Recently, a boom in what is called heritage has been consolidating, following the "new museology" that Llorenç Prats[9] places in the UNESCO conference in Santiago, Chile, in 1972, which renewed museums and heritage in general. However, this heritage has been the target of multiple economic crises, war confrontations and poverty, which have determined its persistence in the world.

Another movement present and in some way developed is the vindication of memory, it is special around cases where some type of notable repression has been generated, which is why it seeks to remedy feelings and conflict.

Also, there is the growing idea of ​​national identity that has been consolidated by the need for differentiation (exogenous) and at the same time collective similarity (endogenous).

The crisis occurs to the extent that this patrimonialization of reality is gradually falling, due to the excessive situation of financial markets that put investment for this type of dynamics at risk, failing to guarantee cultural preservation, which warns of a loss of the same, since heritage is not prioritized, in addition to the fact that this is exclusive by seeking elitist planning, and the focus on visitors who can recognize the identity of a certain place or group, which does not represent, in itself, social cohesion. well-being or economic development, that is, there is a verticality in the treatment of heritage, as well as a limited social prominence of it, which does not generate effects.

Given this, Prats proposes that the crisis is the opportunity to rethink the heritage of countries, and specifically of Spain, which is his case study, since it allows the treatment of heritage to be converted into one at the service of social well-being, which takes into account investment as a way of prioritizing, even increasing the socioeconomic level of a population, given that peculiarities can be potentiated and guide interests of cultural and social recognition, through the appropriate interrelation that allows heritage to be conceived as a resource, that resists crises and haga necesario, minimizando así en parte la situación de clases populares y de la sociedad en general.

The relationship between the conservation of ethnographic heritage and musealization is developing worldwide, according to Blanca Flor Herrero,[10]​ given that this heritage "previously classified as old and considered useless, is now called ancient, is conserved, collected and revalued, becoming a museum asset"[11]​.

Ethnographic heritage has a particularity that makes it notable, such as the conjunction between tangible and intangible, which is why the objective of ethnographic museums surpasses the materialistic interests of the conservation, collection, exhibition and projection of an object "Object (philosophy)"), but rather they seek to do this with the non-object and the subjects, evidencing ideas and immaterial pieces that constitute a specific identity and culture that requires conservation, given that:

Collecting is what has made possible the configuration of ethnographic heritage, as it protects and preserves pieces and their meaning, giving it a functional character that through collection manages to add value to certain groups, which is why:

Furthermore, it is necessary to differentiate between a museographic collection and a museum, since the collection is reduced to collection, conservation and exhibition, while the museum is inserted in gathering, conserving and exhibiting, but through the museology of ordering, classifying, documenting, researching, disseminating and teaching, which adds comprehensive conservation to the pieces, from the spatial one, which takes into account temperature, lighting and humidity, as Herrero points out, to that which thinks about the meaning and value it has and transmits.

Given that cultural heritage is closely related to ethnographic heritage, according to Elías Zamora Acosta, it is necessary to analyze the impact of political practice and social scientists in the conversion of a cultural element into heritage, which is why the author considers necessary the participation of various sectors of society, in such a way that development processes can be generated through heritage that can become a resource for the tourism industry.

Popular culture and tradition are samples of a social identity, which include language, literature, music, dance, games, mythology, rituals, customs, crafts, architecture and other arts.[12]​.

For this reason, it is thought that cultural heritage can be an object of consumption, constituting itself as a source of income for economic positioning, with attraction for the comprehensive development of some territories, based on its own criteria, and not the imposition of enlightened people or foreigners with different cultural, social and economic conceptions.

According to Lorenç Prats, patrimonialization processes account for two different, but complementary, social constructions. La primera de estas es la «sacralización de la externalidad cultural*»*,[13]​ como mecanismo por el que se define un ideal en cuanto a la cultura del mundo que sobrepasa la condición humana y la concepción de la realidad. En este sentido la representación aparece con el desarrollo del capitalismo y a su vez con la revolución industrial, que difunden la percepción del patrimonio, utilizando conceptos de conservación de un bien relevante y absoluto.

The second principle is framed in "the enhancement or activation", and is related to attributing value to heritage elements, especially through political powers, which generate identity processes, timely and useful for political practice.[13]​.

Taking this into account, local heritage supports the general heritage construction, and this is made up of objects, places and related manifestations, which configure and manage local heritage, understanding this as singular and of little relevance to people outside a certain community. That is why this heritage is framed in memory and not in predetermined references, since it allows reflection on the past that projects the future, generating community ties and a singular and contemporarily collective representation, given the mutual cultural interaction that a group represents.

