INTANGIBLE HERITAGE IN CULTURAL STRATEGY OF UNESCO

Spivak Dimitry L.

Визуальная культура / Visual Culture

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

D.S. Likhachev Russian Scientific Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage 2, Kosmonavtov ul., Moscow, Russian Federation, 129366 UNESCO Chair on Comparative Studies of Spiritual Traditions, their Specific Cultures and Interreligious Dialogue

Chair, Ph.D., Dr.Sc. ORCID: 0000-0001-7276-5182 E-mail: d.spivak@mail.ru

INTANGIBLE HERITAGE IN CULTURAL STRATEGY OF UNESCO

Safeguarding intangible heritage forms a focal part of the cultural strategy of UNESCO, which is now being most actively elaborated and promoted. Basing on one of the two essential definitions, contained in the main text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, approved by UNESCO in 2003, one may regard it as comprising five main subject fields, i.e. '(a) oral traditions and expressions, including language as a vehicle of the intangible cultural heritage; (b) performing arts; (c) social practices, rituals and festive events; (d) knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; (e) traditional craftsmanship' (I.2.2). This kind of heritage is directly and deeply linked with two adjacent concepts, belonging to the same level of description, that is, with tangible heritage, on the one hand, and with cultural diversity, on the other hand. As a result, one feels authorized to regard the text of the corresponding three 'great UNESCO conventions', i.e. Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003), and Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005), as parts of a single 'mega-text', regarding them

in turn as three different facets of the same mega-concept of heritage. Forming an integral part of the cultural strategy of UNESCO, implementation of this concept is indispensable for the attainment of such overarching objectives as social coherence and sustainable development. As to the inner elaboration of the concept of intangible heritage, this seminal concept is presently linked with the implementation of Strategic objectives 7 and 8 of the Medium-Term Strategy, consisting respect-edly in giving impetus to advanced identification and documentation, protection and safeguarding, promotion 114 and enhancement, as well as revitalization and transmission of all basic types of heritage; and in promoting its creative facet, especially by all kinds of 'marginalized and vulnerable communities and individuals, in particular indigenous communities'. UNESCO Medium-Term Strategy for a new eight-year term (2022-2029), which now being most actively elaborated and discussed in the framework of expert community, forms the nearest perspective for the development of the topic of the intangible heritage.

Key words: intangible heritage, cultural heritage, living cultures, cultural diversity, safeguarding practices, UNESCO.

UNESCO is a specialized agency, forming an integral part of the United Nations organization, seeking to build peace through international cooperation on education, sciences, and culture. Intangible cultural heritage has been high on the agenda of UNESCO in the course of the latest twenty years, forming the subject matter

of one of its 'great conventions'. Objectives of the present paper consist in delineating the essence of this pivotal notion, tracing back ways in which it became integral part of the mission of UNESCO, and in reviewing its outlook, forming an integral part of the cultural strategy of this leading international organization.

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

To speak in most general terms, intangible heritage consists primarily in '(a) oral traditions and expressions, including language as a vehicle of the intangible cultural heritage; (b) performing arts; (c) social practices, rituals and festive events; (d) knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; (e) traditional craftsmanship'1. This introductory definition may be found in the main text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, which was approved by the General Conference of UNESCO in 2003, and entered into force three years later, in 2006, in accordance with its Article 34.

The aforementioned Convention may be regarded as being inwardly related to at least a couple of other important conventions, elaborated in the framework of UNESCO and issued by it, forming together with them sort of a 'mega-text'. Although this sequence of basic texts was being elaborated in the framework of UNESCO in the course of more than a quarter of a century, it became finally coordinated and consistent in the most essential points, both concerning its purport and structure. The first one of these, entitled Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, was approved by the General Conference in 1972, and entered into force in 19752. The second one, known as Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, was approved in 2005, and entered into force in 20073. A brief review of the process of

1 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage 2003, I.2.2. URL: Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

2 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972. URL: Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

3 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the

Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005 // URL: Con-

evolvement of the topic of intangible heritage in these three 'great conventions' would be most expedient for the purpose of the present paper.

Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage was the first one of the three texts mentioned above. In accordance with its title, the Convention concerned two types of heritage, namely the natural heritage, and the cultural one. Natural heritage included several types of natural objects which had 'outstanding universal value from the aesthetic or scientific point of view'4. As to the cultural one, it comprised monuments, groups of buildings, and sites, 'which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science'5.

The 1972 Convention defined in this way basic tasks as consisting in the 'protection, conservation, and presentation' of heritage objects which had been formed in the past, gained 'outstanding 115 universal value' in the course of history, and became definitely static (immovable) by the present time, which greatly alleviated their detection and protection. Make no mistake, delineation of this type of heritage objects had paramount importance for world culture. However it failed to take into account such mighty cultural phenomena as folklore, which were by no means static, but rather dynamic and even constantly evolving, as they formed part of the present-day living cultural activities, conducted primarily in the framework of the traditional communities. They could possibly be deprived of 'outstanding universal value', however

vention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

4 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972, I.2. URL: Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

5 Ibidem, I.1.

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Визуальная культура / Visual Culture

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

they were crucial for the sake of supporting cultural identities, especially those of ethnic minorities, giving way to spontaneous creativity, linking tradition and innovation, and providing social cohesion.

It would erroneous to suppose that the 1972 Convention was deprived of inner links to present-day living cultures. Careful study of its text allows one to detect presence of such links. Thus reading the text of Article I.5, one may learn that 'effective and active measures', undertaken in the framework of the implementation of the Convention. should positively include 'general policy which aims to give the cultural and natural heritage a function in the life of the community'. However remarks of this kind, which were most timely and constructive, definitely remained peripheral to the main purpose of the Convention.

Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, which formed the second part of the aforementioned 'mega-text' of the three 'great UNESCO conventions', was approved on October 17, 2003, and entered into force three years later, on April 20, 2006, in accordance with its Article 34. The theoretical part of the Convention is rather short, being at the same time highly constructive and seminal. Three major points may be singled out in its main text:

(a) Intangible cultural heritage is linked to the tangible one by 'deep-seated interdependence', to cite the Preamble to the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. As stated in another place of the Preamble, this interdependence was included into the structure of 'normative instruments for the protection of the cultural heritage' by issuing first the 1972 Convention, followed later by the 2003 one. In this way both Conventions were linked, in order to create common ground for research and action - or, to reiterate a detailed formulation from the 2003 Convention, for 'identification, documentation, re-

search, preservation, protection, promotion, enhancement, transmission, particularly through formal and non-formal education, as well as the revi-talization' (I.2.3);

(b) Intangible cultural heritage forms a highly dynamic realm of creative performance, firmly based upon the traditional viewpoints and technologies, linking in this way the past and the future of human culture: 'The "intangible cultural heritage" means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills - as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith - that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them with a 116 sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity' ((I2.1);

(c) Preservation of the intangible cultural heritage forms an integral part of the present-day global agenda. As stated in the text of the Preamble to the 2003 Convention, this kind of heritage is to be regarded as 'a mainspring of cultural diversity and a guarantee of sustainable development'. To fit into this agenda, intangible cultural heritage should be refined in order to leave behind those of its parts which are not 'compatible with existing international human rights instruments, as well as with the requirements of mutual respect among communities, groups and individuals, and of sustainable development' (I.2.1).

The latter notion, which has been high on the agenda of the major international organizations in the course of the latest quarter of a century, was included into the text of the 2003 Convention primarily in line with such pivotal documents of that

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Визуальная культура / Visual Culture

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

time as the well-known Millennium Declaration, approved by the United Nations organization General Assembly in Autumn 2000. As stated in its main text, 'prudence must be shown in the management of all living species and natural resources, in accordance with the precepts of sustainable development. Only in this way can the immeasurable riches provided to us by nature be preserved and passed on to our descendants' (1.6)6. The notions 'preserved and passed on', related correspondingly to the past and the future, might be regarded as linked in an indirect way to the notions of heritage and creativity, which were further elaborated in a number of normative documents, issued by UNESCO.

As to the notion of cultural diversity, which was mentioned in the text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, it was definitely linked to basic ideas of the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, approved by UNESCO in 2001, that is, two years prior to the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention. In accordance with a point of view generally accepted by UNESCO experts, Article 7 of the Declaration should be regarded as playing a seminal role in the process of elaboration of the conceptual notions of the 2003 Convention. As it was stated there, 'creation draws on the roots of cultural tradition, but flourishes in contact with other cultures. For this reason, heritage in all its forms must be preserved, enhanced and handed on to future generations as a record of human experience and aspirations, so as to foster creativity in all its diversity and to inspire genuine dialogue among cultures' (I.7). Experts specializing in the history of UNESCO ideas tend to emphasize that 'this declaration served as a basis

6 55/2. United Nations Millennium Declaration. URL: A/RES/55/2 - E - A/RES/55/2 -Desktop (undocs.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

for developing the normative instrument for safeguarding intangible cultural heritage' 7

Another important thesis, linking the cultural heritage to the natural one, was expressed in the first article of the 2001 Declaration: '...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'8. As biodiversity implies coexistence of manifold and multi-layered subsystems, cultural diversity should theoretically imply coexistence of numerous and complex cultural traditions, both tangible and intangible, and their continuous dialogue. One feels authorized to say in this respect that while the 2003 Convention was centered upon continuity of traditional cultures, ensured by supplementing their tangible component with the intangible one, the Convention on the Protection and 117 Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which was approved in 2005, and entered into force in 2007, was targeted at the elaboration of peaceful coexistence between different cultural traditions, and their interplay.

One has to mention here that comparing conceptual frameworks of both conventions, UNESCO expert community tends rather to emphasize that they are to be regarded as mutually complementary primarily along the axis 'transmission - production': 'While the 2003 Convention deals primarily with the processes of transmission of knowledge within the communities and groups that bear this heritage, the 2005 Convention is devoted to the production of cultural expressions, as

7 2000 onwards and the drafting of the convention. URL: 2000 onwards and the drafting of the Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

8 UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. URL: UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity: UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

circulated and shared through cultural activities, goods and services'9. It would suffice to state here that both aforementioned approaches to the main text of the 2005 Convention are in fact quite compatible.

Having thus mentioned a couple of most important ways in which the 2003 Convention is linked to the 2005 one, one has to admit that the intangible heritage was as a matter of fact directly mentioned in the text of the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions only once. To cite the corresponding thesis, UNESCO General Conference expressed its recognition of the 'importance of traditional knowledge as a source of intangible and material wealth, and in particular the knowledge systems of indigenous peoples, and its positive contribution to sustainable development, as well as the need for its adequate protection and promotion'10.

In other cases, more or less complex in-depth analysis seems to be necessary. To cite a demonstrative example, one might mention the notion of vitality, which is indirectly related to the creative potential of the intangible heritage: 'Taking into account the importance of the vitality of cultures, including for persons belonging to minorities and indigenous peoples, as manifested in their freedom to create, disseminate and distribute their traditional cultural expressions and to have access thereto, so as to benefit them for their own development'11.

