21 min read engagement

Co-Creating Cultural Heritage in Ireland: Challenges and Opportunities

Clonmel Guard, County Tipperary, Ireland
At the Clonmel Guard

Disclaimer

This is a holding page generated by ChatGPT after the prompt "What gaps exist in Ireland that prevent effective co-creation of cultural content and that contribute to a lack of engagement by citizens?" I'm reviewing the accuracy of this content, interspersing some of my own multimedia contributions in the paragraphs, as I cross-check the accuracy of the AI-generated research.

Importance of Cultural Engagement

Co-creation of cultural heritage content – where citizens actively help document, interpret, and share heritage – is increasingly seen as vital for keeping heritage alive and relevant. In Ireland, numerous initiatives encourage people to engage with heritage, from community history projects to youth arts programmes. Yet, youth and rural communities remain underrepresented in cultural heritage participation. Infrastructural gaps – in digital connectivity, access to institutions, education, funding, and platforms – create barriers that limit effective co-creation. The result is lower engagement in these groups, as many lack the means or support to contribute to Ireland’s rich cultural heritage. Below, we examine national efforts to involve citizens in heritage, identify key infrastructural challenges impeding youth and rural participation, and evaluate how these hurdles lead to low engagement. We also highlight examples and recommendations to bridge these gaps for a more inclusive, participatory heritage sector.

Students from Rusheen National School participate in a local biodiversity heritage project, illustrating youth engagement in cultural heritage at community level.

National Initiatives Encouraging Citizen Heritage Engagement

Creative Ireland Programme (2017–present): A major all-of-government initiative aimed at improving cultural access and participation nationwide. Under its Creative Youth and Creative Communities pillars, Creative Ireland works through schools and local authorities to spark creative and heritage projects. For example, Cruinniú na nÓg – the national Day of Youthful Creativity – offers free cultural workshops and events across all 31 counties each year, specifically targeting hard-to-reach young people. In 2019 over 750 free events took place, from art and coding workshops to local history tours. Likewise, Creative Communities has supported cross-sector projects in arts, heritage, and local history through every county council. In its first two years, over 2,500 community initiatives were funded under Creative Ireland, many in rural areas. This includes establishing Culture and Creativity Teams in each county and piloting creativity hubs, as part of a strategy to foster culture in rural communities. These efforts signal strong national commitment to enabling citizens – especially youth – to realize their creative and heritage potential.

Heritage Council Programs: Ireland’s Heritage Council runs several programs to empower local communities in heritage. The annual Community Heritage Grant Scheme provides funding for grassroots projects nationwide. In 2025 alone, it awarded €1.9 million to 132 projects ranging from digitizing local archives to conserving historic graveyards. Demand is high – a call for proposals that year drew hundreds of applications from volunteer groups across the country – indicating many communities are eager to engage if supported. The Heritage Council also leads the Adopt a Monument scheme, which helps community groups actively care for and interpret local archaeological sites. Participating communities receive expert mentoring and small grants to preserve their chosen monument and share its story, instilling local pride. For younger citizens, the Council’s Heritage in Schools program sends heritage experts to primary schools nationwide to introduce children (ages 4–12) to topics like history, biodiversity, and folklore. While this cultivates early interest, it currently serves primary level only. Outside the classroom, National Heritage Week each August engages the public with thousands of free heritage events. Local museums, history societies, and volunteers host walks, talks, and exhibitions – including many family- and youth-friendly activities – to celebrate heritage “on your doorstep”. Heritage Week (part of European Heritage Days) has become a flagship for community participation, raising awareness and enthusiasm for heritage across urban and rural Ireland.

