Cultural Differences As Reflected

=== 2b9cbc30b1f1679a7dbca7a94631324f69941e8a_676646_1 ===

INTRODUCTION

The reality highlights that nowadays, most countries are culturally diverse, according to recent estimates, the 184 independent states of the world containing more than 600 living language groups and 5,000 ethnic groups (Garreta 2000). There are few countries whose citizens share the same language or belong to the same national ethnic group.

Currently, in the era of globalization there is a paradox regarding the substitution of traditional societies by the modern social order (urban, industrial, capitalist ones). This aspect does not only suppress linguistic, religious, cultural differences and so on among the different societies, but on the contrary, it also increases them. In this respect, cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity ceases to be a specific feature of some particular societies (United States, Canada, Australia) to gradually extend to the whole planet.

We are immersed in a truly multicultural and interdependent world that presents the challenge of how to understand and interact, and this diversity involves a series of important and potentially decisive issues.

Thus, majorities and minorities are increasingly confronted with issues such as linguistic rights, regional autonomy, political representation, territorial claims, immigration policy and citizenship. Finding ethically defensible and politically viable answers to these questions is the main challenge facing democracies today. And it is here, when facing the challenge of cultural diversity, that we find theoretical assumptions and concepts about cultural diversity located from different points of view, for example: citizenship, identity, linguistic theme, democracy or all the nuances or intermediate positions that may derive from it, often finding an abuse of the term "cultural diversity" by applying it in an undifferentiated way to phenomena of different natures.

The objective of the present study is to highlight different and marked approaches that have been developed regarding cultural diversity, without implying a "nummerus clausus" relationship, since cultural diversity approaches are broadened with the diverse realities of the countries of the entire world.

The objective is to clarify the fundamental elements of the cultural diversity concept, considering that the intellectual debate on it has not yet reached a consensus and may never do so. The paper reviews the "evolution" of the concept through the theories of different institutional authors and documents, culminating in the recognition of cultural diversity as a right, guaranteed in binding international instruments.

In this respect, in the first chapter one would observe certain difficulties in defining cultural differences and cultural diversity, respectively various interpretations of cultural differences and cultural diversity and contrary currents centred on the theory of cultural relativism.

Chapter number two will present an approach to the issues and changes that cultural differences have developed. Here one would appreciate aspects such as the knowledge of national cultures, cultural identity, endogenous development, democracy and multicultural societies and cultural expressions.

In chapter number III, there will be presented the right to cultural diversity. In this respect, the debated subjects are represented by The Universal Declaration for Cultural Diversity, Main orientations of an Action Plan for the implementation of the Universal Declaration and the Convention regarding the Protection and Promotion of Cultural Expressions’ Diversity.

The last chapter of the present paper will be concentrated on different strategies of cultural diversity. Appreciating strategies at supranational level, there will be presented Regulations related to cultural diversity, The "Cultural Policy and Cultural Diversity" project, the Strategy of multilingualism, Lifelong learning of languages: increase sensitivity and motivation, languages ​​for intercultural dialogue and social cohesion, languages ​​for competitiveness, economic growth and better jobs, creation of a European space for political dialogue and communication with citizens, an action plan designed to "Promote language learning and linguistic diversity". Also, one would observe in this chapter a presentation of Romania, as a different case study, appreciating cross-gender strategy and monitoring of policies for gender equality, cultural stereotypes, inclusive education and the integration of ethnic minorities.

The study ends by presenting an international panorama of how international institutions and independent states have operationalized and developed the concept through action strategies or public policies in favour of cultural diversity. Cultural diversity is not a closed concept, but, on the contrary, it constantly evolves according to its own dynamic and flexible nature, the result of the constant interaction between different cultures. It must be recognized that there are multiple definitions of the term related to its various aspects: identity, own languages, immigration, citizenship, indigenous peoples, cultural expressions, development and so on. As my paper will indicate, all these definitions, beyond confusing us, can help us to better understand the concept of cultural diversity in which we are all immersed today and which we must face in a creative and solidary way.

CHAPTER I. DIFFICULTIES IN DEFINING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY

The term "cultural diversity" has been charged with different interpretations and changes sometimes derived from history, such as colonialism and linguistic or semantic subtleties. As Parekh considers (2001: 113), "any attempt to write a summary of the history of the cultural diversity debate cannot begin without the recognition of the existence of multiple definitions of the term. The lack of a single definition or of a diversity of definitions represents the biggest obstacle in identifying the most important instruments and forums that in the past have dealt with issues of cultural diversity."

Various interpretations of cultural differences and cultural diversity

It is possible to distinguish two general approaches to cultural diversity: diversity "within" states and diversity "between" states. In the large western cities, the question of internal diversity is indisputably linked to the phenomenon of immigration, although internal cultural diversity can be independent of this phenomenon as it is in countries where cultural diversity is connected to the ethnic minorities that have remained over the years in these territories. This approach looks at individuals as potential holders of multiple identities and heterogeneous cultural characteristics that jointly build a nation or another form of identity. This approach can also be understood as "multiculturalism", and although recently it was discussed and talked about multicultural societies, the first multicultural legislation in the world was adopted in 1988 in Canada, which recognized in its "Multiculturalism Act" that cultural diversity was a fundamental characteristic of their society and created a series of policies and government programs to protect and enhance it (Banks 1988: 68-72).

Cultural diversity "between" states or nations focuses on the need for a balanced cultural exchange of goods and services between states and / or cultures. This approach is characterized by the development of the relationship between culture and commerce, or culture and economy; as well as the capacity of the states to "intervene" in cultural markets in order to sustain their "local" or "national" production by assuring them a space in the markets, respectively with a balanced exchange between cultures. And it is translated as the right of a state to develop, preserve and implement the public policies necessary for the preservation and promotion of its cultural diversity (Banks 2000).

Traditionally, cultural diversity was approached by anthropology, where it was also an ambiguous concept, between relativism and the sub-alternization of diverse (Neulfeld 2006). In that historical era and in the context of anthropology, one referred to and even refers to radically different types of social formations (ethnic groups, indigenous tribes). Some of them still exist today and conserve many of their traditional institutions, which do not mean in any way anachronisms, or testimonies of evolutionary backwardness but simply other ways of conceiving the world.

One of the arguments that currently highlights the value of cultural diversity is that it creates a more interesting world, and because other cultures have alternative models of social organization that can be useful to adapt to new circumstances. This is often mentioned in relation to indigenous peoples, whose traditional lifestyles provide a model of sustainable relationship with the environment. It is increasingly accepted that Western attitudes towards nature are unsustainable and self-destructive, so that indigenous peoples "can provide models, inspiration and guidance for the essential task of redefining a new world order" (Kymilcka 1996: 171).

It is important to emphasize that cultural diversity cannot be seen only as a differentiation (something that is defined in relation to something else). Diversity manifests itself in concrete situations and needs to be contextualized, since the historical meaning of "differences" redefines its own symbolic meaning.

Nor should we forget that we live in contexts of cultural diversity, and that these contexts, in so far as they involve diversity, are simultaneously constituted by relations of domination / subordination: the status of immigrants, the connotations attributed to the places of origin, the languages ​​that are declared to be official or the jobs they are allowed to access, build unequal relationships or power relations. In this respect, it is important to understand how those power relations are developed and when the discourse on diversity hides issues such as inequality (Van Dyne 2015). In this respect, one would observe that the following aspects concern cultural identity, indigenous peoples, intercultural education, linguistic differences, political aspects, integration and citizenship, as well as different cultural industries.

1.1.1. Identity

Cultural identity is the process through which a social actor recognizes itself and develops a meaning by virtues and above all of an attribute or set of specific cultural attributes, with the exclusion of a wider reference to other social structures. It is born from the awareness of difference, which does not necessarily mean inability to relate to other identities (Van Dyne 2015). "All societies are culturally heterogeneous while no culture develops without exchanges and cultural interactions." (Van Dyne 2015: 141).

Cultural identity, in the sense that arises from interactions with other cultures, would be a flexible and plural concept, which is not only marked by difference, but by complementarity with what is different. Thus, for example, a person can feel Catalan, Spanish, European, according to the relationship established, the circumstance and the scope in which this relationship is determined.

The understanding of space-time, the perception of physical and cultural distances, also alters the fundamental elements of the configuration of identity, such as feelings of similarity, closeness and belonging, transforming the sense of what is close or similar and of what is distant or not; of what is proper and what is improper. In this respect, globalization also confers a new character to cultural diversity (Gruenewald, Smith 2014: 102-105).

Bennett (2017) considers that the feeling of belonging that is limited to a single culture is much easier to manipulate, since one would have to ask: who is going to develop that specific cultural identity, which must one approach to be identified and accepted as a member of the community? What is the degree of difference that the community will allow before stigmatizing a person? It indicates that the conception of identity as multiple, diverse and flexible is a good antidote against manipulation. However, one forgets that many cultures were not given the option of multiplicity, but only the option of assimilation and have survived and built their identity based on resistance to the dominant culture and the feeling of not belonging to it. This is the case of the ethnic minority groups that have suffered the imposition of national states.

What is clear is that identity is not a unitary aspect, because it needs another reference, nor is it stable and fixed, above time, because all identity evolves with history and context. Identity is formed by a dynamic of interrelations and correlations, where ultimately only the subjective consciousness of being different is an irreplaceable element; and in order to understand and value identities, there should be contextualized each case and it should not be extrapolate into different times or places.

Whelan (2016) analyzes the power of identity in the current information society, which he calls the network society, characterized by the globalization of economic activities, by its form of organization in networks, by the flexibility and instability of work and its individualization, by a culture of real virtuality built through a system of omnipresent aspects, interconnected and diversified media, and by the transformation of the material foundations of life, space and time.

Differentiating three types of identities, one would observe (Whelan 2016: 114-120):

• Legitimizing identity, which is introduced by the dominant institutions of society to perform and rationalize their domination towards social actors.

• Identity of resistance, which is held by those actors who are in devalued or stigmatized positions by the logic of the society domination.

• Project identity, which occurs when social actors build a new identity, based on available cultural materials. In addition to this act, they not only redefine their position in society, but also seek the transformation of the social structure.

Thus, in the current situation "subjects when they are built, no longer do so based on civil societies, which are in the process of disintegration, but as an extension of communal resistance" (Whelan, 2016: 34). Therefore,there is a reaction against globalization that blurs identities. In this respect, while the legitimating identity seems to have entered into a crisis, the identities of resistance are the current forms of identity construction, although they may derive towards project identities.

It is precisely because they are the product of relationships between self-identified human groups that cultures cannot be identities that live in stillness. Subjected to a set of shocks and instabilities, they modify their nature, change their appearance and strategy whenever necessary. Their evolution is often chaotic and unpredictable. Identities must not only permanently negotiate the relationships they maintain with each other, but also those relations with themselves (Bennett 2017: 99).

Among the main elements of the right to cultural identity, one should first highlight the consideration of that cultural identity as a prerequisite of rights, in the sense that without it other rights could not be exercised. Such doctrine is formulated, for example, by Kymilcka (1996), when he speaks of culture as a collective public context from which the individual makes choices as a prerequisite for the effective recognition of individual rights. In other words, the legal recognition of cultural groups will not be satisfied only through references to individual rights, ignoring unequivocally collective dimensions, of which the clearest way is the cultural identity.

It is important take into consideration also the distinction made between cultural identity as the characteristics that an individual or a group is attributed to feel part of a specific culture, and the identity of culture as a reference to the particularities that could be assigned to a determined culture; it is a subtle question, but a distinction is very important, because from there differences arise in order to speak of the right to cultural identity and the right to participate to culture. In this regard, one would emphasize the right to one's cultural identity, one's heritage and cultural heritage and on the other hand, the right to access and participation in culture as a primary good, in the sense of access, participation and enjoyment of culture and cultural life. In the first situation, the difference is important, and in the second one, the goal for everyone to have the same equality is relevant. (De Prado 2001).

1.1.2. Indigenous peoples

The diversity related to indigenous peoples refers to a plurality of individuals, and not just groups, with specific social, cultural and political configurations that present cultural features, social institutions, worldviews, linguistic forms and specific political organizations. According to Hall and Fenelon (2015), “indigenous peoples are considered as such because they descend from populations that lived in the country or in a geographical region that belongs to the country at the time of the conquest, colonization or establishment of current state borders and they conserve all their social, economic, cultural and political institutions or part of them”.

The identities of these peoples are organized and focus much more strongly on a collective identity, rather than on an individual one; in this respect, one would observe why they recognized collective rights together with individual rights. Also, this collective identity is not formed with the shared possession of fixed objective features, but by a continuous dynamic of interrelationships and correlations that are changing, as for any process of identity formation, where ultimately only the self-recognition of being Indigenous peoples and of having a collective identity is the constituent element (Hall and Fenelon 2015: 388). In this respect, they are not frozen in time, as exotic vision that most people have of them, as their traditions and ancestral institutions are changing and evolving, without losing their status as indigenous.

Most of the time, these specific cultures have tried to be flattened with compulsive miscegenation, as indigenism did when promoting a unique culture. The indigenous called this ethnocide "mesticismo", condemning it in an explicit way. It must be observed that culture in most of the countries of the USA, for example, includes many traditions of indigenous origin, so the purpose of indigenous cultures is to strengthen the national self. Many countries in America have an Indian name (Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Jamaica, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Guyana, Suriname, Peru, Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile). It is not a question of creating an indigenist utopia, but only of recognizing what it is and legitimizing the acts and thinking of these peoples, giving them the place that corresponds to them in a global project. The main challenge of these peoples is their recognition as political units constitutive of the State (Dunbar-Ortiz 2014: 112-116).

1.1.3. Immigration

Migrations existed from the origins of human history, however they are more evident since the states are constituted as nations and after the Second World War, in which the disasters of the war led thousands of people to seek better conditions in others territories. Thus, the end of the twentieth century has been described as "the era of migration" because huge numbers of people crossed borders, making virtually all countries more and more multicultural. (Hollifield, Martin and Orrenius 2014: 26)

The migratory flows are a source of cultural diversity, they bring languages, customs, clothing and different visions of the world to the place where they arrive: "The immigrantis an explorer, a naturalist who analyzes the behaviour of those he considers indigenous, and try to imitate to be accepted as one of their own. In some way, he lets himself be colonized by those who receive him. Now, as an explorer of regions that he does not know, he is also a colonizer, a kind of smuggler of cultural products, with the unfailing destiny to modify the conditions he has encountered upon arrival. The immigrant who introduces himself as acculturated is also a culturizer". (Hollifield, Martin and Orrenius 2014: 32).

Immigrants maintain connections with their cultural roots of origin, but at the same time make the definitive break with them. The grouping into associations or the reconstruction of cultural environments of origin performs, through a simulacrum, the utopia of a return, which will never happen. In this respect, Favell (2016: 19) points out that what we call "immigrant is an ephemeral figure, destined to be digested by an urban order that needs it as a fundamental food and as a guarantee of renewal and continuity".

The successive periods of immigration and the varied origins aroused interest in this topic and consequently the development of concepts and integration models. Consequently, in many countries the established norms of political life are challenged by a new cultural diversity. For many people, managing this diversity generates fear, which does not imply that it cannot be managed in a peaceful and just manner if there is good will. In this sense, campaigns in defence of multiculturalism serve to warn the danger of intolerance towards newcomers and to make common cause with the most disadvantaged ones. At the same time, it forces society as a whole to reflect on the meaning of their customs and the inalterability of the moral principles on which they are based on, as well as on the reasons that make them accept values ​​and practices, to the detriment of others (Favell 2016).

There is a debate of immigrants’ integration models, meaning the explicit formulation of a legal political model of insertion of the immigrant population, such as the French "assimilationist" or the British or Dutch "multiculturalist". In the Spanish case, for example, Pietsch (2007: 78) highlights that there is no defined model, that if there is a predominant principle in the integration policies of all the Autonomous Communities and Town Councils, it is standardization, which consists of promoting the standardized access of the immigrant population to the public services of general character, as an alternative to the creation of specific services oriented to cover the needs of this population.

In this respect, a commitment to an effort of public services and their adaptation to the needs of a more diverse and changing society is very positive, insofar as it tends to avoid the segmentation of services and the creation of parallel structures. In this respect, the mere standardized access to public services of a general nature is not enough to also produce a standardized assimilation of immigration by society. In the same way, there must be an awareness and acceptance of the host society that, as new immigrant numbers increase, “it transforms itself and becomes more diverse” (Pietsch 2007: 102).

