RSS

Mobility Matters: Programs and Schemes to Support the Mobility of Artists and Other Cultural Professionals

30 Apr 2012

Sometimes we have to go back to a great research we have done in the past with joined efforts and in a collaborative manner. This helps us to see how we change, advance and improve. It also assists us to look at the past achievements with a fresh new glance.

The ERICarts Institute carried out a six month study for the European Commission between April and October 2008 on mobility incentives in the culture/creative sector. This was not intended to be an audit of all mobility related schemes in Europe, but rather a survey and analysis of the range and scope as well as motives and results of such programs. During the course of the study, the ERICarts Institute collected information on:

  •  mobility trends in different regions of Europe;
  • recent debates taking place within individual countries;
  • existing mobility schemes (their objectives, kind of support, target beneficiaries, eligibility conditions and the nature of benefits);
  • the main motives for funding bodies to support mobility; and
  • the main sources where professionals can find information about mobility incentives or barriers.

The team developed a classification of the main types and objectives of mobility schemes and tried to assess, on the basis of a rather limited supply of comparable data, their impact/effectiveness.
Recommendations for action are targeted to mobility funders within Member States and call for complementary action on the part of the European Commission, which respects the principle of subsidiarity for EU action in the cultural sector.

Experts identified interesting cases from the diverse world of mobility funding. These cases go beyond the ‘norm’ of cultural diplomacy and can be characterized as those which, for example:

  • provide artists and cultural professionals with an opportunity or platform to build partnerships with other individual professionals and/or institutions;
  • open up new markets or opportunities for their works to be recognized and distributed;
  • provide stepping stones for further career development;
  • address contemporary cultural policy issues of e.g. cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue or the cultural industries;
  • address the inequities or imbalances which persist in the mobility flows across Europe;
  • promote transparency in the application and selection process.

Such cases were found within government cooperation strategies (international, trans-regional, national or local), within individual or targeted mobility programmes of arms-length or semi-public bodies, cultural institutions, foundations or other private sector actors from all parts of Europe.

Name of Case Study Prepared by
Anna-Lindh Foundation Kamila Lewandowska
Ars Baltica Network Dorota Ilczuk
Artexte Residency Programme Lidia Varbanova
Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF) Rod Fisher
Austrian Art Fair Participation Grants for Private Art Galleries Andreas Wiesand
CEC ArtsLink USA Lidia Varbanova
Clore Leadership Programme Rod Fisher
Collège international des Traducteurs littéraires en Arles Anne-Marie Autissier
Cork City Council Arts Office Travel & Mobility Awards Judith Staines
Cultural Association Branko Cvetkovic Faces Mobility Impediments Natalija Stošić
Développement et intensification des dispositifs d’appui à l’exportation culturelle Suzanne Capiau
Diverses cités – Hors Les Murs Project Anne-Marie Autissier
European Cultural Foundation Rod Fisher
Fundación Bilbao Arte Fundazioa Anna Villarroya
Gaude Polonia Scholarship Programme for Young Foreign Cultural Professionals Dorota Ilczuk
Germany – Residencies in the Künstlerhäuser Worpswede Andreas Wiesand
Homines Urbani Project Dorota Ilczuk
Hors les murs Anne-Marie Autissier
HungaroConnections Project Péter Inkei
Ibermedia Programme Anna Villarroya
Informal Artists NGO Networks Milena Dragićević Šešić
InovArt Programme Rod Fisher
International Curators Forum Rod Fisher
International Summer Music Festival – Nei Suoni dei Luoghi Natalija Stošić
International Young Creative Entrepreneur Awards Rod Fisher
Linked Euroregion Arts Development Network (LEAD) Anne-Marie Autissier
Mondialisation de la culture – Guichet unique d’export culturel Suzanne Capiau
Movin’Up-Supporting the Mobility of Young Artists in Italy Elena Di Federico
National Ballet Company (Companhia Nacional de Bailado) Programme of extended leave Rod Fisher
New Mobility Strategy for La Grande Région Sandrine Devaux
Norden Balkan Culture Switch Dimitrije Vujadinovic
Nordic Mobility and Artists-in-Residence Programmes Ritva Mitchell
Regional Cultural Mobility between Serbia and Croatia Slavko Matic
Roberto Cimetta Fund Judith Staines
Scholarships of the Spanish Institute for Foreign Trade Anna Villarroya
Straelen Atrium Discourse between writers and translators Andreas Wiesand
Swiss Cultural Programme in the Western Balkans Bertan Selim
Visiting Arts Mobility Grants Rod Fisher
Wales Arts International Rod Fisher

 

 

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

E-learning: models, opportunities and limitations

24 Mar 2012

 1.   Terminology: e-learning, online learning and distant learning/training

There are differences between the three terms, although they are tightly connected.

- E-learning/training involves the use of a computer, or an electronic devise (e.g. a mobile phone, CD-ROM, audio or video tape, satellite TV) to provide a training or educational material. The training or education program is delivered electronically, led by an instructor, or without an instructor (e.g. “self-support learning”).  E-learning applications and processes include mainly:

  • web-based learning;
  •  computer-based learning;
  •  virtual classrooms, and
  •  digital collaboration.

Acronyms like CBT (Computer-Based Training), IBT (Internet-Based Training) or WBT (Web-Based Training) are used as synonyms to E-Learning.

-  Online learning/training involves using mainly the Internet, or in some cases also an Intranet. Other electronic devices can also be used to provide learning materials.

- Distance learning/training methods rely on a variety of information technologies to deliver course materials and instruction to students. These include the use of multi-media online activities, print materials, web, e-mail, Internet, CD-Rom, computer software, audio/video conferencing, audio/video tapes and TV or radio. Any particular course might use a combination of delivery methods.  Distance learning usually combines e-learning methods with “offline” seminars and lectures.

-  “Supported open learning” is a concept used by Open University London. “Open learning” means that students are learning in their own time by reading course material, working on course activities, writing assignments and perhaps working with other students; and “supported” means support from a tutor and the student services staff at the OU Regional Centers, as well as from centralised areas such as the Library of the Open University Students Association.

The common learning/training methodology in all three groups is the following:

Usually courses packages are sent out to learners (are at disposal to learners) before the start of the course. E-learning, online learning and distance learning requires access to vast amount of resources which should be available to learners – usually these are online libraries and resources centers, as well as “electronic reading rooms” where learners can access background materials online. During the course, learners may interact with tutors (instructors, lecturers) and other learners by different media – via phone and/or computer – email, forums, conferences, etc. There are interim and final assignments which can be submitted either by regular mail or electronically via website.  Assignments are then marked and returned to learners in similar fashion. The final decision on passing the course by each student is in the hands of an individual tutor, or a Board/Committee, running the program.

All these methods of learning require self discipline and a significant amount of reading, writing, reflection, interaction, and completion of activities and assignments by the students/participants.

The current document refers to the term “e-learning/training”, considering that the training will be done mainly online, using a combination of electronic devises and distant learning methods.

2. Virtual classroom: ingredients

A core of most of the e-learning platforms is the Virtual Classroom (VC). This is a web-space, designed for real-time classroom teaching, moderated and led by a trainer/instructor. It provides opportunities for trainers to deliver training materials and sessions, and for participants to have access to them, as well as to attend course sessions.  The main objective of VC is to improve access by allowing remote participation and to increase collaborative mode of learning.

Virtual classrooms can be of two main types:

-  Asynchronous:  when classes are conducted through email correspondence, forums, and newsgroups.

-  Synchronous:  conducted with the use of chat rooms, whiteboards, teleconferencing and other tools. These online methods give students the chance to interact with their virtual classmates as well as with their mentors in real time.

The research looked at different types of virtual classrooms and their usability. Important ingredients of any virtual classroom are identified as:

-  Course outline: a summary and curricula of the course covering the main objectives, the topics covered by the course, the methodology of teaching/learning, the methods of evaluation (interim and final), Course outline is prepared by the trainer for each course and approved by a Training/Academic Board (if there is one assigned).

-  Course materials (resources): These are structured resources ( articles, books, publications, documents, online libraries and links), as well as multimedia parts, which are collected by the tutor and are at disposal to the trainees. The materials are provided electronically and can be viewed online.  E-libraries become very popular not only for higher education students and schools. Companies and organisations also convert their libraries and piles of documents to e-libraries which allow more books to be stored and leaving physical space for other purposes.

