News

  • 14.07.10 OMC working group reports have been published Read more...
  • 17.06.10 Culture Action Europe Newsletter #3 2010 Read more...
  • 06.05.10 The Platform for Intercultural Europe is recruting Read more...
  • 14.04.10 Culture Action Europe Newsletter #2 2010 Read more...
  • 12.04.10 The EU 2020 strategy: analysis and perspectives Read more...
  • 31.03.10 Culture Action Europe is looking for a translation intern Read more...
  • 29.03.10 Members’ meetings and policy consultation Read more...
  • 17.03.10 Already 6 new members in 2010! Read more...
  • 10.02.10 Culture Action Europe Newsletter #1 2010 Read more...
  • 10.02.10 Renewed EU commitmment to combating poverty and social exclusion – what perspectives for the Year? Read more...
  • 08.02.10 EP Hearing – Androulla Vassiliou Commisioner-Desginate for Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth Read more...
  • 14.01.10 Our contribution to the EC consultation on the future EU 2020 strategy Read more...
  • 11.01.10 Our contribution to the EC consultation on financial regulation Read more...
  • 07.12.09 Culture Action Europe Newsletter #8 Read more...
  • 18.08.09 Post elections analysis – to know more about the composition of the new European Parliament and of the new Culture Committee Read more...

Tag Cloud

70 cents for culture
EU agenda for culture
arts
civil society
creative industries
culture programme
education
funding
intercultural dialogue
lisbon strategy
lobbying
mobility
open method of coordination
structured dialogue
EU-ACP cultural relations: “An ambitious roadmap for progress” Print

On 2-3 April 2009, the EC organised an international colloquium entitled Culture and Creativity: Vectors for Development in Brussels. The event gathered over 500 participants from Europe and the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. Jordi Balta, Project Coordinator at Interarts Foundation, reports on the event and puts into perspective the changing perception of the relevance of culture to development policies.


On 2-3 April 2009, the European Commission organised an international colloquium entitled Culture and Creativity: Vectors for Development in Brussels. The event, an initiative of DG Development of the European Commission in cooperation with DG Education and Culture, in the framework of EU cooperation with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, gathered over 500 participants.

With the aim of confronting views from both governments and civil society, the international colloquium involving governmental representatives and civil society members from EU and ACP countries was preceded by a series of professional workshops, where practitioners in a range of fields in the arts and culture analysed the present state of EU-ACP cultural relations and formulated a series of recommendations.

The event might be seen to provide a relevant example of the increasing attention paid by EU bodies outside the cultural field for the cultural dimension of their activities, thus embodying Article 151.4 of the Treaty’s oft-quoted commitment to taking cultural aspects into account in all EU actions.

In particular, the cultural dimension of external relations, including development policies, was one area of focus in the European Commission’s 2007 European Agenda for Culture in a Globalizing World. Whereas progress in this respect is slow (or non-existent?) in some policy fields, relevant initiatives in development policy should be noted, including the integration of cultural aspects in the Commission’s approach to human development, which has entailed, among others, the integration of a cultural strand in the ‘Investing in People’ capacity-building programme.

In another significant step, in November 2008 the Council of Ministers approved a set of ‘Conclusions on the Promotion of Cultural Diversity and Intercultural Dialogue in the External Relations of the Union and its Member States’, whose call to ‘encourage the involvement of artists, cultural professionals, and, more broadly, civil society, in both Member States and partner countries, in drawing up and implementing external cultural policies’ was exemplified by the recent Brussels event. Relevant attention has also been paid to the coordination of national activities in the ratification and follow-up of the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, this probably being the aspect of external relations where Member States appear more willing to synchronise their initiatives.

Cultural aspects have also been integrated in specific agreements and strategies towards individual countries and regions. 2005’s EU Strategy for Africa and 2007’s Africa-EU Strategic Partnership both refer to cultural cooperation and cultural diversity. And, in what has been interpreted as one of the earliest examples of the UNESCO Convention on the Diversity of Cultural Expressions’ implementation in international trade relations, the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) signed by the EU and CARIFORUM in 2008 includes a Protocol on Cultural Cooperation, whereby Parties commit to ‘redressing the structural imbalances and asymmetrical patterns’ which exist in their exchanges of cultural activities, goods and services – this should have an impact on, among others, the mobility of cultural professionals and works.

The changing perception of the relevance of culture to development policies was highlighted by EC Commissioner for Development Louis Michel in his opening statement at the Brussels conference – where old development models thought of culture as either a luxury or a hindrance to progress, culture should now be recognised as an integral part of human development, as well as a factor contributing to social, economic and political development. Political statements were supported by two specially-commissioned papers – Francisco Ayi J. d’Almeida’s making a convincing case for the potential of culture in the development of ACP countries and calling for a change of paradigm, and Laurent Héau’s providing an inventory of initiatives in this field.