Digital Heritage Platforms and Networks: Recognizing the importance of digital access, Ireland has developed platforms to involve communities in sharing cultural heritage online. AskAboutIreland.ie, for instance, is a collaboration between public libraries, local museums, and archives to digitize unique local history materials and publish them on a national online portal. This “Cultural Heritage Project” provides a learning zone for schools and a rich repository of local photographs, documents, and folklore, making rural collections accessible countrywide. Another key initiative is the Irish Community Archive Network (iCAN), established by the National Museum of Ireland in partnership with the Heritage Council and local authorities. iCAN empowers volunteer groups to create digital community archives and share their town or parish’s heritage with the world. To date it has supported 36 online archives across six counties and aims for at least 80 community archives by 2028. Each local archive (hosted on the OurIrishHeritage platform) is run by community members – often in rural villages – who upload old photos, oral histories, and research about their area. With much of Ireland’s intangible heritage held by citizens and diaspora, iCAN provides vital infrastructure and training for locals to document their own history and make it globally accessible. Beyond these state-supported platforms, independent projects have also spurred citizen co-creation. A notable example that I have used is the Historic Graves Project – a grassroots initiative (started 2010) that trains local communities to survey historic graveyards and publish their records online. Over 500 community groups across Ireland learned to use low-cost digital tools to record gravestone inscriptions and oral histories, resulting in a freely accessible database of 800+ historic graveyards and details of nearly 200,000 people buried there. This crowdsourced genealogical resource was built by citizens for citizens, and its success earned support from the Heritage Council (which provided a grant to upgrade the platform in 2018). Such case studies demonstrate the appetite among communities to co-create digital heritage content when supportive networks and tools are available.

Commemorative and Community Projects: State-led commemorations and local heritage groups also play a role in engagement. The Ireland 2016 Centenary Programme, marking 100 years since the 1916 Rising, deliberately involved communities and young people in exploring history and identity. It supported thousands of cultural events nationwide – exhibitions, theatre, school projects, digitization of archives – and even consulted youth on its design. This showed that, given resources and national attention, citizen participation in heritage can flourish (over 3,500 community-led events took place in 2016). More routinely, nearly every county and parish has its own historical society or folklore group sustained by volunteers. While these tend to attract older members, some have started youth outreach or partnered with schools on local history projects. Local museums and archives, where they exist, serve as hubs for community heritage activity – and national institutions have begun outreach beyond Dublin. For instance, the National Museum’s Country Life branch in Mayo engages rural audiences, and the National Library’s travelling exhibits and digitized collections help reach communities far from its capital-based reading rooms. Annual culture events like Culture Night also broaden access: on one night each year, cultural venues across 40+ towns and villages stay open late with free events, encouraging new audiences (including many families and young people) to visit museums, galleries, and heritage sites in their locality. In short, Ireland has a growing ecosystem of initiatives – from funding schemes and educational programs to digital platforms and national celebrations – all aimed at lowering barriers and inviting citizens to actively engage with heritage. These efforts have yielded many success stories. However, significant infrastructural challenges continue to prevent truly widespread, effective co-creation of cultural heritage content, particularly for youth in rural areas. Below we identify these gaps and how they contribute to low engagement.

Infrastructural Challenges Hindering Co-Creation

Despite the initiatives above, research and on-the-ground experience reveal structural gaps that limit the reach and impact of heritage co-creation in Ireland’s rural communities and among its young people. Key challenges include:

