Paper for Ministerial Consideration:
Scope and Framework of an International Instrument on Cultural Diversity

Working Group on Cultural Diversity and Globalization

Prepared for the Working Group by: Antonio Rudder (Barbados), Vladimir Skok, Chair and Christina Green (Canada), Paule Iappini and Sophie Valais (France), Regiena Ineke Bink-Leijh (Netherlands), Steven Sack (South Africa), Nicolas Mathieu (Switzerland) in cooperation with the INCP Liaison Bureau, Summer 2001

Introduction:

Purpose

This paper provides a synthesis of the deliberations and substantial progress of the Working Group as they pertain to the pursuit of an international instrument on cultural diversity. The purpose of this paper is to clarify for Ministers in Lucerne the scope and framework for an Instrument and to request a third year mandate to elaborate elements of the instrument in the form of a draft agreement.

This paper reflects the Working Group discussions at both the December 2000 Paris, France and May 2001 Leysin, Switzerland meetings, as well as participation in the Swiss Working Session on the Management of Cultural Diversity and preliminary findings from the ERICarts pilot project on national cultural policy frameworks. The paper also incorporates two key Working Group documents, Towards an International Instrument on Cultural Diversity, a Synthesis by the Working Group Chair and Questions and Answers by Ivan Bernier, an expert advisor the Working Group.

Back to Top

Background

In Oaxaca, Mexico in 1999, the Ministers of culture discussed the possibility of working on a global scale to determine cultural policies that are appropriate for all countries and create the necessary tools for countries to implement policies that favor, preserve and promote cultural diversity. A Working Group on Cultural Diversity and Globalization was established to develop these ideas.

The following year in Santorini, Greece in September 2000 - Ministers identified an international instrument on cultural diversity as a global focal point to promote diversity of cultural expression and identity and endorsed a preliminary series of cultural diversity principles. "Ministers charged the Working Group to continue its work by elaborating on the framework and scope of a cultural diversity instrument for their 2001 annual meeting."

As an informal venue, the International Network on Cultural Policy (INCP) is ideally suited to the role of 'think-tank' on cultural policy development at the international level. During the discussions certain realities emerged this year to form a point of reference for the Working Group.

1. There is a need to develop and strengthen cultural policies both domestically and internationally.
2. Cultural diversity is an important policy objective
3. Governments have a legitimate role to play in preserving and promoting cultural diversity.
4. The new global environment is challenging countries' abilities to achieve policy objectives using traditional cultural policy tools.

The Working Group suggests that an international instrument on cultural diversity should focus on the promotion and preservation of cultural diversity in the face of the context of globalization - including trade liberalization and rapid technological advancement. It should be developed with the understanding that cultural diversity implies both the preservation and promotion of existing cultures and the greatest possible openness to other cultures. This paper provides an analysis and advice to this end.

Part I: The Context for an International Instrument on Cultural Diversity

In order for a large number of countries to agree to begin negotiating an international instrument on cultural diversity, this instrument must meet a clearly identified need, fill a legal void, pursue clear objectives, and provide appropriate, achievable solutions through the norms it sets. The purpose of this paper is to suggest some answers to these questions, answers that are not intended to be definitive but rather to stimulate discussion on the topics raised.

Back to Top

The Impact of Globalization on Cultural Diversity

Globalization, through the transnational flow of people and ideas, technological development, the presence of multi-national corporations and the integration of the global economy, is rapidly redefining our global reality. While these current trends offer new and important opportunities for the development and sharing of diverse cultural identities and traditions inside and outside national borders, the globalization is often unequally distributed and intimidating to smaller or local cultural and linguistic traditions. In the new global world economics is dominant and there is a need to find a balance between the mix of social, cultural and economic issues.

This imbalance is most evident when the differences between developing and developed countries are examined. Many developing countries are only beginning to address the challenges of establishing cultural and media infrastructure where basic technological infrastructure is still absent or underdeveloped. Linkages between culture and sustainable development are important in order to underline how individual social and cultural fulfilment is essential to human development and thus to human security and independence. Developed countries are more concerned with reforming existing policy or regulatory infrastructure to reflect radically changing demographics and globalization to the need for a broader public policy response and increasing partnerships between public and private sectors.

Internationally, the challenge is to undertake actions to promote cultural diversity in ways that respond to and are reflective of all regions, both developing and developed. "There is a need for national cultural policy perspectives and instruments capable of providing support to local (sub-national) efforts as well as protecting and advancing national and international cultural interests." The Instrument should reflect an integrated approach of all dimensions of cultural diversity including the social, human and economic.

In the context of globalization, "the precedence that economic imperatives take over social and political values, backed by the prodigious expansion of the information highway, is challenging national identities, sometimes driving them into retreat and even into aggressively asserting counter-models."

