Contemporary Issues in Law, Culture, and Globalization 3092-7250 1 Serial Number 6 2025 11 01 Cultural Rights and Global Governance: Policy Implementation and Social Meaning Cultural Rights and Global Governance: Policy Implementation and Social Meaning 32 42 EN Journal Article 2025 06 13 <p>This study aimed to explore how cultural rights are understood, translated, and implemented within global governance frameworks and how these policies acquire social meaning among policy actors, cultural professionals, and community representatives in Tehran. This qualitative study employed an interpretive descriptive design based on semi-structured interviews with 24 participants selected through purposive maximum-variation sampling in Tehran. Participants included cultural policy experts, municipal cultural officers, civil society activists, artists, cultural producers, and community representatives with direct experience of cultural policy, heritage initiatives, minority cultural expression, or public cultural programming. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was reached at the twenty-first interview, followed by three additional interviews to confirm category stability. Interviews were conducted face-to-face or online, lasted 45–75 minutes, and were audio-recorded with informed consent. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to organize coding, compare patterns across participant groups, develop categories, and retrieve illustrative quotations. Trustworthiness was enhanced through peer debriefing, analytic memo-writing, member checking with selected participants, and maintenance of an audit trail. Five main categories emerged from the data: cultural rights as lived recognition, the translation gap between global norms and local implementation, unequal access to cultural participation, intermediary actors as bridges of trust, and the symbolic politics of cultural governance. Participants perceived cultural rights not only as legal entitlements but also as social claims related to dignity, visibility, language, memory, artistic freedom, and belonging. While global governance frameworks were viewed as important normative references, their implementation was often weakened by administrative ambiguity, selective enforcement, limited public participation, and insufficient sensitivity to local cultural meanings. The findings suggest that cultural rights become meaningful when global norms are translated into participatory, locally intelligible, and institutionally accountable practices. Effective implementation requires moving beyond formal policy adoption toward inclusive cultural governance, community consultation, transparent decision-making, and recognition of cultural diversity as a living social process.</p> https://journalcilcg.com/index.php/cilcg/article/download/44/36