption of supportive laws and policies for safeguarding of ICH.

III. Impacts of the Ratification of CICH
Recognizing what is identified as ‘ICH’ in a national inventory is the first step in the safeguarding
the process and a prelude to inclusion of in UNESCO’s lists. Once Iran was acceded to the CICH,
the development and maintenance of a national registry became its first priority. As of 2016, 1350
elements have been listed on the National Registry of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

92 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Table 1: Total number of elements in each domain of the Iranian National ICH Registry (2016)
Description

Elements

Social practices, rituals and festivals

531

Traditional Handicrafts

485

Performing Arts

155

Knowledge about nature and the universe

137

Folk literature

42

Total

1350

As Table 1 illustrates, ICHHTO has been very active in listing new ICH elements, with a majorityof elements being in the domains of Social practices (39.4%) and Traditional Handicrafts (36.0%).
The next three domains are the Performing Arts (11.5%), Knowledge about nature (10.1%), and Folk
literature (3.0%). It is worth mentioning that some of the elements in the Traditional Handicrafts
domain have had an important role in employment and have been a source of income for practitioners,
but on the other hand, some of them are considered “in need of urgent safeguarding”. Furthermore,
despite the fact that they had been the focus of anthropological research and had been documented
the most in Iranian Archives before ratification of CICH and establishment of Iranian National
ICH Registry, oral traditions (i.e. Folk literature) have been neglected in being identified as an ICH
element, if one compares Folk literature to other domains. Lack of a standard definition of oral
traditions in national registration guidelines obscures their potential to be identified and to become amajor domain in the Iranian National ICH Registry.

Selected Country Reports 93

Table 2: Total number of elements in each domain, nominated by Iran and inscribed on the
Representative and Urgent Safeguarding Lists
Elements

Domains

NowruzRadif of Iranian music
Music of the Bakhshis of Khorasan
Traditional skills of carpet weaving in
4 Farsskills of carpet weaving in
5 Traditional
Kashan1
2
3

Ritual festive events
Performing Arts
Performing Arts
Traditional
CraftsmanshipTraditional
Craftsmanship
Ritual and6 Pahlevāni and zoorkhāneh rituals
Performing Arts
7 The ritual dramatic art of Ta’zīye
Performing Arts
knowledge of sailing in the Knowledge about nature
8 Traditional
Persian Gulf
and the universe
9 Naqqāli, Iranian dramatic story-telling Performing Arts
10 Qalisuyan rituals of Mashad-e Ardehal Ritual festive event

Date of
Inscriptionon
National
Registry
2007
2008
2009

Date of
Inscription
on
UNESCO’s
List
2009
2009
2010

2009

2010

2009

2010

2008

2010

2006

2010

2010

2011

2009
2010

2011
2012

Table 2 shows the variety of domains present in the total number of Iranian ICH elements inscribedon the International lists, with a majority of elements in the domain of the Performing Arts. Although
the research shows that Iran is very rich in oral traditions, it has no elements inscribed as ICH on theinternational lists in this domain.

IV. A Brief Mention of Previous Works on the Survey
In 2015, The International Research Center for Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region(hereafter IRCI) invited the Tehran ICH Center (hereafter TICHC) to participate in a MAPPINGPROJECT and Ramezanimir, a research expert from TICHC, was commissioned to write a survey
summary report that is in progress. The report covers the research on popular culture, which has been
conducted in Iran up to 2016, before and after the ratification of CICH, and the results have also beenpresented statistically.
I have been entrusted to conduct the complementary survey summary report, considering the need toanswer following five questions:
1. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research activities in the country?
2. What kind of ICH genres are predominant in available research?

94 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

3. What kind of methodological approaches for ICH safeguarding are predominant in available
research?
4. How are the communities involved and who participated in the research activities?
5. What types of methodologies or approaches have to be strengthened?
In order to avoid duplicating work already being undertaken and to address the different approaches
being adopted following the ratification of CICH, it was decided that I focus on the aforementioned
time. We have observed that, in some cases, the implementation of research projects were quite
efficient in safeguarding ICH and the results were striking. Thus, I will introduce those projects as“best practices” in ICH safeguarding. The Project of the Gilān Rural Heritage Museum, for example,
is one of those successful approaches after the ratification. This museum will be discussed in 9th
section.

V. Current ICH Research Trends in Iran
Anthropological research and documentation of oral traditions and cultural expressions in Iran,as mentioned earlier, was started a long time ago by humanities and social science researchers, inparticular, anthropologists. Considering the high priority attached by the Iranian government tocultural heritage, relevant governmental offices have observed the process of preparing and adopting
universally recognized instruments3, and have made attempts to take advantage of the opportunities
they represent. IIAC, in this regard, has set an agenda for documentation of cultural expressions since1997. With moral and material support of the government (through ICHHTO), it paved the way forthe identification, documentation, preservation, and transmission of various aspects of the ICH andhas ensured somewhat the viability of the ICH through raising awareness.
For the purpose of the survey, due to the huge volume of research on safeguarding ICH that has been
produced in Iran4, a total number of 30 research reports were randomly selected, considering different
ICH domains. Our random sample is chosen from the research that has been funded by Institutes,
municipalities, even NGOs and from theses and dissertations. As shown in Table 3, in terms of ICH
domains: 12 studies focus on social practices; 6 on oral traditions; 5 focus on performing arts; 4 focus
on traditional knowledge; and only 3 focus on traditional handicrafts.
These reports provide valuable information about the identification, documentation, and promotionof ICH, although in many cases contextualized and descriptive approaches to ICH research andrecommendations of the CICH are not followed.