9 2000 onwards and the drafting of the convention. URL: 2000 onwards and the drafting of the Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

10 Preamble / Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005. URL: Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

11 Ibidem.

Having briefly regarded the texts of the three 'great conventions' issued by UNESCO by the year 2005, one feels authorized to state that they formed a solid framework providing ample outlook for the preservation, protection, and transmission of the major types of cultural heritage, forming the main line which could tentatively be outlined as 'tangible heritage (1972) - intangible heritage (2003) - heritage plurality (2005)' (dates of approvement of the corresponding conventions are cited above in brackets). Regarding it, one has to take into account that the time which has been marked above by dashes, was in fact full of quite important activities. At least two major directions of these are to be mentioned here:

(a) Prior to the approvement of the 2003 Convention, considerable efforts of UNESCO expert community were directed towards the elaboration of a concise and correct definition of intangi- 118 ble heritage. To cite Article 23 of the Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policies issued by UNESCO in 1982, 'the cultural heritage of a people includes the works of its artists, architects, musicians, writers and scientists and also the work of anonymous artists, expressions of the people's spirituality, and the body of values which give meaning to life. It includes both tangible and intangible works through which the creativity of that people finds expression: languages, rites, beliefs, historic places and monuments, literature, works of art, archives and libraries'12.

One has to emphasize here that UNESCO gradually shifted from the term 'folklore' to the term 'intangible heritage'. Acting in this way, it

12 World conference on cultural policies. Mexico City, 26 July - 6 August 1982. Final Report. Paris, UNESCO, 1982, 40-46. URL:

https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000052505, (accessed 15.05.2021). The conference is often cited in studies related to UNESCO as Mondiacult.

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

managed to complement the protection of traditional song, dance, and story-telling, by an almost limitless realm of rites, beliefs, modes of life, value systems, traditional knowledge systems, as well as languages, especially rare and minority ones. As a result, the notion of tangible cultural heritage was enlarged and prolonged by the intangible one.

The Mexico declaration was, by the way, one of the first ones to introduce this seminal notion into the official discourse of UNESCO. One has to admit that exact structure of its components, roughly outlined above, is still subject to research and reviewing. For instance, language is nowadays regarded not as an integral part of the intangible heritage, but rather a vehicle of cognitive and communicative activities comprised by it, due to its highly specific nature. Listing such complex objects as parts of the intangible heritage comprises elaboration of its multi-layered structure, which is as a matter of fact still in process.

Another important point consists in the fact that the Mexico City Declaration tended to define intangible heritage as 'a body of values which give meaning to life', as one may read in the extract from its Final Document, cited above. Formulations of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage are totally in line with it. Thus the basic definition of the intangible heritage in the aforementioned Convention refers to the only criterion, namely that of 'practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills - as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith - that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage' (1.2.1). This approach presents a sharp contrast to that of the 1972 Convention. Reading its basic definitions, we constantly see references to the 'outstanding universal value', which forms the criterion of listing objects of tangible heritage, e.g.: 'For the purposes of this

Convention, the following shall be considered as 'cultural heritage': monuments: architectural works, works of monumental sculpture and painting, elements or structures of an archaeological nature, inscriptions, cave dwellings and combinations of features, which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science' (I, 1). Universal value forms an obvious opposition to local viewpoints and value assessments.

This distinction was introduced in a highly intentional manner. As it was emphasized by UNESCO experts, 'the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, whose structure is also based on the programmatic approach of the 1972 Convention, places emphasis on the equal recognition of expressions and traditions with no hierarchical distinctions among them. The concept of 'outstanding universal value' embodied in the 1972 Convention does therefore not 119 apply to the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage. International recognition is based on the importance of this living heritage for the sense of identity and continuity of the communities in which it is created, transmitted and re-created'13.

(b) Prior to the approvement of the 2003 Convention, UNESCO directed considerable efforts at listing best practices in preservation and revitalization of the intangible heritage, and honoring its most prominent bearers. Proclamation of the Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity may serve as a plausible example of the former. 'The Proclamation concerned: forms of popular and traditional cultural expressions, and cultural spaces, i.e., places where cultural and popular activities are concentrated and regularly take

13 2000 onwards and the drafting of the convention. URL: 2000 onwards and the drafting of the Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Визуальная культура / Visual Culture

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

place (markets squares, festivals, etc.)'14. Each nomination had to meet a number of criteria, which included primarily presence of obvious roots in the local cultural tradition, considerable value for local cultural identity, and risk of degradation and disappearing.

The Proclamation took place three times, that is, in the years 2001, 2003, and 2005. All in all, about 90 objects were proclaimed Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. The corresponding list included such prominent phenomena as the art of Akyns (Kirghiz epic tellers), Chinese traditional Kun Qu opera, and Vedic chanting in India, to name but a few. The nominations to this list stopped with the approvement and entry into force of the 2003 Convention. According to its Article 31, exclusively dedicated to the results and prospects of the Proclamation, all 90 objects comprised by it, were incorporated into the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.

As to the programs of honoring prominent bearers of local traditions, Living Human Treasures program should be primarily cited. The program was initiated in 1993 and later updated. In accordance with its basic definition, elaborated and approved by UNESCO, 'Living Human Treasures are persons who embody in the very highest degree the skills and techniques necessary for the production of selected aspects of the cultural life of a people and the continued existence of their material cultural heritage' (1.1.1)15.