1.1.4. Intercultural education

"School has traditionally been considered as one of the most powerful vectors of integration" (Coulby 2006: 61). Conversely, it can also be emphasized that the education system can help segregation or it can be a reproducer of inequalities. In this respect, it leads education to assume a leading role in the context of multicultural states.

Intercultural education, a term developed by France and Canada, is considered to be a reaction to the dangers that were sensed in multiculturalism in its version of mosaic or segmented societies. It emerges as a form of attention to diversity through proposals and pedagogical projects differentiated according to the "diverse" character of the subjects (Portera 2008: 64). Indifferent countries of Europe, the United States and Canada, this education is focused specifically on immigrant students, in the countries of Latin America it is oriented towards the indigenous peoples and in Africa to the different ethnic groups that coexist within their nation states.

Education to manage cultural diversity focused on immigrant students has had many different treatments and models, as well as their respective consequences. Coulby (2006) mentions some results of education for immigrants in Europe such as:

“• Children of immigrant origin attend school less often than native children;

• The incorporation into the formal education system of children of foreign origin is significantly delayed compared to native students;

• From the educational centres, immigrant students are recommended, much more frequently than the native ones, to perform their secondary education at the institution and through the curricula of the less academic profile – consequently the proportion of immigrant students who attend secondary schools of better academic quality are inferior to the autochthonous ones;

• Students of immigrant origin obtain poorer academic results than native students in national and international tests (PISA 2000);

• Students of immigrant origin abandon compulsory studies if they accredit the corresponding degree in a percentage much higher than that of native students.”

In this respect, intercultural education is a real challenge and it must be constantly revised and redefined until positive results are obtained. A danger the society face is the formation of schools for specific groups without contact with each other: "ghetto schools" (Vitar 2006), due to the concentration of students of immigrant origin who generally do not have enough time for educational support, children who in the future, will be the national population of the host countries with low or very low educational levels.

On the other hand, "we know that the causes of these results are, on the one hand, the socioeconomic factors common to the entire disadvantaged population. But on the other hand, there are specific problems of these students (recently immigrants) such as language proficiency, cultural distance between their parents and the indigenous society and their own identity fragility which highlights the latent crisis of our educational system. And above all, there is a difficulty of school institutions to adapt and respond to the socio-cultural diversity of their students "(Coulby 2006: 71).

In this regard, if one wants to reverse inequality relations, one must perform the intercultural education project that favours not only minorities or specific cultural groups but also it involves all citizens, regardless of whether or not they are immigrants.

Regarding the attention of the indigenous population’s diversity, intercultural education was the central argument of its own existence, because children came from completely different ethnic, linguistic or cultural contexts and are in permanent clash with the dominant culture. School, then, became a tool for building and reaffirming its identity as a complementary national identity. Here, intercultural education is also part of a cultural political proposal that defends and affirms the cultural rights of the indigenous population, while maintaining the need to strengthen the integration of students into the national system. However, this position was only appreciated in theory, while in practice, except for successful cases, due to budget, management and stereotype issues, intercultural education became a pending challenge (Salas 2006).

1.1.5. Linguistic differences

Linguistic diversity refers to the existence of different languages ​​and the contact between their speakers. Today between 6,000 and 7,000 languages ​​are spoken (Nichols 1992: 35), each of which reflecting a vision of the world, a unique way of thinking and culture, with which one interprets reality and represents perhaps the most important attribute of peoples’ cultural status. Thus, linguistic diversity is the capital of humanity while the disappearance of any language is synonymous with the impoverishment of human knowledge and its communication tools. For example, numerous medicinal plants are only known to members of certain traditional cultures, who know their specific names in their language. Once these languages ​​and cultures have disappeared, the knowledge of these plants and their healing virtues will also disappear. The success of research with unknown medicinal plants has only been and will be possible with the help of the aboriginal population and through the word they use in their languages.

Many of the languages ​​are in danger of disappearing in the near future due to the lack of young speakers and the benefit of the metropolitan languages ​​that generate easier access and professional and work promotion. Many languages ​​are becoming extinct, and according to some experts, around 90% of the languages ​​spoken today will cease to exist in the next century: "this loss will be as serious as the extinction of an animal or vegetable species. Every language spoken in the world represents a unique way of perceiving and expressing human experience and the world" (UNESCO 2015).

Linguistic diversity has always been the subject of political action, in one sense or another, by encouraging or prohibiting the use of a language and its corresponding consequences. In the past, linguistic policy was often used to subordinate groups of people, as an instrument of domination, fragmentation and reintegration in the dominant political structure. Languages ​​are the product of the societies that speak or abandon them and their fate depends on the social and political context, as well as power relations.

It is appreciated that the greatest diversity of languages ​​is found in the minority languages ​​spoken by small groups, while no more than eight languages ​​(the 0.1% of total living languages) is spoken by more than 40% of the population. In this respect, the greatest danger in the loss of linguistic diversity lies in the minority languages, rarely recognizing their official status ​​in the areas where they predominate and without public policies that encourage their use.

For linguists, a threatened language is one that most children no longer learn, so it is destined to disappear with the death of its last speakers. The language, as it is known, also serves as a powerful vehicle for identifying the group and it can simply survive alone for this reason. This is the case of some supposedly complex languages, which foreigners consider impossible to learn, but which serve as a strong symbol of identification. The degree of complexity and inaccessibility of a language is sometimes proportional to national pride, as has been observed with Basque, Finnish, Hungarian or Turkish, among others (UNESCO 2015).

Linguistic diversity is also related to peace processes and conflicts depending on the degree of management with which they are managed. For example, at the request of Bangladesh, UNESCO established February 21st as the International Mother Language Day to promote multilingualism and cultural diversity, as well as to foster understanding, tolerance and dialogue. This date commemorates, at the same time, the tragic events that occurred on February 21st1952 in the then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), where three students were killed by police during a demonstration demanding the recognition of their mother tongue, the Bangla or Bengali, as the official language of Pakistan, which only recognized Urdu as the official language. The respect these students had for their mother tongue and Bengali culture made them martyrs while these events marked the beginning of the Bangladesh liberation war. (Saikia 2004)Thus, not only is the revaluation and promotion of the mother tongue promoted, but it also draws attention to the conflicts that may result from poor management of the mother tongue, especially in those cases where denying them the use of the language means excluding them from the State development.

European integration represents a good example regarding the linguistic challenge of achieving "unity in diversity", revaluing regional languages ​​in countries that until recently have lived emerging in monolingual discourses. In the European discourse, minority linguistic communities, for the first time, are in a privileged position, living in a multilingual context. And the need to create a more tolerant atmosphere towards linguistic diversity has been seen as a favourable factor, not only as a theoretical concept, but also as an everyday phenomenon (Strubell 2001: 59).

Reinforcing the advantages of bilingualism or multilingualism, it has been observed that bilingual or multilingual people, who have acquired the habit of passing from one mode of thought to another, have a greater flexibility of thought. Familiar with different and often contradictory concepts, they tend to be more tolerant than monolingual and more apt to understand different aspects of a problem. For this reason, linguists emphasize the urgency of developing grammars, lexicons, texts and recordings of languages ​​before they become extinct (UNESCO, 2014).

1.1.6. Political aspect

Cultural diversity also involves a political aspect, which is expressed through different political positions such as pluralism, multiculturalism and interculturality.

Pluralism refers to a verifiable reality: a state, a nation or a geographical space where a plurality of cultures coexist. The political stance it presents does not go beyond this recognition and acceptance. It does not seek to homogenize these cultures under the premise that they are situated in democratic societies, although it does not favour their development either.

Multiculturalism arose in the United States, for example, in the seventies as a response to the failure of the integrative model by assimilation, harshly questioned for seeking a cultural homogenization that reproduced the institutions, policies and thought patterns of the liberal Anglo-Saxon tradition, which involved a certain discrimination feeling against ethnic minorities. The presented political position is related to tolerance as a public virtue. It seeks to make viable the principle of equality and the principle of the difference of political liberalism, proposing quotas (ethnic, gender, compensatory, etc.) or differentiated rights for cultural minorities. It does not promote public political culture, but it narrows social gaps. Paradoxically, in practice, prejudices and negative stereotypes are strengthened among the different ones; in this respect, it does not generate positive integration (Goldberg 1994).

Interculturality as a political aspect arises in recent decades as a response to the crisis of ethnocentric euro-centrism and ignorance of the existence and validity of alternative rationalities to the instrumental rationality of capitalist industrial modernization processes (Goldberg 1994). It designates a series of options related to the way of managing the interactions between cultural groups or collectivities, which do not enter into questioning the institutions that establish them or the political, ideological, philosophical, moral positions that sustain them (Weber 2000). The basis consists in the recognition of positive values ​​of the cultures that interact, and in the transformation that occurs as a result of the interaction. It proposes the construction of new values ​​and identities based on mutual learning while it is articulated around two identities: one's own and that of others, and the possibility of benefiting from both.

Modood (2013) considers that globalization has diluted ethnic or cultural boundaries as well as geographical or political ones. In this respect, diversity has acquired a new dimension. That is what the new interculturality must face if it is to be the new humanism of globalization. The current interculturality has as a frame of reference a fluid vision of culture and identity and does not take for granted the borders or pre-established ethnic boundaries. This "identity in process" can even make the idea of belonging meaningless and give way to an identity based on a "style of self-consciousness" that is not totally part, nor totally separate from its culture, but lives rather in the edge. Interculturality understood in this way serves the subject more than the group and favours autonomy and, therefore, the construction of a "culture of accommodation".

1.1.7. Integration and citizenship

Regarding the social (by the community) or political (by state institutions) integration of the culturally diversity, Helbling (2013: 555-576) mentions the following models:

a) The pure and strict assimilation to Western principles and values, as the only effective way of integrating non-western cultural collectives. This position is presented as an advocate of Western values ​​of democracy and pluralism, but stigmatizing multiculturalism, breaks with the basic principles of Western culture itself, like democracy itself.

b) The full equalization of rights, as a way to respect the identity and enhance its full integration and social accommodation. This integration, mainly developed for immigrants, insists on the implementation of immigration policies based on co-development (which allows a real benefit for the immigrants themselves, as well as for the country of origin and the host country), considering the full accommodation of immigrants with all their rights and obligations in public life and in civil society in conditions of equality.

c) The alternative position is the majority position although it entails the difficulty to find an adequate model. With the aim of curbing popular pressure frightened by the great immigration growth, it proposes a charter of rights and obligations that involves the integration of immigration to Western values. It puts Western individual and collective rights before the cultural rights of immigrant communities. However, the richness of cultural expressions contributed by the different migratory waves is respected, granting differentiated rights.

Kimylcka (2006) points out that one of the problems in granting differentiated rights is that it only benefits the majority in a superficial and general way, while the costs for the individual members of the majority are sometimes quite high. In this respect, the defence of differentiated rights must be based on equal justice, in that they are necessary not only to promote the advantages of the majority, but to avoid even greater sacrifices to the national minority’s members. Another stronger argument is the defence of cultural political rights of these minority groups without which they cannot exercise their other individual rights. Without differentiated rights such as rights of representation, self-government, linguistics and so on, talking about "treating people as individuals" is nothing more than a way to cover ethnic and national injustices. It is equally important to emphasize that the limits of these rights should be constrained to ensure equality between groups and equality within groups.

What citizenship is proposed in this context of diversity? The thesis of the cultural neutrality of the State and of Law (Rawls, Habermas 1998) enunciates cultural neutrality as a sine qua non condition of a democratic response up to the demands of pluralism and the universality of rights, as the only way to establish a community free of equals. This thesis understands culture as a basic need that justifies its recognition as a fundamental right.

The problem arises because it assumes that culture is a peaceful, unitary concept, since it assumes that the State is monocultural, that we share the same culture (De Prado, 2001). And on the other hand, one cannot deny that neutrality is an impossible pretence to fulfil, because there is always a position taken on principles and values, interests, practices and cultural institutions defined as necessary and that presupposes a precise prioritization, that according to the thesis in question, one tries to avoid. Contrary to it, are the theses that try to protect the cultural distinctiveness and from it renegotiate their social integration (Taylor, Kymlicka 2002), understood mainly in terms of their participation to the constitution of their public space, with primordial reference to the equality in rights. They also forget the conditions of asymmetry that intercultural dialogue often presents, when the condition of intercultural dialogue is symmetry.

Kymlycka (1996), in the context of immigrant minorities and indigenous peoples, raises multicultural citizenship through the recognition of certain rights and seeks to establish these basic rights of minorities within a liberal approach. The author speaks of a citizenship for two broad models of cultural diversity. In the first case, the cultural diversity that arises from the incorporation of cultures, which previously enjoyed self-government and were territorially concentrated in a General Staff. One of the distinctive characteristics of the incorporated cultures, which were called "national minorities", is precisely the desire to remain distinct societies with respect to the majority culture of which they are a part; they, therefore, demand different forms of autonomy or self-government to ensure their survival as distinct societies.

In the second case, cultural diversity arises from immigration, these groups wishing to integrate into the society of which they are part of and to be accepted as full members of it. While they often seek to obtain greater recognition of their identity of origin, their goal is not to become a separate and self-governing nation parallel to the society of which they are a part, but to modify the institutions and laws of that society to make it more permeable to cultural differences. In this respect, being two distinct groups must be taken into account when evaluating and implementing integration policies or citizenship rights.

1.1.8. Different cultural industries

Nowadays, the economic importance of the cultural sector is a widely recognized fact. For several years, advocates of the allocation of resources to culture began to use economic impact studies in arguing against budget cuts. This type of studies provides economic and financial justifications, in addition to demonstrating that culture generates income and employment opportunities.

The cultural heritage was one of the first cultural areas to which an economic potential was recognized, the "preservation contributes", was the slogan coined in the United Kingdom in the eighties and, since then, the idea of ​​conservation as a development factor, it has acquired legitimacy. However, exaggerating this type of argument runs the risk of cultural objectives being subordinated to purely commercial objectives. The forms of cultural expression should not be reduced to mere mercantile values. "The transformation of culture and creative arts into commodities de-contextualizes and destroys the meaning of cultural practices. Equating arts to income-generating products eliminates spirituality, history, the value of cultural practices, a central element that maintains values ​​and exalts the traditions of disadvantaged communities" (UNESCO 2016: 158).

Already the agreement of the GATT, through its agreement on intellectual property TRIP (Agreement Trade Related Intellectual Property), has provoked a subtle reordering of the copyright towards a commercial perspective, although it has also established the exception of cultural products in the agreements commercial (article XX, b). Such measures, apart from the controversial debate that they generate, face the challenge of maintaining a balance between the interests of the exporting countries and the importing countries generally related to the developing countries. For its part, the European Union, through Article 128 of the Maastricht Treaty, has established as a requirement that the cultural dimension be taken into consideration when developing economic and social policies, reflecting the current tendency to include the evaluation of cultural impact in the economic decision-making processes.

Beyond the questioned commercial value of culture, another important problem is related to access to cultural products, respectively how can everyone be favoured equally? How can telecommunications reach billions of people living in hundreds of villages that do not have electricity? The privileged ones are only a minority concentrated mainly in developed countries and cities. Only 45 of 52 African countries – whose total population exceeds 600 million inhabitants – have national broadcasting systems. In Asia, only 18% of some 386 million households currently have access to cable or can directly receive satellite transmissions. The weak connection in the infrastructure chain of developing countries is often the "last mile" that separates the urban network from the user's home. Indeed, some African countries are so poor in telecommunications that they only have one line per thousand inhabitants, or illustrate the phrase: in Tokyo or Manhattan there are more telephones than in all of Africa (UNESCO 1997).

Another gap is observed in terms of the protection that has been given to cultural expressions between developed and developing countries. The UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972) exemplifies this situation very clear. This instrument applies only to real estate and was conceived and supported by the industrialized countries, reflecting a concern for a type of highly valued heritage in those countries. The list of World Cultural Heritage that includes 851 goods, reflects a frame of reference that is not really appropriate for the most common forms of heritage in regions where cultural energies have been concentrated in forms of expression such as handicrafts, dances and oral traditions. While 185 countries are signatories to what is now one of the most widely ratified legal instruments, everything seems to indicate that the most prosperous countries have benefited most from the Convention.

