MELBOURNE, 18 November 2024 : Diverse societies with cultural differences are complex and difficult to understand. But for a harmonious society their coexistence, mutual acceptance, and respect of each other is essential. A dialogue among different cultures and people is considered must for fostering social harmony and peaceful existence. So, Intercultural Dialogue (ICD) in multicultural and multiracial societies is seen as a prerequisite for a viable better society.
Therefore the need for an Intercultural Dialogue Index (ICDI) which provides a holistic and transparent data driven analysis of a country’s state of intercultural relations through a robust assessment of specific indicators across key dimensions related to ICD.
It is this ‘The Intercultural Dialogue Index (ICDI): Conceptual Framing and Country Analysis 2024’ addresses. The report by Fethi Mansouri & Amanuel Elias backed by the Founding Director, Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship & Globalisation (ADI), UNESCO Chair Cultural Diversity & Social Justice, Deakin University, was launched today at the Deakin University, Melbourne.
Prof Fethi Mansouri, ADI, UNESCO Chairholder, Cultural Diversity and Social Justice, introduced the report explaining the basics of ICD and the need for a ICDI followed by Prof Simon Tormey, Executive Dean, Faculty of Arts and Education who opened the debate on the subject and welcomed those present.
Nesreen Bottriell, Australian Muslim Woman’s Centre for Human Rights (AMWCHR), Vivienne Nguyen AM Victorian Multicultural Commission (VMC) and Farah Farouque, Ethnic Communities Council of Victoria (ECCV) from partner organisations expressed their appreciation of the ICDI report importance for harmonious societies and its potential to use it see how resources are allocated for intercultural or multicultural projects.
Dr Hass Dellal, CEO Australian Multicultural Foundation, launched the report.
Katie Hall MP, State Member for Footscray, Parliamentary Secretary for Creative Industries, welcoming the report, explained how she was working in an electorate with culturally diverse people. She talked about the housing crisis, immigration, multiculturalism, access to basic services and those not accessing them, cultural connections and much more.
Among those who attended the event were Dr. Raju Adhakari (President, AMON) , Neeraj Nanda (Editor SAT & Patron ASAS), scholars researchers from universities among others.
The report does not cover all countries because, the authors say, data form all countries is not available and countries have different political systems. The world’s most populous country, India is there but the second most populous country China is missing. Pakistan is also missing. How much data is reliable from some of the countries is a moot question?
The ICDI website is revealing with the the full report, about ICDI and interactive world map, where you click on the map of the country and see the relevant ICD score. It says, “The Intercultural Dialogue Index (ICDI) measures the level of intercultural relations across 51 countries, for which sufficient data was available. The average score of the ICDI for all countries was 0.53 with a global standard deviation of 0.17. For all countries, the ICDI index ranged between 0.81 and 0.33, with highest score indicating more space for ICD in terms of policy environment and opportunities for intercultural engagement. In five countries including (Sweden, Canada, Australia, Finland, and United Kingdom), we see availability of robust policy environment that encourages ICD as well as significant opportunities for intercultural engagement. Countries were included if there was sufficient data available to calculate all three dimensions on which the ICDI is based: Legislative and Policy Context, Structural Foundations and Intercultural Opportunities.”
Every country has four components – Legislative Dimension, Structural Dimension, Opportunity Dimension and ODI score. Exploring the interactive world map can give one the idea of which country stands where in the ICDI.
The report reveals: “India has achieved an overall ICDI score of 0.42. India has attained average scores for most components which make up the overall ICDI score. A score of 0.53 in the component of inclusion signals an average level of minority representation. A score of 0.50 in the component of anti-discrimination indicates the presence of anti-discrimination acts and policies in the country. A score of 0.18 in the component of access to communication signals that there is little access to modern communication. A score of 0.22 in the component of socioeconomic inequality reflects low levels of intergenerational social mobility and lower levels of educational attainment.
Overall, Australia has achieved a high ICDI score of 0.79. Half of the component scores are above 0.80, with two more above 0.70. The high scores in the multiculturalism and anti-discrimination components indicate a conducive, positive legislative environment. Relatively low scores in the social contact and access to communication components indicate slightly less positive social connectedness. However, Australia’s high scores in intercultural environment tends to show high level of acceptance of minorities, greater civil liberties, above average degree of social cohesion.
The report is in 86 pages with nine sections says, ” …will greatly assist in clarifying the district characteristics of the intercultural approach to diversity governance, one that privileges cross-cultural contact, inter-personal exchange and transformative attitudinal change.”
