You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Abigail Zou and Version 1 by Partarakis Nikolaos.
Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) is increasingly recognised as a potential factor that can strengthen social cohesion and societal resilience. Yet, existing scholarship often valorises ICH without fully examining the challenges, exclusions, and political tensions it can produce. This article addresses that gap by critically reviewing UNESCO frameworks, case studies, and academic literature to evaluate both the opportunities and the limitations of ICH in contemporary societies. Our analysis highlights how ICH can contribute to shared identity, intergenerational transmission, and adaptive ecological knowledge, while also noting the risks of standardisation, misappropriation, and nationalistic appropriation. Using a comparative and critical literature review approach, we synthesise examples from diverse contexts to illustrate the dual role of ICH as both a community resource and a contested political tool. The findings do not suggest that ICH universally or inevitably generates resilience or cohesion. Rather, they map the paradigms in which ICH has been mobilised for these purposes, showing both the potential benefits and the risks. On this basis, the article offers policy recommendations that emphasise community-led safeguarding, integration of traditional knowledge into resilience frameworks, and vigilance against exclusionary or exploitative uses of ICH.
- intangible cultural heritage
- social resilience
- social cohesion
- shared identity
- intercultural dialogue
- intergenerational transmission
- safeguarding
The concept of cultural heritage has evolved significantly in recent decades, moving beyond tangible monuments and artefacts to embrace the living expressions that define communities worldwide [1]. This shift, largely influenced by instruments like UNESCO’s 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the ICH, acknowledges heritage as a ‘living, breathing element of human existence’ [2]. This work regards contributions of ICH to the strengthening of social bonds and the enhancement of adaptive capacities within societies. Understanding these mechanisms is central for policymakers, researchers, and community leaders seeking sustainable pathways to collective well-being and stability in an increasingly complex world. ICH is a fundamental resource for human development and societal flourishing [3].
This article specifies when and how ICH can contribute to social cohesion and societal resilience. We (i) define mechanisms through which ICH operates, (ii) identify the conditions under which these mechanisms translate into absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacities, and (iii) derive policy levers and indicators aligned to those mechanisms. The contribution is a mechanism-led synthesis that integrates opportunities and risks, rather than a claim of universal effects. Methods are a critical review of UNESCO frameworks, peer-reviewed literature and documented programmes, sampled for relevance and diversity (2003–2025).
This study is based on a critical literature review and analysis of international reports, UNESCO declarations, and case studies that link ICH to resilience and social cohesion. The corpus was constituted from three main sources: (i) official UNESCO conventions, handbooks, and policy documents published between 2003 and 2025, (ii) peer-reviewed academic literature in heritage, anthropology, and resilience studies, and (iii) selected case studies documented by international organisations (UNDP, ICCROM, World Bank) and national initiatives. Selection criteria prioritised (1) the relevance of sources in connecting ICH with resilience, social cohesion, or adaptation, (2) their diversity in the inclusion of cases across regions, governance contexts, and cultural domains, and (3) their recency, preferring materials published within the last 20 years, while including seminal older works for conceptual foundations. The analysis was conducted manually by the authors, not by automated data mining. A thematic coding approach was applied to identify recurring patterns (e.g., identity formation, transmission, ecological knowledge, crisis response) as well as tensions (e.g., misappropriation, politicisation, exclusion through UNESCO listing).
Existing scholarship on ICH has demonstrated its importance for cultural identity, sustainable development, and the safeguarding of diversity [3,4,5][3][4][5]. More recent work has highlighted the intersections of ICH with climate change [2], education [6[6][7],7], and peacebuilding [8]. However, much of this literature either valorises ICH as an unqualified good or treats it in narrowly sectoral terms. What remains underexplored is a critical synthesis that examines both the positive contributions of ICH to resilience and cohesion and the tensions, exclusions, and political dynamics that accompany its recognition, transmission, and use. This article addresses that gap by situating ICH within the dual framework of social cohesion and societal resilience, while also engaging with critiques concerning standardisation, misappropriation, and uneven access to safeguarding mechanisms. In doing so, it contributes to heritage studies by offering a balanced, policy-oriented review that integrates opportunities and risks, aiming to guide future safeguarding strategies.
It should be noted that this article does not attempt to prove that ICH is an infallible or universal solution for resilience and cohesion. Instead, its contribution lies in examining the paradigms and mechanisms through which ICH has been utilised as a resource for these purposes. The approach is therefore exploratory and synthetic, mapping conceptual frameworks and case evidence rather than demonstrating causality.
The contribution of this paper is to synthesise existing paradigms, stemming from engineering, socio-ecological, and evolutionary resilience domains, and to locate ICH within them. This provides a foundation for more targeted empirical research rather than claiming infallible outcomes.
References
- UNESCO. Text of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, United Nations Digital Library System, 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Available online: https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention (accessed on 1 October 2025).
- McDermott, P.; Craith, M.N. Intangible Cultural Heritage and Climate Change: Sustainability and Adaptability in a Time of Crisis? Anthropol. J. Eur. Cult. 2024, 33, 1–10.
- Wulf, C. (Ed.) Handbook on Intangible Cultural Practices as Global Strategies for the Future: Twenty Years of the UNESCO Convention on Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2025.
- Schmitt, T.M. The UNESCO Concept of Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage: Its Background and Marrakchi Roots. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2008, 14, 95–111.
- Kurin, R. Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage in the 2003 UNESCO Convention: A Critical Appraisal. Mus. Int. 2004, 56, 66–77.
- Tawil, S.; Locatelli, R. Rethinking Education: Towards a Global Common Good. Dostupnéz. 2015. Available online: https://www.norrageducation.org/rethinking-education-towards-a-global-common-good/ (accessed on 12 August 2025).
- Liu, X. A Comparative Study on the Roles of the World Bank, the OECD and UNESCO in Global Education Policy Making. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Creative Industry and Knowledge Economy (CIKE 2022), Online, 25–27 March 2022; pp. 539–543.
- The World Bank; UNESCO. Culture in City Reconstruction and Recovery (CURE) Position Paper and Technical Notes; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; Available online: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/188951583401533818/peacebuilding-and-recovery-in-the-culture-in-city-reconstruction-and-recovery-cure-framework-technical-notes (accessed on 1 October 2025).
More