For this reason, it is necessary to determine other forms of recognition to effectively protect the diversity and wealth of the entire heritage that exists throughout the world. Demand equitable treatment for living heritage such as handcrafts, clothing, dances or traditional festivals related to millions of indigenous groups and populations of developing countries.

The living heritage suffers from strong tensions due to its relationship with the media, tourism and the market, leading in some cases to the spectacle and the overcrowding, which makes it lose a bit the essence of its identity. The challenge here will be not only to protect it, but to know how to manage a show art for tourism without losing the sense of belonging, without disassociating it from the cultural groups' own identity: "tourism should not invent traditions but be a tool for that the community values ​​its identity and heritage, and once it appreciates it, share it with the other that is the tourist. The cultural legacy is what adds value to the tourist experience, in the case of Europe, for example, this is an element that must be present in every offer of this sector" (Friedman 1994: 44).

Living heritage is often an intangible heritage, so it presents features of greater fragility before the challenges of its protection and, in this sense, some governments have begun to preserve and promote them through digital archives: "Economic and technological globalization will cause a greater mercantilist pressure around the patrimony, which will cause a race to obtain the not digitized patrimony. New technologies will be very useful tools for the management, transfer and conservation of heritage. In the future, what is not digitally protected will hardly be protected." (Friedman 1994: 63)

Now, digitizing heritage or translating cultural expressions into images implies the ability to produce them locally. In this respect, a structured national film sector is necessary. However, this capacity exists only in one hundred countries, representing 465 million people (8% of the world's population). The rest of the countries do not have a cinematographic image that reflects their own culture, which is why some have applied national policies that prioritize video and digital technologies and images, thus dividing production costs and considerably multiplying national audiences. A characteristic feature of the situation of 40 countries that do have a stable annual film production (between 10 and 200 films) is the dependence on direct financing from the government, together with a high degree of legal protection, which is even more important than public financing. (UNESCO 2000)

It would also be necessary to study the value and social, economic and cultural impact of the intangible heritage, such as the festivities, which unleash waves of creativity during the months preceding their celebration, create sources of employment, contribute to the quality of life of the place and revitalizes the tradition. It is also known that investment in the development of handicrafts can provide monetary income and generate employment. It has been estimated that handicrafts represent about a quarter of the microenterprises in the developing world; they allow producers to receive income directly and provide instruments to strengthen the participation of millions of people, many of them women, especially from rural areas. In this sense, respect for handicrafts also calls for greater respect for their producers, the artisans. Here have been the national laws that have provided the first initiatives: some museums in India, for example, have chosen to integrate in their programs of exhibition, conservation and education the artisanal production within their specialized field; other countries adopted laws to protect folkloric heritage, such as Bolivia, which was the first country that adopted this measure in 1967. From these initiatives in 1973, UNESCO assumes that it is their duty to study the protection of folklore from a legal point of view. (UNESCO 2015)

Cultural diversity equates to a certain socially stable order for the coexistence of groups with different cultural identities. This coexistence must have sufficient sustainability to allow the identities in question to be reproduced and evolved over time. A creative and sustainable evolution is the key to diversity, both within the state and between states, as a dynamic and open diversity. However, sustainable diversity is not so simple, since cultural systems change over time, while retaining certain distinctive characteristics. In this respect, in order for cultural diversity to be reproduced, not only the conditions for the survival and reproduction of culturally determined groups must be met. The relationships through which people interact must be able to reproduce as long time these models of reproduction are not mechanical or predictable, but they involve complex models of cultural evolution that arise from the relationships between local and global factors, between culture and history and between state policies and public opinion. Therefore, in order to concretize the ecological metaphor for a moment, not only the diversity of species must be brought to maximum expression, but the ecosystems in which they cohabit – such as forests, deserts or lakes – have been to be able to reproduce over time (UNESCO 2000).

In this regard, one must not forget the symbolic borders that are attributed to the different groups that interact, often they are the result of power relations in which it is necessary to reconstruct the agents, actions and interests of the actors that interact. In this framework, one must analyze relationships taking great care not to rebuild and not essentialize groups that present themselves as radically different cultures and identities and whose relationship is, at times, the one that is producing that radicalism of difference.

Contrary currents: the theory of cultural relativism

Faced with the thesis of cultural diversity, the theory of cultural relativism was opposed: the primacy of the particular over the universal (Spenser, Valery, Sebreli 2000). It is pointed out that cultural diversity gives philosophical reasons to nationalisms, fundamentalisms, primitivisms and various forms of anti-Westernism. The thesis mainly maintains that beyond cultures and diverse historical circumstances there is an essential identity in all men: all people get to understand each other and experience analogous emotional, volitional and intellectual states before the basic situations of life, expressive means are also repeated, as well as sometimes the rituals, rules, codes, taboos, prejudices and ideologies of different cultures. There is a common background in the forms of social organization, work and artistic creation, and even the different languages ​​probably have derived from a simple original language in the Neolithic age (Sebreli 1992: 73-75).

Diversification of human experience is attributed to cultural diversity and therefore they oppose it. Herder, in his Philosophy of History for the Education of Humanity (1774), was the first to use the word "cultures" in plural, distinguishing them from civilization. For Herder, the human experience was not uniform but diversified and the historical process was not extensive to all humanity, but was limited to particular peoples and strains, denouncing the invalidity of the general characteristics and any general concept was considered to be only an abstraction. Even human happiness was a heritage of peoples, ethnic groups, races, nations, the sense of happiness being peculiar to each culture and non-transferable to another. "Even the image of happiness varies with each state and latitude, because what else is happiness, but the sum of satisfactions, of desires, of realizations of ends and that sweet overcoming of the needs that all depend on the country, the time and place? Who can compare the different satisfaction of different senses of different worlds? "

In this respect, according to the theorists who oppose diversity, cultural relativism is reached, being considered an inevitable consequence of particularism. According to Sebreli (1992), the diversification of cultures was a relatively late evolution of a common humanity in the stage of homo sapiens as a consequence of the migrations of the last glacial cycle. The racial differences would be, according to this hypothesis, a simple expression of the adaptability to diverse environmental conditions, of temperature, light, humidity, pressure and solar radiation. He gives as an example the discovery of America, where civilizations were discovered that totally isolated from the rest of the world repeated forms similar to those experienced in other continents many centuries ago. In this respect, leaving human groups enough time, will probably pass through evolutionary stages similar to that of other groups. There is no absolute originality of a single human group, there are always similarities, either by diffusion, by influence or by coincidences and it can be demonstrated historically that all peoples have followed approximately the same successive steps. Forgetting that indigenous cultures are now fully developed cultures, which have not been frozen in time, but have another vision of development, one affirms that increasing the complexity of life, there are reasons for differentiation, and only at a stage of much greater development, such as the current one, can reunification be tried again and alert that civilizations that remain isolated and stagnate, being immobilized and becoming more vulnerable.

A variant of cultural relativism is linguistic relativism, according to which different linguistic systems condition different types of perceptions. "The truth is that the real world is largely built on the group's idiomatic habits. There are not two languages ​​sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are different worlds and not the same world with different labels about things". (Sapir cited in Sebreli 1992: 41) What the theory of relativism tries to show is that civilizations have never been isolated and their contributions have not been in any way incommunicable; on the contrary, they have always interacted by influencing each other. Even the idea of ​​the isolation of cultures from linguistic barriers is unsustainable if a common origin of languages ​​is recognized.

Since the most remarkable characteristics of Western civilization have been imposed to other civilizations and have been assimilated to the last corner of the Earth, Western civilization itself disappears as a specificity because it has become universal. In this respect, the particular identity is to a certain extent similar to the rest of humanity. Here, cultural diversity would not be the heritage of humanity, but rather the other way around, cultural heritage would be common to all humanity, diluting the differences. For those who defend diversity or "relativism", the universalization of the world, the massification of people, colorless and insipid uniformity, destruction of the varied and colorful particularisms that constitute the heritage and the charm of the world.

Already Strauss (1955: 27) had warned: "Never forget that no fraction of humanity has formulas applicable to the whole and that a humanity confused in a unique kind of life is inconceivable, because it would be a reified humanity. The monoculture is prepared to produce mass civilization and as beet, ordinarily, will be its only plate".

Sebreli (1992) considers that the colourful diversity that "relativists" long for is only perceived by travellers; for local members, on many occasions, it means nothing more than poverty, backwardness and oppression for individuals who want to free themselves from a tradition they do not believe in. The true enemy of the individual, he mentions, is not universal humanity but national, biological, racial, linguistic, classist particularism. The negative utopias on the massified world, on a single model of man have not been fulfilled; we already live in a globalized world and the individual is freer than when he lived in a village watched over by neighbours, controlled by family, tribe or clan.

The theory of relativism blamed anthropologists mainly, to absolutize their discoveries by converting behaviours into worldviews. He pointed out that for anthropologists everything was culture: a work of art, the way of eating, sanitizing, dressing, making love, working, burying the dead. In this respect, activities that required specialized preparation with those that were merely spontaneous, unconscious or transmitted by tradition were placed on the same level (Sebreli 1992).

Another position, that of Manuel Delgado (1998/1999), argues that to speak of cultural diversity is a redundancy, since differentiation is always a function of culture for humans. Thus, behavioural, linguistic and intellectual differences are always cultural, as well as any other difference that is considered culturally significant. Since there are in fact no more differences than previously the culture has codified as such.

He also affirms that it is naive to want to denounce globalization as the ultimate evil of the millennium and to believe that globalization would lead us to a single thought, when the single thought is above all the only son of dictatorial regimes, be they political or religious and has existed in all the times. It seems to him rather that they are democratic and even secular regimes, where the individual can better avoid the single thought. The danger sees it on the other hand, for example, in who establishes the traditional political power of the minorities that compose it; in the folklorization that sometimes is made of culture; what is saved, when you want to save the culture. Nothing than the ultimate horizon is the human being and not the ideologies.

Following this pattern, Weber (2000) considered that it is precisely the cultural difference that will form and create a coherent whole where the cultures here are fundamental because they contribute to the construction of a larger set that gives a new harmony to each culture, a new sense. Thus, a culture that does not want to adapt to the world is condemned to be abandoned. The question then centres on knowing if such or such a culture is willing to be part of the world mosaic to make more sense of the world.

Finally, one should mention that history itself has shown in the meeting between cultures that the differences almost never diminished harmoniously, it is enough to put the same example of the America’s conquest, where almost 90% of the population became extinct and not because they do not adapt to a globalizing world but because of exterminations, forced labour and epidemics.

There is talk of a globalized world that blurs identities, a reality that we do not deny, but it does not explain why there is a resurgence of identities in this context. It is considered that only at a much more developed stage could the reunification of humanity be attempted again, but we wonder if we are at that stage of development, if possible with the levels of poverty and inequality that currently exist. The cultures are condemned to disappear because they do not adapt to the world, it would be necessary to ask to what world they should adapt, it is truly a world in constant redefinition or the values ​​of the hegemonic cultures prevail, it is enough to remember the example of the languages ​​in the world, in which more than 40% of the population speaks no more than 8 of the almost 7,000 thousand languages ​​of the world. We should also ask ourselves if this globalized world offers them the possibilities of integrating or rather excluding them.

Conclusion

One would understand that the crossing of cultures is inevitable and is seen as enrichment. Affirming that cultures are not immutable, but relative identities, and that every culture is doomed to die, transform, and evolve, one would observe it difficult to accept. In this regard, it is impossible to speak of cultural integration, because there is no definite "culture" in which to integrate, what can exist is a civil, social, economic and political integration, it is society that demands integration, but in absolute "culture".

CHAPTER II. AN APPROACH TO THE ISSUES AND CHANGES THAT CULTURAL DIFFERENCES HAVE DEVELOPED

After the Second World War, political leaders sought that history would not be repeated. The famous phrase "war begins in the minds of men" offered some approximation to the prevention of conflict. The idea of ​​knowledge as the key to understanding and peace, and ignorance as the underlying cause of mistrust and war between people led UNESCO, for example, to direct its efforts to foster peaceful relations among its members, understanding that the key was "The intellectual and moral solidarity of humanity". The optimistic formula: "knowledge, understanding and peace", was quickly developed by a relatively small number of delegates at the UNESCO Constitutional Conference who had a common and urgent agenda for peace, facing the World War.

2.1. Knowledge of national cultures

Regarding the knowledge of national cultures, one would identify five phases in relation to the evolution of the concept of cultural diversity and the changes it has developed. The following five phases provide useful references as they reflect the consensus of the states. (UNESCO, 2004) The first phase comes after the period of the Second World War, when culture was spoken more in terms of cultural production and the nation states were seen as unitary entities. The concept of pluralism was connected to the differences between nations and not to differences within nations. The second phase is characterized by the broadening of the concept of culture to include its own "identity", this phase coincides with the growth of resistance to the domination of state power and imperialist ideology in the emerging context of the cold war. The third phase is when culture as a concept begins to be associated with development and brings an important change in the level of policy planning and in the field of research. The fourth phase is characterized by a link between culture and democracy, and a growing awareness of the need to broaden the concept of cultural diversity in order to encompass all the changes and meanings it contains. The most recent period is linked to cultural expressions and reflects the need to have a binding legal instrument that helps the theoretical work.

The main objective in the constitution of the organization was and is "to contribute to the maintenance of peace and security in the world by promoting, through education, science and culture, relations among nations." (UNESCO, 2004) The "culture" referring to the historical information and the artistic production of each unitary state, not yet explicitly understood as a particular experience with a specific content and identity, the culture was not yet politicized. However, a hint of the future political power of cultural diversity at this stage came in the reservation clauses, designed to reassure sovereignties that would not be curtailed as a result of their participation in international institutions. The limits of the scope of cultural organizations were identified and its competences with a view to: "preserve the independence, integrity, and fruitful diversity of the cultures and educational systems of the member states of the Organization".

Diversity was understood within the unitary model of each sovereign State over its own people and its own territory. The rulers would act in favour of their people, the idea that UNESCO, as a cultural organization, could be on top of their governments and directly cover their population was contrary to their mandate and would probably have prevented the formation of the organization as a whole. Only the stipulation that "the responsibility of the General Director and its secretariat staff should be exclusively international" opened the possibility for UNESCO to join the international community qualitatively different from those of its individual members. In the 1940s, an international community as an actor with duties and responsibilities was clearly at the forefront of its time. And the idea of ​​a more politicized cultural identity was already an embryonic notion that would develop over time (UNESCO, 2004).

2.2. Cultural identity

The report "Creative arts" written by L. Egri in 1946 stated that "art transcends documentation by interpretation, and helps to give people and nations an intimate knowledge of each of the human beings within different conditions, but in close relationship with human experience, which is essential for the achievement of world peace" (Egri 1946: 123). "In the human family, each country and region has its own characteristics and values, and each one makes this distinction a contribution to the common treasure of culture" (Egri 1946:124). The arts, the concrete product of culture, are then the means of exchange and mutual understanding: "art is the key to understanding our culture and that of our neighbors" (Egri 1946: 6), and diversity is understood as a source of wealth and not of conflict. The Report echoes the constitution formula of the organization: "knowledge, understanding and peace".

However, the Director General's Report of 1947 (written by Sir Julian Huxley) pointed out that this variety of human experiences could lead to conflict. Given this possibility, Huxley pushed a middle ground between standardization and incomprehension, captured in the now familiar motto: "unity in diversity" (p.47) and, although noble, this phrase did not go beyond rhetoric, as it did not count with a clarified content yet.

Likewise, the project "General History of Civilizations" written by A.H. Dani (2005) pointed out that there were multiple civilizations, not a single category that adequately involved all human experience. This idea, the emphasis on particularity rather than universality, was reinforced in the observation that differentiated cultural diversity from science whose ultimate goal is the unity of even uniformity. Diversity could be based on the idea of ​​endogenous development as the development trajectory that presents to people their "unique culture", rather than uniformity or a formula of trajectory prescribed by the dictates of science; which did not imply isolating it. The potential for "empowerment" contained in this diversity was motivated by the goal of preventing smaller nations from being dominated by the propaganda of politically more powerful nations, a message clearly related to the cold war context that was emerging.