  • Limited Digital Infrastructure: A fundamental barrier has been the uneven availability of high-speed internet and digital tools, especially in rural Ireland. Until recently, many rural towns and villages had poor broadband connectivity – restricting residents’ ability to access online cultural resources or contribute content digitally. In fact, “rural life has many advantages, but until recently, high-speed internet wasn’t one of them,” as National Broadband Ireland wryly notesnbi.ie. The government’s ongoing National Broadband Plan (NBP) – described as “the largest infrastructural project in rural Ireland since rural electrification,” spanning 96% of Ireland’s land massnbi.ie – is actively addressing this digital divide. As of mid-2025 it has connected over 125,000 rural homes, farms and businesses to gigabit-speed fiber, with thousands more in progressthinkbusiness.iethinkbusiness.ie. This belated investment is transformative: reliable broadband “is providing rural Ireland with the same access to digital opportunities as our cities,” allowing online learning, remote collaboration, and digital creativity in areas long left behindthinkbusiness.ie. However, until full rollout (projected late 2020s), many remote communities remain on the wrong side of the digital divide. Lack of fast internet or modern equipment in these areas severely hampers heritage co-creation – be it participating in a virtual workshop, uploading oral history recordings, or even simply accessing digitized archives. As one rural youth report observed, poor broadband in combination with sparse transport “inhibits young people’s access to vital supports and information available online”youth.ie. In short, without robust digital infrastructure, youth and volunteers in rural Ireland struggle to engage with digital heritage, leading to lower participation and a feeling of being “left out” of national cultural initiatives. Bridging this infrastructure gap (through the NBP and community internet hubs) is critical to enabling equal co-creative opportunities.
  • Geographic and Institutional Access Gaps: Ireland’s major cultural institutions – national museums, archives, galleries – are concentrated in Dublin and a few urban centers. Rural communities often lack proximate access to these resources and the expertise they offer. While admission to national institutions is free (and under-18s enjoy free entry to special exhibitions)national-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu, the cost and logistics of travel pose hurdles for youth and schools outside cities. The National Youth Council reports that limited public transport is one of the biggest challenges for rural youth, isolating them from services and opportunities in urban areasyouth.ieyouth.ie. A teen in Mayo might be 50+ miles from the nearest museum or archive and have no bus to get there. This physical disconnect translates into less exposure to professional heritage spaces, fewer chances to participate in museum programs or national events, and a perception that “culture” happens elsewhere. The government has acknowledged this gap: the 2017 Action Plan for Rural Development included a pillar on “Fostering Culture and Creativity in Rural Communities,” with goals to increase access to arts and enhance cultural facilities in rural areasnational-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu. Through Creative Ireland, each county now has a Culture Team and some have begun setting up creativity hubs in libraries or arts centers to bring heritage programming closer to communities. Mobile initiatives – like the Free Educational Visits scheme that funds school trips to heritage sites, or traveling exhibitions from Dublin-based institutions – also help mitigate geographic barriersnational-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu. Still, many rural counties lack a dedicated cultural infrastructure (such as a county museum or archive) with the staffing to support community co-creation. Local heritage groups often have no physical space or professional guidance. The result is that rural residents, and especially youth, have fewer touchpoints with Ireland’s heritage landscape. Without easy access to inspiring collections or heritage experts, interest and engagement can remain low. A sense of exclusion may set in – one EU report noted that rural communities can feel disconnected from government and cultural policy, which leads to misunderstanding and distrustec.europa.eu. Over time, this feeds apathy or “indifference to the past” among those who have not had chances to see the value of heritage up closeec.europa.eu. Infrastructural investment in local cultural centers, traveling outreach, and inclusive programming is needed to ensure no community is too remote to participate in cultural heritage.
  • Education and Training Deficits: Another structural challenge lies in the education system and skills training related to heritage. Currently, Ireland has no dedicated national policy or framework to promote youth engagement with heritagenational-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu. Heritage education is uneven: primary schools get a taste of it (via the Heritage in Schools visits and local history in the curriculum), but secondary students have little formal heritage content beyond academic history class. There are few opportunities for teenagers to practice hands-on cultural heritage work (such as oral history, genealogy, or digital archiving) as part of school or youth programs. The absence of heritage-focused pathways means many young people enter adulthood without awareness of how they could contribute to preserving culture. Outside formal education, training opportunities for community members in heritage skills are limited and often centralized. For example, learning to digitize photographs, conserve an old structure, or curate an exhibit usually requires seeking specialized courses or urban institutions. Rural volunteers may lack access to such training, and youth may not even know these skill-development options exist. The Heritage Council and others have begun to fill this gap through ad-hoc workshops – e.g. Adopt a Monument provides participating groups with conservation and interpretation training, and the Irish Community Archive Network runs workshops to teach volunteers digital archiving techniques. But these reach only a fraction of communities so far. A 2019 European platform on heritage and social innovation highlighted that rural communities often suffer a “general lack of resources, both in terms of money and in skills and competences”, making it hard to implement heritage projects effectivelyec.europa.eu. In many areas, heritage activities rely on a few active individuals; if they lack training or age out without successors, projects falter. The capacity-building gap also extends to digital literacy – older volunteers may be unfamiliar with new technologies, and while youth are tech-savvy, they might not know how to apply those skills to heritage (for instance, using GIS to map local monuments or creating a documentary). This skills gap contributes to low engagement because people don’t feel empowered or qualified to contribute content. As one analysis noted, a small number of engaged community members cannot carry all initiatives on their ownec.europa.eu. Without broader community education and upskilling, many potential contributors remain on the sidelines. Addressing this requires integrating cultural heritage into youth programs (e.g. through Transition Year projects, youth clubs, or Scouting merit badges in heritage) and offering accessible training (possibly via online modules or local libraries) to equip citizens with the know-how to document and share their heritage.
