Elements page Acknowledgements 2 1. Aims of Dialogue 4 2. Mapping of the Situation in Societies 10 3. Causes of Conflict 15 4. Who Needs to Be at the Table? 22 5. Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) 30 6. Facilitation of Dialogues 36 7. From Hidden Obstacles to Key Questions 41 8. Design of the Dialogue Process 45 9. Concluding Remarks 50 10. References and Resources 54 Sponsors and Peer Review Partners 60
Toolkit for Conducting Intercultural Dialogue
Acknowledgements The work towards this Toolkit for conducting intercultural dialogue was launched by the Conference of International NGOs of the Council of Europe in preparation for the Council of Europe NGO Forum in Istanbul, 24–25 March 2011. We wish to thank the hosts, organisers, participants and supporters of this event because the workshop findings of this Forum, the Plenary Meetings and the many questionnaires returned by the participants together with valuable experiences and insights which formed the raw material for this Toolkit. Special thanks go to the Turkish Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers, for focussing again on the need for intercultural dialogue and to Council of Europe Director General Mrs Gabriella Battaini-Dragoni for her commitment and support in this regard. We wish to acknowledge the keen interest of the NGO Unit of the Council of Europe, which kindly provided for a two-day editorial meeting of the members of the Dialogue Hub, a vital step in the process. At subsequent INGO Conference plenary sessions and Standing Committee meetings their
respective members provided comments, which further enriched the Hub’s work. Based on a four-page Toolkit Overview made available to the participants in the European Civil Society Forum on 13–14 November 2011 in Strasbourg, another set of valuable comments was gained. The Dialogue Hub was grateful for the widespread and informed range of comments it was able to feed into the process. Thus, the present kit is a tool created by practitioners for practitioners! The project required external support to ensure good visibility. We wish to express our gratitude to CAUX-Initiatives of Change and IofC-International, Switzerland for their kick-off donations. The project also obtained recognition by the Human Security Division of the Swiss Federal Department for Foreign Affairs and this support made it possible for the Toolkit project to go online and enter the starting blocks for implementation. The media company Brunner AG, CH-6010 Kriens, gave a considerable discount on the graphics, layout and printing, and Messrs. Ronak
Acknowledgements | 3
Sutaria and Nakul Mehta generously volunteered to take on the web mastering of the toolkit website. A warm word of appreciation should also be expressed to the colleagues at work, our own friends and family members, the Dialogue Hub and the INGO Conference President. Their on-going support by way of questions, conversations or simply their sheer tolerance meant a lot to us, the ones glued to the elaboration of the Toolkit for over a year. It should be noted here that the following elements were written by different members of the Dialogue Hub, adding to the valuable multiple perspectives of the product, in different writing styles; readers are therefore requested to tolerate this unusual linguistic “joint venture” aspect of the assembled material. Finally our heartfelt thanks to the experts who gave their valuable comments in the Peer Review, helping to achieve the final shape of this product: Prof. Tom Woodhouse, University of Bradford, UK; Prof. Eduard Vinyamata Camp, Universidad Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain; Prof. Konstantin
Sigov, National University Mohyla-Academy, Kiev Ukraine and Mr Ulrich Bunjes, Department Head at the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France. The Dialogue Hub: Rui Gomes, Portugal (during the Istanbul Forum), Romina Mattei, Romania; Denzil Nurse, United Kingdom; Christoph Spreng, Switzerland, coordinator; Anna Widegren, Sweden & Italy; Yulia Zvereva, Russian Federation. The President of the INGO Conference: Jean-Marie Heydt, France. Dialogue Toolkit Toolkit for Conducting Intercultural Dialogue © 2012, Christoph Spreng on behalf of the INGO Conference of the Council of Europe ISBN-10: 2-88037-526-6, ISBN-13: 978-2-88037-526-3 EAN (European Article Number): 9782880375263 Published by Caux Books, Switzerland On line, see www.dialoguetoolkit.net/
1. Aims of Dialogue Why Dialogue you might ask? The accumulation of unresolved issues in matters of diversity and migration over the last years has led to an intolerable level of Human Rights infringements in European countries. The Conference of International NGOs of the Council of Europe has witnessed this regrettable development and has discussed it. The reaction to acts of exclusion and discrimination in the form of whistle-blowing and advocacy is indeed needed. But how can the often prevalent climate shift from blame to the search for solutions? With this in mind, the Conference of INGOs initiated an implementation process for intercultural dialogue at the NGO Forum dated 24–25 March 2011 in Istanbul. The process drew on the experience, knowledge and practices of the participating NGOs and continued auditions in Strasbourg, both at the INGO Conference and with the participants in the Civil Society Forum on 13–14 November 2011, bringing together methodological know-how and practical wisdom. This Toolkit is designed as a unique contribution by the INGO Conference towards strengthening
social cohesion and the human rights-based approach to diversity issues. At the Council of Europe the Group of Eminent Personsϭ was especially called upon in 2010 to assess “the seriousness of the risk to the Council of Europe values posed by rising intolerance”. As early as 2008 the White Paper on Intercultural DialogueϮ noted: “The breakdown of dialogue within and between societies can provide, in certain cases, a climate conducive to the emergence, and the exploitation by some, of extremism and indeed even terrorism. Intercultural dialogue, also on the international level, is indispensable between neighbours.”ϯ Currently a tendency to fix problems by either relying on or avoiding the justice System can be observed. In extreme cases it would mean rely1 http://www.coe.int/t/dc/files/events/groupe_eminentes_ personnes/default_EN.asp? 2 http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/intercultural/Publication_WhitePaper_ID_en.asp – TopOfPage 3 from WPID, page 16, Section 2.4
Aims of Dialogue | 5
ing on military power. After that, post-conflict reconstruction efforts would include dialogues. Would it not be more normal and efficient to begin the cycle with diverse, inclusive dialogues, the outcomes of which would then also benefit legislation? Definitions Philosopher Martin Buber termed Dialogue as an existential palliative to counter atomization and social alienation in mass industrial society. The word “culture” has countless definitions but is most commonly used in three basic senses: • Excellence of taste in the fine arts and humanities, also known as high culture; • An integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief and behaviour that depends upon the capacity for symbolic thought and social learning; • The set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterises an institution, organisation or group. The Toolkit focuses on this latter, broader sense. Consequently, it is suggested that the word “in-
tercultural” should also be given the same broad meaning. The Toolkit thus takes a practical approach, suggesting structured dialogue which “represents a class of dialogue practices developed as a means of directing the dialogic discourse towards problem understanding and consensual action.”ϰ The Toolkit also takes up the concept of “honest conversation»ϱ, a practise described by Rob Corcoran in his work, “Trustbuilding”, which former US Assistant Secretary of State Harold H. Saunders6, rates as follows: “This is a soberly inspiring book about citizens who have struggled to find respectful and productive ways of relating through dialogue across the racial, social, and economic differences that divide us dangerously.”
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue#Structured_dialogue 5 http://www.amazon.com/Trustbuilding-Honest-Conversation-Reconciliation-Responsibility/dp/0813928753 6 President IISD, www.sustaineddialogue.org/
Aims of Dialogue | 6
Background The Third Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe (Warsaw, May 2005) in its Action Plan explicitly endorsed intercultural dialogue – together with political and interreligious dialogue – as a means of ensuring that the diversity of European cultures becomes a source of mutual enrichment. In April 2006, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe launched the preparations of the Council of Europe White Paper on Intercultural Dialogueϳ, which it subsequently adopted in May 2008. The Conference of International NGOs of the Council of Europe has actively participated in the process of the White Paper elaboration. The Preamble of this White Paper states: “Managing Europe’s increasing cultural diversity – rooted in the history of our continent and enhanced by globalisation – in a democratic manner has become a priority in recent years. How shall we re7 http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/intercultural/Publication_WhitePaper_ID_en.asp – TopOfPage
spond to diversity? What is our vision of the society of the future? Is it a society of segregated communities, marked at best by the coexistence of majorities and minorities with differentiated rights and responsibilities, loosely bound together by mutual ignorance and stereotypes? Or is it a vibrant and open society without discrimination, benefiting us all and marked by the inclusion of all residents in full respect of their human rights?” The Toolkit offers an applicable way to realize the recommendations of the “Living together – Combining diversity and freedom in 21st-century Europe” report by the Group of Eminent Persons, which was published on 11 May 2011. This report states: “Thus the role of various civil society actors in answering all the questions considered in this report – the challenges to open and diverse societies, the difficulties of ‘living together’, and the future of European values – is more important than is generally recognised by the major decision- and opinion-makers in Europe. (…) Yet all these activities are under per-
Aims of Dialogue | 7
manent threat if policy-makers only pay lip service to civil society’s role, and then go on to ignore it in practice.” Therefore, the Toolkit is conceived as a practical follow-on from the White Paper for Intercultural Dialogue and the Report of the Group of Eminent Persons mentioned above. The approach is not on the level of “high end culture”, but to provide support where people want to help build social cohesion and the human rights-based approach to diversity issues. Whilst welcoming harmonious living and keeping in mind the vision of “Europe: Belonging and Opportunity for Everyone”, it provides practical frameworks for wrestling with the complex, pressing issues of 21st-century societies in inclusive, unbiased formats. The ready acceptance and spread of mobile telephones across the globe is a technological and marketing achievement. Why was this tidal wave of communication so successful in the most diverse socio-economic settings? Building up the
network of antennas was a reasonably simple infrastructure task. Then, marketing strategists added every conceivable function to the portable phones, which gave the “mobile” an indispensable position in the digital revolution as well as an unprecedented gadget status. The universality of this revolution, however, rests on the fact that the basic mobile telephone is a device which is simple to use; and the solid basis for its worldwide success is humanity’s deeply-rooted, universal reality of oral culture. Speech is the outstanding distinction between humans and other creatures. From time immemorial narratives emerged as the transmitters of worldly wisdom, the art of survival and, more generally, the art of living. Thus, oral culture had an intrinsic integrity by helping to cover basic human needs. These narratives and stories covered topics that later became the vast areas of formal study, education and research. It is as if a 21st-century person might have moved past the oral and written culture into the age of images and touch screens. Are we past the oral phase? Although we can observe tendencies
Aims of Dialogue | 8
towards an atomisation of societies, the need to belong and to interact in meaningful ways remains a basic, indeed possibly even an increasing need. That is why â€“ among many other factors â€“ the rapid spread of mobile telephones is based on our deep human need to understand, to talk, to be heard and to be listened to and understood. This is another good reason for investigating this Dialogue Toolkit. Using the Toolkit At its core, the dialogue approach is universally human. Many references in the Toolkit stem from a European context, because the INGO Conference has initiated the Toolkit process primarily to address the needs perceived in societies of Council of Europe Member States. However, its approach and application should not be interpreted as wanting to be geographically exclusive. The following nine Elements are presented for implementation in consecutive order. At the end, under References & Resources is a collection of
links to documents and literature for further reading, and to examples of good practice of intercultural dialogue. Some references in the text carry abbreviations: WS refers to reports of Workshops that took place when the Toolkit was elaborated and FQ refers to feedback obtained from questionnaires. What is offered here is not simply a recipe. The Toolkit is the result of experience, field observations and debate, it draws together lessons learned, which need to be adapted according to context by persons previously trained for this. These persons are the Facilitators, whose role is described in Element 6 in the following pages. Also, the design of a Dialogue should be understood as a sequential process with feedback loops, which will improve according to quality and the time devoted to it. And finally, each of the subsequent Toolkit Elements contains Action Points. They will assist users to move to implementation without any delay.
