02054nas a2200325   4500000000100000000000100001008004100002653002400043653001200067653001700079653001100096653002300107653002200130653002300152653002100175653001600196653002600212653002000238653002300258653002900281653002000310100001800330700001600348245007400364856015300438300001200591490000700603520109800610022002001708                                       d10aintangible heritage10aLesotho10aLesotho (LS)10aUNESCO10acultural geography10acultural heritage10acultural landscape10adam construction10adevelopment10aheritage conservation10apolicy approach10aproject management10asocial impact assessment10asouthern Africa1 aLuiseach Eoin1 aRachel King00aHow to develop Intangible Heritage: the case of Metolong Dam, Lesotho  uhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84888012550&doi=10.1080%2f00438243.2013.823885&partnerID=40&md5=38f4300387ebb8a12d6cc64f6ed989e7  a653-6690 v453 aAfter ten years and extensive debate of UNESCO s Convention on the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage (2003), workable definitions and frameworks for safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) are either emergent or non-existent. This is particularly significant in the case of heritage mitigation associated with large-scale construction projects: where these entail population resettlement and/or landscape loss, recording ICH is necessary both for impact assessment and mitigation and for helping impacted-upon communities cope with trauma. Nevertheless, there is little discussion of how to implement ICH safeguarding frameworks in salvage contexts.This paper focuses on attempts to record ICH impacted upon by western Lesotho s Metolong Dam. We highlight the practical shortcomings of existing ICH definitions and safeguarding protocols. We discuss the methodology used at Metolong and its ethical entailments, and take inspiration from UNESCO policy (and debates thereupon) and other sources in an attempt to find a workable framework for ICH recording in development contexts.  a00438243 (ISSN)