Introduction

Intangible cultural heritage is a valuable cultural information resource of human society, carrying the Chinese nation’s civilization and unique spiritual values. Recognizing its significance, protecting, transmitting, and developing ICH has become a priority for the state and ethnic groups. In 2003, the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage was established by the UNESCO General Conference, aiming to preserve ICH represented by traditions, oral expressions, festive rituals, handicraft skills, music, dance, and other heritage. Numerous scholars have studied ICH’s preservation and development. Tan et al. (2018) examined the elements of the “people-place bond” that may contribute to the sustainability of ICH and found that a “sense of loss”, “sense of justice”, and “sense of mission” emerged as the three main themes of the “people-place bond”. Similarly, Lonardi et al. (2020) highlighted the significance of ICH, particularly language, in sustainable tourism research. Chen et al. (2020) proposed a framework for experiential landscapes of ICH that takes a multidimensional view of the “landscape”. Moreover, York et al. (2021) pointed out that the socio-cultural adjustment brought about by working in ICH tourism enterprises positively influenced migrant workers’ local identity.

At the same time, the IPP of ICH has become an increasing concern for both national and international parties. In 2019, China’s State Council issued the “2019 Promotion Plan for Accelerating the Implementation of the National Intellectual Property Strategy to Build a Strong Intellectual Property State” (the “Promotion Plan”), which aimed to promote the implementation of the national intellectual property strategy and emphasized the importance of ICH IPP. Later, in August 2021, the State Council released Opinions on Further Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage (the 2021 Opinions). The plan highlights using various means, such as trademark rights, patent rights, and geographical indications, to reinforce ICH IPP and outline an in-depth intellectual property strategy for ICH protection.

Intellectual property protection of intangible cultural heritage refers to protecting ICH by incorporating it into intellectual property rights (Peng, 2021). To explore the hotspots and development trends in the field of research on ICH in the context of IPP in China and to give an overview of the overall development of this field, this paper analyzes the literature in much research on IPP of ICH in China based on the relevant literature in the Chinese database CNKI through a combination of bibliometric and knowledge mapping analysis.

Literature review

Studying Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) under the lens of Intellectual Property Protection (IPP) has emerged as a crucial academic endeavour. This paper conducts a systematic literature review on the intricate relationship between IPP and ICH, guided by bibliometric analysis and knowledge mapping. The literature was selected based on stringent criteria: relevance to IPP and ICH, citation impact, and contributions to the theoretical and conceptual framework of the field. This review aims to trace the academic trajectory, identify pivotal works, and synthesize core themes and debates.

Research on the intellectual property protection of intangible cultural heritage

Problems of intellectual property protection of intangible cultural heritage

While the IPP of ICH significantly impacts its safeguarding, transmission, and revitalization globally, many practical issues remain unresolved. Wagner and de Clippele (2023) contended that globally, the protection of ICH has evolved from rescue and salvage efforts to comprehensive safeguarding and, finally, to achieving sufficient protection. However, the IPP system has private rights and exclusive properties that contradict the collective and public interest nature of ICH, leading to the “tragedy of the commons” and “anti-tragedy of the commons” in the practice of ICH protection (Chen and Yang, 2021). The current intellectual property rights system has significant limitations in protecting traditional crafts, and its revision regarding these crafts needs to be more scientific and feasible (Yan and Li, 2021). Moreover, knowledge in the public domain is at risk of damage if it is not more widely protected from privatization (Raath and VerhoefI, 2021). A quantitative analysis of 12,123 ICH trademark search data in China found that ICH symbol trademarking was disorderly, and many trademark applications could distort, derogate, or dilute the ICH’s connotations (Luo and Wang, 2021).

