In fact UK and NL have not (yet??) even signed up to this scheme. On the other hand I note that Bhutan, which resolutely fails to get any of its undoubted tangible heritage inscribed on the WH list, has engaged here and has 1 item inscribed . Indeed, if the WH list can be criticised for "over-representation" of European countries, this list could be similarly "criticised" for over-representation of Asia (France, Spain and Croatia seem to be the main movers in Europe) . This confirms my view that to some extent this criticism of the WH list is unjustified. It is a fact that the heritage of some cultures/countries tends more to the "Intangible" and that of others to the "Tangible". To try to overcome this by adding lots of dubious "tangible" sites from non-tangible cultures is just "political correctness".
We know that some WHS are inscribed under Criterion vi (" to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance") which emphasises their "intangible" aspects -and that this has caused some "heart searching" regarding its validity as a reason for inscribing WHS. The converse seems to happen with the Intangible list. I was surprised to see the Katchkars of Armenia inscribed as "Intangible" heritage. They seem pretty tangible to me - although of course they are associated with intangible beliefs and cultural activities.
I also note that the Intangible list actually seems to consist of 3 lists
a. The Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity (RL)
b. The List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding (USL)
c. Programmes, projects and activities for the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage considered to best reflect the principles and objectives of the Convention.
I just don't understand the 3rd but the first 2 each have their own criteria and the second is NOT a subset of the first - i.e it isn't like the "In Danger" list within the World Heritage list but is totally separate. Strange?
It would be a good travel goal to "experience" all these, next to having visited all WHS.
We have our "problems" about deciding whether we have "seen" a WHS and I can see a whole new set of issues about deciding whether one has "seen" items from the Intangible list!
Authenticity would be one problem - Would some touristy and, no doubt, Disneyfied performance of e.g an Ifugao Hudhud chant given in some hotel in Banaue count? What about the presentations of Beijing opera - I have seen these in London (as well, as it happens, in China) but would those count?
And what would count as "seeing" (or even "experiencing") Chinese Calligraphy? Presumably one would actually need to see it "being done" rather than merely the result? Similarly with "Indonesian Batik".
And do the dinners I have had in France actually count as a genuine "French Dinner Party" gastronomic experience!!