Selected Country Reports 95

Furthermore, there is much to be learned from comparing the number of research studies with thenumber of listed elements in the National ICH Registry (Table 1) in terms of domains:● The social practices are the most in the former as it is expected from the latter.5● The oral traditions are surprisingly high in the former, given their number in the latter.
● The performing arts and traditional handicrafts are the same in the former, despite their unequal
ratio in the latter.6● Finally, the knowledge about nature and the universe is the same in the former and the latter, andits number in the former roughly correlates with that in the latter.7

It is worth mentioning that the focus of recent research has been on ICH elements, which got listed
on international lists.

VI. Strengths of Current Research on ICH Safeguarding
6-1. Contextual Approaches to ICH Research
Research on cultural expressions in Iran was aimed at raising awareness of the public until recently
and most of the studies were descriptive. It is worth mentioning, as a strength of recent researchon ICH safeguarding, although in a limited number of studies, that there is progress towards
a more contextualized approach and more holistic understanding of ICH. More recently, Iranian
researchers have decided to look deeply into the conceptual aspects of ICH, focusing on the grave
threats of deterioration, disappearance, and destruction as well as intergenerational transmission.
Research reports such as those published about Nowrūz, Pahlevāni and zoorkhāneh rituals, andthe ritual dramatic art of Ta’zīye, have drawn attention to the valuable resource that ICH is forachieving sustainable development and have provided insight into the development of approaches
and guidelines for ensuring the viability of ICH. Among the aforementioned examples, all of which
are listed in UNESCO’s representative list, Nowrūz has widely been studied as a multinational ICH.

6-2. Addressing the Relationship between Tangible and Intangible Heritage
Iranian research tended to ignore the interaction between tangible and intangible heritage. Evenin the process of the identification and promotion of ICH, there had been no attempts to establish
the relationship between ICH and instruments, objects, artefacts, and cultural spaces associated96 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

therewith. One of the strengths of the research, in this regard, is that there has been an increasingemphasis on the relationship between tangible and intangible heritage and also on the notion ofcultural landscapes. For instance, the research report about Pahlevāni and zoorkhāneh rituals, andthe ritual dramatic art of Ta’zīye illustrate the close relationship between cultural space and related
artefacts. The Gilān Rural Heritage Project, on the other hand, is one of the outstanding examples
that establishes a relationship between intangible heritage and tangible values associated with
cultural space, architecture, artefacts and instruments, thus ensuring the viability of the ICH due tothe consideration of both tangible and intangible values. This approach indicates a move toward anemphasis on social structure that considers tangible and intangible heritage as the very fabric of thecommunity. If there is no relationship between tangible and intangible values in ICH safeguarding
research, the proposed safeguarding measures would be inefficient.

6-3. Participatory Approaches to ICH Research
The community-involved participatory approach is another strength of current ICH research(conducted after the ratification of CICH). Looking at the research on safeguarding ICH thathas been produced in Iran, we found that most of the research has been undertaken by academic
institutions, relevant governmental offices, and sometimes NGOs in collaboration with experts infields such as anthropology, art, archeology, and handicrafts. Since they have a good knowledge of
operational directives for the implementation of the CICH, they have often involved practitioners
and communities of culture bearers in the research process and therefore ensured preservation andpromotion of the ICH. For example, in the case of research on local dolls, women and girls played
an important role in the documentation of skills, beliefs, and rituals associated with these local dolls.
Participating practitioners and culture bearers in national and international festivals of local dolls
have also provided increased awareness of ICH. The field research for the Linguistic Atlas of Iranis another example of this approach in which researchers have recorded interviews with the few
remaining speakers of numerous endangered languages across Iran.
Involving practitioner communities in the research process and opening up negotiations between
cultural mediators in academic institutions, relevant governmental offices and NGOs have played avital role in the process of documentation, promotion, and transmission of ICH and in establishing aclose relationship between tangible and intangible heritage and –ultimately- in ensuring the viabilityof ICH in Iran.

Selected Country Reports 97

6-4. Accessibility of Research on ICH
Acquisition, preservation, organization, and the dissemination of information resources both written(print and manuscript, electronic) and oral produced in territorial Iran or by Iranians living abroad
is one of the goals and objectives of The National Library and Archives of Islamic Republic of
Iran (hereafter NLAI). NLAI, in this regard, keeps records of every research work which has been
published according to the corresponding directives, and provides an easy access to the records.
Searches for the title, author, publisher, subject, date of publication, and table of contents of the works
in the database are possible through the NLAI website.8 It is a big step toward raising awareness itself
because it provides an opportunity to get the latest research on safeguarding ICH. Furthermore, notonly does it provides full access to all works after going through a short approval process, but it
also provides full online access to most of the research on ICH elements inscribed on national andinternational lists and even, in some cases, it provides access to audiovisual recordings. It indicatesthat there is a great emphasis on the accessibility of the research on ICH.

