1. Cultural policy system
Armenia
Last update: March, 2023
The cultural policy in Armenia was seriously changed after the Velvet revolution of 2018. The appearance of new political elites has strongly influenced new public perceptions of culture and development of a new system of cultural policy and management. Significant transformations first started in the institutional sphere. In 2019, the government’s new optimized organizational structure was introduced, where respective ministries of education and science, culture, sports and youth had been reorganized into a Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports[1]. The newly created Ministry defined its main functions as follows: “The Ministry .... is a central body of executive authority that elaborates and implements the policy of the Government of the Republic of Armenia in the spheres of education, science, culture and sport”.[2] Such a transformation was ambiguously accepted by public circles and many critics emphasized that it would not be going to effectively resolve accumulated problems in the mentioned spheres, but would lead to more centralization of power and, generally, wouldn’t be effective in institutional and financial terms. [3]
The new Charter of the Ministry (2019) defines the goals, objectives, functions and methodologies of institutional and financial management of the Ministry.
- The main goals and objectives of the cultural policy are:
- Enhancing the intellectual, spiritual, creative and physical potential of the Armenian people
- Providing equal and open access to high quality education, cultural institutions and facilities, and sports for everyone independently of age, gender and physical abilities.
- Preservation, creation and promotion of national cultural heritage
- Raising new generations in accordance to patriotic and humanistic values.
- Providing equal facilities and opportunities for healthy physical and mental development of individuals and communities.
- Considering and developing education, science, culture and sports as the main factors for developing the economy, competitiveness, societal progress and security.
- The Ministry’s general functions correspondingly lie in: developing policies and programmes and bringing them into compliance with international conventions, norms and agreements; implementing programme and financial management, monitoring and evaluation of targeted programmes and projects; international cooperation; and mediation between private and public sectors.
The main substantial distinctions of current policies from the previous ones may be formulated as: a) an integrative perception of culture as a compound of creative, value-generation/preservation, intellectual and physical development processes; b) the focus on accessibility of and targeted involvement in, culture, education, creative activities and sports, for all social groups of the population, both individuals and communities.
In the new government programme developed immediately after the snap parliamentary elections of June 2021, which accepted by the National Assembly (August 2021), culture is not separately addressed and makes up part of the general concept of “development of human potential”.
Main features
Article 6 of the Law on the Principles of Cultural Legislation (2002) defined culture as "a set of modes of activities, perceptions and thinking in the material and spiritual fields of the society and their expression representing a stated value". Since 2009, another broader definition of culture included in the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity has been introduced. It states that culture "should be regarded as the set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features of a society or social groups, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs”. No other official definition or concept of culture appeared since.
However, post-revolutionary authorities (the “Civil agreement” party) have brought several concepts of cultural development, which are reflected in their political programme as of June 2021 for the next 5 years[4]. Put briefly, it includes optimization, technical, technological and substantial modernisation, community involvement, infrastructural development, diversity and creativity support, and heritage protection/preservation. To generalize, the main idea is that better access to culture and education, creativity and technological advancement are thought to provide an economically, socially and physically more developed and secure environment.
Background
During the last 70 years Armenia has passed through a number of political regimes each imposing its own system of perception, management, implementation and control over culture.
1950-1991 – The Soviet regime
The Soviet system of cultural policies and management was extremely politicised and ideologised. Education and culture were tightly controlled and orchestrated by party and government officials through a pyramidal system of power. In general, it can be characterised as a strongly "paternalistic" model according to Abraham Mole's definition[5]. All professionals in art, literature, music were registered as members of the so called "creative unions" managed and controlled by party officials. On the other hand, “bringing culture and education to the masses” was the main concept of the soviet cultural policy. Culture and education were perceived as the main and the most powerful tools of soviet propaganda since the first days of Soviet power. Armenia as an integrative part of the Soviet Union underwent all stages of cultural transformation with some local specifics. Firstly, infrastructural development was prioritised: thousands of schools, houses of culture, institutions of technical and higher education, art and music schools, theatres, cinema theatres, music halls, libraries and museums had been built throughout the country. Most of educational institutions were free of charge and the charge for cultural events (concerts, performances, cinema, etc.) was minimal and accessible even to those on low incomes. Secondly, creative arts, literature and science was funded by the state only, in a centralized way, and the state officials (through membership in different committees and the censorship system) used to decide who/what deserved funding and who/what did not. Thirdly, special attention was paid to mass media and mass literature: thousands of books, news-papers and magazines in millions of printed copies were issued daily and disseminated through official (in some cases obligatory) subscription networks.[6]. All this ensured the process of active everyday consumption of highly regulated and controlled mass culture. At the same time, culture as a concept was very limited, it was understood as a scope of selected cultural heritage and creative activities as arts, literature, music, etc. implemented within the communist, socialist and atheist ideological frameworks. Cultural diversity was understood only as a variety of ethnographic cultures: the population of all Soviet republics was divided into the privileged “title” nations and the unprivileged “minorities”. Religion was excluded from the definition of culture. In terms of language, national history and cultural heritage, the Soviet authorities conducted the politics of standardization, unification and russification, although in some republics including Armenia these trends were less effective.
