"Heritage-for-Peace and Development": An Opportunity Not to be Missed


  • Miloš Milenković Department of Ethnology and Anthropology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade, Serbia




cultural heritage, peace and reconciliation, antirealism, nationalism, social sciences and humanities – social impact


The dominant approach of the international community to the subject of our research and teaching is to instrumentalise cultural heritage safeguarding within stabilisation and development programs in post-conflict regions. Since the turn of the Millennium, cultural heritage safeguarding has been among the crucial instruments used by the international community, especially in post-conflict regions, for: reconciliation and peace building; development of a common sense of belonging; promoting mutually respectful dialogue in culturally complex societies. Many international organizations, such as the UN, the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, NATO, the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, the World Bank, the United Nations Development Program, the Council of Europe, and the EU, promote the management of ethno-political conflicts as their priority. Their agendas follow the principles of a) the overall relevance of cultural heritage for society and b) the importance of social networks for peace-building and peacekeeping in post-traumatic contexts. Instead of opposing this peace and development oriented paradigm from either anti-realist or nationalist perspective, we can recognize it, apply it and use it to improve the social status of social sciences and humanities in Serbia. Anthropological and critical heritage studies-based criticism of UNESCO-driven, state-governed ICH safeguarding fails to comprehend that standard academic constructivist analyses of a community’s key symbols of identity are offensive from the native’s point of view. Our typical analyses unwittingly confuse, annoy or even insult a great majority of the wider public who view/perceive collective identity as something given, inherited and real analogously to the objects and processes of the physical world. Consequently, our theoretical work counterindicates both peacekeeping, stability-building efforts by the international community in post-conflict regions and the goals of critical social science (which it nominally represents). Hence, a novel approach is required, one prioritising heritage stakeholder inclusion (and not our theoretical or ethnoreligious commitments). It is precisely the studies of nationalism and its consequences which forbid us to think of heritage as something useful, a counter-intuitive method for achieving fundamental anthropological goals. As communities regularly perceive their identities as objective and real, and see a critical social theory approach to their customs and traditions as confusing, non-academic, illegitimate or even offensive, I here propose a shift from constructionist criticism, standard in anthropology, to realist instrumentalism, typical of ethnology, in order to boost ICH safeguarding potential for achievement of both social and disciplinary-specific goals.


Akagawa, Natsuko and Laurajane Smith eds. 2009. Safeguarding Intangible Heritage: Practices and Politics. London and New York: Routledge.

Ayhan, Bakar. 2014. “Whose Tradition, Whose Identity? The politics of constructing “Nevruz” as intangible heritage in Turkey.” European Journal of Turkish Studies 19: 1-24

Bendix, Regina F. et al. (eds.). 2013. Heritage Regimes and the State (Göttingen Studies in Cultural Property). Göttingen: Universitätsverlag.

Beresford, Alexander. 2012. “The politics of regenerative nationalism in South Africa.” Journal of Southern African Studies 38(4): 863–884

Bortolotto, Chiara. 2010. “Globalising intangible cultural heritage? Between international arenas and local appropriations.” In: Labadi, Sophia and Collin Long eds. Heritage and Globalisation, 97–114. London: Routledge.

Bräuchler, Birgit. 2018. “The cultural turn in peace research: prospects and challenges.” Peacebuilding 6(1): 17-33.

Brumann, Christoph and Berliner, David. 2016. “UNESCO World Heritage – Grounded.” In World Heritage on the Ground: Ethnographic Perspectives, edited by Brumman and Berliner eds. (EASA Series, 28), 1–34. Oxford: Berghahn Books.

Ćuković, Jelena. 2019. Nematerijalno kulturno nasleđe iz antropološke perspektive : reprezentativnost, selektivnost i instrumentalizacija. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet i Dosije Studio.

Ćuković, Jelena i Miloš Milenković. 2020. “Mogućnosti i prepreke za kreiranje Inkluzivnog registra nematerijalnog kulturnog nasleđa AP Vojvodine – antropološka analiza.” Etnoantropološki problemi 15(1): 313-332.

De Cesari, Chiara. 2010. “Creative Heritage: Palestinian Heritage NGOs and Defiant Arts of Government.” American Anthropologist 112(4): 625-637

Eriksen, Thomas H. 2001. “Between Universalism and Relativism: A Critique of the UNESCO Concept of Culture.” In Culture and Rights: Anthropological Perspectives, edited by Jane Cowan et. al., 127-148.

Gavrilović, Ljiljana. 2011. “Potraga za osobenošću – izazovi i dileme unutar koncepta očuvanja i reprezentovanja nematerijalnog kulturnog nasleđa.” Etnoantropološki problemi 6(1): 221–234

Giblin, John D. 2014. “Post-conflict heritage: symbolic healing and cultural renewal.“ International Journal of Heritage Studies 20(5): 500–518

Hafstein, Valdemar T. 2009. “Intangible heritage as a list: from masterpieces to representation.” In Intangible Heritage, edited by Smith, Laurajane and Natsuko Akagawa, 93–111. London: Routledge.

