Culture and Governance

Culture, from the Latin colere, means “to cultivate” or “to care for.” Originally referring to the cultivation of the land, the meaning of the term evolved to indicate the “cultivation of the soul” and spirit, eventually representing the set of practices, beliefs, and values that characterize a society.

From an anthropological point of view, Edward Tylor, in 1871, proposed one of the first systematic definitions, describing culture as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.”

This conception emphasizes the social and acquired nature of culture, highlighting its vastness and inclusiveness. Tylor paved the way for a broader study of culture, considering it an organic whole that defines collective identity.

In the sociological field, Clifford Geertz, in 1973, introduced a symbolic interpretation of culture, defining it as “a system of shared symbols and meanings that guide human behavior.” This view shifts attention from the material aspects of culture to the practices and meanings that structure social life. For Geertz, culture is not a material entity but a set of practices that create symbolic coherence, making the understanding of value systems possible.

Karl Marx, from his historical-materialist perspective, instead framed culture as a superstructure derived from the economic base. According to Marx, culture reflected the relations of production and dominant economic structures, serving as a tool to consolidate power relationships. This view suggests that cultural changes are closely linked to economic and political transformations.

Another significant perspective is the psychosocial one of Carl Jung, who saw culture as a collective expression of the human unconscious. Jung argued that myths, symbols, and archetypes reflect the internal dynamics of individuals and collectively shape cultural identity. This perspective attributes a fundamental role to psychology in the understanding of culture.

Modern and interdisciplinary definitions further expand the interpretative horizon of culture. UNESCO, in 1982, provided an inclusive definition describing culture as “the complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features of society or a social group.” This formulation integrates both material and immaterial elements, recognizing culture as a collective heritage that embraces diversity and specific identities.

On a cognitive level, culture is often described as the result of accumulated knowledge that enables a human group to adapt to and transform its environment. This perspective emphasizes the role of learning and the transmission of information in technological and cultural evolution.

Finally, Pierre Bourdieu emphasized the practical dimension of culture, defining it as “a set of practices that generate and reproduce social and symbolic capital.” According to Bourdieu, culture is not merely a set of beliefs but an operational structure manifested through repeated habits and patterns of behavior.

¹ Edward Tylor, Primitive Culture, 1871.

² Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures, 1973.

³ Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, 1859.

⁴ Carl Jung, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, 1959.

⁵ UNESCO, Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policies, 1982.

⁶ Pierre Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, 1977.

Operational Definition

For application purposes, the usefulness of an operational definition of culture emerges. Such a definition can be formulated as “a dynamic set of knowledge, beliefs, values, norms, symbols, and practices shared and transmitted by a social group through processes of learning and adaptation, influencing behaviors and relationships within the group and with the environment.”

This definition not only allows for the analysis of complex concepts but proves particularly useful for designing cultural interventions, studying social phenomena, and understanding changes in the interactions between technology and culture.

The operational definition of culture has emerged in response to the need to analyze and manage cultural phenomena in practical contexts. It integrates theoretical perspectives and methodological tools to make the concept of culture usable in the fields of sociology, organizational management, cultural policy, and social psychology. Malinowski, Schein, Hofstede, and UNESCO have contributed to the formalization of this approach, offering tools to understand cultural phenomena dynamically and contextually.

The operational definition of culture highlights its dynamic and contextual nature, emphasizing how it evolves over time through social interactions and is shaped by historical, geographical, and economic factors. It focuses on tangible and observable elements such as behaviors, symbols, norms, and shared values, and includes social transmission and adaptability to changes.

This conception allows for the design of cultural interventions, the analysis of social phenomena, and the understanding of change processes, symbolically linking culture and governance of socio-technical systems. In practical terms, it impacts areas such as policy-making—respectful of local specificities—organizational culture management, sociological research on cultural change and globalization, and technological adaptation, evaluating the impact of innovations such as artificial intelligence.

 Culture as a dynamic system

Culture is a complex and dynamic system, constantly evolving, which includes both tangible aspects such as artifacts, tools, architecture, and technologies that represent the values and skills of a society and intangible aspectssuch as beliefs, values, moral norms, traditions, and shared symbolic meanings.

 Cultura and human behaviour

Culture operates as a “lens” through which individuals interpret the world, influencing perceptions, as people from different cultures may understand the same event in different ways. It conditions actions by establishing what is considered appropriate in a given context and contributes to creating collective identities, offering a sense of belonging to social, ethnic, religious, or national groups.

 Adaptation and cultural change

Another key element of the operational definition of culture is its ability to adapt and transform. This can occur:

• Through internal innovation: the development of new ideas or practices within a group.

• Through interaction with other cultures: phenomena such as globalization, migration, and cultural exchanges profoundly influence local culture.

• Through conflicts or crises: sudden changes can redefine values and norms.

The operational definition of culture offers a perspective that distances itself from a partial vision, often imbued with nostalgia and a static humanism, which reduces culture to a collection of works of art, antiques, or historical testimonies to be admired. This new approach allows culture to be understood as a dynamic and complex system, living primarily in the minds and interactions of people rather than in places of conservation or aesthetic representation.

In this sense, culture is not confined to museums or historical artifacts, but is configured as a set of knowledge, values, symbols, and practices that emerge and evolve through the learning and adaptation processes of human communities. Culture, thus understood, is the connective tissue that guides collective actions, organizes social dynamics, and drives change in complex systems.

The operational definition also allows for the analysis of culture not as an elitist or affected attitude toward artistic heritage, but as a living and dynamic phenomenon that continuously develops, influencing and shaping governance systems and transitions between states of social systems. In this perspective, culture becomes both the result and the engine of complex interaction processes, capable of responding to emergencies and transformations, acting as a feedback system that shapes society and, at the same time, is shaped by it.

Therefore, speaking of culture does not simply mean celebrating the past through the contemplation of works of art, but recognizing a dynamic and adaptive mechanism that underlies human relationships and their ability to face present challenges. With this vision, culture becomes the beating heart of society, a driving force that transcends its material representation to embody collective thought, learning, and evolution.

This perspective clearly distances culture from a purely representative, elitist, and self-referential conception, embracing instead a vision in which it becomes a driver of innovation, cohesion, and transformation. Thus, culture does not belong to salons or museums, but to daily interactions, collective dynamics, and adaptation processes that allow communities to face the present and design the future. Culture as a living and shared heritage, whose value lies in its ability to generate meaning, build connections, and foster change and social well-being.