Imperatives for Action

Globalization poses new challenges to the ability of governments, civil society and the private sector to nurture diversity. For instance, changing technology, industry concentration, growing economic interdependence, global trade in cultural products and the increasing reach of trade and investment obligations are creating new regulatory challenges and uncertainty about how States can maintain their cultural policies. Trade negotiations could have an effect on cultural policies areas such as services, intellectual property, subsidies, investment, competition policy and electronic commerce. Moreover, while the international trading system has an enforceable dispute settlement mechanism, no existing cultural instrument possesses one of the same weight. Some predictability is needed for policy makers who wish to design effective policies in support of cultural diversity and for creators, producers, distributors of cultural goods and services and audiovisuals. Undertaking a new approach will help to improve the management of the risks facing our cultural policies.

Back to Top

A challenge for governments is to assess how global trends are affecting their ability to ensure that there is a public space where citizens can enjoy a diversity of choice and opinion, thereby reflecting a diversity of cultural expression. From this perspective, globalization can raise the following concerns for the national production of cultural goods and services:

1. The increasing presence of foreign cultural products in some societies can overshadow domestic cultural products, thereby limiting the opportunities for the symbolic discourse essential for their own development, and the promotion of cultural diversity.
2. The concentration of production and marketing of cultural products in large corporate entities has the potential to generate standardization of cultural expression under the influence of basically commercial imperatives.
3. New information technologies (the Internet, etc.) could create disequilibrium in the international cultural space.
   

In view of these global trends, action is needed to ensure the basic right to cultural expression and encouragement of a diversity of cultural expression at the international level. Traditional cultural policies need to adapt to the global environment, in framing both domestic and the international cultural policy tools.

There have been attempts in recent years to address these challenges from a cultural perspective as shown by the impressive number of existing multilateral, bilateral and regional instruments dealing with culture. However, they often do not address the problem of preserving the diversity of cultural expression in the new global environment. Five areas have been identified that would, if addressed, fill this gap.

1. Lack of a comprehensive vision of the effect of globalization on cultural diversity.
   • Existing instruments take a fragmented approach to the promotion of cultural diversity, addressing it from a variety of particular standpoints. What is lacking is an instrument, which would articulate a common set of principles and ensure that appropriate action is taken to preserve all facets of cultural diversity. It should be noted that UNESCO has begun to look at a more comprehensive approach to cultural diversity through its proposed Declaration on Cultural Diversity.
2. Insufficient consideration of local needs.
   • Cultural diversity needs to be considered at the national and international levels but also at the local level. It is important to give more thought to the mounting domestic or local problems.
     
3. Insufficient consideration of the imbalance in international cultural exchanges.
   • With the development of new information, communication and network technologies, the increased interaction with cultures possessing a global reach can pose a threat to the existence of local and regional cultural and linguistic traditions. Developing countries are particularly vulnerable to this type of imbalance as they face the challenge of establishing cultural and media infrastructures with limited resources to correct market forces. For developed countries, the challenge is to encourage openness while recognizing the importance of the production of, and respect for diverse cultural content. This type of imbalance is clearly present in the audio-visual sector both for developing and developed countries.
4. Need to address the cultural trade issue.
   • Those instruments that attempt to address the culture and trade issue reaffirm at the international level the necessity of treating cultural goods and services, including audio-visual products as not like other forms of merchandise . The issue is to how put into practice this principle of preserving and promoting cultural diversity in the context of globalization and trade liberalisation. Any new approach to the cultural trade quandary should be derived from and driven by a cultural policy perspective and should ensure that governments have the ability to achieve their cultural policy objectives.
5. Declaratory nature of the majority of existing documents
   • Generally speaking, instruments are either legally binding or not. There is currently no enforceable instrument that reflects the positive commitment of signatory states to take action in favour of cultural diversity.

Back to Top

Part II: Scope of an International Instrument

To address these areas a critical mass of countries need to agree to work together to develop an international instrument on cultural diversity. Such an instrument should meet a clearly identified need, and pursue objectives and provide appropriate consensus around solutions. Several elements are needed in order to build an instrument that addresses both social and economic development in the international environment, including principles and objectives and operational and substantive issues. One of the most important elements of this initiative is that it should help to elevate the importance of cultural diversity and cultural policy objectives at home, particularly as cultural policies are what would define any Instrument.

The first step for building an international instrument on cultural diversity is to acquire a common understanding or vision of cultural diversity issues. The vision below outlines some core principles and objectives and articulates a consensus that reflects shared opportunities concerns and challenges of cultural diversity. It also reflects a broad consensus on the important issue areas of cultural diversity for social and economic development.

