https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8745-4862
![Sample our Geography journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5937/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Geography.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
UNESCO heritage policies encourage the idea that heritage should be ‘shared’ at the international scale, and invite states and the involved actors to adopt this vision. Yet, ‘sharedness’ can be understood in many different ways. This paper explores several territorial and political issues related to this notion of sharedness. A focus on the uses of a particular UNESCO tool – ‘multinational nominations’ – sheds a light on transnational cultural practices and examines forms of cooperation within communities and between states in the framework of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH). Specifically, it analyses the work of a French commission for the ICH as well as the nomination processes of three different cultural practices to the ICH lists: flamenco, falconry and alpinism. It is argued that ‘shared heritage’ is interpreted in a variety of ways, leading to contrastive appropriations and competing territorial scenarios among the various protagonists.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are grateful to Ellen Hertz (University of Neuchâtel) for the constant support she provided to this research project, Maya Judd, etc.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 The ICH Committee is composed of representatives of 24 states parties to the Convention, elected by the General Assembly of the States Parties for four years based on equitable geographical representation (UNESCO, Citation2003, Arts 5–6).
2 The ICH Convention establishes two lists: the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity and the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding. The first aims to illustrate the diversity of the ICH and raise awareness about its importance. The second aims to mobilize international cooperation and assistance to undertake safeguarding for cultural expressions considered in need of urgent measures to keep them alive. Additionally, the Register of Good Safeguarding Practices contains programmes, projects and activities that best reflect the principles and the objectives of the Convention.
3 ITH/10/5.COM/CONF.202/INF.6.
4 These include philosophers who work on collective intentionality (e.g., Schmid et al., Citation2008), social psychologists, sociolinguists, cultural anthropologists, and communication or cognitive scientists who analyse forms of intersubjectivity involved in dialogue, or group decision-making when ‘shared’ forms of understanding are necessary.
5 B.D. and H.M. followed the preparation of the alpinism nomination (2010–19). B.D. investigated the falconry nomination through interviews, document analysis and a review of the available literature. C.R. did the same for flamenco (2017–19). C.B. has conducted ethnographic observation of the meetings of the Statutory Bodies of the ICH Convention since 2009, as well as participant observation of its implementation in France as a member of the French Ethnological and Intangible Heritage Committee.
6 This notion, introduced in the 1970s outside of UNESCO, initially concerned natural resources in areas outside of national jurisdictions (Baslar, Citation1998). Certain UNESCO cultural policy documents refer, however, to this idea of a common moral accountability for heritage protection and safeguarding, including the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity: ‘cultural diversity is as necessary for humankind as biodiversity is for nature. In this sense, it is the common heritage of humanity and should be recognized and affirmed for the benefit of present and future generations’ (art. 1).
7 All being signatories of the WH Convention and 178 of the ICH Convention.
8 Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention.
9 Fieldnotes of the 13th session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Port Louis, Republic of Mauritius, 26 November–1 December 2018.
10 Such a reflection is under way, at least in the context of national inventories. The French National inventory, for instance, includes certain cultural practices of the Mexican, Indian and Italian communities in France, and the Dutch Center for the ICH has taken a similar view of the cultural heritage of migrants from Suriname in the city of Arnhem.
11 Resolution 4.GA 5.
12 ITH/10/5.COM/CONF.202, DECISION 5.COM 7.
13 For example, state parties must develop their own inventory(-ies) of ICH elements before submitting one or more as nominations to the ICH lists.
14 Fieldnotes of the 14th session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Bogota, Colombia, 9–14 December 2019.
15 Decision of the ICH Intergovernmental Committee: 9.COM 10.3.
16 Decision of the ICH Intergovernmental Committee: 11.COM 10.B.2.
17 To date, all the multi-state ICH inscriptions involving France (five) have been built exclusively with other European states, with the exception of falconry, where only 10 of the 18 states are European or Mediterranean.
18 This application was carried out for the ‘masterpieces of the oral and intangible heritage of humanity’, a programme run by UNESCO between 2001 and 2005, before the ICH Convention entered into force.
19 This argument was not, however, taken up by the Junta de Andalucía in media coverage of the rejection. For the Junta, the refusal derived from the vitality of flamenco, which was thus not in danger of disappearing.
20 The form mentions ‘about 60 countries’ where falconry is identified as being practiced. Some of these nations have not signed the ICH Convention and therefore were not allowed to participate in the nomination, while others lacked the resources or motivation.
21 We rely here on the discussions observed during the nomination process.