In 1882, the coastline of Lagoa on São Miguel island was transformed by the arrival of a new factory — the Fábrica de Álcool — with German machinery, local workers, and a product that would define the island’s economy for generations. More than 140 years later, the factory stands silent, waiting to be reimagined. Who gets to decide what it becomes? Who carries the memory of what it was? These are not just logistical questions. They are ethical ones — and they sit at the heart of what it means to safeguard intangible cultural heritage.
1. Why Ethics and ICH are Inseparable
Intangible cultural heritage (ICH) is not simply a collection of customs, crafts, and performances that happen to have survived into the present. It is the living expression of communities’ identities — their values, their relationships, their understanding of the world. As UNESCO’s 2003 Convention makes clear, ICH encompasses oral traditions, performing arts, social customs, rituals, festive celebrations, knowledge of nature and the universe, and traditional craftsmanship.
The word “ethics” comes from the Greek ethos — the character or spirit of a community, the set of guiding principles that orient human action toward what is good. The connection to ICH is not accidental. If ICH is how communities express who they are, then ethics is the framework through which we ask: are we treating that expression — and those communities — with the respect they deserve?
Culture encompasses the knowledge, art, morals, customs, and beliefs acquired through social life. It forms both material dimensions (art objects, buildings) and immaterial ones (customs, knowledge, values) that underpin social identity. There is an intrinsic relationship between culture and identity: cultural interpretation helps individuals discover themselves and find meaning in their reality. Neglecting or erasing a community’s ICH undermines its identity and imposes cultural dominance — diminishing the richness of cultural interaction in today’s global society.
Key concept: ICH is not a museum piece to be preserved in a glass case. It is alive and ever-evolving, passed down through generations not by formal instruction alone but through participation, imitation, celebration, and shared memory. A fundamental ethical principle follows: safeguarding efforts should not aim to “freeze” cultural practices. Freezing a tradition — fixing it in the form it had at a particular moment — distorts its nature and may strip it of the very vitality that makes it meaningful.
2. UNESCO Principles and the Ethical Foundation of ICH
UNESCO’s 2003 Convention sets out three principles that are simultaneously ethical and practical:
- Participation: Communities, groups, and individuals must be central to all decisions about their ICH — its identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, and revitalization. Participation is not a token gesture but a structural requirement.
- Respect for cultural diversity and creativity: ICH safeguarding must not impose any hierarchy of value between traditions. Every expression of human creativity and community identity deserves respect, regardless of how it compares to dominant cultural norms.
- Non-exploitation: ICH must not be used in ways that demean, commodify, or exploit the communities that created and sustain it. This applies to commercial use, academic research, tourism, and digital dissemination alike.
These principles establish a shared vocabulary for the entire module: FPIC (Free, Prior, and Informed Consent), custodianship, data sovereignty, cultural appropriation, representation, and equitable benefit-sharing.
3. Shared Vocabulary for the Module
| Term | Working definition |
|---|---|
| ICH | Practices, expressions, knowledge, and cultural spaces that communities recognise as part of their cultural heritage — oral traditions, performing arts, social rituals, knowledge of nature, traditional craftsmanship. |
| Ownership | The right to control and make decisions about a cultural expression. In ICH contexts, this is usually collective and communal, not individual. |
| Custodianship | The responsibility to safeguard, transmit, and share ICH with respect for community values — distinct from ownership, and often more appropriate in ICH contexts. |
| FPIC | Free, Prior, and Informed Consent — the principle that communities must agree to research, documentation, or use of their ICH before it occurs, without coercion, with full information. |
| Data sovereignty | The right of communities to govern how digital records of their ICH (audio, video, metadata) are stored, accessed, and shared. |
| Cultural appropriation | The use of elements of one culture by members of another, especially when this involves power imbalances, lack of consent, or misrepresentation. |
| Benefit-sharing | Mechanisms ensuring communities receive fair recognition and compensation when their ICH is used commercially or for research purposes. |
Case Study Connections
Case Study 1 — Fábrica de Álcool da Lagoa (Azores)
The Fábrica de Álcool da Lagoa — a former alcohol production factory on the island of São Miguel — illustrates how industrial heritage can become a site of intangible cultural memory. Founded in 1882, the factory employed up to 220 workers at its peak, shaped local toponymy, gave rise to community institutions (including a football club still active today), and embedded itself in the social fabric of Lagoa over more than a century.
When the factory closed in 2021, it did not simply lose its economic function — it lost the social and cultural role it played in the community. Former workers, their families, and local residents carry memories, stories, and a sense of identity shaped by their relationship to this place. Any future redevelopment must reckon with this intangible dimension. Ethics begins here: not with legal compliance, but with the question of whose identity is at stake.
▶ Video: Fábrica de Álcool da Lagoa — heritage and community memory
Case Study 2 — Ceramics and Embroidery in the Azores
The ceramics of Lagoa (particularly the blue-and-white faience of Cerâmica Vieira, established in 1862) and the distinct embroidery traditions of São Miguel, Terceira, and Faial embody centuries of artistic knowledge, social history, and island identity. Each island’s tradition tells a different story: the bordado a matiz of São Miguel, worked in shades of faience blue inspired by rural motifs; the white linen embroidery of Terceira, influenced by English craft traditions; and the straw embroidery of Faial, with its distinctive contrast of straw-colored patterns on black fabric.
These are not merely decorative crafts — they are expressions of how Azorean communities have understood themselves across generations, how women’s labor has been valued (and sometimes undervalued), and how local environments and materials shape cultural identity. They are also living traditions, continuing to evolve through family workshops, cooperatives, and contemporary design adaptations.
Activities
→ Ethical Anchors Wall (groups, 20 min): Using the two case studies as your source material, identify 6 ethical “anchors” — key ethical dimensions present in both cases. For each anchor (e.g., intergenerational transmission, women’s roles and livelihoods, identity and place, community ownership, risk of commodification, authenticity vs. industrial copies), attach at least one specific piece of evidence from the texts. Post to a shared board and compare with other groups.
→ Glossary & Principles Wall (digital , 20 min): Using the shared vocabulary table and the UNESCO principles, build a digital glossary (Padlet, Miro, or shared document). For each term, add: (1) a brief definition in your own words; (2) one concrete example from the Azores case studies; (3) one question the term raises for you. Pay particular attention to ownership vs. custodianship, and appreciation vs. appropriation.
→ Who Is a Stakeholder? (individual, 15 min): For the Fábrica de Álcool da Lagoa, list all the stakeholders who have a legitimate claim on decisions about the site’s future. For each, note: (a) the nature of their connection to the heritage; (b) whether that claim is based on ownership, custodianship, or something else; (c) which UNESCO principle most protects their interest. Then rank the top three stakeholders who should have the most say — and justify your ranking.
Key Questions
- Why is ethics described as “co-natural” to ICH safeguarding — what goes wrong when ethics is treated as an add-on rather than a foundation?
- What does it mean to say that ICH is “living”? What are the risks of treating it as fixed or frozen, and how do the Azores case studies illustrate those risks?
- Which of the three UNESCO principles (participation, respect for diversity, non-exploitation) do you think is most under threat in the case of the Fábrica de Álcool da Lagoa — and why?
- How do identity and recognition shape the ethical claims that communities make about their heritage?
- In what ways do ceramics and embroidery in the Azores illustrate the relationship between ICH and cultural diversity? What would be lost if these traditions disappeared?