In this respect, two important issues emerged in the platform of UNESCO, linked together, and contain at the same time a certain internal tension, if not a contradiction: first, the mutual concessions between unity and difference, the idea that the first could be achieved without sacrificing the second; and second, the idea of ​​individual development trajectories, with the advantages of a balanced "empowerment" against the potential dangers of excessive isolation.

Previously, following the titles of the reports of the General Director, one could see how "culture" was perceived and defended as cultural activities. In this respect, it seemed to occupy an autonomous sphere separate from the social sciences. In 1951, however, Sub Section 4E of the category of cultural activities dealt with "action in the service of human rights", establishing a relationship between culture and rights, which represented an important step in bringing culture closer to society as a central line of politics, making it constitutive of individual and group identity and independence (and not simply expressive or as a product). For that reason in 1952 the Economic and Social Committee was specifically responsible for: "fight against discriminatory measures and the protection of minorities", which reflected again that the realization of culture could not be limited to the definition of artistic production.

From the Report in 1952, it can be observed that the question of industrialization and technical assistance were limited by concern for cultural diversity, taking into account the obvious objective of "balanced modernization, which at the same time preserves the originality of the particular cultural and social values ​​"(UNESCO 2004: 199); and that the question of "social integration" (UNESCO 2004: 200) began to emerge remarkably with the assimilation of immigration as a positive objective that needed to be reached in order that immigrants could belong to the host society and fully enjoy their rights. This was also reflected in the "measures to end discrimination and thus accelerate the integration of groups, excluded so far within the community" (UNESCO 2004: 206), with the theoretical and practical differences between assimilation and integration policies not yet developed clearly. At a specific level, studies were developed on these topics, such as the Yugoslav National Commission on "The policies implemented and the results achieved with respect to the integration of national and cultural minorities" (UNESCO 2004: 207), suggesting that individuals they needed to be treated as members of specific groups in certain political situations, an observation that would acquire added importance with the appearance of the discourse "of the right of the people" of the last decades.

The issue of mutual knowledge remained important, the Report articulated the conviction that if people knew that there was no scientific basis for prejudice about ethnic differences, they would automatically accept and support racial equality (UNESCO 2004: 204). This position ignored political motivations to perpetuate false ideas and build ethnic differences as an indicator of natural inequality or socio-political differences. In this respect, education was fundamental, as evidenced in the 1945 Report of the Education Section, saying that education "protects the individual's sense of loyalty to his own country and humanity, his awareness of belonging to an extensive family, their confidence in the international institutions that maintain and promote peace and union among the entire world population "( UNESCO 2004: 211), and reinforced the idea of ​​the unity of the human family.

The Report of 1960 added two reflections to the "Main Project on Mutual Appreciation" between East and West. First, the emphasis on "programs for the general public" (UNESCO 2004: 157) highlighted the importance of spreading culture, not only among intellectuals from different countries, but also to people within the same countries. Secondly, the terms used to describe the process of cultural exchange could equally be applied to political exchanges between different cultures, revealing the potential susceptibility in such efforts: "the meeting of people representing different branches of art and literature allowed continuing with the confrontation of spiritual values ​​and the criteria of artistic sensitivity of the East and the West, taking into account the important differences presented by the personalities of the creators and the fact that they do not stop drawing their inspiration in the most diverse cultures" (UNESCO 2004: 161). The important question is how the difference can form the behaviour, going a step forward, the mere recognition of the different cultures of the people can explain that they react differently in the same situation.

An important document of the 1960s that emerged from discussions about culture and its influence on international relations was the "Declaration of Principles of International Cultural Cooperation" of 1966, Resolution of the 14th session of the General Conference, during the twentieth anniversary of UNESCO. Article I establishes the importance of each culture, for the people to whom it belongs (Article I.2) and as part of the common heritage of humanity (Article I.3). Article IV.4 reflects a similar balance, the assumption that each individual is able to enjoy other cultures and not just their own. Once again this compensation is evoked at both levels (one's own and that of others), promoting mutual enrichment and respect for the originality of each culture in the efforts of international cooperation, and maintaining the imperative of the sovereignty of the states (Article XI.1) under the ideals of freedom and openness (Article VII).

The Declaration was important within a political will for cooperation, but could not resolve in detail the specificities and potential contradictions that this implied in cooperation. The politicization of culture made it more present in the international agenda and, at the same time, raised the milestones in cultural cooperation and intercultural activities (UNESCO, 2004).

2.3. Endogenous development

The need to overcome rhetoric with resources and provide material support for cultural development became a priority in the late 1960s. This was reflected in a series of meetings, such as the Intergovernmental Conference on Institutions, Administrations and Financial Aspects of Cultural Policies (Venice 1970). The Report of 1969 (section 3.2.d) also mentioned the "right to culture", making culture an even more important category by emphasizing the individual right to culture (according to Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Rights Humans) and assured "aid to the Member States for cultural development" which focused mainly on translation, literary dissemination and cultural exchanges.

The 1975-76 Report linked cultural flourishing to the development and well-being of a nation as a whole (culture at the service of development, category 4A); the 1979-80 Report emphasized that this challenge to the traditional dichotomy between economics and aesthetics was an essential element in the strategy of promoting cultural financing (UNESCO 2004: 50)

The idea of ​​endogenous or diversified development, the cornerstone of Report 1977-78, of subdivision 1.2 of Education and Section 2.1.2 of the Social Sciences, connected culture to development. For new independent and developing countries, culture provided a unique direction for an autonomous path of progress that would be politically independent and economically "empowered". This report gave "appreciation and respect for cultural identity," which implied respect for cultural identity as a set of political and economic options (rather than simply aesthetic), as a prerequisite for greater equality in the nations of the world.

Beyond the question of power in international relations, another element emerged in the study of culture and cultural policies. According to the last mentioned report, "the new and main characteristic of the program for the studies of cultures is the importance given to cultural interactions" (UNESCO 2004: 40). As part of this change of direction, "an attempt is being made to study regional cultures" and "a great interest is being shown in cultural regions that are in themselves units of synthesis of a variety of cultural influences and contributions. The intra-societal issue of cultural diversity had often been overlooked in the post-war context, where peace and understanding among sovereign states was the highest priority for international organizations that peace and understanding "within" those states. A really important step for an organization such as UNESCO, which in its mandate explicitly avoided being "interfered" in the internal affairs of its members. However, it became increasingly clear that many of the issues surrounding intercultural relations were within and between societies themselves.

The suggestion that the strategies should be useful at both levels: intra and international became an important part of the UNESCO platform; however, the balance between accentuating "convergent values" and "recognizing differences" was easier to maintain in theory than to execute it in practice. Thus, the Medium Term Plan for 1977-82 identified some of these issues and included some of the following objectives, which show the priorities in the study of culture during that period.

Objective 1.2 regarding the promotion of appreciation and respect for the cultural identity of individuals, groups, nations or regions is an example. He showed that cultural identity could belong to a diverse number of entities (individuals, groups, etc.), with two implications: first, this interculturality does not simply begin where the frontier of a state ends; and, second, that respect for cultural identity may demand rights for groups as well as for individuals.

Sub-objective 1.2.1: Promotion of cultural identity as a factor of independence and solidarity. It reinforced the geopolitical importance of culture as a force for liberation at this stage, although the dual imperatives of independence and solidarity did not combine very well: Could the reactivation of cultural identities be maintained as the central pillar of political independence, or did they help hinder attempts at international understanding? What positive elements of a common culture could be preserved to preserve something solid among diverse people, while at the same time avoiding the colonial excesses of uniformity and domination at all costs? At least, the political points in question were clear: "the identity of nations, which is the basis for their sovereignty and a precondition for dialogue, draws its strength in the intensity and authenticity of their cultural life" (UNESCO 2004: 11). The plan suggested that the affirmation about culture could be a fact that promoted mutual understanding: "For each nation, whether or not its own political master, whether or not there is great power, has a full range of resources and skills at their disposal or that are still at the stage of development, the affirmation of cultural identity is the basis of "cultural pluralism " and " the acceptance and respect for such pluralism, with equal rights and on an equal footing, is today clearly a factor that contributes to peace and understanding among nations "( UNESCO 2004: 11).

Sub-objective 1.2.3: Promotion of cultural identity within the context of a global development strategy. The relationship between culture and endogenous development was absolutely clear at this stage, but it was less clear what was meant by "global development strategy", especially together with the emphasis on unique and autonomous trajectories. Could different styles of development be coordinated and complementary without being uniform? To what extent was cultural identity a vehicle for development and to what extent was it something that had to be protected against the affects of the development process? Despite these potential contradictions, a more sophisticated concept of development arose during this period to encompass cultural aspects: "Thus, the principle that has been recognized once, has begun to be applied, development cannot be limited only to the economy it implies growth goals that must be defined in terms of cultural, individual and collective improvements, and of general well-being" (Medium-term Plan 1984-1989: 234). The call to a new international economic order maintained cultural identity as an "essential condition" of endogenous and integrated development, with political liberation and economic development, as preconditions for obtaining cultural affirmation, creating a virtuous circle of cultural and economic prosperity. Culture was not only a channel of expression, but it was itself constitutive of people as political agents in this international stage.

Sub-objective 1.2.4: Promotion of respect for the cultural identity of individuals and groups, with particular emphasis on those affected by the social phenomenon of exclusion within developed or developing societies. It raised the question of intra-societal cultural identities, and the question of social cohesion within the same states. While the situation of immigrant workers had already been studied in this context, the growing realization that the populations of the states were in fact much more diverse than they had been, opened a new series of questions and priorities. Especially in urban centres, the discourse of marginalization involved both socio-economic and cultural factors, which were frequently mentioned. This objective evokes the central idea of pluralism as participation and sharing, not only withdrawn to the notion of intercultural dialogue.

Likewise, the Intergovernmental Conference of Bogota on Cultural Policies in Latin America and the Caribbean of 1978 had as its main themes cultural identity, cultural development, and cultural cooperation and marked a crucial moment for UNESCO in cultural cooperation. The idea that cultural pluralism could be "the very essence of cultural identity" challenged the picture of culturally monolithic states and introduced the notion, already familiar in the Latin American region, of a "culture of miscegenation". Given this enormous diversity, the conclusion reached was that "the cultural diversity of the people must be seen as a stabilizing factor rather than a divisor". Taking advantage of this potential implies "encouraging people to regain control over their own destiny, while at the same time consolidating their interest in the outside world" (UNESCO 2004: 1).

"Empowerment" would lead to exchanges, not exclusions. The established idea of ​​culture as the very essence of people, and not just as a product was also pointed out in the Declaration of Bogotá: "Culture as the sum total of the values ​​and creations of a society and the expression of life itself is essential for life and not a simple means or subsidiary instrument of social activity" (UNESCO 2004: 1). In the spirit of the Bogota Conference, cultural cooperation would provide the relationship between diversity and solidarity, with UNESCO as an institutional facilitator (UNESCO, 2004).

2.4. Democracy and multicultural societies

The Report of 1981-83 referring to Resolution 4/01 promoted "the implementation of the recommendation on participation of people in general in cultural life and in their contribution to it and in studies of national cultural legislation" (XXII). According to this, the management of cultural pluralism was a question within societies. It was emphasized that cultural rights could be demanded by individuals and groups within developed and developing countries.

The Declaration of Mexico on cultural policies included a definition of culture that presented an evolution of concepts since the creation of UNESCO. The statement noted that "in its broadest sense, it can now be said that culture is a complex set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional characteristics that characterize a society or social group. It includes not only the arts and letters, but also the ways of life, the fundamental rights of the human being, the value systems, traditions and beliefs" (UNESCO 2004: 39). According to this definition, the concept of culture by itself contains both the universal and the particular: the idea of ​​fundamental universal human rights, and the traits, beliefs and particular forms of life allow the members of a group to feel a special and unique relationship with other members.

The Declaration of Mexico also defined the breadth of the role of culture: "culture gives man the ability to reflect on it. It is culture that makes us specific, rational human beings, endowed with a critical judgment and a moral sense. It is through culture that we discern values ​​and make choices. It is through culture that man expresses himself, is aware of himself, recognizes his incomplete state, questions his own achievements, tirelessly seeks new meanings and creates jobs through which he overcomes his limitations" (UNESCO 2004: 39). This more sophisticated view of culture as a universal faculty, rather than a rigid system of practices, offers maximum potential for flexibility and transcends it. This effort also represents an important counterweight to the excessive politicization of cultural identity at the expense of a search for common values.

Liberation remained an imperative for groups within society and for societies themselves, even after the initial wave of decolonization. The 1984-89 Medium Term Plan recognized "many and varied prerequisites – not only political and legal, but also economic, social and cultural – for the effective enjoyment of all people of true independence, that is, the ability to to solve his own future according to his aspirations" (UNESCO 2004: 261). The relationship between culture and politics, initiated for several decades, was strengthened by attention to democracy and the promotion of economic, social, and cultural rights within societies and internationally. As always, this affirmation of the particularity was redefined by the permanent question of "is it possible to identify a significant system of values ​​shared by the whole of humanity?" (UNESCO 2004: 234).

On December 8, 1986, at its centennial plenary meeting, the General Assembly of the United Nations published the Declaration of the World Decade for Cultural Development. Its goals were: the recognition of the cultural dimension of development, the affirmation and enrichment of cultural identities, the increase of participation in culture and the international promotion of cultural cooperation. The relationship between culture and politics, development and democracy were evident in these four objectives, both internationally and intranationally. The Report for 1988-89 highlighted this relationship by stating that "the effective exercise of cultural and linguistic rights is becoming increasingly important in the resolution of national and international conflicts and in the protection of human rights" (p.77), showing the desire to achieve universality without imposing uniformity.

The report for 1990-91 emphasized the enhancement of democracy, and the expansion of peace and intercultural dialogue. The Prague International Forum on Culture and Development of September 1991 explored "ways to build a new concept of citizenship, based on greater knowledge and responsibility, through the development of civic dimensions together with purely political aspects". UNESCO's ongoing efforts were related to this ideal in the area of ​​people's rights, self-determination and cultural identity, with a plan to prepare "a specific study on autonomy and new political arrangements, as well as on multiculturalism as an alternative model of assimilation and integration to address the rights of national minorities" (UNESCO 2004: 81).

Far from the days when assimilation was seen as an objective for immigrants, as the only way to enjoy rights as members of the host society, this new model of multiculturalism allowed a greater preservation of diversity and cultural autonomy within the same societies, with the hope that the bonds of citizenship would unite the diverse cultures within the same state. The questions of how the concept of citizenship could or should be, is still presented as an unresolved issue to this day.

The Medium Term Strategy for 1996-2001 continues to emphasize avoiding intra-state conflicts, "for what multi-ethnic, multicultural or multireligious provide a more fertile soil" (UNESCO 2004: 6). These conflicts, caused by "the fear of differences", threaten global security and social cohesion. The idea that "the new world that forms is undoubtedly less homogeneous and therefore less" governable "than it appears" (p.6) highlights an urgent need for concepts and strategies addressed and managed to these challenges. The observation of conflicts that may explode over time is perceived as "cleavage" between populations and cannot be ignored. The work of the United Nations, according to this strategy, is to try to "call the order within the international society that becoming global is fragmenting in the same time" (p.6), and the construction and maintenance of peace in the bases "Of equity, justice and freedom". The high priority of the Medium Term Plan repeated over and over again, of creating "public orders that help to consolidate social cohesion within multi-ethnic or multicultural societies" (UNESCO 2004: 45) was basically to allow individuals to enjoy their security safely, individual and plural identities within a social and democratic framework.

2.5. Cultural expressions

After the two round tables of culture ministers, one on "culture and creativity in a globalized world" (1999) and the other on "cultural diversity 2000-2010: market challenges" (2000), and a Committee of Experts on "The consolidation of UNESCO's role in the promotion of cultural diversity in the context of globalization" (Paris, 2000), the 31st session of the General Conference unanimously adopted the Universal Declaration of UNESCO on Cultural Diversity, within a rather unusual context. It came from the lags of the September 11, 2001 event, so it was an opportunity for states to reaffirm their conviction of intercultural dialogue as the best guarantee of peace and openly reject the theory of the inevitable clash of cultures and civilizations.