1991-2021 The post-Soviet developments
During the first decades since independence, some Soviet perceptions and patterns of implementation and management of culture like the centralized pyramidal management, the predominantly state funding of education and cultural institutions, and the perception of education and culture as a tool for ideological/political propaganda, etc., were preserved. However, the adoption of a market economy and the developing oligarchic system of political power appeared to be destructive for the Soviet cultural and educational infrastructures, especially in rural communities. Tens of schools, houses of culture, museums, and theatres were privatized, sold, reconstructed and changed functions or even completely destroyed. The private and international funding reanimated performative and creative arts, but could not recover the previous scale of consumption of cultural education and mass culture and the government programmes and strategies did not set such a goal.
Recent changes in the cultural policy system, their main reasons and motivations
Pre-revolutionary cultural development policy[7] focused mostly on preservation of tangible and intangible cultural heritage, development of cultural infrastructures, international collaboration and considered public TV as a main tool for cultural promotion. Practically, that meant the allocation of money for different construction and reconstruction projects, and targeted funding for cultural actors, preferred by the government, that contained a lot of corruption risks. The velvet revolution of 2018, aimed at annihilation of corruption and conducting the democratic/economic transformations of the country was a main reason for changing policies, including those related to culture and education. However, the rapidity and the complicated political agenda of revolutionary events did not give enough time and possibilities to fully develop profound and well-thought concepts and programmes, although their main principles were formulated as it was mentioned above. The COVID-19 pandemic and the Azerbaijani-Armenian war (2020) were other serious factors affected policy changes. For instance, the war and the Azerbaijani occupation of the Armenian-populated territories of Karabakh exacerbated the problem of protection and physical preservation of the Armenian cultural heritage, and the pandemic forced the government to resort to necessary reconsiderations of its strategies and to make a stronger focus on creativity, infrastructural development and modern technologies.
[1] https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docID=130615
[2] https://www.gov.am/en/structure/275/
[3] https://www.e-draft.am/projects/1503/digest
[4] See the full programme аt: https://www.civilcontract.am/hy/culture
[5] Moles, A. Sotsiodinamika kultury [Sociodynamics of culture]: Translated from French. B.V.
Biryukov. 3rd edition. M.: LKI Publishing house, 2008.
[6] Khudaverdyan K. Kul’turnaya revolyutsiya v Sovetskoy Armenii (1920-1940), Yerevan, 1969.
[7] https://escs.am/files/files/2019-07-04/e3c0b7f3ce6e00f5a386a824e84f02d9.pdf
Last update: March, 2023
Last update: March, 2023
The role and function of state government bodies, local self-government bodies, and non-state organizations in cultural policy are defined according to corresponding laws and legal regulations. The Law on Local Self-Government, adopted in 2002 and amended in 2021[1], the Law on Basics of Cultural Legislation adopted in 2002 and amended in 2011[2], and the Law on Public Organizations adopted in 2016[3] are particularly important in this regard.
Most of laws and legal decisions regulating the relationships of cultural policy main actors were adopted in the 2000s, thus forming the basis of the modern cultural policy system. However, it is worth noting that all these laws were revised and reformulated during the period of 2018-2020 in an attempt to adapt the governance of culture to the new political system and institutional changes. Thus, according to the Law on the Basics of Cultural Legislation, the Government of the Republic of Armenia:
- ensures the implementation of the state cultural policy;
- creates a foundation for development of culture and approves its charter in order to attract additional financial resources for the preservation, dissemination and development of culture;
- the law defines the order of privileges to benefit from the paid services of cultural organizations for some groups of the population (pre-school children, school children, students, pensioners, disabled people, conscripts);
- grants legal statuses to non-commercial cultural organizations, defines the procedure and conditions for granting statuses.
