Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Milli Folklor, cilt.136, ss.15-24, 2022 (AHCI)
© 2022, Milli Folklor Dergisi. All rights reserved.When it comes to the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage, different institutions and formations become the main topics of conversation. These differences are also reflected in safeguarding approaches, approved lists, and applications. In addition to safeguarding approaches implemented by official institutions and adopted by governments, there are also safeguarding approaches initiated and maintained by civil society. In some cases, approaches that seem to progress on these two different levels may meet at common points. For example, we can look deeply into the other institutional approaches such as the Slow Food and Cittaslow movements. The Slow Food movements that started in Italy in the 1980s and the Cittaslow movements that started in Italy in the 1990s emerged as a civil society-based social reaction movement. The main purpose of these movements were to develop food and urban culture in harmony with traditions and local culture against the rapidly increasing consumption culture in the world. Basically, they pursue a similar purpose with the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (hereinafter the 2003 Convention) adopted by UNESCO in 2003. UNESCO also strives to safeguard cultural heritage for the same reasons, first with the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, and then with the 2003 Convention. The areas where the similarities of these approaches employing different paths are diversi-fied. Issues such as the definition of cultural heritage, the practices for the safeguarding of cultural heritage, the lists in which the elements are inscribed, the criteria for registration on the lists, the participation of com-munities, groups and individuals, cooperation with civil society, Sustainable Development Goals and, risky areas of safeguarding are the areas where similarities and differences can be identified for both approaches. As it is known, in addition to civil society, communities, groups and-if any-individuals are frequently mentioned in the 2003 Convention. The main purpose of the 2003 Convention is to safeguard cultural heritage with a multi-stakeholder and participatory approach. In this sense, it can be asserted that the combination of the approaches of non-governmental organizations that seem very different at a first glance and the safeguarding approach of the 2003 Convention are basically in harmony with the participatory safeguarding approaches of UNESCO. Thus, the power of civil society-based approaches in reaching out to the society and ability take quick decisions will join together with the inclusive and official power of the 2003 Convention. Therefore, this article compares the UNESCO’s safeguarding approach to intangible cultural heritage with the safeguarding approaches of civil society-based movements such as Slow Food and Cittaslow. The comparison is based on the text of the 2003 Convention, Operational Directives, ethical codes formed in this context, in addition to relevant web pages of the UNESCO, Slow Food and Cittaslow movements. As a conclusion, the safeguarding methods shaped by the 2003 Convention sometimes are in harmony with civil society-based safeguarding methods. It is possible to develop new participatory and multi-stakeholder approaches by turning this similarities into an advantage. These new approaches might help to bridge the gap between civil society and governmental institutions in the field of cultural heritage.