For the first time, cultural diversity was recognized as "the common heritage of humanity", whose defence was considered an ethical and practical imperative, inseparable from respect for human dignity. And freedom of expression, pluralism of the media, multilingualism, equal access for all cultures to artistic expressions, scientific and technological knowledge, and the possibility that they are present in the means of expression and dissemination constituted the essential guarantees of cultural diversity. The new challenges that were presented to UNESCO were related to the expansion of the globalization process, which entails two unprecedented potentialities: that of expression and the risk of marginalizing the most vulnerable cultures.

In this perspective, UNESCO highlights the need to protect tangible and intangible heritage in all its aspects, as well as the diversity of contemporary intellectual and artistic creation. Particular attention is paid to the commercial exploitation of cultural products, which are also symbols of identity. This means taking into account copyright, intellectual property and the formation of new global markets.

Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, there have been many international initiatives on the advisability of strengthening a normative and unified framework for cultural diversity. For this reason, in 2003, at a meeting of the Executive Council, the member states considered it advisable to elaborate a mandatory normative instrument on cultural diversity, for which four options were proposed:

a) a new and comprehensive cultural rights instrument

b) an instrument about the status of the artist

c) a new Protocol to the Florence Agreement

d) a new instrument in the protection of the diversity of cultural contents and artistic expressions. The latter option was adopted on the recommendation of the Executive Board.

The Convention, inspired by the principles of the Universal Declaration (mainly the relationship between cultural diversity and fundamental rights, democracy, dialogue and development) was initiated with the aim of recognizing the equal importance of the cultural and economic aspects of development, and nature specific cultural content and artistic expressions; that is, the dual cultural and economic nature of cultural goods and services.

The ultimate goal was to provide all countries with the means to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions within and beyond their borders, to allow all countries and, especially, developing countries to participate in a more balanced in globalization and benefit from the diversity of its cultural expressions. Cultural diversity was identified as the main motive for sustainable development that states should promote by adopting appropriate measures. In the opinion of UNESCO, the development of new technologies should not weaken cultural diversity, insisting on the need to promote media pluralism, linguistic diversity and the presence of local content in cyberspace, including this new economic dimension and technology induced by globalization in its strategy for cultural diversity.

In preparing the preliminary outline, the General Conference entrusted UNESCO with the mandate to undertake consultations with the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the World Intellectual Property Organization. (WIPO) to ensure that the convention is complementary to them, rather than contrary to them, taking into account that they are pre-existing international legal instruments (UNESCO 2004).

The most sensitive issue was the article on the relationship of the convention with other international treaties. The two extremes were (Obuljen 2006):

a) those who favoured subordinating the convention to other agreements, including trade agreements in particular, noting that nothing in the Convention could repeal rights and obligations in other international instruments;

b) those who believed that the Convention should ensure that any discussion of cultural goods and services should be judged exclusively under the terms of this new legal instrument, guided only on the basis of principles and objectives of cultural diversity (Obuljen 2006).

This article is still controversial and was drafted to regulate a relationship of complementarity with the rest of the international treaties, based on the good faith of the states. Thus, after intense discussions and negotiations, the 33rd Assembly of the General Conference of the United Nations Organization, meeting in Paris in October 2005, approved the "Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions", the same that entered into force on March 18, 2007, with 54 ratifications.

2.6. Conclusion

Summing up the work of UNESCO, the search for peace led to establish the relationship between culture and knowledge as the central pillar in peaceful relations between countries; the relationship between culture and politics made cultural identity crucial in the search for political independence; the relationship between culture and development allowed the new countries to build economic power and position themselves in the international context, and the relationship between culture and democracy drew attention to the interior of the states and the cultural relations that developed in it. Currently, the implicit relationship between culture and security can serve to reinforce the importance of intercultural relations as a cornerstone of international peace, with all the financial and administrative assistance that this priority requires.

The objective of the Convention to preserve cultural diversity in the rise of new technologies and the globalization of trade, only remains to reiterate what Nina Obuljen (2006: 34) pointed out "if the purpose of the convention was only to take out the culture of the scope of the WTO and other trade and investment agreements, it was then a losing battle even before it started. No country could have been involved in such an exercise, […] the key element will surely be how the signatories take seriously their responsibility to work together to achieve the objectives of the convention.

CHAPTER III. THE RIGHT TO CULTURAL DIVERSITY

Cultural diversity is currently threatened by globalization, global commercialization and transnational corporations that do not care about customs, but rather, they put economics before culture, destroying the cultural patrimony of states to obtain money and power. Diversity in culture is a legacy of our ancestors, who far from contemplating a homogeneity in the way of being and acting, kept their uses and customs, as well as the cultural forms of coexistence of their ancestors, which allowed for the identification full to a certain social or ethnic group. In this way, identity, belonging, incorporation to a population and nationality were preserved. This diversity is protected by the laws of each country, but it also regulates and protects differences, while it must protect and respect people manifestation in the area of ​​ human rights’ protection.

3.1. Universal Declaration for Cultural Diversity

The Declaration aspires to preserve cultural diversity, understood not as a static heritage but as a process that guarantees the survival of humanity; avoiding any segregationist and fundamentalist bias that, in the name of cultural differences, takes those same differences to extremes and thus distorts the message of human rights. (Obuljen 2006) The Declaration is based on the fact that each individual must recognize not only alterity in all its forms but also the plural nature of its own identity within equally plural societies. Only in this way is it possible to preserve cultural diversity in its dual dimension as an evolutionary process and as a source of expression. Overcoming thus the debate between the countries that wish to defend the cultural goods and services "that, to be carriers of identity, values ​​and sense, they should not be considered merchandise or goods of consumption like the others", and those that looked for to promote the cultural rights, by combining these two complementary aspirations, highlighting the causal link that unites them: one cannot exist without the other.

The preamble of the declaration presents a fairly broad definition of culture: "Culture must be considered as the set of distinctive spiritual and material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or a social group and that encompasses, in addition to the arts and letters, ways of life, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs", and affirms that respect for the diversity of cultures, tolerance, dialogue and cooperation, in a climate of trust and mutual understanding, are the best guarantors of international peace and security.

From here on, in its articles the Declaration presents a review of the main issues on cultural diversity that UNESCO has been working on and recording in its Reports over the years since its establishment:

Cultural diversity is recognized as the common heritage of humanity, which must be recognized and consolidated for the benefit of present and future generations (art.1).

Presents cultural pluralism as a political response to the fact of cultural diversity, inseparable from the democratic context, understanding by this, the harmonious interaction and a willingness to live of people and groups with plural, dynamic and dynamic cultural identities seeking the inclusion and participation of all the citizens (art.2).

Maintains that cultural diversity is a factor of development, understanding development not only in terms of economic growth, but also as a means of access to a satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual existence (art. 3).

As the defence of cultural diversity an ethical imperative, inseparable from respect for the dignity of the human person, implies the commitment to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular the rights of persons belonging to minorities and of the indigenous peoples. Making the clarification that nobody can invoke cultural diversity to violate human rights (Article 4).

Regarding cultural rights, it recognizes every person the right to be able to express themselves, create and disseminate their works in the language they want and in particular in their mother tongue; the right to quality education and training that fully respects their cultural identity; as well as the right to participate in the cultural life of their choice and to exercise their own cultural practices, within the limits imposed by respect for fundamental rights (art. 5).

A diversity accessible to all is sought so that all cultures can express themselves and make themselves known (art.6).

Points out that cultural goods and services are goods that are different from others. Therefore, particular attention must be paid to the diversity of the creative offer, to the just consideration of the rights of authors and artists, as well as to the specific nature of the cultural goods and services that are carriers of identity, values ​​and meaning (art.8).

Cultural policies, while guaranteeing the free circulation of ideas and works, must create favourable conditions for the production and dissemination of diversified cultural goods and services, thanks to cultural industries that have the means to develop at the local and regional levels. (article 9).

Given the current imbalances in the flow and exchange of cultural goods worldwide, it is necessary to strengthen international cooperation and solidarity aimed at enabling all countries, particularly developing countries and countries in transition, establish viable and competitive cultural industries at the national and international levels (Article 10).

Finally, the functions of UNESCO are presented, whose responsibility includes:

a) promoting the consideration of the principles enunciated in the Declaration in the development strategies elaborated within the various intergovernmental entities;

b) to constitute a reference and agreement instrument between the States, international governmental and non-governmental organizations, civil society and the private sector for the joint elaboration of concepts, objectives and policies in favour of cultural diversity;

c) continue its normative action, awareness raising and capacity building in the areas related to this Declaration that correspond to its spheres of competence;

d) facilitate the implementation of the Action Plan attached as an annex to this Declaration (Article 12).

3.2 Main orientations of an Action Plan for the implementation of the Universal Declaration

It was hoped that all member states would commit not only to widely disseminate the UNESCO Declaration on Cultural Diversity and promote its effective implementation, but also to commit themselves through cooperation in the realization of the objectives of the Action Plan, including:

1. To deepen the international debate on the problems related to cultural diversity, in particular those related to its links with development and its influence in the formulation of policies, both nationally and internationally; deepen in particular the reflection on the advisability of elaborating an international legal instrument on cultural diversity.

2. To promote the exchange of knowledge and good practices in the field of cultural pluralism with a view to facilitating the inclusion and participation of people and groups that come from varied cultural horizons.

3. Advance in the understanding and clarification of the content of cultural rights, considered as an integral part of human rights.

4. Safeguard the linguistic heritage of humanity and support the expression, creation and dissemination in as many languages ​​as possible, as well as respecting the mother tongue at all levels of education.

5. Incorporate, to the educational process, as much as necessary, traditional pedagogical methods, in order to preserve and optimize culturally appropriate methods for communication and the transmission of knowledge.

6. Encourage "electronic literacy" and increase the mastery of new information and communication technologies, which should be considered both as teaching disciplines and as pedagogical instruments capable of reinforcing the effectiveness of educational services.

7. Fight against inequalities in electronics, favouring the access of developing countries to new technologies, helping them to dominate information technologies and facilitating both the electronic circulation of endogenous cultural products and the access of those countries to the numerical resources of educational, cultural and scientific order, available worldwide.

8. Encourage the production, safeguarding and dissemination of diversified content in the media and global information networks and, to this end, promote the role of public broadcasting and television services in the production of audiovisual productions of quality, favouring in particular the establishment of cooperative mechanisms that facilitate the diffusion of the same.

9. Develop policies and strategies for the preservation and appreciation of cultural and natural heritage, in particular the oral and intangible heritage, and combat illicit trafficking in cultural goods and services.

10. Respect and protect traditional knowledge systems, especially those of indigenous populations; recognize the contribution of traditional knowledge to the protection of the environment and the management of natural resources and favour the synergies between modern science and local knowledge.

11. Support the mobility of creators, artists, researchers, scientists and intellectuals and the development of international research programs and associations, while at the same time preserving and increasing the creative capacity of developing countries and countries in transition.

12. Guarantee the protection of copyright and related rights, with a view to fostering the development of contemporary creativity and a fair remuneration of creative work, while defending the public right of access to culture.

13. To assist in the creation or consolidation of cultural industries in developing countries and countries in transition and, for this purpose, to cooperate in the development of necessary infrastructures and competencies, to support the creation of viable local markets and to facilitate the access of cultural goods from these countries to the world market and international distribution circuits.

To elaborate cultural policies that promote the principles inscribed in the present Declaration, among other things by means of support mechanisms for execution and / or of appropriate regulatory frameworks, respecting the international obligations of each State.

3.3. Convention regarding the Protection and Promotion of Cultural Expressions’ Diversity

An antecedent of the convention was the UNESCO Symposium on culture, market and globalization entitled: "Culture: a different commodity from the others?" (1999), whose final document was repeatedly cited in all the discussions that called for a deal special for culture in the global economy. The conclusions were inspired by the shared understanding that culture was not only an economic concept and therefore could not be treated like any other commodity; but have special treatment. Also, because some countries pointed out that the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity was only a declaratory instrument, the General Conference pointed out the convenience of elaborating an international convention on cultural contents and artistic expressions, taking into account cultural goods and services, as carriers of identity, values ​​and meaning, and not just as simple merchandise or consumer goods, something that had already affirmed the Declaration, and that finally collected the Convention, noting that they are both economic and cultural: with content cultural and commercial value.

In order to give an incentive to the least developed countries for their participation in the negotiations, the experts included in the strong measures of the draft convention to support the development of cultural capacity in these countries, including measures of positive discrimination, where the rich countries would agree increase the cultural market share of goods and services from developing countries. It was recognized from the beginning, as a consequence of a great variety of systems and cultural policies, that the convention should not impose or introduce any uniform rule.

The most sensitive issue was the article on the relationship between the convention and other international treaties. The main concern of these countries was that the wording and formulations of the Convention interfere with other international instruments and obligations, especially those related to trade. Governments in favour of the convention, insisted on its design to address a broader position of culture in international law (UNESCO 2004).

The Convention already in force, becomes a mandatory norm for all the states that ratified it. The preamble of the Convention includes most of the fundamental issues of cultural diversity, already recognized in the Universal Declaration, as reiterating that cultural diversity constitutes a common heritage of humanity that must be valued and preserved for the benefit of all, and that is indispensable for peace and security at the local, national and international levels.

In this last statement, UNESCO's approach changes with respect to the Declaration that ensured that cultural diversity was a guarantee for international peace. Here, diversity is guarantor of peace in all areas: local, national and international, in recognition that current conflicts are no longer developed between states, but within states.

One of its innovative bets is the incorporation of culture as a strategic element of national and international development policies, as well as in international cooperation for development; that is, cultural diversity is recognized as a factor of development.

Another novelty is the explicit mention of "indigenous peoples", recognizing the importance of their traditional knowledge as a source of immaterial and material wealth, in particular their knowledge systems and their positive contribution to sustainable development, as well as the need to guarantee their protection and promotion in an appropriate way. It also recognizes the importance of the vitality of cultures, especially for minorities and indigenous peoples, as manifested in their freedom to create, disseminate and distribute their traditional cultural expressions, as well as their right to have access to them in order to take advantage of them for your own development. Recalls that linguistic diversity is a fundamental element of cultural diversity and recognizes the need to adopt measures to protect especially cultural expressions in situations of danger of extinction or serious impairment.

Among the definitions for Convention purposes (art. 4), cultural diversity is recognized as the multiplicity of ways in which the cultures of groups and societies are expressed. The same that enriches and transmits the cultural heritage of humanity not only through this variety of cultural expressions, but also through the different modes of artistic creation, production, dissemination, distribution and enjoyment of cultural expressions, whatever the means and technologies used. Cultural expressions would be the expressions resulting from the creativity of people, groups and societies, which have a cultural content. And cultural industries would be those industries that produce and distribute cultural goods and services. A last important definition is that of interculturality, such as the presence and equitable interaction of diverse cultures and the possibility of general shared cultural expressions, acquired through dialogue and an attitude of mutual respect. Here I emphasize equitable interaction, because without this budget we would not be talking about a true dialogue between cultures.

Among its objectives we have (art.1):

protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions;

create the conditions for cultures to flourish and interact freely in a mutually beneficial way;

foster dialogue between cultures in order to guarantee broader and more balanced cultural exchanges in the world in favour of intercultural respect and a culture of peace;

promote interculturality in order to develop cultural interaction;

promote respect for the diversity of cultural expressions and raise awareness of their value at the local, national and international levels;

reaffirm the importance of the link between culture and development for all countries, especially developing countries;

recognize the specific nature of cultural activities and goods and services in their capacity as carriers of identity, values ​​and meaning;

reiterate the sovereign rights of States to conserve, adopt and apply the policies and measures they deem necessary to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions in their respective territories;

strengthen international cooperation and solidarity in a spirit of collaboration, in order to strengthen, in particular, the capacities of developing countries in order to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions.

The objectives already show a change in the political approach, which goes from the cultural plurality that the Declaration bets on, as a mere observation of a plurality of cultures within the same territory, a commitment to interculturality, recognized as the need for dialogue between cultures under equal conditions, from which shared elements can emerge. The relationship between cultural diversity and development is also clearly present, as well as the commitment to cooperation for development through cultural policies, especially in developing countries.

Among the guiding principles of the Convention, it is pointed out (art. 2):

Principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, which requires protecting and promoting cultural diversity by guaranteeing human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Principle of sovereignty, which recognizes the sovereign right of States to adopt measures and policies to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions in their respective territories.

