Address by Françoise Rivière, Assistant Director-General for Culture, on the occasion of the Conference on “Cultural Diversity – Europe’s Wealth. Bringing the UNESCO Convention to life”, Essen, Germany, 28 April 2007.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

First of all, allow me to thank the German Commission for UNESCO for its very welcome invitation to this conference which illustrates once again the rich and dynamic part the vast “UNESCO family” plays in the progress of ideas.

Why have I used the term “UNESCO family”? Because the 500 or so participants from 60 countries around the world represent both the rich diversity of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions and that of the institutions, organizations and movements that inspire and sustain UNESCO’s work. They have been provided with an opportunity to examine in depth the possible means of implementing the Convention. The debates, I have been told (several of my colleagues followed the meeting from start to finish), were exciting. I am particularly pleased that producers and artists, representatives of non-governmental organizations, the European Union and UNESCO, and naturally representatives of States, were brought together here in Essen. And, as an innovation, the invitation was extended to tomorrow’s decision-makers. All the key figures from civil society involved in the work were therefore able to voice their opinions. The Essen Conference can rightly be regarded as a milestone in the life of the Convention: something important has happened here, which fulfills the wishes of the conference organizers, whom I would like to congratulate and thank.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is clear that the almost unanimous adoption of the Convention by the Member States in 2005, at the 33rd session of the General Conference, was a decisive step, which underlined the wish of the States not to leave to other institutions than UNESCO the task of fulfilling that mandate.

The unprecedented speed of the entry into force of the Convention, which has beaten all records in the cultural area, leads us to wonder about the reasons for such a success. The first reason is surely linked to the topicality of its ideas. Through this Convention, the Member States wished to recognize creative diversity as an essential element of development. The Convention is thus the first standard-setting instrument that makes such a clear connection between culture and development, the latter being understood broadly as having both a symbolic and economic meaning. Of course, there have been conferences, declarations, action plans, but never before a convention, that is, an instrument with binding force. The Convention tackles head on what is proving to be one of the major challenges of the twenty-first century: establishing the place of cultural expressions in development, in view of the transformation in the ways of creating, producing and disseminating culture.

Another reason is undoubtedly that the Convention is one of the first, and one of the only, international instruments which simultaneously acknowledges globalization and endeavours to guide it, to master its processes so that they ensure not only the protection, but also the promotion, of the diversity of cultural expressions. It is not by chance that UNESCO was entrusted with the drafting of the Convention: not only because it involves managing the cultural and not just the economic aspects of cultural activities, goods and services, but also because its aim is not so much “regulating” exchanges, that is, structuring them according to certain rules of the game, as encouraging and facilitating them, thus fulfilling the true vocation of UNESCO.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

With this Convention, the international community now has an almost complete standard-setting framework concerning the promotion of cultural diversity. Seven conventions have been adopted since the 1950s for the conservation and promotion of the many forms of diversity. Of those conventions, three in particular are pillars of cultural diversity: the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, adopted in 1972; the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, adopted in 2003; and the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, adopted in 2005.

Each of them covers a specific aspect of the issue. The 1972 Convention is intended to protect the most outstanding tangible heritage of the world’s creative talent. The aim of the 2003 Convention is to protect the capacity to recreate the intangible heritage ceaselessly and transmit it to future generations. The 2005 Convention is unlike the other conventions in that it is dedicated to the diversity of cultural expressions as expressed through the contemporary tools of cultural activities, goods and services. It consists of strengthening the five inseparable links of the same chain, that is, the creation, production, distribution and diffusion, access and enjoyment of cultural expressions. Taken together, these texts form the framework for ethical and strategic reflection drawn up and adopted by the Member States of UNESCO to address the main aspects of cultural diversity.

The Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions is dedicated above all to cultural activities, goods and services. For the first time, their specific nature, as vehicles of identity, values and meaning, is officially recognized. The Convention thus acknowledges that States have the right – through their cultural policies – to encourage equal access to all cultural expressions and, as a corollary, the obligation to ensure openness to the expressions of other world cultures, since exchange, within and across borders, is the sine qua non of diversity and dialogue.

The guiding principles of the Convention guarantee that it will not be used for purposes other than its own. They recall UNESCO’s fundamental values: human rights, fundamental freedoms, sovereignty, equal dignity and respect for all cultures, international solidarity, development, equal access, openness and balance. All are elements which have guided UNESCO’s action since its creation.

The Convention has in fact two major aims. First, the creation of a legal framework within which cultural activities, goods and services will be considered for their cultural content and will be the subject of specific measures and policies, not limited to their nature as a commercial “product”. This legal framework will make it possible for States to take the measures necessary to provide their citizens with genuine access to the means of production, diffusion and distribution. Secondly, the Convention recalls the place of culture in development and outlines innovative international cooperation mechanisms to foster the rapid expansion of cultural industries in the world and, consequently, to promote development. Which of those two aims will prevail? In other words, how will the Convention principally be applied? It is not for the UNESCO Secretariat to say, but for the Parties to the Convention, in particular, through their governing bodies.