VII. Weaknesses of Current Research on ICH Safeguarding
7-1. Lack of Academic Coherence
While most of the research studies are funded by governmental offices and academic institutions,some of them have been carried out according to a self-defined methodology, regardless ofrecommendations of the CICH. Hence, they were not able to involve practitioner communities andensure the viability of ICH. These studies can serve as a reference for future works, or as a graduation
thesis. If these research centers or supervising professors impose requirements to ensure that its
research is carried out in conformity with the guidelines of the CICH, the research will help topreserve the cultural diversity and heritage resources and will not serve merely as an approval of
graduation or as a document in an archive.

7-2. Shifting Focus from Safeguarding to Identification and Description
One important finding of survey is that, in spite of a holistic and contextualized approach in somecases, researchers often tend to describe the ICH in isolation instead of addressing the means oftransmission or safeguarding methods. They have focused on identification of heritage resources
and their current interpretations and usage. For example, the research on skills in making latticeworkwindows and doors (Orosi)9 has only addressed different forms of the ICH rather than capacity-

98 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Regionbuilding activities and means of transmission for safeguarding it. Another example is the researchon Yaldā rituals. In spite of its nationwide practitioner community, the research only describes theelement in isolation. It does not concern itself with how it has survived over centuries and how it
can be safeguarded. Furthermore, it does not provide any approach to involving practitioners in the
research process.

7-3. Lack of Needs Assessment Studies and Lack of Communication between Governmental
Offices and Academic Centers
One of the fundamental weaknesses of research on safeguarding ICH in Iran is that the custodiansof intangible heritage have not carried out a “needs assessment” study, in order to set the priorities
of safeguarding and to turn weaknesses to strengths in the research on safeguarding ICH. Thissurvey, in this regard, can pave the way toward an effective guideline for future development. On
the other hand, lack of communication between cultural mediators (community representatives,practitioners, independent experts, officials etc.) in the field of safeguarding ICH has removed theaccess of independent experts and practitioners to decision-making in the area of cultural policymaking. Hence, every group of cultural mediators deal with its own subject-matter separately without
having any needs assessment in common. There is also concern over duplicating works already being
undertaken even, in some case, doing repetitive research. Thus, making a cultural policy with theparticipation of all interested parties is a necessary measure in the field of safeguarding ICH in Iran.

7-4. Lack of Monitoring and Evaluation
The constantly evolving and dynamic character of ICH requires a continuous monitoring andevaluation process that was absent in almost all studies that have been produced in Iran10; moreover,
the CICH frequently stresses the requirement of keeping lists up to date. It is, therefore, impossible
to evaluate the consequences of the interference that safeguarding activities produce in Iranian
communities. Monitoring and evaluation of safeguarding practices, which is best in terms of socialand cultural sustainability, will pave the way toward enjoying the best and the most successful
safeguarding practices.

VIII. Recommendations for Improving Future Research on Safeguarding ICH
8-1. Drafting a Bill for Safeguarding ICH

Selected Country Reports 99

Creating legally binding obligations on the governments of the countries ensures the preservationand promotion of different aspects of the ICH. As tangible heritage has been equipped with legal
instruments in national and international levels, this approach will also provide efficient tools for
safeguarding ICH. However, the legal instruments for intangible heritage should not be the sameas those of tangible heritage. Thus, drafting a bill with the participation of ICH experts and lawyers
would prepare a legal framework for safeguarding ICH in Iran.

8-2. Establishing a New Academic Discipline and a National ICH Research Institution
As preservation of tangible heritage has almost reached its full significance in Iran, the findings ofresearch on fields such as archeology, architecture, cultural landscape etc., enrich the field of tangible
heritage preservation. Establishing a new discipline in academic institutions, and training students indifferent aspects of ICH will therefore serve the purpose of the efficient safeguarding of ICH throughproducing theoretical and practical insight into the field of safeguarding ICH. This initiative will
manifest itself at the regional level, if only to provide positive results at the national level.
Thus, the first step toward establishing this new discipline should be taken at a national level, by the
Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, and not by a regional center such as TICHC.

8-3. Launching a Channel for Raising Awareness about ICH
There are numerous TV channels in Iran with a focus on topics such as sports, health, the economy,
industry, culture, etc. ICH is of particular importance in Iranian public opinion and plays a vital role inachieving sustainable development and maintaining cultural identity. Hence, lunching a TV channel
with a focus on ICH will encourage the Iranian people to participate in safeguarding processes, and it
will be a turning point in awareness-raising and capacity-building programmes in Iran.
It is worth mentioning that numerous TV programs with a focus of ICH have been produced andsporadically aired on different TV channels of Iranian broadcasts, but the expected result has not be
achieved due to a lack of coordination and planning.