Aims of Dialogue | 9
Users are invited to take the Elements one after the other with an open mind, because, as the saying goes: “Your mind is like a parachute – it works better when it’s open.”
Action Point When proposing a Dialogue in order to work through a set of problems, then inquire: 1a) As a whole society is only as strong as its weakest link, like a chain; do the major stakeholders agree to strengthen the “weak” link by starting a Dialogue? One benefit would be safe spaces for free expression without fear, for addressing pending issues in a spirit of non-violence.
2. Mapping of the Situation in Societies “Today, all over Europe, we are dealing with social structures that are, even if to differing degrees, characterized by cultural diversity.” ϴ
The Council of Europe includes 47 member states, all striving to uphold the common values of Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. 800 million people live on our continent making it an incredibly diverse one, rich in history and with many cultural differences. Nevertheless, despite our common values, we are facing many problems such as discrimination, rising intolerance and people feeling that they are threatened. In this Element we try to map out the main challenges which societies and intercultural dialogue face today. This list does not pretend to be ex8 http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/intercultural/Publication_WhitePaper_ID_en.asp – TopOfPage
haustive, because that would hardly be possible in view of the brevity of this text. Intercultural Dialogue today is a lot more complex than simply majority versus minority. In the past the dominant culture was more homogenous. This situation has changed into a “fractured mainstream society” meaning that there are now more sub-cultures and differences present in the so-called mainstream than ever before. One must also consider other new challenges facing us right now. Recently, several leading figures in the European political arena have asserted that “multiculturalism is dead”. Furthermore, rising unemployment and uncertainty due to the financial crisis has given rise to populist trends, as people feel threatened and insecure in their own societies. These new stances demonstrate that past political approaches have sometimes inadvertently promoted self-isolation and parallel societies (as opposed to integrated societies) by accepting the separation of cultural communities. During a Round Table on “How to address the new multi-
Mapping of the Situation in Societies | 11
cultural challenges facing European societies”, Ms Gabriella Battaini-Dragoni, Director General of the Council of Europe observed that Some challenges are not created by (increasing) cultural diversity itself, but by the insufficient, illadvised or outright populist response of political forces and political institutions. Xenophobic trends in politics are usually creating more problems than they pretend to solve. We observe, moreover, that the level of xenophobia and discrimination is inversely proportional to the factual level of diversity (i.e. the more cultural diversity, the lower the level of xenophobic tendencies, and vice-versa). There may be some truth to the perceptions of the general public, however we must recognise that there is some ambiguity requiring clarification. The role of “Identity” is one of the core issues when talking about the challenges of intercultural dialogue. Mr Doudou Dieneϵ clarified this 9 The Former UN Rapporteur on Racism and President of the European Muslim Initiative for Social Cohesion
concept and stated, “All identities are constructions”. In Europe, identity constructs are mainly based on ethnic, religious and national affiliations. When considering the role of identity it is important to remember that identity constructs often define themselves in opposition to something, as national identity is based on the exclusion of the “other”. Many of these constructions arise from historical conflicts, whilst others are new and, unfortunately, very resilient. Identities can also be manipulated by political power holders to win popular support and elections, and are therefore instrumentalised and politicised. Negative constructs of identities can be very strong and harmful, and often fuel stereotyping and segregation. What are the key challenges in Europe What follows here was collected from debates and questionnaires at the Istanbul Forum in March 2011. When asked what the main difficulties of intercultural dialogue are, the most recurrent answers to come from the questionnaires were concerned with the issues of immigrants
Mapping of the Situation in Societies | 12
and asylum seekers, ethnicity, religion and the Roma population. The issues of Immigrants: Regardless of what the term “immigrant” actually means, in this case it is more important to consider what is meant or perceived when the term is used. During discussions of the NGO forum, as well as in the questionnaires, it emerged that most of the participants perceived immigrants as people facing challenges, not being integrated into the society of the host country. In fact, this view is supported by the Report: “Living Together”ϭϬ where it is stated that “people whose appearance or life-style clearly distinguishes them from the majority, are often referred to as ‘immigrants’” whilst “there is little or no prejudice expressed against foreigners who come to live and work in a country where they are visually indistinguishable from the majority of its inhabitants”. 10 Living Together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21stcentury Europe, Report of the Group of Eminent Persons of the Council of Europe
As we can see, the public perceptions and labels are central in this discussion. Immigrants are often seen as second-class citizens. Some of the prejudices against them are that they are: “subhuman, lazy, violent and criminal, social parasites, thieves, dealers, incompetent, dangerous, welfare scroungers” and that they “steal our” jobs and lower these standards in schools. This stigmatization underlines the general hostility felt by a large category of people, and only serves to increase the antagonism and segregation of the different peoples. The Roma issue: The precarious situation of the Roma people has been brought centre-stage recently. Although their situation shares many similarities to that of the immigrants, they deserve special attention since their situation has some unique characteristics. They, too, are considered secondclass citizens and are continuously rejected by the rest of society. They have difficulties gaining access to benefits and rights, and in participating in public and political life. The more they are
Mapping of the Situation in Societies | 13
discriminated and denied the opportunity to participate in social life, the more alienated they will become, thereby feeding the vicious cycle. The issue of Religions: Religious barriers are an age-old problem that still persists today. In many communities today religious stereotypes and stigmatisation creates social barriers which are hard to overcome. Furthermore, in the last decade, fundamental extremists and terrorism have given rise to Islamophobia, which has become deeply-rooted in many people’s psyche. Even when laws are established to educate people about religion and freedom of religion, this is not always enough as an example from Italy shows: “In Italy the main difficulties with Muslim African immigrants centre on religion. The only religion taught in school is Catholicism and while the law requires alternatives to be offered, in fact this is very rarely practised” (FQ).
Conditions which entrench existing divisions: Problems such as unemployment, different socio-economic circumstances and levels of education greatly contribute to rising inequalities, and thus racism, discrimination, stereotyping, etc. The rise in unemployment makes people feel insecure and threatened, and this in turn leads to scapegoating and “blaming the other”. Different socio-economic circumstances and different levels of education keep people living in separate communities with no natural space for interaction and only reinforce interpretations and perceptions. Moreover, as the labels and stigmas are reinforced, it becomes harder for barriers to be broken down, thus making it even harder for the victims of discrimination to gain the same access and benefits in the following areas: employment, housing, education, healthcare and social services. Parallel Societies: Parallel societies within nation states can be harmful in many different ways. Firstly, it is important to bear in mind that “contact between
Mapping of the Situation in Societies | 14
people from different cultures does not automatically lead to improved mutual understanding”ϭϭ; rather limited contact without dialogue and understanding mainly reinforces preconceived notions. However, they often arise because “the non-autochthones are often afraid of losing their cultural identity, want to live together and end up creating kinds of ‘ghettos’. The autochthones may resist the integration of these ‘newcomers’ due to the strength of their national culture” (FQ). Clearly, from all the above descriptions such isolation leads to mutual alienation between groups, and fosters growing dissent. Other elements were also mentioned, such as the gender dimension, different perceptions of what freedom means, historical barriers, intergenerational barriers, lack of/misleading information, and many more.
11 Otten in Ramberg, I. (2009). Intercultural Learning in European Youth Work: Which Way Forward? Council of Europe, Budapest
Action Points When mapping a region where dialogue is requested, proceed to find out: 2a) How is the situation perceived by the different parties? 2b) Consider using appropriate Assessment Tools to perform this mapping. 2c) After an initial set of findings, please proceed to refine the findings by “double checking”, or “increasing the sampling to reduce the error rate”.
3. Causes of Conflict How is change managed so that conflict is avoided? What are the Tools for Change? How, indeed, is conflict managed? In an increasingly diverse world, where people are “forced” by circumstance to live and work together with differences, there will always be the tendency for conflict to arise. In fact, conflict becomes inevitable. Nevertheless, we aim for an inclusive society where all are valued and contribute to the democratic life of society. A society at ease with itself! It is within our collective abilities to discern potential areas of concern and risk which arise in society, to identify the sources and respond appropriately, strategically and with compassion for the other. In examining the causes of conflict, it may be necessary to identify the elements that give rise to the cause of conflict.