State governance in the field of culture is carried out by the state body authorized by the government of the Republic of Armenia (The Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports of the Republic of Armenia, hereinafter: MESCS of RA).The authorized state body:
- implements the state cultural policy, participates in the development of cultural legislation and state programmes for the preservation, dissemination and development of culture;
- participates in the development of educational standards (standards), methodological manuals and programmes in the field of culture;
- participates in the formation of foreign policy in the field of culture within the limits of its powers;
- exerts control over the export and import of cultural values in accordance with the law.
- submits petitions for awarding state awards of the Republic of Armenia and honorary titles in the field of culture and art;
- creates a unified state information system in order to ensure cultural activities in the territory of the Republic of Armenia;
- manages the administrative statistics in the sphere of culture, and listing of cultural organizations;
- discovers, registers, studies, restores and preserves objects of cultural heritage;
- maintains state lists of cultural heritage objects.
- organizes the professional education, training and retraining of employees in the field of culture;
- submits a petition on granting "National" status to certain non-commercial cultural organizations: theatre, music, dance, museums, libraries and archives.
A significant change in the relationships between the state and the cultural sphere is especially noticeable in terms of decentralization of cultural policy and publicity of decision-making. In particular, it is possible to observe legal changes, new approaches, the introduction of a new practice of public debates over the programme development strategies, and the organization of transparent competitions in the field of cultural development, expressed rather weakly before 2018.
[1] See: http://www.irtek.am/views/act.aspx?aid=150060
[2] See: https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docID=69109
[3] See: https://www.arlis .am/documentview.aspx?docID=110802
Last update: March, 2023
The territory of RA is divided into ten regions and the city of Yerevan, which is governed by the law "On Local Self-Government in the City of Yerevan"[1]. The relations of the sphere of public administration in the regions of the Republic of Armenia are regulated by the decree of the President of the Republic of Armenia "On public administration in the regions of the Republic of Armenia"[2] and other legal acts.
There are departments of cultural management in the structure of regional administrations. The governor is the main person responsible for regional administration and implementation of cultural policies. Governors implement the government's regional policies, coordinate the activities of regional services of executive bodies, conduct regional cultural politics, which should not contradict the general vision of state policy in its goals and objectives.
Thus, the regional administration ensures the implementation of the state cultural policy in the territory of the region, organizes public cultural events related to state, national and other holidays and memorial days, contributes to the restoration and dissemination of national rituals, exerts power established by law for the preservation and utilization of historical and cultural monuments located in the territory of the region, and organizes the construction, maintenance and operation of cultural objects and recreation areas for the territory of the region.
Last update: March, 2023
According to the Law on Local Self-Government[1], the head of the community implements the following functions in the field of education, culture and youth work.
organizes and manages the activities of schools, kindergartens, clubs, culture houses, libraries, other educational and cultural institutions and organizations, their operation and repair works.
The head of the community has the following functions:
- organizes events related to the holidays and memorial days of the Republic of Armenia.
- supports the development of crafts, folk creativity and artistic self-activity;
- supports the preservation of historical and cultural monuments in the territory of the community;
- records, classifies and distributes the information about the historical-cultural, natural and tourist-recreational resources located in the territory of the community;
- supports increasing the role of youth;
- supports the activities of public schools. The Law on Local Government, adopted in 1996 and amended in 2012 and 2016, was the first attempt to decentralize cultural policy, to dismantle of the highly centralized and paternalistic Soviet model of cultural policy and to create a decentralized model of cultural policy on a liberal basis.
If the Soviet model assumed the adoption and implementation of decisions only from the "centre" /Ministry of Culture/, then in the years of independence, especially in the first decade, the culture management system was decentralized, which became the basis for the disintegration of a number of cultural structures, for example, community libraries, culture houses, art schools. Being cut off from the direct funding and patronage of the Ministry of Culture and passing under the authority of the municipal governments without receiving the appropriate financial and technical support, most community cultural institutions have been disintegrated, disappeared or survived just formally[2].
[1] See https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docID=73271
[2] See: Muradyan H., Houses of Culture in Soviet and post-Soviet times: Semantic and Functional Transformations and Heredity, Proceedings of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, HAIA-3, Yerevan, 2019, 194-203.
Last update: March, 2023
Non-governmental cultural organizations, or in other words, non-commercial cultural organizations, began to form in Armenia after independence, in 1991. A large number of organizations had been formed especially in the 2000s, which was related to the internal stabilization of the political and economic situation in Armenia, active foreign politics and cooperation with international structures and organizations. In 2005, the law on non-governmental cultural organizations was adopted.[1]. According to the law, such organizations have a right to implement cultural and business activities, which are not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Armenia and correspond to the main organizational goals and purposes, that is production of relevant goods, provision of relevant services and implementation of their property and non-property rights.[2] Cultural non-commercial organizations can also engage in certain types of activities that are subject to licensing or a special permit.