The legal framework for the Intellectual Property Protection (IPP) of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) encounters numerous obstacles. Specifically, concerning traditional medicine, the current intellectual property regulations exhibit notable delays and tend to prioritize administrative safeguarding measures, resulting in the inability of existing IPP laws to provide legal protection for all forms of ICH (Nan, 2023). Additionally, there needs to be more special legislation and target provisions for ICH’s IPP, and the scope, rights, obligations, and duration of ownership of the subjects of ICH have yet to be clearly defined (Gao et al. 2017). There is a necessity for a more precise delineation of the legal characteristics of folk paper-cutting art in China, alongside strengthening the legal acknowledgement of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) within society (Zhang, 2023). China’s intellectual property-related legislation started late, and the financial investment in folk paper-cutting needs to be increased. Further, although the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage calls for international cooperation in safeguarding the world’s intangible heritage, it inadvertently fosters nationalistic claims of local cultural traditions (Aykan, 2015). States Parties can use the Convention as a patent ratification system and its list to register common traditions as their national heritage. The current international protection of ICH favours a government-led administrative public law approach to safety, and international negotiations on IPP for ICH have needed to be faster (Wang and Huang, 2021). There are problems of “free-riding,” distortion and falsification, uneven protection, lack of justice in distribution, and high transaction costs in the security and utilization of ICH (Xiao, 2019). The safety and utilization of ICH resources and the distortion and falsification of ICH by external users of ICH heritage should be taken seriously and solved.

Measures for the intellectual property protection of intangible cultural heritage

Given the considerable challenges surrounding the intellectual property protection (IPP) of intangible cultural heritage (ICH), scholars have researched and proposed potential solutions. One such approach is the “Classified policy and joint protection” model for constructing an IPP system for ICH heritage (Wang and Huang, 2021). This model entails government leadership in defining the boundary between public and original ICH achievements and using platforms and data to protect ICH heritage innovation achievements through legal means such as patents and copyrights. Creating a supportive environment for preserving and developing time-honoured ICH techniques is also essential, as is respecting local customs during the ICH IPP process for traditional folklore.

Reducing the registration criteria for geographical indications of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) is crucial for safeguarding ICH and enhancing its quality benchmarks (Arfini et al. 2019). This involves reducing related fees, clarifying ICH geographical indication owners and rights holders, and ensuring product quality standards. A new system must be designed, outlining rights subject and object, content limitations, and automatic protection authorization (Yan and Li, 2021). Furthermore, when selecting the geographical indication path for ICH, natural and human factors related to ICH products, geographical distribution inheritance, product quality characteristics, and prior rights, as well as the promotion and protection plan for geographical indication products, must be considered and tailored on a case-by-case basis (Campi and Dueñas, 2019). For example, some researchers studied the IPP of Miao embroidery and proposed that Miao embroidery should be protected for an indefinite period, defining folk organizations among the Miao people as the subjects of Miao embroidery rights and establishing a royalty system to ensure that Miao embroidery creators can profit from users (Luo, 2022).

Building an intellectual property protection system fully integrated with marketization is crucial for promoting traditional ethnic handicrafts while ensuring their inheritance and protection. This system must rely on modern intellectual property protection and leading enterprises to maximize its effectiveness. A special rights system for modernizing and developing traditional crafts should also be considered to ensure that conventional ethnic arts are preserved and developed effectively (Wang, 2022). In addition, to promote international cooperation and competition in intellectual property rights, countries along the “Belt and Road” should deepen and promote collaboration based on a joint interest base. Through the consensus of establishing a community of human destiny and implementing new TRIPS-plus rules as a practical strategy, “Chinese wisdom” and “Chinese solutions” should be applied to improve the protection of intangible cultural heritage on a global scale (Wang and Huang, 2021).

In terms of legislation on intellectual property rights protection of ICH, Reves (2023) suggests that the protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) in intellectual property rights legislation should incorporate the use of criminal law, including the establishment of a dedicated section within the criminal code and the definition of specific offences related to the loss of ICH. Nan (2023) advocates for creating specialised legislation to protect intellectual property rights in traditional medicine. This entails enhancing the current legal framework for conventional medicine’s intellectual property rights protection, developing a unique legal safeguarding mechanism, and establishing a comprehensive database of traditional medicine knowledge. Tan and Cao (2018) highlighted the importance of constructing an intellectual property rights system for ICH in ethnic minority regions designed to meet the needs of the socialist legal framework with Chinese characteristics while also focusing on the innovation of intellectual property rights law for ICH. To protect ICH in Tibet, Xiao (2019) proposed a hybrid management mechanism of “public law-soft private law” constructed by the ICH Law, the internal norms of traditional communities, and the Copyright Law. Similarly, Lin and Lian (2018) recommended strengthening copyright, trademark, geographical protection, and patent protection to deal with the diversity and complexity of ICH and reconcile the various interests involved. As far as trademark management of ICH symbols is concerned, trademark grabbing by outsiders and scattered registration by indigenous people, as well as orderly use of ICH symbols under collective trademarks or certification trademarks, should be excluded, which should be identified as the primary goal of ICH trademark law protection. To achieve this goal, the “exclusion method plus uniform use” scheme shall be adopted in practice. Under this scheme, First Nations, trademark offices, courts, and ICH protection centres need to cooperate to improve trademark law protection of ICH through advocacy, action, institutions, and information (Luo and Wang, 2021).