1. Start with SELF. Unwillingness to have an honest self-talk/lack of honest self-talk Who am I? What is my history? My feeling of belonging (to a welcoming and inclusive community). Recognition of our inherent, “natural” tendencies and prejudices. What are my prejudices? The need for human security and survival. What are the actual or perceived threats to my survival? 2. Recognising the other – friend or foe; failure to recognise otherness Walk a mile in the other person’s shoes. See “the Other” through the lenses of SELF. Recognise the differences without being threatened by them. 3. Gaps in mapping the intercultural issues facing our community, town and/or city Holding a mirror up to the communities and reflecting back to ourselves those areas of life that
Causes of Conflict | 16
are causing conflict or the potential for conflict; each community or town can be confronted with different issues (see also JOINT STRATEGIC NEEDS ASSESSMENT, JSNA). 4. Existing and emerging perception of other cultures, ideologies and religions as a threat Historic conflicts which still influence attitudes and identities; The rise of new alliances, for example, could be misconstrued as a threat to those outside them; The concept of a global village through migration patterns and globalisation can be perceived as a threat to the status quo; The shocking and tragic events of 11th September 2001 which serves as a brutal illustration of the dangers lurking in our globalising world and as a consequence the rise of Islam in Europe being seen as the new seat of conflict, giving rise to reactions, some of which are in themselves a challenge to common values. To give an example of the challenges ahead, the current chasm between “the West” and the Is-
lamic world requires the need to engage in a dialogue to begin to bridge this growing gap. The West/Europe faces some critical basic questions from Muslims around the world. The term “double standards” is frequently cited. There is a widespread feeling of having been wronged and unfairly treated by the West. The response of the West to such statements must be to establish a dialogue at all levels, to intensify a commitment to – and call for – the peaceful handling of differences. There must be a willingness to better understand the outlook and perceptions of people in the Islamic world. 5. Change: often a source of conflict However, change happens. It is a “constant”. How is change managed in the avoidance of conflict? What are the Tools for Change? How, indeed, is conflict managed? It is necessary to develop the competencies, the conscience and compassion in order to make change benefit all the stakeholders.
Causes of Conflict | 17
6. The Rich vs. The Poor Despite unprecedented overall levels of wealth, the economic and social disparities between rich and vulnerable populations in Europe are growing. This situation has bred resentment and hostility, especially in the light of the failure of the financial sector in many countries. Stringent austerity measures, necessary though they may be, are an offence to the citizens with hunger, especially when contrast alongside the burgeoning expenses of wars and the continuing “business-as-usual” bankers’ bonuses. Economic development, geared to self-actualisation/personal fulfilment, is essential for people to make progress out of poverty. 7. RACISM: in all of its form and guises! “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” (Buckminster Fuller)
Racism has become so ingrained and intractable in our society that it defies the efforts of successive governments, institutions and NGOs to eradicate it. The impact of this man-made construct denies the victim certain opportunities to progress in life, strips them of their dignity, and has a debilitating effect on the mental, physical and emotional health of the victim, onlookers and perpetrators. 8. Migration pattern and all its drivers Migration has driven the nations of Europe over centuries to discover new worlds and to gain from the spoils of those adventures. It continues to drive us today, in the quest for new jobs and human security for our families within the “safety” of the European Union, and other distant places. It is those same drivers that cause immigrants to frequent the shores of Europe. We therefore need to walk the mile in the others’ shoes to enable us to understand and cope with this issue. The media coverage of migration stories has sometimes added a further spin to handling the question. Research has shown that targeting mi-
Causes of Conflict | 18
nority groups has led to those groups being violently attacked (see in References & Resources: The Search for Common Ground: Muslims, NonMuslims and the UK Media London. Greater London Authority , p. 18). 9. The Plight of Travellers There is a need for a joint strategy for the inclusion of Gypsies, Roma and Travellers with effective monitoring of the impact of policies on these groups, especially in planning, education and employment. Since 2011 the Council of Europe has taken some special measures in this regard.ϭϮ 10. The ambivalence of news coverage in the media The role of the media in spreading prejudice against certain ethnic and religious groups remains a very serious concern. Muslims depicted in association with terrorism, migrants as “illegal” and sponging off the state, 12 http://www.coe.int/web/coe-portal/roma
asylum seekers as making bogus claims for protection, and Gypsies, Roma and Travellers as trouble-makers, are frequently presented in a negative light in the mainstream media. Media coverage in certain high circulation newspapers have been disproportionate, hostile and inaccurate, using such inflammatory words as “bogus”, “wave”, “flood” and “fraudulent” (see in References & Resources: The Search for Common Ground: Muslims, Non-Muslims and the UK Media London. Greater London Authority ). An example of good practice in the media A good example of an intercultural approach by the media is found in the city of Leicester in the UK. The Leicester Mercury, with a readership of over 200,000, is the pre-eminent local newspaper of the city of Leicester. The city is one of the most diverse in the UK and the Mercury’s editor, Nick Carter, takes this very seriously. The paper’s approach is to challenge sensationalism and myths, and it has an effective rebuttal policy in place if very right-wing and extremist messages are
Causes of Conflict | 19
voiced in communities. The Mercury is a partner of the city’s Multicultural Advisory Group and Carter often chairs meetings. This group meets monthly to discuss, mediate and to identify action to prevent community conflict, to agree tactics for proactive myth busting and reproaching far-right and other extremists groups in the city. The editor’s presence is not to report on what is said at the meetings, but to engage in dialogue to achieve a greater degree of understanding between the media and community groups. This contributes to more effective, sensitive and informed reporting, which overcomes the challenges of “sensationalisation” and myths, while giving the local press a stake in maintaining the cohesion of the City. 11. Extremism and the activities of the far right The negative positioning of multiculturalism as a failure, the anti-immigration rhetoric and the ethnically-coded counter-terrorism policies have fed the xenophobia and Islamophobia that have strengthened the activities of the far right, often
re-awakening anti-Semitic statements and actions. Such activities bring numerous supporters onto the streets, in direct confrontation with the community, often with violent consequences. There is a need for governments to work with NGOs to establish effective community engagement strategies that address these threats.ϭϯ 12. Pent-up dissatisfaction, disillusionment and anger leading to conflict “When an individual is no longer a true participant, when he no longer feels a sense of responsibility to his society, inexorably the individual is impelled to pull away from this soulless society. This process produces alienation perhaps the most pervasive and insidious development in contemporary society.” Martin Luther King, Jr.
13 One of the recommendations of the Joint Submission by the UK NGOs against racism to the UN Committee on the elimination on Racial Discrimination (CERD) – (July 2011)
Causes of Conflict | 20
Often kindled by missed or ignored signals, community tensions, suppressed freedom of expression, parallel living/a parallel way of life or the implementation of excessively authoritative (police, rules, bylaws) controls, these abstract forms of conflict can be spontaneous and explosive.
that the management of conflict is a skill (Multicultural competencies) which can and should be acquired, not just by a few specialists but also by all those who play a role in the routine operation of the departments and other public spaces.
The causes of conflicts like these can be much deeper and more complex than meets the eye. Judging by the evaluation of the aftermath of such conflicts, it will be necessary to â€œdrill downâ€? deeper to find the root cause of the problems, address them head-on and be bold enough to take decisive action. The intercultural space is not always an easy place to be. Being an active citizen here demands that you engage and interact; that you question and are prepared to be questioned by others, that you listen and are listened to; and that you are not afraid to disagree but you must be prepared to go the extra distance to work through and resolve a conflict to arrive at a common solution. It also implies the recognition
Causes of Conflict | 21
Action Points After having mapped a situation (point 2), pursue the inquiry to find out what is/are the cause/s of the problems. 3a) Proceed with sorting the findings into “factual” and “perceived” causes with a view to designing the dialogue (Element 8). 3b) The conceptual items, also fall under the perceived causes, for example: the concept of a global village through migration patterns and globalisation may be perceived as a threat to the status quo. 3c) As change happens to be a constant, find out how change is managed; is it denied, avoided, addressed, or instrumentalised? Is it a threat, or an opportunity? 3d) Take time to track possible ingrained and intractable causes, the debilitating denials.
4. Who Needs to Be at the Table? “Nobody should be left out.” (from FQ) Dialogue is a multivector and multidirection everyday process that incorporates, to some degree, each and all either in a personal capacity as individuals, or the members of social groups, be it in private life, in a professional capacity or while performing public functions. In this Element, we attempt to systematise the baseline circle of dialogue stakeholders in terms of their functions in this process with the underlying factors that predetermine it. The White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue – Living together as equals in dignity of 2008 defines stakeholders as “all those groups and individuals of minority or majority background who play a role and have interests (a ‘stake’) in intercultural dialogue. Most prominently these are policymakers in governments and parliaments at all levels, local and regional authorities, civil-society organisations, migrant and religious commu-
nities, cultural and media organisations, journalists and social partners.” An Individual remains a key link in intercultural dialogue. In today’s world, an individual – as a social actor, a culture bearer, and a member of social groups – iteratively contacts other cultures as phenomena and their representatives on various forums and strata – from school and workplace to public places and, correspondingly, an individual should build the strategy for interacting with them. The efficiency of this interaction depends on the readiness of individuals to engage in such interactions and on their skills and knowledge, their values which determine the individual’s behaviour, and their social background. The key idea is based upon the principle of unityin-diversity – a prerequisite for progressive development of any system and of society as a whole. We should not only accept the diversity around us, but also learn to value it and live together for the benefit of each and all of us. In
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 23
order to do so, we need to be able to understand the Other – a different culture – and that requires knowledge. As highlighted by the results of all three workshops and the questionnaires, an educational factor lies in the basis of this process and remains a long-term solution – one of the tools for changing a mind-set. “The way forward is to promote the intercultural education approach” (WS). Here we are talking about all levels of formal education as well as a non-formal and informal education and therefore educational institutions, other entities that perform educational functions and in particular educators as stakeholders in intercultural dialogue. Let us identify the following functions of education in the realm of intercultural dialogue: • Providing knowledge about history, culture, language, traditions, and religions of peoples;
primarily it is important from the point of view of preventing the misinterpretation of history; • Development of critical thinking that enhances the extirpation of stereotypes and prejudices and, as a result, prevents “Otherisation”ϭϰ (WS); it also ensures steadfastness in the face of attempts at manipulation; • Forming/Building/Development of a humanistic culture and tolerance; • Involvement of an individual in the social practices of intercultural dialogue. At the same time, as other participants in the discussion pointed out, it is important to incorporate modules of instruction in intercultural relations in the training of essential professionals such as teachers, journalists, lawyers and politicians. These modules must be embodied in the initial training and not presented as merely optional propositions (WS). 14 See more on this concept in Intercultural Communication: an Advanced Resource Book. 2nd Edition. By A. Holliday, J. Kullman, M. Hyde. Routledge, 2010
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 24
In this context, one should emphasise the role of a family – the key agent in the initial phase in the socialisation of a human being, building the foundations of personality and a source of informal education. It is in the family that individuals receive first perception of themselves and their social environment.