As it had been foreseen by Article 29 of the 2003 Convention, States Parties undertook the duty

14 Definition and criteria. URL: Proclamation of the Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity (2001-2005) - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

15 Guidelines for the establishment of "Living human

treasures" systems (2002). UNESCO, 19.

of taking regulative, legislative, and other kinds of measures which were necessary to ensure safeguarding the intangible cultural heritage in the respective countries. Accounts on the most important of such activities were accumulated, analyzed, and annually reported to the relevant UNESCO committee, which in its turn conducted their in-depth analysis and synthesis, which was later presented to the General Assembly.

Prior to the year 2019, summaries of this kind tended to be dedicated to topics which were regarded as being the most actual. Thus Integration of Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding into Cultural Policies formed the key issue of the 2016 report of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of this kind of heritage; in 2017, the focus shifted to Measures Taken by States Parties to Build and Strengthen National Capacities for Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage; in 2018, 120 towards Measures Taken by States Parties to Raise Awareness about the Importance of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

Following the year 2019, decision was taken to focus upon the regional aspect of the implementation of the 2003 Convention. 2020 was planned to be dedicated to Latin America and the Caribbean, 2021 to Europe as a whole, 2022 to Arab states, and so on.

Separate accounts are annually dedicated to the updated contents of the major lists conducted by UNESCO in the realm of intangible heritage, i.e. List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding. Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, and Register of Good Safeguarding Practices16.

16 For details, cf.: Browse the lists of intangible cultural heritage and the register of good safeguarding practices. URL: Browse the Lists of Intangible Cultural Heritage and the Register of good safeguarding practices - intan-

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Визуальная культура / Visual Culture

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

UNESCO Medium-Term Strategy for the years 2014 to 2021 forms another normative frame for the safeguarding and developing the intangible cultural heritage. The former of these tasks is formulated primarily in the text of Strategic Objective 7, entitled 'Protecting, promoting and transmitting heritage'17. As stated in Article 66, 'heritage, understood in its entirety - natural and cultural, tangible and intangible - constitutes assets inherited from the past that we wish to transmit to future generations because of their social value and the way in which they embody identity and belonging. These assets shall be used for promoting social stability, peace-building, recovery from crisis situations, and development strategies'18. Somewhat beyond, i.e. in the main text of Article 69, this thesis is corroborated by reference to the text of the 1972, 2003, and 2005 Conventions19. As a result, one may conclude that our representation of the three aforementioned Conventions as forming a single 'mega-text', dedicated to the analysis of three different aspects of the same cultural phenomenon, conducted above in the present paper, was correct and constructive.

gible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

17 Strategic objectives of UNESCO are aligned in the text of the Medium-Term Strategy along nine independent directions.

18 UNESCO 37 C/4 2014-2021 Medium-term Strategy (2014). UNESCO, 24.

19 Their list is supplemented in the text of the Article 69 by the enumeration of three more UNESCO Conventions (namely, Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention (1954),

Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970), and Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (2001), some aspects of which are most relevant for the purport of the Medium-Term Strategy as a whole.

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

As to the latter of the two aforementioned tasks, it was regarded in the text of the Medium-Term Strategy primarily in the formulation of Strategic Objective 8, entitled 'Fostering creativity and the diversity of cultural expressions'. The emphasis here was laid upon 'the continued creativity that is a defining characteristic of intangible cultural heritage'20. Fostering this kind of activities, UNESCO strove towards the implementation of two basic tasks, one of which consisted in supporting and promoting the sense of 'identity and belonging' (mentioned above in the text of Article 66), especially by the 'marginalized and vulnerable communities and individuals, in particular indigenous communities, women and youth' (Article 75). Another task consisted in giving impetus to creative activities, particularly in the realm of traditional cultures, as means of prolonging the past into the future. 121

The text of the new eight-year strategy is now being elaborated and discussed in the framework of UNESCO. There is no doubt that seminal intuitions and formulations of the 2014-2021 Medium-Term Strategy would be reviewed and updated in the new text of the Strategy.

Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage has been ratified by now by about 180 states parties. 193 non-governmental organizations or institutions have been accredited by Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Basic lists of this type of heritage (that is, List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding. Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, and Register of Good Safeguarding Practices) have comprised by the present time 584 elements, representing 131 countries.

20 UNESCO 37 C/4 2014-2021 Medium-term Strategy (2014). UNESCO, 25.

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

Some countries have not formally ratified the 2003 Convention by now. However they have normally taken definite part in its practical implementation. The Russian Federation might serve as a plausible example of both. On the one hand, Russia has not ratified the 2003 Convention by now. On the other hand, Russian Committee for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage was formed as early as in 200321. Two objects presented by Russia were included into the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity in 2008. They are the Cultural Space and Oral Culture of the Semeiskie [ethnoreligious group of Old Believers in Siberia], and Olonkho Yakut Heroic Epos22. A national list of intangible cultural heritage started to be compiled at a a special web site23. As a result, limited collaboration between UNESCO and the Russian Federation in the realm of the intangible heritage has been established and developed in due time.

Appearance of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage gave impetus to the creation of a large amount of scientific literature. General context of its elaboration was regarded, as well as its basic notions and narratives24. National policies and strategies in the realm

21 Russian Committee for the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage (2019). Commission of the Russian Federation ^for UNESCO Vestnik, Special Issue, 40-41.

22 Browse the lists of intangible cultural heritage and the register of good safeguarding practices. URL: Browse the Lists of Intangible Cultural Heritage and the Register of good safeguarding practices - intangible heritage -Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

23 Нематериальное культурное наследие России. URL: Нематериальное культурное наследие России -на портале «Культура.РФ» (culture.ru), (accessed 15.05.2021).