In Colombia, the history of ethnography is related to archeology, since these disciplines developed in parallel in the country, given the importance acquired by living communities, which in themselves constitute diverse ways of thinking and relating to others.

In this sense, in Colombia, in principle, cultural and linguistic homogenization was intended, based on the foreign model linked to "progress and civilization"[14]​.

During part of the century, the country focused on indigenous communities, given their "wild" character and that was why the first ethnographic pieces were collected. Later, in 1917, according to the National Museum of Colombia, the Museum of Bogotá in its general catalog dedicated a volume to the archaeological collection, which included "contemporary Indigenous objects"[14]​ such as crafts, which include weapons, fabrics and necklaces, and even musical instruments.

As for the historical processes, these date back to 1920, with the defense of indigenous communities, in correspondence with processes that were taking place outside the country, in such a way that the record of archaeological and ethnographic pieces was generated.

However, it is since 1940 that interest in indigenous communities was established, especially in their study, by the founding of the National Indigenous and Ethnological Institute, which sought to collect pieces that would enrich the collections as part of a "relic, antiquity "Antiquity (object)"), curiosity and work of indigenous art"[14] Correspondingly, ethnographic studies rescued the diversity of indigenous communities, as well as their organization, way of life and traditions.

Finally, in 1999, the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and the Institute of Hispanic Culture merged, creating the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History, ICANH, part of the Ministry of Culture, which is made up of archeology and heritage, social anthropology and history, and a center for cultural studies.[14]​.

Meanwhile, ethnography is a research method that studies people related to each other, during a certain period of time, which uses participant observation and interviews to identify social behaviors, which reveal meanings of actions and interactions of the social reality of a certain group, which include decisions and actions, where "customs, beliefs, myths, genealogy, history, language"[7]​ among others. Furthermore, these types of studies tend to develop the qualitative method to a greater extent, given that the quantitative method can reduce the individuals or groups and the dynamics they establish. For this reason, the aim is to generate an image attached to the reality of the group studied, as well as their problems, attitudes and so on.

The distinction between ethnology and ethnography occurs in that ethnography designates the field study of the culture of a particular group, generating interpretations and explanations, but does not establish a hypothesis, while ethnology does, since it is based on spatial and intercultural understanding that allows a comparative analysis between cultures.

On the other hand, cultural heritage, as a specific heritage, is the synthesis or approach of ethnographic or ethnological heritage, given that the latter are interrelated or complemented through field study (ethnography) and comparative cultural study (ethnology), so they are "the set of traditional manifestations and forms of life, material or immaterial, that define the characteristics of the different groups that make up a community"[7]​ which is why cultural heritage has three important dimensions, as they are symbolic-identitarian, political and economic, where clearly this is formed as a socio-historical construction that takes the past, exposes it in the present, and consolidates it for the future as a collective identity.[7]​.

Recently, a boom in what is called heritage has been consolidating, following the "new museology" that Llorenç Prats[9] places in the UNESCO conference in Santiago, Chile, in 1972, which renewed museums and heritage in general. However, this heritage has been the target of multiple economic crises, war confrontations and poverty, which have determined its persistence in the world.

Another movement present and in some way developed is the vindication of memory, it is special around cases where some type of notable repression has been generated, which is why it seeks to remedy feelings and conflict.

Also, there is the growing idea of ​​national identity that has been consolidated by the need for differentiation (exogenous) and at the same time collective similarity (endogenous).

The crisis occurs to the extent that this patrimonialization of reality is gradually falling, due to the excessive situation of financial markets that put investment for this type of dynamics at risk, failing to guarantee cultural preservation, which warns of a loss of the same, since heritage is not prioritized, in addition to the fact that this is exclusive by seeking elitist planning, and the focus on visitors who can recognize the identity of a certain place or group, which does not represent, in itself, social cohesion. well-being or economic development, that is, there is a verticality in the treatment of heritage, as well as a limited social prominence of it, which does not generate effects.

Given this, Prats proposes that the crisis is the opportunity to rethink the heritage of countries, and specifically of Spain, which is his case study, since it allows the treatment of heritage to be converted into one at the service of social well-being, which takes into account investment as a way of prioritizing, even increasing the socioeconomic level of a population, given that peculiarities can be potentiated and guide interests of cultural and social recognition, through the appropriate interrelation that allows heritage to be conceived as a resource, that resists crises and haga necesario, minimizando así en parte la situación de clases populares y de la sociedad en general.

