02513nas a2200217   4500000000100000008004100001653001100042653001100053653002800064653003300092653002000125653001900145653001700164653002200181653001600203100001300219245013500232856016100367300001200528520175500540                                       d10aTurkey10aUNESCO10aapplied ethnomusicology10aIntangible cultural heritage10asohbet meetings10aSustainability10asıra gecesi10atraditional music10aŞanlıurfa1 aO. Muslu00aUNESCO- Based and UNESCO- Free: Governmental and Non- Governmental Efforts for Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage in Turkey  uhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85144356914&doi=10.1093%2foso%2f9780197609101.003.0007&partnerID=40&md5=a5ceb46f3ff37fb747e6ea873dbdad10  a118-1383 aLegal responsibilities imposed on Contracting States to the Intangible Cultural Heritage oblige them to play more active roles in its application. However, the “protectability” and “transferability” of ICH remain problematic in terms of efforts to list and inventory elements, the form and performance of National Committees, and the structural organs of governments. In Turkey, new ways of working with cultural and political stakeholders were developed following major structural changes to the administration of the Republic of Turkey in 2018 and the adoption of the current presidential system. This chapter examines the successes and failures of two different approaches to safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: a UNESCO-aligned approach, and an independent grassroots approach. The former is given through the example of traditional sıra gecesi of the city of Şanlıurfa in southeastern Turkey. The latter is considered within the context of a “UNESCO-free” applied ethnomusicology project conducted in rural Anatolia. Findings reveal that the implementation of the Convention is largely left to state actors in Turkey. This becomes a basis for the dominance of diplomacy and bureaucracy in the functioning of the convention and the landscape is extremely political. The commodification of ICH elements such as sıra gecesi and their usage as promotional material for tourism are seen as destructive by some communities, but the counter argument shows that such usage allows the elements in question to be better safeguarded. Without the support of local, national, and international authorities, the safeguarding capacity of independent actors remains extremely limited in economically challenged places like rural Anatolia.