The real test of any grand strategy is to check how it could be implemented. In the last few years four main institutional actors have been advancing the case for a substantive EU strategy for international cultural relations with varying intensity. What should happen next?
A European strategy for international cultural relations has come to the forefront of the European policy agenda as of summer 2016. The relevant “Communication Towards an EU Strategy for International Cultural Relations”, adopted in June 2016 by the European Commission (EC) and the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, set out a three-pronged approach: supporting culture as an engine for sustainable social and economic development; promoting culture and intercultural dialogue for peaceful inter-community relations; and reinforcing cooperation on cultural heritage.
These objectives are to be achieved through socio-economic development policies that focus on the sector of culture (including heritage, cultural industries etc), promote cultural and creative industries in the partner countries, and support the role of local authorities and civil society actors in cultural heritage policies. The Communication addresses a gap in the external dimension of EU cultural policies that seek to coordinate the activities of different Member States, particularly those that have a tradition in international cultural relations and have very active national cultural institutes such as the British Council and the Institute Français, to name just two obvious examples.
It thus foresees the setting up of cultural focal points in EU delegations and creates tools for enhanced EU cooperation through existing policy instruments and funding mechanisms. It also launches a Cultural Diplomacy Platform, which aims at facilitating the networking of cultural stakeholders from the EU and third countries through training programmes and other workshops.
Tool for soft power and growth
While the European Parliament has been supportive of these developments, it has pointed out the importance of utilising this strategy as a tool for increasing the EU’s soft power in international relations but also as a tool for growth and employment, including the development of new skills and the integration of different types of stakeholders such as creative and cultural agents and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
The European Parliament [...] has pointed out the importance of utilising this strategy as a tool for increasing the EU’s soft power in international relations but also as a tool for growth and employment.
In particular, the Parliament identifies a number of shortcomings that need to be addressed in the programme for implementing an EU strategy for international cultural relations. First of all, a clear budget line must be created to finance such activities and programmes and to support international cultural relations in existing programmes and future calls, especially in the next generation of programmes on culture and education, so that these can develop their international action in a proper way.
Secondly, the Parliament emphasises the importance of mobilising artists, cultural and creative professionals, and involving cultural institutions, private and public foundations, universities, cultural and creative businesses.
Multi-annual work programmes that clearly identify thematic and geographic clusters on which to work would be an asset. Naturally, synergies between development and cultural policies in the EU’s foreign relations need to be developed while the cultural dimension should be mainstreamed in negotiations and association agreements with third countries. Policy learning would be very beneficial: the EU has a long tradition and experience in exchange schemes such as Erasmus and others. Such best practices can be used to inform current and future action, particularly with regard to exchange and residency programmes for partners in countries of origin and destination.
While the suggestions of the European Parliament are particularly useful and to the point, what remains to be seen is how they can be implemented. This article offers some suggestions in this respect.
Institutional change and budget line
The real test of any grand strategy is to check how it could be implemented. In the last few years four main institutional actors have been advancing the case for a substantive EU strategy for international cultural relations with varying intensity: the European Commission, the European External Action Service, the European Parliament, and the Council of the European Union.
All four actors have had their respective legal and political roles to play and their efforts have been complemented with an active stakeholder and civic community in the cultural field. Given the national sensitivities and the obvious limitations of EU competence, the interplay among them has been remarkably free of serious conflicts, even though this has progressed at a somewhat leisurely pace, partly also due to the nature of the subject.
Within the European Commission, in addition to the Directorate-General (DG) for Education and Culture (EAC), so far the DG for International Cooperation and Development (DEVCO) and the DG for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (NEAR) have been the protagonists, the last two having the largest budgets at their disposal through their existing financial instruments.
Recently the DGs have been cooperating closely with each other and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to plan ahead and to roll out concrete actions on the ground. Some of these actions (e.g. EAC drafting new legislation) require no, or only limited budgets, but still have a significant indirect financial, economic and societal impact.
Other programmes require greater funding, but in return have a positive direct impact on the lives of many people across the globe. This is the case, for example, with large-scale development programmes and partnerships run by DG DEVCO and DG NEAR with the active contribution of the EEAS and the local EU Delegations, with the most comprehensive new type of pilot scheme being developed in Tunisia.
The funding opportunities of the EU strategy on international cultural relations are spread across numerous programmes. However, the financial framework has to be renegotiated time and again, illustration: Gary Waters via ikon images/picture alliance.
As funding opportunities are currently scattered across numerous programmes and cooperation frameworks handled by different services of the EC and EEAS, currently no overall figure for culture-related expenditure has been set. The upcoming negotiations on the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) should give a response on how to finance the strategy from 2021 onwards.
A European Agency for International Cultural Relations
So if the EU plans to implement a medium-to-long-term strategy for international cultural relations this is the time to create a European Agency for International Cultural Relations that would function as coordinator of the different programmes and actions and that liaise between the various EU institutions involved and the different policy priorities to be promoted through an EU strategy for international cultural relations.
Such an agency could act as an important coordinator and hub for the external cultural relations of Member States. It could maximise synergies and visibility and, in doing so, counteract or become a dialogue partner to the equivalent policy of China, which created 480 Confucius Institutes in 10 years (between 2004 and 2014) and aims to reach 1,000 such institutes by the year 2020.
Such an agency could act as an important coordinator and hub for the external cultural relations of Member States. It could maximise synergies and visibility.
While these institutes have a different modus operandi compared to the national cultural institutes of European countries (insofar as they are all linked up with local universities in the different countries and their cultural diplomacy activities vary widely in intensity and scope), their potential and impact cannot be underestimated.
