CulturalRights,SustainabilityandDevelopment:aretheyrelated?Ifso,how?

JohnClammer

ArticleInformation

Issue22:2018:SpecialIssueCulturalRightsandGlobalDevelopment,ed.JonathanVickery.Thisarticlewaspublishedon:6thJune2018.Keywords:rights,sustainability,culturalpolicies,development,globalisation. JournalISSN:1467-0437Abstract

Thisarticleexaminestherelationshipbetweentheoftenseparatedideasofrights,developmentandsustainability.Whileacceptingthateachisacontestedterm,thepaperarguesthatthethreeelementscanbebroughttogetherintoaholisticmodelofpositivesocialtransformation,andinwhicheachinformstheotherincreativeways.ThearticleexpandsthistriangulationbyexploringinsomedetailthenotionofCulturalRightsasanexpansionandre-applicationofmoreclassicalunderstandingsofhumanrights,andthenlinksthisexplorationtocontemporarydebatesinthefieldofcultureanddevelopment.Itarguesthatculturalrightsprovidethebestvehicleforclarifyingandapplyingthe2005UNESCOConventionontheProtectionandPromotionofCulturalDiversityandsuggestsconcretewaysinwhich,ontheonehand,culturecanbemoreeffectivelyintegratedintoholisticdevelopmentdiscourseandpractice,and,ontheother,bywhichculturalaswellasecologicalsustainabilitycanbeforegrounded. Author

JohnClammerisProfessorintheSchoolsofLiberalArtsandHumanitiesandLawattheJindalGlobalUniversity,Dehli:jrclammer@jgu.edu.in

Copyright:JournalofLaw,SocialJustice&GlobalDevelopment,UniversityofWarwick,UKhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/research/priorities/internationaldevelopment/lgd/

2

Introduction

ThenotionsofRights,DevelopmentandSustainabilityarenowverymuchpartofthecontemporarydiscoursesofpolitics(bothnationalandglobal),environmentalpolicy(likemanagingtheeffectsofclimatechange),andsociety(socialorcommunitymovements,callingforjustice,equalityandrecognition).Yet,thesethreenotionsvaryandareoftencontestedastotheirmeaningandviability,butallthree(perhapsalongwithafourthnotion,‘globalization’)nowframethewayinwhichbothsocialscientistsandpolicymakersapproachtheworldwhichtheyattempttobothunderstandandinfluence.Butleavingasideforamomentthequestionoftheirprecisedefinition,andoftheideologicalbaggagethatthese(aswithmostsocialscienceconcepts)carry.Asignificantissuealsoarises–whethertheyarerelated,andifso,how?Aretheythreequiteseparateapproachestothecontemporarysocial,politicalandeconomicaspectsoftheworld,eachvalidinitsownsphere,butwithnoorganiclinksbetweenthem?Orcanacasebemadethatamoreholisticapproachtopositivesocialtransformation(andhencepotentiallyamorepowerfulandeffectiveone)mightbeenvisaged–ifthesethreeprimarytermsarebroughtintoaworkingrelationship?Thispaperwilltakethelatterasitsstartingpoint,foranapproachthatwillarguethatbyidentifyingtheirinterconnection,andbystrengtheningthemwheretheyarecurrentlyweak,anewtheoreticalmodelandaworkablepolicyframeworkcanbecreatedandutilized.

Butfirst,soastobrieflycommentonthesemanticsofthedebate:thenotionof‘development’hasofcourseattractedavastliteratureandmanyvoicescontestingitsnature,andindeedcontestingwhetheritisagoodideaatall(orsimplythelatestphaseofWesternimperialisminamoreattractivepackage).Oneareaofagreementisthatitsrelativefailurestillverymuchexist–(givenmanyoftheproblemsthatdevelopmentpurportstoaddress,suchaspoverty,inequalityandsocialexclusion)–andonereasonforthishasbeentheneglectoftheculturalaspectsofdevelopmentinfavourofoveremphasisoneconomicaspects.Thesomewhatbelatedrecognitionofthislacunahasbegunto

giverisetoaburgeoningliteraturetobringcultureanddevelopmentbackintofruitfuldialoguewithoneanother(SchechandHaggis,2000;Radcliffe,2006;Clammer,2012).Likewisetherecognitionoftheunsustainablenatureofcontemporarypatternsof‘development’(andtheirhistoricalandcontinuingpatternsofindustrialization,consumption,transport,energyuseandurbanization),andthegrowingacknowledgementthatthesecannotcontinuewithoutcourtingdisasterfortheeco-systemsonwhichalllifedepends,hasrightlybecomeamajorpreoccupation.ButwhatofRights?Whileasarecognitionofcertaininalienabledimensionsoftherelationsofhumanbeingstooneanother,theprinciplessetoutinthe1948UniversalDeclarationofHumanRights,arenotwidelycontested(evenifsomeofthedetailsare).Infact,itwasquitequicklyrecognizedbytheUNandmanyofitsconstituentagenciesandadheringgovernmentsthatthescopeoftheUNHRwasnotwideenough,andin1966twoadditionaltreatieswereadopted–theInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(ICCPR)andtheInternationalCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights(ICESCR).Butalthoughthelatterdoesindeedcontaintheword‘culture’initstitle,itdoesnotclearlyindicatewhichofitsprovisionsspecificallyrelatetoculturalrights,nordoesitactuallydefinesuchrights.Therelationshipbetweenhumanrightsandculturalrights,ifsuchtherebe,isconsequentlyleftvagueintheprincipleinternationallegalinstruments.