Principle of equal dignity and respect for all cultures, which presupposes the recognition of the equal dignity of all cultures and respect for them, including the cultures of people belonging to minorities and those of indigenous peoples.

Principle of international solidarity and cooperation that should aim to enable all countries, especially developing countries, to create and strengthen their means of cultural expression, including their cultural industries, nascent or established, at the local level, National and international.

Principle of complementarity of the economic and cultural aspects of development, which recognizes that culture is one of the main engines of development, and that cultural aspects of it are as important as its economic aspects.

Principle of sustainable development, by which the protection, promotion and maintenance of cultural diversity are an essential condition for sustainable development for the benefit of current and future generations.

Principle of equitable access to a rich and diversified range of cultural expressions from all parts of the world and the access of cultures to the means of expression and dissemination.

Principle of openness and balance, which seeks to promote in an appropriate way an openness to the other cultures of the world.

The rights of the Parties stipulate that they may adopt measures to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions in their respective territories. These measures may consist of regulatory measures; measures that provide opportunities for national cultural activities, goods and services, for their creation, production, distribution, dissemination and enjoyment, including provisions regarding the language used for such activities, goods and services; measures aimed at providing independent cultural industries and informal sector activities with effective access to the means of production, dissemination and distribution of cultural goods and services; measures to grant public financial assistance; measures aimed at encouraging public or private organizations or entities, artists and other cultural professionals; to promote and promote the free exchange and circulation of ideas, cultural expressions and activities, cultural goods and services; measures aimed at promoting the diversity of social media, etc. (art.6.2).

The Convention introduces a special approach to gender and indigenous peoples when it establishes that measures aimed at encouraging the creation, production, dissemination and distribution of cultural expressions and access to them, must pay due attention to the circumstances and special needs of cultural expressions, women and persons belonging to minorities and indigenous groups (art.7.a).

Likewise, the parties may determine if there are special situations in which cultural expressions in their territory are at risk of extinction, or are subject to a serious threat or require some type of urgent safeguard measure, in which case they may adopt measures they deem necessary to preserve them (art.8).

It also seeks to strengthen bilateral, regional and international cooperation among the states parties, to create conditions that facilitate the promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions and facilitate their dialogue on cultural policy (through professional and cultural exchanges, collaboration to extend the exchange of information, encourage the signing of co-production and co-distribution agreements) (art.12).

Based on the principle of sustainable development, the states parties should strive to integrate culture into their development policies at all levels in order to create favourable conditions for sustainable development (art.13). This principle is also related to the commitment of developed countries to developing countries, to support them in the creation of cultural policies to protect the diversity of cultural expressions; as well as with the objective of involving these countries in a joint global strategy.

Supporting the states that need it the most was a way to stimulate their commitment to cultural diversity and to encourage their participation in a more balanced manner in globalization. Therefore, the Convention guarantees that the parties strive to support cooperation for sustainable development and poverty reduction in developing countries, in order to foster the emergence of a dynamic cultural sector offering, among others, the following means (Article 14):

1. Strengthening cultural industries in developing countries: creating and reinforcing the capacities of these countries in terms of cultural production and dissemination; facilitating access to cultural goods and services, the world market and international distribution networks; fostering the emergence of local and regional markets; taking measures to facilitate the access of cultural goods and services activities from developing countries; supporting creative work and facilitating the mobility of artists from the developing world; as well as fostering collaboration between developed and developing countries. The latter also supports respect for interculturality, in the sense that it provides the possibility of generating shared cultural expressions.

2. Capacity building through the exchange of information, experiences and competencies, as well as through the training of human resources, both in the public and private sectors, especially in terms of strategic and managerial capacities, in the preparation and application of policies, promotion of the distribution of cultural goods and services, promotion of small and medium enterprises and microenterprises, use of technology and development and transfer of skills.

3. Transfer of skills and practical knowledge, especially in the field of industries and cultural enterprises.

4. Financial support through the creation of an International Fund for Cultural Diversity (art.18).

Here the States were forced to support forms of cultural expressions that could threaten theirs; but an attempt was made to guarantee the right of access to all citizens to a wide variety of cultural goods and services; and that it would have prevented States from closing their border to certain forms of cultural expressions under the pretext of promoting their own expressions. It also establishes the obligation of the parties to exchange information and share specialized knowledge about gathering information and statistics related to the diversity of cultural expressions, as well as good practices for their protection and promotion. To this end, UNESCO will create and keep updated a data bank on the different sectors and governmental, private and non-profit organizations that act in the field of cultural expressions (Article 19). In practice, this has been the main task of UNESCO regarding the Convention since it came into force: to establish cultural indicators for the collection of information from all member countries, indicators related to statistical data on cultural consumption and cultural industries, hence the main criticism of the Convention, which only focuses on cultural industries and that will benefit the developed countries to a greater extent.

We have to reiterate that the Convention will be what the governments want it to be. The Convention is an important step of the common will of the states in relation to the recognition of the need to have cultural policies in favour of cultural diversity. It provides important tools to promote, protect and prioritize almost all important aspects of cultural diversity, which, complementing human rights and fundamental freedoms, offer a wide range of possibilities for an effective guarantee of it. However, it is difficult to predict how the provisions of this Convention will be interpreted by the states that have ratified it. In any case, the force of the Convention will be determined mainly by the number and range of ratifications, the responsibility of the signatories in the execution of the convention, as well as the follow-up work that UNESCO must perform.

3.4. Conclusion

Finally, on the topic that generated the most debate, it is established that the relationship of the Convention with other international instruments will be mutual empowerment, complementarity and non-subordination, based on the respect and good faith of the states parties with the obligations of the Convention and of the other treaties in which they are a part. Thus, without subordinating the Convention to other treaties, when states parties interpret and apply the other treaties in which they participate or contract other international obligations, they will take into account the provisions of the Convention; and on the other hand, no provision of the Convention can be interpreted as a modification of the rights and obligations of the Parties that emanate from other international treaties to which they are party (Article 20). As you can see the article does not settle the debate and leaves much to the interpretation and good faith of the parties. However, perhaps it was the only way to achieve the consensus of the states and take forward the Convention.

CHAPTER IV. STRATEGIES OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY

The Organization of the United Nations for Education, Science and Culture, in the area of ​​Culture and specifically in the field of Cultural Diversity since the beginning of its work, has established strategies in favour of cultural diversity at an international and national level, working directly in each State Party. These strategies have been transformed over the years, in a manner consistent with the development of the concept of cultural diversity. Step by step, their work gains strength and the strategies of promotion and dissemination of cultural diversity in recent years are supported by international legal instruments such as Declarations and Conventions of UNESCO. They also help the States Parties through the lines of action and cooperation measures established by said instruments.

4.1. Strategies considering supranational level

4.1.1. European Union

Linguistic diversity is one of the distinctive features of the European Union because respect for the diversity of the languages ​​of the Union is one of the founding principles of the European Union. Therefore, strategies linked to the challenge of cultural diversity have focused in a certain way on linguistic diversity. Europe since the beginning of its history has brought together a great diversity of cultures and languages; however, since the Second World War, another form of difference was set in motion on a large scale through people who crossed borders in search of work, refuge or both.

Currently, this diversity does not go unnoticed and has transformed the face of Europe, becoming the main European cities in completely multicultural and multilingual cities, where more than a hundred languages ​​are spoken – only in Catalonia there are around 250 spoken languages. Therefore, the issue of cultural diversity in Europe is closely linked to immigration, especially extra-community, which visibly brings a cultural difference.

4.1.2.1 Regulations related to cultural diversity

Regarding the support of a regulatory framework and leaving aside other background, Article 128.1 of Title IX of the TEU guaranteed, in its paragraph 1, that "the Community will contribute to the flourishing of the cultures of the Member States while respecting their national diversity and regional, highlighting at the same time their common cultural heritage", an objective that has been working through different programs. (Watson, 2017:11)

Within the Council of Europe, the following normative instruments stand out, from very different ranks:

The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages ​​of 1992 underlines, in its preamble, the principle of cultural diversity as a constituent of European heritage and the need to take positive steps by States and European regional organizations to secure that heritage. The problem is the normative weakness of this instrument, since it does not provide a sufficient legal basis for the recognition of individual and collective rights even in the strictly linguistic field.

The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of 1995, which expressly states, in addition to other rights and principles, respect for minority identity (Article 5). From the normative point of view, it does not reach a dimension that allows us to speak about the establishment of a European standard on cultural identity.

Although its rank is not strictly normative, the Final Declaration of Cultural Cooperation of the Council about the project "Democracy, human rights and minorities: the educational and cultural aspects" of 1997 reiterates the consideration of multiculturalism as an inevitable reality that requires taking into account and respect cultural diversity as a basis for the principle of equality and accept cultural identity as an essential component of human dignity, both as regards individual development and from a collective point of view. The most relevant aspect of this declaration is the definition of a cultural community: "a group of persons who are part of the culture, they recognize a common cultural identity in order to develop and conserve it". An account of the situation of risk regarding the vulnerable groups contemplated in the project, supposes "the necessity of solving the problems in ethical terms of cultural rights" (Albornoz, 2016: 556).

4.1.2.2 The "Cultural Policy and Cultural Diversity" project

The Council of Europe Project, carried out during the 2001-2006 period, is a research project that seeks to improve the conceptual approach to cultural diversity in order to develop development policies based on the results obtained. In the first phase, research focused mainly on Western Europe, with studies on diversity undertaken in seven countries (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and for comparative purposes, Canada). In the second and third phases of the project, eight more studies were undertaken with emphasis on Eastern Europe (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, the Russian Federation, Serbia and Montenegro, and Ukraine). In each of these countries, reports of commissioners on cultural diversity and diagnoses of the national policy situation regarding diversity were presented. In addition to these national reports, team members also had the opportunity to make study visits to the countries in question. The visits involved an extensive program of discussions and meetings with people linked to the cultural practice and cultural policy of each study site, performed during the years 2001-2003 (Robins 2006: 52).

I. Phase I: the Bennett Report. Differing diversities (2001) summarizes the work of the first phase of the project. Bennett observes the existence of a range of different types of diversities within the European space, focusing particularly on two of them: the one associated with local minorities who have opposed assimilation within dominant national cultures over a long period of time; and the one associated with postcolonial migration in the decades following the Second World War. Both kinds of diversity have different times and different contexts and present significant challenges to national governments in their desire for an integrated national society. The struggle of the national states to reconcile apparently similar objectives, related above all with the imperatives of the maintenance of the nation state is observed. The logic of the homogenization of national cultures is observed, the aspiration to possess an identity, a culture, a nation and a history. And against this assertion of primacy of homogeneity emerges the fact that all cultures, in fact intrinsically and inescapably, are characterized by diversity. Bennett affirms then, the normative state of diversity in all societies, and emphasizes the implications of these policies: "the change from homogeneity to diversity as the new social norm requires a review of processes, mechanisms, and the necessary relations for the development of democratic policies in diverse societies ". In this new context, he argues that diversity should not be seen as a social problem, to be encompassed and managed, but as a potentially productive social resource, which should be positively consolidated by governments and cultural agencies. It should be noted that Bennett's diversity agenda moves beyond ethnic differences, opening the category to other kinds of diversity such as gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, etc. (Greene 2017: 47)

II. Phase II: the report Ellmeier and Rásky. Differing Diversities: Eastern European perspective refers to the second phase of the project, especially related to the situation of cultural diversity in Eastern Europe. Ellmeir and Rásky point out that the particular logic of consolidating a nation in Eastern Europe presents a diverse context of the cultural diversity of the case of Western Europe (where the discussion, in general, was prompted by the growing presence of immigrants). In Eastern Europe there is a different diversity, derived from its different historical circumstances. On the one hand, there are remnants of the cultural heterogeneity of the old empires (Austro-Hungarian-Ottoman, Russian), in which the dominant power is different from Western imperialism; and, on the other, there the consequences of the construction of the nation-state in the region implied, at the same time, the strategic elimination of the old cultural complexity of the empire and the creation of new minorities (Mestizas) from the drawing and redesign of the borders of the state. As consequences of this history, there are inevitably diverse experiences and attitudes towards diversity. In this respect, if the artistic and cultural landscape is not developed in a way that reflects the realities of the existing social landscape, the legitimacy of cultural institutions and the public order that supports them can be undermined.

III. Phase III: The Robins Report. Transcultural Diversity recounts the project, noting that transnational migration and transnational immigrants have opened a new cultural and diverse agenda for Europe. The proliferation of transnational mobility and transnational social spaces (east and west) has generated a significant challenge to the essential concept of culture and has reintroduced the idea of ​​complexity of culture. Although changes in culture associated with transnationalism remind us again that cultures "are formed with complex dialogues and interactions with other cultures; that the limits of cultures are fluid, porous, and discussed." Transnational migrations have given rise to new cross-cultural fields that cannot be easily confined within the limits of national culture, and cannot therefore be conceived as the exclusive cultural characteristic of any particular group. The crucial point is that transcultural diversity has become an integral aspect of Europe's social landscape, upon which European culture and identities must now be elaborated. Noting that cross-cultural diversity must be at the centre of the concerns of European cultural policy and that many aspects of democracy, cohesion and inclusion have to be dealt with at the cross-cultural level (Robins 2016: 58).

4.1.2.3 The Strategy of multilingualism

Multilingualism is part of the policy, legislation and practice of the European Union since its inception, although associated exclusively with the linguistic regime of the European institutions. Following the Maastricht Treaty (1992), the promotion of language teaching and individual multilingualism based on linguistic diversity became a cornerstone of the EU's educational policy and while in the 1990s community support was turned over In the teaching of official languages, the first decade of the new century has focused on an educational policy of linguistic inclusion that seeks to promote the learning of all languages, including regional or minority languages, immigrants and the main international languages.

The European Commission, aware of the growing importance of the multilingual challenge for the European project, has established in 2007 a separate portfolio within the Commission devoted to multilingualism. This is based on the observation that practically all of its member states have become multilingual and multicultural societies, and on the cross-cutting nature of the issue of multilingualism, that is, its importance for a wide range of policy areas.

The multilingualism strategy presented in 2007 develops ideas related to policies and good practices for the whole EU and makes recommendations for concrete actions at community level, working around three objectives:

a) economic competitiveness, growth and better jobs;

b) lifelong learning and intercultural dialogue;

c) the creation of a space for European political dialogue and communication with citizens. The strategies are divided into four components:

4.1.2.4 Lifelong learning of languages: increase sensitivity and motivation

The European Parliament and Council recommendation on "key competences for lifelong learning" identifies "communication in foreign languages" as one of the eight key competences "necessary for personal fulfilment, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment" in a knowledge society. And, since there is a limit to what can be expected from official language teaching, we seek to create additional learning opportunities and make them available to everyone. Among the recommendations indicated there are:

the teaching systems of the member states ensure the teaching of two languages ​​in addition to the main language in official education.

Continue to develop community action programs and exchanges in accordance with the lifelong learning program, in order to expand contact with other languages ​​and their education outside the curricula.

Encourage the creation of local and regional language teaching networks in the Member States, from various providers and support their collaboration at European level.

Disseminate good strategies to initiate and maintain the motivation of students to all interested states in Europe.

The possibility of encouraging the production of so-called "recreational education programs", designed to arouse interest in other languages ​​and cultures, should be studied.

4.1.2.5 Languages ​​for intercultural dialogue and social cohesion

The learning of other languages ​​has an intercultural value. In addition to promoting openness to cultures and attitudes of other peoples, the teaching of languages ​​can increase awareness of the culture and value them, stimulating the will and increasing the ability to communicate and cooperate with others. Immigrants who do not participate in the education system should be encouraged to learn the language of the host country and at the same time make the citizens of the host country appreciate the culture of the immigrant community to the point of motivating them to learn their language. Immigrants are valuable linguistic resources, valuing their languages ​​can increase their motivation to learn the language of the host community and even other languages, making them become competent mediators between different cultures or can help establish economic contacts in their countries of origin. origin, as well as getting to play an active role in intercultural dialogue and integration programs for recently arrived immigrants.

On the other hand, the growing trans-European mobility and immigration has led to a sharp increase in the demand for interpretation and legal translation, so that member states and local and regional authorities must assume their responsibilities in this regard. In the recommendations they indicate:

Whenever possible, European projects designed to promote intercultural dialogue should weigh the aspects of multilingualism.