8-4. D eveloping a New Cultural Policy Instrument in the field of Safeguarding ICH and a
Twenty-Year Vision Plan
As mentioned earlier in 7.3, the process of safeguarding ICH requires a needs assessment or analysis
as well as a vision plan, in order to develop a national cultural policy in Iran according to the CICH

100 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

with the participation of groups, communities, and relevant NGOs. In this regard, negotiations
between cultural mediators, including individual experts and academic centers, and Iranian policy
makers will play a vital role in organizing a coherent and well-established framework and avoiding
duplicating works that have already being undertaken in the field of safeguarding ICH.

8-5. Conducting Research with Results that can be applied to the Social and Cultural Life ofCommunities
Emphasis should be placed on research with applicable results in the process of safeguarding ICH.
If the research is carried out only to prove or disprove theories in academic institutions, this research
will have no major impact on safeguarding ICH. Hence, increased support should be provided toresearch practical issues in the field of safeguarding ICH. The findings of this research should serve
to “revitalize intangible creations and place them back into the circuits of live transmission”.11
The Gilān Rural Heritage Project provides an incomparable example of applied research in the fieldof safeguarding ICH in Iran. Therefore, it has to be considered as the most appropriate model for
research on safeguarding ICH in Iran.

IX. Introduction of the Gilān Rural Heritage Museum Project as the “best practice”
in research on ICH safeguarding
The Gilan rural heritage museum project has all the aforementioned strengths, and it has turned theweaknesses found in the survey into strengths. Establishing a close relationship between tangible
and intangible heritage, evaluation and monitoring, academic rigor, high accessibility of the research(some of it is translated into French and English), applicability of results, and focus on safeguarding,have all been combined together and presented in this project. It has been carried out to preserve theexisting cultural resources of Gilān Province. The methodology, policy making, and scoping of this
distinctly different research project were a significant milestone in the preservation of intangible
cultural heritage in Iran.It drew national and international attention to the cultural properties of local
people in Gilān Province. It has protected and restored their cultural resources, and also provided
a new and effective pattern for transmission of cultural properties in the regional level.It has also
created life in a desolate landscape and revitalized the social life and the cycle of transmission in an
original way in this region. It has added tangible heritage with intangible heritages and created new
economic opportunities for local livelihood as well.

Selected Country Reports 101

Furthermore, it has restored endangered social practices and rituals, traditional craftsmanship,knowledge about nature and the universe, oral traditions and the performing arts of local people inthat region and established an original relationship between these intangible aspects and physicalspaces and tangible items associated with them.
The idea of establishing an open air museum to exhibit the rural heritage of Gilān was first introducedby Mahmoud Tāleghāni, professor of sociology at Tehran University, after the 1990 Manjil-Rudbar
earthquake. The aim of the Gilān museum project was in fact to safeguard the tangible and intangible
heritage of the local people.
The launch of Gilan Rural Heritage Museum was guided by a team of experts from ICHHTO and
Tehran University, under the supervision of Taleghani. It has built in an area of 263 hectares inSaravan Forest Park. The museum's construction started in 2004 and was completed in 2005.
A sizable number of research studies were carried out on cultural diversity, heritage forms, traditional
knowledge of architecture, and vernacular patterns of Gilān province, and consequently, the Gilāncultural-architectural area was categorized into 9 classes, regardless of political divisions. These
classes were categorized according to environmental factors (topography, climate, etc.), agriculturalactivities, culture (religion, dialect, language, etc.), and the type of rural vernacular architecture.
A total number of 80 structures were dismantled and re-erected at the site. First, field research on thetypology of buildings belonging to each class and existing intangible heritage was carried out before
transference of the buildings to the site and putting them back into the circuit of transmission. A
sample of movable buildings were then built according to the architectural typology of rural dwellingsand existing heritage forms that were identified from the research project itself and were dismantled,transferred, and finally re-erected at the site of museum. The main objective for the construction ofthis museum was the development of a sustainable architecture in harmony with surrounding natureand the revitalization of traditional social life in the Gilān region. The purpose of the Gilān rural
heritage museum was not merely the transference of rural buildings into the site, but it was also thepreservation of folk culture, know-how, and a tacit knowledge of the rural population of Gilān.
Accessory buildings such as silkworm cocoon and rice warehouses, barns, and vegetable gardens
were constructed in every house in order to revitalize the traditional social practices. A tea garden,
Toutestān and Naringestān were also planted in the site to represent the means of livelihood of rural
populations in Gilān. The production of livestock and poultry is also a common activity in Gilān
Rural Heritage Museum. These activities, as a whole, exhibit the social and cultural life of these102 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

populations.
Holding numerous traditional festive events and performing folk music, local games and performancesin the museum serve the purpose of the preservation and transmission of these aspects of ICH.
An outstanding achievement of architectural and anthropological studies in this research project has
been the identification and documentation of masterpieces of oral heritage of Gilān, and their results
were published in the anthropological and architectural literature.
It is worth mentioning that the Gilan Rural Heritage Museum has won numerous awards andcertifications from national and international institutions.
Table 3: Summary of Research on Safeguarding ICH Elements
Elements

Date Publisher Measuresof
Pub.