- Interactions between students and between them and the tutor (e.g. discussions of problems, solving exercises, case studies, review questions, etc.). This part of the classroom allows the use of electronic media and web 2.0 tools, like a discussion forum, blog space, chat room, voice mail, e-mail, etc. :

  • Real time discussions: they allow students to interact with each other at the same time. In international training, this type of communication is not widely used due to difficulties to organise timing and access from different geographic areas.
  • Video conferencing allows students to create verbal communication, but the cost of software and hardware may be a barrier to making it popular.
  • Some courses have been converted to podcasts in order to make toe course more accessible, as students can download podcasts at any time to their mp3 players or smart phones.

-  Homework assignments and interim evaluation: Learning process requires regular homework assignments which are normally submitted electronically. Tutors help where needed by an online help desk, Q/A online sessions, email, personalised communication or other methods.

-  Final exam: It is usually done in a form of a final test, project to complete, writing an essay after reading texts, or other methods.

Depending on the methodology and preparation of the course materials, courses can be: mainly text-based, video-based, audio-based, textbooks-based or peer-to-peer courses.

3. Important ingredients of e-learning/training

The experience of experts participating in the targeted survey and technical developers interviewed shows that starting a new online program is a multi-layer process, which requires a serious consideration in advance of several key areas and answering of the following questions:

Content and methodology

Learning methodology has to combines principles of:  project management, online learning specificities, visual aspects and good design to ensure that online learning is engaging, and involves interactive experience that meet the desired learning outcomes. Questions to consider:

  • Subject matters: Are the training topics suitable for online training?
  • Level of training: is this going to be a basic program, or an advanced one?
  • The number of courses offered and their content: What is the overall concept for the training and how the content is split between different courses?
  • The content structure: How the content can be organised in a clear and understandable manner, with all logistics details?
  • What is the planned combination between online and offline learning methods: The research shows that a combination of e-learning tools with face-to-face contact, study visits, etc. is the most effective.
  • Duration:  What is the duration of the each course, as well as the duration of the whole program? Too short courses might look unserious and not sufficient, too long courses/modules are difficult to implement for busy professionals.

Participants’ number, skills, attitude and background

  • Is the training for young people or for adults?
  • Are the  students professionals in the field, or beginners?
  • How many trainees are expected to be involved in the e-learning process? This is an important question, as available technical tools and software for e-learning (packages and prices offered) depends on the number of people participating in the training process .
  • What is the geographic spread of the participants? Online learning is as more cost effective as larger the number of the participants is, and the greater the geographic spread is. ON another hand, involving more than one country in the e-learning process creates other problems, incl. language barriers and increased costs for translation.
  • What is the attitude of potential students towards using online spaces for learning, especially in terms of what kind of additional information skills they need to acquire to enroll in the training?

The training teams

  • How the training team is formed and on what principle?
  • What are the requirements for selecting trainers?
  • What are the skills of the trainers in using online tools for e-learning?
  • How much time and efforts are required for training the trainers in using the chosen software for e-learning?

The technical platform

  • What are the main criteria for choosing a technical platform?
  • How to choose between the open software options and ready commercial products?
  • What set of online tools is necessary for running the e-learning platform considering the aims of the training, the content structure and the profile of the participants?

Capacity/capability to develop online learning: This aspect concerns the ability of the organisation to develop: the e-learning content/methodology, the training teams, and the technical platform, as well as to administer and coordinate the e-learning process. Usually a combination between “in-house” solution and outsourcing parts of the training is preferable.

4. Advantages and disadvantages of e-learning/training

There are several main advantages of e-learning:

-  Increased access: overcomes timing, attendance and travel difficulties:

-  Easy access from different spots across the world. Courses can be accessed from a variety of locations.

  • Eliminating or significantly reducing travel and accommodation costs for participants in the training: both students and lecturers.
  • Covering a large number of people in a short time.

-  Faster delivery cycle in time than traditional classroom based instruction. Students can subscribe for several courses at once.

-  Very scalable and therefore suitable for professionals: Training can be undertaken when people are available, rather than having to make sure participants are available when the training is planned. Learning sessions are practically available all the time and learners are not bound to a specific day or time to attend classes.

- Flexibility: The content can be updated, modified and changed in a flexible and fast manner.

- Re-use and modularization: learning objects learning materials can be reused.

-  Higher freedom for participants: The trainer/tutor is usually a coach and facilitator rather than a traditional lecturer.

-  Advances competences in new technologies: Help students to understand and to cope with new technology and online tools.

-  Affordability: It’s easy to reach economies of scale: the greater the number of participants, the greater the probability that economies of scale will make e-learning an attractive proposition from a cost perspective.

-  Better, faster and cheaper administration than classroom training. Due to the online technologies, one coordinator can handle significant amount of courses and students enrolling.

-  Improved performance: Results of numerous surveys show that online education students in general perform better than those in the offline learning.

Together with the advantages, e-learning platforms and tools are sometimes frustrating, and not always efficient. The research identifies the following weaknesses and risks:

-  Users” resistance to changes: Introduction of new methods and technologies always creates frustration, especially in people who have more “conservative” mindsets in relation to training and education.

-   Strong requirement for self-discipline:  Not all users participating in online courses are disciplined and can spare time for studying on their own. E-learning requires a higher level of responsibility in the hands of the participants to plan their course participation and preparation.

-  New communication technologies improve rapidly all the time: Today’s developments are already outdated tomorrow. Every on technical development and implementation requires a significant amount of time and investments, and the results could be outdated soon.

-  Synchronisation is difficult: For some e-learning methods, like webinars, online conferences, etc. where students need to participate simultaneously, it is difficult to synchronise their schedules to attend at the same time. This is especially an issue when e-learning process covers two and more countries with time differences.

-   Internet connection:  The use of many technical applications in the e-learning process (webinars, podcasts, video materials, teleconferences, etc.) requires a high speed internet.  This is a problem in developing countries where Internet infrastructure is not well developed and uploading and downloading processes are very slow.

-   Copyright on the training materials: E-learning platforms need to consider that trainers are not willing to post free in the public domain their articles, papers and training materials.

- Language barriers: Training in countries where spoken languages do not coincide with the main languages of developing software for e-learning programs is an obstacle. In training environment where trainers are international consultants and experts, costs of the project might drastically increase due to the need for translating all language materials into the local language.

5. Success factors in e-learning/training

There are several key factors which influence the level of success in implementing e-learning programmes:

  • Interactivity and engagement. The most effective learning occurs when learners are actively engaged. Interactivity involves active participation by the learners: answering questions, interacting with others, uploading content, reflecting on course materials, providing feedback. Whatever tool is used, it is important to engage students from the start, because immediate engagement builds self-esteem, and gives the courage to go ahead.
  • Customisation: The content and the design of the courses should reflect the needs and interests of the target group. The tone, level of content, and interactivity should be appropriate to the culture and training methods of the participants.
  • Usability of the content. The content should be developed in a way that participants come to it multiple times as they should be the one to control the timing and flow of content.
  • Visualising. It is important to use rich media elements (photos, graphics, animations, simulations, videos, and sounds.
  • Evaluation methods. There are many ways for interim and final evaluation in online learning programs. The most popular are:
    • Tests
    • Doing a case study (preliminary prepared by the trainer, or initiated by the student, following up certain requirements).
    • Solving a practical problem based on a theoretical framework.
    • Writing an essay.
    • Doing a practical project and  analysing the project in a preliminary set up grid.
    • Evaluation of the level of participation:  engagement in online classes, chat rooms, information flow.
    • Easy to understand content and evaluation techniques. Comprehensive and structured way of presenting course material is a must. Reading the summaries and highlights in the course material is sometimes more important for the students than reading the whole package.  The students’ performance need to be evaluated with easy-to-understand evaluation techniques during the whole course.
    • Balancing the content and the visual presentation. Both are equally important in any types of e-training. Visual images help learners to retain attention and maintain their interest. Gadgets (e.g. pick-n-choose button for choosing the right answer; coffee mug icon for break-time, or a guru icon that gives out hints) give a sense of a human touch that makes learners feel more engaged and attentive. Unless very important, background music and sounds should be avoided because they usually overload the working memory.
    • Combining theory and practice. Irrespectively of the students’ background, the courses have to allow them to relate the content to their own experiences.
    • Providing ongoing feedback. Many learners are afraid of failures; therefore ensuring sufficient feedback is an important factor for success. The methodology need to also secure providing feedback from the students for each trainer and for each course at the end of the training.

E-learning is the future, but it has to be elaborated with care as it requires different methods and methodologies of teaching and learning. A cost-benefit analysis is a must before deciding on implementing an e-learning module or program. To be successful, e-learning should be based on a collaborative mode between partners involved in the training.

