Closing Speech of András Bozóki
President Barroso, Prime Minister Gyurcsány, Your Excellencies the Ministers of Culture, Honourable Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,
To paraphrase Imre Kertész's message to this conference, we have to resist the temptation of passive innocence when we deal with the future of culture in the process of European integration. Professor Alain Touraine has also ruthlessly rejected the navel-gazing European optimism about integration and inclusion, and called our attention to the parallel processes of disintegration and exclusion. While we are rightfully joyous about the successful European collaboration in the development and adoption of the UNESCO Cultural Diversity Convention, the ethnic riots still waging in the cities of France should be considered as warning signs and as challenges to motivate us to engage in further intercultural dialogue and collaborative work.
Our conference tried to find methods for fostering inclusion through culture against the backdrop of looming hardships for European integration and European societies. Besides the most recent cases of ethnic unrest, the derailment of the European Constitution process by the majorities of the French and Dutch voters also halted the consolidation and deepening of integration of the enlarged European Union. In 2005, we are at the half-way point for the Lisbon agenda aiming to make the EU "the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010." However, now it seems clear that this goal cannot be reached.
The feelings of insecurity of West European societies are increased by the urgency of structural reforms of continental European welfare states. The same societies could not yet digest the biggest ever enlargement of the European Union. Their fears seem to be redirected towards new member-states, their migrant workers as well as immigrants from external countries. The lack of political consensus concerning further enlargement and the future shape of the EU increases this feeling of insecurity. Among many European citizens, all this may result in a refusal to accept the growing diversity.
These tensions point at serious imperfections of inclusion in Europe. The tensions may also foreshadow a long term European stalemate and the weakening of the European vision. However, I believe that culture is instrumental in overcoming the current stalemate in the integration process. Culture can help to discover and realise the value of increased diversity. Culture has the potential to provide a solution to this social and economic crisis due to its unique ability of enhancing cohesion and competitiveness simultaneously. Economic theory may assume a trade-off between cohesion and competitiveness. But I argue that through culture, cohesion and competitiveness can be mutually reinforcing. In terms of cohesion, culture means inclusion, cooperation, self-respect, solidarity, tolerance, equality of opportunity, curiosity and dialogue. At the same time, through innovation, ingenuity and creativity, culture enhances economic competitiveness.
Based on the proposition of His Excellency Ján Figel, the European Commission is considering to declare 2008 the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. I believe that intercultural dialogue must be advanced at multiple levels: first, within multicultural societies and localities, resulting from migration and mobility. Second, between societies of the old and new member states. And third, between societies of EU-member states, prospective members and non-members (especially new neighbour countries).
Intercultural dialogue must involve more than a mere cultural exchange. It has to foster cooperation and common creation. It has to provide societies with skills and attitudes that enable them to profit from a complex multinational, multicultural, multilingual environment. Culture may perform both exclusive and inclusive social functions. On the one hand, cultural exclusion breeds social backwardness. On the other hand, migrants and immigrants play a positive role by connecting cultures and public spaces. This increased diversity could serve as the very basis for Europe's development, as its capacity for renewal.
Linguistic diversity is a defining feature of Europe. It was mentioned throughout the panel discussions that translation work is one of the most significant businesses in Europe. In his speech during the opening plenary session, Monsieur Donnedieu quoted Umberto Eco, who once perceptively observed that the language of Europe is translation.
However, the acceptance of the pragmatic use of English as language of European discourse should free up and redirect resources for the promotion of less spoken languages. Small languages are valuable cultural resources; or as the Maltese Minister of Culture, Mr Dimech argued, language is the greatest heritage a small country can offer to the world culture. Instead of translating bureaucratic texts, policies of multilingualism should concentrate on education, literary translations and other ways of support to minority languages.
Let me turn to the interrelations between competitiveness and culture, and the issue of achieving competitiveness by improving human capital.