Domains

Participatory?

Availability

1. Overview
of Folk
MedicalScience inIran2011 Tehran
university
medicalsciencefaculty

Traditional
Knowledge
about Natureand theUniverse

Yes

Onlyavailablein NALIupon
request

2. Recognition 2011of theCulture andTribes ofIran
3. Sweet Behbahanian
Proverbs
and slangs

Acecr
Identification,(jahadeEducation,
daneshga- Awareness raisinghi)SID

Social practice, No
Ritual , Oral
traditions

OnlineIdentification,
Documentation,
Awareness raising,Transmission,

Oral Traditions Yes

Onlyavailablein NALIupon
requestRoodaky Identification,
culturalDocumentation,
and artistic Transmission,foundation Awareness raisingSocial practice, No
Ritual,Traditionalcustoms

Only
availablein NALIupon
requestOral Tradition
and Folk
Literature

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
requestSocialYes
practices,
Ritual and Oral
traditional

Only
availablein NALIupon
request2011 Zoohoor

4. Nowroo
2011
Land: The
backgroundof ritual andCustomDocumentation,
Awareness raising,
Education

5. Khorasan
Fables

2006 Mahjan

Identification,
Document,
Awareness raising,Transmission

6. Nowrooz
rituals andcustoms inFars

2010 Farsology Identification,foundation Document,
Awarenessraising

Selected Country Reports 103

7. The culture 2004 samiraof Ilamlocal games

Identification,awareness raising,transmission

Social practice, Yes
local games

Only
availablein NALIupon
request8. The2006 Tahooricharlang
bakhtiyari
tribe rituals,
Customsand PopcultureIdentification,
Document,
Awareness raising,Transmission,
Participation

Social practice, Yes
ritual and oral
tradition

Only
availablein NALIupon
request9. Ghalishuyan,
Symbolic
Ritual of
Ghalishoyan in Mashhad Ardehal

Cultural
Identification,
Festive events,
Researcher Documentation,
ritual, Social
OfficeAwareness raising, PracticeIntangible Tangible
Interface

Yes

Online10. Ghsabe
Qanat ofGoabad2010 East
planning
anddevelopcompany

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raising,
Education,
Transmission,
Tangible –Intangible Interface

Traditional
Knowledge
about Natureand theUniverse

Yes

Onlyavailablein NALIupon
request11. Taft
Ghanats

2003 ICHHTO

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness Raising,
Education,
Transmission,
Tangible Intangible
Interface

Traditional
knowledge
about natureand theuniverse

Yes

Onlyavailablein NALIupon
request12. Thehistoryof carpet
weaving
art in Iran2005 Niloofar

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raising

Traditional
Craftsmanship

No

Only
availablein NALIupon
request13. The
2010 Iyrick
principle
educationof vocaltahrirs in
Iraniantraditionalmusic

Performing arts

Education,
Transmission

No

Only
availablein NALIupon
request14. Galam2013 Mirdashti
zanisustainable
art

Identification,
Documentation,
Education

Traditional
Craftsmanship

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request104 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

15. Wood and 2015 Markabe
woddy art
Sefid ,
Iran
Alzahrauniversity

Identification,
Documentation,
Education

Traditional
Craftsmanship

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request16. Trainingof IranianTraditionalMusic

Identification,
Education,
Transmission

Performing art

No

Only
availablein NALIupon
request17. Idioms,
2008 HashtbeAllusions,
hesht
Proverbs
And
Humorsin Gazi
Language

Identification,
documentation,awareness raising,trans mission

Oral Tradition

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request18. Lalabies, 2006 ICHHTO
Songs,
Fables andChildren's
Games ofIsfahan

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raising,Transmission

Oral tradition,
Oral
expression,
Social practice

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request19. Anthropol- 2012 Hampa
ogy AndPopularCulture(based on
people's
popularculture)Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raisingSocial practice, No
ICH in general

Only
availablein NALIupon
request20. Ritual,
2005 SabzCuskhame,toms andOrdered
Structureby the Inof AncientternationalSportsZoorkhandi Sports
Federation

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raising,
IntangibleTangible interface

Performing
Arts,
Oral Tradition

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request21. The
2004 ICHHTO
collectionof International
conference
articleson Moharam andpeople'scultureIdentification,
Documentation,
Awareness RaisingSocial practice, No
Festive events,
RitualOnly
availablein NALIupon
request22. Spiritual
Heritage

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raising,Transmission

Oral Tradition,
Ritual- Folk
Literature,

OnlineRaze
Nahan

2010 ShoorafarinNoSelected Country Reports 105

23. Traditional 2011
Medicine
Baharestan
Quarterly

MuseumIdentification,
Documentation,andDocument Awareness Raising
Centre in Education
Par Leman
Islamic
Republicof IranKnowledge
about Natureand theUniverse