At a macro level, the legal protection of traditional knowledge and cultural heritage must support the economic development of the country concerned based on its resources (Hilty, 2009). In the modern era, it is essential to not only enhance ICH digital preservation techniques but also to reflect on the cultural values and ethics that ICH embodies (Chen and Yang, 2021). To further bolster ICH development in China, efforts must be made to improve the protection path of the United Nations Convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage. Additionally, local legislation and normative documents should be promulgated and integrated with specificity and operability based on the Law of the People’s Republic of China on ICH to strengthen the legal system for ICH protection (Chen and Luo, 2022).

Visual analysis of iIntangible cultural heritage research

In recent years, scholars in China have used CiteSpace visualization and measurement software to research ICH, with significant findings. While some studies have focused on ICH as a whole, others have explored specific types of ICH, such as drum lyrics and Sichuan opera, or ICH in different regions, such as ethnic minority regions. Ducharme et al. (2024) stated that ICH research needed a more robust cooperative network between authors and academic institutions, underscoring the need to strengthen such collaborations to enhance educational influence. Chen and Huang (2020) discovered that research on ICH in China had undergone three stages, including slow start, rapid growth, and steady-state development, and that the scope of study involved many fields, such as tourism economy, fine arts, and music. Fan and Wang (2022) identified cultural industries, cultural inheritance, legal protection, and tourism development as key research domains in the field of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH). They observed a low citation rate of foreign journals within this discipline. Zhang et al. (2024) emphasized the importance of increased collaboration among researchers and institutions in ICH studies. They further pointed out the field’s emphasis on theoretical analysis, advocating for an expansion into more applied research to enhance practical applications.

From the communication studies perspective, Chen et al. (2022) explored the research clustering of ‘ICH communication’ in China since 2007. He proposed that research on ICH from the communication perspective mainly consisted of two discourse systems: reflections and discussions on ICH’s essential characteristics and cultural attributes and problem strategy research on the protection, inheritance, and development of ICH. In the future, new media communication will play a crucial role in preserving the living heritage of ICH, and the “digital communication of ICH” will become an important research topic in the field. A lot of research was conducted on the ICH of ethinc minorities in China. The annual distribution of literature advanced wave-like, and the overall trend of publications had declined (Liu, 2021). While research hotspots in this area continue to deepen, there is still a need to expand into new research areas in theoretical ICH research of China’s ethnic minorities. In the field of drumming research, Li and Hu (2018) employed scientometrics theory to analyze drumming research literature between 1956 and 2016 and pointed out future directions for research, including a systematic study on the origin and flow of drums and research on the association and interaction between drumming and other music and art disciplines.

In terms of research on the digitization of ICH, Zhao (2013) found that the focus of the study had been on the digitization process of cultural heritage and its technological excavation, while issues related to remote visualization of networks and intelligent services for the public had not been studied enough. Fan et al. (2021) analyzed the theoretical construction and knowledge storage of knowledge graphs regarding the digital protection of ICH knowledge. They employed knowledge graph-related technologies to display different types of ICH in each region and constructed a regional ICH knowledge base platform. Shi et al. (2018) constructed a topic map of ICH digital resources and visualized it, indicating that topic map technology could help visualize the relationship between topics and provide visual navigation for users.

In terms of Chinese agricultural and cultural heritage, Cui and Shang (2020) the field is dominated by qualitative research and case studies and pointed out that primary national strategic needs should guide future scholars’ research. When it comes to ICH in theater, researchers have proposed using the essential event technique to study the dynamic evolution of Gaozai opera, which reflects the initial formation and inheritance development of the art form (Chen and Xu, 2015). Zhao and Tian (2021) conducted a quantitative and qualitative visual analysis of the current state of Sichuan opera communication and found that research on Sichuan opera has been gaining momentum over time. There are now many hotspots for research, including various forms of Sichuan opera communication, Sichuan opera works, and Sichuan opera artists. However, challenges such as limited cooperation among different regions and institutions and fragmented cooperation among scholars still exist. Li and Wu (2021) emphasized that Tibetan opera research is interdisciplinary, covering history, art, and communication. They found that 11 major categories, including Tibetan opera and Princess Wencheng, have been formed, and Tibetan opera, Intangible Cultural Heritage, and cultural heritage are research hotspots. However, there is a lack of research on Tibetan opera digital preservation, and inter-institutional cooperation is limited (Xu et al. 2021).