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

The changing dynamics between artistic creativity, economy and cultural policy: Lyudmila Petrova’s professional projects and passion

28 Feb 2012

Lyudmila Petrova is a co-founder and organiser of the CREARE Summer School of cultural Economics .  She holds a MA in cultural economics and cultural entrepreneurship and is an active member of the cultural economics community. Recently, she pursues her PhD thesis on factors of artistic creativity and innovation at Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication (ESHCC), Rotterdam, the Netherlands. She is also graduated in marketing and management studies at University of Economics Varna, Bulgaria and in cultural studies at New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria. Being passionate for arts, she is teaching and worked on various international researches in the areas of creativity and economy, financing of the arts and international cultural policy. She has publications in related to her research topics in various books and international journals; among the others, Journal of Cultural Economics, The  Journal of Art Management, Law and Society, Japanese Journal of Cultural Economics, as well as regularly presenting at international seminars and conferences (of the Association of Cultural Economics International, of Cultural Policy Research, of Arts and Cultural Management, to name some). 

1. Lyudmila, you currently work on your PhD on factors of creativity and innovation in the arts at the Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication. Could you please share with us what is your main hypothesis and methods of research?The broader purpose of my thesis is to provide better understanding of the relationship between art, creativity, innovation and changes in the environment within which they operate, while examining the peculiar nature and origins of the artistic creativity and innovation and the specific conditions within which they emerge and establish. Thus, I study creativity not simply as a characteristic of process, individual and product, but also in relation to its context.

Often, it is suggested that artistic creativity promote economic benefits and often associated with the cultural & creative sectors and their contributions to the overall economy. Instead, I argue that capturing artistic creativity only in instrumental benefits does not do justice to what the phenomena of creativity is about. With my research I suggest that creativity and innovation are characteristics we cannot take as granted for all art, instead they show themselves only when they yields qualitative changes within the existing art domain, succeed to transform an old one in a new one or to create a new one. Or only when artistic creativity can trigger outstanding artistic achievements, we can talk about its positive spill over effects to the entire economy and society. I study this when I examine how artistic creativity emerge, establish and leave a trace and how it turns into innovations, while distinguishing various types and levels of creativity.

The second proposition in my thesis is that creativity which is so crucial for changes to take place requires a supportive environment that is constructed from both overall environmental factors such as social, economic and political and structural factors of the art domain where artists, intermediaries, peers and cultural organizations interact. More specifically, I analyse the consequences for the artistic creativity and innovation processes of the any shifts in the environment, when focusing on the case of the Bulgarian visual arts during the transition period (1989-2000). The purpose in this part is that of analysing the specific institutional factors that may or may not influence the emergence and establishment of new artistic expressions, genres, movements, and even changes of paradigms and examine the role of the government when those qualitative changes take place.

Building on very interdisciplinary approach, adopting psychology, economics and sociology theories, I use qualitative analysis based on archive data and semi-structured interviews, as well as analysis on various case studies. 

2. You work as a researcher in the field of cultural economics since years. Which is your favorite piece of research or academic work on the topic – an article, viewpoint, book, or a publication? Why?

From the very beginning I am inspired from the work of Klamer, Throsby, Frey, Ginsburg, who not simply introduced the economic logic to the art and culture world, but very persuasively intertwine economic and cultural perspectives. Actually, my personal journey in the field of cultural economics has started when I first read Arjo Klamer’s (1996) book Value of Culture. Next to it, books like Not just for the money: an economic theory of personal motivation by Frey (1997), Economics and culture by Throsby (2001), Beyond prices: value in culture, economics and the arts edited by Hutter and Throsby (2008) shape my understanding of the dynamic relationship between art, culture and economics. Despite all the methodological difficulties, these authors enhance the conversation on economics of art and culture, while engaging various disciplinary approaches of psychology, economics, sociology, philosophy, anthropology and as such extend the discussion beyond the usual economic questions. They do not only challenge the traditional economic approach, but also introduce new viewpoints, that art and economic logics can coexist and complement each other. As such, they also invite non-economists to join the cultural economics conversation.

3. One of the courses which you teach is on the topic of relations between artistic creativity and economy. What are the practical aspects of these relations in light of managing of cultural organizations and projects?The relationship of artistic creativity and economy is very complex and dynamic and maybe because of that often simplified or misinterpreted. If economy requires rules, efficiency and efficacy, what matters for the artistic creativity are values of novelty and authenticity, values that inspire us. It also requires its own space, time and dynamics.

In line with this, on the organizational level, we can identify the relationship between both, for example, when processes of creating new content and transmitting artistic values converge with the processes of audience development, efficiency of business models, monitoring outcomes, motivating creative workers and etc. Another aspect of this relationship can be expressed when cultural institutions have to balance between working environment that foster artistically innovative practices and strategies to generate more income and engage diverse audience and supporters.

Research and practice bring evidences that to achieve the balance between artistic creativity and economic aspects, it is a task that requires change in the mindset of the existing cultural organizations (especially those in the non profit sector). Inevitably, there is a need of the figure of cultural entrepreneur – the one, who understand the dynamic relationship between such a distinct logics, can operate between and among both logics and is aware of the spill over effects when marginalize one or another of them.

4. In your opinion, can policy instruments motivate and facilitate artistic creativity? Give an example.It is very difficult to draw a direct causality between policy instruments in terms of regulations, public expenditures and tax incentives and motivation for artistic creativity. However, some suggestions can be made. Public instruments that directly and excessively interfere with creativity motivation might give a rise of crowding out of the creative motivation. What plays a critical role here is the fact that on one side, policy instruments are constrained by clear objectives and norms, derived from specific institutional settings including administrative procedures. And on the other, artistic creativity is driven by values of freedom, nonconformity and authenticity.

Creativity also requires supportive environment, which can be facilitated by the government, when implementing public instruments which indirectly can support the development of an independent art sector. In respect with the recent subsidy cuts, governments can remain responsible for cultural basis infrastructure and promote mechanisms that favour the development of mecenat, encourage more private involvement in the cultural sector and cultural entrepreneurship as well as boost the demand for art and culture production.  For example, according to a study, in the Netherlands, the implementation of favourable provision for tax incentives generate contribution to the art and culture as much as the annual budget of the Ministry of Culture and invite greater diversity of stakeholder when individuals, companies, foundations donate and invest in the arts and culture. Another good example in the Netherlands, is the establishment of cultural funds with the support of specially designed tax. This scheme on one side aimed to encourage private individuals to invest through cultural funds in cultural projects and on the other to improve the access of cultural entrepreneurs to capital/loan with low interest rate when investing in cultural project or buying contemporary art works. The use of cultural investment funds by cultural entrepreneurs and/or cultural organizations shows that since 2006, 42 projects were accepted and granted a total of 382 million euro. The outcome of this measure supported by the government, foster risk-taking, while promoting stronger partnership between the subsidised art sector, creative industries and other areas of Dutch private sector, a collaboration which beckon new artistic experiments, too.

5. Fundraising for artistic projects and events is becoming more and more frustrating nowadays because of the global financial difficulties we face. Are there any “back-up strategies” for organizations in the cultural sector in such a situation of squeezed government funding and limited or decreased business support for the arts?It is true that the financial crisis prove to be a great challenge for the art and culture sectors.  In one way it creates barriers and difficult situations, but on the other it opens different possibilities that we might neglect in the period of abundance. Or as Jon Elster puts it – less could be more.

Practically speaking, with the decrease of the government subsidies and business support, cultural organizations need to focus on how to increase their own earn incomes. There are a few alternatives to consider:  to rethink their marketing strategies to attract new audience and extended the old one; to reassess their price formation; to discover possibilities for additional support from donation, sponsorship and income from merchandising of products and services.

Some of the these strategies might be more effective in short run and others can be realized in  a long run. For example, applying some marketing techniques to attract greater numbers of traditional visitors, to intensify the engagement with the existing audience and attracting new group of audience can be effective to generate income in short run. Let’s face it, many art and cultural organization still do not apply effectively marketing tools to segment better their audience. Next to this, cultural organizations still invest more in publicity than in well-motivated communication strategies, especially exploring the potential of the new media tools. For example, fundraising for concrete projects through so-called crowdfunding, i.e. contributions are derived by the audience via internet donations, proves to be a good alternative to the cuts in the subsidies to the arts and a very effective way to use the social media. Further, borrowing new methods for price formation from other businesses such as auction for tickets, dynamic price formation (easy Jet way) and air miles program can also generate more than one can expect.

