Second, it guides national and international governments in the legislation and other actions they can take to preserve cultural diversity within their states or regions.

Third, it calls for action by public and civil bodies at local and national levels to support diverse cultural expressions.

[12] The international community was progressively lowering barriers to free trade, easing the movement of goods, services and capital between states.

By making commitments in economic agreements, states agree to eliminate all forms of discrimination between domestic and imported cultural products.

It allows for a balance to be struck between the economic benefits of opening up economies and taking into account the specificity of cultural products.

[8] Faced with the fact that the commitments made within the WTO did not allow for the recognition of the dual nature of cultural goods and services,[23] some states decided at the end of the 1990s to move the debate to UNESCO.

[24] On the other hand, the United States was not a member of this organization at the time (it rejoined UNESCO in 2003 when the negotiation of the convention was launched), which created a favourable context for the development of a multilateral instrument aimed at protecting cultural diversity.

The UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity was adopted unanimously by 188 member states on 2 November 2001, in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.

[28] It affirms "that respect for the diversity of cultures, tolerance, dialogue and cooperation, in a climate of mutual trust and understanding, are among the best guarantees of international peace and security".

[42][35] At the third intergovernmental meeting, a working group was charged with finding a compromise between the positions expressed to date on the relationship of the convention to other treaties.

The convention lists several groups such as women, indigenous peoples, minorities, and artists and practitioners of developing nations as specifically intended to benefit.

[8] The preamble affirms the importance and benefits of cultural diversity and of the "framework of democracy, tolerance, social justice and mutual respect" needed for it to flourish.

[51] In article 5, the convention reaffirms the sovereign right of states to use legislation to promote and protect the diversity of cultural expressions.

Article 8 sets out the powers of a state to identify a situation where a cultural expression is in need of "urgent safeguarding"[53] and to take "all appropriate measures".

[54] Articles 9 to 11 commit the states to sharing information transparently, to promoting cultural diversity through education and public awareness programs, and to working with civil society to achieve the convention's goals.

[55] Article 15 is the most explicit provision for partnerships between public authorities and civil society, especially to respond to the needs of developing countries.

The International Fund for Cultural Diversity (IFCD) was created as a result of the demands of developing countries[58] and is established under article 18 of the convention.

[72][73] The monitoring framework is structured by four overarching objectives from the convention, as well as by the desired outcomes, core indicators and means of verification.

In order to respect this commitment, the parties designate a point of contact[77] and must produce periodic reports every four years, starting from the date of deposit of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.

[78][79] These reports are examined by the Conference of the Parties in order to plan international cooperation by identifying innovative measures and targeting the needs of countries that could benefit.

[82] UNESCO reports that "at least eight bilateral and regional free trade agreements concluded between 2015 and 2017 have introduced cultural clauses or list [sic] of commitments that promote the objectives and principles of the 2005 Convention.

The subsequent years saw the rise of online streaming media, meaning that cultural works could be exported from one country to another without a physical medium.

[85] However, this rapid technological change raised the question of how to interpret the convention's rights and obligations relating to online cultural works.

The authors conclude that there are successful cases of involving civil society in the convention's implementation but that the participating organisations were not yet truly diverse.

[90] In 2009, the Intergovernmental Committee identified three general reasons why, in some countries, civil society participation was less than expected: 1) an organisationally weak cultural sector; 2) an excessively top-down approach by government and public bodies; and 3) poor communication between public bodies, civil society, and the cultural sector.

The UNESCO Chair on the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, launched in November 2016, participates in the implementation of the convention and in the development of knowledge.

[94] According to Lilian Richieri Hanania of the University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, the convention was significantly watered-down by the negotiation process and so "it has been strongly questioned" whether it can provide a counterbalance to trade agreements.

"[4] Sociologist John Clammer praised the convention for highlighting the role of culture but said it "lacks a hard-edged analysis or concrete policy proposals of how to address the very issues that it itself raises".

He described it as setting out a desirable democratic system of cultural governance without specifying how this could be achieved: "it is hard to see how many of the non-democratic members of the UN Assembly could ever implement many of its Articles".

[97] In 2018, the Polish sociologist Dobrosława Wiktor-Mach described the political support for the convention, leading to its rapid ratification by many states, as impressive.