English: cultural autonomy; French: autonomie culturelle; Spanish: autonomía cultural; Italian: autonomia culturale; Hungarian: kulturális autonómia

Cultural autonomy refers to the autonomous self-governance of a people, a country, a social subgroup, a minority or similar group in cultural matters. This includes identity-forming elements such as language, upbringing, education, customs and traditions. These are promoted and preserved in their own schools, cultural institutions and publications. On this basis, ethnic minorities can not only define cultural values and norms for themselves, but also develop them freely.

Cultural autonomy in the broader sense refers to the cultural sovereignty of individual Federal States within a federal system, that is, the right to regulate cultural affairs independently of the central government. Thus, the German Federal States possess cultural autonomy, which is not restricted by any right of objection on the part of federal authorities.

Many of the fundamental ideas behind a decentralised model of cultural autonomy can be traced back to the Austro-Marxists led by Karl Renner (1870–1950). Renner argued that the minority should not be subject to the majority population. The state should have only framework powers in the cultural sphere, although not all cultural policy responsibilities need to be transferred to the minority. Cultural autonomy could, for example, be implemented in school education. In any case, autonomy in the sense of cultural autonomy must extend to an area that is significant for the preservation and development of the minority’s own cultural life.

According to Renner, a ‘state of nationalities’ also requires political participation by the minority. Genuine integration of the minority into the ‘foreign state’ can only succeed if cultural autonomy is combined with proportionate participation by the minority. In this context, the minority community should be organised as a body under public law, whose organisational and membership structure is defined within a framework set by legislation and which operates under state legal supervision.

However, the distinction from the majority culture within the state as a whole can also give rise to ambivalence. The application of specific cultural rights for minorities is not without political controversy. It is precisely the extensive powers granted to minorities that are frequently criticised. Critics argue that a permanent separation of ethnic groups leads to greater distance and alienation between sections of the population, thereby making it more difficult for different groups to come together through cultural autonomy. When safeguarding cultural identity within the framework of cultural autonomy, the concept of integration within the state as a whole must therefore be taken into account. Ultimately, the scope of cultural autonomy reaches its limits where protection against cultural assimilation leads to segregation or secessionist tendencies.

Cultural autonomy can be realised within various concepts of autonomy. In this context, cultural autonomy is predominantly associated with personal autonomy. Personal autonomy is not tied to a specific territory, as is the case with territorial autonomy, but is linked to members of the minority as individuals. It exists when the minority is constituted as a legal entity under public law and when certain (state) powers—essential for the preservation of their minority identities—are transferred to this entity for independent regulation and implementation. Personal autonomy can also be introduced for minorities living in scattered communities; as it mainly applies to cultural matters, it is frequently equated with cultural autonomy.

Examples of states with cultural autonomy include Hungary and Estonia, where legal frameworks have been established that are modelled on the personal autonomy of minorities in cultural matters. In Hungary, the 1993 Minorities Act placed the exercise of cultural autonomy primarily within the remit of regional self-governing bodies. This enables minorities to maintain cultural institutions of all kinds (such as libraries, collections, theatres, publishing houses, research institutes, and, in particular, primary, secondary and higher education institutions), determine the use of the radio frequencies or broadcasting slots allocated to them, and establish the respective minority’s national holidays. Comprehensive minority-specific provisions at the level of ordinary legislation are contained in the Estonian Act on the Cultural Autonomy of National Minorities of 1993, which grants ethnic groups resident in Estonia the right to organise themselves as such. Building on the Estonian Minorities Act of 1925, associations or federations representing the Russian, German, Jewish and (now virtually non-existent) Swedish minorities may, by virtue of the law – provided they can demonstrate that they have at least 3,000 members – establish cultural self-governing bodies.

• Anna-Mária Bíró, Petra Kovács (eds.): Diversity in Action. Local Public Management of Multi-ethnic Communities in Central and Eastern Europe. Budapest 2002.
• Dieter Blumenwitz: Ethnic Groups and Minorities. Political Representation and Cultural Autonomy. Berlin 1995.
• Georg Brunner: Concepts of Autonomy for the Protection of Minorities – An Overview and Perspectives. In: Gerrit Manssen, Boguslav Banaszak (eds.): The Protection of Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe. Frankfurt am Main 2001.
• Herbert Küpper, Georg Brunner: European Options of Autonomy: A Typology of Autonomy Models of Minority Self-Governance. In: Kinga Gál (ed.): Minority Governance in Europe. Budapest 2002.
• Karl Renner: The Right of Nations to Self-Determination, with Particular Reference to Austria. Part One: Nation and State. Leipzig, Vienna 1918.

Christoph Schnellbach: Cultural Autonomy. In: Online Encyclopaedia on the Culture and History of Germans in Eastern Europe, 2012. URL: ome-lexikon.uni-oldenburg.de/p32718 (accessed 4 September 2012).