In a long run, instead of focusing only on fundraising among big private foundations and companies, cultural institutions will need to invest in more qualitative relationships based on loyalty with small donors (individuals and small foundations). There are enough evidences to suggest that private wealth and generosity have increased in the last decades, at least here in the western world, but it is not proportionally distributed among different social sectors or “good causes”. For example, private giving to culture still lacking far behind the other social sectors in the Netherlands – only 8% of the total private giving in 2007 is allocated to the arts and culture. It is often the case that cultural organizations do not have enough experience and knowledge to develop and explore the “culture of asking” on which depends the development of “culture of giving”. However, beside the money and willingness of small donors to contribute to the arts, one can argue that considerably efforts and time will be needed to build different relationship between those who give and those who receive, especially after such a long period of predominant public support to the arts and culture.

6. You are in the core team for initiating and conducting the annual CREARE Summer school in cultural economics. What are the main outcomes of its latest edition in 2011? Did you achieve what you were expecting for?In 2009, together with Arjo Klamer and Anna Mignosa, we established the summer school with the idea to convey knowledge of the cultural economic perspectives among professionals, policy makers and (graduate) students. Next to this, it aims to bridge theoretical and practical knowledge, while participants are engaged in conversations with well-known scholars (Arjo Klamer, Kazuko Goto, Francoise Benhamou, Ilde Rizzo, Izidoro Mazza, Olav Velthuis, to name some) as well as successful cultural entrepreneurs.

What we have achieve this year is the fact that great variety of graduate students, academics and cultural operators from a wide diversity of institutions (government, non profit and private) and cultures join us at the summer school in Amsterdam. Together with participants from all over the world (Austria, China, France, Fiji, Island, Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, Mali, Mauritius, Russia, Trinidad & Tobago, Spain, Sweden, UK) we shared private experience and build up a common understanding about the concepts of culture, value, valuation of the arts, the creative economy, and cultural policy and their relevance to specific national contexts. We are also very glad that this year, we managed to launch our first course in Uganda in collaboration with Bayimba cultural foundation. To add the African perspective, was invaluable experience to us.

This year, we also welcome two new members of the team  – Priyatej Kotipalli from India and Carmen Artenie from Romania – which add great deal of multi-cultural experience also on the organizational level.

Being a pioneer in providing this intensive education on cultural economic perspectives to such culturally and professionally diverse audience is the greatest challenge that we have faced. Our expectation was to draw in and engage the participants into the conversation of cultural economics – to trigger their expectations, to inspire them to take look out of their own perspective, to make them understand the perspective of the others. And yes, I think we have succeeded in this.

7. Do you have any personal affiliation to the arts: hobby-related, family-related, or volunteering?  Living in the Netherlands, do you have a nostalgia for participating at Bulgarian cultural and artistic events?I like the experiment in the arts without differences between sectors. Exploring galleries, museums, performances, cultural districts, underground places became very inspirational for me. What else intrigues me since years is the crossing edge between art and design. Sometimes when attending some design fair, exhibitions or events, I get so inspired that I often come back home and start experimenting with my own design forms and compositions.

Yes, indeed, the most difficult part of leaving abroad, turned to be the fact that I cannot participate in Bulgarian cultural scene as I used to. The most I miss is the theater; also because of the language barriers I do not attend so much theater performances here. And I used to love it.

———–

Read the interview also on Young Cultural Policy Researchers Forum on LabforCulture: http://www.labforculture.org/en/groups/open/young-researchers-forum/voices-and-viewpoints/94211

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

The future of cultural networks

17 Jan 2012

ENCATC Interview with Lidia Varbanova during the 19th ENCATC Annual Conference, Helsinki, Finland (October 2011): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QfyYBkxiZ0&list=UU1uzMLf_wy1c9CM_y5eBChw&index=1&feature=plcp  

The first European networks: founded in the early 80s: they had lean structures and simple organizational models. The Manifesto of the European Cultural Networks (Adopted by the Forum of European Cultural Networks  in Brussels,  September 1997) confirmed the importance of the networks and their role in the overall economic and social development. Networks are facing now a new era of digitalization and globalization, as well as lack of funding and less options for fundraising. Many of them face difficulties of not knowing how to proceed in the future. They are pressed by the needs of their members, the requirements of their funders and stakeholders and the constantly changing world around. What is their future? Do they have strategic visions and strategic orientation? Do they operate within a strategic framework? One thing is certain: they need to become much more innovative and entrepreneurial if they want to not only survive,  but to be leaders in the cultural sector.

Networks are about:

  • Strategic collaborative approach
  • Synergy
  • Multiplying effects
  • “Laboratory/experimental” type of thinking and actions
  • Spontaneous innovation
  • Motivating “intrapreneurial” climate
  • Fin and friendship

 

Strengths of our networks:

  • Having a “common voice” in the sector
  • Diversity in membership
  • Cross-border experiences
  • Knowledge gain
  • Capacity building and professionalism
  • Flexibility
  • Dynamic behaviour
  • Inclusiveness and openness
  • New programs and services

 

Some weaknesses:

  • Managing diverse and growing membership
  • Keeping members motivated
  • Growing and losing the focus
  • Concerns about over-programming and limited staff
  • Difficulty to match services with constantly changing needs of members
  • Not sufficiently involving boards and members as “ambassadors” and “fundraisers”

 

Why having a strategy is important for networks:

  • Helps to see the “bigger picture” and look further: beyond the daily problems
  • Consider where to collaborate, with whom and how
  • Consider alternatives
  • Better use of membership fees and public money
  • Better management, organisation and financial performance
  • Predict (to a certain extend) unexpected circumstances and risk factors

 Why cultural networks avoid strategies?

  • Operate in a turbulent changing environment
  • Lack of understanding of the importance of a strategy
  • Formal strategic planning is time consuming
  • Overloaded by operational problems
  • Operate with limited resources and strategic planning can be costly
  • Do not have the necessary expertise in strategic planning
  • Fear  of failure when goals are set up

 

Possible “to do” list for cultural networks: strategic goals:

  • Elaborating strategic directions/plans
  • Find tools to inspire innovation
  • Invest in R&D: experimenting
  • Build up strategic alliances: in the arts and beyond
  • Explore alternative sources of financing, incl. self-generated revenues, business models in networking, better negotiation for group benefits for members
  • Initiate new dynamic and focused forms of online collaboration
  • Reflect to global issues (sustainability, global warming, climate change, etc.)

 

What will happen with our networks in the future?

  • Some of them will be maybe merging and growing
  • Others will dissolve in smaller satellite versions.
  • There will be networks which will simply disappear
  • Others will be transformed partially (or fully) in online platforms.
  • New networks will certainly appear.

The least possible is to stay unchanged.  Because initiating and managing changes is in the heart of networking.

Watch also ENCATC Youtube Channel:  inspiring interviews with my colleagues in the arts management and cultural policy field from different corners of Europe: http://www.youtube.com/user/CommunicationsENCATC/videos

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

Immigration policies, governance of ethnic minorities and multiculturalism: A snapshot interview with Miikka Pyykkönen

13 Jan 2012
Miikka Pyykkönen has worked at the department of social sciences and philosophy in University of Jyväskylä Finland since 2000. He is specialized in politics of cultural diversity and multiculturalism, civil society, Foucauldian methodology and analytics of power, governance of ethnic minorities, indigenous politics, and European and Finnish immigration policies. His recent publications deal  with cultural diversity in cultural policy, theoretical conception of civil society, historical governance of the Roma and Sami in Finland and immigrant politics in Finland.1. Miikka, your PhD thesis (completed in 2007) examined the work of immigrant associations in Jyväskylä and Tampere. Could you share with us the main hypothesis, research objectives and main outcomes of your research?The guiding hypothesis in the beginning was that the immigrant associations in Finland work mainly for the cultural and religious traditions of groups they represent. Very soon while working on the thesis, I figured out that this general assumption was partial. The repertoire of associations is much wider and their orientations vary from traditions and religions to gender, age, arts, sports and intercultural issues, for instance. My main research objectives were to study how the associations construct ethnicities of different immigrant groups, what kinds of forms of integration association promote and how they understand the concept, and how is their role signified in the administration of immigration affairs. The outcomes connected to these objectives are: Ethno-cultural and some mono-ethnic religious, women and youth associations want to, indeed, construct the ethnic identity in accordance with the traditions of the areas and countries of origin. However, many associations tend to promote multiculturalism, interculturality and multiethnic identities. Some multicultural, youth and women associations do not cherish ethnic identities at all, but emphasize other identifying elements of citizenship and belonging. Relatively similar division was seen in relation to integration as some associations mainly promoted integration of their members and clients to a particular ethnic group, some – especially so called integration associations – to Finnish society and culture accordingly to the official integration policy, and some between the immigrated groups. One central finding was that the administration of immigration affairs is very keen on incorporating immigrant associations to the integration work in accordance with the official integration principles and general societal rationalities. Immigrant associations have become more and more a tool for governing and administrating the immigration affairs in an empowering way.2. What are the three distinguished features of the University of Jyväskylä in comparison of other programs and universities you are familiar with?