In sports and martial arts, Yang et al. (2021), research patterns have evolved from conceptual definitions, conservation, and development studies before 2014 to case studies focused on specific regions and sports. Sports ICH embodies a unique folkloric characteristic in each region, spatially dispersed. In another study, Cao and Lin (2020), Chinese martial arts have gained considerable attention in the international academic community, with research primarily focused on exercise science and neuroscience. They found that the engineering model was the primary approach to promote research in this field.

There are relatively few CiteSpace-based ICH research results in international academia. Dang et al. (2021) pointed out that digitization of ICH is indispensable for preservation and transmission, and combining ICH and cultural industries is a crucial approach for utilisation and dissemination. Meanwhile, Su et al. (2019) used CiteSpace to analyze ICH-related literature and discovered limited academic collaboration among researchers, research institutions, and countries conducting ICH research. The relationship between highly productive and highly cited authors was also weak.

Further, Robbins (2010) proposed new directions for technological innovation in ICH: direct documentation of indigenous traditions, the transformation of indigenous traditions into emerging technologies and contemporary cultural expressions, and the development of new technologies applying indigenous practices. Cozzani et al. (2016) argued that the European Community-funded project - “Treasures” had made a precious and innovative contribution to the preservation and transmission of ICH and that these projects are practical tools for organizations, schools, and institutions to promote endangered ICH. Alivizatou (2008) claimed that the concept of ICH had greatly enriched the cultural heritage discourse, leading to a more inclusive and human-centred understanding of past concepts and that the museum sector had the potential to benefit from this new approach. Rodzi et al. (2013) argued that cultural heritage sites and cultural tourism had a high potential to attract tourists and that ICH could only be sustainable if it were consciously and equally protected. Finally, Perkins and Krause (2018) argue that environmental conditions affected ICH.

The analysis above indicates a gradual increase in academics focusing on ICH from the perspective of intellectual property rights and visualization. Both qualitative and quantitative studies have yielded fruitful research results, providing valuable references for scholars studying this field. The intersection of ICH and intellectual property has become increasingly important. Moreover, CiteSpace has been applied to visual analysis in a broad range of subject areas, including environmental scanning (Robinson et al. 2021), intelligent libraries (Du et al. 2021), low-temperature electrolytes for lithium-ion batteries (Hu et al. 2022), hotel management (Li et al. 2017), molecular mechanisms of cancer (Zhong et al. 2021), advanced tourism (Pestana et al. 2020), mechanical energy harvesting (Azam et al. 2021), and barrier-free tourism (Qiao et al. 2021). For example, Zhong et al. (2021) identified hot research mechanisms, such as metabolism (aerobic glycolysis, insulin resistance, actin), oxidative stress, gene expression, and apoptosis, in studying the effects of exercise on cancer. Wei et al. (2022) identified the inflammatory and immune mechanisms, related diseases, and related cytokines as the primary research topics in atherosclerosis (AS), with research frontiers in B cells, mortality, inhibition rates, and monocytes. It can be seen that CiteSpace is used in an extensive range of research fields, such as sociology and engineering. Knowledge graphs can generate a traceable knowledge graph from disorganized data through visualization techniques and provide a reasonable and sufficient basis for relevant research.

In summary, the literature on systematic analysis and prediction of the future of research in the field of IPP of ICH is limited. There is also a need for more literature on the characteristics and development trends in this field using visualization methods. Therefore, it is an innovative and valuable attempt to study the current situation of the IPP of ICH through econometrics and to analyze the state of past research more precisely. The Promotion Plan has explicit provisions for the IPP of ICH and supports local research in this area. Against the State’s strong endorsement of IPP of ICH, the need for in-depth study on the inheritance, revitalization, and utilization of ICH has become a significant issue in academic and practical circles in China. What is the status of research in this field in the last decade? What are the hot topics and trends? Who are the foremost scholars and research institutions studying this field? To promote research in this field, it is essential to answer these questions and better understand the current state, core research themes, and development trends. Therefore, this paper collects relevant literature on ICH and intellectual property in the Chinese database CNKI and uses CiteSpace software to visualize and analyze the field of ICH intellectual property to reveal the research hotspots, research frontiers, and development trends in this field.

