UNESCO’s 20th Session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage

India Hosts UNESCO’s 20th ICH Committee Session: Cultural Diplomacy or Bureaucratic Spectacle?

For the first time, India is hosting the 20th session of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) at the historic Red Fort complex in New Delhi. The significance of this event cannot be overstated: India, with 15 elements inscribed on UNESCO’s Representative List, presents itself as a cultural powerhouse. Yet, despite serving three terms on the Intergovernmental Committee, serious questions remain about the link between international prestige and domestic policy impact.

The Core Mechanism: UNESCO’s 2003 Convention

The backbone of this exercise is the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, which India ratified in 2005. This treaty outlines a framework for identifying, safeguarding, and promoting ICH elements. Central to its implementation are the UNESCO ICH Lists, which include three categories: the Representative List, the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding, and the Register of Best Safeguarding Practices.

The Intergovernmental Committee, comprising 24 Member States, plays a pivotal role in processing nominations for these lists, managing the Intangible Cultural Heritage Fund, and monitoring compliance with the Convention. This year’s session in New Delhi will evaluate new nominations and assess the operational directives of the Convention. However, a common problem persists: the gap between inscription and genuine safeguarding.

India’s Case for Cultural Leadership

India’s Ministry of Culture, in partnership with the Sangeet Natak Akademi, has gone to great lengths to ensure the success of this high-profile diplomatic event. Hosting this session not only underscores India’s commitment to cultural preservation but also advances its soft power aspirations. With elements such as Yoga, Kumbh Mela, Vedic Chanting, and Kalbelia folk songs on the Representative List, India has positioned itself as a leading voice for intangible heritage globally.

The stakes are economic as well as cultural. According to government estimates, India’s cultural economy contributes 2.8% to the GDP, with sectors like artisanal crafts and cultural tourism playing a key role. Events like the UNESCO session dovetail with flagship initiatives such as ‘Dekho Apna Desh’ and the Artisan Credit Card Scheme, which aim to monetize cultural assets.

Moreover, intangibles such as traditional agricultural knowledge systems and indigenous ecological practices resonate with contemporary global challenges like climate change and biodiversity loss. These traditions, often seen as repositories of "sustainable wisdom," bolster India’s argument for their global relevance.

The Skeptic’s Angle: Inscription Without Safeguarding?

Despite the pomp, the institutional critique is unavoidable. The promise of safeguarding elements inscribed on UNESCO lists is often undermined by implementation gaps at the state level. Consider the example of Kalbelia folk songs and dances of Rajasthan, inscribed in 2010. Reports suggest that performers struggle with declining patronage, lack of state funding, and exploitation by intermediaries in the cultural tourism value chain. Post-inscription support mechanisms—economic aid, institutional training, or market linkages—often remain ad hoc or absent altogether.

Additionally, the UNESCO process, while prestigious, inadvertently reinforces hierarchies. The nomination process is both expensive and complex, sidelining grassroots community groups that lack the resources to engage with it. In India, prioritization of nominations by central agencies often leads to less politically visible traditions being ignored. Furthermore, it is unclear how the Ministry of Culture’s allocation of ₹3,000 crores in its budget for 2023-24 addresses these systemic deficiencies.

The irony here is that while hosting the ICH session bolsters India’s global image, it risks becoming yet another bureaucratic exercise disconnected from ground realities. As UNESCO acknowledges, safeguarding is meaningless unless rooted in community ownership—an area where India’s policies often falter.

What Can India Learn from South Korea?

South Korea presents an illuminating contrast. Known for its robust safeguarding mechanisms, the country established the Cultural Heritage Administration, a dedicated agency tasked with implementing a comprehensive ICH framework. Under its “Living Human Treasures” programme, Korea offers financial, educational, and institutional support to practitioners, ensuring sustainability beyond mere recognition.

This approach has yielded significant dividends. For instance, traditional Korean practices such as Kimjang (the preparation of Kimchi) have not only thrived culturally but also become commercially valuable in global markets. South Korea’s experience shows that decentralization, practitioner-centric policies, and sustained financial investments are indispensable for safeguarding ICH.

India, with its decentralized federal structure, could emulate such models. Granting financial autonomy to state cultural bodies and facilitating public-private partnerships for ICH preservation might yield more tangible outcomes than top-down interventions focused on external validation.

Where Things Stand

India’s hosting of UNESCO’s 20th ICH session is undoubtedly a milestone. But a deeper reckoning is required: will this lead to transformative safeguarding frameworks or merely reinforce India’s reliance on global cultural diplomacy? The answer depends on bridging two distinct gaps—one between nomination and sustainability, and another between central policy intentions and grassroots execution.

South Korea’s proactive measures indicate what India could achieve with targeted institutional reform. For now, however, it appears that public representation outpaces substantive policy outcomes. Hosting an event on such a grand stage must not overshadow the unglamorous but vital task of making safeguarding locally viable.

Practice Questions for UPSC

Prelims Practice Questions

Frequently Asked Questions