Yet the transition from political discourse to practice remains indeed the main challenge which the Brussels conference and its resulting decisions should set out to address. This was stressed by civil society representatives in the opening paragraphs of the Brussels Declaration resulting from the previous days’ discussions – ‘After so many conferences where clear diagnoses were established and specific recommendations were made but not pursued… it is with a mixture of scepticism and hope that we have come to participate in this Colloquium.”

The Declaration, comprising contributions from artists, cultural professionals and entrepreneurs in the visual and performing arts, audiovisual, publishing and music, calls for the development of structural, public cultural policies at national, regional and international levels, the integration of a cultural dimension in other sectorial policies and in the approach to development and for the recognition of the role of artists and creators as actors in development, including measures regarding their professional and social status. The document contains a wide range of objectives and recommendations addressed to professionals, as well as to local, national and regional authorities and the EU, so as to improve culture’s position in the political, social and economic spheres.

The Declaration’s call for a long-lasting, monitoring scheme to ensure the sustainability of the recommendations and decisions emerging from the Brussels conference was taken up by the European Commission, in Louis Michel’s suggestion that a follow-up committee be entrusted with the production of an annual monitoring report and a new colloquium be planned for 2011.

Other commitments in Michel’s closing speech included the setting up of a capacity-building fund, in cooperation with UNESCO, to support the development of cultural policies in developing countries, as well as the recommendation to EC Delegations outside Europe to consider increasing the resources allocated to culture in the framework of their mid-term reviews of existing development programmes. On the other hand, the EC expressed its commitment to use the EU-CARIFORUM Protocol on Cultural Cooperation as a model for subsequent regional agreements, and to place emphasis on mobility, distribution, South-South and North-South exchanges, co-production and skill transfer in the future intra-ACP programme. Michel deemed the results of the conference ‘an ambitious roadmap for progress’.

It remains to be seen to what extent the forthcoming European Parliament elections and subsequent changes in the European Commission may have an impact on such decisions, as well as on the broader integration of cultural aspects in the EU’s policies. It is worth noting that whereas relevant progress has been made in relations with ACP countries, much remains to be done in the framework of cooperation with other world regions, including Asia, Latin America and the Mediterranean, which have traditionally placed less emphasis on cultural aspects or done so in a less structural, institutional fashion. Of course, partner countries and regions' own priorities remain key in this respect.

The latter also applies to ACP countries themselves, which have so far developed cultural legislation, policies and strategies to a varying degree. On a related matter, the integration of cultural activities in the EC's development programmes with these countries also ranges widely. The ability of partner countries to design national and regional strategies suited to existing needs and priorities should be one long-term aim, with capacity-building, access to markets and South-South cooperation emerging as some transversal issues.

Beyond development policy, the EC’s efforts towards mainstreaming culture in external relations should increasingly target other policy fields, including international trade and relations with developed countries.

The Brussels event may also be seen as an interesting opportunity for EU Member States to publicise their actions in the field of culture and development – indeed, several national and regional development agencies have designed policies and programmes in this area in recent years, in a move not dissimilar to that of the European Commission. Further efforts in cooperation and information exchange among Member States might be one desirable outcome of these events. Ultimately, this could contribute to reducing the traditional privileges held by some European countries vis-à-vis certain regions and countries, where bilateral approaches to international cooperation continue to prevail.

On the other hand, it might be necessary to ensure that a broad perspective on culture is adopted in development strategies, whereby the provision of opportunities for access and participation by the population at large and creative expression by everyone become priorities, as opposed to a narrower focus on established artists and organisations. What has often been called 'an enabling environment' for cultural practice and cultural diversity, involving a structural, cross-disciplinary approach to cultural life, including the design of cultural policies, should increasingly inspire initiatives in this field.

Finally, whereas the Brussels conference demonstrated an increasing willingness on behalf of development policy decision-makers to engage with a debate on cultural aspects, the participation by civil society agents outside the cultural sector should still be strengthened. An effort towards transversality should also increasingly be expected in civil society, with partnerships involving development agents in the fields of human rights, gender issues, education, environment, citizen participation, fight against poverty, etc. Although the evolution of recent years proves that much has been gained, big challenges in that roadmap remain.

For more information, visit the conference website: http://www.culture-dev.eu/ and read another detailed conference report by Isabelle Bosman for Cacao/Ccawa.