Enlargement has increased cultural and linguistic diversity in Europe. Many sceptics still have to be convinced that enlargement is not a process that dooms European integration to failure; rather it brings a unique opportunity for enhancing economic competitiveness and realising the Lisbon target. Enlargement greatly increases the pool of the main European resource that might enable the EU to catch up and take over the US and East Asia. This resource is human capital. The incorporated large pool of human capital can be enhanced by investing in culture and educational systems.
It is financially and socially worthwhile to invest in culture, because it produces measurable benefits both in terms of GDP growth and employment. Creative industries involve diverse areas such as cultural tourism, the media and entertainment industries, software development, fashion design - all of them among the most dynamic branches of global economy in the 21st century.
Statistics from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) of the United Nations demonstrate vividly that countries and regions that invest in enhancing the creativity of their citizens gain in terms of economic growth. The countries where the contribution of cultural activities (the so-called copyright industries) to the GDP is highest are also among the most competitive in the world. This suggests that cultural innovation and creative industries are among the best tools to become competitive.
We, therefore, propose to the Commission and our governments to ensure that cultural priorities are duly incorporated in national and regional development plans, educational programs, support schemes to Small and Medium Enterprises, the EU neighbourhood policy, and above all in the Lisbon agenda. Europe also needs a closer coordination of national cultural policies along selected priorities.
And finally, let me turn to an important area that affects the cultural opportunities and chances for inclusion of our contemporary youth and the future generations.
Enhancing cohesion and competitiveness though culture would require a widening of access to cultural products for everyone. At our conference, several participants addressed the relevance of digital networks in cultural activities. In fact, as we discuss priorities for the next 15 years, that is, with the horizon of the year 2020, digital access to cultural content and services as well as the creation and uploading of online content must be taken into account to an ever growing degree.
Technological optimism aside, digital networks provide unprecedented opportunities of distribution of ideas, cultural products and their use in education. At the opening of our conference, French cultural minister Donnedieu de Vabres mentioned the creation of a European digital library, a plan which is already supported by six member states. Accessibility is the key to understand the cultural market in our era. Opening up and facilitating access to European heritage and contemporary culture provides a competitive advantage with the United States in the global cultural competition. European culture can triumph over global mass culture by simply being within reach.
Access to culture is often faced with limitations posed by contemporary copyright regimes. However, we should begin a process of finding creative ways to rethinking our intellectual property system that we inherited from the last centuries, and find those ways that equally satisfy the author, the public good and the market in the 21st century. The demand of public access should be especially emphasized in the case of publicly sponsored cultural content.
Freeing media archives in similar ways would be especially in the public interest in Eastern and Central Europe. In our region, state media enjoyed monopolies until 1990. Making state-owned cultural archives accessible is therefore of vital interest. Several legal solutions may offer themselves to tackle the issue. The Adelphi Charter on Creativity, Innovation and Intellectual Property, for example, is an important initiative signed, among others, by the Brazilian Minister of Culture, Gilberto Gil. It calls for wide coalitions that aim at an intellectual property regime that ensures both sharing of knowledge and rewarding of innovation. A cultural and legal movement, the Creative Commons offers diverse licence options within the current legislative framework that provide access to culture, enhance creativity and support sustainable economic development for the less privileged groups and communities. What is common in these initiatives is that they all widen access to culture in the public domain, in the public interest, and contribute to the competitiveness of European cultural products.
In concluding, I would like to highlight and propose these issues for consideration at the next ministerial meetings and larger conferences on European culture: first, cohesion and competitiveness through culture; second, highlighting culture as a priority in the Lisbon agenda; and third, empowering human creativity, innovation and understanding through supporting digital networks and platforms and rethinking intellectual property rights for a new millennium.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we are truly in the same boat named Europe : artists, cultural activists, politicians. Thank you all very much for kindly participating in our conference and sharing your vast experience and knowledge. I would like to say it was a true honour working with you and discussing pressing matters regarding culture in Europe in the 21st century. Thank you very much indeed.
