Document ITH/13/8.COM/13.a Decision 8.COM 13.a
966. As item 9.b was still undecided, the Chairperson turned to the first of the series of four documents under item 13, concerning possible draft amendments to the Operational Directives.
967. The Secretary recalled the Consultative Body report in 2012 that: i) highlighted the importance of intangible cultural heritage for sustainable development; ii) appreciated nominations that include income generation that ensured the viability of intangible cultural heritage; and iii) regretted that safeguarding seemed to be secondary. At its seventh session in 2012, the Committee discussed a number of points on the relations among safeguarding, commercialization and sustainable development, which highlighted: i) cultural and economic dimensions as complementary; ii) that businesses and governments could
be involved in the safeguarding process through cultural tourism and craft development;
iii) the important place of intangible cultural heritage within creative economies in which revenues generated from its practice could contribute directly to the sustainability of the heritage and thereby its safeguarding; and iv) the will to reconcile safeguarding and commercial activities, yet cautioning against over-commercialization. Consequently, the Committee invited the Secretariat to propose draft directives, elaborating, among others, paragraphs 116 and 117 of the Operational Directives [Decision 7.COM 7] that are now within the chapter on ‘raising awareness about ICH’, while this complex issue far exceeds this subject.
968. The Secretary remarked on the fact that the IOS evaluation had noted the lack of guidance in the Operational Directives on how intangible cultural heritage was expected to foster sustainable development. Moreover, the Chengdu Recommendations called upon the international community ‘to renew its commitment to the Convention’s fundamental premise that intangible cultural heritage is a guarantee of sustainable development’. The Secretariat thus proposed some first steps in document 13.a that included: i) several initial amendments to paragraphs 102, 116 and 117; ii) that the Committee think about the possibility to propose to the General Assembly in 2016 a new chapter to be created in the Operational Directives to focus on ‘safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and sustainable development at the national level’, in which the contribution of intangible cultural heritage to the creative economy and questions of commercialization, among others, could become sub-chapters; iii) that to do so, further guidance from States Parties would be needed, and therefore an expert meeting could be organized in 2014 funded from extrabudgetary contributions whose conclusions could be presented and discussed during the ninth session of the Committee; and (iv) the preparation of revised draft Operational Directives to be discussed at its tenth session in 2015 and its submission to the sixth session of the General Assembly in 2016. The Secretary was pleased to inform the Committee that the Turkish National Commission for UNESCO had offered to host this expert meeting in autumn 2014.
969. The Chairperson acknowledged Turkey’s generous offer to host this meeting, inviting the Turkish authorities to provide the Committee with more details.
970. The delegation of Turkey spoke about the importance of the creative economy and cultural industries, with the expert meeting focusing on new technologies and media, the relationships of the cultural economy and intangible cultural heritage in the context of transmission from generation to generation, as well as the use of virtual technology.
971. The Chairperson was happy to accept Turkey’s hospitality for the event to take place in Turkey in 2014, which would be reflected in the decision.
972. The delegation of Morocco wished to recall some of the outcomes of the meeting that was held in Rabat, Morocco, in July 2013 that emanated from its proposal at the seventh session of the Committee in 2012 to convene an international meeting of experts on the subject of commercialization. It noted that the Committee often discussed links between certain aspects of intangible cultural heritage and economics or commerce at its annual sessions in the context of the implementation of the Convention. The aim of the meeting was to reflect on the issue in order to facilitate the implementation of the Convention in this regard. Participants in the meeting (Rabat, 5 to 6 July 2013) included cultural heritage experts from Belgium, Burkina Faso, Canada, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, United States of America, France, Italy, Japan, Morocco and Turkey with UNESCO represented by Ms Cécile Duvelle and the representative of the UNESCO Office in Rabat. The delegation also thanked some of the participants at the present session for their participation at the meeting. Four key speakers gave lectures, with each leading to rich discussions and instructive learnings. The first lecture spoke about quantifying intangible cultural heritage, and whether we should or could quantify the contribution of intangible cultural heritage in the development and well-being of societies. The second lecture was about striking a balance between intangible cultural heritage and economics and its relevance or not with regard to the economic quantification of intangible cultural heritage. The third lecture spoke
of the role that economists could play in a study of the contribution of intangible cultural heritage to the economy and sustainable development. Finally, the fourth lecture spoke of the relevance of the concept of ‘the commons’ or common property developed by Elinor Ostrom [Nobel Prize Economist who died in 2012], as applied to the management and safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage.
