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 2006; conducted survey in 2010.\n- As of June 2013, has two elements on the RL and one accredited NGO.

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.

This book introduces the tug-of-war traditions of Korea and the three Southeast Asian countries mentioned as well as the tugging traditions passed down in Japan, Thailand, and Ukraine. The book presents studies showing various conditions and perceptions of tug-of-war in each country. So, it will be valuable research material for those interested in tug-of-war.

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. 

ICH Courier is the quarterly magazine on ICH in the Asia-Pacific region issued by ICHCAP since 2009. Every issue has its own theme under the title of the Windows to ICH, and the theme of the Vol 11 is 'ICH AND WEAVING WITH BARK AND PLANTS'.

ICH Courier is the quarterly magazine on ICH in the Asia-Pacific region issued by ICHCAP since 2009. Every issue has its own theme under the title of the Windows to ICH, and the theme of the Vol 21 is 'Traditional Pottery Making.'

As part of the Cultural Partnership Initiative of 2016, ICHCAP invited ICH professionals from Malaysia, Mongolia, Sri Lanka and Tonga. Each participant researched ICH topics of interest that relate to comparative studies, sustainable development, traditional medicine, and safeguarding organizations. These reports were compiled into a bound publication and is now made available as an online download.

ICHCAP published the book Living Heritage Series – Traditional Musical Instruments in collaboration with the ICH NGO Forum’s #HeritageAlive.\n\nProven from a long history, music shares thoughts and emotions among community members who play the instruments and enjoy it. This book was made with the contributions of fifteen writers from countries across the globe. The authors describe the current status of traditional music and provide insight on how to revitalize these traditions based on the 2003 Convention.

Kathakali (lit. story- play) is a highly sophisticated and stylized semi-classical dance drama prevalent all over Kerala. It evolved amalgamating features from all folk and classical performing art forms of Kerala. \nKathakali as a performing art evolved from Ramanattam. The King of Kottarakkara adapted eight episodes from the Ramayana as Ramanattam. However, in the 17th century, the King of Vettathu Nadu modified Ramanattam to develop a classical dance-drama, the Kathakali.\nKathakali derives its themes from the Indian epics, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Bhagavata Purana. The language used for the songs in Kathakali is a mixture of Malayalam and Sanskrit (manipravalam). For theatric communication, the actor uses dance movements, a codified language of gestures and facial expressions. Kathakali displays great dexterity and potential for the actor to show his histrionic and interpretative skills through resorting to an elaborate method of acting.\nThe performance of Kathakali follows a particular sequence. At dusk, the percussionists play their instruments to announce the event (keli). The traditional lamp is lit in front of the performing area (vilakku veppu). The horizontal drum is played to signal the commencement (arangu keli or suddha manddalam), and singers recite the invocation (sloka). \nTwo performers dance a ritual invocation behind the curtain, salute the deities. \nAnother prayer dance is performed in front of the curtain, followed by the ensemble of the drums (chenda, maddalam, chengila, elathalam). The actual story (katha) begins only after these preliminaries. \nIn Kathakali, the make-up and costume represent different traits of character. The colours are symbolic; green represents satwik (pious and virtuous characters); red patch on a green face to represent rajasi’(valorous characters); and a thadi (beard) is added to represents tamasic (evil traits of a character). Elaborate costumes and intricate face make-up In Kathakali is done to mask the human face and invest it with super-human characteristics. \nKathakali has transformed over the recent years from all-night performances in temples and other sites, to three-hour presentations in contemporary settings. The plays have become abridged to suit the tastes of a new audience.

This report includes presentation papers and a discussion summary of the three sessions that took place during the conference. The first chapter, “What Is the Significance of the 2003 Convention,” includes papers on the historical meaning and current situation of the Convention. The second chapter, “How to Safeguard the Value of ICH,” reviews measures on how ICH can promote cultural diversity, sustainable development of humanity, and social development in developing countries. The last chapter, “How to Promote Better ICH for Sustainable Development,” includes country reports that outline the efforts each participating country has taken to promote and use ICH.

The 2016 Sub-Regional Meeting for Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding in Southeast Asia: Enhancing Viablity in Intangible Cultural Heritage Community, jointly organized by ICHCAP and George Town World Heritage Incorporated, was held on 18 and 19 September 2017 in George Town, Penang Malaysia.\n\nThis report is composed of twenty presentation papers delivered at the meeting by national representatives, NGOs, UNESCO Office in Bangkok, and facilitators of UNESCO Capacity Building Workshop. In addition, the outcome document of the meeting is also affixed to put it on record the adopted recommendations of the participants in moving forward together.

On 12 and 13 November 2020, ICHCAP and the ICH NGO Forum virtually held the 2020 ICH NGO Conference entitled “ICH and Resilience in Crisis.”\n\nThe fifteen participants, including eleven selected presenters from ten countries around the world, discussed various cases and activities of each country applied under the Corona-era, and proposed solidarity for the resilience of ICH for a ‘New Normal.’\n*The English version applied from page 1 to 142.