ICHCAP and the Vanuatu Cultural Center organized the fourth sub-regional networking meeting in collaboration with the UNESCO Apia Office. Representatives from the collaborating organizations as well as from six Pacific countries—Fiji, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Tonga, and Vanuatu—attended the meeting in Port Vila, Vanuatu, in April 2013. This publication includes presentation materials as well as meeting summaries to provide information to promote international cooperation among Pacific experts and institutions in the ICH safeguarding field.

Based on the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding Efforts in some South-East Asian countries (2009-2012), this summary provides a brief overview on the ICH situation in Cambodia, Thailand, Viet Nam, Indonesia, the Philippines, Laos, and Myanmar . The summary focuses mainly on ICH safeguarding systems, safeguarding policies, and ICH inventories as well as on pending issues and the urgent safeguarding needs of these countries. Moreover, information on the main entities in charge of ICH safeguarding and opinions of each country on the issue of community involvement are provided. To give a quick overview these countries’ participation in ICH safeguarding at the international level, some additional information related to UNESCO is specified as well. Apart from the main topic, information on the situation of intellectual property related to ICH safeguarding in each country is included. This survey report offers a large sample of the diverse ICH situations in South-East Asian countries. Each country has a different background on the issue of intangible heritage. \n\nFor instance, Indonesia is the only country participating in the field survey that has a programme in the Register of Best Practices. Viet Nam developed ICH-related definitions in its Law on Cultural Heritage; whereas the Philippines has a strong legislative background and solid network of public structures protecting cultural heritage. Cambodia recognises the link between cultural heritage and development of national economy and runs relevant activities on promoting traditional culture while maximizing its economic benefits to the country. For Laos, training local artists rather than researchers in ICH safeguarding, including IPR, is deemed to be essential, as the artists are the important resources that master their arts. Among the South-East Asian participants, Thailand and Myanmar are the newest to approach ICH safeguarding. Although all countries are concerned about the threats ICH faces, most countries participating in the survey haven’t defined ICH and haven’t established national ICH lists. Meanwhile, drawing up an inventory of traditional cultural expressions in different forms—register, cultural map, or database—is a common activity in these countries. Moreover, each country expresses a high degree of motivation and encouragement for safeguarding ICH, sharing experiences, and promoting international cooperation.\n\n- Ratified the ICH Convention in 2005; conducted survey in 2009 and updated in 2015.\n- As of March 2018, has 11 ICH elements on the RL, 1 element on the USL, and 2 accredited NGOs.\n

This seminar material contains presentation manuscripts that were announced at the 3rd APHEN-ICH International Seminar held on 18-19 Feburary 2021. ICHCAP hosted this event in cooperation with the UNESCO Bangkok Office and Korea National University of Cultural Heritage (KNUCH).\n\nThis seminar was held under the theme of Diversity and Distinctiveness: Looking into the Shared ICH in the Asia-Pacific, to re-assess that while fragile, intangible cultural heritage is an important factor in maintaining cultural diversity, connecting bounds, and enhancing international dialogue and peace.

In 2011 and 2012, field surveys were conducted to examine the intellectual property issues that could arise in the process of ICH information building and sharing. The survey was conducted in eleven countries—Cook Islands, Fiji, India, Kazakhstan, Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Viet Nam. The purpose of the surveys was to highlight the IP-related problems that ICH-related organisations may encounter while conducting ICH information–related activities, such as identification, documentation, digitisation, etc., and promoting the groundwork for a guide to protect IP-related aspects of ICH in the process of information building and sharing.

