The origins of this article stem from the involvement of the authors in the Estonian National Museum’s (ENM) food culture project which ran from 2017 to 2019. The project was devoted to food culture, or more precisely, to the current interpretations and uses of Estonia’s historical food culture. The aim of the project was to achieve some practical, workable research results in cooperation with various interest groups. Being an institution offering expertise in cultural heritage, the ENM welcomed the challenge posed by the project, as it would combine the fundamentals of inclusive museology with research and collection-based knowledge as well as provide a site fostering discussions and multi-voiced interpretations. The food project managed to highlight clearly various interpretations of food heritage for food production businesses and the tourism sector. The entrepreneurs and developers involved in the project informed the museum of their needs and expectations, while all the parties jointly evaluated the museum’s potential for meeting those needs and expectations. We recognized that the researchers could not afford to limit themselves exclusively to the sharing of expertise on cultural heritage, but also needed to extend their skill set to match the expectations of their cooperation partners, contributing also to the creation of marketing materials (such as films and the Livonian Culinary Route in the past). For the museum, the desire to participate in the process of product development led to some innovative forms of cooperation and outcomes. For example, the application of artistic research was born out of the principles of co-creation and as such, differed from the ENM’s earlier practice of ethnographic documentation via the film medium. In this case, the films were made and uploaded onto the social media platform YouTube, which enabled the museum to expand its outreach. Another experiment that was initiated was the food souvenir contest for which entrepreneurs submitted a relatively representative set of food heritage products within a short period of time. The products and their stories vividly demonstrated many different ways for entrepreneurs to connect their products to heritage. This experience also made us realize that competition is not always the most suitable format for inviting entrepreneurs to take part in joint development programs related to food heritage. Our participation in the Livonian Culinary Route project created the opportunity for us, as researchers, to make our contribution to the development cooperation in the area of gastronomy tourism. Unfortunately, since tourism developers interpreted food heritage in purely instrumental terms, we were not perceived as an equal and important partner. We learnt a valuable lesson that when heritage creation is solely underpinned by marketing goals, it cannot be the basis for sustainable cooperation for researchers of cultural heritage. In a way, the food project also constituted the ENM's attempt to market itself as a possible partner for entrepreneurs and business developers. In the course of the project, we came to the realization that food production entrepreneurs did not necessarily perceive food heritage as a resource that adds value to their product, and even if they were interested in food legacy, they might not know to contact the museum for advice regarding this matter. It became obvious that cooperation in the area of product development in particular requires, on the part of the museum, long-term and regular communication and joint activities with regional development organizations and indeed, with the entrepreneurs themselves. Moreover, it is not possible to initiate heritage-based product development without the museum’s cooperation with other research institutions and the cultural researchers’ collaboration with representatives of other disciplines (including food technologists, as well as marketing and product design specialists). It is this kind of interdisciplinary expertise that could genuinely benefit food producers.