Our Master’s programme in Cultural Policy is strongly grounded in the critical social scientific basic research. The leading objective in our research is not that the research is applicable for administrative work or art field, but the interests rise mainly from the earlier research, theoretical perspectives and communication of the researchers. I think this is the number one difference if compared to cultural policy or management programmes in many other European and non-European educational institutions. However, we of course do applicable research and cooperate a lot with instances doing research like that (e.g. Foundation for Cultural Policy Research – CUPORE). Secondly, and in relation to the previous, our programme deals with many dimensions of cultural policy and the curriculum of our programme is very versatile. It combines anthropological and “semiotic” approaches to culture as well as aesthetic and arts oriented approaches. We study, and also have courses on:  theories of culture and cultural policy, multiculturalism, governance of culture, cultural and arts organizations and artistic identities and professions. Thirdly, we are very well established in the international and national networks of cultural policy research. This is not actually a difference if compared to many other educational institutions in this field, but our central characteristic anyway. We participate actively in Nordic and international research networks and organize events. We have also strong representation in the international scientific journals and publications of the field.

3. You have been visiting lecturer at several prominent universities (University of Umeå, University of Iceland, University of del Salvador and University of Fasta, Argentina). Is there any difference in the way issues related to immigration, cultural identity and multiculturalism are approached by researchers in Europe, in the Scandinavian region, and in South America?

It is really hard to point out any country-specific differences in research orientations, but there are differences between the departments and faculties due to the research traditions and paradigms they affiliate with. At the time when I visited the University of Iceland (2006), immigration and multiculturalism did not seem to be big issues there in cultural studies and social sciences. Nevertheless approaches to culture and cultural differences were very similar than in Finland – postcolonialism, anti-essentialism and the study of representations and stereotypes. The same goes with Umeå University in Sweden. Both destinations also shared similar interests to political processes and policies than sociologist, political scientist and cultural policy researchers working with multiculturalism and diversity have in Finland.

In Argentina the orientations and approaches were quite similar too, but I have to say that many older and established researchers shared views which have been contradictory or even somewhat rejected in the European (multi)cultural studies for the last decades, mainly concerning the natural existence of racial categories and differences between races. The whole academic race discourse, which is not much used in Europe (here ethnicity), was quite lively there. However, this can be also because of the influence of the US academic discourses. More or less constructionist approach to identities and cultures was not unfamiliar there, but not as taken for granted as it is in Europe. One has to bear in mind that I only visited two universities in Argentina and my experiences are only from them. Just out of curiosity I want to mention a funny coincidence, which happened when I spoke about the policy models of multiculturalism in Europe for the PhD students at the Universidad del Salvador. One of the PhD students in anthropology was hostile toward me from the very beginning of my lecture and questioned my position by saying “Why does this representative of European imperialism come to our university to lecture about the policy models of dealing with multicultural issues? Europeans have never been able to deal with multicultural phenomena properly”. His point was that I do not have any legitimacy to be there and talk about these issues in terms of the historical colonialist relations between Europe and Latin-America. I tried to explain that it is not of course my point to tell about the best models of multiculturalisms and I am very critical towards colonialism and most of the European models as well. To convince him about this was hard because of his very negative attitude, but also because of simultaneous translation used in the class. In the end the Dean of the faculty removed the student from the class for disturbing my lecture. However, I guess we managed to find some kind of understanding as he publicly said “I agree with you, I love this man” when he went out. It was a pity that I did not have possibility to discuss with him about colonialism and postcolonial approach(es) any longer.

4. The issues of multiculturalism are popular among researchers and academia, but less understood by artists and cultural managers. Could you give few examples of the practical implementation of multiculturalism in artistic practices?

I am not quite sure if I agree with the statement in the question, because to me it seems that artists and art world have been dealing with multicultural issues already for long, and cultural managers have “wakened” to the issue as well. It seems to me that multiculturalism has perhaps already passed the art world as a trendy issue… There are already a lot of existing examples of dealing with multiculturalism in arts and art organizations. Here are few practices which I know from Finland and Nordic countries:  Immigrant associations have had amateur art activities since the beginning of 1990s and recently they have also affiliated more or less professional artists. Cultural associations of the Roma are quite active and organize Roma arts and artists. The professional and amateur art activities of the Sami have already since mid 1990s been autonomously taken care of the own representative body of the Sami, Sami parliament. Recently particular arts council funding strands for immigrant artists and multicultural arts projects have risen. Locally the galleries, museums and artists have lot of cooperation and have got artists with Nordic or immigrant background involved in intercultural and integrative “multicultural activities”. What still have remained rather untouched by explicit multicultural approaches are the mainstream cultural events. On the one hand, many of them are multicultural by their founding nature as the performers very often share different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. On the other hand, not many minority members do know about them or find their ways to them. Thus the instruments for increasing minority participation and access could be still improved a lot. However, many examples show that the position of minorities among the audiences should not be over-emphasized, because the participants do not want to be treated differently, even – or especially – if they belong to minorities.

5. In August 2010 you gave a keynote speech at the 6th International Conference of Cultural Policy Research. What was your personal impression of the Conference? What were the main benefits for you as a result of your participation?

To my understanding the conference was success. People heard interesting speeches and papers and got new fruitful contacts, and the old networks strengthened. I know that at least three joint publications and several research projects have been constituted on the basis of the discussions in that conference. The main benefit for me personally was to get good critical feedback to my conference paper, which is now being processed into submitted article manuscript. The keynote speech – which is published in the issue 2/2011 of the Nordisk Kulturpolitisk Tidskrift – was an educative personal challenge as I had not really given keynote speeches before that. It also brought new contacts for me as many people approached me after the speech to continue the conversation. 

6. What motivated you to start an academic and research career in the cultural policy field? Do you have any “role model”, or a person who helped you the most in your professional development?

Initially: money J. I was making my dissertation on Finnish immigrant associations to sociology and facing the end of one financing period when Professor Anita Kangas suggested me to apply in an ongoing cultural policy doctoral student financing call. I did and got the funding, which also settled that I did a cultural policy dissertation within the discipline of sociology. Then when the lectureship at the Master’s programme of cultural policy was established in 2006, I applied to it and got the position. After a year the position was regularized.

I cannot say that I have any role models. However, I do follow certain theoretical and methodological “gurus” like 99% of researchers do.  Prof. Kangas has been the person supporting me the most with my career development in the field of cultural policy research as she and her contacts have opened many doors for me to networks and publications, but also current cultural policy trends and discussions on them.

7. What are your next research plans?

Right now I am making my post doc research on the history of governance of the Roma and the Sami in Finland and in other Nordic countries to some extend. The research touches upon the time between 16thcentury and 1917 (Independence of Finland). I investigate which were the main political rationalities of this governance and how these rationalities implemented through different kinds of technical and practical solutions.  The ultimate aim is to see what kind of discourses and practices there are on the background of the recent assimilative and integrative multiculturalisms in Finland and Nordics. We have also put quite a lot effort to research project on urbanization of indigenous peoples and cultures in northern and southern circumpolar areas. Perspectives of the planned project are cultural policies on the urbanized indigenous groups, cultural sustainability and cultural rights. This is really something that I would like to develop in the near future, because it is so acute topic considering the huge cultural changes and challenges indigenous peoples are facing in these areas, the true realization of human and cultural rights and the preservation of unique forms of the intangible and tangible heritage of humanity, but also because of the recognition of different epistemic models of understanding the urban living. Right now I am finishing couple scientific articles in relation to the previous topics. I am also writing couple of book manuscripts at the moment: one being an English text book on multicultural cultural policy and the other – more polemic – book in Finnish on the pervasive and hegemonic entrepreneurial ethos, including focus on the cultural sector.

8. What do you do in your free time? Do you have a passion for the arts outside of your work?

Most of my free time goes with my two years old daughter and the family. I also play football and futsal, snowboard and try to spend as much time in nature as possible. In terms of modern and late modern art, I am mostly keen on critical visual arts. I try to visit exhibitions once a month at least.  Music – especially alternative genres and scenes like punk, indie and drum’n bass – is close to my heart as well. I do practice some photographing myself and to some extent have greater passion for photographs as an art form as well.  In addition I belong to a group of hobbyists in archaeology and that takes a major part of my leisure. In this context I am interested in ancient arts, especially rock art (petroglyphs and rock paintings).  Last August we organized a week trip to North-Karelia and White Sea regions in Russia for this purpose. In 2012 I plan to visit river Umba in Kola Peninsula.

