In June 2004, I attended the Third International Conference of Cultural Professional Organisations in Seoul, the Republic of Korea. Four hundred delegates from fifty seven countries met to discuss the effects that free trade agreements, particularly involving the United States, pose for the protection and extension of cultural diversity especially in smaller and less well developed economies. This conference and previous ones, have sought the development of a binding international treaty through the auspices of UNESCO, to protect cultural diversity from the ramifications of free trade agreements. It is anticipated that UNESCO will release its draft declaration shortly, for possible adoption at the 33rd session in 2005.

There is a world wide movement for the liberation of world trade, a reduction or elimination of tariffs and tariff protections and of government subsidies and incentives. It is led by the World Trade Organisation and takes the form of Free Trade Agreements, Closer Economic Relations, Bilateral Investment Treaties and other international trade agreements. Within this movement, all aspects and components of a nation’s economy are subject to inclusion in a Free Trade Agreement, including culture and education. The World Trade Organisation identifies culture as a commodity. By so doing, the cultural identity of a country will be subject to the interests and dealings of a major economic force, particularly the United States. The modus operandus of the United States, especially to smaller and third world economies is to “take it or leave it” – accept the free trade agreement we offer, including open access to your culture and education, or there will be no agreement.

The cultural sectors in many countries particularly in film, broadcasting and publishing are at risk of being taken over by large multinational companies. Many governments fight to preserve their national and cultural identity through government support and subsidies. However, World Trade Organisation agreements prevent such subsidies and policies to protect local culture. Countries like Korea and France have local film and music quotas and have been put under tremendous pressure to reduce or eliminate these by U.S trade negotiators. The recent Australia – United States Free Trade Agreement not only requires local television quota to be reduced but forever prevents it being increased. Any new media to be developed in the future requires Australia to consult with the United States. Developing economies can not compete with the cultural might of the United States. Hollywood not only produces 85% of the western worlds films, they are almost all inevitably in English. This along with world wide television programming by the likes of CNN and BBC is a major threat to the retention and strengthening of local culture and indeed, language.

Beginning in Canada in 1998, a Coalition for Cultural Diversity organisation was formed. Its mission was that the cultural sector should not be a subject of trade and commerce negotiations. The international conferences in Montreal 2001, Paris 2002 and in South Korea 2004, sought a mechanism to achieve this aim. A number of countries and organisations such as Canada, France, the European Union and Brazil have made strong declarations for cultural diversity. UNESCO was seen as the best forum to develop a cultural protection clause to be inserted in all free trade agreements. The Coalition for Cultural Diversity believes that cultural diversity is a fundamental right for mankind and that each country must have the sovereign right to develop, implement and preserve cultural policies. The CCD support and promote the establishment of UNESCO’s “International Convention on Cultural Diversity” to assure cultural exemption in international trade agreements – (The Third International Meeting of Cultural Professional Organisations, Seoul, South Korea, June 2004).
It is anticipated this declaration will be adopted at the 33rd UNESCO’s General Conference in 2005, to guarantee each nation’s cultural policy.

Such an agreement is vital given the backdrop of culture being treated as a general commodity and traded as a subject of free trade in the name of “market economy”. Individual nations face difficulty in winning and protecting local culture against the strong forces of trade agreements. No culture or language should disappear because it did not have market competitiveness and could not withstand the strong bullying of the weak in order to secure a Free Trade Agreement. Korea is an excellent case study. Following the 1998 financial crisis, Korea began negotiations with the United States to sign a U.S. – Korea Bilateral Investment Treaty. A requirement was that the Korean film quota system be scrapped allowing open access to the U.S film industry. The Korean film industry and public protested and the Bilateral Investment Treaty was never signed. However, pressure from the United States trade and commerce officials continues and with another period of Korean economic down turn and the threat of North Korean instability, it is anticipated the fight is about to begin again.

The education sector is also at risk. Globalisation of trade and culture also impacts on education. A major function of education is to disseminate the national culture – literature, music, art, dance and drama. If New Zealand schools didn’t promote and disseminate New Zealand Arts, particularly Maori Arts and culture, then who would? A defining aspect of our national identity would be lost. To have possible restrictions placed on the exclusivity of promoting and disseminating New Zealand culture in New Zealand schools would be a subjugation of our national sovereignty. Similarly, through free trade agreements it might become feasible for a large multinational publishing house or corporation to take over a sector of the New Zealand education system and superimpose the philosophy and curriculum direction of its choice. Already, particularly in underdeveloped countries various educational “brands” are already in the market place.

In summary, World Trade Organisation trade agreements put national cultural identity and development at risk. Individual nations find it hard to stand up against powerful trading countries to exclude cultural protections from Free Trade Agreements. The development of an international legal agreement through UNESCO is seen as an essential protection especially for smaller and developing countries. Several countries have already begun a consultative process and consideration of the issues (including the United States). Within the New Zealand context, greater awareness of the UNESCO Declaration needs to be created within the government, the cultural professional organisations, trade unions and within Maori. It is strongly to the advantage of New Zealand that there is a binding international process to ensure the sovereign right of states to take appropriate measures for the protection and promotion of cultural diversity.