Data sources and research methods

Data sources

To conduct an in-depth study on the intellectual property protection (IPP) of China’s intangible cultural heritage (ICH), this research has selected China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) as the primary data source. The choice of CNKI is due to its comprehensive coverage of academic research in China, encompassing a wealth of resources such as journal articles and dissertations, which significantly meet the analytical needs of this study. Compared to other databases, CNKI emphasises Chinese literature, which is crucial for investigating the domestic phenomenon of ICH IPP. This study specifically selected literature from the Peking University Core Database and Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) to ensure reliance on high-quality research. The time frame for the study was set from 2011 to 2020, with the aim of exploring the research progress and development trends in the field of ICH IPP over the past decade.

In terms of literature selection criteria, a search strategy was initially established. A secondary search was conducted after a preliminary search of the topic words to identify keywords closely related to the theme. In this study, the keywords related to intellectual property protection included “Intellectual Property Protection”, and those related to intangible cultural heritage included “Intangible Cultural Heritage”. Based on these keywords, an initial search expression was formed: TS= (Intellectual Property Protection) AND (Intangible Cultural Heritage), facilitating the literature search. Additionally, this research focused on including journal articles with high citation rates and academic influence while excluding non-academic articles and duplicate studies. Detailed information on the specific languages, types of literature, time frame, and search results are provided in Table 1.

Table 1 Research data retrieval process in CNKI.
Full size table

Furthermore, to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the research data, the retrieved samples were imported into CiteSpace for deduplication. Upon verification, it was confirmed that there were no duplicate articles in the sample, ensuring the uniqueness and accuracy of the data. This curated and verified set of samples will be used for an in-depth visual research analysis in this field.

Research methodology

The use of CiteSpace software for bibliometric analysis is due to its proficiency in visualizing academic collaboration networks and research trends. Integrating features of bibliometrics, databases, and information science, CiteSpace can create knowledge maps that depict the development status and research trends of various disciplines over different periods. These maps unveil the evolution of fields and current research frontiers, highlighting CiteSpace’s ability not only to forecast future developments in a domain but also to explore the logical relationships between works of literature, expressing these relationships through graphical representations (Chen, 2006; Chen et al. 2010). The knowledge evolution visual model provided by CiteSpace approximates the scientific development of specific physical world domains. Its high level of abstraction forms a “second-order science” category, offering more vivid visual effects that facilitate the interpretation of existing scientific discoveries and the establishment of literature-based scientific findings (Chen et al. 2015).

In this study, CiteSpace V5.7.R3 was employed to conduct a visual analysis of 91 papers in the field of intellectual property protection and intangible cultural heritage, encompassing an analysis of the basic overview of the field (distribution of countries/regions, co-cited journals, co-cited authors, institutional co-occurrence, and keyword clustering) as well as an examination of research hotspots and the overall research evolution. The temporal segment was set from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2020, with a time slice of one year. The version of CiteSpace used, V5.7.R3, is known for its efficient processing of large data sets and the generation of detailed knowledge maps, which are invaluable for understanding the state and mechanisms of scientific development. This methodology aims to comprehensively reveal the developmental trends and research hotspots in Chinese ICH studies, particularly from the intellectual property rights perspective. This enriched and expanded analysis is crucial for articulating a nuanced understanding of the field’s trajectory and current research emphases, thus contributing significantly to the scholarly discourse on ICH and IPP.

Results and analysis

Analysis of the total number of publications

Over the past decade, the annual distribution of literature on the Intellectual Property Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage (IPP of ICH) has served as a barometer for measuring China’s research interest and academic engagement in this field (La et al. 2021). As depicted in Fig. 1, between 2011 and 2020, the overall trajectory of ICH IPP publications has declined, delineating two distinct phases. In the initial phase from 2011 to 2015, despite a decreasing annual output, the number of publications each year remained above ten, with the first two years witnessing relatively high outputs of 16 and 14 articles, respectively. This phase coincided with China’s intensified national strategy to strengthen the protection and utilization of intangible cultural heritage, aligning with global efforts to recognize and safeguard these heritages.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The number of published papers from 2011 to 2020.