YvonneDondersattemptstoclarifythisconfusionbybothdefiningculturalrightsandindicatingtheirscope:‘Culturalrightscanbebroadlydefinedashumanrightsthatdirectlypromoteandprotectculturalinterestsofindividualsandcommunitiesandthataremeanttoadvancetheircapacitytopreserve,developandchangetheirculturalidentity’(Donders,2015:117).Sheexpandsthisminimaldefinitionbyarguingthatsuchrightsnotonlyincludethosethatspecificallymentionculture(e.g.therightsofminoritiestopracticeandenjoytheirownculture),butalsothosebroaderhumanrightsthathaveadirectlinktoculturalfreedom,suchastherightstoself-determination,toeducation,tofreeexpressionandfreedomofreligion,andtothoseprinciples

3

embodiedinsuchinternationalinstrumentsasUNESCO’s2001UniversalDeclarationonCulturalDiversity–inwhichculturalrightsarenotedasrequiredforthefullexpressionofculturaldiversity.Seeninthislight,culturalrightscanbeidentifiedasasub-sectionorextensionofgeneralhumanrights.Atonelevel,ofcourse,itisoddtotalkaboutcultureasbeinga‘right’atall:everyonealreadyhasaculture(oramixtureofseveralofthem).Thekeyissuesarenotthoseofa'rightto'orbylogicalinferenceof‘possession’,butofthetragicfactthatinsomanycasesculturalrightsarethreatenedbycensorship,suppression,erosion,exclusionordisplacement.Thisisthecasewiththosewhodesiretopracticetheirculture,butfindthemselves,forexample,inrefugeesituations(Balfour,2013).Thequestionthenbecomes,howareculturalrightsrelatedtoeitherorbothofdevelopmentand/orsustainability?

CultureandDevelopmentRevisited

Asnotedabove,therehasbeenaconsiderableswingtowardstheideaofsystematicallyrelatingcultureanddevelopment.Thishastakenanumberofforms.Onehasbeenthemorefamiliarargumentthatculturecontributestothe‘delivery’ofdevelopmentgoods.Examplesindeedaboundofthenecessityoftakingcultureintoaccountinmanycontexts–healthprovision(wherelocalideasofthebody,gender,diseasecausationandwitchcraftandmagicmayhavealargeimpactonthesuccessfulimplementationofwell-meaningbutculturallyinappropriatehealthcareplans–seeSamson,2004),agriculture(includingtheadoptionofcropsthatarenewtoindigenousdiets),housingandarchitecture(forexamplepost-disasterreconstruction–forexamplesseeAquilino,2011),andmanyothersituations(foraslightlydatedbutstillexcellentsetofcasestudiesseeDove,1980).

Inthesecases,culturehasaprimarilyinstrumentalrole:itisnotnecessarilyvaluedforitself.Thisweaknessimpliesamorecomprehensiveapproachinwhichcultureitselfisseenasanintrinsicvalue,andhencewhatmightbecallednotsomuch‘developmentandculture’asthe‘developmentofculture.Thisagainhasa

numberofpossibledimensions,includingtheencouragementbyUNagenciessuchasUNESCOandUNDPof‘creativeindustries’–particularlydrawingonindigenousculturalproduction(music,performance,crafts,visualarts)asanimportanteconomicresourceforincomegenerationin‘developing’communities(UNESCO/UNCTAD2008;Kabanda2014).Thisapproachisdifferentagainfromtheolder‘humanneeds’approach,invirtuallyeverylistofwhichaestheticneedsandtheneedsforexpressionandleisurearealwaysprominent(Dube,1984).Thisisreflectedinrecentdiscussionsoftheroleoftheartsindevelopment,whichnotonlyarguefortheutilityoftheartsinincome-generation,butfortheiressentialroleinactuallyconstitutingcultureaswellastheirroleinestablishingdignity,identity,imaginationandcreativity(Clammer,2015).Allthispointstoaholisticconceptionofdevelopmentthattakesintoaccountsociological,economic,politicalandculturalelements,notonlyaspartsofthetotalityofaroundedimageofdevelopment,butalsoasdefiningthegoalsofdevelopment.Whatshoulddevelopmentlooklike?Whatareitsendsandwhatkindoffuturesocietydoweenvisagethatistheoutcomeofthewholeprocess?

Butwhatthenofsustainability?Doesitrelateinanycoherentwaytothenotionofculturalrights?Hereagain,Iwillarguethatitdoes,ifweconsiderfourpossibledimensionsoftherelationshipbetweencultureandsustainability.Thefirstistherelationshipbetweenculturaldiversityandbio-diversity.Heretwolevelsarerelevant.Oneisthatlocalnotionsofecologyareencodedinlocallanguagesandculturalpractices(includingmethodsoffarming,foraging,huntingandconservation,embodiedinturninsymbolicpracticesuchassystemsoftaboo),andwiththelossorerosionofsuchculturesandlanguages,suchknowledgeislost.Societiesthathavemaintainedsustainablerelationshipswiththeirenvironmentshaveobviouslygotsomethingright,andthelossoftheir‘know-how’weakensthewholebodyofhumanknowledgeandexperiencewhendealingwiththecrucialissueoftheenvironmentwhichwearesorapidlydespoiling.Thesecondisthatitiswidelyrecognizedthatbiodiversitystrengthenstheentirebiosphere.Weoftendonotknowtherolethatacreatureora

4

plantplaysinthistotalsystem,andhowitcontributetothemaintainingofthewhole.Butwhenwedo,weseetheprincipleclearlyatwork:thehumblebeeforinstance,populationsofwhicharebecomingseriouslydepleted(probablybecauseofhumanover-useofinsecticides),arethemajorpollinatorsofmanyplantspecies,andwithoutthemmanysuchspeciescouldnotreproduce;andwithoutbeesthemselvesreproducing,humanfoodsupplieswillgreatlydiminish.

Itisnotunreasonabletoextendthesamelineofreasoningtohumancultures:thatthelossofculturaldiversitydiminishesthewholeasknowledge,alternativelifestyles,longsustainedrelationshipswiththeenvironmentandformsofmusic,performance,cuisines,language,technologies,cosmologiesandkinshipstructures,arelostforever.EvensuchanarguablystaidbodyasUNESCOrecognizesthis,andinthepreambletothe2005ConventionontheProtectionandPromotionoftheDiversityofCulturalExpressionsrecognizes‘theneedtotakemeasurestoprotectthediversityofculturalexpressions,includingtheircontents,especiallyinsituationwhereculturalexpressionsmaybethreatenedbythepossibilityofextinctionorseriousimpairment’.