Based on the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding Efforts in some Pacific countries (2009-2013), this summary provides a brief overview on the ICH situation in Fiji, Papua New Guinea, the Cook Islands, the Marshall Islands, Tonga, Palau, Vanuatu and Federated States of Micronesia. The summary focuses mainly on ICH safeguarding systems, safeguarding policies, and ICH inventories as well as on pending issues and the urgent safeguarding needs of these countries. Moreover, information on the main entities in charge of ICH safeguarding and opinions of each country on the issue of community involvement are provided. To give a quick overview these countries’ participation in ICH safeguarding at the international level, some additional information related to UNESCO is specified as well. Apart from the main topic, information on the situation of intellectual property related to ICH safeguarding in each country is included. This survey report offers a large sample of the diverse ICH situations in Pacific countries. Each country has a different background on the issue of intangible heritage. Although all countries participating in the survey are concerned with the threats facing their ICH, most of them haven’t defined ICH and haven’t established inventory national ICH list or inventory. However, each country expresses a high degree of motivation and encouragement for safeguarding ICH, sharing experiences, and participating in international cooperation efforts. Compared to some Asian countries, Pacific countries seem to be well aware of the emerging intellectual property issues related to ICH. This might be related to the internationally publicized infringement and violation of intellectual property rights by outsiders on the Pacific’s traditional knowledge, cultural expressions, and genetic resources . Moreover, these countries appear to collaborate closely with the World Intellectual Property Organization on various awareness-raising and capacity-building activities on protecting traditional culture in a broad sense. To date, out of the eight Pacific countries participating in the survey, five countries (Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Cook Islands, Palau, and Vanuatu) are drafting laws on the protection of traditional knowledge and expressions of culture. Furthermore, in terms of technical terminology, the Pacific countries tend to use “traditional knowledge” and “expressions of culture” as equivalent terms to “intangible cultural heritage”. Pacific countries are also conducting cultural mapping projects, which is another common point that they share. Finally, the Pacific region has the highest rate of indigenous populations of any other region of the world and the highest rate of customary or traditional land ownership.\n\n- Has not ratified the ICH Convention yet; conducted survey in 2011\n- As of May 2013, has no elements on the ICH Lists of UNESCO and no accredited NGOs

This booklet was supported by the Central Asia-ICHCAP Joint Cooperative Project (2011 to 2014) and funded by the International Information and Networking Centre for Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region under the auspices of UNESCO and the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea.

ICHCAP published a book in collaboration with banglanatak dot com, an UNESCO accredited NGO, about ICH NGOs’ contribution to sustainable development. The 29 NGOs’ story showcase us how intangible cultural heritage can drive, enable, and guarantee achieving SDGs along each of its three dimensions –the economic, social, and environment-underpinned by peace and security as fundamental prerequisites for sustainable development.\n\n

Present Promotional book was developed by experts of Uzbekistan in line with provision of the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003). The Promotional book is the output of the joint cooperation project between National Commission of the Republic of Uzbekistan for UNESCO and ICHCAP under the title of “Publishing an ICH Promotional Book in Uzbekistan”.

Based on the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding Efforts in some South Asian countries (2010–2013), this summary provides a brief overview on the ICH situation in Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka . The summary focuses mainly on ICH safeguarding systems, safeguarding policies, and ICH inventories as well as on pending issues and the urgent safeguarding needs of these countries. Moreover, information on the main entities in charge of ICH safeguarding and opinions of each country on the issue of community involvement are provided. To give a quick overview these countries’ participation in ICH safeguarding at the international level, some additional information related to UNESCO is specified as well. Some information on the ICH safeguarding status of Pakistan is updated, based on Periodic Report No.00794/Pakistan on the implementation of the Convention and on the status of elements inscribed on the RL submitted to UNESCO on December 2012. This survey report offers a large sample of the diverse ICH situations in South Asian countries. Each country has a different background on the issue of intangible heritage. Although all the participating countries are concerned about the threats facing ICH, most of the countries participating in the survey haven’t defined the ICH and haven’t established national ICH lists and/or ICH inventories.However, each country expresses a high degree of motivation and encouragement for safeguarding o ICH, sharing experiences, and cooperating internationally. A common point noticed among them is that they tend to pay more attention to traditional performing arts in comparison to other ICH domains. Apart from the main subject, information on the situation of intellectual property related to ICH safeguarding in each country is included. However, this issue is very briefly reflected, so it is necessary to go through the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intellectual Property Issues in the Process of ICH Information Building and Information Sharing (2011–2012) to obtain more comprehensive and concrete information on this topic.\n\n- Accepted the ICH Convention in 2008; conducted survey 2011.\n- As of April 2013, has no elements on the Lists of UNESCO and no accredited NGOs.