Non-governmental public cultural organizations play a significant role in the implementation of the cultural policy of the Republic of Armenia. Their establishment and activities are regulated according to the corresponding law.[3] Public organizations began to establish themselves in the field of cultural policy immediately after Armenia had become independent. Cultural NGOs are divided between several spheres according to the type of their activities. Those are the protection of human rights in the spheres of culture and education; dealing with cultural, environmental, social problems, related to vulnerable groups such as people with disabilities, refugees, the elderly, children, and the protection of the rights of journalists. Most of the registered NGOs are concentrated in Yerevan.
Non-governmental organizations have the right to independently implement cultural programmes, develop their own policies aimed at the preservation and development of culture, but according to the law regulating the activities of such NGOs, these activities must not contradict the concept of the state cultural policy. The number of organizations subordinated to the Ministry of Education and Culture of RA has increased over recent years, reaching to 100[4]. Some of these are: "Dialogue of Cultures" NGO, "Creative Europe Cultural Platform" NGO, "ARI" Literary Foundation, "Art Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia" NOC, "Aram Khachatryan-Competition Cultural Fund", "International Academy of Culture and Performing Arts" NGO, "Filmadaran" Cinema Culture Development NGO, "Armenian Pop Jazz Orchestra" SNOC, "Teryan Cultural Centre" NGO, "Civil Art" Cultural NGO, etc. Non-governmental organizations subordinated to the Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Armenia are also indirectly involved in development of state cultural policies through public debates, organized prior to presentation of policies and laws at sessions of the Parliament.
[1] See: https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docid=21548
[2] See: https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docid=51750
[3] See: https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docID=110802
Last update: March, 2023
The Republic of Armenia supports the development of international and intra-national cultural cooperation, encourages independent and direct participation of citizens and organizations in international and intra-national cultural exchanges.
The policy of international cultural exchanges of the Republic of Armenia, its primary directions are defined by the interstate agreements of the Republic of Armenia and the state programmes of preservation, dissemination and development of culture.
Intra-regional cultural cooperation is supported by different local and state programmes such as support to festivals, community tourism, cultural and educational visits and exchanges between communities. Such projects are funded with local budget or donor organizations and coordinated by local authorities, educational institutions or local NGOs. The organization of festivals and regional cultural events is backed by several legal acts and decisions[1]. Among regional festivals the most known are: the barbecue festival organized in Akhtala in Lori province, the Blueberry Festival in Lori in Margahovit village, "Tavush Wine Days", Tolma Festival in Armavir, Pumpkin Festival in Hovk village of Tavush, Areni Wine Festival, Harvest Festival in Dzoraghbyur, Gata Festival in Vayots Dzor - Khachik village, Arts and Crafts Festival in Dilijan, Honey and Berry Festival in Tavush - Berd village, Beerday in Gyumri, etc. The festivals often include performances and fairs with participants from different regions.
Last update: March, 2023
Since the Soviet times, Armenia has inherited the large network of public institutions (schools, universities, houses of culture, art and music schools, libraries, theatres, cinema theatres, museums, and art galleries) and a widely shared perception that education and culture should be orchestrated, managed and financially covered primarily by the state.
However, since as early as the 1990's, a number of NGOs and private organizations acting in the sphere of education and culture has significantly increased[1]. Their activities in very rare cases were compatible with the governmental strategies, only in those cases when they were founded by governmental officials or their relatives and received grants from the state to implement programmes to be delegated to the public/private sector. Today more than 50 organizations and private institutions are implementing state programmes in the sphere of culture[2]. However, they have not played any serious role in the policy-making process, with minor exceptions, like the YFA (Youth for Achievement) case (2010-2012), when its members participated in the international “Black Sea Cultural Animation” programme and could make some input in the state strategy development.[3]
Some profit-making prospects also stirred up the process of emerging private institutions such as art/dance/music schools, private museums/galleries and, quite recently, private theatres. Their number increased as the effectiveness and quality of state institutions declined. For instance, currently there are about 120 private museums/galleries, but only 50 of them are registered in the list of cultural institutions of the Ministry of ESCS.[4] However, their influence on policy-making is becoming increasingly more important. Thus, the law on museums has been discussed since 2011, but has not finally shaped, because it does not appropriately address private museums and galleries and does not fully reflect their problems and interests.
