Policy: Social Impact of the Arts Project - Week 10

From Creative Economy to Creative Society (Stern and Seifert, 2008)

• creative economy has become a popular remedy for blight
• flaws of creative economy policy:
• misperception of culture and creativity as a product of individual genius rather than collective activity
• willingness to tolerate social dislocation in exchange for urban vitality or competitive advantage
• calls for new model of neighborhood-based creative economy
• way to integrate urban neighborhood residents with the regional economy and civil society
• must integrate economic opportunity and social inclusion
• assets-based, treating neighborhoods as potential "cultural hubs;" some have potential to become "natural cultural districts"
• vision must be social, political, economic, and possess rationale
• cultural cluster perspective has greatest potential to meet dual policy goals of economic equality and social inclusion
• gentrification: common objection
• artists are especially vulnerable to winner-take-all dynamic
• creative industries are dominated by jobs with high educational requirements
• creative economic development can expand job opportunities for highly-skilled workers rather than less well-trained urban residents
• relationship between cultural engagement and "collective efficacy" - "social cohesion among neighbors combined with their willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good"
• informal arts have high potential for community building
• culture is linked to neighborhood revitalization by the social organization of the creative economy; culture can create social networks in ways other community activities can't
• "neighborhoods with a critical mass of cultural assets--and a dense web of social networks--are more likely to experience stable social diversity as well as economic revitalization"
• "creative economy perspective misunderstands creativity" (6)
• most culture-based revitalization focuses on downtowns and invests more in high-income residents and visitors; benefit for lower-income residents is usually tied to some trickle-down effect
• smaller-scale projects yield modest direct economic return yet often create spill-over effects that contribute to the quality of community life, which can trigger long-term economic benefits
• creating artists' centers help maximize artistic spillover effects
• culture can foster inclusion, but not automatically

Cultivating "Natural" Cultural Districts (Stern and Seifert, 2008)

• culture can succeed in modern urban revival because arts have become much more active, accessible, and polyglot
• informal social settings are most common venues for creative engagement in low-income urban areas
• natural cultural district
• neighborhood that has spawned a density of assets that sets it apart from other neighborhoods
• clusters encourage innovation and creativity--spur cultural production--push neighborhoods to regeneration tipping-point and attract new services and residents
• occurs without policy intent
• public sector can contribute to the success of these districts by simply doing its job better
• need to develop broader workforce policies for people going into the arts sector
• must be cultivated; difficult to encourage growth without interfering negatively in their uniqueness 
• usually have diverse population that are already involved in creative activities
• many poor urban neighborhoods have these ingredients but lack the consumer base to help them take off
• problem of externalities--people who create social value in these areas often have no way of reaping their full reward from doing so
• think of cultural sector as an ecosystem in which different parts are self-organizing and interdependent
• cities of greater diversity are more likely to have high cultural participation, house cultural groups, and provide support for artists
• possess energy and vitality conducive to creativity
• high levels of cultural production might be product of competition or cooperation
• revitalization relies on both direct economic impact and, perhaps more importantly, impact on the civic life of urban neighborhoods
• two possibile negative consequences for culture-based development: gentrification and expansion of economic inequality
• displacement can occur only when conditions are "right"
• proliferation of informal arts sector is one symptom of expanding inequality within the creative sector
• "The conflict between downtown and neighborhood development is a false choice" (10)
• creative sector excels at and needs to build connections, foster social engagement
• culture is effective at strengthening communities and building bridges between them

Migrants, Communities, and Culture (Stern et. al., 2008)

• Migrant cultural engagement is particularly important for urban neighborhoods
• all immigrants are not alike
• urban cultural scenes offer immigrants links to other social institutions
• immigrants are concentrated at bottom and top of economic ladder
• many have problems translating educational achievement into economic benefits
• institutional barriers to arts, education, employment, and health
• cultural expression is a way for immigrants to define who they are; more than a commodity
• immigrants are likely to participate in informal cultural expression related to themselves, but are less likely to participate in established cultural organizations
• shift balance between nonprofit cultural sector and commercial and informal sectors
• differences between arts organizations are less based on nonprofit vs commercial, but on large vs small
• immigrant groups often provide opportunities for cultural expression alongside other social benefits
• fulfill everyday necessities and self-identity needs
• cultural engagement can promote an assets-based strategy for expanding opportunities for immigrant communities to link to a wider range of services
• immigrant arts have accelerated the growth of the informal sector

Questions/Comments:

• What benefits are gained by thinking of the cultural sector as an "ecosystem"?  How is this different from thinking about the sector as a market?
• How is culture better able to foster inclusion than other types of activities?
• How might it be possible to get immigrants more involved in established arts organizations?  What problems or issues might be involved in drawing them away from their ethnic cultural organizations?  What would the benefits be?
• Why is the distinction between informal, nonprofit, and commercial arts organizations significant?  Is it only important to the structure of the organization?  How does it effect the experiences of the participants?
• Why is the 'conflict between downtown and neighborhood development' a 'false choice'?  How can development occur across geographic lines when resources are often tight?
• How can policy improve the environment for arts organizations?  How, besides providing funding, can they encourage them to succeed and proliferate?
• Should public policy actually be involved in these arts organizations/cultural sector?
• How are direct economic impacts and impacts on the civic life or urban neighborhoods related?  Is their relationship of the 'the chicken and the egg' variety, or is there a clear process in which they occur?

Further Reading:
*highlighted sources in documents
Information on the Rotunda (connected to Penn)