  • Fragmented Funding and Support Mechanisms: Sustained citizen engagement depends on resources, yet funding for community heritage is often piecemeal or insufficient. While Ireland does have grant schemes (as discussed earlier), the available funds cover only a portion of needs. The Heritage Council’s €1.9M for 132 projects in 2025 is a welcome boostheritagecouncil.ie, but hundreds of other proposed projects went unfunded that yearheritagecouncil.ie. Many rural heritage groups operate on shoestring budgets, relying on volunteer time and occasional small grants from county councils or LEADER rural development funds. This short-term project funding model can limit impact: groups might digitize some photos or restore a local monument when a grant comes through, but lack money for follow-up phases like interpretation, outreach, or maintenance. There is also the issue of bureaucracy and access to funding. Smaller community organizations often find grant applications and compliance daunting, especially if they lack paid staff. According to participants at a heritage and social innovation forum in Dublin, rural communities “often lack access to support, funding, and are more hampered by bureaucracy” than urban counterpartsec.europa.eu. Moreover, most funding is competitive, which can pit groups against each other rather than encouraging collaboration. For youth-led initiatives, the hurdles are even higher – young people or schools might not be eligible to apply directly for many grants, and they depend on supportive adults or agencies to navigate funding processes. The net effect is that promising ideas in heritage co-creation may never get off the ground due to resource constraints. It also risks geographic inequity: active counties (or those with Heritage Officers and savvy volunteers) grab a share of funds, while isolated areas with less know-how get left behind. Even when money is secured, it’s typically for one-off projects, not continuous engagement. A community might host a fantastic oral history weekend with grant support, but with no funds the next year, momentum is lost. Consistent engagement requires ongoing support structures. The absence of a long-term funding strategy for community heritage (beyond annual grant cycles) is a structural gap that keeps engagement levels low and precarious. As Dr. Martina Moloney, Chair of the Heritage Council, noted, programs like Heritage Council grants, Adopt a Monument, and Heritage in Schools demonstrate how “local engagement and national support can combine to deliver real, lasting benefits.”heritagecouncil.ie The challenge is extending that support to all communities consistently, rather than a lucky few sporadically. Without reliable funding or advisory support, many communities simply cannot sustain co-creation initiatives, resulting in drop-offs in volunteer involvement over time.
  • Lack of Participatory Platforms and Networks: Finally, there remains a digital and organizational platform gap for cultural heritage co-creation. Outside of the specific projects and networks mentioned (iCAN, AskAboutIreland, etc.), there is no ubiquitous, user-friendly platform where any citizen – young or old, urban or rural – can readily contribute their local heritage content and connect with national collections. The existing initiatives, while excellent, cover limited content areas or regions. Many local heritage groups still operate in isolation, perhaps sharing stories on a small Facebook page or not at all. There is untapped potential for a unified participatory heritage portal that could aggregate community-contributed content (stories, photos, sites of interest) under the aegis of national institutions. The lack of such mainstream platforms means much citizen-generated heritage knowledge stays locked in local silos or personal files, invisible to the wider public and researchers. It also means communities without their own website or archive find it hard to share their heritage beyond word-of-mouth. The Irish Community Archive Network is a promising model, but as noted, it has so far reached dozens, not hundreds, of communitiesheritagecouncil.ie. Ireland’s Heritage Ireland 2030 framework recognized this need, calling for improved digital tools and a “coherent policy for the management of Ireland’s digital heritage data”irishmuseums.org. The consequence of limited platforms is a lower engagement rate: people are more likely to participate if there’s an easy avenue to do so and if their contributions gain visibility. Without a national “heritage commons” online, a young person in a small town might not bother scanning old photos or recording their grandparent’s stories because there’s nowhere obvious to upload or archive them. Or they may simply never hear about citizen heritage opportunities. This also ties into the issue of awareness and outreach: many youth and rural residents are not aware of the existing channels they could engage through. A community archive network or citizen science project only engages those who know about it and feel invited. Currently, there is a lack of broad communication and accessible platforms to welcome first-time contributors. This results in a core of repeat participants (often older history enthusiasts) and a large segment of the population remaining passive consumers of heritage. Encouragingly, where participatory platforms have been well-publicized and easy to use, engagement has spiked. The crowd-sourced Historic Graves project grew a worldwide community of 15,000 users contributing data once a simple website and training workshops were providedincultum.euincultum.eu. Volunteers were highly motivated by seeing their work published instantly and shared globallyincultum.eu. This example shows that people will co-create heritage content if the infrastructure (both technical and social) lowers the barrier to entry. Thus, expanding such platforms and networks is essential to overcoming the current low participation outside of a few niche projects.