Full size image

However, during the declining phase from 2016 to 2020, with the year 2020 marking a low with only two published articles, a critical inquiry arises into the factors influencing this downturn. Several potential explanations merit exploration. The reduction in output could be associated with shifts in research focus, changes in policy, or the maturation of the field where foundational research questions have been extensively addressed, prompting a need for innovative methodologies and approaches. Therefore, while this study delineates the decadal trajectory of IPP literature in intangible cultural heritage, reflecting tangible research advancements, it is evident that both the quantity and quality of academic output could greatly benefit from enhanced scrutiny. Through this analysis, we posit that the impending academic endeavours in the IPP of ICH will integrate innovative theoretical propositions and methodological breakthroughs, fostering a revival in this critical research domain.

Analysis of the authors of literature

Firstly, utilizing CiteSpace V5.7.R3 software, we constructed the co-authorship visualization map (Fig. 2) and the co-authorship clustering view (Fig. 3) for the field of intellectual property protection and intangible cultural heritage research. These views reveal the collaborative patterns among scholars in this domain, where the co-authorship network elucidates the cooperative relationships between researchers, and the number of publications reflects the individual scholars’ contributions and engagement in the field. Upon delving into the author collaboration trends, Table 2 showcases the publication frequency of individual authors. This study identifies Chen Yuxi as the most prolific author, highlighting a prominent collaboration pattern. Similarly, the consistent, collaborative relationship between Wang Shuting, Xiong Wanzhen, and Sun Zhiguo indicates a stable research collective. However, a broader author collaboration network, predominantly characterized by single-article contributions, unveils a different, possibly nascent, research community.

Fig. 2
figure 2

CiteSpace-based author collaboration mapping.

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

CiteSpace-based author collaboration clustering mapping.

Full size image
Table 2 Number of papers published by authors.
Full size table

Further refinement in Fig. 3 showcases the collaborative clusters derived from the extensive cooperation network, revealing ten distinct research groups marked with “#”. These groups reflect the diversity and specialization within the research field, covering varied thematic directions and scopes ranging from developing heritage products to sports heritage, intellectual property of traditional medicine, and studies on folk arts. This prevailing pattern of individual research and sparse collaborative networks unveils key characteristics of intellectual property protection within the Chinese intangible cultural heritage academic ecosystem. While individual scholars’ contributions have brought diverse research perspectives and insights, the absence of a tightly-knit research collaboration network indicates that the synergistic effects of cooperation may not have been fully realized. This further suggests an urgent need to bolster interdisciplinary exchanges and collaboration to enhance the depth, robustness, and impact of research in the intellectual property of intangible cultural heritage.

Analysis of literature publishing institutions

Institutions are crucial in producing research results. The research institutions and their publication volume reflect the current situation and development trend of IPP of ICH research power in China. From the perspective of institutional cooperation density, it can be seen from Fig. 4 that the nodes in the figure are research institutions, the number of nodes is 111, the node linkage is 31, and the node density is 0.0051. The node linkages signify institutional cooperation in this field, with connection strength proportional to the inter-institutional collaboration level. Institutions are somewhat scattered and less connected, highlighting a need for more cooperation among institutions in IPP or ICH research in China, requiring further academic exchanges. Table 3 indicates that most publications originate from university faculties and research institutes. Specifically, most publications are from university law schools, colleges of the arts, history, management, resources, and environmental sciences, among others. The extensive involvement of universities and research institutes is evident in the IPP of ICH research. The School of Law of South-Central MinZu University and the Research and Creation Division of Guangxi Arts Institute have published the most articles, with three articles each. However, most research institutions issued only one article. Hence, institutions need to conduct more in-depth research on ICH’s IPP. Geographically, institutions with more articles are mainly located in Hubei Province, Sichuan Province, Beijing City, Chongqing City, and other regions. This indicates a positive correlation between research in the field and the level of regional economic and social development. However, the overall research strength of institutions in IPP of ICH is relatively weak, with fewer articles being issued. There needs to be more academic exchanges and cooperation among institutions, and research strength needs to be strengthened. The main research forces in this field are universities’ law schools. A region’s economic and social development of an area is directly proportional to the degree of development of a research field.

