Executive Summary: Comparative Study Similarities and Differences

With the limited participation of just five countries that are members of the International Network on Cultural Policy - South Africa, Switzerland, Canada, the Philippines and Mexico - a virtual meeting convoked by Mexico was held from December 2001 to April 2002, with the main objective of examining the different possibilities that the tangible and intangible heritage (traditional, contemporary and industrial) can offer for the economic and social development of nations.

In a nutshell, it can be said that this virtual meeting, held over the Network's Agora site, provided a general understanding of the different institutions responsible for the cultural heritage in the above-mentioned countries, their legislation to protect it, the use of the latest technologies for its registration and identification, the importance attached to the intangible heritage, participation by civil society, the role of cultural tourism, strategies and resources for the conservation of the cultural wealth of peoples, and the role played by the large international organizations to support conservation of the world heritage.

The information gathered through the Internet gave us a better understanding of the methods to work with the cultural heritage that have been developed by five countries from four continents (Africa, the Americas, Asia and Europe), which we have summarized below.

The Intangible Heritage:

The members of the International Network on Cultural Policy were hoping that this meeting of the Working Group on Cultural Heritage would focus mainly on the intangible heritage, since it has received the least attention from international organizations. They were asked the question What role does the intangible heritage play in socioeconomic development in your country? which was answered in a variety of ways.

The governments of South Africa and the Philippines fully recognized the significance of the intangible heritage and considered it a priority in their cultural activities. In contrast, the Swiss government felt that the meaning of the intangible heritage is still not clearly defined and that there are no indicators that would allow its impact on the country's socioeconomic development to be measured. Canada has a clear definition of the concept of the intangible heritage and is currently scouting all parts of the country to identify collections of that heritage. Mexico noted the government's lack of recognition of the intangible heritage, which is an obstacle to its preservation and development.

The Institutions:

All the countries that participated in the virtual meeting have institutions or agencies devoted to the protection and promotion of their cultural heritage.

Technological Advances:

Most of the countries coincided in underlining the importance of using technological innovations for the administration and management of their cultural heritage. For example, Switzerland reported on two projects that are based on modern technologies, e.g. CHOICE, the creator of a common platform of tools available to the public, where regional documents and financial aspects can be inserted; and the project to enumerate and identify the collection of photographs of the Federal Archive of Historical Monuments, so that public access can be provided.

The Canadian Heritage Information Network (CHIN) prides itself on having made good use of technology to ensure proper management of its collections over the past 30 years. The Philippines finds that the Internet has facilitated the exchange of information and that cyberspace links are an enormous benefit. Mexico has also been involved in these activities, digitizing and cataloguing about 70,000 historical monuments to date, out of an estimated total of 110,000 country wide. This allows for easy consultation of the most important data on this rich cultural heritage.

Legislation:

One of the major issues for the protection of the cultural heritage is undoubtedly the legislation established for that purpose. The participating countries have a series of recent laws, acts and declarations, with the exception of Mexico, whose main piece of legislation dates back to 1972.

The Social Players:

As jointly responsible for the cultural heritage, civil society has a fundamental role to play in its conservation and promotion. All the countries stated that they had non-governmental and civil society organizations that cooperate with the government.

Cultural Tourism:

In the quest for a balance between the positive social and economic aspects of the so called cultural tourism and the need to protect the heritage, the countries participating in this virtual meeting agreed that the tourism factor was a source of resources for economic and social development in communities with a cultural heritage. In South Africa, the government launched an initiative to create sustainable jobs based on the production of crafts as a means of helping to mitigate poverty at certain sites. For the Swiss government, the relationship between heritage and tourism is still the subject of controversy.

For Canada, cultural and natural tourism can help the economies of large and small centres, creating opportunities for businesses and jobs. The Philippines has the National Commission for Culture and the Arts to establish the country's cultural policies, with tourism being the responsibility of the Department of Tourism. Most of the commission's cultural programs are closely linked to the development of cultural tourism, with consideration given to both the social and economic aspects. Mexico's cultural diversity has a large potential for contributing to economic and social development through cultural tourism and offers solutions to the problems of poverty through creativity and productivity.