Jackson, Antoinette. 2010. “Changing Ideas about Heritage and Heritage Management in Historically Segregated Communities.” Transforming Anthropology 18 (1): 80-92.

Kearney, Amanda. 2009. “Intangible Cultural Heritage: Global Awareness and Local Interest.” In Intangible Heritage, edited by Smith, Laurajane and Natsuko Akagawa eds., 209-226. London: Routledge.

Kisić, Višnja. 2016. Governing heritage dissonance: promises and realities of selected cultural policies. Amsterdam: European Cultural Foundation.

Kisić, Višnja. 2019. “Reconciliation through cultural heritage in the post-Yugoslav space: an apolitical endeavour,” In The cultural turn in international aid: impacts and challenges for heritage and the creative industries, edited by S. Labadi, 173–191. New York and London: Routledge.

Klein, Barbro. 2014. “Cultural heritage, human rights, and reform ideologies: the case of Swedish folklife research”. In Cultural heritage in transit: intangible rights as human rights, edited by D. Kapshan, 113–124. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Kudumovic, Lana. 2020. “The experience of post-war reconstruction: the case of built heritage in Bosnia”. Open House International 45(3): 231–248.

Kurin, Richard. 2007. “Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage: Key Factors in Implementing the 2003 Convention.” International Journal of Intangible Heritage 2: 10–20.

Langfield, Michele, William Logan and Mairead Nic Craith eds. 2009. Cultural diversity, heritage and human rights. New York and London: Routledge.

Little, Barbara and Paul Shackel. 2014. Archaeology, heritage, and civic engagement: working toward the public good. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.

Lixinski, Lucas. 2011. “Selecting heritage: the interplay of art, politics and identity”. European Journal of International Law 22(1): 81–100.

Logan, William. 2009. “Playing the devil’s advocate: protecting intangible cultural heritage and the infringement of human rights”. Historic Environment 22(3): 14–18.

Love, Bridget. 2013. “Treasure hunts in rural Japan: place making at the limits of sustainability.” American Anthropologist n. s. 115(1): 112–124.

Milenković, Marko, Milan Antonijević i Jovana Spremo. 2019. “Inkluzivni pristup zaštiti manjinskog nematerijalnog kulturnog nasleđa u Srbiji iz perspektive standarda ljudskih prava.” Etnoantropološki problemi n.s. 14(2): 715-731.

Milenković, Miloš. 2016. Povratak nasleđu: Ogled iz primenjene humanistike. Beograd: Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju i Dosije studio.

Milenković, Miloš. 2019. “Inclusive Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection as an Instrument for the Prevention of Identity-Based Conflicts: The Case of Serbia”. In Extremism and Violent Extremism in Serbia: 21st Century Manifestations of an Historical Challenge (Balkan Politics and Societies Series), edited by Valery Perry, 339-374. Stuttgart and Hannover: Columbia University/Ibidem Press.

Milenković, Miloš, Marko Pišev, and Jelena Ćuković. 2021. “O povezanosti zaštite manjinskog nematerijalnog kulturnog nasleđa i vrednovanja društveno-humanističkih nauka u Republici Srbiji”. Etnoantropološki problemi 16(2): 375-390.

Milenković, Miloš and Marko Milenković. 2013. “Serbia and the European Union. Is the “Culturalisation” of Accession Criteria on the Way?” In EU Enlargement: Current Challenges and Strategic Choices (Europe plurielle/Multiple Europes, Vol. 50), edited by Finn Laursen, 153–174. Bruxelles: Verlagsgruppe.

Mountcastle, Amy. 2010. “Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and the inevitability of loss: a Tibetan example.” Studia ethnologica Croatica 22: 339–59.

Nielsen, Bjarke. 2011. “UNESCO and the ‘right’ kind of culture: bureaucratic production and articulation.” Critique of Anthropology 31(4): 273–92.

Oldham, Paul and Miriam A. Frank 2008. “We the peoples…’ The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.” Anthropology Today 24(2): 5–9.

Saldin, Melathi and Catherine Forbes 2018. “The role of cultural heritage in building peace and reconciliation: conflict, disaster and the future of heritage.” Historic Environment 30 (3): 76–83.

Stengård, Malin, and Mattias Legnér 2019. “Funder and facilitator: Swedish development aid aimed at cultural heritage in Bosnia and Herzegovina 1995–2008.” International Journal of Cultural Policy 25 (7): 858–870.

Vrdoljak, Ana F. 2015. “Challenges for international cultural heritage law.” In A companion to heritage studies, edited by W. Logan, M. Nic Craith and U. Krockel, 541–556. New York: J Wiley and Sons.

Walters, Diana, Daniel Laven and Peter Davis eds. 2017. Heritage and Peacebuilding. Woodbridge: Boydel and Brewer.




How to Cite

Milenković, Miloš. 2021. “‘Heritage-for-Peace and Development’: An Opportunity Not to Be Missed”. Etnoantropološki Problemi / Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 16 (4):1149–1164. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v16i4.7.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>