Encourage the launch of European projects for the joint development of higher education programs in legal and community translation and interpretation.

The Council of Europe has made the integration of immigrants (both school children and adults) a priority of their activities in the field of language teaching.

Invite the authorities of the Member States and other interested parties to indicate and exchange examples of good practices of integration and intercultural dialogue derived from the learning and use of the languages ​​of immigrants by members of the host societies.

Research should be carried out on the impact on integration and intercultural dialogue of language learning of the host society by first, second and third generation immigrants of their parents' languages, and of learning the languages ​​of the immigrants’ parents on the part of the members of the host society.

4.1.2.6 Languages ​​for competitiveness, economic growth and better jobs

The Commission, in accordance with the Lisbon strategy, confirmed its conviction that qualifications in several languages ​​are important for the EU economy as a whole, the competitiveness of enterprises and the employment prospects of workers. At the end of 2015, the Commission performed a study at European level on the impact on the economy of the lack of language skills. The study confirmed the importance of linguistic and intercultural qualifications for export success. Among the recommendations for this component are:

Encourage the creation of regional networks or platforms for education and business at European level.

Support an investigation or a study on how to take advantage of and develop the linguistic resources available in immigrant communities with the specific objective of helping the export effort of companies.

The European Commission should exploit other opportunities to use the European Social Fund and the Structural and Cohesion Funds to support the teaching of languages, in order to increase employment opportunities and economic results.

The European Commission should develop a European label for SMEs that achieve export success through exemplary management of language and culture, including effective staff development.

Research should be carried out on the relationship between multilingual competence and creativity.

4.1.2.7 Creation of a European space for political dialogue and communication with citizens

Increasingly, efforts were made to reach citizens through new media, relaying European events online in a multilingual way and translating websites. The strategies of the Interpretation and Translation General Directorates were also examined to face the increase in demand for their services after the last enlargements. (Cherednichenko 2015: 170) Therefore they recommend:

Encourage and support the development of European or international degrees in interpretation and translation that help to solve the current shortage of specific language combinations.

The possibility of supporting European projects for the joint development of higher education programs that train multilingual communication specialists should be taken into account. In the same way, the launching of projects for the joint development of modules or continuing education courses to acquire new skills and professional knowledge should be encouraged.

The European Commission should convene a meeting of the best specialists in higher education, the relevant institutions and organizations and the administrations of the Member States to study the problems related to multilingual translation, interpretation and communication.

It is pertinent to highlight the novelty of this strategy in that the recommendations no longer only address the official languages ​​of the States Parties, but also the regional or minority languages ​​and the language of the immigrants; In the same way, it not only promotes the languages ​​of the host countries but also that of the countries of origin of the immigrants.

Alternatives are also offered not only within the framework of official education, but concerted strategies outside of it, with the support of the media and new technologies. And it is committed to new research on the impact of multilingualism in the economic sphere and especially for the immigrant population. All this presents the intention of the EU to adapt to the new European reality, which has not only grown in economy but also in cultural diversity.

4.1.2.8 Action Plan to "Promote language learning and linguistic diversity"

The action plan also promoted by the European Commission had as an execution interval the years 2004-2006. The Report on the implementation of the Plan was recently presented, stating that: "the Commission has fulfilled the tasks entrusted to it. Member states have endeavoured to achieve a considerable number of goals set out in the Action Plan. Other tasks established in the Action Plan require a long-term commitment that cannot be limited to a specific date. Although the general trends are positive, the situation varies from country to country, since the starting point and the initial political approach differed in the Member States. Additional efforts by all interested parties will be required in order to maintain these trends and consolidate the reforms started in the Member States."

The Action Plan followed three strategic areas:

Permanent learning of languages. It seeks to extend the advantages of language learning to all citizens through the teaching of the mother tongue and two other languages; language learning in high school, vocational training, and higher education; Language teaching for adults and for students with special needs. The set of languages ​​taught should include the least spoken European languages, the most spoken, the regional, the minority, the immigrants, the "official" languages ​​and those of the main trading partners of the European Union from any part of the world.

Improve the teaching of languages. It is committed to a favourable language school based on a comprehensive approach to language teaching, which establishes adequate links between the teaching of the mother tongue, foreign languages, the language of instruction and the languages ​​of immigrant communities. This comprehensive approach seeks to stimulate the development of Internet tools and ICT for pedagogical uses. In relation to the training of language teachers as the main axes of a multilingual Europe, they are asked, in addition to being subject teachers, to highlight European values ​​of openness to others and tolerance with differences. It is important that each of them not only have an adequate experience in the use of a foreign language, but also understand the culture related to it, as well as promote the exchange of teachers between member states. Member States have been recommended to remove legal and administrative obstacles to teacher mobility.

Creation of an environment favourable to languages. The regions, cities and towns of Europe have to become favourable environments for languages, in which the needs of speakers of all languages ​​are fully respected, where linguistic and cultural diversity is maximized and where there is Strong demand and a varied offer of learning opportunities.

The aim is to take better advantage of the opportunities to hear and see other languages ​​and cultures, which will improve the awareness of languages ​​and their learning. It also seeks to capitalize on the skills and experience of its many bilingual and trilingual citizens, as well as those who reside temporarily in its territory, who can teach monolingual citizens and whose qualifications could be better used by public authorities in schools, adult education centres, cultural centres and places of work. Local language learning programs can take advantage of tourism projects, cross-border projects and city twinning programs, which allow learning the language or languages ​​of twinned or neighbouring cities.

Currently, the Commission will continue in its task of promoting linguistic diversity in those areas where greater efforts are required. At the same time, it will support the development of an indicator of linguistic competence to provide the Member States with a comparative basis in the development of their policies. In this sense, it is preparing a European Survey of linguistic competences that will be carried out in 2010 in order to obtain information on the level of knowledge acquired in two foreign languages ​​at the end of compulsory school education in Europe.

4.2. National strategies. Romania, a different case study

The strategies presented below do not cover global strategies of countries in terms of cultural diversity, but we focus on their most relevant strategies, those for which they have been highlighted and that serve us for the comparative example.

4.2.1 Cross-gender strategy and monitoring of policies for gender equality

The concept of a cross- gender strategy appears in the political documents of almost all European countries, due in part to the European Union's important commitment to this strategy, which means that, at least in political rhetoric, it is a concept that always it is present. The strategy of gender mainstreaming implies "the (re) organization, improvement, development and evaluation of the political processes in order to ensure that those who normally design and elaborate the policies incorporate the perspective of equality between men and women at all levels and in all stages "(Council of Europe, 2007). Thus, gender mainstreaming is not a political priority in itself, but rather a way to ensure that the goal of gender equality is taken into account in the design and implementation of any policy or measure. As such, this strategy is closely linked to the development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policy instruments. This section analyzes how the strategy of gender mainstreaming in the field of education is applied.

In addition, one would take into account the principle of gender mainstreaming in their policy documents, some countries pay special attention to the application of specific strategies of this type.

In terms of monitoring the implementation of gender equality policies, European countries use two fundamental channels. Regarding the first one, the monitoring mechanisms are linked to the general system of gender equality, respectively monitoring the implementation of gender equality policies in schools is usually the responsibility of the authorities in charge of equality of opportunities. In summary, Romania is concerned about gender inequalities in education. However, the scope and breadth of legal and political frameworks vary widely among countries, from the absence of political actions to an extensive definition of problems. In addition, although countries have implemented several different policy instruments, more general strategies are often missed. More specifically, although in almost all countries the objective of equal opportunities between men and women is contemplated, very few have explicitly identified the goal of achieving effective gender equality, or have successfully implemented the goal of gender equality. transversal gender strategy in the field of education. Although the list of possible policy measures to address traditional gender roles and stereotypes is quite extensive, only a few countries have implemented them.

Most countries say they take gender into account in their curricula, but the breadth and ways in which the gender perspective is collected are variable. The decisions of the centers and, ultimately, of the teachers also influence in this respect. National gender policies also play an important role, in the countries where they exist.

Although gender is often included as a subject in the curriculum, gender-sensitive teaching as a classroom management tool seems to have only been implemented in about one third of European countries, and it cannot be said either. that, in general, there are guidelines for schools and for teachers in this regard. When there are, these guidelines do not always come from government agencies; they have often been developed by NGOs or, at least, developed with their collaboration.

In Romania, the project "The Gender Dimension in Education", developed by the Institute of Education and Science in cooperation with UNICEF Romania, has been launched. In this context, in 2006 guidelines were published online and used for the training of school inspectors who coordinate training in new teaching methods at the county level. In addition, teachers have at their disposal a "Compendium on the Gender Dimension in Education" that offers them a series of specific tools for self-evaluation and evaluation of educational institutions from a gender perspective, as well as a set of indicators to evaluate textbooks from this same perspective. The compendium also includes a glossary with the definition of a series of basic concepts of the field "gender and education".

On the other hand, for immigrant students it is very important that they integrate into the Romanian language and culture to function properly. For this they need to achieve the sociolinguistic and sociocultural adaptation that can be provided to them from the school. One would also want to emphasize the fact that teachers will do their job better as intercultural guides and mediators if they know, at least in part, the cultural differences between the immigrant student's culture of origin and Romanian culture. Among the abundant literature that exists on cultural differences, we would highlight some useful bibliographical sources for teachers in the care of immigrant students (without forgetting to study religious differences):

1) Between Anglo-Saxon and Romanian culture. The best-known differences point to work and food schedules; gastronomy and food; the distance that is marked in personal relationships; the greater use of courtesy marks in English; the sense of humor; the way to drive on the left; spontaneity or improvisation in invitations (less in the Anglo-Saxon culture), etc.

2) Between Arab and Romanian culture.

3) Between Romanian and Spanish culture.

4) Various cultures.

5) Between Bulgarian and Romanian culture. We thought it appropriate to highlight the great ignorance we have of Bulgarian culture. However, surprisingly, the Bulgarian immigrants in Romanian outnumber the Chinese ones. It is convenient to get a little closer to the cultural differences that the Bulgarian immigrants present: from the gestures to greet and to offer to the way to form the surnames, the patronymic, etc.

6) Between Chinese and Romanian culture.

7) Between German and Romanian culture .

8) Between Russian and Romanian culture.

9) Between Dutch and Romanian culture

4.2.2 Cultural stereotypes

It should also be noted that there are two major groups of stereotypes: autostereotypes and hetero-stereotypes. Auto-stereotypes represent the image that a people has of itself and this image is usually favorable. On the contrary, hetero-stereotypes are the image that others have of a people and are often unfavorable, which demonstrates a certain ethnocentrism. We could say that the Romanians share the hetereo-stereotypes of others about them: sun, beach, party.

4.2.2.1 Hostile attitudes towards immigrants

We want to reflect on whether the current situation has changed since 2002: Perhaps behind unemployment, crime (with which it is frequently associated), the drug addiction and terrorism, migratory movements constitute one of the greatest current concerns. Of course, they are associated with the rise of right-wing movements in Romania. We can affirm that in the current Romanian society there is an increase in xenophobia due to unemployment. It is considered that immigrants remove jobs, create problems for social security, generate crime, lower school performance, etc. The media is the largest source of information that creates and maintains stereotypes.

4.2.2.2 Stereotypes about the academic performance of immigrant students

One of the stereotypes disclosed in our society is that immigrant students have worse academic performance compared to Romanian students. One of the obstacles to highlight is the concentration of immigrant students in public centers with the consequent danger of "ghettoization"; difficulties in learning the host language (s), which may lead to some isolation; In parallel, loss of the language of origin, which means loss of cultural wealth and disadvantage in case of return; average performance lower than that of natives in standardized tests, such as those in the PISA program; increasingly restrictive national and European legislation; certain social rejection and, at times, feeling of incompetence of the teachers in situations of great cultural plurality in the classrooms. This problematic picture is accentuated when the immigrant condition is joined by other variables such as poverty or belonging to certain minority ethnic groups. Take, for example, the case of the gypsies of Romania. One would consider that the challenge consists of moving from a monocultural school project that caters to boys and girls" who come from outside, towards a pedagogical model that addresses issues such as diversity, inclusion and social cohesion: from multiculturalism (factual) to interculturality, from cultural plurality as a fact, to pluralism as a value.

Also, there are opinions of different professionals in the educational field regarding this aspect:

a) Academic performance / school progress, understood as the success or failure of students immigrant in the acquisition of the competences of the subjects that make up the curriculum, particularly in the learning of the Romanian language.

b) Compliance with the rules of coexistence, conceived as the observance / non-observance of the rules and behavior guidelines of the school.

c) Social integration, which refers to the quantity and quality of social networks established by immigrant students, as well as the acceptance / rejection that it awakens in native students.

Regarding compliance with the rules of coexistence, foreign students, in general, respect and comply with the norms of coexistence, and, in some cases, with more scrupulosity than native students. This generic statement, however, has its nuances, according to cultural groups. In a positive sense, for their outstanding observance of the norms, the Chinese stand out and especially the Latin Americans, sometimes with obvious expressions of obedience and submission. Also Poles and Lithuanians are usually faithful adherents of the rules of coexistence, due to the authoritarian and disciplinary traditions of their countries of origin. At the opposite pole one would point out that the most undisciplined and disrespectful behaviors are more frequent among Moroccan students of rural origin. In addition, it has been observed that they respect teachers more than teachers. Regarding social integration, one would conclude that Lithuanian, Polish and Latin American students are the most sociable. On the opposite side are the Moroccans in the first place, followed by the Chinese. Here it should be noted that Moroccan immigrants, in general, are the worst accepted by the native population; provoke more rejection. Regarding the causes of greater or lesser social integration, one would indicate that the majority of the informants believe that the economic factor (social class, family income) is decisive in terms of level of social integration of the immigrant student (and his family) both in the school setting and in the community. This is demonstrated by the cases of foreign, Eastern European or even Moroccan students, who belong to families of medium-high social status and who are fully integrated and participate in rich and diversified social networks. Apparently, the stereotype about the worst academic performance of immigrant students is false, like so many others. That is why we have to try to raise awareness in society for the acceptance and respect of the Other, of immigrants, in this case.

4.2.3 Inclusive education

As we know, the inclusive school is for everyone: it covers all linguistic and cultural diversity, all ethnic groups and all students with special educational needs. Therefore, the existence of cultural stereotypes towards immigrants is an obstacle to their implementation and functioning. The inclusive school aims, in addition, to provide educational attention to all students, guaranteeing equal opportunities, and unite all members of the educational community (students, teachers, all workers in the school, educational and local administration, social institutions). The fundamental principles that govern its operation are the following:

The school must educate in the respect of Human Rights and, in order to do so, organize and function in accordance with democratic values ​​and principles.

All members of the community collaborate to facilitate personal and professional growth and development, as well as development and cohesion among peers and other members of the community.

The diversity of all the people that make up the educational community is considered a valuable fact that contributes to enrich the whole group and promote interdependence and social cohesion.

Fairness and excellence are sought for all students and their right to share a common educational environment in which each person is valued equally is recognized.

The educational attention is aimed at improving the learning of all students, so it must be adapted to individual characteristics.

The educational need occurs when the educational offer does not meet individual needs.

Consequently, inclusion implies identifying and minimizing learning and participation difficulties and maximizing educational attention resources in both processes.

One of the barriers that must be overcome, perhaps the most difficult, is to overcome cultural stereotypes and the rejection of the Other.

Learning to live together in a multicultural society is fundamental and essential. In this respect, we must overcome incomprehension, ethnocentrism and stereotypes. It is a long road, which already has a long journey, but still needs, and more in times of crisis, the collaboration of the whole society: educational field, media, family, etc. The differences should not separate, but unite. The unknown is often feared and, therefore, measures must be designed to raise awareness of immigrant cultures. Knowledge facilitates acceptance and dialogue. Ignorance causes insecurity, distrust, fear. Therefore, one would be convinced that the increase in contacts between the native population and immigrants will be an effective measure to accelerate the acceptance and integration of immigrants in this society.

4.2.4 The Integration of Ethnic Minorities

4.2.4.1 Migratory movements and ethnic minorities

Immigration in Romania has grown in the last twenty-five years causing the most numerous ethnic and culturally minority groups in our educational centers to be:

• Gypsy students: They present difficulties of school and social integration, poor school performance and a high rate of school absenteeism.