Thesecondelementisthatoftheemergence(intheaffluentsocieties)ofconsumptionculturesthatareinherentlyunsustainable.Buy-and-throw-away,bingeflying,dependenceonthemotorcar,un-necessarypackaging,rapidchangesoffashioninclothing,hugeamountsoffoodwastage(someestimatessuggestthat50%ofallfoodgrowniswasted),andenergywastageinmanyforms,allcontributetounsustainability,especiallywhenscaled-uptoagloballevel.Linkedtothisisthethirdfactorofwhatmightbecalled‘culturalperformances’–themanywaysinwhichourculturehasitselfhascontributedto,orindeedcreated,theplanetarycrisisinwhichwenowfindourselves.Itspropensityforgeneratingconflict(andmilitariesbythewayareamongtheworld’sbiggestpollutersandenergyusers,andmuchoftheirpollutionishighlytoxic),itsdependenceonhigh-techmedicalprocedures,destructionofthesoilthroughoveruseofartificialfertilizersandpesticidesandweed-killers,itsexcessiveresource

extraction,over-urbanization,relianceonenergyguzzling(butinefficientmeansoftransportationandmassiveairpollutionderivingfromthesame),areallexamplesofthewaysinwhichour‘civilization’isactuallyself-destructive.Evensmall-scaleactionsandactivitiescancontributetothissituation:cruiselinersareamongthemostpollutingandwaste-generatingthingseverafloat,andasecologically-mindedtheatreproducershaveinsomecasescometorecognize,atheatricalproductioncanbehighlyunsustainableinitsshorttermuseofnon-recyclablesetsandcostumes,hugeusageofelectricity,wastegenerationbytheaudience(manyofwhomusedunsustainablemodesoftransportationtogettoandfromthetheatre),somethingthatuntilrecentlyrarelyoccurredtopractitionersinthetheatricalworld(Garrett,2012).

Thefourthelementistherelationshipsbetweencultureandeconomy.OnedoesnothavetobeaMarxisttorecognizethattheeconomyisthedominantelementinmodernsociety.Itnotonlycreatesthematerialandimmaterialgoods,butitalsocreatesthedesireorthe‘need’forthem;itshapesoursubjectivities,ouruseoftime,thepossibilitiesofourleisure,ourpatternsofmovementandstructureoftime,ourwaysofmovingandwhatwewear,eat,drink.Thishasanumberofimportantimplications.Oneisthatculturalcritiquealonerarelyinitselfreshapessociety.Itcertainlyprovidestheimaginativeengine,butwithoutaddressingitsrelationshipto,andoftencomplicityin,theeconomicsystem,itcannotinitselfbealeveroffundamentalchange.Yetculturalcritiquecansupplytheammunitioninmanyforms:reimaginingthefuture,engaginginwhatagenerationago,HerbertMarcusecalledthe‘educationofdesire’,formulatingformsofculturalpracticethataresustainableanddiscouragingthosewhichdonot.Sustainabilityandcultureareintimatelyconnected,andsothennecessarilyisdevelopment,desirableorundesirableformsofdevelopmentbeingpreciselytheoutcomeofthatintersection.

Thereareanumberofmajorimplicationsoftheforegoing,andcertainlyfourthatimmediatelyspringtomind.Thefirstisobviouslytheexpandingofthenotionofhumanrightsto

5

includeculturalrights,andtoensurethatsuchrightsarenotsubordinatedtoothersintheclassicallistoftheUDHR.Thesecondisencouragingthecultivationofculturalpracticesthatarebothsustainableandjust.Itmightindeedbeherethatwearebroachingthequestionoftherightsofnature–thelinkinotherwordsbetweenhumanrightsandtheprotectionofthebiosphere.Thethirdistolinktheideaofrightstothatofresponsibilities,sinceacultureofonlyentitlementsislikelytobedestructiveofboththerightsandlibertiesofothers,andoftheenvironment.Thefourthistoexpandthenotionofsocialjusticetoincludeculturaljustice,andtoincludeinthelatterwhatIhaveelsewherecalled‘visualjustice’–therighttobeauty,orattheveryleasttothereductionofugliness,baddesign,visuallyunattractivearchitectureandcityplanning(Clammer,2014,SchwartzandKrabbendam,2013).AsthemessageonaTshirtspottedonasuburbantraininTokyo(averyfunctionallyefficient,butnotvisuallyattractivemega-city)‘Gooddesignmaynotsavetheworld,butitsuremakesitmoreattractive’.

Iftheseprinciplesarecorrectthenculturalactivismisrequired.Thiswillentailapro-activestance,whichpromotesculturalrightsandculturalproduction,extendslegalandcopy-rightprotectiontoindigenousculturalproducts,andpressuresgovernmentstomeettheirobligationsunderthevariousUNESCOconventionsanddeclarations.Itwillalsoencourageabroadandconcretizednotionofhumanrights(i.e.rootedinactualculturalpracticesandmanifestations),whichencompassesbothculturalandecologicalrights.Inotherwords,itwillconstructagenuinelyholisticconceptionofdevelopment.

InterrogatingCulturalRights

Theargumentofthisarticlesofar,hasbeenthatindeedculturalrightsarecloselyconnectedtodevelopmentandtosustainabilitythroughmanyintimatelinks–sustainableculturalpracticesinconsumptionpatterns,transport,urbanplanning,andverymuchinthearts,architectureanddesign(Kagan,2011).Culturesarebothexpressionsofandsourcesofimagination,includingwhatwemightterm‘socialimagination’–ideasthat

promotenewpatternsofsocialchangeandtransformation.Thedevelopmentofcultureisinaveryrealsense‘development’–thecreationofspacesofmeaningandfreedom(oftenbeyondpoliticsoreconomicsintheirnarrowsense),thesourceofalternatives,thewateringoftherootsofidentity,andthegeneratorofculturalandaestheticpluralismthatconstitutesthediversitythat,aswehavesuggested,parallelsinsignificancethebio-diversityonwhichtheweboflifedepends.Butmorethanoneapproachcanbetakentothis–certainlyananthropologicalone.Thisexaminestheactualmanifestationsofculture,butalsoamoreformaloneasexpressedininternationallegalinstruments,andinparticularinthevariousdeclarationsandconventionsthatUNESCO,astheUNbodyspecificallychargedwiththeprotectionandpromotionofculture,issokeenonissuing.