[1] The current number of registered NGOs in Armenia is 5408, foundations – 1418, and community enterprises 1449, see: https://www.moj.am/legal/view/article/1420/
[2] https://www.govtravel.am
[3] http://kasa.am/hy/, https://www.culturepartnership.eu/am/article/creative-industries-study-for-armenia
[4] https://escs.am/am/static/museums?s=culture
Last update: March, 2023
Table 1: Cultural institutions, by sector and domain
Domain |
Cultural institutions (subdomains) |
Public sector |
|
|
|
2016-2017 |
2020-2021 |
Cultural heritage |
Cultural heritage sites (recognised) |
24.221 |
24.221 |
|
Archaeological sites |
N/A |
N/A |
Museums |
Museum institutions |
106 |
100 |
Archives |
Archive institutions |
N/A |
N/A |
Visual arts |
Public art galleries / exhibition halls |
1 |
1 |
Performing arts |
Scenic and stable spaces for theatre |
28 |
26 |
|
Concert houses |
|
|
|
Theatre companies |
28 |
26 |
|
Dance and ballet companies |
1 |
1 |
|
Symphonic orchestras |
1 |
1 |
Libraries |
Libraries |
733 |
664 |
Audiovisual |
Cinemas |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Broadcasting organisations |
N/A |
N/A |
Interdisciplinary |
Socio-cultural centres / cultural houses |
N/A |
N/A |
Other (please explain) |
|
N/A |
N/A |
Source(s):https://escs.am/am/static/statistist, https://statbank.armstat.am/pxweb/hy/ArmStatBank/?rxid=9ba7b0d1-2ff8-40fa-a309-fae01ea885bb&fbclid=IwAR2CPkrEix7CCjNHCTrOp56MQkvYPVa5CBSIqzhaJdcFXzrM_bJacAeRohc
Last update: March, 2023
Today's network of public cultural institutions of the Republic of Armenia, generally founded back in the Soviet 1920-30s, have been perpetually undergoing semantic and morphological changes, which became dramatic especially in the post-Soviet period. Although in the post-soviet period new cultural and educational structures and institutions began to emerge, the old ones also proved to be viable after some more or less significant changes. In the post-soviet period, most of the cultural institutions underwent structural and legal status changes. Since 2002, museums, libraries, and performance organisations (theatres and concert-halls) have been reorganised into state non-profit organisations. Large cultural organisations were awarded "National" status (The National Academic Opera and Ballet Theatre, The National Gallery of Armenia, The National Library, The National Television, The National Book Chamber). Only the State Academic Theatre, named after G. Sundukyan, was not awarded national status, although it continued to be considered the main theatre of the country (“Mother-theatre”). The local networks of Soviet cultural institutions were rather large; they included museums, libraries, theatres, houses of culture, clubs, creative unions, cinemas and other institutions. In the post-Soviet period, they got rid of socialist ideology, but most of the cultural centres such as houses of culture, clubs, creative unions, some theatres and cinemas were cut off from state institutional and financial support, and in accordance with the Local Government Law adopted in 1996, were passed under the control of municipal governments. Some institutions like most of the cinema theatres, some houses of culture and libraries were alienated from community budgets (sometimes illegally), privatized and ceased operating. Alternatively, new types of cultural organizations and structures emerged such as private theatres, church-managed cultural houses with an accent on religious topics, private art and dance schools, etc., which tried to fill the gap.
Although the Local Government Law was the first step in the decentralization of cultural policies and institutions, it must be noted that the newly formed municipal governments did not have adequate resources to maintain these structures and simply closed some of them or at best just provided minimal means to sustain their formal existence. In relation to the renovation of cultural institutions, their institutional “revival” began only in the 2000s, in connection with the internal and external stabilization of RA, with the establishment of the legislative field, active international cooperation, and the signing of many conventions and declarations. However, the “revival” appeared to be just superficial, and no serious reformation or big financial investments into qualitative development of cultural institutions had not been made until recently. Similarly, in the sphere of cultural politics no innovative strategies, alternative solutions or new standards and values had been developed. On the contrary, in the 2010's, a period of restoration of the soviet-like statuses, hierarchies, privileges and ideological functions under the patronage of the ruling party (The Republican party of Armenia) began and went deeper and deeper.