24 Schmitt. T.M. (2008). The UNESCO concept of safe-

guarding intangible cultural heritage: its background

and Marrakchi roots. International Journal of Heritage

Studies, 14 (2), 95-111.

of intangible heritage safeguarding were analyzed, including those related to listing25. Preliminary re-

DOI: 10.1080/13527250701844019; Vecco, M. (2010). A definition of cultural heritage: from the tangible to the intangible. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 11 (3), 321-324. DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2010.01.006; Kurin, R. (2004). Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage in the 2003 UNESCO convention: a critical appraisal. Museum International, 56 (1-2), 66-77. D0I:10.1111/j.1350-0775.2004.00459.x; Chao, G. (2017). Ethical principles for safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: interpretative Reading and Commentary Review. Bulletin of the Kalmyk Institute for Humanities of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 34 (6), 117-130. https://doi.org/10.22162/10.22162/2075-7794-2017-34-6-117-130, cf.: Шилова, О.Е. Роль ЮНЕСКО в охране нематериального культурного наследия / О.Е.Шилова. Текст: непосредственный // Культура и искусство. - 2014. - №6 (24). - С.611-617. DOI: 10.7256/2222-1956.2014.6.13516. (Shilova, O.E. Rol' UNESCO v okhrane nematerial'nogo kulturnogo naslediia (UNESCO role in safeguarding intangible cul- 122 tural heritage) / O.E. Shilova. Text: direct // Kultura i iskusstvo. 2014. No.6 (24). 611-617). 25 Schreiber, H. (2017). Intangible cultural heritage and soft power - exploring the relationship. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 12. URL: IJIH - International Journal of Intangible Heritage :: Article), accessed 15.05.2021; Konach, T. (2015). Intangible cultural heritage projects - national policies and strategies. The creation of intangible cultural heritage inventories. ENCATC Journal of Cultural Management and Policy, 5 (1), 67-79, cf.: Шулбаев, О.Н., Новоселова, Н.В. ЮНЕСКО и российский опыт сохранения нематериального культурного наследия на современном этапе / О.Н. Шулбаев, Н.В. Новоселова. Текст: непосредственный // Альманах современной науки и образования. - 2017. - № 1. - С. 108-110 (Shulbaev, O.N., Novoselova, N.V. UNESCO i rossiiskii opyt sokhraneniia nematerial'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia na sovremennom etape (UNESCO and Russian experience of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage at present time) / O.N. Shulbaev, N.V.Novoselova. Text: direct // Almamakh sovremennoi nauki i obrazovaniia. 2017. No.1. 108-110); Каргин, А.С., Костина, А.В. Сохранение нематериального культурного наследия народов РФ как приоритет культурной политики России в XXI веке / А.С. Каргин, А.В. Костина. Текст: непосредственный // Культурная политика. - 2008. -

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

sults of the initial 15 years of the implementation of the 2003 Convention formed subject of a collective monograph edited by N.Akagawa and L.Smith26. The book was divided into two parts, one of which was dedicated to 'legal, administrative and conceptual challenges of safeguarding', the other one, to a number of case studies drawn from both the national and the sub-national level. The book belonged to a series entitled 'Key Issues in Cultural Heritage', As it was stated in a foreword, submitted by series editors, Heritage Studies had in fact formed a new realm of academic stud-

27 ies27.

Basic actors who are normally active in the field of intangible heritage safeguarding, particularly museums, were regarded28, especially at the lev-

№3. - C. 59-71 (Kargin, A.S., Kostina, А.V. Sokhranenie nematerial'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia narodov RF kak prioritet kul'turnoi politiki Rossii v XXI veke (Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage of people of the Russian Federation as a priority of cultural policies of Russia in the 21st century) / A.S. Kargin, A.V. Kostina. Text: direct. // Kul'turnaia politika. 2008. No.3. 59-71).

26 Akagawa, N., & Smith, L. (Eds.). (2019). Safeguarding intangible heritage practices and politics, Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-138-58074-9.

27 Logan, W., & Smith, L. (2019). Series editors' foreword. In N. Akagawa, & L. Smith, (Eds.). (2019), Safeguarding intangible heritage practices and politics fpp.XIII-XIV). Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-138-58074-9.

28 Cros H. du. (2012). Intangible cultural heritage, education and museums. UNESCO Arts in Education Observatory for Research in Local Cultures and Creativity in Education. DOI:10.13140/RG.2.1.3217.5522; Staubermann, K. (2020). Reconstructing the past: when intangible heritage meets scientific practice. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 15. URL: IJIH - International Journal of Intangible Heritage :: Article), accessed 15.05.2021; Blake, J. (2018). Museums and safeguarding intangible cultural heritage. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 13 (=IJIH - International Journal of Intangible Heritage :: Article), accessed 15.05.2021; Donelli, Ch.C., Fanelli, S., & Mozzoni, I. (2019). Managing and enhancing the intan-

el of cities; a collective monograph edited by M.Kwiecinska is to be mentioned here29. As it was stated in the foreword to the aforementioned book, 'A broad understanding of culture as heritage furnishes a narrative on human history that offers unlimited potential in the urban context. As it expresses collective identity, it also acts as a force in the process of building and reinforcing identification, local history, and memory'30. In accordance with this approach, basic parts of the book were devoted to: city identity, city soundscape, preservation practices, musealization practices, identity bearers, and education strategies, all of which were directly linked to intangible heritage. Attitudes and strategies of other stakehoders in this field, like organizers and operators of cultural tourism, were detected and analyzed by a number of authors31.

gible heritage: the experience of "literary parks". EN- 123

CATC Journal of Cultural Management and Policy, 9 (1), 52-63.

29 Kwiecinska, M. (Ed.). (2016). Intangible heritage of the city: musealisation, preservation, education. The Historical Museum of the City of Krakow. ISBN: 97883-7577-246-3.