Themostrecentoftheseisthe2005ConventionontheProtectionandPromotionofCulturalDiversity,andthewaysinwhichitconceptualizescultureanditsrelationshiptodevelopmentissignificantandcontestable(UNESCO,2005).ThepreambletotheConvention,whileneverattemptingtodefineitsoperativeconceptofculture,setsout,intypicalUN-speak,aseriesofpropositions.Havingstatedthatitregardsculturaldiversityasanormalcharacteristicofhumanity,andthatitisaglobalcommonheritageandshouldbecherished,theConventiondevelopsthesepropositions:‘Beingawarethatculturaldiversitycreatesarichandvariedworld,whichincreasetherangeofchoicesandnurtureshumancapacitiesandvalues,andthereforeisamainspringforsustainabledevelopmentforcommunities,peoplesandnations’;‘Recallingthatculturaldiversity,flourishingwithinaframeworkofdemocracy,tolerance,socialjusticeandmutualrespectbetweenpeoplesandcultures,isindispensableforpeaceandsecurityatthelocal,nationalandinternationallevels’;and‘CelebratingtheimportanceofculturaldiversityforthefullrealizationofhumanrightsandfundamentalfreedomsproclaimedintheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRightsandotheruniversallyrecognizedinstruments’.Havingsetouttheseclaims,theConventiongoesontoargue(withoutanyspecificevidenceorsuggestionsofhowtodoso)forthe

6

needtoincorporatecultureintonationalandinternationaldevelopmentpolicies,toprotectculturesfromerosion,particularlyundertheimpactofglobalization.ThesubsequentArticlesreaffirmtheimportanceofthelinkbetweencultureanddevelopment,andspecificallyassertsinArticle2,subsection6(thePrincipleofsustainabledevelopment)that‘Theprotection,promotionandmaintenanceofculturaldiversityareanessentialrequirementforsustainabledevelopmentforthebenefitofpresentandfuturegenerations’,andagainrepeatsitselfinArticle13:‘Partiesshallendeavourtointegratecultureintheirdevelopmentpoliciesatalllevelsforthecreationofconditionsconducivetosustainabledevelopmentand,withinthisframework,fosteraspectsrelatingtotheprotectionandpromotionofthediversityofculturalexpressions’;anditthensuggestsanumberofmeansofdoingthis,includingstrengtheningculturalindustries,allowingfairaccesstoglobalmarketsfordevelopingcountryculturalproductsandservices,culturalcapacitybuilding,andthepromotionofthemobilityofartistsfromthedevelopingworld.Verywoollyinitslanguage,withoutsanctionsorconcretemethodsforpromotingitsaims(leftspecificallyuptothegoodwillofsignatorygovernments),andwithoutactuallydefiningtheconceptofculturalrights,theConventionisclearlyawell-meaning,butineffectiveinstrumentforpromotingthoserightsandthebroaderfieldofsocialjusticewhichtheyaresupposedtoembody.Butthisweaknessinturnpointstowherethelacunaeexist,andhencetopotentiallystrengtheningandmoreclearlydefiningthelinksbetweencultureanddevelopment.

Thereare,ofcourse,manyaspectsoftheConvention,andofitspredecessorsincludingthevarioushumanrightsdeclarationssuchasthe1965InternationalConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofRacialDiscrimination,earlierUNESCOdocumentssuchastheConventionConcerningtheProtectionoftheWorldCulturalandNaturalHeritage(1972)andthe2001UniversalDeclarationonCulturalDiversity,togetherwithdebatesaboutthecirculationandprotectionofculturalproductsarisingfrommovestoliberalizeglobalmarketsthroughtheGATT(GeneralAgreementonTariffsandTrade)andits

successor,theWorldTradeOrganization(WTO),whichcannotdetainushere(forasystematicstudyseeDeBeukelaer,PyykkonnenandSingh,2015).Theaspectthatspecificallyconcernsmehereisthelinkbetweenculture,sustainabilityanddevelopment,whichnowneedsdrawingoutinmoredetail.

SignificantintheConventionisthatitspecificallyrelatesculturalrightstohumanrights,andculturetosustainability.WhetherthelogicthatlinksthesethingsintheConventionitselfisveryclear,isanotherquestion,butatleastthisimportanttriangulationhasbeenputonthetablefordebate,andthequestionnowistooperationalizeandstrengthenit.TodothisIwouldsuggestthatseveralstepshavetobemade.Thefirstoftheseistherecognitionthatallpeople’s‘have’aculture,andthatallculturesareinprincipleequal.Debateaboutthisarisesprimarilyinrelationtosuchissuesas,classically,femalegenitalmutilation,cannibalismandperhapstodayinrelationtonon-sustainableculturalpractices,suchasexcessivewastegeneration.Buttheprincipleremainsasallculturesaredynamicandchangeovertime.AsFoucaultandothershavepointedout,inWesternculturesdisciplinaryregimeshaveevolvedfromthebrutalityofviolentandbloodypublicexecutionstowards,forthemostpart,muchmorepsychological-basedforms,andfromtheinflictionofpainonthebodytowardsrehabilitativeworkonthe‘soul’.Whatthisprinciplealsopointstoisthedissolutionofanydistinctionbetweenso-called‘high’and‘popular’cultures.Inpracticethesedrawoneachother,‘quote’eachother,andinteractinnumerousways(informssuchasadvertisingforexample),andmanyformsof‘craft’are,intermsofworkmanshipandaestheticqualities,oftenfarsuperiortomanymanifestationsofcontemporaryart.Furthermore,manyformsofperformanceartsarerootedinritual,religiouspracticesorecological/agriculturalpracticesthatareanintegralpartofalocalculture,notsomethingjust‘puton’forpurelyentertainmentpurposes.

Whileaninstrumentalapproachtoculture–whetherasseekingculturallyappropriatewaysofconceivingordeliveringdevelopmentpolicies,orastheencouragementofcreativeindustries–is

7

important,itshouldnotobscurethefactthatculturerunsmuchdeeper–infact,verydeepindeed.Itrepresentsworld-viewsandformsandexpressionsofmeaning(oftenembodiedinreligionasmuchasinart),thewaysinwhichagroupofpeopleexpressthemselvesverbally,visually,architecturally,inperformanceandinself-representations.Itisalsoholisticandencompassessuchthemesrarelydiscussedinthedevelopmentliteratureasfood,costume,bodilydecoration,music,bodylanguage,hair,sexuality,sportanddesign,andintersectsinfundamentalwayswitheconomy,kinshipandindigenouslegalconceptionsandpractices.Thenotionofthedevelopmentofculturepointstotheideathattherecognitionof‘culture’notassomeabstractidea,butinitsconcretemanifestations,andtheactivestrengtheningandencouragementofthesemanifestations,isrealdevelopmentandreflectsinaverypracticalwaythe‘capabilities’approachrecommendedbyscholarssuchasMarthaNussbaum(2011)andAmartyaSen(2009).This,inotherwords,constitutes‘culturalrights’atwork,intheirconcreteexpression.Ifattemptstodefine‘development’pointtowardsideasbothofsocialjustice(freedomofexpressionandthecreationofacontextinwhichculturalrightscanbeactuallyexercised)andtosomeconceptofanabundantlife,oreventoautopia,andcertainlytoafutureinwhichcreativeculturalexpressionisanorganicpartofeverydaylife.Indeedonecouldarguethatthepovertyofmanydevelopmentpracticesispreciselythattheypointtoanimageoflifedominatedbytheeconomicandbywork,ratherthantoapictureinwhichcreativityandimaginationaregivenfullplay.Simpleevidenceofthiscanbefoundinthefactthatfewaidagenciesactuallyfundculturalwork,andthatwhengovernmentsdecidethattheyneedtocutbudgets,thefirsttogoisusuallyfundingfortheartsandforsuchvaluable,indeedessentialculturalinstitutionsaslibrariesandmuseums.