The Objectives of an International Instrument would be to:

1. Ensure that cultural diversity is preserved and promoted in the face of the challenges and opportunities posed by globalization. Each country should be able to address specific challenges in ensuring their place in global diversity and find effective solutions to national diversity concerns, based on a global consensus of the broader importance of cultural diversity for the social and economic prosperity of societies. The challenge for developing countries is to develop cultural infrastructure. Due to the lack of infrastructure support, countries are losing cultural forms and treasures that do not have a space in the market place. A mixed economy approach to develop and integrate public and private institutions needs to be developed.
2. Reinforce the legitimate role of governments to support, promote and safeguard cultural diversity as a key public interest objective. It would ensure that countries and communities have the ability to achieve their cultural policy objectives; ensuring that nations can develop and use tools to create enabling conditions for the creation, production, distribution, promotion, conservation and circulation of cultural content, while still remaining open to all the world has to offer.
3. Articulate the close and important relationship between cultural diversity and international social and economic development. An instrument should recognize cultural diversity as an object of public interest requiring due consideration in the development of public policy similar to that of the environment and sustainable development. A healthy economy is conducive to cultural growth and market forces alone cannot assure the preservation and promotion of cultural diversity.

Back to Top

Core Principles

The Instrument should be built on overarching core principles that could outline the basis for a common understanding of the importance of cultural diversity. The principles must articulate common values that address particular concerns and challenges. Principles should emerge from the deepening of understanding of the central themes or issues of cultural diversity that are part of the vision. The following principles have emerged from the Working Group discussions and could help develop the priority areas for content:

• When human and democratic rights are ensured, cultural diversity is a positive force in society that strengthens social cohesion, human security and democracy as well as facilitates the fostering of mutual understanding and respect and acceptance of differences within groups
• Recognition and implementation of all human rights, in particular established economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights, are an integral part in addressing issues of cultural diversity in a global context.
• Recognition that states have a role to play in preserving and promoting the common and individual cultural identities of their people.
• Freedom of expression as well as the free flow of information and ideas are an integral part of cultural diversity.
• All peoples should have access to their own cultures.
• International collaboration and partnership amongst all players (governments, international organizations, private sector, and civil society stakeholders), as well as social dialogue, must be encouraged to facilitate the preservation and promotion of cultural diversity within and between countries.
• Countries should strive to be open to the best the world has to offer while nurturing domestically rich cultural expression.

Specific Issues to be Addressed

In deepening and broadening collective understanding of cultural diversity, some parameters or issues for an international instrument should emerge. These issues should respond to the challenges posed by globalization to the promotion and preservation of cultural diversity and help fill the gaps in existing international agreements. The following issues should be acknowledged and supported as the basis for action:

• Natural and Cultural Heritage: A community is linked to its past through the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage, which forms a crucial component of identity and self-understanding. Governments, society and communities should facilitate access to natural and cultural heritage, to ensure its protection and to promote its importance as an expression of our diversity and shared humanity, as a source of knowledge and as a factor in economic development and social cohesion. Repatriation is a key issue concerning natural and cultural heritage.
• Arts and Creativity: To promote awareness of the arts and to increase and sustain engagement and participation in the arts for everyone, Governments should develop and integrate education and learning strategies to entrench the arts as a fundamental value and a right of all citizens, in support of identity, health, security and personal fulfillment.
• Cultural Goods and Services : Cultural goods and services are a medium through which a creator shares his or her vision with the citizens of his or her community (city, region, country, or the world). As such they should be fully recognized as playing a greater role in societies than as mere commodities. With respect to the creation, production and dissemination of cultural goods and services, governments should have the flexibility to foster, develop, and support an environment conducive to creativity and cultural expression through appropriate
  cultural policies and regulations, as well as ensuring consumer choice and a diversity of voices and opinions in society.
• Intellectual Property : Authors and rights holders have the right to protect their moral and material interests regarding creation. Intellectual property needs to be further recognized and existing international engagements should be preserved and respected.
• Information and Communication Technologies: The global information society needs to evolve in a such a way that the social and economic opportunities provided by the enabling forces of the market are enjoyed by all the world's people.
• Development: For many developing countries the global environment means uncertainty and vulnerability. Addressing their particular needs and concerns plays an important part in the social and economic prosperity of all nations. Various kinds of intervention can be considered, ranging from positive discrimination in favour of cultural products from developing countries to the establishment of mechanisms for providing technical and financial assistance, or the facilitation of the international circulation of artists and creators.

In addition to addressing such issues, an instrument should outline the necessary international actions and commitments required to realize the overarching or core principles in the context of globalization.

Back to Top

Part III: A Framework for the Instrument

Any new international instrument would require a preamble describing the background of the new instrument and its objectives. The preamble would situate the international instrument in the context of existing international instruments dealing with cultural diversity. It would also clearly outline the objectives and rationale of the instrument, namely the preservation and promotion of cultural diversity in the face of globalization. It is generallly recognized that the scope and architecture of an international instrument are determined to a large extent by the objectives that it pursues and the nature of the problems encountered in trying to realize this objective.