30 Niezabitowski, M. (2016). Foreword. In M. Kwiecinska, M. (Ed.). (2016). Intangible heritage of the city: musealisation, preservation, education (pp.9-11). The Historical Museum of the City of Krakow. ISBN: 978-83-7577-246-3.

31 Tourism and Intangible Cultural Heritage (2012). World Tourism Organization. ISBN (electronic version): 978-92-844-1479-6; Qiu, Q., Zheng, T., Xiang, Z., & Zhang, M. (2020). Visiting intangible cultural heritage tourism sites: from value cognition to attitude

and intention. Sustainability, 12 (132), 1-20. doi:10.3390/su12, cf.: Афанасьев, О.Е. Шедевры устного и нематериального культурного наследия: роль и функции в туризме / О.Е. Афанасьев. Текст: непосредственный // Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма. - 2016. - Т.10, №.3. - С.7-17. DOI: 10.12737/21095 (Afanas'ev, O.E. Shedevry ustnogo i nematerial'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia: rol' i funktsii v turizme / O.E. Afanas'ev. Text: direct // Sovremennyie problemy servisa i turizma. 2016. Vol.10, No.3. P.7-17).

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

Legal aspects of the intangible heritage safeguarding have formed a specific and well-elaborated realm of heritage studies as a whole. Peculiarities of both national law, and the international one were analyzed32. Copyright problems, which had been detected as most problematic particularly in the case of living cultures, were reviewed and updated33. A serious study produced by L.Lixinski

32 Deacon, H., Prosalendis, S., Dondolo, L., & Mrubata, M. (2004). The subtle power of intangible heritage: legal and financial instruments for safeguarding intangible heritage. Human Sciences Research Council. ISBN-13: 978-0796920744. ISBN-10: 0796920745; Petrillo P.L. (Ed.). (2019). The legal protection of intangible cultural heritage: a comparative perspective. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-72983-1. ISBN: 978-3-31972982-4; Lenzerini, F. (2011). Intangible cultural heritage: the living culture of peoples. The European Journal of International Law, 22 (1), 101-120. DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chr006, cf.: Газизова, А.Ш. Роль ЮНЕСКО и ВОИС в международно-правовой охране традиционных выражений культуры и традиционных знаний / А. Ш. Газизова. Текст: непосредственный // Московский журнал международного права. - 2019. - №3. - С. 81-92. https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2019-3-81-92 (Gazizova, A.Sh. Rol' UNESCO i VOIS v mezhdunarodno-pravovoii okhrane traditsionnukh vyra-zhenii kul'tury i traditsionnykh znanii (UNESCO and VOIS role in international legal protection of traditional cultural expression and traditional knowledge) / A.Sh. Gazizova, Text: direct. // Moskovskii zhurnal mezhdu-narodnogo prava. - 2019. - No.3. - P.81-92); Марты-ненко, И.Э. Правовая охрана нематериального культурного наследия государств-участников СНГ на международном и национальном уровнях / И.Э. Мартыненко. Текст: непосредственный // Вестник ВГУ. Серия: Право. - 2017. - №2. - С.282-293 (Martynenko, I.E. Pravovaia okhrana nematerial'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia gosudarstv-uchastnikov SNG na mezhdunarodnom i natsional'nom urovniakh (Legal protection of intangible cultural heritage of CIS member states at international and national levels) / I.E. Martynenko. Text: direct // Vestnik VGU. Seriia: parvo. - 2017. No.2. 282-293).

33 Farah, P.D., & Tremolada, R.( 2015). Conflict between intellectual property rights and human rights: a

may be regarded as tracing back and summarizing basic legal problems and prospects of the initial 15 years of the implementation of the 2003 Conven-

tion34.

Advanced bibliography of references related to the implementation of the 2003 Convention has been conducted by UNESCO for a number of years at its official site. The list of literary sources, which is aligned according to region, language, year of publication, and document type, contains by now 1276 entries and tends to grow quite rapidly35.

Summing up our brief review of issues related to the intangible heritage, we wish primarily to state that it forms a focal part of the cultural strategy of UNESCO, which is now being most actively elaborated and promoted. Basing on one of the two essential definitions, contained in the main 124 text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, approved by UNESCO in 2003, one may regard it as comprising five main fields, i.e. '(a) oral traditions and expressions, including language as a vehicle of the intangible cultural heritage; (b) performing arts; (c) social practices, rituals and festive events; (d) knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; (e) traditional craftsmanship' (I.2.2).

This kind of heritage is directly and deeply linked with other two concepts, belonging to the same level of description, that is, with tangible heritage, on the one hand, and with cultural diversity,

case study on intangible cultural heritage. Oregon Law Review, 94 (1), 125-178.

34 Lixinski, L. (2013). Intangible cultural heritage in international law. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780-19-967950-8.

35 Research references on the implementation of the 2003 convention. URL: Research references on the implementation of the 2003 Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

on the other hand. As a result, we feel authorized to tentatively regard the text of the corresponding three 'great UNESCO conventions', i.e. Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003), and Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005), as parts of a single 'mega-text', regarding in turn three different facets of the same mega-concept of heritage.

Forming an integral part of the cultural strategy of UNESCO, this concept is indispensable for the attainment of such overarching objectives as social coherence and sustainable development (cf. UNESCO Medium-Term Strategy for the years 2014-2021, III. 1).