MarthaNussbaumandothershavecogentlyarguedthatculturaldevelopment(anditsexpressioninformsofeducationandparticularlythehumanities)isessentialtothecreatingandmaintainingofdemocracyandcivilisedformsofgovernmentalityingeneral(Nussbaum2012).Thenotionofculturalrightsmaythenbeextendedto

encompassnotonlytheprotectionofexistingformsofculturaldiversity,butalsototherighttobeexposedtosuchforms:inotherwordstheentitlementtoahumanisticeducation,whetherinitself,orasacomponentofaneducationinothertechnicalfields–management,engineering,medicine,lawandsoforth,ormayonedaretosayso,indevelopmentstudies–asanessentialpartofaroundedupbringingandasthemechanismthroughwhichformsofimagination,creativityandthesearchforalternativesisbestpursued.Suchimaginationandcreativityneednotbeconfinedtotheartsthemselves,butspillsoverintoanynumberofadjacentfields,providingthetoolstorethinksuchsociallyfundamentalcategoriesasgender,ethnicityorsexualandsubculturaldifferences.Italsoallowslocalconceptionsof‘heritage’tobeembraced,and,asUNESCOitselfhasdone,toextendthisnotionfrompurelymaterialremainstowhatitiscalling‘intangibleculturalheritage’whichincludesfolklore,oraltraditionsandstories,localmusicaltraditions,folkdancesandmanyother‘popular’butnon-materialexpressionsofculture.Anditallowstheexpansionofideasofwhatconstitutesa‘socialmovement’,itbeingevidentthatmanyculturalmovementsarealsosocialmovements–say,SurrealismintheWest,ortheMayanRightsmovementinLatinAmerica,inwhichrightswereseennotonlyaspoliticalandeconomicbutalsoverymuchascultural(Davis2004),andinwhichthestruggleforculturalrightswaspartofaholisticconceptionofidentityanddevelopment.

CulturalRights,MulticulturalismandtheCosmopolitan

Anessentialistor‘anthropological’definitionofculturetendstowardsthestatic,butyetstasiscanhardlybetakentobetheconditionofcultureinthecontemporaryworldsituation.Herewecannotonlyinvokeglobalization,butalsoseeminglynon-culturaleventssuchasclimatechange,whichinfacthaveprofoundeffectsonculturalpracticesandconceptionsoftheworldinwhichsuchpracticesmightflourish(ornot.)Suchaviewofcultureiswhat,incritiquingtheworkoftheanthropologistJonathanFriedman,NikosPapastergiadiscallsa‘residentialist’conceptionofculture–notablyonethatdenieshybridityand

8

mobilityandwhichassumesthat‘Symbolicpracticesweresupposedlyconfinedtothephysicalandterritorialboundariesofagivenplace’andwhichhasthecorollarythatsomeoneuprootedfromordisconnectedfromtheoriginalplaceofbelongingand‘severedfromtheculturalsystemthatholdstogetherthewholesetofidentifications’(Papastergiadis,2012:125).Suchaviewofculture,whichisveryclosetotheonesembodiedintheUNESCOdocumentscited,makesatleastthreeimportantandcontestableassumptions.Firstly,thatculturesarespatiallyrooted(presumablyinonlyoneplace);secondly,thatidentityistiedtosuchaspecificlocation(akindofculturalnationalism)suchthatmobilitydestroysthatvitalconnection;andthirdly,consequently,thathybridculturesareinauthentic.Andsoacosmopolitansubjectivityequalsrootlessness.

However,thesethreeassumptionscanbecontestedboththeoreticallyandempirically,andhavesignificantconsequencesforboththenotionsofculturalrightsandofculturaldiversity.TheUNESCOunderstandingofculturedoesappeartobehighly‘residentialist’inassumingthatcultureexistsinparticularspaces;butnotbetweenthem.Thisiswhytheyneedtobe‘protected’fromglobalisation.Itseemshardlynecessarytoevenargueagainstthisview:itisglaringlyobviousthatcultures,likepeople,‘travel’,thattheyrecomposethemselvesindialogue,conflict,mergerorinfluencewithoneanother;thatthereareno‘pure’cultures,thathybridityismorethenormthantheexception;thatmigrantssuccessfullyreconstituteavarietyoftheiroriginalcultureinwaysthatinterfacewiththenewhostculture(modifyinghabitsoffood,dress,bodylanguage,housingandsoforth,whileretainingreligiousidentityandmanyaspectsofkinshipandmarriagecustoms);andthatverymanysuchpersonsdonotfeelanyproblemwiththeir‘identity’(itselfaveryconceptuallyunclearterm)butformulatenewsubjectivitiesappropriatetoandquitecomfortablewith,theirnewspatialandculturalsituation.