Impact on Engagement: These infrastructural challenges – digital divides, limited access to institutions, gaps in education, scarce funding, and missing platforms – together create a landscape where engagement remains lower than it could be. Young people in rural areas are especially affected: they face a confluence of obstacles (no nearby museum or youth heritage program, patchy internet, few role models or resources) which can translate into apathy or a feeling that “heritage isn’t for us.” As the Dublin Platform on rural heritage noted, indifference often stems from ignorance and lack of awareness of the value of being connected to one’s heritageec.europa.eu. Infrastructure shortcomings perpetuate that ignorance by depriving communities of the tools and opportunities to engage. Additionally, these limitations can reinforce socioeconomic and regional disparities. Wealthier or urban communities find it easier to overcome some hurdles (they may fundraise locally, have better internet and transport, or more cultural offerings nearby), whereas poorer rural communities fall further behind, leading to an even wider engagement gap. Crucially, the challenges also feed one another in a vicious cycle: for example, low funding leads to less training and fewer platforms, which leads to less participation, which in turn might make funders think there is low interest – when in fact interest could blossom if infrastructure improved. The net effect is untapped potential. Ireland’s youth and rural citizens have unique stories, knowledge, and creative energy that could greatly enrich the national heritage narrative if empowered to do so. The next section discusses how Ireland can break this cycle by building on existing initiatives and addressing infrastructural gaps, with examples of successful strategies to boost citizen co-creation of heritage.