Strategies And Resources for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage:

The five countries clearly stated their positions on actions for effective management of cultural tourism, its planning and adequate access to development, as well as their long-term strategies for preservation of the cultural heritage. In South Africa, DACST established an area devoted to cultural tourism, responsible for facilitating opportunities for training for cultural groups and ensuring that they become more knowledgeable about financial matters and more competitive in the tourism industry.

Switzerland acknowledged that it does not currently have a long-term government plan for preservation of the cultural heritage. The Philippine authorities promote cultural tourism as a means of obtaining constructive cultural exchanges of different kinds, according to the regions and cultures concerned. Despite having one of the smallest budgets of all Mexican federal government institutions, the Department of Tourism develops and applies tourism policies throughout the country, analyzes statistical data relating to the number of visitors, amounts spent, placed visited, hotel occupancy rates, as well as other data. Tourism is Mexico's third-largest source of revenue, which calls for a larger investment of resources in this area.

The Intangible Heritage and Cultural Tourism:

This was one of the most interesting topics discussed at the virtual meeting, since it is one of the areas that has been least explored to date and which has great potential for bringing progress to the many communities that live in poverty. The Swiss government stressed the need for stronger support for popular traditions to prevent the loss of traditional wisdom and knowledge and to preserve the quality of the product, thereby ensuring its potential integration into a tourism framework. With respect to integrating the intangible heritage into cultural tourism, the Philippines has recently made some efforts, for example, the UNESCO proclamation of the Ilfuago heroic ballads (the Hudhud) as an intangible heritage of humanity.

Mexico views the intangible heritage as a cultural resource which, accompanied by the necessary infrastructure and services, could become a tourism product that generates economic benefits and social well-being for the community.

Legislation and the Intangible Heritage:

Since legislative measures to preserve the intangible heritage are not as developed as those for the tangible heritage, it was hoped that a catalogue of laws on the protection and conservation of the intangible heritage would be established at this virtual meeting. However, it was found that such laws do not address the intangible heritage directly but rather always as part of the heritage in general. The government of South Africa mentioned four specific acts or laws that date back to the late 90s. The Swiss authorities also exemplify this model, since they report that measures to protect the intangible heritage are implicit in their general heritage laws. Switzerland reports that it has no specific legislation to protect the intangible cultural heritage.

For its part, the Canadian government did not identify any laws or regulations on the intangible heritage, but rather referred to the challenge it faces in working with the provincial governments on that topic, although the provinces agree that the intangible heritage plays a very important role in their policies. The National Commission for Culture and the Arts in the Philippines approved the creation of an Intangible Heritage Commission together with a Legislative Committee on Living Treasures to handle matters relating to the identification, registration, protection, conservation, dissemination and promotion of the intangible cultural heritage. The only legislation that deals with the intangible heritage in Mexico is Article 2 of the Constitution, which is intended to preserve the cultures of Mexico's indigenous groups. Unfortunately, there is no specific legislation that deals with this kind of protection in greater detail.

International Organizations:

In this globalized world, protection and preservation of the cultural and natural heritage has become the concern of all nations. Organizations such as UNESCO, ICOMOS, IUCN and the World Bank, among others, have stood out as the main agencies for the promotion and support of that heritage. The countries that responded to this virtual meeting participate in one way or another in the programs, forums and conventions of these bodies.

Tools and Methods for Promoting the Cultural Heritage:

On this final topic, the objective was to exchange information on catalogues, laws, management plans, urban planning, etc., as methods used by the countries in the network to promote the cultural heritage. In the case of South Africa, promotion of its heritage is carried out through legislative structures, whose results are reflected in the establishment of the Resource Agency for South African Heritage responsible for the protection and management of cultural heritage at the state level.

The tools used by Switzerland are described in the discussion of its legislation, and also include the preparation of federal inventories. Heritage Canada has clearer tools and methodologies at its disposal, such as the set of programs designed to preserve and promote Canada's cultural heritage. The Philippines pointed to developing methods or strategies to promote the intangible heritage as its most difficult task. Mexico's response in this area is based on its current legislation, which establishes the following methodological framework based on three essential goals, i.e.: identification of property to be protected; control measures for specific activities in the form of various legal documents such as the Cultural Property Register; and the issuance of licences and permits and, where warranted, the application of fines. Other measures are being developed, such as tax incentives and promotion of the creation of civil associations, neighbourhood councils or rural unions for the protection of individual monuments or monumental zones.

Back to Top