973. The Chairperson opened the floor to observers.
974. The Representative of the NGO, Traditions pour demain (France) spoke of its work with communities in the field, including with indigenous peoples, whereby it encountered all too often situations in which good intentions to contribute towards sustainable development in safeguarding intangible heritage sometimes led to unintentional damage to these living traditions, and often at the risk of social cohesion within the communities themselves. It was therefore desirable that this be reflected in the Operational Directives so that this concern could be transversally considered in the implementation of safeguarding measures. Finally, it was deemed essential, as highlighted in the IOS evaluation report, to incorporate the issues of intellectual property rights, and in particular, to strongly encourage States Parties to put into place mechanisms to this effect in their policies to safeguard intangible heritage.
975. The Representative of the Centre for Peacebuilding and Poverty Reduction (Nigeria) spoke of the relationship between commercialization, safeguarding and sustainable development, which was pointed out during the general debates at the seventh session in Paris in December 2012 in which the Consultative Body emphasized the importance of intangible heritage for sustainable development, and considered traditional communities and bearers as ensuring viability of the intangible cultural heritage. During that particular debate, some State Parties highlighted the necessary linkage between the local economy and the cultural value of the intangible heritage in which they found that cultural and economic dimensions were complementary, and that businesses could be involved in the safeguarding process through cultural tourism. Nevertheless, the potential damage that excessive commercialization brought about could compromise the cultural character of the intangible heritage elements. The Representative sought to further explore the balance of beneficial advantages of intangible cultural heritage – a necessary component of sustainable development – without compromising its cultural value by excessive commercialization, which was vital in ensuring its sustainability and viability.
976. The Chairperson thanked the observers for their interventions, and turned to the draft decision 8.COM 13.a.
977. The delegation of Guatemala agreed that the issues of collective intellectual property rights and sustainability had to be part of intangible cultural heritage in the context of economic development. Governments developed the local economy on the basis of cultural elements that often devalued culture whose cultural products were not necessarily beneficial to the communities concerned. Generating income from culture in the development of a community had many facets to be considered. Linkages to the environment, the local region and the self-determination of peoples were other important factors for inclusion in these proposals.
978. The delegation of Belgium noted that the problem was indeed complex and, as noted in the previous Committee session, it would be wise to reflect on this in full and create a new chapter in the Operational Directives. As safeguarding intangible heritage and sustainable development was a good idea, it proposed to first reflect on the issues in the expert group before discussing it as a whole, instead of tackling these issues on a piecemeal basis.
979. The Chairperson felt that the proposal by Belgium reflected the real situation in that the issues would be better understood following the outcomes of the expert meeting. He therefore proposed to move to the draft decision on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis. With no comments or objections, the Chairperson pronounced paragraphs 1–3 adopted.
980. The delegation of Morocco responded to the remarks by Belgium and the Chairperson by proposing to delete paragraph 4. It warmly thanked the Secretariat for all its efforts, but
since an in-depth discussion was to take place on this issue, it was better that they be tackled as a whole.
981. The Chairperson therefore deleted paragraph 4 and moved to paragraph 5. In light of the deletion, the delegation of Morocco suggested deleting ‘further’, which was duly approved.
982. The delegation of Grenada proposed a new paragraph 6, which reflected the decision taken following the discussion on the IOS evaluation that recommended to strengthen UNESCO’s relations with WIPO, which read, ‘Recommends the Secretariat to take adequate measures to strengthen UNESCO’s cooperation with WIPO over traditional knowledge and culture to ensure an ongoing exchange and learning between the two organizations on this question’.
983. The delegation of Morocco suggested the terminology ‘invites’ in place of ‘recommends’.
984. The Chairperson noted that this was accepted by Grenada. With no comments or objections, paragraphs 6–8 were adopted. Turning to the draft decision as a whole, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 13.a adopted.
ITEM 13.b OF THE AGENDA :
DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE OPERATIONAL DIRECTIVES ON THE REFERRAL OPTION