In reality, safeguarding ICH (or whatever term one uses)1 has been an important issue for the large majority of countries around the globe and their citizens long before the 2003 Convention was adopted. The ‘problem’ of ICH, therefore, was a lack of formal international recognition of this reality and a cultural heritage protection paradigm that prioritised monumental European cultural forms over local and indigenous ones and that, when it addressed traditional culture, it did so from a heavily researcher-oriented viewpoint. The experience of those countries that are Parties to the 2003 Convention shows clearly that ICH in all its various forms is a rich social and, often, economic and even political resource that provides a variety of possible routes towards sustainable models of development. This variety is determined by many social, cultural, economic, political, and environmental factors and is itself part of the invaluable diversity of this form of heritage.

Artifacts and art works, often classified as material culture, have long been targets of collectors’ classifications, typologies, or taxonomies. In architectural and urban preservation, inventories play a major role as tools for the identification of monuments and sites of heritage value. The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (UNESCO 2003), however, requires a totally new approach to this matter. Safeguarding is a public policy that aims at protecting cultural elements in the context of the social experiences that create and nurture them.