• Students from sectors of high marginalization: They present the same type of problems as the previous group, adding the lack of belonging to a culture of their own.

• Students from immigrant families.

• Children of itinerant families: The learning difficulties presented by this group are aggravated by the roaming situation in which they are immersed.

4.2.4.2 School and social integration of ethnic minorities: a challenge for intercultural education

In the last decades of the 20th century, the school has undergone an extremely important change, such as paying attention to the diversity of students and their special educational needs, as well as the full schooling of the entire population, regardless of their culture of origin, their characteristics own, their way of life, values ​​and language. In this respect, it has become a pluricultural and multilingual school. Therefore, in order to favor the learning and school integration of students belonging to ethnic-cultural minorities, it is necessary to qualitatively transform the school system by bringing its contents and activities closer to the family culture of these students. It is essential that the school adopts an intercultural perspective that actively and explicitly recognizes the values ​​of the minorities that it intends to integrate, respecting the right to its own identity. But what definition can we give about Intercultural Education? What are the pedagogical objectives and principles on which it is based?

The generalized meaning of the term interculturality refers to the interrelation between cultures. The terms multiculturalism and pluriculturalism simply indicate a juxtaposition or presence of several cultures in the same society. According to Cozma (2001), in Romania, in the eighties, to speak of Intercultural Education was equivalent to an education for immigrant foreigners, when in fact for Intercultural Education we must understand the education of all to coexist within a multicultural society. "Intercultural education is, therefore, a concept built on philosophical ideals of freedom, justice, equality and human dignity that should be contained in the institutional documents that govern the life of a center, as well as an educational process that includes all aspects In this way, intercultural education should help all students to develop positive self-concepts and discover who they are as themselves and in terms of the different members of the group, offering knowledge about the history, culture and contributions of the students. the various groups through the study of the differences in development, history, politics and culture that characterize them" (Nedelcu 2008: 75). Cucoș (2000: 13) points out that for interculturalism to exist, minimum conditions are required in society:

• Explicit recognition of the right to cultural difference.

• Recognition of different cultures.

• Relations and exchanges between individuals, groups and institutions of various cultures.

• Constitution of common languages ​​and shared rules that allow exchanges.

• Establishment of boundaries between common and specific codes and standards through negotiation.

• Minority groups need to acquire the technical means of communication and negotiation (written language, media, association, claims before courts, public demonstrations, participation in political forums …) to be able to affirm themselves as cultural groups and resistant to assimilation .

The Intercultural Education aims to achieve in all the students of all the centers, through any area and curricular scope, a solid cultural competence, or what is the same, a whole series of attitudes and skills that enable them to know how to be, to live together and respond appropriately in a diverse, plural, democratic and multilingual society. Thus, the objectives of Intercultural Education can be specified in the following:

• Cultivate positive intercultural attitudes.

• Improve the personal, cultural and academic self-concept of the students.

• Promote coexistence and cooperation among students of different cultures.

• Promote equal academic opportunities.

• And act in collaboration with families and other cultural entities in the neighborhood.

Regarding the pedagogical principles of Intercultural Education, these can be synthesized in:

• Training and strengthening in the educational centers and society of the human values ​​of equality, respect, tolerance, pluralism, cooperation and social co-responsibility.

• Recognition of the personal right of each student to receive the best differentiated education, with special care for the formation of their personal identity.

• Positive recognition of the different cultures and languages ​​and their necessary presence and culture in the school.

• Attention to diversity and respect for differences, without labeling or defining anyone under them.

• Non-segregation in separate groups.

• Active fight against any manifestation of racism or discrimination.

• Attempt to overcome prejudices and stereotypes.

• Improvement of school success and promotion of ethnic minority students.

• And active communication and interrelation among all students.

Intercultural education should be understood as a space that through learning, the development of values ​​and attitudes, and reflection, promotes social transformation and change in the ways and ways of thinking and acting of people. The school is the main agent of socialization with the family. One of the tasks of educational centers is to provide intercultural education in their classrooms so that all students and, in general, all citizens are able to accept diversity and see it as a social enrichment, as normal in their lives. lives, never as a threat or invasion.

4.3. Conclusion

The multicultural society should not be perceived as a mosaic where cultures are together without having any effect on one another, but diversity is enriching for both the individual and society. As a consequence, the educational response in relation to ethnic minorities cannot be assimilation to the majority culture, nor a poorly attended integration in which the immigrant is the one who must integrate and change, losing their identity. If the goal is cultural miscegenation, education must not only tolerate difference, diversity, but must empower it. The predominance of linguistic, cultural, ethnic, religious diversity, etc., along with globalization, miscegenation and tolerance, are the only guarantee to face the changes that lie ahead. It is important, then, that intercultural education forms part of and permeates the curriculum of all centers, but that participation must be through committed and meaningful activities and activities that are truly related to the different cultures that coexist in the school context. In Romania, the efforts made in the field of Administration to perform an adequate preparation of teachers in intercultural education have been few, sporadic and fragmentary. Thus, content in this regard must be included both in initial training and in the permanent training of teachers. To conclude, indicate that only through a positive and comprehensive policy of integration can the active and full incorporation of ethnic and cultural minorities in society be encouraged.

CONCLUSIONS

Cultural diversity is not a closed concept, on the contrary, it constantly evolves according to its own dynamic and flexible nature, the result of the constant interaction between different cultures. It must be recognized that there are multiple definitions of the term related to its various aspects: identity, own languages, immigration, citizenship, indigenous peoples, cultural expressions, development; that beyond confusing us, it can help us to better understand the concept of cultural diversity in which we are all immersed today and which we must face in a creative and solidary way.

One would appreciate that there is a diversity "inside" of the same states produced by the different cultural groups that coexist in the territory (indigenous, indigenous or immigrants); and a diversity "between" states more related to the national cultural production and to the exchanges of products, goods, services and cultural activities between countries. There is also a new diversity that begins to encompass both: global, transnational cultural diversity, provided by those people who cannot be located in a single country, but who distribute their lives between two or more countries, but this is not yet a fact homogeneous to most countries, as if it is that national states are transforming into multicultural states.

As a limit to the concept, we must point out that cultural diversity cannot be seen only as a differentiation: something that is defined in relation to something else. But cultural diversity manifests itself when there is the "cultural element" that differentiates it in concrete situations; and that it needs to be contextualized because the historical sense of "differences" also defines its symbolic meaning or its cultural construction.

Many times the term "cultural diversity" has been abused by applying it in an undifferentiated way to phenomena of different natures, or generalizing the concept to all realities. Cultural diversity as a cultural approach or policy can and should be treated transversally in all areas and sectors of countries that recognize themselves as multicultural. But do not confuse the part with the whole, cultural diversity is a part of the reality we live that can be recognized, guaranteed and promoted in all public and private spheres, but do not try to put everything within the concept of cultural diversity, as if this were a "catch-all".

The defence of cultural diversity is inseparable from respect for the dignity of the human person, it implies the commitment to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular the rights of people belonging to cultural minorities. In this sense, no one can invoke cultural diversity to violate human rights.

There is a certain criticism of the purpose and limitations of the Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions, in the sense that it focuses on cultural industries, leaving aside historical and structural aspects of cultural diversity with which the UNESCO initiated its process and fought for its recognition. Despite some limitations, the Convention is an important step and serves as a basis for the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions, not only from developed countries, but especially from less favoured countries, so that they can participate in a more balanced in globalization and benefit from the diversity of its cultural expressions. This economic benefit of culture must be seen and worked as a factor of development, from the dynamics of cultural groups.

Likewise, the tools that allow promoting, protecting and prioritizing almost all important aspects of cultural diversity are present in the preamble of the Convention, which must be interpreted systemically and not in an isolated manner according to convenience. Reiterating that the Convention is an act complemented by human rights and fundamental freedoms that broaden the range of possibilities for a greater guarantee of it. In any case, the usefulness of the Convention in the protection and promotion of cultural diversity will be determined mainly by the number of ratifications, the responsibility of the signatory countries in the execution of the Convention, as well as the follow-up work that must be performed by UNESCO.

It is very important to develop and implement the Convention, according to the realities and national contexts; as well as include references to the Convention in bilateral and multilateral cultural cooperation agreements, in the declarations and in the documents that arise from the meetings and the governmental and non-governmental conferences. It is equally important to continue the in-depth debate on issues of cultural diversity and its challenges among artists, professionals, policy makers and cultural academics. Only in this way will the Convention be a truly useful tool.

Nowadays, the economic importance of culture is an undeniable fact; that the culture generates income and employment opportunities is a fact that has been demonstrated by the defenders of a greater allocation of resources to the cultural sector. However, exaggerating this type of argument runs the risk of cultural objectives being subordinated to purely commercial objectives. Cultural expressions should not be dissociated from the identity of the cultural groups from which they emanate. Rather, the economic value must be an acknowledgment for the community to value its identity.

Without departing from the economic approach, the crucial role of culture in national and international development strategies and policies is increasingly highlighted. And the protection and promotion of cultural diversity is presented as a basis for the defence of sustainable development. Therefore, a new approach of cultural industries and creative potentials should be given as tools that serve sustainable global development, from their own development visions, unquestionably linked with their identity and culture.

The Romanian multicultural society should not be perceived as a mosaic where cultures are together without having any effect on one another, but diversity is enriching for both the individual and society. As a consequence, the educational response in relation to ethnic minorities cannot be assimilation to the majority culture, nor a poorly attended integration in which the immigrant is the one who must integrate and change, losing their identity. If the goal is cultural miscegenation, education must not only tolerate difference, diversity, but must empower it. The predominance of linguistic, cultural, ethnic, religious diversity, etc., along with globalization, miscegenation and tolerance, are the only guarantee to face the changes that lie ahead. It is important, then, that intercultural education forms part of and permeates the curriculum of all centers, but that participation must be through committed and meaningful activities and activities that are truly related to the different cultures that coexist in the school context. In Romania, the efforts made in the field of Administration to perform an adequate preparation of teachers in intercultural education have been few, sporadic and fragmentary. Thus, content in this regard must be included both in initial training and in the permanent training of teachers. To conclude, indicate that only through a positive and comprehensive policy of integration can the active and full incorporation of ethnic and cultural minorities in society be encouraged.

REFERENCES

Albornoz, Luis A. "The International Fund for Cultural Diversity: a new tool for cooperation in the audiovisual field." International Journal of Cultural Policy 22.4 (2016)

Alegre, Miquel Àngel, and Joan Subirats Humet. Education and immigration: new challenges for Spain in a comparative perspective. Center for Sociological Research, 2007.

Ang, Soon, and Linn Van Dyne. Handbook of cultural intelligence. Routledge, 2015.

Banks-Wallace, JoAnne. "Staggering under the weight of responsibility: The impact of culture on physical activity among African American women." Journal of Multicultural Nursing & Health 6.3 (2000)

Bennett, John W. The ecological transition: cultural anthropology and human adaptation. Routledge, 2017.

Brockwell, Peter J., and Richard A. Davis. Introduction to time series and forecasting. Springer, 2016.

Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2012)

Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2015)

Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (2010)

Coulby, David. "Intercultural education: theory and practice." Intercultural education 17.3 (2006).

Cozma, Teodor. O noua provocare pentru educatie: interculturalitatea. Polirom, 2001.

Cucoș, Constantin. "Educația. Dimensiuni culturale și interculturale." Iași: Polirom (2000).

De Prado Rodriguez, Javier (2001) Cultural Diversity, identity and citizenship. Presentations and communications presented at the Permanent Seminar organized in Córdoba. Institute of Transnational Studies (INET) Córdoba

Dunbar-Ortiz, Roxanne. An indigenous peoples' history of the United States. Vol. 3. Beacon Press, 2014.

Favell, Adrian. Philosophies of integration: Immigration and the idea of citizenship in France and Britain. Springer, 2016.

Fell, Clemens B., Cornelius J. König, and Jana Kammerhoff. "Cross-cultural differences in the attitude toward applicants’ faking in job interviews." Journal of Business and Psychology31.1 (2016)

Fredriksen-Goldsen, Karen I., et al. "Successful aging among LGBT older adults: Physical and mental health-related quality of life by age group." The Gerontologist 55.1 (2014)

Garreta, J. "Cultural diversity and education in Quebec." Lleida, Milenio (2000).

Gold, Hilary Leah. "Capoeira and Hip Hop in North East Brazil: Resistance to Inequality." (2015).

Goldberg, David. "Multiculturalism: A critical reader." (1994).

Goodman, Howard L. Ts' ao P'i Transcendent: Political Culture and Dynasty-Founding in China at the End of the Han. Routledge, 2016.

Greene, Roberta. Human behavior theory and social work practice. Routledge, 2017.

Gruenewald, David A. "Place-based education: Grounding culturally responsive teaching in geographical diversity." Place-based education in the global age. Routledge, 2014.

Hall, Thomas D., and James V. Fenelon. Indigenous peoples and globalization: Resistance and revitalization. Routledge, 2015.

Helbling, Marc. "Validating integration and citizenship policy indices." Comparative European Politics 11.5 (2013).

Hollifield, James, Philip L. Martin, and Pia Orrenius, eds. Controlling immigration: A global perspective. Stanford University Press, 2014.

King, Joyce E., and Ellen E. Swartz. The Afrocentric praxis of teaching for freedom: Connecting culture to learning. Routledge, 2015.

Korteweg, Anna C., and Triadafilos Triadafilopoulos. "Is multiculturalism dead? Groups, governments and the ‘real work of integration’." Ethnic and Racial Studies 38.5 (2015)

Kymlicka, Will (1996) Multicultural Citizenship. A liberal theory of the rights of minorities. Paidós Ibérica S.A. Editions Barcelona

Lévi-Strauss, Claude. "The structural study of myth." The journal of American folklore 68.270 (1955)

Majtényi, Balázs, and Gyorgy Majtenyi. A contemporary history of exclusion: The Roma issue in Hungary from 1945 to 2015. Central European University Press, 2016.

Modood, Tariq. Multiculturalism. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2013.

Nedelcu, Anca. Fundamentele educației interculturale: diversitate, minorități, echitate. Polirom, 2008.

Neufeld, A., Stewart, M. J., Harrison, M. J., Spitzer, D., Hughes, K., & Makwarimba, E. (2006). Immigrant women family caregivers in Canada: Implications for policies and programmes in health and social sectors. Health & social care in the community, 14(4)

Nichols, Johanna. Linguistic diversity in space and time. University of Chicago Press, 1992.

Offord, Baden, et al. Inside Australian culture: legacies of enlightenment values. Anthem Press, 2015.

Parekh, Bhikhu. "Rethinking multiculturalism: Cultural diversity and political theory." Ethnicities 1.1 (2001)

Pietsch, Juliet, and Vince Marotta. "Bauman, strangerhood and attitudes towards immigrants among the Australian population." Journal of Sociology 45.2 (2009)

Politique d'Intégration Scolaire et d'Education Interculturelle, 1998

Potter, Christopher C. "What is culture: And can it be useful for organisational change agents?." Leadership & organization development Journal 10.3 (2015)

Rigney, Lester-Irabinna. "Indigenist research and aboriginal Australia." Indigenous peoples' wisdom and power. Routledge, 2017.

Robins, Kevin. The challenge of transcultural diversities: Transversal study on the theme of cultural policy and cultural diversity. Vol. 772. Council of Europe, 2006.

Sebreli, J. J. "Cultural relativism, antiuniversalist particularisms." The siege (1992).

Strategies collected from the UNESCO portal: http://portal.unesco.org/culture

Strubell, Miquel. "Some aspects of a sociolinguistic perspective to language planning." Institutional status and use of national languages in Europe (2001).

The UNESCO Declaration on the Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage (2012)4

The Universal Declaration of UNESCO on Cultural Diversity (2010)

Watson, Irene. "Introduction." Indigenous Peoples as Subjects of International Law. Routledge, 2017. 11-14.

Weber, David J. "The Spanish Frontier in North America." OAH Magazine of History 14.4 (2000)

Whelan, Yvonne. Heritage, memory and the politics of identity: New perspectives on the cultural landscape. Routledge, 2016.

Wood, Van R., and Joshua S. Wilberger. "Globalization, cultural diversity and organizational commitment: Theoretical underpinnings." World 6.2 (2015)