|
12th Expert Mechanism on Right to Development (EMRTD), held 27-29 October 2025 in Geneva, had a session on Cultural Rights and AI titled “The impact of AI on creative industries, cultural rights, and the right to development”. EMRTD Vice Chair Klentiana Mahmutaj introduced the session, warning that while “AI can amplify creativity by assisting creators and promoting their work, as well as by expanding public access to cultural life,” it can also “undermine creators’ work,” by “using their output to generate new content… [eroding] the economic rights of creators and narrow the diversity of cultural expressions in digital spaces”. Given the fragmented regulatory landscape and weak enforceability of existing safeguards, “non-binding undertakings and international pledges often appear toothless in the face of the rapid evolution and growing power of the AI industry”. The session explored the risks and opportunities of AI in the creative field and the impact on cultural rights and right to development, with discussions among Member States, UN agencies and industry experts. |
EMRTD, a subsidiary body established by the Human Rights Council (resolution 42/23, 2019), provides the Council with thematic expertise on the Right to Development (RTD), identifying and sharing best practices with Member States, and promotes its worldwide implementation, including by educating stakeholders. Resources
GPF Monitors on RTD:
|
|
Statements from Member States, UN Agencies and Experts |
Key Themes |
|
Giorgos Samouel, Deputy Permanent Representative of CYPRUS:“[T]hree key areas are essential to achieving this balance between technological innovation and the protection of cultural rights. First, data governance for cultural materials. We need clear principles of provenance, consent, community curation, and attribution whenever cultural content is used to train AI systems…. Without such safeguards, AI systems risk reproducing bias and enabling new forms of cultural appropriation, ultimately undermining the very diversity they aim to preserve. Second, effective safeguards for creators’ moral and economic rights. Legal and contractual instruments must ensure that artists and cultural professionals are duly recognized and fairly compensated when their works contribute to AI systems or inspire AI-generated content…. We must provide targeted support for creators and cultural institutions, particularly in smaller states across the Global South, to build technical expertise, negotiate fair terms, and access public funding for human rights based cultural AI initiatives.” |
Cultural data governance, legal instruments to safeguard rights of creators; targeted technical support for Global South |
|
Andrea Detmer Latorre, UNESCO:“We have the ‘digital culture for all by 2035’. How can we increase success and empower creation? This was done with Amazon and several experts…. One [issue] is the importance of bringing into the same table different voices, perhaps contested voices and ideas to advance… that includes the private sector, civil society, international organizations, policymakers, researchers…. Creative industries are changing in many ways in terms of, what are the actors involved, what are the processes, what are the power balances or imbalances? … We have a governance lag because of the very nature of policy systems and technological developments. The adoption and the development of technologies is way faster than the development and implementation of policy frameworks…. We have a concentration of AI power. There are a handful of companies, mostly American and Chinese, that have the concentration of the infrastructure, of the data, of the processes and of the economic benefits related to AI systems, and that, in a way, decreases the bargaining power of the voices of marginalized communities of the Global South…. [With] overreliance on AI, we humans and our civilization, may decrease the muscle of thinking, analysing, critical thinking, creativity and also some emotional skills on how we relate with ourselves and with others…. [W]e need to encourage eco-responsible AI practices, by reducing its environmental footprint and promoting low carbon models…. In that sense, some of the instruments that we have been discussing include an AI tax. How can large companies retribute society for the use of cultural expressions that might have not been developed intentionally with that aim, but that in the aggregation of data points become an actual asset that big AI systems use?” |
UNESCO partnership with Amazon; governance policy lag & rapid tech advancements; concentration of AI power; impact of overreliance on AI; environmental footprint; taxing AI |
|
Paula Westenberger, Brunel University of London:“In the current policy space [there] is a reductive binary between AI firms and creative industries…. These are not the only stakeholders in the discussion, so only focusing on them leaves out such important perspectives… for example, are the licensing deals that are being firmed up now, are they transferring down to the creators themselves?… A lot of materials that are being used to train AI models [are] not protected by copyright anymore. If we talk only about copyright, we might be leaving out traditional knowledge [and] Indigenous rights…. Copyright is one of the major barriers that can hinder the decision to digitize items…. AI uses data that is protected by intellectual property, in particular copyright, such as text, images and sound, unless there is an exception in copyright legislation to allow these uses, such as the text and data mining exceptions…. Article 15.1c [of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights], on the moral and material interests of creators, draws a distinction between human rights and intellectual property rights… Intellectual property rights are means by which states seek to provide incentives for inventiveness and creativity…. The scope of protection of these moral material interests doesn’t necessarily coincide with what is referred to as intellectual property rights under national legislation or international agreements…. [I]t is important to not necessarily equate intellectual property to human rights, and understand what are the dimensions of the human rights dimensions and intellectual property…. Intellectual property is a social product and has a social function.… AI can be harmful or helpful to the environment…. Generative AI has an impact on natural resources, water, energy, rare minerals, data centres and resources in the Global South, resulting in extractivist practices, and this significantly impacts local communities, minorities, indigenous groups, so these groups will have an issue in exercising their cultural rights and their ability to create if those very important resources which are crucial for their lives, subsistence and culture disappear.” |