After the "Velvet" revolution (2018), the process of revising cultural institutions was launched. Despite the political instability, pandemics and war, the cultural sphere has demonstrated increasing trends of quantitative and qualitative development. There were no budgetary reductions for the state cultural organisations; on the contrary, there is a tendency for growth, also due to larger access to grants’ programmes run by different funds. The Ministry of Culture continues to finance the state cultural institutions, which, in their turn, are free to cooperate with any local and foreign donor organisations. Institutionalised structures of the Armenian Diaspora (political parties, cultural unions, benevolent foundations, etc) and individuals also provide financial sources for cultural institutions. The local sponsors contribute mainly to popular culture and show business. A number of NGOs, CJSCs and funds established in recent years are actively implementing regional and international cooperation in the cultural sphere. They are also partnering with local and state government, different educational institutions and other NGOs. Approximately 900 NGOs are registered in the cultural sphere, making up to 33% of all registered NGOs. In the provinces, one cultural organisation is counted per 1 334 residents (the total population in provinces (except Yerevan) is 2 116 300, and the total number of cultural organisations is 1 586).
Projects on infrastructural renovation and development, cultural creativity grants, the optimization of management and structure of cultural institutions were implemented or planned for implementation. The repertoires of some state theatres such as the Opera Theatre, the State Dramatic Theatre have significantly improved and the number of performances has doubled and even tripled. This created larger opportunities for self-sustainability. However, not all transformations were understood and approved by the beneficiaries. Thus, the project of merging two theatres, the State Chamber Musical Theatre and the State Musical Comedy Theatre evoked much dissatisfaction, debates, protests and struggle. As a result, the process of merging was temporarily frozen. In general, however, despite a lot of structural and qualitative improvements, the post-revolutionary government is much criticized for its uncertain or maldeveloped cultural strategies and politics, and especially for the structural transformations and personnel politics of public cultural institutions.
Last update: March, 2023
During thirty years of independence, Armenia has established cooperation with almost all important European, Eurasian and International players like EU, UNESCO, ICOM, WMF, BSI, INCP, CIS, etc., and accepted and ratified tens of international conventions in the sphere of culture. The international collaboration and cooperation has traditionally pursued the following goals: 1. Political and normative integration through legislative compliance with international norms and agreements in the sphere of culture; 2. Professional and institutional integration through different professional and institutional networks; 3. Keeping up with the international trends and processes through professional improvement, individual development projects, professional consulting, etc.; 4. Getting financial support from international grant making organizations and cultural grant programmes; 5. Marketing and promotion of Armenian culture and cultural tourism.
Currently, most of these objectives have not changed. It may be added that Armenia is currently seeking a serious improvement of the country's image and international cooperation in the sphere of culture is seen as one of the possible tools. That’s why there is state support for different international cultural events, festivals, conferences, etc. However, there are some distinctions from the previous strategies. The post-war consequences made the government focus on targeted contacts and cooperation with UNESCO, WMF, BSI, European Association of Archeologists, ALIPH international alliance, etc. on the burning problem of rescuing and preservation of the Armenian cultural heritage on the territories under the Azerbaijani control. The Armenian side is seeking support, international awareness on the problem and, possibly, international pressure on Azerbaijan, which has already distorted or even completely destroyed a number of cultural and historical monuments.
Also, Armenia is deepening its international cultural and educational cooperation through the Armenian diaspora and the Diaspora organizations. The current programmes are aimed at creating pan-Armenian cultural, creative and educational networks and platforms[1], as well as providing better involvement in the Armenian development processes by some foreign educational and cultural institutions through Armenians working there. Regarding the policy of international cultural exchanges of the Republic of Armenia, its primary directions are defined by the interstate agreements of the Republic of Armenia and the state programmes of preservation, dissemination and development of culture. The Republic of Armenia (together with other states and the Diaspora) supports the activities of Armenian cultural centres and organizations in foreign countries and promotes the preservation, dissemination and development of national culture and art.
In recent years, the use of the bilateral format of international cooperation in foreign policy has been noticed. Since 2018, a number of agreements, memorandums and programmes have been signed for the purpose of cultural development and cultural loans. For example, in 2018-2021 some agreements of cooperation in the fields of education, culture, youth and science were signed between the government of the Republic of Armenia and the government of the Republic of Bulgaria[2], Korea[3], Swiss Humanitarian Foundation "KAZA[4], and The Russian Federation[5]. A memorandum of understanding was signed between the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports of the Republic of Armenia and the British Council on cooperation within the framework of the "Creative Industry Policy Dialogue" programme in 2021[6]. These and other programmes strengthen international cultural and educational ties of Armenia.