The Korea-Mongolia Joint Project ‘Establishing a Safeguarding System for the ICH in Mongolia’ was officially launched in 2008 subsequent to a series of consultative meetings between concerned officials from both parties, held in both countries.\n\nAs a third-phase of the Project, the previously prepared texts were deeply elaborated in addition to ICH related photos were provided and reference book layout, designing and publications were implemented. As a result, a 272-page book titled ‘The Intangible Cultural Heritage of the Mongol Nation’ was published and a relevant book opening ceremony and project evaluation seminar were held on 08 and 09 December2010 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

Based on the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding Efforts in some South Asian countries (2010–2013), this summary provides a brief overview on the ICH situation in Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka . The summary focuses mainly on ICH safeguarding systems, safeguarding policies, and ICH inventories as well as on pending issues and the urgent safeguarding needs of these countries. Moreover, information on the main entities in charge of ICH safeguarding and opinions of each country on the issue of community involvement are provided. To give a quick overview these countries’ participation in ICH safeguarding at the international level, some additional information related to UNESCO is specified as well. Some information on the ICH safeguarding status of Pakistan is updated, based on Periodic Report No.00794/Pakistan on the implementation of the Convention and on the status of elements inscribed on the RL submitted to UNESCO on December 2012. \n\nThis survey report offers a large sample of the diverse ICH situations in South Asian countries. Each country has a different background on the issue of intangible heritage. Although all the participating countries are concerned about the threats facing ICH, most of the countries participating in the survey haven’t defined the ICH and haven’t established national ICH lists and/or ICH inventories.However, each country expresses a high degree of motivation and encouragement for safeguarding o ICH, sharing experiences, and cooperating internationally. A common point noticed among them is that they tend to pay more attention to traditional performing arts in comparison to other ICH domains. Apart from the main subject, information on the situation of intellectual property related to ICH safeguarding in each country is included. However, this issue is very briefly reflected, so it is necessary to go through the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intellectual Property Issues in the Process of ICH Information Building and Information Sharing (2011–2012) to obtain more comprehensive and concrete information on this topic.\n\n-Ratified the ICH Convention in 2005; conducted survey in 2010.\n-As of April 2013, has one element on the RL of UNESCO and no accredited NGOs.

The early history of the Nagas is shrouded in obscurity and many theories abound of their origin  and  migration.  How  and  when  they  came  to  settle  in  the  north‐eastern  region  of India is an unsettled question. \nSeveral  traditions  exist  within  the  multi‐ethnic  Naga  communities  on  their  origins. \nAccording to the oral traditions passed down through songs, folklore and word of mouth the Ao emerged from six stones at Long‐terok, which exists to this day near Chungliyimti, the first legendry settlement of the Ao. ‘Long’ meaning stone and ‘Terok’ six, refers to the six stones from which emerged three pairs of male and female progenitors whom the Ao claim  to  be  their  ancestors.  The  Ao  is  distinguished  with  two  phratries  –Chongli  and Mongsen. The Chongli claim  that the  three males and  females who emerged at Longtrok were Tongpok and his sister Lendina, Longpok with his sister Yongmenala and Longjakrep with  his  sister  Elongshe.  They  were  the  first  human  beings  who  emerged  at  Longtrok. \nEach  male  member  along  with  his  sister  formed  the  three  phratries  of  the  Chongli. \nTongpok founded the Imsong‐Pongen clan, Longpok the Longkumer clan and Longjakrep with  his  sister  founded  the  Jamir  clan  respectively.  The  three  siblings  intermarried  and through  these  marriages,  the  Ao  clans  came  into  existence  and  a  well‐  knitted  clan exogamy marriage evolved that is followed to this day.