Civil society, which institutionalises the factor of self-organisation of society and public activity, is a multifunctional, complex stakeholder. Let us review the role of civil society in the context of intercultural dialogue through the prism of the key objectives and activities of NGOs. The priorities here include:
The young people stand out of social groups as agents of change (WS). They are real “ambassadors” of integration (WS) and a source of innovation and inspiration (WS).
• Stimulation of its own daily practice of living together on a grassroot level – extirpation of stereotypes and fears in relation to the Other and prejudices; • Fostering of awareness in society for the issues related to diversity and intercultural dialogue; participation in education in democratic citizenship and human rights education, especially within the system of non-formal and informal education (see in References and Resources: Recommendation CM/Rec (2010) 7 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the Council of Europe Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education); • Articulation and discussion of sensitive issues at the level of grassroots members of society;
One should also point out the role of the older generation as guardians of tradition ensuring the continuity of social and cultural values and positive experience generated over time. On a longer timeline, the idea of the “200-year present” by Elise Bouldingsϭϱ and the dialogue approach of “future imaging” come to mind. 15 See more on this idea in Conflict Resolution: Origins, Foundations and Developement of the Field in Contemporary Conflict Resolution by O. Ramsbotham, T. Woodhouse, H. Miall, 2011. http://www.polity.co.uk/ccr/contents
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 25
• The creation of a platform for interaction among representatives of various religions, cultures, nationalities aiming at the identification of our common values; • The assumption of a consultative function in the process of development and political decision-making and constructive dialogue between society and public authorities must be ensured; • Lobbying of public interests with the authorities; • To play a watchdog role. Locally, implementation of intercultural dialogue often depends on the mood and activities of communities. One should emphasise participation of migrant communities in the dialogue, be it their formal associations or non-formal groups. The activities of religious leaders, religious communities and institutions, which play a significant role in the promotion of a Culture of Peace (WS), bring into focus the religious
dimension of intercultural dialogue. Cooperation between them oriented towards the promotion of universal values and ideals of Good and Morality can influence the mind-set of people and foster intercultural dialogue. The Activities of sports organisations and cultural organisations and their various representatives are extremely significant in the formation of a culture of respect for diversity and in preparing and sustaining a dialogue. It is through sports, music, theatre, cinema, fine arts that we can ensure interaction regardless of the political situation.ϭϲ The role of intellectuals, academics and researchers is very important because they are the ones who elaborate the theoretical aspects of 16 See more in Violence, conflict and intercultural dialogue by Jean-Fred Bourquin. CoE, 2003, p. 52–53; Conflict Resolution in Art and Popular Culture in Contemporary Conflict Resolution by O. Ramsbotham, T. Woodhouse, H. Miall (2011). http://www.polity.co.uk/ccr/contents/chapters/ 16.pdf
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 26
problems concerning the entire complex of social relations within society, beyond which it would be impossible to prove the objective necessity and possibility of intercultural dialogue as a prerequisite for sustainable development. It is apparent that an individual’s behaviour and the vectors and trends of activities of social groups within society largely depend on political factors. A special management apparatus – i.e. public authorities which, according to the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, includes “the national government and political and administrative bodies at the central, regional and local levels”, “town councils or other local authority bodies, as well as natural or legal persons under private law who perform public functions or exercise administrative authority” – is one of the key stakeholders in intercultural dialogue. It performs the following functions: • Development of the political agenda in the realm of intercultural dialogue and the definition of goals and objectives;
• Definition of a public discourse conducive to intercultural dialogue; • Adoption of relevant standards, including legislative ones that create conditions for the efficient implementation of intercultural dialogue. For instance, modernisation of legislation that combats discrimination, racial, religious and ethnic crimes and hatred; the introduction of legislation to establish a proper balance between different rights (WS); • Alignment of social policy towards social inclusion and social cohesion; • Support of the NGO activities in the implementation of intercultural dialogue. One should stress the importance of local authorities in the implementation of initiatives aimed at establishing and sustaining the process of intercultural dialogue (see in References & Resources: Gods in the city – Intercultural and interreligious dialogue at local level [CoE, 2008]; Intercultural cities. Towards a model for intercultural integration. Ed. by Phyl Wood [CoE, 2010]).
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 27
We cannot ignore the role of the private sector which, through its projects under contemporary conditions, is not only involved in frequent intercultural interaction, it is often a platform for representatives of different cultural, religious, linguistic and other communities. “Companies can contribute to positive intercultural relations through efforts to support diversity in the workplace, responsible approaches to marketing, and support of community projects that encourage tolerance in the wider society.” See in References & Resources: The Business of Peace. The private sector as a partner in conflict prevention and resolution by Jane Nelson. IBLF, 2000 cited by Doing Business in a Multicultural World: Challenges and Opportunities. A Joint Report by the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations and the United Nations Global Compact Office. 2009. In turn, sustainable development of society based on harmonious intercultural relations also creates a sound foundation for business activity, which may serve as one of the factors for a con-
structive partnership between the private and public sectors. Identification of common goals and interests in this area and their subsequent implementation on the basis of joint resources are the key elements to strengthen the process of establishing and maintaining intercultural dialogue.ϭϳ The information and communication factor plays a special role, ensuring the efficiency of horizontal and vertical communication between all stakeholders, which in today’s mediatized society shapes the nature of their relations and their decisions. One of the most urgent tasks – as pointed out by the Forum participants – is changing the narrative, first and foremost, by focusing on positive and constructive messaging. 17 See more in: Doing Business in a Multicultural World: Challenges and Opportunities. A Joint Report by the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations and the United Nations Global Compact Office, 2009. http://www.unglobalcompact. org/docs/issues_doc/Peace_and_Business/Doing_Business_in_a_Multicultural_World.pdf
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 28
The mass media remain a major channel for information, but not the only one. Their key functions for the implementation of intercultural dialogue include: • Communication: establishment and sustainment communication with all stakeholders across horizontal and vertical levels; • Informative: comprehensive and adequate, fact-based information for audiences/the public/people; reflection of the diversity that exists in reality, positive contribution of migrants to economic and cultural life of the country, prevention of retranslation of stereotypes and prejudices, etc.; • Socially orienting: objective reflection of social realities thus promoting the formation of value orientation of audiences aimed at recognition and respect of diversity, sustainability of intercultural dialogue, identification and coverage of common values; • Cultural and educational: dissemination of knowledge about a society’s own culture and the culture of the Other;
• Organisational: establishment of a dialogue between public authorities and society, influence over social institutions. Support of a shared sense of accountability is one of the key aspects of the work of mass media relating to intercultural dialogue. Under current conditions, the role of an image, a word is becoming vital – which may be both a positive and a negative mobilizing factor – and information policy in terms of media requirements and the personal responsibility of a journalist are increasing beyond measure. In our contemporary, globalising world everyone is included in the process of intercultural dialogue. This process has a complex nature requiring a coordinated and integrated approach.
Who Needs to Be at the Table? | 29
Action Points Based on the findings of Action Points 2 and 3, assemble a list of potential Dialogue participants. 4a) Review the list: Are all stakeholders present/ represented? Try to reflect different ages, gender, professions, backgrounds, and social strata. Proceed to adjust the list accordingly; 4b) Determine how the potential Dialogue participants are organised; who are their key figures/leaders/opinion leaders; what are their expectations; Give particular thought to the role of the media and consider the timing factor: When the Dialogue needs the “Safe Space” and when it needs to “go public”?
4c) Try to assess which functions can be implemented by each of the stakeholders in your particular case; based on which human and material resources; 4d) Gather data on positions/attitudes/steps taken/achievements of the potential stakeholders in the scope of intercultural dialogue; 4e) Think about/Reconsider the contribution you expect from each participant; 4f) Consider the nature of a body/platform which should be established to give the participants an opportunity to express their interests openly, coordinate their efforts, and draw up a program of activities; 4g) Based on the above, develop an inclusive strategy of a Dialogue built on the common interests of the stakeholders.
5. Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) “A huge movement is needed coming from individuals and NGOs to promote the value of- and see – the intercultural dimension as a resource.” (from WS) Intercultural dialogue is possible and effective in the presence of a whole number of macro- and micro-level conditions which are, however, closely interrelated and interdependent. According to development, these conditions may be displayed on one level or another. The aim of this Element is to name the basic components of these conditions and to define the context/scenario that creates fertile ground for intercultural dialogue. “The universal values upheld by the Council of Europe are a condition for intercultural dialogue. No
dialogue can take place in the absence of respect for the equal dignity of all human beings, human rights, the rule of law and democratic principles.” (White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue) As defined in the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, macro-conditions include the functioning/ fulfilment of the following values and principles: • Human rights, democracy and the rule of law • Equal dignity and mutual respect • Gender equality • Combating the barriers that prevent intercultural dialogue Respect for human rights, equal dignity and mutual respect implies the creation of a context which allows everyone to express their uniqueness without fear of being ostracised, to contribute to discussions, to take decisions on urgent matters of public life and implement them. This is the basis for creating objective conditions
Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) | 31
which can be a safeguard against discrimination, racism and xenophobia, thus reinforcing the process of social cohesion. This very model of dialogue, if properly practiced, is the basis for a democratic political system – and a way of life. At the same time, genuine dialogue is only possible with a responsible attitude and respect for the balance of competing rights and freedoms. In European countries today, which differ in their cultural variety, the idea of “cultural citizenship”, including “not only the traditional rights and privileges of the citizen in a democratic state but also the third dimension of the general right to have one’s culture and heritage recognized”, “could become increasingly important as a means of generating a sense of belonging, particularly among groups who often feel marginalised by the dominant cultural groups” (see in References & Resources: Handbook on values for life in a democracy. Ed. by Robert Stradling and Christopher Rowe (2009), P. 16). Strengthening social inclusion and overcoming social exclusion constitute one of the major challenges facing Europe today. Of particular ur-
gency is the implementation of the New Strategy and Council of Europe Action Plan for Social Cohesion (2010), which is based on four pillars: “reinvesting in social rights and a cohesive society; building a Europe of responsibilities that are both shared and social; strengthening representation and democratic decision making and expanding social dialogue and civic engagement; building a secure future for all”. Poverty, unemployment, homelessness and other signs of social deprivation in today’s world, especially in times of crisis, are often a basis for the conflicts that are only superficially of an ethnic, religious or cultural nature. Assurance of social rights, complete and accurate implementation of the obligations of states as defined in the European Social Charter, is vital for sustainable development and to create conditions which reduce conflicts in society. All human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated, which was reaffirmed in the Declaration on human rights in culturally diverse societies, adopted by the CoE Committee of Ministers on July 1, 2009.
Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) | 32
Any initiative for intercultural dialogue must undoubtedly be founded on the basic principle of equality between women and men as an integral part of human rights and a criterion of democracy. The risk of non-compliance with this principle in practice means that a woman who belongs to minorities becomes an object of cumulative discrimination: on the grounds of gender, both within the group subjected to an essentially patriarchal society, and by belonging to a minority. In a democracy, everyone has the right to participate in the governance of state affairs and to determine the reality in which they live. However this is only possible in a mature civic culture of participation. The rule of law as a fundamental prerequisite for intercultural dialogue, assuming equality of all before the law and practicing the rigorous separation of powers principle, aims at creating an atmosphere of stability and security. Human rights abuse, undermining the dignity of the Other, racism, discrimination, violation of social rights access, poverty, and exploitation:
these are the most frequently named challenges in intercultural dialogue. The struggle against these negative phenomena is one of the obvious macro-conditions for intercultural dialogue. Diversity is an essential feature of reality, whether it be natural or social and it necessitates sustainable development. The task today is not just to recognize, respect and cherish this diversity, but to use it for the common good. It is more a fundamental issue of the public mindset shifting from confrontation to solution-oriented dialogues. “A foreign culture only reveals itself fully and deeply in the eyes of another culture. … A meaning only reveals its depths once it has encountered and come into contact with another, foreign meaning: they engage in a kind of dialogue, which surmounts the ‘closedness’ and one-sidedness of these particular meanings.” (Mikhail Bakhtin, Aesthetics of Verbal Creativity (1986)
Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) | 33
Therefore, the starting point for intercultural dialogue is an understanding of the unity-indiversity phenomenon as a modern world reality with diversity seen as an advantage and as a resource, but not as a threat (WS). The initial basic conditions of the micro-level include motivation/intention and willingness(!) to join and conduct the dialogue, the openmindedness of the participants, enabling them to deal with the challenges for which answers can be only provided by joint actions and the identification common goals and values that can serve as the basis for such unity, mutual trust and respect. The willingness to engage in dialogue is closely related to such a condition as hospitality, affability and benevolence, which are specific expressions of respect for the partner(s) in the dialogue, and it signalises an invitation to a dialogue.
“In the design of the dialogue process, the actors involved should be treated equally. The design should prepare a dialogue of honest conversations, gathering all those who should be at the table and confronting the issues on the basis of what is right and not who is right” (FQ). • Listening skillsϭϴ, an ability to listen attentively and carefully; aspiring to understand the Other. “We have to listen to the Other and to read the Other (e.g., scientists and philosophers)” (WS). The challenge is to create the opportunity for groups, which are not part of the decision-making process to speak out, to engage in dialogue, and most importantly, to make themselves heard and not simply be passive listeners. One should emphasise the core of the process – the desire to understand each other, appreciate other points of view, “to be open to alternative narratives” – in other words, not to be trapped in
This group of conditions includes: • Equal footing, as a result of the basic macrocondition of Equal dignity.
18 For more information, please, see http://www.infoplease. com/homework/listeningskills1.html. See also http://www.drnadig.com/listening.htm
Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) | 34
a “parallel monologue” (FQ). This is not so easy to achieve. Right timing and well-prepared ground are among the factors which facilitate progress and also highlight the role of those who facilitate dialogues. • Self-awareness and self-reflection, which are closely connected with the capacity for critical thinking. • Awareness: knowledge about the Other, his/her traditions and culture that allows us to base the dialogue on facts while avoiding stereotypes and misinterpretations and, as a result enables us to reach reasoned decisions. Here are the examples of measures aimed to reach this condition: citizen exchange programmes, including youth exchanges, youth mobility programmes, capacity building and awareness-raising programmes, organisation of events/projects that present the culture and the history of the immigrants, informing them about their rights, etc. (FQ). • Quality and quantity of information. • Communication skills, based on a spirit of cooperation.
“All human beings have the same needs (e.g. love, acceptance, understanding, identity, respect, recognition, equal treatment, wellbeing, support, tolerance, belonging) so that a win-win situation can be actualised” (FQ). • A common language which is understandable to all communicators with common terminology and using creative methods to express one’s position. • Organisational skills. • Honesty and bravery, the ability and wish to explain one’s position openly often demand a certain amount/a specific kind of courage and resoluteness. • Resilience is the capacity of society as a whole and its individual members for social adaptation, the ability to overcome the negative impact of conflicts, traumas or tragedies, to recuperate and cope with bitterness and surmount the desire to take revenge, to build constructive relationships with one’s opponents and to forgive. • A responsible approach towards the implementation of rights and freedoms (from the stand-
Conditions and Context (macro- and micro-level) | 35
point of inseparability from responsibilities and accountabilities). Being realistic, one has to be prepared to work on refusal posturesϭϵ and what to do when normal dialogue does not work or might not work – i.e. when views are in “radical disagreement”, because there are some ways beyond this. Finally, the efficiency of intercultural dialogue is possible only on the basis of the approach that would take into account the whole range of macro- and micro-conditions and the dynamics of social processes in 21st century.
Action Points This phase of dialogue preparation needs particular attention to: 5a) Ascertain with all participants/stakeholders (decision-makers or not): The awareness of the basic precepts of Dialogue, which aims at a culture of participation. 5b) Prepare participants by way of conversations or correspondence about the desired qualities for Dialogues. This should be elicited, rather than carried out in a prescriptive mode.
19 http://www.polity.co.uk/ccr/contents/see Chapter 18
6. Facilitation of Dialogues Working on the process integrity is … working on the quality of the dialogue outcome itself. It is worth recording here that the INGO Conference began to initiate dialogues in earlier years, such as contributing to an enabling environment for NGOs on “the Role of NGOs in the situation following the August 2008 Conflict”, be it in conjunction with its Regional CongressesϮϬ or in StrasbourgϮϭ. These experiences have also helped to discern the forethought and facilitation that demanding dialogues require. This Element aims to clarify the role of a Facilitator in Dialogue, distinguishing it from other roles and procedures. It also sets out the Facili20 http://www.coe.int/t/ngo/Source/Penza_NGO_Congress_ Declaration_en.pdf http://www.coe.int/t/ngo/Source/Vilnius_Congress%20_ Conclusions.pdf 21 https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1456177
tators’ responsibilities as well as some of the requisite skills. JP and Arbitrator roles Some legal systems contain provisions for a Justice of the Peace to oversee a settlement process instead of engaging in court action. Another and fairly similar avenue is arbitration. According to the dictionary the “arbitrator is someone chosen to judge and decide a disputed issue”22. The Mediator role The Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs with its track record of “good offices” in diplomacy writes: “A mediator receives a specific mandate from the parties in a conflict. A mediator not only makes it possible for the parties in a conflict to come together but also actively helps them try to find a solution. For example, mediators can communicate a solution proposed by one party to the other party, negoti22 http://www.chacha.com/question/what-does-‘arbitrator’mean
Facilitation of Dialogues | 37
ate possible solutions between the parties, or propose a solution of their own.” “Peace negotiations today are usually highly complex and are conducted by mediators with considerable experience. Mediators can call on the help of experts in a number of fields, such as constitutional law, elections, security system reform, building state structures, disarming combatants and reintegrating them into society, and dealing with the past.” The main actors in mediation come for multilateral institutions, from smaller states and from NGOs. The INGO Conference has worked on the mediation theme in the context of its Human Rights Committee, supported by Prof. Michele GuillaumeHofnungϮϯ, a leading French academic in the mediation field.