There are two of those bodies. The Conference of Parties is the plenary and supreme body. It will meet very soon, as the first Conference of Parties will be held at UNESCO Headquarters from 18 to 20 June 2007, when it will adopt its own rules of procedure, elect the members of the Intergovernmental Committee and set up the International Fund for Cultural Diversity, a mainstay of international cooperation, provided for in Article 18. The intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations involved in the process of drafting the Convention will be invited by the Director-General to participate as observers in the work of the first session, as will the independent experts who drew up the preliminary draft convention. The geographical representation of the Parties is still unbalanced, however, and very few States from the Asia and the Pacific and the Arab States regions have as yet acceded to the Convention. While many States have initiated an internal process of ratification, the procedure is sometimes long and complicated. We are confident that over the coming months the list of Parties will lengthen. International solidarity, which lies at the heart of this text, can only really function fully if the partners are many and varied, in the world’s own image.

The Intergovernmental Committee, made up of 24 members, elected by the Conference, meets annually. The first meeting of the Committee could take place in December 2007 and, in order to give momentum to the Convention, two extraordinary meetings of the Committee could be held in 2008-2009. It is in fact the Committee’s responsibility to propose to the Conference of Parties, and therefore to envision, the Convention’s mode of functioning. To that end, expert meetings will be held in the coming months, to help States arrive at a coherent interpretation of certain points which need clarifying in the text of the Convention, such as those regarding international cooperation, “threatened cultural expressions” or measurement of cultural diversity. Their work should help the Intergovernmental Committee in the preparation of operational guidelines for the Convention’s implementation. Obviously the agenda is ambitious and the schedule very tight, if we wish to adopt within two years, i.e., for the second ordinary Conference of Parties in 2009, the main operational implementation mechanisms.

UNESCO, in accordance with Article 24, provides the secretariat for the Convention. It is a large-scale task. It does not solely involve assisting the governing bodies by preparing documentation in accordance with their agendas. Under Article 19, UNESCO is responsible for facilitating the collection, analysis and dissemination of all information, statistics and best practices relating to the diversity of cultural expressions and for establishing a data bank of information on all the stakeholders in the area of cultural expressions. The task is urgent and, at the same time, particularly difficult, as this information will make it possible to measure the actual impact of the Convention.

The Convention clearly covers a wide and complex field, leaving choices to be made. Let me repeat that it is not up to the UNESCO Secretariat to make these choices, but the Parties. We are aware of the great interest sparked by the Convention and the impressive number of publications and conferences on the subject, and we are ready to listen to all that is being said. That is why this meeting is so important to us.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would already like, nonetheless, to underline three main themes which deserve our attention. The first concerns the duty to provide information and be transparent when implementing the Convention. In this regard, the reports that the Parties are bound to submit every four years to the Secretariat, which set out the measures they have taken to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions nationally and internationally, are of primary importance. What is more, the reports are the source of vital information for measuring both the quality and quantity of the diversity of cultural expressions. It is therefore essential that the reports be drafted in such a way as to yield data that can be used to implement the Convention effectively; this is all the more important because data on culture – participation in cultural activities, contribution to GNP, share of the national budget – are, as we well know, severely lacking. Moreover, when they are collected – as is true to some extent in European countries and, to a much lesser extent, in African or even Asian countries – the data are often not comparable. Measuring the diversity of cultural expressions is therefore an entirely new and extremely important endeavour. We have laid the first foundations along that road by working with the UNESCO Institute for Statistics to update the framework for cultural statistics (FCS) and by developing new methodological tools so that comparable data can be collected in the future.

The second, even more fundamental, theme is the central position accorded to international cooperation in the Convention. No fewer than seven articles (12 to 18) are dedicated to the subject, underlining the duty of cooperation which the Parties have pledged to respect. The Convention is based on a simple fact: we all benefit from cultural diversity, so we should all feel ourselves to be responsible for its future. Yet some countries, many of which are developing countries, are experiencing a very critical situation with regard to their cultural expressions. This is true mainly because cultural industries in these countries lack production and distribution capacities and the access to new technologies is not sufficient. These cultural expressions must not disappear or be marginalized, or humanity would suffer an irreversible loss for they are as necessary for the human race as biodiversity is in the natural world. By ratifying the Convention, States have pledged to honour a duty of solidarity. Today, it is important to move beyond the declaration of intention to active implementation at the national and international levels.