As to the inner elaboration of the concept of intangible heritage, this seminal concept is presently linked with the implementation of Strategic objectives 7 and 8 of the Medium-Term Strategy, consisting respectedly in giving impetus to advanced identification and documentation, protection and safeguarding, promotion and enhancement, as well as revitalization and transmission of all basic types of heritage (VII.7.66), and in promoting its creative facet, especially by all kinds of 'marginalized and vulnerable communities and individuals, in particular indigenous communities' (VII.8.75). UNESCO Medium-Term Strategy for new eight-year term (2022-2029), which now being most actively elaborated and discussed in the framework of expert community, forms the nearest perspective for the development of the topic of the intangible heritage.

References

Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage 2003. URL: Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972. URL: Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005 // URL: Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972. URL: Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

55/2. United Nations Millennium Declaration. URL: A/RES/55/2 - E - A/RES/55/2 -Desktop (undocs.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

2000 onwards and the drafting of the convention. URL: 2000 onwards and the drafting of the Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. URL: UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity: UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

2000 onwards and the drafting of the convention. URL: 2000 onwards and the drafting of the Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

World conference on cultural policies. Mexico City, 26 July - 6 August 1982. Final Report. Paris, UNESCO, 1982. URL:

https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000052505, (accessed 15.05.2021).

2000 onwards and the drafting of the convention. URL: 2000 onwards and the drafting of the Convention - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

Definition and criteria. URL: Proclamation of the Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity (2001-2005) - intangible heritage - Culture Sector -UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

Guidelines for the establishment of "Living human treasures" systems (2002). UNESCO, 19.

Browse the lists of intangible cultural heritage and the register of good safeguarding practices. URL: Browse the Lists of Intangible Cultural Heritage and the Regis-

125

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

ter of good safeguarding practices - intangible heritage -Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

UNESCO 37 C/4 2014-2021 Medium-term Strategy (2014). UNESCO, 24.

Russian Committee for the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage (2019). Commission of the Russian Federation for UNESCO Vestnik, Special Issue, 40-41.

Nematerial'noe kul'turnoe nasledie Rossii. URL: cul-ture.ru/traditions/culture-heritage/location-russia, (accessed 15.05.2021).

Schmitt. T.M. (2008). The UNESCO concept of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: its background and Marrakchi roots. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 14 (2), 95-111.

DOI: 10.1080/13527250701844019.

Vecco, M. (2010). A definition of cultural heritage: from the tangible to the intangible. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 11 (3), 321-324.

DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2010.01.006.

Kurin, R. (2004). Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage in the 2003 UNESCO convention: a critical appraisal. Museum International, 56 (1-2), 66-77. DOI: 10.1111/j.1350-0775.2004.00459.x.

Chao, G. (2017). Ethical principles for safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: interpretative Reading and Commentary Review. Bulletin of the Kalmyk Institute for Humanities of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 34 (6), 117-130. https://doi.org/10.22162/10.22162/2075-7794-2017-34-6-117-130.

Shilova, O.E. (2014). Rol' UNESCO v okhrane nematerial'nogo kulturnogo naslediia (UNESCO role in safeguarding intangible cultural heritage). Kultura i is-kusstvo, 6 (24), 611-617.

Schreiber, H. (2017). Intangible cultural heritage and soft power - exploring the relationship. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 12. URL: IJIH - International Journal of Intangible Heritage :: Article), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Konach, T. (2015). Intangible cultural heritage projects - national policies and strategies. The creation of intangible cultural heritage inventories. ENCATC Journal of Cultural Management and Policy, 5 (1), 67-79.

Shulbaev, O.N., Novoselova, N.V. (2017). UNESCO i rossiiskii opyt sokhraneniia nematerial'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia na sovremennom etape.

Al'manakh sovremennoi nauki i obrazovaniia. 1, 110.

108-

Kargin, A.S., Kostina, A.V. (2008). Sokhranenie nematerial'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia narodov RF kak prior-itet kul'turnoi politiki Rossii v XXI veke. Kul'turnaia politika. 3, 59-71.

Akagawa, N., & Smith, L. (Eds.). (2019). Safeguarding intangible heritage practices and politics, Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-138-58074-9.

Logan, W., & Smith, L. (2019). Series editors' foreword. In N. Akagawa, & L. Smith, (Eds.). (2019), Safeguarding intangible heritage practices and politics fap.xiii-xiv). Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-138-58074-9.

Cros H. du. (2012). Intangible cultural heritage, education and museums. UNESCO Arts in Education Observatory for Research in Local Cultures and Creativity in Education. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3217.5522.

Staubermann, K. (2020). Reconstructing the past: when intangible heritage meets scientific practice. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 15. URL: IJIH - International Journal of Intangible Heritage :: Article), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Blake, J. (2018). Museums and safeguarding intangible cultural heritage. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 13 (=IJIH - International Journal of Intangible Heritage :: Article), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Donelli, Ch.C., Fanelli, S., & Mozzoni, I. (2019). Managing and enhancing the intangible heritage: the experience of "literary parks". ENCATC Journal of Cultural Management and Policy, 9 (1), 52-63.

Kwiecinska, M. (Ed.). (2016). Intangible heritage of the city: musealisation, preservation, education. The Historical Museum of the City of Krakow. ISBN: 978-837577-246-3.

Niezabitowski, M. (2016). Foreword. In M. Kwiecinska, M. (Ed.). (2016). Intangible heritage of the city: musealisation, preservation, education (pp.9-11). The Historical Museum of the City of Krakow. ISBN: 978-83-7577-246-3.

Tourism and Intangible Cultural Heritage (2012). World Tourism Organization. ISBN (electronic version): 978-92-844-1479-6.