Yes

Online24. Sistan and 2013 Taftan
Baluchistan
clothing
and trim

Identification,
documentation,awareness raising

Traditional
Yes
Craftsmanship,
Oral tradition,
Rituals

Only
availablein NALIupon
request25. Transient 2005 Roshanan
Ritual in
Iran (Comparative
Surveyon Iranian
Ritual in
Historicaland Geographical
Region)Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness raisingSocial practice, No
RitualOnly
availablein NALIupon
request26. Forty
2011 Sobhan
speech inmeybodanthropology

Identification,
Documentation,
Awareness- raising,Transmission,
WIPO

Traditional
knowledge
about natureand universe

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request27. Dayee Ra- 2011 Kermanmezooncultureservice

Identification,
Folk literature,
Documentation,
Oral Tradition
Awareness Raising,Transmission

Yes

Only
availablein NALIupon
request28. North ofKhorasanMusician

2002 Peters

Identification,
Performing Art, Yes
Documentation,
Oral Tradition
Awareness- raising,Transmission

Onlyavailablein NALIupon
request29. Spritual
Heritage2011 ICHHTO

Social Practice,
ICH in General

Online30. Water,2008 Sooroshritual andrelevant
believesin popular
culturePerformingNoart, ritual, oral
tradition, social
practices

Identification,
Social Practice, No
Documentation,
Ritual, Oral
Awareness- raising, Tradition
Transmission

Onlyavailablein NALIupon
request106 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

1. 1 7000 active voluntary staff have been mobilized to prepare radio and television reports about
ritual, oral traditions, and manners and customs related to food and clothing across the country.
2. 1 0 villages were studied in every county and all ICH items related to their cultures were reported
in a series of monographs.
3. C
 riterion VI in the World Heritage Convention of 1972, the UNECO Recommendation on the
Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore of 1989, the Proclamation of Masterpieces of
the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity, and finally, the UNESCO Universal Declaration
on Cultural Diversity of 2001.
4. There exists approximately 1000 research reports from 2003 to 2016.
5. It can be concluded that oral tradition is not a well-known domain in preparation of cases for the
National ICH Registry and there is no contextualized account of ICH elements in this domain.
6. The ratio of traditional handicrafts to performing arts in the National ICH registry is 2:1. It does
not correlate with this ratio of research studies.
7. T his domain requires particular attention because it contributes a low proportion of the total
number of research studies and listed elements in the National ICH Registry.
8. http://www.nlai.ir.
9. It is in need of urgent safeguarding.
10. The Gilān Rural Heritage Project, on the other hand, is an example that does not suffer from thisweakness and is cited as the best safeguarding practice in this survey.
11. Kristin Kuutma, ‘Concepts and Contingencies in Heritage Politics’ Ch.1 in Lourdes Arizpe andCristina Amescua, eds., Anthropological Perspectives on Intangible Cultural Heritage (2013,
Springer).

Annexes

108 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Annex I : List of Participants
ChairsName

Title

Noriko AIKAWAFAURE (Ms)

Former Director/ Chief of the Intangible Heritage Section, UNESCO,
Advisor for Intangible Cultural Heritage, Agency for Cultural Affairs,
Japan

Janet Elizabeth
BLAKE (Ms)

Associate Professor
Department of Islamic Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University,
Iran

Surveyor/ Presenters
Region

Name

Title

East Asia

Saruul ARSLAN(Ms)

ICH Specialist,
Centre of Cultural Heritage,
Mongolia

Hiroyuki SHIMIZU(Mr)

Lecturer,
Ibaraki Christian University, Japan

Hanafi Bin HUSSIN(Mr)

Associate Professor, Department of South East
Asian Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences,
University of Malaya, Malaysia

Sokrithy IM (Mr)

Deputy Director, Angkor International ResearchCenter and Documentation, APSARA Authority,
CambodiaSouth-East Asia

Nang Lao Ngin (Ms) Director,
Department of Archaeology and National Museum,
Ministry of Culture, Myanmar
South Asia

Anura
Director/ Professor,
MANATUNGA (Mr) Centre for Asian Studies, University of Kelaniya,
Sri Lanka
Yadab Chandra
NIRAULA (Mr)

Chief Librarian,
Nepal National Library,
Nepal

West Asia

Atousa MOEMENI(Ms)

Director General, Scientific Studies andInternational Cooperation Office of Iranology
Foundation,
IranPacific

Meked BESEBES(Ms)

Cultural Anthropologist/ Ethnographer,
Bureau of Cultural and Historical Preservation/
Palau Historical Preservation Office, Palau

SandraMORRISON (Ms)

Associate Professor,
Faculty of Maori and Indigenous Studies,
University of Waikato, New ZealandRichard SHING (Mr) Senior Archaeologist,
Vanuatu Cultural Center,
VanuatuAnnexes 109

Presenter of Regional Survey Summary Report
Name

Title

Hanhee HAHM (Ms) Professor,
Department of Archaeological and Cultural Anthropology, Chonbuk
National University, Republic of Korea
Resource Persons
Name

Title

Don NILES (Mr)Acting Director and Senior Ethnomusicologist,
Institute of Papua New Guinea Studies,
Papua New Guinea

Tomiyuki UESUGI(Mr)

Professor,
Department of Cultural History, Faculty of Arts and Literature, Seijo
University, Japan