Fig. 4
figure 4

CiteSpace-based mapping of institutional collaboration.

Full size image
Table 3 Number of articles issued by research institutions.
Full size table

Analysis of research hotspots

To identify research hotspots and development trends in the subject area, a knowledge mapping analysis of keywords was conducted using CiteSpace software to analyze data related to the IPP of ICH. The lines between nodes represent the co-occurrence of keywords. The larger the node circle, the higher the frequency of the node keyword appearing and the closer the relationship between the term and its co-occurring keywords. In Fig. 5, the number of nodes is 149, links are 357, and network density is 0.0324, indicating a relatively compact network structure. The two largest nodes are “intangible cultural heritage” and “intellectual property”, reflecting their high frequency of appearance compared to other keywords (Table 4). From these two keywords, other high-frequency keywords such as “intellectual property protection”, “legal protection”, “copyright”, and “intellectual property law” were derived. These high-frequency keywords are significant nodes in the study of the IPP of ICH. In the past decade, they have also been the research hotspots for ICH’s IPP. Meanwhile, in CiteSpace, nodes with intermediary centrality higher than 0.1 are key nodes. In Fig. 5, nodes such as “intellectual property” (the centrality of 0.55) and “intellectual property protection” (the centrality of 0.18) are key nodes, indicating that the state and academics are paying more attention to the protection of the intellectual property of ICH, and conducting follow-up studies on this issue.

Fig. 5
figure 5

CiteSpace-based keyword co-occurrence mapping.

Full size image
Table 4 Centrality and frequency of keywords.
Full size table

Secondly, the frequency of keywords reflects the distribution and focus of a subject area, which is conducive to grasping the development trend of research in this area. The frequency of keywords in Table 4 shows that “intangible cultural heritage” and “intellectual property” appear most frequently, 73 times and 56 times, respectively. “Intellectual property protection” was mentioned nine times, and “legal protection” was mentioned seven times. “copyright” and “intellectual property law” appear 4 times, while “local legislation” and “ethnic minorities” appear 3 times. The high occurrence of these keywords signifies research hotspots, indicating growing attention toward the combination of ICH and intellectual property in the academic community. At present, practical circles have adopted intellectual property-related legislation to protect ICH vigorously. Local legislation is increasing. Furthermore, the research community has shown interest in the protection of ICH in minority communities, with ICH in such regions serving as a research hotspot. This focus can help strengthen ICH preservation among these groups.

To more intuitively demonstrate the correlation between keywords in the IPP of ICH in China, this paper uses CiteSpace to conduct a clustering analysis of keywords, aiming to reflect the closeness between nodes. Cluster labels are named after keywords with larger arithmetic values; the smaller the number of cluster labels, the more keywords are included in the clusters. Each cluster consists of a series of keywords with strong correlations in the mapping. Different clusters represent different research directions within a subject area. The clustering module value (Q value) and the clustering mean profile value (S value) in CiteSpace can be used to judge mapping effectiveness. It is generally considered that a Q value > 0.3 means that the clustering structure is significant, an S value > 0.5 indicates that the clustering is reasonable, and an S value > 0.7 means that the clustering is convincing. From the clustering results of keywords in Fig. 6, it can be seen that Q value = 0.5306 and S value = 0.794. Therefore, the clustering of IPP of ICH research is significant and convincing. As can be seen in Fig. 6, there are seven clusters, namely, “intellectual property”, “intellectual property protection”, “geographical indications”, “protection mode”, “copyright”, and “problem-oriented”. This indicates in-depth research into ICH protection in China under intellectual property rights. The smaller the number in the clustering labels, the more closely related keywords are included in the clusters. It is also evident from Fig. 6 that intellectual property is a hot spot in the current research field of IPP at ICH.

Fig. 6
figure 6

CiteSpace-based keyword clustering mapping.