The budget and institutional infrastructure to be mobilised will have an obvious impact on how to move forward with EU cultural diplomatic activities, and in that linguiscontext should take into account the fact that culture-related funding has been on the rise among Europe’s global competitors in the race for soft and smart power.
Past experience and recent policy analysis indicate that a number of challenges need to be addressed in order for the EU to become more efficient in furthering its international cultural relations and to ensure a more profound integration of culture into its foreign, security and development policies.
Key features of an effective implementation strategy
Coordination at central and local level
First of all, coordination is key, both at central and local levels during the whole process and among all actors concerned. Beyond governmental institutions, such as ministries and national cultural institutes, the process should also involve non-state actors at local and regional levels, such as cities, cultural associations, artists and curators, as well as UNESCO and the Council of Europe. The involvement of such actors should help establish a proper overview and avoid overlaps and duplications of EU, Council of Europe and UNESCO actions.
Second, the involvement from the outset of all cultural stakeholders in the co-creation and co-curation of products and services, such as film festivals, art exhibitions, fairs and laboratories, creates a sense of co-ownership of projects and initiatives, which is a basic condition for success.
There is no one-size-fits-all model; each world region and country requires a different approach and pace.
There is no one-size-fits-all model; each world region and country requires a different approach and pace. In some cases, for example, crucial demands in terms of livelihood security, education and basic infrastructure, need to be met before it is possible to engage in any cultural activity. In other cases, creative and cultural industries become the main sources of livelihoods for people who would otherwise remain unemployed and marginalised. In some regions of the world a city-level approach works best, in others the emphasis should be more on engaging with regional or national players.
Thinking diversity
Co-creation also presents important value challenges. The question that arises is whether the EU’s cultural projects for development, mobility and exchange should have a common value basis or if, instead, they should have a common set of cultural creation goals and seek to build bridges and forge common values in the process of working together.
In addition, one should not forget that countries are internally heterogeneous, as they often embrace native and migrant minorities and may be composed of different regions. In this context the role of diasporas deserves special attention. Most important, in both Africa and Asia borders have been drawn by colonial powers that cut across or bring together different ethnic and linguistic communities. Taking into account such variety and complexity and building it into cultural projects is a must for an EU strategic approach for international cultural relations to be successful.
Active communication and promotion
Active communication and promotion should accompany all actions. Selected audiences, beyond the participants, should be informed about concrete projects using targeted messages, directly as well as via social media and through audio-visuals, in order to increase their impact and create a virtuous feedback loop.
Monitoring and assessment: the duration of each project is likely to be particular to each individual context but there is a need for either relatively long projects or for projects repeated at regular intervals in order to measure their impact on community relations and development.
Building on existing strengths
So far, the actions and programmes that bring a cultural dimension to the EU’s external relations have been concentrated at Member State level, neglecting the important contribution of city-to-city schemes and/or the role of regional authorities in the process. The European strategy for international cultural relations needs to build on the richness of initiatives that already exist both within the EU and between EU and non-EU cities and regions. This would help avoid duplicate efforts and reinforce synergies and the transfer of know-how between cities and between particular projects.
At the same time it would of course be important and necessary to build on the strength of EU Member States in specific world regions and countries. While this may be easier in smaller, remote regions with only a few national embassies, where the EU Delegations are prone to play a key role as cultural diplomacy hubs, it would also be essential to forge synergies in large countries using the potential of big players (such as the Goethe Institute, Institut Français, or the British Council) for a common purpose.
At the same time it would of course be important and necessary to build on the strength of EU Member States in specific world regions and countries.
Overall it would be advisable to continue and/or replicate good practices and projects that have proven to be successful and sustainable. Replicating these projects in different realities could enhance the sustainability of projects and promote lasting cultural relations with third countries.
Start-up projects based on digital technologies could provide for pilot actions specifically tailored to young artists, curators, and artisans, and help cut out intermediaries and costs while promoting creativity. There is also a need to develop inter-sectoral approaches, bringing together, for instance, cultural industries with education institutions to generate new learning and employment opportunities.
A vision for the present and future
Engaging with the media in publicising international cultural projects and networks, diffusing information, and widening the impact of cultural projects can have a multiplier effect. In particular, electronic and social media make it possible to combat the elitist dimension that cultural activities can have, and further increase the impact of cultural projects and initiatives in terms of community cohesion and the overall well-being of the population.
National cultural institutes are not equally developed nor equally resourced. Thus, the EU approach offers strategic opportunities for smaller Member States to actively engage in international cultural relations activities. It is essential to build consensus and encourage engagement among all Member States in this respect. Successful pilot projects and the EUNIC network have a pivotal role to play in turning theory into practice.
The time is ripe for a European Agency for International Cultural Relations to be created, but the challenges are many. In this short contribution, I have tried to identify and respond to some of these challenges, highlight the opportunities on offer and present a vision for the present and future.
About the Author
Anna Triandafyllidou
Sociologist and expert on migration policy
Anna Triandafyllidou is a sociologist and migration policy expert. She holds the Canada Excellence Research Chair in Migration and Integration at Toronto Metropolitan University and is Editor-in-Chief of the "Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies". She was previously a professor in the Global Governance Programme (GGP) at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies (RSCAS) at the European University Institute in Fiesole, Italy.
Culture Report Progress Europe
Culture has a strategic role to play in the process of European unification. What about cultural relations within Europe? How can cultural policy contribute to a European identity? In the Culture Report Progress Europe, international authors seek answers to these questions. Since 2021, the Culture Report is published exclusively online.
