‘Intangible cultural heritage’, as defined by the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), continues to gain traction as a concept within the international heritage discourse. Despite the fact that a decade has now passed since the enforcement of the 2003 Convention, the issue of effectively safeguarding intangible cultural heritage (hereafter ICH) remains an important topic of debate at international, national and regional levels.1 Most importantly, there exists a framework for the safeguarding of ICH that continues to gain international acceptance: the set of guidelines and suggestions put forward within the 2003 Convention, including its accompanying Operational Directives (see UNESCO 2014). This is based on the fact that over 165 States Parties have now accepted and/or ratified the 2003 Convention, which attests to its geographically spread popularity, as well as its potential for setting the standard for safeguarding approaches on an international scale (UNESCO 2016).

Particularly relevant to the following discussions is the topic of museological intervention with respect to safeguarding ICH. The current framework, as structured and promoted by UNESCO, is linked to the museum sector and its practices in two major ways. First, within the past several years, museums across the world have been called upon to engage more with ICH through the efforts of the International Council of Museums (ICOM), such as the 2004 Declaration of Seoul, and through relevant sub-committees (ICOM 2004; see also Vieregg and Davis 2000, Vieregg et al 2004; ICME 2004; Boylan 2006). In general, these developments can be viewed as a response to UNESCO's early efforts in the 2000s, especially the 2003 Convention, and the concern with rising cultural homogenisation via the forces of globalisation (see, for instance, Baghli 2004; Kurin 2004a; Lee 2004; Yim 2004).

At ICOM's 2004 General Conference it was stated that although museums have historically prioritised tangible heritage and would, thereby, need to significantly shift their approaches in order to engage with ICH, they are ‘probably the best institution to do so’ within society (Kurin 2004b, 8). While national governments determine what agencies, ministries and/or organisations are to be held responsible for the implementation of the 2003 Convention within their territories, it is possible that the museum sector will become even more involved than ever before.