Follow Us:

Jump Menu

What to do next


After the identification of the entries with common links that tell the same story we should develop a coordinated strategy between the programs that would include the following steps:

Raising awareness

All the programs focus on actions to spread knowledge of the heritage among people. The ICH for example is interested in documenting the intangible heritage and protect it from being lost by diffusing knowledge through education in the community. MOW, as WCH, delivers knowledge about the heritage mainly through informational campaigns and educational programs. In addition all three programmes propose training about preservation of the heritage (to involve local people and to improve the operators’ skills).

The actions are pretty similar. Therefore, in the "common" cases coordinated actions could be more effective. For example, one may think at an educational program or an informational campaign which deals with the three types of heritage at the same time.

Coordination could show its benefit in two other actions: the documentation and the participation actions. The first refers to the ICH strategy: it entails a documentation action with the aim of conserving the local expression. The coordination with the MOW Program could be beneficial to the ICH Program, since the MOW has a sound experience in this field. The second issue has to do with the involvement of the community in the preservation process, which relates to the ICH and WCH program.


The preservation action is very specific for each program, so it may be difficult to propose any form of coordination. In fact both the MOW and the WCH are concerned with the physical conservation of the heritage, but evidently this entails different skills and abilities. Moreover, the MOW is focused mainly on the conservation of the content of the document through digital skills. ICH refers to the conservation of the heritage as directly maintaining the traditions alive and diffusing them among people.


Access is interpreted differently across the programs. For the MOW Program it means giving people the opportunity to be directly in contact with the content of the documentary heritage. This is achieved through internet and the digitalization of the document that is through Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The WCH and the ICH program focus on the participation of people. WCH aims at integrating the site by giving it a function in the life of the community, while the ICH involves the community directly in the management of the preservation process.

It is interesting to note that MOW is using the Information Technology to diffuse the heritage and to grant free access to its content, while the WCH and the ICH are focused on a direct approach with local people. Surely both strategies are significant. The programs could possibly share experiences to achieve a complete access at each field.

Structures, status and relationships

All the programs encourage advisory relationships with NGOs which are involved in their own field. Moreover, the WCH allows the Committee to cooperate with international and national governmental and non-governmental organizations for the implementation of the projects as well.

These relationships concern specifically each program’s management and aim at a significance improvement of their action.