——-

You can read the interview also on the Young Cultural Policy Researchers Forum on LabforCulture: http://www.labforculture.org/en/groups/open/young-researchers-forum/voices-and-viewpoints/93088

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

Cultural policies: relevance to real life

16 Dec 2011

Aimed at providing young/early career cultural policy researchers with the opportunity to meet fellow researchers, share their experiences and analyse topical research issues regarding content and methodology, the YCPR Forum brought together in Helsinki, on the 11-12 October 2011, researchers, students, academics and cultural policy experts in the cultural field drawn from a wide range of countries in Europe and beyond.

One of the workshops with young researchers during the Forum in Helsinki was on how cultural policies are relevant to real life, addressing topics such as: creative cities, creativity in everyday life, support for the creative economy, the place and role of small cities in cultural policy formulation, cultural empowerment and revitalization through the arts. We discussed the following questions:

Here are some of the findings and conclusions as a result of the vivid one hour discussion:

  1. It is important that cultural policy research is visible on local level. How do we use local media to make our work disseminated: both through conventional and non-conventional online media (social networks, web 2.0 tools, etc.) is important. Policy research is useful when it has an applicable element/s.
  2. The level of policy formulation, development and application is different in different countries. It is important to realize at which “cycle of policy development” a country is before judging is a policy document, article or research useful or not.
  3. Having a legal framework does not mean having a well elaborated cultural policy. This is only one part of the overall policy-development.
  4. Civil society organizations have an important role to play for all lobbying and advocacy efforts to apply a participatory approach to policy making. Cultural actors have to be active contributors to the overall policy-making process at local and national level. Experts and professionals in culture need to elaborate good ideas in a consulting mode, which can further help shaping, changing and improving cultural policy.
  5. Policy-making is a complex process, and not a simple one. It needs setting up “strategies for research” and universities, research institutions and other knowledge-based bodies are the one to work on this process, together with all local stakeholders.
  6. Communities and audiences need to also be involved in policy-making through surveys to set up policy objectives in an open collaborative manner. It is important to elaborate a local cultural policy in a flexible way-to be able to incorporate future goals and not to be rigid.
  7. Culture and arts has to be part of policy formulation and development in other fields: e.g. education, social sphere, environment, health care etc.
  8. Researchers have to contribute to the strategic visions at local level, helping for maximizing the utilization of the local resources, and at the same time-examining local needs. Much more field studies and surveys among local communities should be done to understand where their future expectations are in terms of development of arts and culture in a specific city or region.
  9. The “rebranding of a city” is a popular concept nowadays: and culture and arts has an important role to play in this process. Many cities and regions of cities look at how to use arts and artistic activities to revitalize abandoned areas, refresh the city life, and motivate citizens to work, live and create there.
  10. Cultural policies of a city should reflect also the need of young artists to create and disseminate their works of art online. Online technologies certainly change the way we create, and government support for artistic projects at all levels should consider these digital changes. We need more research on how policies and new technologies are connected (or not) on a city-level.
  11. Young researchers often face difficulty in finding the right “language” with policy-makers who have been in the field for many years and use concepts and tools not that relevant to the changing realities.

—-

Initiated in 2006 by the ECF and managed since 2008 by ENCATC, the Young Cultural Policy Research Forum has proven to be over the years an ideal occasion for young cultural researchers to expand their network and explore new cooperation opportunities as well as publishing possibilities.

—–

Photos:  Julius Töyrylä

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

Comparative cultural policies and using ICTs in cultural management: A viewpoint by Marco Antonio Chavez-Aguayo

25 Nov 2011

Marco Antonio Chavez-Aguayo is one step away to complete his PhD degree. He is going to be the first graduate of the new PhD programme in Culture and Heritage Management of the University of Barcelona (Spain) -one of the fewest PhD programmes in the world with this major and especially in the Spanish-speaking world. He expects to defend his doctoral thesis in January 2012. Marco is from Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico, living in Barcelona since 7 years. He has worked at the University of Barcelona as lecturer and researcher, studied at this University a Master’s degree in Cultural Management, and another one in Comparative Studies at the University Pompeu Fabra, also in Barcelona. He has been also visiting researcher at the University of Glasgow (UK) and at the University of Guadalajara (Mexico), doing research for his PhD thesis. Currently, he is a lecturer at The Open University (UK) in an online course of the BSc (Hons) of Psychology, and is looking for new projects to undertake.

1. Marco, the PhD thesis you just finished and are about to defend is on comparative cultural policies at a subnational level. How did you get interested in this topic and what are your main research questions?

First of all, thank you very much, Lidia, for this interview. I follow up the online forum since a long time and I wish that this becomes a great place to share and to build networks between young researchers on cultural policies around the world. I am very keen to see how it looks the refurbishment of the website and all its new features. I hope many more people gets involved from different parts of the world and in different stages of their research lives, so we can have a rich environment with the help of new technologies.

My PhD thesis is about arts councils and the arm’s length principle, but my main interest was to carry out a comparative research between three local institutions at sub-national level. I discovered there was an arts council in Jalisco (the state in Mexico where is my birthplace) and I started wondering if it was set up on the same principle as the arts councils in the UK and in other parts of the world. Then I wondered what would be the differences and similarities between the arts councils. At the same time, in Catalonia, Spain, a public discussion started about creating an arts council. So, I asked myself: why arts councils are apparently so important bodies and what is their uniqueness? That’s how I started my research.

I knew that the arts councils are intended to work under the arm’s length principle (or at least, this was the original intention), but I wanted to discover is it so. I also wanted to find out what was the main reason that in Jalisco, Mexico, the arts council was created more than 20 years ago if there seems not to be any connection in that time with the European or other countries’ arts councils. I am very intrigued about how cultural policies from one country influence other countries and are there policies copied from one context to another without adapting them.

One of the findings in my thesis is that an arts council and an “arm’s length principle” are two different things, and the second one is more of a theoretical character. An arts council does not necessarily mean a body operating under the arm’s length principle, as it seems. Of course, there are many more findings in the thesis, but this can be one of the most important.

2. I read that you had the chance to carry out fieldwork in Mexico and UK, as in Spain, to study the cases you were researching. Did you find many differences between cultural policies in those three countries?

My research focused on the sub-national level, so I paid attention to governmental bodies in Jalisco, Scotland and Catalonia, trying to find out how their cultural policies match the reality. I expected to find a lot of differences, as I chose to compare different countries: one from the Anglo Saxon context, one from Continental Europe and one from Latin America. But beyond the differences they can have, I have found interesting similarities: all the three places seems to admire public policies or projects from other place. And they try to incorporate those policies into the specific context, which doesn’t seem to be a problem. The problem is when they just “copy” policies from other places and do not try to adapt them to their specific context. I mean that most of the time they don’t do the appropriate research to find out if the policy can work properly there. One policy can be successful in a specific place, but this doesn’t mean that implemented in a different context would become successful as well in the same way. This happens at least with the arts councils. They started as a concept in the UK, and then spread over the Commonwealth countries as well as beyond. There are public and academic discussions in the last decade about their suitability und usability. In some cases of countries in Continental Europe or Latin America, the idea of arts councils is just “imported”, focusing in their “pros” and ignoring the discussions about their suitability and critical perspectives. I have found such evidences in Catalonia. They looked at other countries arts councils’ (specially the UK) and wanted to introduce an arts council in Catalonia. The result was not very successful and it is even in danger to be almost eliminated after just a couple of years of existence.

On another hand, in Scotland there is criticism about the dependency of the local cultural policy to London – shifting the focus of public policy support in the last few years from “culture” to “creative industries”.

Finally, in Jalisco there seems to be no connection to other countries’ experiences in relation to creation and running of arts council. Mexico has a lot of influence from the USA in their policies, but the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) seems to be not the only inspiration. There is an overall intention in the country to have arts councils: at federal level, the main public body for culture is called an “arts council” (the National Council for Culture and Arts, CONACULTA), but it works completely like a ministry. And both a Ministry and an Arts Council exist in Jalisco. From my point of view, there are traces of influence from European cultural policies as well.

There are other similarities of public policies for the arts: some politicians seem to be similar everywhere; culture is the “Cinderella” of the public policies; there is always a few money for cultural projects, and now even fewer: considering the unfavorable global economic context.

There is still a lot to research. I am still intrigued by many things. I am aware that my PhD thesis is just at the beginning of my research career.

3. What was the methodology you used in your research?

I used mainly a qualitative methodology in my research. I found out that this approach was not very much applied: at least not here in Barcelona. My degree is in Psychology, so I feel more comfortable being surrounded by humans rather than numbers. Luckily I could find very interesting bibliography supporting qualitative research in a comparative study, and case study analysis was the best method to reach my objectives. I did interviews, observation and documentary work in the local contexts.