Cholponai
Researcher and Project Coordinator, Aigine Cultural Research Centre,
USUBALIEVAKyrgyzstan
GRYSHCHUK (Ms)
Observers
Name

Title

Himalchuli
GURUNG (Ms)

Programme Specialist for Culture, UNESCO Beijing Office

Yasue HAMADA(Ms)

Deputy Director, Office for International Cooperation on Cultural
Properties, Traditional Culture Division, Cultural Properties Department,
Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan

Organiser
Name

Title

Wataru IWAMOTO(Mr)

Director-General
IRCI, Japan

Misako OHNUKI(Ms)

Deputy Director-General
IRCI, Japan

Tetsuya TANAKA(Mr)

Associate Fellow
IRCI, Japan

Yurika SUGINO(Ms)

Associate Fellow
IRCI, Japan

Shigeaki KODAMA(Mr)

Research Assistant
IRCI, Japan

Fuyuki DOI (Mr)Research Assistant
IRCI, Japan

110 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Annex II : Programme ScheduleDay 1: 18 NOVEMBER:
9:45-10:00

Opening of The Meeting
Address by:
Ms. Yasue HAMADA, Deputy Director, Office for International Cooperation
on Cultural Properties, Traditional Culture Division, Cultural Properties
Department, Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan
Ms. Himalchuli GURUNG, Programme Specialist for Culture, UNESCO
Beijing Office
Mr. Wataru IWAMOTO, Director-General, International Research Centre for
Intangible Cultural Heritage in Asia and the Pacific Regions (IRCI), Japan
Self-introduction of Experts

10:00-12:00

Session I: presentation by four experts
Co-chaired by
Ms. Noriko AIKAWA-FAURE, Former Director/ Chief of the Intangible
Heritage Section, UNESCO, Advisor for Intangible Cultural Heritage, Agency
for Cultural Affairs, Japan
Ms. Janet Elizabeth BLAKE, Associate Professor, Department of Islamic
Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, IranSpeakers of Session I: 20-mins Presentation and 10-mins Q&A
Ms. Sandra MORRISON (New Zealand)
Ms. Meked BESEBES (Palau)
Mr. Yadab Chandra NIRAULA (Nepal)
Mr. Anura MANATUNGA (Sri Lanka)

12:00-12:15

Tea Break

12:15-13:15

Session II: presentation by three experts
Co-chaired by Ms. Noriko AIKAWA-FAURE and Ms. Janet Elizabeth BLAKE
Speakers of Session II: 20-mins Presentation and 10-mins Q&A
Mr. Hiroyuki SHIMIZU (Japan)
Ms. Saruul ARSLAN (Mongolia)
Mr. Richard SHING (Vanuatu) : to be distributed

13:15-14:15

Lunch

14:15-16:15

Session III: presentation by four experts
Co-chaired by Ms. Noriko AIKAWA-FAURE and Ms. Janet Elizabeth BLAKE

Annexes 111

Speakers of Session III: 20-mins Presentation and 10-mins Q&A
Ms. Nang Lao Ngin (Myanmar)
Mr. Sokrithy IM (Cambodia)
Mr. Hanafi Bin Hussin (Malaysia)
Ms. Aousa MOEMENI (Iran)
16:15-16:30

Tea Break

16:30-17:15

Session IV: Regional Survey Summary Report (45-mins presentation)
Co-chaired by Ms. Noriko AIKAWA-FAURE and Ms. Janet Elizabeth BLAKE
Ms. Hanhee, HAHM, Professor, Department of Archaeological and Cultural
Anthropology, Chonbuk National University, Republic of Korea

17:15-17:45

Discussion

Day 2: 19 NOVEMBER
9:00-11:00

Session V: Overall Discussion
Co-chaired by Ms. Noriko AIKAWA-FAURE and Ms. Janet Elizabeth BLAKE
1. Discussion on the Literature Survey
Results of Assessment of the Survey Methodology in 2015-2016(to be presented by IRCI)
Discussants’ Comments: Ms. Hanhee HAHM, Mr. Tomiyuki UESUGI,
Mr. Don NILES, and Ms. Cholponai USUBALIEVA-GRYSHCHUK
2. Future Orientation of the Mapping ProjectDiscussants’ Comments: Ms. Hanhee HAHM, Mr. Tomiyuki UESUGI,
Mr. Don NILES, and Ms. Cholponai USUBALIEVA-GRYSHCHUK
3. Wrapping Up of the Meeting

11:00-11:10

Concluding Remarks
Mr. Wataru IWAMOTO

12:00-13:00

Lunch

13:30-17:00

2016 International Symposium

17:00-19:00

Reception
at Restaurant Sun Sun (1st Floor, A Building, Sun Square Sakai)

112 Proceedings of 2016 IRCI Experts Meeting on the Mapping Project for the Safeguarding ofIntangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region

Annex III : Discussion on the Literature Survey (from 2015 to 2016)

These slides were shown at the section 1 on 19 November 2016.

1. Do you assess your literature survey by pointing out percentages as awhole of the existing literature on ICH safeguarding in the target country?