Thenotionofculturalrightsthencannotbetiedtoastaticconceptionofculture.Onthecontrary,itmightbearguedthatthenotionofrightsneeds

toberecastas,asitwere,an‘hybrid’one–thatistosay,thatisopenendedandcontextualised.Thisdoesnotdissolvetheideathatculturalrightscanrefertothepreservationandtherighttopracticethe‘original’culture,butexpandsittoallowfortherightsofhybridculturalformstobeequallyrespected,particularlywhentheyarequitenormal.Thepoliticaldimensionsofthisneedtoberecognized:claimsforthespecialprotectionof(only)originalculturalrights,oftenmasks,atbest,aformofnationalismandatworst,abarelydisguisedformsoffundamentalism.Thereare,alternatively,strongvoicessuggestingthatwhatisemergingonaglobalscaleisanewformofcosmopolitanism,fedbytheinternetandreflectingnewwasof‘belonging’orassertingidentity(Creed,2003),orPaulGilroy’sclaimthatwhatweareseeingisanew‘planetaryhumanism’emergingfromandfedbynewformsofurbanconvivialityandtransnationalhumanrightsmovements(Gilroy,2004:28).Theseareoptimisticvoices,buttheydopointtotherealpossibilityofnewformsofcosmopolitanidentity,nolongernecessarilyrootedinaplace,orinthespaces‘inbetween’,butinanewspace,constitutedexactlyoutoftheprocessesofglobalizationandculturaltransnationalism,thatarethecontemporaryplanetaryreality.Thishasimportantimplications,includingthatuniversalismcanexistatsomelevels(forexample,intheidealsoftheUDHR),whilediversitycanbecelebratedatothers,whetherinlocalculturesorinthemanyhybridformsthatculturaldynamismtakes.Italsosuggeststhatculturaltranslationbecomesanimportanttool–perhapsthebasisofanewanthropology–asmediationbetweenculturalformstakesplaceandasinterpretationisconstantlyneeded,betweenwhatusedtobecallednations,betweengenerations,betweenonecultureoforiginandothers,andbetweenonecultureoforiginanditsownemergingtransformations.

Therearemanypointsofcontactbetweendebatesaboutthepossibilityandnatureofcosmopolitanidentitiesanddebatesaboutmulticulturalism,althoughthetwoshouldnotbeconfused.Multiculturalismsuggestsasituationinwhichanumberofculturesco-existtogether,withoutachievinganydegreeofintegration,while

9

cosmopolitanismsuggestseitherameldingofculturalidentitiesoratranscendingofculturaldifferencesinfavourofamoreuniversalisedsenseofidentity.Buteventheconceptofmulticulturalismunderminesanyessentialistor‘residentialist’notionofculture,orattheveryleastpositsthespatialandtemporalcoexistenceofmultipleresidentialcultures,awareofeachother’sexistence,althoughnotnecessarilyinteracting.ForphilosopherKant,forwhomthedevelopmentofappropriatepoliticalformationsisapre-requisite,itfollowsthat,asPapastergiadisrightlypointsout,‘Cosmopolitanismisthusnotavirtuethatistobepursuedforitsownqualities,butisdependentonthedevelopmentswithinapoliticalprocessthatseekstocontrolthedestructivedrivesinhumannature,aswellastotemperthetyrannicalabusesofpower’(Papastergiadis,2012:83).Thesimplediversityofculturesdoesnotguaranteethatallofthoseculturesarebenignorcommittedtotheintegrityorautonomyofotherculturesintheworld-order.Farfromit:someculturesmaybepredatory,colonialistorassimilativeofothersinthetotalculturalecology.Somemightarguethatthisisanaturalevolutionaryorhistoricalprocess.Butevenifitis,itdemonstratestheroleofpowerinculturalrelationships.Allculturesmaybebornequal,buttheycertainlydonotnecessarilyremainso.

SowhilewhatPapastergiadiscallsa‘CosmopolitanImaginary’iscertainlypossibleanddesirable(unlessoneisahard-coreresidentialist),it,alongwithUNESCOlikeconceptsofculture,mustbeframedinrelationtoacomplexunderstandingofhybridity–astheinevitableincorporationof‘foreign’elementsintoidentity,astheprocessoftheassimilationorattemptedneutralizationofsuchelementsbythereceivingculture,ortherecognitionoftheinevitabilityofsocio-culturalchange,ofindividualandcommunalstrategiesofopennesswhilestillretainingattachmenttoearlierdimensionsofidentity(suchasone’sreligionofbirth),andtheexistentialandsocialprocessthatemergeindiasporicsituations(whichinmanywaysarenowthenorm,whetherthroughphysicalmigrationortheconsumptionofglobalizedculturesviathemediaandotherpervasivesourcesofinfluence).Thenatureofthe

publicsphereisthustransformedandbecomesa(culturally)fluidspaceinwhichallthepartnersinvolvedare,ifnottransformed,certainlyinfluencedbytheprocessof‘culturecontact’withinwhichtheyarenecessarilyinvolved,andwhichcanleadtonewgroupformationor,andthisiscrucial,tonewformsofsocialexclusion(NederveenPieterse,2001).Culturalrights,then,havenotonlytorecognisethedynamicnatureofculture/culturalchange,butalsotograspthatculturalinteractionisnotequal,butanaspectofpowerrelations.‘Diversity’initselftellsusnothingabouttheactualdominanceofsomeculturesandthemarginalizationofothers(andhenceoftheirmembers)inthetotalglobalculturalecology.Cosmopolitancultureshavealwaysexistedandthecollaborativemethodologiesnowbecomewidelyemployedamongartists,scientists,ethnicgroups,co-religionistsandinmanyotherspheresarewitnesstothisprocess.Butwithoutrecognitionofcultureasaprimarysiteofstruggle,thenotionof‘culturalrights’ishollow.Likeallnotionsofrights(andindeedofallsystemsoflawandjurisprudence),thenotionisunnecessarywherejusticeprevails.Itssaliencecomespreciselyfromthefactthatsuchjustice(andecologicalresponsibility)doesnotyetdoso,makingthepursuitofculturalrightsanevenmoreurgentandsustainability-promotingprocessthaneverbefore.

DeepeningDevelopment:CultureandSocialJustice

Developmentitselfthenisahighlypluralproject,onethatnecessarilyincludescultureandinwhichfordevelopmentalprocessestolast,mustbesustainable.Culturalpoliciesasaresultenterthefieldofdevelopmentdiscourseeverybitasmuchaseconomicones.Itmustberootedinthelocalsoilsofculturesoritwithers,andthemanydevelopmentfailuresthatlitterthelandscapearetestimonytothis,astheanthropologistJamesScottandothershavesopointedlyindicated(Scott,1998).Thisis,inmanycases,becauseofthefailuretoadequatelytriangulateculture,developmentandsustainability.Tomakethatrelationshipacreativereality,Iwillsuggestanumberoffactorsthatideallyneedtobeincorporatedintothemodel.