The main actor of RA's cultural policy is the Ministry of Cultural Affairs. According to the RA Law "On Making Amendments and Additions to the Law "On the Structure and Activities of the Government" adopted on 08.05.2019, the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs and the Ministry of Education and Science merged and the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports of RA was established[7]. After the Velvet Revolution (2018), the formation of a new political elite significantly influenced the formation of new perceptions of culture and, as a result, influenced the formation of a new system of cultural policy and, therefore, cultural diplomacy. Thus, in March 2021, during the international conference devoted to cultural diplomacy, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia formulated a new concept of culture as soft power[8]. Besides, the Ministry of ECS and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there are other actors implementing cultural diplomacy for Armenia such as:
- Educational institutions such as Universities implementing cultural diplomacy through different educational programmes. Educational, scientific and cultural exchange through international programmes of Erasmus, FLEX (Future leaders exchange), IREX, Leaders' school and other programmes
- Local governments implementing cultural diplomacy through different programmes of cultural exchange and tourism development programmes. One of the best examples of cultural diplomacy is the sister-cities relationship. Sister cities establish permanent friendly ties for mutual acquaintance of history and culture. Cooperation between the cities includes economic, political, scientific, cultural, health, tourism, urban management and other aspects. For instance, the political and economic contacts may be backed by the exchange of delegations, students, art and sports teams, the organization of exhibitions, book fairs, the demonstrations of films, etc. For example, Yerevan (the capital) has 24 sister cities[9] and Gyumri (the second city) has 15 sister cities[10].
- Cultural NGOs implementing cultural diplomacy through participation in different international cultural programmes, and hosting and management of international cultural events.
Current cultural diplomacy may be characterized by the following strategies and approaches:
1. Cultural diplomacy as a soft power
More proactivity and state financial participation in the organization of international educational, scientific, sports and cultural programmes and activities. They may include international festivals, summits, scientific and sport competitions and other cultural events aiming at making Armenia a regional cultural centre. E.g. on September 6-11, 2021, "STARMUS FESTIVAL VI" was held for the first time in Armenia under the title “50 Years on Mars", dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the first landing on Mars. The festival had a technological focus and combines science, education, art and technology.
2. Promotion of locally produced knowledge and creative initiatives and exporting ideas.
Armenia is currently actively promoting the establishment of one of its “visit cards” for the children’s centres of innovative technologies “TUMO” outside Armenia and have already helped to open such centres in Paris, Beirut, Moscow, Tirana, Lyon and Kiev. Another Armenian “savoir-faire” is the “Armath” network of engineering laboratories, the idea of which has already been “exported” to the region of Javakheti, Georgia.
[1] https://escs.am/am/news/6649
[2] See: https://escs.am/am/news/4462
[3] See: / https://escs.am/am/news/10372
[4] See: https://escs.am/am/news/10469
[5] See: https://escs.am/am/news/12298
[6] See: https://escs.am/am/news/8058
[7] See: www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docid=130615
[8] See: https://www.1lurer.am/en/2021/03/24/Armenia-tends-to-make-culture-a-powerful-tool-in-diplomatic-arsenal-Minister-of-Foreign-Affairs/440845
[9] https://www.yerevan.am/am/partner/sister-cities
[10] http://www.gyumricity.am/hy/gyumri/sister-cities
Last update: March, 2023
Collaboration with European and international agencies, programmes and initiatives have recently become more intensive. Armenia actively participates, or at least is represented, in many pan-European initiatives and programmes, meetings and congresses, exhibitions and competitions. Provision of active representation of Armenian culture, cultural achievements or agents of cultural spheres is becoming a necessary part of Armenian cultural policy trends.
European Union
EU cooperation is conducted on the basis of partnership and cooperation agreements between the EU and the Republic of Armenia that were signed in 1996 and entered into force in 1999. Since June 2004, Armenia, along with Azerbaijan and Georgia, has been participating in the European Neighbourhood Policy, which is an important step for the region towards European integration. Cultural cooperation and promotion of the Armenian cultural heritage are priorities of the cultural policy in the EU-Armenia joint actions programme. Armenia is involved in the Eastern Partnership Culture Programme (since 2010) and aims to strengthen regional cultural links and dialogue between the EU and Eastern countries. Since 2013, Armenia is participating in the European Commission's "Twinning Instrument" programme, which operates in the countries of European Neighbourhood Policy, giving opportunities to develop administrative skills and to ensure the efficiency of state management.