I can say that working on a PhD thesis is certainly very stressful and tiring, but it is also enjoyable and satisfactory. I really enjoyed working on it. One of the things of my thesis that makes me feel happy with the result is that I pursue my actual interests and I was quite motivated. This gave me the energy to go on and to complete it. Choosing a methodology that made me feel comfortable is another reason to be happy with the result.

4. One of your areas of research and professional interests is “creativity and cultural production in the virtual world”. How, on your view, the digitalization era changes the ways in which we create and disseminate cultural and artistic content nowadays?

I think digitalization and new technologies are changing and challenging many things: our profession, our researches, our teaching, and even our relations. If we are able to chat, speak or watch a person online on real time, who is probably in the other side of the world, why are we not going to be able to perform and share artistic content online on real time as well? And where there is an artistic or cultural content, there should be a job for cultural managers: with changing functions and responsibilities, considering also the online space and the role of users as active participants.

I have tested this thought with a project in Second Life which I have been developed with a team since 2007. Although Second Life does not seem to be the ultimate platform for a virtual world (I hope to see other initiatives progressing in further years, like those based in OpenSim, for example), a developed virtual world could become for many people a stage or a gallery to share their creations or their performances. I think this is one of the many doors that the new technologies are opening to our profession and we have to keep our minds open, as well to face the constant changes and find how to cope with them.

5. What is your project in Second Life about?

We run a virtual land that shows the cultural heritage of Jalisco (Mexico). We have there virtual replicas of tangible and intangible heritage such as representative buildings, landscapes, monuments, sculptures, nature, tours, markets, handcrafts, furniture, dressings, food, drinks, music, etc. As Second Life is a virtual world where you can interact with the environment and even contribute with the content which you can create, the virtual representations of the users, the “avatars”, can enter the buildings, visit the places, play, interact, meet people, party, etc. What you can do there is indeed very interesting!

I also work with “Opera Joven”: a non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion and diffusion of culture and arts. It specializes mainly in the cultural heritage of Mexico and the State of Jalisco. It has been recognized and awarded with prizes and scholarships from various governments, public and private entities. We put on stage in Jalisco diverse original plays. Also, we organize in Second life live music concerts, ballet, poetry readings, dance parties, exhibitions, etc., with artists from all around the world. In addition to organizing events and art projects, it is also dedicated to educational and research activities about culture, arts and cultural heritage.

6. Do you think cultural managers efficiently use Web 2.0 tools and other new technologies in their daily operations? What are the opportunities and restrains in this respect?

I think we should use it much more and much better. New technologies are constantly evolving and it is better if we keep updated and take advantage of them. They can be a great help and a very useful tool. For example, we can start thinking of how to use Facebook, Twitter, etc., and other social networks not just for leisure, but also for professional reasons. Many institutions, organizations, governments, media, politicians, and even academics post daily useful information on real time. This is a very inspiring way to keep track on the topics and issues which we want to mutually update each other. There is always a way to keep your private information and professional affiliations separately and to decide whom and how to contact: the online platforms give options for such a choice.

7. What is your hobby and affiliation with an art form?

I love music. I am an opera singer, a tenor “leggiero”. I studied opera performance in Mexico for more than 11 years. I also studied other subjects like theatrical performance, piano, harmony and counterpoint. I performed in several theatre plays and operas in Mexico. Now in Barcelona I focused a lot in my studies and could not do much about my singer career. But in the meantime I found the way to perform and to reach a specific audience for my art: again, in Second Life. My virtual “personality”, Brent Renard has performed live opera concerts since 2007 and has a considerable number of followers from around the world and a fan club. For me, as an artist and as a cultural manager, as well as researcher, it has been very interesting to find a way and learn how to plug in a microphone in a console and then in a home-made-server to stream my voice live – singing for an international audience, who “attends” my concert and listens in a real-time-basis, providing feedback. And all this happens from home! This is just one of the many examples of what you can do with the new technologies.

8. Once you have finished your PhD, are you going back to Mexico or going to stay in Barcelona?

That is a difficult question! I don’t know at this stage. I love my country and I am always thinking about it. That is why in my researches and projects, I always try to involve the city and the region where I was born. (My Master’s thesis was an analysis of the legal framework of Jalisco concerning the cultural heritage protection) On another hand, there is no reason for not loving Barcelona, right? It is just an amazing place. I believe in both places there are big challenges for a cultural manager and in both places our profession is very much needed – maybe in different ways. So, the time will tell. My best option would be to be in both at the same time. Can this be possible?!

———-

Read the interview also on the Young Cultural Policy Researchers Forum.

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

“Culture Forecast”: Academics, policy-makers, artists and students addressed the Future in Helsinki

15 Nov 2011

ENCATC, the leading European network on cultural management and cultural policy education, held its 19th Annual Conference and General Assembly on 12 -14 October 2011 in Helsinki, Finland. Co organized by five Finnish Universities of Applied Sciences (HUMAK, Metropolia, Novia, Mikkeli and Seinäjoki), and with the support of Cupore Foundation for Cultural Policy Research, TAKU Art and Culture Professionals Trade Union and To Culture With Love, this international event attracted over 300 participants from 39 countries.

The theme of the Conference “Forecasting Culture” was explored by three keynote speakers and cultural experts Dr Saara Taalas, Dr Katri Halonen and Dr Lidia Varbanova, who inspired constructive debates and provided valuable insight, fresh input and innovative ideas for cultural organisations to ride the waves of change.

Committed to stimulating cultural policy research, ENCATC put the spotlight on 2 young researchers during the ENCATC Annual Conference: Aleksandar Brkic (Serbia) from the University of Arts in Belgrade was awarded the 8th Cultural Policy Research Award worth €10,000, whilst Thomas Perrin (France) from PACTE-Grenoble University and IUEE-Barcelona received the first Mark Schuster Prize. Other research opportunities available at the ENCATC Annual Conference included the 5th Young Cultural Policy Researchers Forum as well as ENCATC’s 2nd Annual Research Session, an ideal platform for researchers both to present their recent work to a wide audience and to strengthen their research knowledge.

The 4th Annual meeting of each of ENCATC’s 8 Thematic Areas, including the newly created “Performing Arts Management”, were also held during the Annual Conference in Helsinki.  Participants attended study visits of six cultural organisations across the Finnish capital, where new creative activities, projects, or businesses which have succeeded in Helsinki were explored as sources of inspiration.

The Conference in Helsinki was also the opportunity to unveil the prototype of a major new initiative, the ENCATC Journal of cultural policy and cultural management, a new online tool aimed at stimulating the debate on the topics of cultural management and cultural policy among scholars, educators, policy makers and cultural managers. The Journal is based on a multidisciplinary perspective and aims at connecting theory and practice in the realm of the cultural sector.

During the 19th ENCATC General Assembly, ENCATC members were invited to elect the ENCATC Board for the next 2 years, and renewed their trust in Cristina Ortega Nuere, University of Deusto, Institute of Leisure Studies (Spain), ENCATC President, Gerald Lidstone, Goldsmiths University of London, Institute for Creative and Cultural Entrepreneurship (United Kingdom), ENCATC Vice-President, Blanka Chladkova, Janacek Academy of Music and Performing Arts in Brno (Czech Republic), Treasurer, and Fabio Donato, University of Ferrara; MuSeC – Department of Economics, Institutions, Territory (Italy). The ENCATC membership elected Manuele Debrinay-Rizos from ENSATT Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Techniques du Théâtre (France), Jaakko Pitkanen, from Mikkeli University of Applied Sciences (Finland), and Annick Schramme from the University of Antwerp/Antwerp Management School (Belgium) as ENCATC Secretary to replace Jacques Bonniel, Pia Strandman and Svetlana Waradzinova who had to leave for the end of their 6 years mandate.

Cristina Ortega Nueres, ENCATC President, announced that the 20th ENCATC Annual Conference will be taking place in September 2012 in London, UK. Next year’s Annual Conference will represent a milestone for ENCATC, as the network celebrates its 20th anniversary. Provisionally entitled “Cultural networking: Sustainable Strategies and Innovative Actions”, the theme for the 20th ENCATC Annual Conference will address European networks in the current context of globalisation and the challenges in the cultural arena.

More information about the main outcome of the conference?

——-

Photos: Julius Töyrylä

 

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

The world of arts and sustainability

26 Oct 2011

Dr. Lidia Varbanova, Research Associate with the David O’Brien Centre for Sustainable Enterprise, discusses with us about arts/artists in a sustainability context.