Creators themselves left out of licensing deals; differentiating between types of AI; copyright law and AI; IPR; impact of Generative AI on environment |
|
PAKISTAN (1:11:27-1:14:46):“Limited digitalization, poor connectivity and inadequate resources mean that large parts of the world risk being excluded from this new wave of digital creativity. Unaddressed, such digital divides would not only deepen inequalities, but also endanger cultural diversity itself, as countless voices, traditions and artistic expression may slip through the gaps and be lost in the emerging data gap. Equitable access to AI technologies, data and digital infrastructure must therefore be a central component of efforts to realize the right to development for all. Global frameworks for data governance are also essential to ensure that data from developing countries, in particular and their creators, is not merely extracted but used responsibly, transparently and for shared benefit. AI must be a tool for cultural empowerment, not assimilation or cultural erasure. We must ensure that everyone, regardless of their level of digital advancement, can participate in, contribute to and benefit from this new creative frontier… conversations tend to focus on the impact of AI in terms of procedural generation, as Professor Westenberger also noted, but it also has an outsized impact on the enjoyment of culture as a fundamental part of the exercise of cultural rights. Algorithms and data already play a large and not entirely transparent role in what content is promoted. In the future, AI agents and companions may become an ubiquitous yet opaquely administered filter through which individuals process or interact with cultural goods or exercise their cultural rights. Moreover, individuals’ data may be one of the most meaningful contributions to the development of AI models, but there are only limited avenues for these contributions to be matched by equally significant benefits. Instead, individuals’ data becomes the property of those who collect, sift and process… integrating a right to development perspective at the design stage could serve as an important safeguard for all human rights, and could be a valuable contribution of the thematic study. Finally, we would highlight the implications of blockchain deployments to intellectual property protection systems. Here too, the lack of access to compute energy costs and capacity would hinder adoption in developing countries, giving rise to potential risks where the cultural expression of individuals or a people is misappropriated as the intellectual property of others.” |
Equitable access to – and responsible use of- tech/data/digital infrastructures is central to RTD; cultural empowerment not erasure; impact of biased algorithms |
|
ECUADOR (1:05:23-1:08:28):“It is vital that the adoption of emerging technologies such as AI is focused on protecting cultural diversity and not substituted or watered down its richness and its sense of community belonging…. Ecuador would like to highlight the importance of promoting international cooperation in this area, facilitating the exchange of good practices and strengthening capacities in the area of transfer of technology, ensuring that AI can contribute appropriately to the right to development and the respect for cultural diversity.” |
Tech transfer; AI as a tool to protect cultural diversity |
|
CHINA (1:01:25-1:05:09):“AI has revitalized the creative industries, leading to new artistic forms and new economic models, creating drivers of economic growth and contributing to the realization of cultural rights, including the right to development. On the other hand, algorithmic biases can lead to an erosion of cultural diversity and unbalanced learning. Data can marginalize cultural expression of vulnerable groups and misuse of AI can lead to disinformation, racial discrimination and hate speech. How can AI be channeled to promote the prosperity of creative industries to protect cultural rights and to promote inclusive development? This is a shared question for the international community…. We must adhere to the development of coordinated security, promote the rapid development of a framework of rules for global governance of AI based on a broad consensus. China will actively participate in this and will propose further solutions and Chinese know-how. The Global Organization for Cooperation and Artificial Intelligence, initiated by China will certainly make a contribution here.” |
Algorithms as a mechanism to destroy cultural diversity; China’s Global Organization for Cooperation and Artificial Intelligence |
|
VENEZUELA (58:44- 1:01:15):“AI is today a strategic tool for social and economic progress of peoples of the world. For Venezuela, its promotion is an opportunity to consolidate the right to development, promoting technological sovereignty, digital equity and social inclusion through innovation, knowledge and supportive cooperation. We believe that AI applied ethically and responsibly, can contribute to the collective good, to strengthening health systems, education systems, economy and national development equitably and sustainably. Venezuela promotes a vision of AI as a global public good, which is to be used ethically…. This is part of the seven [point] transformation plan, recognizing science and technology as essential pillars to build a social inclusion development model…. We also have a draft bill on the ethical and responsible use of AI adopted during the first discussion at the National Assembly in November 2024. This standard ensures that AI is used on the basis of digital sovereignty and the respect for human rights, protecting sovereignty and citizenship, vis-a-vis the risks of algorithmic discrimination.” |
Tech sovereignty; AI as a global public good; digital sovereignty and human rights |
|
JORDAN (55:40-58:30):“In 2022 Jordan launched its national AI code of ethics, developed by the Ministry of Digital Economy. The Code promotes fairness, transparency, accountability and sustainability and alliance with international standards adopted by the UN. It highlights respect for intellectual property, privacy and human values, and explicitly prohibits the use of AI to mislead or manipulate people.” |
AI code of ethics; respect for intellectual property |
|