Full size image

Analysis of research frontiers and evolution

The time zone mapping of keywords provides valuable insights into the evolution and trends of IPP of ICH research from 2011 to 2020. The mapping shows the connections between keywords and reflects the research frontiers in the field. Research advances reveal new trends and mutational characteristics of a subject area. Figure 7 shows that intangible cultural heritage, geographical indications, intellectual property rights, legal protection models, and bearers have been the research hotspots in the field. The line between the keywords in the time zone map indicates that these hot keywords appeared in different years of literature and journals. New research hotspots emerged in different years, such as “local art, private rights protection, public goods, and sports culture” in 2013. In 2015, there were hotspots such as “traditional medicine, rights system, misconceptions about intangible cultural heritage protection, and protection of productive areas”. 2019 new research hotspots emerged, such as “judicial protection, excellent traditional culture, cultural and creative products, and criminal law protection”. The changes in research hotspots for these keywords reflect the evolutionary path of research on IPP of ICH, from initial research on the combination of intellectual property and ICH to research on the combination of intellectual property and specific ICH items to legal application of intellectual property of ICH. Finally, as research in this field continues to grow, the scope of research has expanded. For example, IPP has been extended to numerous kinds of ICH, from indigenous art to folk music, traditional medicine, folk paper-cutting art to fine arts. There are four main research frontiers in this field today: legal protection of intellectual property of ICH, digital protection, traditional cultural expressions, and original certification. Obviously, the research scope and research content of IPP of ICH have been expanded, but the depth of its research needs to be further promoted.

Fig. 7
figure 7

CiteSpace-based timeline mapping.

Full size image

Conclusions and recommendations

This paper, leveraging bibliometrics and knowledge mapping through CiteSpace software, critically examined the landscape of Intellectual Property Protection (IPP) of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) in China. By dissecting 91 documents over the past decade, this study illuminated the research trends, collaboration patterns, and institutional contributions within this niche yet vital academic terrain.

Conclusions

Firstly, the analysis revealed a decremental trend in the annual publication volume, highlighting a research plateau in the IPP of the ICH domain. The initial phase (2011–2015) demonstrated robust engagement, aligning with national strategies for ICH preservation. However, a noticeable decline post-2015 raises concerns about diminishing research vigour. This downturn, possibly due to shifts in academic focus or policy changes, underscores the imperative for rejuvenated scholarly attention.

Secondly, a fragmented scholarly network was evident, with minimal collaborative endeavours among researchers, as showcased by the predominant single-article authorships. This scenario indicates a lacuna in multi-disciplinary and inter-institutional collaborations, essential for nurturing a holistic research ecosystem. Research concentration within certain law schools and regional institutions suggests a potential disparity between research intensities across different geographical and academic precincts.

Thirdly, the institutional analysis underscored a scant interconnectivity among entities engaged in IPP of ICH research. Predominantly anchored in law schools, the research landscape portrays a need for a broader engagement spanning various academic disciplines. The regional distribution of research output, correlating positively with economic and social development indicators, calls for strategic resource allocation and academic support enhancement, especially in underrepresented areas.

Finally, the shift in research hotspots, from general ICH preservation to nuanced aspects like legal frameworks, copyright, and geographical indications, reflects an evolving academic discourse. The current emphasis on legal protection, digital safeguarding, and traditional cultural expressions signifies a maturing research domain, albeit requiring deeper, more innovative explorations.

Recommendations for future research

Fostering multidisciplinary and international partnerships will be crucial to cultivating a vibrant academic environment. Enhancing research methodologies and diversifying analytical tools will enrich the scholarly narrative. Policy-makers and academic institutions must prioritize funding and support mechanisms to invigorate research in underexplored themes and regions.

As China progresses in its ICH protection journey, aligning with global intellectual property norms, a strategic fusion of public law mechanisms and private intellectual property rights is essential. The burgeoning awareness and legislative advancements in ICH protection herald a promising trajectory for future research, wherein an interdisciplinary and collaborative approach could unlock novel insights and sustainable heritage conservation strategies.

In conclusion, this study delineates a critical juncture in China’s ICH research landscape, marked by a call for strategic interventions and collaborative synergies to harness the full spectrum of intellectual property rights in safeguarding the cultural tapestry. Future scholarly endeavours should pivot towards an integrated, dynamic, and inclusive research paradigm that resonates with the evolving global discourse on intangible cultural heritage.

Limitations of the study

While this bibliometric analysis offers insights into the IPP of the ICH landscape, it is imperative to acknowledge the inherent limitations of such an approach. Reliance on published literature might not fully capture the extensive on-ground activities and nuanced cultural dialogues within the ICH spectrum. Furthermore, the methodological constraints and potential biases in data selection and analysis necessitate a cautious interpretation of the findings.