23 Professeure des facultés de droit, directrice du master diplomatie et négociations stratégiques de l’Université de Paris 11. Author of “la médiation“, 5th edition 2009, published by PUF.
The Facilitator role A facilitatorϮϰ of dialogues as set out in this Toolkit is someone who helps a diverse group of participants to • accept and appreciate each other; • evaluate all factors involved in overcoming difficulties; • own their share of responsibility to make a difference; • identify the groups’ common objectives, and to • assist them in planning their achievement. Facilitators are thus responsible for creating the space and atmosphere as well as for the process. Although in a role quite different from the participants, they all share a common interest in working towards a good outcome. Process Integrity The Facilitators affiliations should be known to the participants and seen to be not in conflict with their required independence. If a contract 24 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitator
Facilitation of Dialogues | 38
brings the Facilitator to work with a dialogue, then the employer should declare his identity. The Facilitator does not take a particular position regarding the substance of the discussion but is well-advised to have or obtain knowledge about the issues at stake in a given dialogue. An early phase in Dialogue serves to establish ground rules with the participants, which the Facilitator can subsequently uphold. The relationship between the Facilitator and the participants is therefore symbiotic, quite well characterised as the role of a midwife. Just as the midwife takes care of hygiene at the time of birth, the facilitator minds the integrity of the dialogue process. Working on the process integrity is also working on the quality of actual outcome of the dialogue. “We practice stewardship of the process and impartiality toward content”, writes one professional association of facilitators, the IAFϮϱ.
Skill and Selection Facilitating can be a person’s natural aptitude, but most facilitators have undergone training. 20 years ago it became a professional skill which can be learned by way of formal or informal education. Business, training and conflict management are the main areas where facilitation has been applied. Dialogue “Facilitators must know how to use non-formal methods (experiential, participatory, active methods) to build trust, develop communication skills and a climate of acceptance, develop win-win situations, etc. Facilitators should also have patience in the dialogue process as it can be quite timeconsuming.“Ϯϲ Credentials Many training institutions will award a credit upon successful conclusion of a facilitator course. For the Dialogues proposed here the INGO Conference is conducting a specific introduction 26 Feedback offered through the Civil Society Forum Questionnaire (November 2011)
Facilitation of Dialogues | 39
workshop for Facilitators to master the parameters outlined in this Toolkit. Team work Depending on the size of the undertaking it is advisable to have two or even more facilitators to accompany a Dialogue. Also, co-facilitation itself shows to all the stakeholders that partnership is possible. The Dialogue Steering Group As mentioned just above, managing a Dialogue is a sizeable task. Bringing together the diverse required talents into a Steering Group is the most productive approach. It is akin to the role of Facilitators, the Steering Groupâ€™s main task is to enable the process. It has succeeded when the results/outcomes of the Dialogue are endorsed by all the participants. Dialogue schedule Depending on the design of a dialogue, as will be further outlined in Element 8, the schedule of a dialogue needs consideration. Are two days
enough? Should one week of intensive meetings be considered, or one to two evenings per week over several months? The choice of the time schedule has a bearing on the integrity and credibility of the dialogue process; an extremely tight schedule may be perceived as pressuring the participants and a very open schedule may be understood as inefficiency. The Dialogue Steering Group is therefore well-advised to assess the time schedule as the process unfolds. Outcomes Working through Elements 2 to 5 has outlined the framework of the issue(s) to be addressed in a particular situation. Participants and Facilitators therefore expect an outcome. As in modern process management, the Facilitator needs to bear in mind to review those elements of the Dialogue which potentially constitute the outcome and he/she needs to obtain the participantsâ€™ consent. Such reviews may include adjusting/enlarging or reducing the intended outcomes of the Dialogue. Therefore, the design of the Dialogue is a sequential process with feedback
Facilitation of Dialogues | 40
loops, which improves according to the quality and time devoted to it. Feedback, Evaluation, Follow-up Trained facilitators will ask participants for feedback, at intervals both during a dialogue as well as at the end of it. The Dialogue Steering Group would do well to request participants’ assessments 6 months after the conclusion of a dialogue. Comparing immediate and retrospective feedback will provide the data for a full evaluation. This evaluation will in turn help design follow-up measures. Whatever these measures may turn out to be, dialogue participants should be invited to tell others what they have learned in the process.
Action Points The next step in Dialogue preparation is: 6a) To draw up a list of potential facilitators. Also, you might consult third parties for ideas about facilitators. 6b) To ask potential facilitators if they are willing to commit themselves to the proposed Dialogue, subject to the code of facilitators’ ethics. 6c) To form a Facilitators’ Team for the Dialogue with at least two Facilitators for each session.
Reminder: The role and skill of Facilitators as catalysts of the process needs to be understood when assembling the elements required for a Dialogue.
7. From Hidden Obstacles to Key Questions A question to be raised when preparing for dialogue or periodically during it is the question WHY? This Element invites the reader to think and to reflect on some possibly hidden obstacles to achieving a good process of intercultural dialogue. This part of the Toolkit is more about “putting” on the table those issues that are not so obvious and not so often touched-on in the process of a dialogue; it is about launching ideas and offering some points to reflect on. What are the hidden obstacles to dialogue? What are (if there are) dilemmas in approaching the dialogue? Are there any “Hot-Button” words/catalytic terms? Dialogue requires at least two parties to be involved. In order to create a “smooth” dialogue
each party should be open to receive and to give on the same level of honesty and mutual understanding. The space for dialogue can be safe for sharing and exploring aspects that are not usually touched on in daily life. The actors involved should address “the hot issues” via intercultural dialogue on a basis of mutual understanding. For this to happen open and honest communication are imperative. The request for dialogue could come from either side “from the majority point of view and from minority point of view” (see in References & Resources: Bashy Quraishy – Migration and Integration, a minority perspective, November 2010). The participants in the dialogue should be prepared before entering it. A personal development programme should be established for less privileged groups to develop their competences in order to acquire the skills to participate equally in the dialogue. Before entering the dialogue it is important to understand the needs of those involved and to make space for the Other. All the
From Hidden Obstacles to Key Questions | 42
stakeholders involved in the process should express their needs (before entering into the process of dialogue) and what each party is willing to give to their other counterpart(s) and what each expects of the other. The preparation for intercultural dialogue should be based on agreeing on a verbal â€œcontractâ€? between the parties, where expectations, fears and contributions are clearly and honestly expressed.
Whether stereotypes are positive or negative, they significantly influence the process of dialogue. Therefore false perception/the stereotypes/prejudice have to be addressed.
not as a tool to fight, manipulate or convince. Intercultural dialogue is not only for marginalized communities; it reinforces the entire community because it can cultivate a sense of belonging and equality (WS). The question often arises as to how much freedom of expression and freedom of religion there should be. What is the limit of being open and honest, and of offending the other(s)? Some criticism against religion and different systems of beliefs can be shocking but there is still the difference between an insult and inciting hatred (from WS). In this process respect should be shown for the values and for the belief systems of the persons engaged in the dialogue.
Another issue that is sometimes considered a taboo is self-identity. Tension is always there in diversity; over time the mood sways, like a pendulum, between acceptance and rejection. People may fear losing their cultural identity when they are faced with the prospect of meeting with many others. Dialogue can be seen as an opportunity which happens naturally and in harmony â€“ and
The obstacles to intercultural dialogue taking place to be found on all levels: international, national, regional and local. The manner in which conflicts are handled on the international level have a strong influence on the feelings of concerned people, wherever they live. On the national level, big differences can be observed in the legal frameworks, for instance the lack of
From Hidden Obstacles to Key Questions | 43
state institutions that specifically address the issue of discrimination. Encouraging state policies on all levels is vital for presenting and maintaining intercultural dialogue. It is necessary also to have clear legislation on “racial” and ethnic discrimination and hate crimes, supported by institutions that can deal with these kinds of cases, backed up by official statistical data on racial discrimination and hate crimes (FQ). An important question to be raised when preparing for dialogue or periodically during it is the question WHY. For example, “Why is immigration perceived as negative?” “Why is the integration of young people from immigrant backgrounds so important?” “Why do we need intercultural dialogue?” and so on.
There are still a lot of obstacles that can block/ interrupt dialogue (at all levels – individual, local, national, regional, international). Some of the obstacles can be eliminated by openness and the ability to recognize, approach and the will to overcome them; some of them require time, effort, long-term commitment and courage to push the “hot buttons”. All in all, intercultural dialogue is an organic process, which can be continuously improved and can be used as a method through which the paradigm is being changed/is changing. It is a place where everyone can meet: minority with majority, media and religion, policy and religion, cultural and social, economic and cultural and thus it is “practical wisdom” (WS).
While religious and social problems may be discussed openly, there is still often reticence in talking about personal morality and family education because they are based on a delicate equilibrium (from WS/questionnaires). Through intercultural dialogue these issues can also be addressed.
From Hidden Obstacles to Key Questions | 44
Action Points Inquire and work out what the pitfalls to Dialogue in the given situation might be. Then transpose these items into questions for the participants. 7a) The Personal approach Get people to write down and/or express: What is my identity? Which are the elements that make up my perception of my own culture? What is my perception of the others and their culture? Try to unpack and identify hidden stereotypes and prejudices, etc. 7b) The other(s) What are your needs/motivation to enter into dialogue? What do you want to achieve
from this process? What are you prepared to give? 7c) The institutional/structural level Evaluate the policies and their implementation mechanisms in the context of which you have to operate. Is there an issue that has been left from policy making and practise? 7d) Narratives and communications What stories are told in my group, about ourselves, about the others? Do I know what stories the others have about themselves and about us? How do the media reflect the narratives?