10

Therecognitionthatweliveononesharedplanet,andoneofremarkablecomplexityandbeauty,(andonwhich,leavingasidesciencefictionfantasies,wearehappilycondemnedtolive),pointstosomeofthewaysinwhichtheC-S-Dtriangleneedstobebothfilledinandmodifiedinthelightofemergingglobalissues.Allthreetermssharethequalityofbeingimplicatedequallyinallthesefactors:theyformtheirconstantfieldorhorizon.TherecognitionofsharedEarth-boundnesshasatleasttwoimplications.Oneofthesewehavealreadysuggested,notablythenecessityoforientingculture,sustainabilityanddevelopmenttowardstheenvironmentanditsprotectionandimprovement–thefosteringof‘ecologicalcultures’asabasisfortrulysustainabledevelopment,withoutwhichmerelytemporaryband-aidsolutionsarelikelytopredominate(andultimatelyfail).Thesecondistherethinkingoftheconceptsofcitizenship,multiculturalismandthecosmopolitaninthecontextofasharedandglobalizedworld.Earlierconceptsofcitizenshiphavebeentiedtothenotionofthenation-state.Butinaworldofinter-connections(signalledmostsignificantlybyglobalwarmingandclimatechange)nosocio-politicalunitstandsalone.Asaresultthesuggestionhasbeenemergingthatnewandmoregloballyinclusiveconceptsofcitizenshiparerequired,includingwhatsomecommentatorsarecalling‘ecologicalcitizenship’(Davidson,2004).Thisimpliesaglobalethics,andoneofmutualresponsibilityratherthaneitheranindividualisticoneorapurelylocalorpoliticallyrootedone.Theveryword‘cosmopolitan’meanstobelinkedtoalargerwhole.Somescholarsofmulticulturalismhavesuggestedthatthekindof‘culturaldiversity’embodiedintheUNESCOdocumentrepresentsaformof‘liberalmulticulturalism’(Kymlicka,2005)–awell-meaning,buthardlypro-activeconceptthatdoesnotuncovertheradicalimplicationsofsuchanotion,whichwouldincludeaculturallymulti-polarworld,oneinwhichglobalizationratherthanhomogenizingculturessupportsgenuinedifferenceandhencetheexistenceofmanyepistemologiesandculturalontologies.Cultureisnotonlywhatis,butalsowhatmightbe--theverynotionofliteraryfictionbeingexactlythecreationofalternativevisions,asMarioVargasLlosasocogentlyargues(VargasLlosa,2007).

TheC-S-Dtrianglealsohastobecontextualizedwithinthosecontemporaryprocessesofglobalisationthatthrowupconstantnewchallengestoallthree.Thelistislongandcanneverbeinclusive,butcertainlycontainstherelationshipbetweentheC-S-Dholismandglobalizationitselfasaneconomicandsocialphenomenon,containingsuchelementsandmigrationandmigratorycultures,newglobalsocialnetworkssupportedandmadepossiblebytheinternetandsocialmedia,emergingissuesoffoodsecurity,ofglobalhealth,oftheimpactofnewtechnologiesandtheirrelationshiptotheappearanceofa‘digitalworld’andthefunctionalanddysfunctional(forexamplecyber-crime)thatthisgenerates,newformsofoftenviolentfundamentalisms,newsubcultures,patternsoftravel,andnewconceptsofidentityamongnotonlythedisplaced(refugeesandasylumseekers)butalsoamongthosewhochosetobemulticulturalandhavethemeanstobeso.Slowly,yetanotherareararelydiscussedindevelopmentthinkingismergingpartlyinresponsetotheseissues–notablynewformsofinternationallaw,whichhavethemselvestonegotiatetheirrelationshipwithlocallegalcodes.Astransnationalismincreases,legalsystemsrootedinasingleculturebecomelessandlessapplicable,notonlyinrelationtolocallegalpluralism(sayinIndiawithHindu,Muslim,tribalandBritishcoloniallawalloccupyingthesamenationalspace),butpreciselytoissuesofinternationaltrade,copyright,space(asperhapsalogicalextensionoftheexistinglawofthesea?),newtechnologies,andbasicreligiousandculturaldifferences.

Thisdiscussionthenpointstoanumberofpropositions,whichcanbesummarizedasfollows:

1. Thatculturalrights,sustainabilityanddevelopmentformatriangleofnecessarilyrelatedelements.

2. Thatculturalrightsareanintegralpartofhumanrights,andbotharerelatedtotherightsofnature.

3. CritiquesofthesupposeduniversalismofhumanrightsastheyareembodiedintheUDHRhavelargelytakentheformofarguing

11

thatthereareculturalvariationsthatmeanthathumanrightsshouldbecontextualizedinrelationtoparticularcultures.Leavingasidetheself-servingmotivesofsomegovernmentsthathavearguedthisposition(inordertowaterdowntheircommitmenttoparticularrights,forexample),theincorporationofculturalrightsasanaspectofhumanrightsgoesalongwaytomeetingthisobjection.

4. Culturalrightsmustrecognisetheautonomyofparticularaestheticexpressions,arecognitionthatgivesculturalrightsacriticaledgebynotsimpleacknowledgingdiversity(apatronizingposition),butrecognisingthemasgenuinealternativeandequalepistemologiesandontologies–ofwaysofseeingtheworldandofbeinginthatworld.Nooneculturecanthenclaimamonopolyashavingthecorrectworld-view.Thereisnosuchthing.

5. Allculturesevolveandchange,butshould,exceptwhenclearviolationoffundamentalhumanrightsoccurbehindthesmokescreenofclaimstoculturalexceptionalism,beallowedtoevolveattheirownpace.Thealternativeisakindofculturalcolonialism,inwhichthemoreeconomicallyandpoliticallypowerfulsocietiesseektoimposetheirowncultureontherestoftheworld,(oftentodayinthenameof‘softpower’),leadingtoformsofculturalhomogeneityquiteatvariancewiththegoaloftheprotectionandpromotionofculturaldiversity.

6. Giventheimbalancesinpower,politically,economically,technologicallyandculturallyinthecontemporaryworld,imbalancesenhancedratherthandiminishedbyglobalisation.Pro-activeculturalpoliciesshouldseektonotonlyprotect,buttoactivelysupportindigenousculturesinalltheirvariety,toencourageculturalexperimentationandnewformsofart,andaidagenciesshouldseeitaspartoftheirdutytosupportcultureasanessentialpartofaholisticapproachtodevelopment.