Strategies and Recommendations to Boost Engagement

To overcome these challenges and foster widespread co-creation of cultural heritage, Ireland can implement a multi-pronged approach. Below are recommendations and examples targeting each gap, grounded in current best practices and research:

  • Invest in Digital Connectivity and Tools: Fast, reliable internet access is a prerequisite for digital participation. Continued prioritization of the National Broadband Plan is critical – the government should ensure the ambitious rural rollout stays on schedule (or even accelerates) so that no community is left offlinenbi.ie. In parallel, interim solutions like establishing Broadband Connection Points (Wi-Fi hubs in rural public spaces) should be expanded to give communities immediate access to digital networks. Additionally, providing local heritage groups with the necessary digital tools (scanners, recording devices, GIS mapping tools) through small grants or equipment loan schemes can empower them to start creating content. For example, a community archive group might need a high-quality scanner to digitize old photographs – a targeted micro-grant could fulfill that need. Libraries and schools could serve as tech hubs where youth learn to use these tools for heritage projects (e.g. scanning family letters or creating a local history podcast). By leveling the digital playing field, Ireland can unlock co-creation in areas that have been quiet due to connectivity issues.
  • Bring Heritage to the People – Locally: To counter geographic isolation, cultural institutions and authorities should increase outreach in rural and underserved regions. This can take the form of traveling exhibits, pop-up museums, or mobile heritage labs that visit small towns (for instance, a bus outfitted as a mini-museum or recording studio). The success of initiatives like Culture Night, which brought free cultural events to over 40 towns in 2019national-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu, shows that people will engage when opportunities come to their doorstep. Local authorities, supported by national funding, could establish permanent Heritage Points in each county – multipurpose spaces (often in libraries or community centers) where archives, museums, and arts offices collaborate to host exhibitions, talks, and workshops year-round. Creative Ireland’s plan for creativity hubs in rural areas is a step in this directionnational-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu and should be fully realized. Furthermore, integrating heritage with existing rural life can spark interest: for example, holding a heritage showcase at the local agricultural fair or mart, or having a “museum corner” in county fairs and festivals. Schools in rural areas could partner with nearby heritage sites to use them as open-air classrooms. The key is making heritage visible and accessible in everyday community settings so that youth and residents encounter it naturally. Such proximity can inspire curiosity and pride, even among those who might never travel to a national museum. Over time, this builds a local culture of participation, where contributing to heritage projects is seen as a normal community activity.
  • Embed Heritage in Education and Youth Programs: To address the education gap, stakeholders should integrate heritage co-creation into both formal curricula and extracurricular youth activities. Secondary schools could be encouraged (via the Department of Education) to undertake heritage projects – for example, as part of the Transition Year module or the new Wellbeing curriculum. Students might research their town’s history, interview older residents, or contribute to a digital archive, thereby gaining skills and appreciation for heritage. Successful models exist, such as “history and folklore transition year projects” run in some schools in County Clare (often in collaboration with the County Heritage Officer). At primary level, expanding the Heritage in Schools scheme to cover more hands-on projects (e.g. school-led mini museums or gardens that reflect local heritage) and extending it to early-secondary students (age 12–15) could maintain the interest sparked in early yearsnational-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu. Outside school, youth organizations (Foróige, scouting groups, youth clubs) can incorporate cultural heritage into their agendas by setting up “Young Heritage Ambassador” programs or heritage badges/certificates. The National Youth Council’s emphasis on youth arts and active citizenship could naturally extend to heritage preservation as a form of civic engagement. Funding small awards or competitions for youth-led heritage initiatives (like a prize for the best youth-made local history film or community archive contribution) would incentivize involvement. Training and mentorship are also crucial: providing workshops for teachers and youth workers on how to facilitate heritage projects will build capacity to guide young participants. Ireland might also develop partnerships with universities and institutes to have public history or archaeology students mentor school projects, creating inter-generational learning. The goal is to nurture a generation of youth who not only learn about heritage but actively participate in creating it – normalizing co-creation from an early age.
  • Strengthen Community Support and Funding Continuity: To ensure local heritage efforts thrive, Ireland should bolster the support structures around them. One recommendation is to increase funding for community heritage and make it more sustainable. Rather than only short-term project grants, multi-annual funding or core support for networks like iCAN could be provided. This would help pay for coordinators who can assist volunteer groups over time, building continuity. The Heritage Council, for instance, could be resourced to expand its community team (building on its new Head of Community Engagement roleirishtimes.com) to provide on-call advice and mentorship to any community group that wants to start a heritage project. Simplifying grant application processes and offering grant-writing assistance (perhaps through the local Heritage Officers or libraries) would lower the entry barrier for rural and youth groups. In addition, creating a small-grants scheme specifically for youth-led heritage projects might encourage more young applicants – this could tie into Creative Ireland’s Creative Youth pillar for funding. The evidence from current schemes suggests even modest funds can catalyze creative ideas: community grants have enabled projects like recording oral histories of Irish showpeople or training volunteers in archival skillsheritagecouncil.ieheritagecouncil.ie. Ensuring such funding reaches a diverse range of communities (including marginalised and minority groups) is important for equity. Another support mechanism is to foster peer networks: connecting heritage volunteers and youth across different counties to share experiences. For example, an annual Community Heritage Forum or an online group could allow a village heritage group in Donegal to learn from one in Kerry. During the pandemic, many discovered the “power of local” in heritage and developed innovative ways to share stories within the 5km lockdown radiusirishtimes.com; building on that renewed local interest through networks and steady support can keep the momentum going. Ultimately, reliable funding, reduced bureaucracy, and strong advisory networks will give communities the confidence and means to initiate and sustain co-creation projects, leading to higher and more continuous engagement.
  • Expand Participatory Digital Platforms: Finally, creating and promoting inclusive platforms for heritage co-creation will directly tackle the issue of limited avenues for contribution. One recommendation is to develop a national online community heritage portal as a partnership between state cultural institutions and communities. This portal could aggregate contributions from various sources – community archives, local history blogs, school projects, etc. – and present them on an interactive map of Ireland’s heritage. Citizens could easily upload a story or image about their locality, tag it to a place, and see it become part of the larger national story. This kind of “Wikipedia for Irish local heritage” (perhaps moderated by professionals for accuracy) would greatly increase visibility of rural heritage content. A similar concept is being pursued in some EU projects focusing on participatory heritage and linked open dataeu-cap-network.ec.europa.eueurospeak-ireland.com, which Ireland could learn from. In the meantime, existing platforms should be supported and scaled up. OurIrishHeritage (iCAN), for instance, should continue to grow beyond 36 archives – achieving the target of 80+ community archives by 2028 will require training more groups and possibly creating a toolkit so that any community can start an archive on the platform with minimal direct supervisionheritagecouncil.ie. Likewise, projects like Dúchas.ie (the digitized Schools’ Folklore Collection) which involved crowdsourced transcription, show the appetite of the public to help when invited – tens of thousands of pages of 1930s schoolchild folklore were transcribed by volunteers nationwide. Ireland’s cultural institutions can run more crowdsourcing campaigns like this (transcribe manuscripts, identify photographs, map historic sites) to get citizens directly contributing to institutional collections. Promotion is key: using social media, local radio, and youth-oriented channels to publicize these opportunities will draw in new participants. Partnering with popular platforms can help too – for example, encouraging youth to share heritage content on TikTok or YouTube (some have already started trend challenges about local folklore or historic sites). The state broadcaster RTÉ and others might facilitate a youth heritage media project, where young people produce short videos or podcasts on heritage themes for broadcast (building on RTÉ’s support of Cruinniú na nÓg). Moreover, adopting open data principles (as recommended in Heritage Ireland 2030) will allow community-contributed data to be easily shared and built upon. The Historic Graves project demonstrates the virtuous cycle that can occur: an easy-to-use platform plus community ownership led to enthusiastic participation and even drew diaspora tourism as people discovered their ancestors online. Repeating this formula in other areas – be it historic maps, traditional crafts, or oral traditions – could significantly boost engagement. The overarching idea is to make contributing to heritage as straightforward as posting on social media, and to visibly value those contributions. When people see their local knowledge featured on a respected platform or contributing to a national narrative, it validates their role as heritage co-creators and encourages ongoing involvement.