8. Design of the Dialogue Process One of the fundamental principles of democracy is that those affected by decisions should have a say in them. This Element seeks to set out the basic requirements for the design of Intercultural Dialogue. Each situation requires specific treatment as indicated previously, in particular in Elements 2, 3 and 4. Hence this Element is presented differently from the previous ones and may inevitably also contain some repetitions. But common to all dialogue undertakings are some basic elements, briefly sketched out here. Guiding Principles These following tenets should form the fundamental elements of any Dialogue and are worth being put on a dialogue agenda:
Understanding of the principles of Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law; Understanding and managing conflict (Theory & Practice); Inclusion of Behavioural Techniques; Cultivating the Skills of Discernment; Seeking to promote Unity in Diversity; Building on Honest ConversationsϮϳ to attain a good level of trust; Working towards the principle: “What is right, not who is right»; Keeping reflective Wisdom in mind: “We need to develop reflective wisdom: to care about things that will sustain us and give us good experiences” – Valerie TiberiusϮϴ͘ Preparation Who takes the lead? By their very nature dialogues are started by people who are looking for ways to respond to unfulfilled needs. They do well to form themselves into a Steering Group, 27 http://www.hopeinthecities.org/trustbuilding 28 http://philpapers.org/rec/TIBTRL
Design of the Dialogue Process | 46
which should include at least one facilitator from the outset. The composition of the Steering Group should eventually mirror the spectrum of stakeholders. Who decides? At the outset, the initiators will have to be those responsible. As the process starts, the role of the facilitator(s) will be to ensure “shared ownership” by the dialogue participants. Taking care that the process ownership is shared means obtaining optimal energy at the time of putting the dialogue outcomes into practice. Who pays? The costs of conducting dialogues can vary greatly, depending on their scope, both in geographical and thematic terms. The overall purpose of dialogues is to promote and put into practice a culture of participation, therefore their economics should also reflect a measure of participation; when it involves disadvantaged groups, they may consider a symbolic kind of participation. A system of cost sharing among the participants could be considered, too. For larger dialogue projects the origin of the donations should be known. The identity of donors
can be beneficial if the donors’ policies are in line with the aforementioned guiding principles. The Council of Europe for instance would be the ideal partner to provide funding and to partner in conducting dialogue programmes, because thereby its basic values would be transmitted. Process-oriented management In preparing for an intercultural dialogue, each element will require its own process, including workshop materials, hand-outs, and schemes of work. Participate: Know yourself; make space for the other. Dialogue stakeholders need to develop a sense of having a shared destiny. The participants are the “team” that will bring improvements to the quality of life to society. Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing are four stages of the team-development model by Bruce TuckmanϮϵ. Each stage has a process to be worked through. 29 http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm
Design of the Dialogue Process | 47
Remove obstacles to reach good interaction: learn from the past by gathering intelligence about current narratives and past history. Experience shows that the most effective intercultural dialogues have tended to the wounds of the past.ϯϬ Otherwise, left unresolved they would become obstacles to solution-oriented dialogues. Be outcome-focussed: The process can be topdown (a proposal put to participants) or bottomup (elicit outcome ideas from participants). Look out for the capacity, skills, data and knowledge needed for an outcome. Intelligence gathering of good practices by scanning the horizon for providers and institutions. Secure the involvement of participants for example by inviting them to conduct a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analysis. And/or create systems to allow people to reflect on the coherence and relevance of their involvement in the process as it relates to their life or work in order to answer the implicit question: “What has 30 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KZH/is_2_19/ ai_n16726175/
it got to do with me?” This is particularly pertinent to get young people involved in the Dialogue process. Make things ‘cool’ for young people alongside Facebook, social networking and Blogs, Local exchanges as well as youth exchanges. Develop media support packs for young journalists. Working together and living together across cultures: where this happening already you can use this resource. “It should be stressed what each side must win from the dialogue, i.e. the benefits of dialogue vs. the losses from the absence of dialogue.”31 Sequencing the stages of a Dialogue: depending on the situation and context, a dialogue may have to begin separately within stakeholder groups. This is known as the “intra talks” stage. And again, depending on the situation and context, a dialogue with all stakeholders may have to take place in a “safe space” context, where the conversations are not repeated or reported to outsiders. When participants have become sufficiently enabled – at the Performing stage – 31 Feedback from a questionnaire
Design of the Dialogue Process | 48
having worked through the various barriers to meaningful engagement, the “public” phase of a dialogue can be envisaged, with media presence. This phase can begin when consensus has been reached within the group. A “test run” with some selected people from outside the group may be helpful. Practitioners will know that: “A lot of patience and gentle pushing is needed to bring/invite people to the dialogue table.”ϯϮ Of equal significance is the time factor during the process; it takes patience, resistance to the temptation to skip some stages or to throw up the running process when there seem to be no immediate results. Good Practice guide and Templates Good practice in one area may not be transferrable to another but may inspire other areas to adapt practice to fit their context. If possible, consider inviting guests for a dialogue session who can share experiences from their own situa-
tion. Or find and use video materials that relate such activities being conducted elsewhere. Situations will always vary, but the value of learning from one another has been found to support the process well. Develop an open and interactive process, accountable to all partners, that scans and reconciles language, perspectives, values, etc. and in which all partners own and understand the priorities and are prepared to implement change. Create worksheets and evaluation templates, which maintain and reinforce the universal values and principles that underpin this model of intercultural Dialogue. And remember … In a world that is fast becoming a global village, it is impossible to live anywhere without being touched by diversity. The challenge of living together in a diverse society can only be met if we can live together as equals in dignity. Only in dialogue can that process take place.
32 Feedback from a questionnaire
Design of the Dialogue Process | 49
Action Points The Dialogue Steering Group needs to take care of the following items: 8a) Work on the aforementioned findings and those of the previous Elements. 8b) Decide on an initial timeframe and location for the Dialogue. 8c) Decide if the Dialogue needs to begin with intra-group conversations before dialoguing with all stakeholders in a plenary. 8d) Schedule its own interim assessments and at appropriate intervals the same with all stakeholders.
9. Concluding Remarks The culture of participation, as with all culture, cannot be imposed. It has to be developed. (from FQ) Would the issuing of orders from a place of authority not be much simpler to bring everybody in line, one might ask? In the last decades and centuries we have successively seen the enormous cost of exclusions, assimilations and annihilations. And recent events have shown that people yearn for a sense of opportunity and belonging – the by-products of a culture of participation. On the academic level work is well underway to clarify the subtle, but important, relation between electoral processes and social interaction, which jointly makes Democracy what it is meant to be. One of the terms that is being used in this context is Deliberative Democracyϯϯ. 33 http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/28710/frontmatter/9780521828710_frontmatter.pdf
Dialogues should therefore be seen against the background of the concordance model, in which the basic common understanding of living together is arrived at by a broad consensus of the affected parties, associations and interest groups, i.e. all the stakeholders. This process cannot be left to chance, especially in situations of accelerated change. This is a working method in/for situations where social cohesion is deficient and the confidence of citizens in politics and administration needs to be restored. Who benefits from Dialogues? “Intercultural dialogue is not only good for marginalized communities; it brings benefits for all groups and the entire society.” This sentence stems from one of the Workshops of the Istanbul Forum. The rapporteur of another Workshop noted: “A huge movement coming from individuals and NGOs is needed to promote the value of intercultural dialogue and the perception of the intercultural dimension as a resource. (…) Using intercultural dialogue, we should change the narrative. Why keep the label “migrant back-
Concluding Remarks | 51
ground” alive? – And how long should we continue to do that? – An alternative can be “young people with multiple ethnic origins”. Finally, a questionnaire return statement mentions that, “Intercultural dialogue also builds confidence between communities, creates space to approach different issues such as missing persons, returning and reintegration, facing the past, identity, etc.” Pulling together these strands one could summarise that Dialogues do well to be aware of narratives, because by nature they tend to represent past perceptions, in some cases even passed down over generations, thus risking to pass by the recent and current realities of a given situation and distorting its diagnosis. Also, akin to narratives, the identity aspect should not be underestimated and factored in. Because invariably, most societies have undergone changes, often emerging from a period when identities were prescribed, containing hermetic elements, again passing by the recent and current realities of a given situation with the risk distorting its diag-
nosis. Thus, properly-designed Dialogues are helping the development of the entire society. The Common Denominator Do the Toolkit publishers assume that societies need to or have to start dialogues with a blank page? What could form the basis of such endeavours? With others they believe that some vital lessons have been brought forth by the 20th century, among them the creation of the Council of Europe, the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the European Court for Human Rights. These landmarks can and need to be referred to, as every generation needs to grasp anew the lessons learned. Besides the classic defence of the Human Rights as universal standards, the Dialogue approach can bring about the renewed “ownership” of these values by societies as they evolve over time. More specifically, the Dialogue method allows for creative work on pressing questions that otherwise might just get stuck as “political footballs” making the life of leaders and led more difficult.
Concluding Remarks | 52
The larger Context A UK study paper entitled “Achieving Culture Change”ϯϰ was written as part of setting out to “make government work better”. The Dialogue Toolkit finds the study’s key lessons worth quoting in order to further clarify the larger context in which the proposed dialogues can be held: • “Seek big changes secured over a long period of time. • Take the lead to exemplify the positive social norm. • Signalise this consistently by way of political narrative and policy decisions. • Create ‘safe spaces’ to test and try out new ideas and innovations. • Identify and build on changes already occurring in society – and carefully time intervention to shape dialogue and debate. • Bring together multiple interventions where effects are most entrenched. 34 Published by the Strategy Unit, Admiralty Arch, The Mall, London SW1A 2WH, Crown Copyright 2008
• Be willing to innovate and try out new routes, such as mentoring. • Understand where the boundaries of public acceptance for the intervention lie, and seek to win it over time through dialogue, debate and by demonstrating efficacy/competence.” The majority of the above points contain elements that speak in favour of conducting Dialogues. Who should initiate a Dialogue? An old, but lesser-known dictum goes: “Create the thing you see the need for.” The authors wish to point out that perception and willingness are the key to initiating a Dialogue. Then comes the question of how to meet the needs and requirements of such a process. Exploration, budgeting, planning, facilitation, the location, all these needs have to be considered. A culture of participation can already be designed and modelled in the planning and provision of dialogues, which will enhance the credibility of the whole endeavour.