Weareinasituationinwhichdevelopmentfailswithoutculture,asdoesanyrealisticnotionofsustainability,inwhichitisnowrecognizedthatcultureisa‘pillarofsustainability’(Hawkes,2001).

Thebottomlinethenisanexpandednotionofhumanrightsthatnotonlyincludesculturalrights,butwhichseesthefulfilmentorachievementofarights-basedworldasconstitutingthenatureofsustainabilityandthepurposeorendofdevelopment.Socialjusticeisthenon-negotiableproject,butintherecognitionthatsocialjusticemustnowincludebothculturalandecologicaljusticeintherecognitionofdevelopmentasaholisticandlife-enhancingprocess.

References

Aquilino,MarieJ.(ed.)(2011)BeyondShelter:ArchitectureofCrisis.London:ThamesandHudson.Balfour,Michael(ed.)(2013)RefugeePerformance:PracticalEncounters.BristolandChicago:Intellect.Clammer,John(2012)Culture,DevelopmentandSocialTheory:TowardsanIntegratedSocialDevelopment.LondonandNewYork:ZedBooks.Clammer,John(2014)VisionandSociety:TowardsaSociologyandAnthropologyfromArt.AbingdonandNewYork:Routledge.Clammer,John(2015)Art,CultureandInternationalDevelopment:HumanizingSocialTransformation.AbingdonandNewYork:Routledge.Creed,B.MediaMatrix:SexingtheNewReality.Crow’sNest,NSW:AllenandUnwin.Davidson,Julie(2004)‘CitizenshipandSustainability:RightsandResponsibilitiesintheGlobalAge’.InRobWhite(ed.)ControversiesinEnvironmentalSociology.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.168-184.Davis,S.H.(2004)‘TheMayanMovementandNationalCultureinGuatemala’.InV.RaoandM.Walton(eds.)CultureandPublicAction:ACross-DisciplinaryDialogueonDevelopmentPolicy.Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress,pp.328-358.DeBeukelaer,Christiaan,MiikkaPyykkonemandJ.P.Singh(eds.)(2015)Globalization,CultureandDevelopment:TheUNESCOConventiononCulturalDiversity.BasingstokeandNewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.Donders,Yvonne(2015)‘CulturalHumanRightsandtheUNESCOConvention:MorethanMeetstheEye?InChristiaanDeBeukelaer,MiikkaPyykkonenandJ.P.Singh(eds.)Globalization,CultureandDevelopment:TheUNESCOConventiononCulturalDiversity.BasingstokeandNewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.117-131.Dove,Michael(ed.)(1980)TheRealandImaginedRoleofCultureinDevelopment.Honolulu:UniversityofHawai’iPress.Dube,S.C.(1984)DevelopmentPerspectivesforthe1980s.KualaLumpur:PelandukPublicationsfortheUnitedNationsAsianandPacificDevelopmentCentre.Friedman,Jonathan(1999)‘Thehybridizationofrootsandtheabhorrenceofthebush’.InMikeFeatherstoneandScottLash(eds.)SpacesofCulture:City,Nation,World.London:Sage,pp.230-256.Garrett,Ian(2012)‘TheatricalProduction’sCarbonFootprint’.InWendyAronsandTheresaJ.May(eds.)ReadingsinPerformanceandEcology.BasingstokeandNewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.201-209.

12

Gilroy,Paul(2004)AfterEmpire:MelancholiaorConvivialCulture?LondonandNewYork:Routledge.Hawkes,J.(2001)TheFourthPillarofSustainability:Culture’sEssentialRoleinPublicPlanning.NewYork:CommonGround.Kabanda,Patrick(2014)TheCreativeWealthofNations:HowthePerformingArtsCanAdvanceDevelopmentandHumanProgress.Washington,DC:WorldBankGroup.Kagan,Sacha(2011)ArtandSustainability:ConnectingPatternsforaCultureofComplexity.Bielefeld:TranscriptVerlag.Kymlicka,W.(2005)‘LiberalMulticulturalism:WesternModels,GlobalTrendsandAsianDebates’.InW.KymlickaandB.He(eds.)MulticulturalisminAsia.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.22-55.Llosa,MarioVargas(2007)Touchstones:EssaysonLiterature,ArtandPolitics.Selected,translatedandeditedbyJohnKing.London:FaberandFaber.NederveenPieterse,Jan(2001)‘Hybridity,sowhat?Theanti-hybriditybacklashandtheriddlesofrecognition’.Theory,CultureandSociety,18(2/3),219-45.Nussbaum,MarthaS.(2011)CreatingCapabilities:TheHumanDevelopmentApproach.Cambridge,MA:BelknapPressofHarvardUniversityPress.Nussbaum,MarthaS.(2012)NotforProfit:WhyDemocracyNeedstheHumanities.PrincetonandLondon:PrincetonUniversityPress.Papastergiadis,Nikos(2012)CosmopolitanismandCulture.CambridgeandMalden,MA:PolityPress.Radcliffe,SarahA.(2006)CultureandDevelopmentinaGlobalizingWorld:Geographies,ActorsandParadigms.AbingdonandNewYork:Routledge.Samson,Colin(2004)‘WeLiveThisExperience:OntologicalInsecurityandColonialDominationoftheInnuPeopleofNorthernLabrador’.InJohnClammer,SylviePoirierandEricSchwimmer(eds.)FiguredWorlds:OntologicalObstaclestoInterculturalRelations.TorontoandLondon:TorontoUniversityPress.Schech,SusanneandJaneHaggis(2000)CultureandDevelopment:ACriticalIntroduction.OxfordandMalden,MA:Blackwell.Schwartz,MichielandDianeKrabbendam(2013)SustainistDesignGuide.Amsterdam:BISPublishers.Sen,Amartya(2009)TheIdeaofJustice.Cambridge,MA:BelknapPress.Scott,James(1998)SeeingLikeaState:HowCertainSchemestoImprovetheHumanConditionHaveFailed.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.UNESCO(UnitedNationsEducational,ScientificandCulturalOrganization)(2005)ConventionontheProtectionandPromotionoftheDiversityofCulturalExpressions.Paris:UNESCO.UNESCO/UNCTAD(2008)CreativeEconomy.ParisandGeneva:UNESCOandUNCTAD©JournalofLaw,SocialJustice&GlobalDevelopment