01942nas a2200265   4500000000100000000000100001008004100002653002700043653002600070653001800096653000900114653002800123653001700151653003900168653003100207653002200238100001900260700002000279245010800299856011800407300001200525490000600537520111900543022001401662       2013                            d10aCandidature files 201110aCommunity involvement10adocumentation10aFree10aGrass-roots initiatives10aHuman rights10aIntangible Cultural Heritage Lists10aPrior and informed consent10aTenth anniversary1 aBritta Rudolff1 aSusanne Raymond00aA Community Convention? An analysis of Free, Prior and Informed Consent given under the 2003 Convention  uhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84891107885&partnerID=40&md5=0ffb4a9305788623cf0ed3fd2f8aa844  a153-1640 v83 aWhen the 2003 Convention was drafted a decade ago, one of its aims was to overcome the perceived exclusions and shortcomings of the earlier UNESCO heritage conventions, perceived as not community-driven and often Eurocentric in approach. The intention was to adopt a legally binding instrument, which allowed for stronger representation of heritage expressions of the South, which placed communities and grass-roots initiatives at the centre of its activities, and which would strengthen the recognition of, and support for, heritage practitioners. On the occasion of the Convention s tenth anniversary, this paper offers a review of the Convention s success rate in community involvement by focusing on two aspects: the degree to which communities were the driving forces or strongly involved partners in the preparation of candidature files for the Convention s Intangible Heritage Lists and the way in which their free, prior and informed consent was documented. Based on these findings the paper reflects on potential further improvements towards the Convention s aims within the forthcoming nomination cycles.  a1975-3586