50 %Answer:Yes%
If you assess the survey at less than 100%, kindly clarify the main elementsthat prohibit inclusion of the rest of the literature survey? (More than one
answer is possible)[ ] Shortage of Time60 %[ ] Lack of Budget[ ] Lack of Human Resources[ ] Lack of Intellectual Infrastructure: such as Libraries, Archives, Museums,etc.
[ ] Lack of Accessibility due to a Weak Digital Environment or Government
Restrictions[ ] Other

2. How do you assess the literature survey‘s targets in the target country?
Should we continue to survey the following four elements next year?
Kindly choose your answer from each sub-question and note the reasons
why.
(1) Publication by NGOs:
Yes [ ] No [ ]75 %: Yes

(2) Methodological or theoretical approaches in each work of literature:Yes [ ] No [ ]75 %: Yes

(3) Research focusing on communities:
Yes [ ] No [ ]100 %: Yes(4) Publication written in languages other than English:
Yes [ ] No [ ]1

3. How do you assess the survey summary report [See“Survey Summary Report”], especially minimum
required five analytical questions, in the target country?
[
[
[
[
[

75 %: Yes
] Perfectly Organized] Need More Elements/ Questions] Reduce Some Elements/ Questions] Not Effective
Better to identify “who is doing what”,] Anything Elseand classify the main actors involved in
the research process. Some questions
seems overlapped.
[Uzbekh 2015]3

85 %: Yes2

4. How do you assess the IRCI Literature
Annotation Sheet for the literature survey?
[
[
[
[
[

] Perfectly Organized] Need More Elements] Reduce Some Elements] Not Effective] Anything Else

60 %: Yes

ISBN/ ISSN number [Sri Lanka 2016]
Websites, audiovisual materials [Thailand 2015]
Photos as references [Myanmar 2015]4

Annexes 113

Annex IV : Future Orientation of the Mapping Project

These slides were shown at the section 3 on 19 November 2016.
[Session V]

Date: 19 November 2016, IRCI

Mapping Project on the Safeguarding of ICH< Mapping Project 1>

IRCI International Conference on the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible
Cultural Heritage< Mapping Project 2>

Literature Survey

FY 2014Preliminary Literature Survey conducted by IRCI2015 Literature Survey

FY 2015

Japan

Literature Survey on ICH Safeguarding Research in the Asia-Pacific Countries

China

Thailand

Malaysia

Vietnam

MyanmarCambodia

Laos

Bangladesh

India

Kyrgyzstan

Tajikistan

Uzbekistan

Kazakhstan

Fiji

Australia

Iran< Mapping Project 3>

Research Data Collection on ICH Safeguarding in the Asia-Pacific Region and
Optimization of its Use

International
Conference

discussions on current trends andchallenges on research for ICH
safeguarding; researchers’ network

Literature
Surveycollecting information; identifying
research trends and challenges
Research information

Research
Database2016 Literature Survey

FY 2016
Instigating
research activities
for ICH
safeguarding

sharing research information
through databases

International Experts’ Meetings/Forums
under the Mapping Project since FY 2013
1. Preliminary meeting at UNESCO,
Bangkok (FY2013; 19-20 February 2014)

Mongolia

Myanmar*Cambodia*

Malaysia*

Nepal

Sri Lanka

Iran*

Palau

New ZealandOverlapped with 2015th survey

Vanuatu

FY 2017? Remaining countries to be surveyed (21)Indonesia Pakistan

Singapore520

FY2015

3. 2015 IRCI Experts’ Meeting, Bishkek(FY 2015, 8-9 December 2015)
Literature Survey: 17 countries in Asia-Pacific
Revising the guidelines of the survey(community involvement suggested)Nov.

(FY 2016, 18-19 November 2016)
Literature Survey: 11 countries in Asia-Pacific
Revising the guidelines of the survey
Future Orientation of the Mapping Project

Submitting results of
the literature survey
Organizing theexperts’ meetingJan.

Publishing theproceedings of themeetings

March

Putting information about
the literature into the
Database

4. 2016 IRCI Experts’ Meeting, Osaka

7

750

FY 2016800

Instigating research activities for ICH safeguarding

Shortageof timeSep.

etc

Future Orientation of the Mapping ProjectStarting contracts withsurveyors

Identification of key issues(FY2014, 26-27 January 2015)
Case studies of ICH safeguarding
Plans for FY2015-2016>>> literature survey

Papua New
Guinea6April

2. International Experts’ Meeting, Kuala
LumpurBhutanResearch Database
FY 2014

Literature
SurveyMay

Total Number of countries surveyed: 11

Japan*

5

Experts’Meeting

Total Number of countries surveyed: 18

Republic of Korea★Fostering Researcher’s Linkage
International
Conferences

Leading ResearchInstitutes
Key Researchers★Setting a suitable agenda
Literature Survey

Lack ofqualitycontrol

Researchers in the
Asia-Pacific region

Building the capacityof young researchers★Committing the literature survey for longer length (one full year)
Research
Database

Digital Archive
Experts

Strengthening thebasis of academic
discussion★Integrate research information on ICH safeguarding andguarantee the right of information

8