In 2016, ICHCAP organized the 2016 Asia-Pacific ICH NGO Conference, which was held from 3 to 5 November in Jeonju, Republic of Korea. After the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted at the seventieth UN General Assembly, SDGs have gained even more attention of the international community. Understanding the importance of SDGs in relation to culture, we held the conference under the theme Achieving SDGs through Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage. The outcome report includes the meeting agenda and outcomes as well as photographs and presentation papers by the participants.

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. 

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. For 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 2013; conducted survey in 2016.\n- As of March 2018, has 1 ICH element on the RL and no accredited NGOs.

The creation of this reference book, “The Intangible Cultural Heritage of the Mongols” sticks to the vision, principle and classifications of the UNESCO Convention of the ICH. This book consists of five chapters, each dealing with a domain of the ICH and explaining every episode. The national language and dialect, romantic oral literature, folk knowledge, wisdom and method, tangible art, delicately inventive and traditionally undying crafts, folk art, national toys and games, human feelings, decencies, solemn ceremonies and festivities of Mongolia are inexhaustibly rich sources and have subtle differences in nuance.