Armenia continues to participate in different pan-European jointly funded programmes such as Days of European Heritage, Museum Night, Music festivals, Francophonie programmes, etc). Special attention is paid to the individual professional development of actors (Artist in Residence programme). Since 2021, Armenia is part of EU4Culture project, which is currently the biggest regional cultural project (2021-2024). The project aims at promoting culture as an engine for growth and social development across the region, by assisting in implementing Cultural Development Strategies of non-capital cities and towns, providing grants and capacity-building support for complementing those strategies, and organising mobility schemes for artists and culture professionals. Another project (since 2018) is the “European Union National Institutes of Culture” (EUNIC), a global network of EU Cultural Institutes, which unites 36 cultural Institutes from 27 Member States. EUNIC members work in the area of the arts, languages, youth, education, science, society, and development. At a local level, EUNIC members join together in over 100 clusters - in cities and countries - to collaborate on common projects and programmes and to promote the role of culture in the EU’s internal and external relations.
Creative Europe Desk Armenia (founded in 2018) operates with the support of the European Commission and Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport of the Republic of Armenia. The goal of the Desk is to promote the European Union's programme of cultural grants in Armenia and contribute to the development of the capacity of cultural operators, as well as to disseminate information about the upcoming calls for funding and hosting info days, training and consultations.
UNESCO
One of the trends of Armenia and UNESCO cooperation is having the most important Armenian cultural values and achievements integrated into the world cultural heritage. The Ministry of Education and Culture regularly submits nominations for inclusion in the UNECSO calendar of prominent people and historical events. The list of World material cultural heritage currently includes three Armenian monuments of material (tangible) heritage such as: 1) Temple complexes of Haghpat and Sanahin (as one monument); 2) Cathedral of Etchmiadzin, the churches Hripsimeh, Gayane, Shoghakat and the ruins of the temple of Zvartnots; 3) Gegard Monastery and the Upper Valley of Azat River. Since 2005, pieces of intangible heritage started to be also included in the UNESCO list. The Armenian duduk, traditional bread “lavash”, the Armenian epos "The Daredevils of Sasoun", and the Khachkar ("cross-stone", the medieval religious and cultural monument) were incorporated into the list of World Cultural Heritage. The cooperation with UNESCO in the cultural heritage sphere is also focused on improvements in preservation and management processes through training of specialists. Thus, in 2009, training of museum specialists was organised and conducted.
Council of Europe
Cultural cooperation with the Council of Europe is one of the main directions of Armenian cultural relations. Since 2015, Armenia is part of the Cultural Routes programme launched by the Council of Europe in 1987 with the Declaration of Santiago de Compostela. “The Cultural Routes programme” is an invitation to travel and to discover the rich and diverse heritage of Europe by bringing people and places together in networks of shared history and heritage. They put into practice the values of the Council of Europe: human rights, cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue and mutual exchanges across borders. On 13-15 October, the Black Sea Universities Network Congress of 2021 (BSUN Congress) was held with the theme of ‘The Role of Universities in Solving Complex Challenges’. The conference took place in Yerevan, Armenia, and was directed by Professor Vahram Ter Matevosyan of the American University of Armenia.
The Armenian National Agrarian University (ANAU) has just joined the University Network for Cultural Routes Studies. The ANAU offers a number of courses aimed at the development of agrotourism and wine tourism, including Bachelor and Master degree educational programmes in Fermentation Technology, Winemaking, wine marketing, wine tourism, and a special “Enology and Wine Business Programme”, the first of its kind in Armenia.
Armenia is also taking part in the programmes of cultural development and cooperation of the INCP (International Network of Cultural Policy), BSEC (Black Sea Economic Cooperation), CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States), and the British Council. It is also part of the Open Society Institute network, which is supporting different cultural programmes such as the organization of cultural events, festivals, performances, panel discussions, lectures, discussions and other such cultural activities that will involve the wider society. In particular, the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Armenia received various grants from OSI for a number of cultural events such as the «Golden Apricot» International Film Festival, the «Nazar» International Theatre Festival, the «Tumanyan Fairy Tale Day» International Theatre Festival, the International Youth Film Festival, and the International Festival «Woman», etc.
Last update: March, 2023
NGOs are playing a significant role in implementation of cultural policies and projects as well as professional cooperation. Different aspects of cultural activities of NGOs are addressed in chapters 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.3.1, 1.3.3, and 2.5.5. Within the framework of different projects and activities, described in the listed chapters, Armenian NGOs usually develop active professional cooperation with local and foreign art professionals.
The development of collaboration between art professionals from abroad and local NGOs have become important since the beginning of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Thus, in 2022-23 the Cultural and Social Narratives laboratory NGO funded by the New Democracy Fund is hosting a thematic residency programme for artists, cultural workers, or representatives of related fields, whose main areas of interest include urban space issues, urban memory, and the ways of interpretation of the Soviet urban architecture as an inheritance of the colonial past are invited to apply for the residency programme. The residency is held in the city of Dilijan (Tavush region), where they can also participate in local art life.