In part 2 of 4 video post, Dr. Varbanova shares her thoughts about how artists are critical in building awareness, engaging audiences and encouraging a cross disciplinary dialogue about sustainability. More to come …

For part 1 of 4 of this video series, please click here.

—-

The Sustainable Enteprise Blog Project (SEBP) seeks to create an online blog community to widely disseminate the ideas of a core collective of bloggers, around sustainability challenges/issues facing organizations.  It will seek to engage the public, especially young professional working adults, to empower them to act in their own work settings. By creating topics for debate and initiating discussion circles around enterprise sustainability we hope to bridge the gap between academic peer-reviewed research and the people who need information to act on.  The blog is supported by a core group of bloggers, who are academic and professional experts in the field of sustainability, along with the technical/administrative assistance from the David O’Brien Centre for Sustainable Enterprise (DOCSE) to help facilitate clear coherent discussions.  Core bloggers have the opportunity to expose their research and ideas to the public.

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 

Cultural workers in between the local creative industries and global trends: Jaka Primorac shares

23 Oct 2011

Jaka Primorac works as a Research Fellow at the Department for Culture and Communication at the Institute for International Relations in Zagreb, Croatia. She holds a PhD in Sociology from Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Zagreb. Her primary research focus is on cultural and creative industries, cultural labour and digital culture. She worked on a number of research projects in Croatia and abroad (e.g. for ERICarts Institute, ELIAMEP , European Parliament), and is a co-author of the county profile for COMPENDIUM of Cultural Policies and Trends in Europe. She was the winner of Cultural Policy Research Award in 2005.

1. Jaka, you are currently a Research Fellow at the Department for Culture and Communication of the Institute of International Relations in Zagreb.  In your research work, you look at the co-relations between globalization and local development in the field of culture. What in your opinion are the main trends, especially related to the countries of Southeastern Europe?

When looking at the global influences and local cultural change in Southeastern Europe, there are several trends that could be highlighted. Firstly, this is the influence of the global cultural industries and their impact on local level – this involves mainly the re-interpretation of their formats that can be rather diversified according to the local context. Secondly, in most of the countries of Southeastern Europe, we have the development of our ‘own’ local cultural production that is small-scale, where the markets are rather fragmented. Cultural communication and cooperation in the region are rather limited, and in the recent years new/old connections started to emerge – mainly between the countries of ex-Yugoslavia. The situation for financing cultural field was problematic in the past, but the influences of the global recession made the situation even more difficult. The financial cuts for culture are present either on the state level (and in the countries of Southeastern Europe this level of funding is very important), local government level or from the sponsors or donators.

Thirdly, there are opportunities provided by the globalization processes through possibilities of developing specific niches of local cultural production and opening these niches to the broader global (niche) audiences and in this way of broadening the cultural markets and their influence. This can be achieved through the usage of new emerging digital tools, although one should not be too techno-optimistic. Other new approaches to cultural communication and collaboration could be developed, that involve more participatory approach in decision-making. As an example of such different approach I would mention Croatian Clubture network as a non-profit participatory network that gathers independent cultural organizations.

I would say that this is a very difficult time for the cultural field in the whole of Europe and globally as well, and the answer lies in the structural changes that would benefit culture as well.

2. Your PhD thesis, which you defended in 2010, is titled: “The Changes in Structure of Work in Creative Economy: Culture, Transition and Creative Class”.  Could you share with us why you were inspired by this topic? What are the main outcomes of your research?

I was inspired to do this research for two main reasons. Firstly, I have noted that there is a lack of research on cultural labour, especially on cultural actors themselves. Even the classics of cultural theory such as Raymond Williams were not so much interested on the conditions of those who make culture and how they live from it. Secondly, research that focused on the transition processes in Southeastern Europe, scarcely tackled the aspects of cultural transition. The notion of entering post-transitional phase was mainly done looking at the economic and political sphere, while the cultural was neglected. These are the ‘gaps’ that I have tried to supplement with my work.

In my research I have showed how the specificities of work in creative economy have characteristics of nonstandard work, but also of underemployment and voluntary work, and that this situation is even more precarious for cultural workers in Southeastern Europe due to the general unfavourable conditions of its’ creative economy. New policies for protection of work rights need to be developed as the current ones do not function to full extent and leave cultural workers to develop their own tools for protecting their work. On the basis of the researched data on work in/and creative economy I have showed that the processes of rationalization of the field, the development of local production, influence of new technologies, and opening of cultural consumption towards new formats are still under way. Therefore, we can say that in the countries of Southeastern Europe the processes of cultural transition are still not finished.

 3. In the last few years you have been participating in numerous projects, led by ERICarts Institute, ELIAMEP Institute and other organizations. Which one of them had an influence on you in terms of helping you to work in a collaborative mode on a research project as well as understand multicultural aspects at work? Why?

Every project has its own challenges and benefits, and I have learned a lot from each project that I’ve participated in. Nevertheless, I would say that working both on the COMPENDIUM project for ERICarts and on Seventh Framework project MEDIADEM for ELIAMEP I got an insight into richness of diversity of European cultures, their similarities, but also of dangers of misunderstandings when we think that we are speaking of the same issues, when actually we are not. This is always a challenge when doing comparative research projects such as these.

When you mention multicultural aspects, I would like to stress that for me it was important to be part of the organization and to participate at postgraduate courses at the Interuniversity Centre that our Department organized in the period 2002-2006 on the initiative of Dr Nada Švob-Đokić. They were the only such courses at that time that gathered people from Southeastern Europe and that were focused on cultural (policy) research. At the time when cultural communication between the countries of the region was lacking, for me this was important in meeting professionals from cultures so near and yet so far away at that time, and to be able to work with them. I am happy to say that I still continue to collaborate and communicate with many of them.

 4. In 2005 you were the proud Winner of the Cultural Policy Research Award for your research project on position of cultural workers in creative industries of Southeastern Europe. Did this award change your professional perspectives and activities? If yes, in what way?

The award definitively changed my professional perspectives as it provided me with funding to do my research and it opened many doors for acquiring data, going to conferences and workshops, etc.  The publication of my research online gave me more visibility on the European cultural research scene and it provided me with additional networking with colleagues from the field. The CPRA is a really great project and I hope that it shall continue in the future together with the Young Researchers Forum as they give many opportunities for young researchers, and as they further strengthen cultural policy research capacities. I was glad to hear that this year’s award went to Aleksandar Brkić from Serbia, and I am looking forward to reading the outcomes of his research.

 5. Which one of your numerous publications in diverse areas of cultural policy you cherish the most? Why? Which one was the most difficult for you to complete?

It is difficult to pinpoint one publication, as each one is a different struggle in themselves – either because writing is a kind of a “struggle with yourself”, or/and because of a particular conditions, deadlines etc. The publication for Cultural Policy Research Award for me was a particular challenge as it was my first solo publication of a larger scope that was to present me to the European cultural policy research audience. I felt a great responsibility because of the jury who has put a trust in me, and because I wanted to present my work as best as I could.

I still cherish the work that I did for the book ‘The Culture of Oblivion: Industrialization of Cultural Activities’, which was my first co-authored book in Croatian (with Nada Švob-Đokić and Krešimir Jurlin) that was published in 2008 by Jesenski & Turk and Croatian Sociological Society. I am still very much satisfied with the part that I wrote, and the cover of the book has a photograph that I’ve made as well.

6. What do you think are the main changes and challenges in the cultural policy research field in Europe nowadays, especially considering the involvement of emerging researchers?

Since its beginning it has always been difficult for the cultural policy research to be recognized in full in the academic circles, but the situation now is much better than ten years ago – as it was stressed at the last international conference on cultural policy in Jyväskylä. Cultural policy research field is established now with the conferences, courses, journals, awards, etc., but more should be done to connect researchers to do joint research projects. For me the interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary nature of cultural policy research proves to be always challenging: anybody who enters this field should not be put off with the problems that this brings, as the benefits always arrive. I myself start and look at a research work from my background in sociological research, but I always find in-views from other fields to be inspiring for future research.

 7. How do you spend your free time? Are you still interested in photography?

Photography has been my hobby for years now, and this ‘relationship’ has its ups and downs… I would say that I enter a new phase now – with my new camera and a new enthusiasm.

I do like going out – I would say that I am a cultural omnivore as I like going to diverse concerts, cinema and exhibitions. When I am tired of the ‘city life’ I prefer going to the seaside. Recently I started up mountaineering – there is such serenity in the mountains that cannot be found anywhere else. Mountain Velebit has been a particular beautiful discovery for me.

 
No Comments

Posted in Lidia's blogs

 
Page 1 of 71 2 3 4 5»... Last »