The relationship between the conservation of ethnographic heritage and musealization is developing worldwide, according to Blanca Flor Herrero,[10]​ given that this heritage "previously classified as old and considered useless, is now called ancient, is conserved, collected and revalued, becoming a museum asset"[11]​.

Ethnographic heritage has a particularity that makes it notable, such as the conjunction between tangible and intangible, which is why the objective of ethnographic museums surpasses the materialistic interests of the conservation, collection, exhibition and projection of an object "Object (philosophy)"), but rather they seek to do this with the non-object and the subjects, evidencing ideas and immaterial pieces that constitute a specific identity and culture that requires conservation, given that:

Collecting is what has made possible the configuration of ethnographic heritage, as it protects and preserves pieces and their meaning, giving it a functional character that through collection manages to add value to certain groups, which is why:

Furthermore, it is necessary to differentiate between a museographic collection and a museum, since the collection is reduced to collection, conservation and exhibition, while the museum is inserted in gathering, conserving and exhibiting, but through the museology of ordering, classifying, documenting, researching, disseminating and teaching, which adds comprehensive conservation to the pieces, from the spatial one, which takes into account temperature, lighting and humidity, as Herrero points out, to that which thinks about the meaning and value it has and transmits.

Given that cultural heritage is closely related to ethnographic heritage, according to Elías Zamora Acosta, it is necessary to analyze the impact of political practice and social scientists in the conversion of a cultural element into heritage, which is why the author considers necessary the participation of various sectors of society, in such a way that development processes can be generated through heritage that can become a resource for the tourism industry.

Popular culture and tradition are samples of a social identity, which include language, literature, music, dance, games, mythology, rituals, customs, crafts, architecture and other arts.[12]​.

For this reason, it is thought that cultural heritage can be an object of consumption, constituting itself as a source of income for economic positioning, with attraction for the comprehensive development of some territories, based on its own criteria, and not the imposition of enlightened people or foreigners with different cultural, social and economic conceptions.

According to Lorenç Prats, patrimonialization processes account for two different, but complementary, social constructions. La primera de estas es la «sacralización de la externalidad cultural*»*,[13]​ como mecanismo por el que se define un ideal en cuanto a la cultura del mundo que sobrepasa la condición humana y la concepción de la realidad. En este sentido la representación aparece con el desarrollo del capitalismo y a su vez con la revolución industrial, que difunden la percepción del patrimonio, utilizando conceptos de conservación de un bien relevante y absoluto.

The second principle is framed in "the enhancement or activation", and is related to attributing value to heritage elements, especially through political powers, which generate identity processes, timely and useful for political practice.[13]​.

Taking this into account, local heritage supports the general heritage construction, and this is made up of objects, places and related manifestations, which configure and manage local heritage, understanding this as singular and of little relevance to people outside a certain community. That is why this heritage is framed in memory and not in predetermined references, since it allows reflection on the past that projects the future, generating community ties and a singular and contemporarily collective representation, given the mutual cultural interaction that a group represents.

In Colombia, the history of ethnography is related to archeology, since these disciplines developed in parallel in the country, given the importance acquired by living communities, which in themselves constitute diverse ways of thinking and relating to others.

In this sense, in Colombia, in principle, cultural and linguistic homogenization was intended, based on the foreign model linked to "progress and civilization"[14]​.

During part of the century, the country focused on indigenous communities, given their "wild" character and that was why the first ethnographic pieces were collected. Later, in 1917, according to the National Museum of Colombia, the Museum of Bogotá in its general catalog dedicated a volume to the archaeological collection, which included "contemporary Indigenous objects"[14]​ such as crafts, which include weapons, fabrics and necklaces, and even musical instruments.

As for the historical processes, these date back to 1920, with the defense of indigenous communities, in correspondence with processes that were taking place outside the country, in such a way that the record of archaeological and ethnographic pieces was generated.

However, it is since 1940 that interest in indigenous communities was established, especially in their study, by the founding of the National Indigenous and Ethnological Institute, which sought to collect pieces that would enrich the collections as part of a "relic, antiquity "Antiquity (object)"), curiosity and work of indigenous art"[14] Correspondingly, ethnographic studies rescued the diversity of indigenous communities, as well as their organization, way of life and traditions.

Finally, in 1999, the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and the Institute of Hispanic Culture merged, creating the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History, ICANH, part of the Ministry of Culture, which is made up of archeology and heritage, social anthropology and history, and a center for cultural studies.[14]​.