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

Qiu, Q., Zheng, T., Xiang, Z., & Zhang, M. (2020). Visiting intangible cultural heritage tourism sites: from

126

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Dimitry L. SPIVAK

| Intangible Heritage in Cultural Strategy of UNESCO |

value cognition to attitude and intention. Sustainability, 12 (132), 1-20. doi:10.3390/su12.

Afanas'ev, O.E. (2016). Shedevry ustnogo i nemateri-al'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia: rol' i funktsii v turizme.

Sovremennyie problemy servisa i turizma. 10 (3), 7-17.

Deacon, H., Prosalendis, S., Dondolo, L., & Mrubata, M. (2004). The subtle power of intangible heritage: legal and financial instruments for safeguarding intangible heritage. Human Sciences Research Council. ISBN-13: 978-0796920744. ISBN-10: 0796920745.

Petrillo P.L. (Ed.). (2019). The legal protection of intangible cultural heritage: a comparative perspective. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-72983-1. ISBN: 9783-319-72982-4.

Lenzerini, F. (2011). Intangible cultural heritage: the living culture of peoples. The European Journal of International Law, 22 (1), 101-120. DOI:10.1093/ejil/chr006.

Gazizova, A.Sh. (2019). Rol' UNESCO i VOIS v mezhdunarodno-pravovoii okhrane traditsionnukh vyra-zhenii kul'tury i traditsionnykh znanii. Moskovskii zhurnal mezhdunarodnogoprava. 3, 81-92.

Martynenko, I.E. (2017). Pravovaia okhrana nemateri-al'nogo kul'turnogo naslediia gosudarstv-uchastnikov SNG na mezhdunarodnom i natsional'nom urovniakh.

Vestnik VGU. Seriia: pravo. 2, 282-293.

Farah, P.D., & Tremolada, R.( 2015). Conflict between intellectual property rights and human rights: a case study on intangible cultural heritage. Oregon Law Review, 94 (1), 125-178.

Lixinski, L. (2013). Intangible cultural heritage in international law. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-019-967950-8.

Research references on the implementation of the 2003 convention. URL: Research references on the implementation of the 2003 Convention - intangible heritage -Culture Sector - UNESCO, (accessed 15.05.2021).

127

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Визуальная культура / Visual Culture

Дмитрий Леонидович СПИВАК

| Нематериальное наследие в культурной стратегии ЮНЕСКО |

Дмитрий Леонидович СПИВАК

Российский научно-исследовательский институт культурного и природного наследия им. Д.С. Лихачёва

129366, Российская Федерация, г. Москва, ул. Космонавтов, 2 Кафедра ЮНЕСКО по компаративным исследованиям духовных традиций, специфики их культур и межрелигиозного диалога

Заведующий кафедрой, доктор филологических наук ORCID: 0000-0001-7276-5182 E-mail: d.spivak@mail.ru

НЕМАТЕРИАЛЬНОЕ НАСЛЕДИЕ В КУЛЬТУРНОЙ СТРАТЕГИИ ЮНЕСКО

Охрана нематериального наследия представляет собой одну из существенно важных составляющих культурной стратегии ЮНЕСКО, которая весьма активно развивается в настоящее время. Обращаясь к одной из двух базовых формулировок, содержащихся в тексте Конвенции об охране нематериального культурного наследия, принятой ЮНЕСКО в 2003, можно выделить в его рамках пять основных предметных полей, подразумевающих «(а) устные традиции и формы выражения, включая язык как носитель нематериального культурного наследия; (б) исполнительские искусства; (в) социальные практики, ритуалы и празднества; (г) знания и практики, относящиеся к природе и ко вселенной; (д) традиционные ремесла» (1.2.2). Данная разновидность наследия прямо и глубоко связана с двумя одноуровневыми по отношению к ней концептами, а именно, материальным наследием, с одной стороны, и культурным многообразием, с другой. Как следствие, в статье предлагается рассматривать тексты трех «великих конвенций ЮНЕСКО», т. е. Конвенции об охране всемирного культурного и природного наследия (1972), Конвенции об охране нематериального культурного наследия (2003), и Конвенции об охране и поощрении разнообразия форм культурного самовыражения (2005), на правах своего рода «мегатекста», трактующего три различных аспекта единого мегаконцепта наследия. Воплощение в жизнь задач по охране нематериального

наследия, в свою очередь, представляет собой часть мер, необходимых для достижения таких стратегических целей ЮНЕСКО, как устойчивое развитие и социальная гармония. В том, что касается внутренней разработки концепта нематериального наследия, следует в первую очередь принимать во внимание стратегические цели 7 и 8 Среднесрочной стратегии развития данной организации. Первая из них состоит в придании максимальной динамики решению задач идентификации и документации, охраны и защиты, продвижения и поощрения, а также ревита-лизации и передачи подрастающему поколению всех типов наследия; вторая же - в развитии его креативной составляющей, прежде всего применительно к «маргинализованным и уязвимым сообществам и индивидуумам, в особенности же к туземным сообществам». Рассчитанная на новый восьмилетний период (2022-2029), новая Среднесрочная стратегия ЮНЕСКО, проходящая в настоящее время активную доработку и обсуждение в экспертном сообществе, представляет собой ближайшую перспективу в разработке тематики культурного наследия.

Ключевые слова: нематериальное наследие, культурное наследие, живые культуры, культурное разнообразие, практики сохранения, ЮНЕСКО.

Список литературы

Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage 2003. URL: Convention for the Safe-

guarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).

Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972. URL: Convention con-

| 3 (44) 2021 |

Дмитрий Леонидович СПИВАК

| Нематериальное наследие в культурной стратегии ЮНЕСКО |

cerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (unesco.org), (accessed 15.05.2021).