The first part of an instrument would be educational and declaratory in nature and would explain why action must be taken to preserve and promote cultural diversity. This first part should also contain a series of definitions of the chief terms that are used, including culture, cultural diversity, cultural communities, and cultural industries. Various international organizations have already developed some definitions, which could serve as a basis for the purpose of this Instrument.

The actual norm-setting contents would constitute the second part of the instrument. It could be structured in various ways. The most effective norm-setting framework that arose from Working Group discussions would be one that is issue based. Such a structure would have the advantage of adhering more closely to the overall purpose of the instrument. It would establish a direct link between the objectives and the principles that underlie the realization of those objectives and the measures or actions necessary to realize those objectives. Finally, this part of the instrument should reflect the positive commitment of the signatory states to take action in favour of cultural diversity and could set out a framework of rules regarding government measures in support of cultural diversity.

The assessment of where an instrument should be hosted remains to be analyzed. It will depend to a large extent on the nature or the instrument. There are several possible organizations, each with their merits and drawbacks. UNESCO, as it has a cultural mandate, is a likely candidate. The WTO is another option of an organization that could host an instrument. Another possibility is to have an instrument hosted by more than one international organization. This would bring together different viewpoints. Another possible alternative is a stand-alone instrument, not related to any particularly international organization.

In the interest of keeping all options open, the need to maintain links between international organizations with competence in cultural diversity was emphasized. Duplication or creating divergence in the agendas should be avoided. Therefore, it was agreed that the Working Group would continue to work towards an instrument and share the information with the other international organizations working on this issue at the appropriate time.

Back to Top

Next Steps 2001-2002: An International Instrument on Cultural Diversity

The preservation and promotion of cultural diversity is facing a host of tough challenges in the new global environment. This suggests that a new and stronger approach to position the role of cultural policy in the public agenda is needed.

In this context, the Working Group discussed the idea of an international instrument on cultural diversity that would articulate the close and important relationship between cultural diversity and international social and economic development while reinforcing the legitimate role of governments to preserve and promote cultural diversity. This is however, only the first step in providing Ministers with policy advice, which they will need to consider the proposed content of any instrument.

The Working Group on Cultural Diversity and Globalization agreed on a number of principles for cultural diversity and the purpose of an international instrument. However, for the next phase of work, a series of questions have emerged in the course of the discussions that will need to be examined in depth, including the notion of enforceability and the detailed structure of an instrument. Scope and architecture of an Instrument must be addressed in order to have an effective and enforceable Instrument. This should allow governments to have the flexibility to choose how to preserve and promote cultural diversity and maintain their national cultural policies.

The Working Group seeks a third year mandate from Network Ministers in Lucerne to pursue further work regarding outstanding issues and to examine some of the options identified in the course of its current mandate.

The third year Work Plan for the Working Group would include looking further into developing the arguments for an Instrument and could outline various options for what type of Instrument is needed. An in-depth assessment of the objectives and priority domestic policy issues would help to focus future work.

In addition, a comparative study of instrument architecture used in other fields such as in the environment and an analysis of various international treaty architectural models and legal frameworks would be a useful exercise in determining the possible nature of an international instrument on cultural diversity. The Working Group would therefore be in a position to outline different options for an Instrument for Ministers in 2002.

The question of how to further inform and equip cultural policy makers, and others, about the full range of cross-sectoral issues will also need to be considered. How should cultural Ministers engage more broadly at home? The Working Group discussed the option of a positive and proactive strategy to articulate the basic aspects that they have been promoting around cultural diversity. In the elaboration and consideration of a draft Instrument, domestic and international experts working in the area of cultural diversity will need to be engaged in the process. This will require communications tools to contribute to the awareness raising and elaboration of strategies to discuss these issues with other constituencies. It was noted that there would be no coherence at the international level between trade policy and cultural policy without co-operation at the domestic level.

Other types of actions in support of cultural diversity should also be explored in the course of the Working Group's third year mandate. For example, increased international policy co-operation would appear to be an effective tool in addressing the various cultural diversity issues faced by developing countries. Different co-operation mechanisms or parallel processes that could provide guidance need to be explored further. An observatory could be set up to advise governments and stimulate talks between the different sectoral representatives and help to stress the importance of cultural diversity and cultural policies.

One of the original goals of the INCP is to make culture central to the international agenda and discussions on the international instrument are helping to achieve this. As a think-tank, the work of the International Network on Cultural Policy should feed in to the ongoing work on cultural diversity in other international organizations and help to elevate the importance of cultural diversity and cultural policy objectives at home.

Back to Top