The cooperation referred to in the Convention can take many forms – bilateral, regional or international – and can endeavour to create situations that will increase the diversity of cultural expressions and reinforce cultural industries. The search for innovative partnerships, exchanges of information and expertise, capacity-building, sharing best practices, supported by new technologies when necessary, and financial support are all tools set out in the text of the Convention. The operational guidelines drawn up by the governing bodies should, for example, specify the means of submitting and the criteria for granting requests to the International Fund for Cultural Diversity. I should like to mention here the Spanish Government’s generous contribution, which is funding our first expert meeting in Madrid next July on the theme of international cooperation. The experts will be examining the implications of the mechanisms set out in the Convention with a view to favouring the emergence of a dynamic cultural sector.

This international cooperation is similar, in some ways, to the Global Alliance for Cultural Diversity programme launched by UNESCO in 2002 for a period of six years, which supports creative industries, encourages the development of partnerships with civil society and the private sector and experiments with ways of facilitating exchanges, supporting creative industries, providing them with access to expert networks and building their capacities. Here, the dynamic is created through the sharing of expertise and experience. Turning the creativity of developing countries’ cultures into sustainable creative industries means, in reality, both fostering cultural diversity and dialogue and contributing to economic development. The Global Alliance is a flexible mechanism, open to civil society as well as to the private sector. It can be seen as a complement to the Convention’s International Fund for Cultural Diversity.

The third theme, which is fundamental to the question of cultural expressions, concerns creation and creativity, which contribute to the emergence of new world views and the dynamism of innovation. Creators are the front line of cultural diversity. Supporting creation and creators, that is, ensuring their protection, is a collective duty which States and civil society must work together to fulfill. This close cooperation will inevitably have positive repercussions on copyright and will also contribute to building the production and distribution capacities of cultural industries.

Several of UNESCO’s standard-setting instruments deal with creativity and ensure its protection, in particular, the Recommendation concerning the Status of the Artist (1980), to which a periodic monitoring mechanism has been added, aimed at increasing its dissemination. This mechanism is the World Observatory on the Social Status of the Artist, which enables progress to be measured, and the measures taken to be compared so that creativity can flourish.

Another instrument is the Universal Copyright Convention (1952) for which UNESCO and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) share joint responsibility. Without respect for intellectual and artistic property, constantly threatened by piracy, no creator can flourish, become known or even survive. Piracy is a scourge which weighs heavily on the diversity of cultural expressions and on the vitality of creativity. The fight against piracy, in contrast, encourages the development of creation and cultural industries in the South, since it helps to eradicate pirated cultural media and makes possible fairer remuneration for creators, which in turn stimulates creativity. Exchange, capacity-building, awareness-raising and information are once again key words in this domain. UNESCO, through the observatory on the fight against piracy, a flagship instrument of the Universal Copyright Convention, provides essential information on the arts and the creative industries.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This third theme, which relates to the protection and promotion of creativity and creation, requires, as I said, close cooperation between governments and civil society. What a strange paradox it is that the Convention, which by definition is addressed to States, is based on the assumption that civil society will actively participate in its implementation.

Specific reference is made to civil society in Article 11 of the Convention, wherein the Parties acknowledge its fundamental role in the implementation of the Convention’s provisions. Instigator, analyst, partner and critic as well, civil society participates in policy-making, consultation, planning and action. Civil society therefore seems to be a vital cog and lever in all projects concerning the diversity of cultural expressions. As it stands, the 2005 Convention is certainly an important political tool for the Parties, but is also a major advocacy instrument for civil society.

UNESCO, in that respect, seems well placed to foster ties between governments and civil society. Civil society has in fact always been UNESCO’s partner. Its autonomy, flexibility and capacity for mobilization, the great diversity of its stakeholders, its perceptions and its structures, makes it an important partner in democracy. UNESCO has always worked in close cooperation with civil society, as can be seen from the large number of NGOs affiliated with our Organization. These unshakeable ties are also reflected by the absence of a parallel forum at the world congresses that UNESCO convenes, whether in Dakar or in Stockholm.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In conclusion, I would first like to stress the need to make the Convention better known and understood, whether among decision-makers or young people; secondly, to recall that exchanges at all the levels should be fostered and dialogue pursued; and finally to reiterate the importance of building constructive links between civil society and governments.

During these two days, we have all enjoyed the pleasure of sharing and have been considerably enriched by the diversity of the themes and the broad range of the participants. We have taken note of the extraordinary diversity of expectations expressed, in particular, by civil society. How can we ensure that States and States Parties take those expectations into account? That will be the subject of the work which will occupy us in the months and years to come. As we get started, let us pledge to use these expectations for the benefit of the Convention, so that it may be brought to life.

Thank you.

• Publication Date : 28-04-2007