What's Next?

Ireland has laid important groundwork with national programs championing cultural participation and some excellent community heritage initiatives. Yet, to truly unlock the co-creative potential of its youth and rural communities, infrastructural challenges must be addressed. Gaps in digital connectivity, access to institutions, education, funding, and participatory frameworks have kept engagement levels lower than they could be. These limitations mutually reinforce low participation by depriving communities of the means, opportunity, and sometimes the awareness to get involved in heritage content creation. The good news is that each challenge is surmountable – and in many cases, pilot solutions already exist within Ireland’s experience. By scaling up broadband and tech access, bringing cultural resources to every corner of the country, educating and empowering young heritage enthusiasts, securing sustained funding and guidance, and building inclusive platforms, Ireland can ensure that all its citizens have the chance to actively shape and share their heritage. Academic studies on rural civic engagement confirm that when structural barriers are removed, young people and community members are eager to contribute and take pride in local culture. The benefits of overcoming these challenges are manifold: a richer cultural record that includes diverse voices, strengthened community identity and cohesion, inter-generational knowledge transfer, and even economic perks through cultural tourism and creative industries in rural areas. Most importantly, it affirms the idea that heritage is a living, collaborative enterprise rather than a static legacy accessible only to a few. As one Heritage Council leader put it, local heritage projects show that “our shared heritage is preserved and celebrated by all” when communities are empowered. By closing infrastructural gaps and implementing the recommendations above, Ireland can move toward a future where co-creating cultural heritage is a normal activity for a teenager in a rural village as much as for a historian in Dublin – ensuring the country’s heritage thrives through the active engagement of its people, everywhere.

Sources:

Bernard Goldbach

Bernard Goldbach

Creates rich media content as a short form blogger and podcaster. Teaches creatives to write and share.
Ireland