Concluding Remarks | 53
“Democracy is not a spectator sport”ϯϱ Finally, the INGO Conference and the Dialogue Hub – mandated to put together this Toolkit – thank you for your attention and wish you all the best in the development of dialogues and in the hope that you may add to the desired culture of participation.
35 Quoted from the participants bill board of “Making Democracy Real“, a conference in January 2012 in India
10. References and Resources White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue “Living together as equals in dignity” (2010) • European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) of the Council of Europe is a human rights body of the Council of Europe, which monitors problems of racism, discrimination, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance and presents examples of best practice regarding the fight against all forms of discrimination at the national level, more specifically through media. (http://www.coe.int/t/ dghl/monitoring/ecri/default_en.asp) • Directorate General for Democracy proposes examples of best practice in the area of citizenship education • “COMPENDIUM” site of the Council of Europe on cultural policies and trends in Europe offers a database of examples of best practice • European Commission (DG Education and Culture) of the European Union has published two manuals of examples of best practice in preparation of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue 2008
Aims of Dialogue | 55
• Some of the funding programs that supports intercultural dialogue: • European Youth Foundation – http://www. eyf.coe.int/fej/ • Youth in Action – http://eacea.ec.europa. eu/youth/programme/about_youth_en.php • Live Long Learning – http://ec.europa.eu/ education/lifelong-learning-programme/ doc78_en.htm • Anna Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for Dialogue between Culture – http://www. euromedalex.org/ • Tools used for promoting intercultural dialogue in national/regional/local level: • Human Library – http://humanlibrary.org/ • Inter-faith dialogue – http://www.interfaith. org.uk/ • Mobility projects – http://www.youthcan.eu/ • One World Movies – http://www.jedensvetnaskolach.cz • Successful implementation of projects: • European Movement – http://www.emins.org/ emins_english/content/index.html
References and Resources | 56
• International Academic Project – implemented by Panteion University from Athen (Greece) and the European Community Studies Association of Greece – http://unipd-centrodirittiumani.it/en/pubblicazioni/B-Governinga-Multi-cultural-Europe-a-New-RepublicanApproach-Athens-Team-Introduction/318 • Implementation of the law: the new subject “Education for Citizenship and Human Rights” in School in Spain – http://www.coe.int/t/ dg4/education/edc/2_edc_hre_in_member_ states/country_profiles/profile_spain_EN.asp Some Books and reading items: Autobiography of Intercultural Encounters by Michael Byram, Martyn Barrett, Julia Ipgrave, Robert Jackson, María del Carmen Méndez García with contributions from Eithne Buchanan-Barrow, Leah Davcheva, Peter Krapf, Jean-Michel Leclercq (2009) http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/autobiography/Source/ AIE_en/AIE_autobiography_en.pdf
Contemporary Conflict Resolution by O. Ramsbotham, T. Woodhouse, H. Miall. 3rd Edition (2011) Contribution des enseignants à l’éducation à la citoyenneté et aux droits de l’homme Cadre de développement de compétence Peter Brett, Pascale Mompoint-Gaillard et Maria Helena Salema avec contributions de Virgílio Meira Soares, Vedrana Spajic-Vrkasˇ, Sulev Valdmaa et Ulrike Wolff-Jontofsohn Sous la direction de Sarah Keating-Chetwynd (2009) http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/edc/ Source/Pdf/Contribution%20enseignants_d% C3%A9velop_competencesf.pdf DEMOCRATIC DIALOGUE: a Handbook for Practitioners by Bettye Pruitt and Philip Thomas (2007) http://www.idea.int/publications/democratic_ dialogue/index.cfm Doing business in a multicultural world: challenges and opportunities. A Joint Report by The United Nations Alliance of Civilizations and The United Nations Global Compact Office (2009)
References andofResources Aims Dialogue | 57
http://www.unaoc.org/ibis/2010/05/17/doingbusiness-in-a-multicultural-world-challengesand-opportunities/ Domino – A Manual to use peer group education as a means to fight racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance (Third edition) (2005) Education aux droits de l’homme dans les systèmes scolaires d’Europe, d’Asie centrale et d’Amérique du Nord. Recueil de bonnes pratiques (2011) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/ CompendiumHRE_fr.pdf End Game in Ireland (2002) by Eamon Mallie and David McKittrick. Hodder & Stoughton Gods in the city – Intercultural and inter-religious dialogue at local level (2008) http://book.coe.int/EN/ficheouvrage.php?PAGEI D=36%E3%80%88=EN&produit_aliasid=2289
Handbook on values for life in a democracy. Robert Strandling and Christopher Rowe (2009) How all teachers can support citizenship and human rights education: a framework for the development of competences. Peter Brett, Pascale Mompoint-Gaillard and Maria Helena Salema Contributions by Virgílio Meira Soares, Vedrana Spajic-Vrkasˇ, Sulev Valdmaa and Ulrike WolffJontofsohn. Edited by Sarah Keating-Chetwynd (2009) http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/edc/ Source/Pdf/Documents/6555_How_all_Teachers_ A4_assemble.pdf Human Rights Education in the School Systems of Europe, Central Asia and North America: A Compendium of Good Practice http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/ CompendiumHRE.pdf Human rights in culturally diverse societies. Challenges and perspectives (2009)
References and Resources | 58
Intercultural cities. Towards a model for intercultural integration Edited by Phil Wood (2010) http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/culture/cities/ICCModelPubl_en.pdf Intercultural Communication: An Advanced Resource Book for students. 2nd edition. By A. Holliday, M. Hyde, J. Kullman (2010) Intercultural Dialogue in the Framework of European Human Rights Protection (White Paper Series â€“ Volume 1) by Patricia Wiater (2010) Intercultural dialogue on Campus (Council of Europe higher education series No. 11). Ed. by Sjur Bergan and Jean-Philippe Restoueix (2009) Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue in Youth Work Ed. by Silvia Volpi (2007) http://www.eycb.coe.int/eycbwwwroot/hre/eng/ HREportal%20documents/Symposium%20IRID/ List%20of%20pax%20final%20for%20uploading.pdf
Living in Diversity â€“ Lesson Plans for Secondary Schools (2010) http://book.coe.int/EN/ficheouvrage.php? PAGEID =36&lang=EN&produit_aliasid=2553 Local consultative bodies for foreign residents (2004) Sonia Gsir, Marco Martiniello Manual on Hate Speech (2009) Anne Weber Manual on the wearing of religious symbols in public areas (2009) Malcolm D. Evans Migration and Integration, a minority perspective by Bashy Quraishy (2010) http://www.iiz-dvv.de/index.php?article_id= 729&clang=1 Models of Intercultural Competence by Martyn Barrett http://www.theewc.org/content/resources/intercultural.competence/
References Aims andofResources Dialogue | 59
Mosaic. The training kit for Euro-Mediterranean youth work (2010) http://book.coe.int/EN/ficheouvrage.php? PAGEID=36&lang=EN&produit_aliasid=2482
Speaking across borders: the role of higher education in furthering intercultural dialogue (Council of Europe higher education series No. 16) (2010) Sjur Bergan and Hilligje van’t Land (Eds)
New Strategy and Council of Europe Action Plan for Social Cohesion (2010) http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/socialpolicies/socialcohesiondev/source/2010Strategy_ActionPlan_ SocialCohesion.pdf
Strategic support for decision makers – Policy tool for education for democratic citizenship and human rights http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/edc/Source/ Pdf/Downloads/6896-2-ID9989-EDC-HRE%20Strategic%20Support%20for%20Decision%20Makers%2016x24%20assembl%C3%A9.pdf
Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity – Concepts, principles and challenges in teacher education (2009) Recommendation CM/Rec (2010). 7 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the Council of Europe Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education Regard critique sur le dialogue interculturel et ses risques pour l’éducation http://ebookbrowse.com/calin-rus-regard-critiquesur-le-dialogue-interculturel-doc-d217447927
T-Kit 4: Intercultural Learning (2000) http://youth-partnership-eu.coe.int/youthpartnership/documents/Publications/T_kits/4/ tkit4.pdf The Business of Peace. The private sector as a partner in conflict prevention and resolution by Jane Nelson (2000) http://www-dev.iblf.org/docs/BusinessofPeace.pdf
References and Resources | 60
The Search for Common Ground: Muslims, Nonmuslims and the UK Media London (2007) http://ics-www.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?ou tfit=ks&folder=75&paper=170
Violence, conflict and intercultural dialogue by Jean-Fred Bourquin (2003) http://book.coe.int/EN/ficheouvrage.php?PAGEID =36&lang=EN&produit_aliasid=1693
Hendrik Otten (2009). Ten theses on the correlation between European youth work, intercultural learning and the qualification and professionalization demands on full and part-time staff working in such context http://www.nonformality.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/ten.pdf Un soutien stratégique pour les décideurs – Instrument d’action pour l’éducation à la citoyenneté démocratique et aux droits de l’homme David Kerr et Bruno Losito en collaboration avec Rosario Sanchez, Bryony Hoskins, William Smirnov et Janez Krek http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/edc/ Source/Pdf/Downloads/ID11172%20FRA%20 7061%20Soutien%20strategique%20Version%20 web%20Policy%20Tool.pdf
Sponsors and Peer Review Partners
DRUCK UND MEDIEN
112989_Dialogue_Toolkit.indd 64 18.06.12 16:20
EAN (European Article Number): 9782880375263
The Dialogue Toolkit