Comparative Cultural Policy Research in Europe: A Change of Paradigm (original) (raw)
Related papers
Comparative Cultural Policy Research in Europe: A Change of Paradigm (2000)
Canadian Journal of Communication, Vol 27 / No 2, 2002
Parallel to the ongoing European integration process, comparative cultural policy research has changed its orientation and methods during the last thirty years, moving from institutional, almost "diplomatic" exercises to networking exchanges, and has arrived at an approach which favours integrated research projects. Against this background, this paper reviews the methodological problems of and first steps taken towards a more action-oriented and, at the same time, cohesive ("European") concept of cultural research, which extends beyond a mere comparison of national policies and experiences. This is illustrated through individual research projects and the more recent appearance of ERICarts, the European Institute of Comparative Cultural Research.
Accomplishing cultural policy in Europe
Accomplishing Cultural Policy in Europe, 2022
Citation: Mathieu, C & Visanich, V. (2022). Accomplishing cultural policy in Europe: Connections and Illustrations. In C. Mathieu and V.Visanich (eds.), Accomplishing Cultural Policy in Europe: Financing, Governance and Responsiveness (pp.1-16), United Kingdom: Routledge. Chapter 1: Accomplishing Cultural Policy in Europe: Connections and Illustrations Christopher Mathieu and Valerie Visanich Abstract This chapter develops the concept of “accomplishing” cultural policy and discusses it as an anchor-point for the chapters appearing in this volume. The accomplishing approach marks an interest in understanding the total reach of cultural policy from its formulation, to its facilitation of and impact on the creation of cultural offerings, to how these meet audiences, to evaluation. The conceptualisation also sees accomplishing as an ongoing process, with origins at different governmental levels, taking place across different artistic fields in non-linear manners. It is thus not reducible to a policy cycle or single project. This chapter outlines how the selections in the volume focusing on different dimensions or phases of this wider, ongoing process in a variety of artistic and cultural genres illustrate the nuances and variations in how accomplishing cultural policy across Europe takes place. Simultaneously the studies also highlight similarities and differences across contexts in governance procedures, how financing is used and its impact, and various forms and relationships of responsiveness, such as artist’s and cultural creators’ responsiveness to policy signals, policy-makers responsiveness to trends and social groups, and artists and cultural creators’ responsiveness to audiences and participants.
Mirroring Jacques Delors’ much quoted ‘No one falls in love with a common market,’ there has been an increased emphasis on ‘culture’ as a vital tool in the European Union (EU) integration process. Yet, how these programs for ‘cultural exchange and dialogue’ affect artistic production, and reception, is rarely discussed. Drawing on interviews with actors in Berlin and Istanbul who engage with cultural policy in the European arena (2005–2008), this paper aims to illuminate the tensions that this nascent European cultural policy has engendered, not least with regard to the EU stipulations on national cultural sovereignty. I argue that while EU cultural initiatives indeed produce a kind of ‘Europeanization,’ they do so mainly through thematic and institutional incorporation. However, this type of integration tends to recast power differentials within the EU and beyond, despite proclaimed goals to the contrary, as cultural exchange programs tend to reinforce distinctions between ‘art proper’ and ‘ethnic cultural production.’
Croatian International Relations Review, 2018
The current political situation and challenges facing today’s Europe have a strong impact on cultural policy domain and on the conditions under which cultural sector operates today. Although the European Union has not been involved in formulating an explicit common cultural policy, it has been indirectly contributing to the creation of common cultural policy frameworks through its soft cultural policy instruments and mechanisms (e.g. Open Method of Coordination – OMC, the Creative Europe programme, the European Capitals of Culture (ECoC) and others). The question is whether such an approach is still adequate for today’s cultural and social challenges, and whether national level cultural policies can tackle complex global problems, especially in the context where many other public policies are increasingly influencing the field of culture. These issues motivated researchers from the Department for Culture and Communication of the Institute for Development and International Relations ...
Cultural Policies in Europe.From a State to a City-Centered Perspective on Cultural Generativity
2010
Cultural policy in Europe is deeply rooted in the Welfare State doctrine that has been prevailing during the last half century. Its implementation has gone along with the invention and rise of educational policy, social policy and health policy. This paper sketches its evolution as a four phase move towards what has been emerging as the central dual content of the current public cultural policy: preserving and promoting heritage, and bringing the creative industries at the core of the so-called knowledge society. The general evolutionary trend shows four distinct phases: 1) the creation of a systematic cultural supply policy based on a limited definition of culture suitable for public financing and based on a vertical concept of democratization by conversion; 2) the gradual decentralization of public action, which leads to an increasing disparity in its aims and functions, and which challenges the initial universalist, top-down egalitarian model; 3) a revision of the legitimate scop...
New cultural policies in Europe : toward a social fonction of culture and arts
2011
Cultural policies and public cultural expenses have often, in the 80’s and 90’s, been legitimated by local and national government by emphasizing the economic contribution of culture and arts, either directly (as an economic sector per/se) or indirectly (by increasing the attractiveness of a place for tourists or enterprises).In the past decade, this discourse underwent a considerable change, in the context of both the economic crisis and the increasing social and ethnic diversity of Europe, notably of its large cities.In this context, metropolitan cultural policies are ready to point atthe “social" and integrating function of cultural institutions and events. Art is to provide communication, distraction, solace, but also social cement to increasingly hybrid societies.There is no will anymore to bring underprivileged categories of the population to major works of art considered asvaluable, yet untouchable good. Today the real need seems to be to bring culture in its various and...
The Cinderella of European Cultural Policies
There is a realm of culture which – no matter how big it is in certain parts of Europe – exists without an established consensual name, not just in the lingua franca of cultural policies (English) but in other vernaculars, too. Cultural centres or houses of culture are most often used but similar approximations do not prevail for the professionals and the activities connected to those houses. In the next pages the term socio-culture, a loan translation of the German Soziokultur will be applied.
European Union and Challenges of Cultural Policies: Critical Perspectives. An Introduction
Croatian International Relations Review, 2018
This introductory article contextually frames the contributions to the special issue gathering articles critically addressing the key questions and challenges that the European Union (EU) and national cultural policies are facing in the 21st century. Interdisciplinary contributions in this special issue point to the diverse understandings of culture, the complexity of the EU governance system, and the discrepancy and mismatch of the national and EU levels that regulate the field of culture. The authors detect the inconsistent development strategies on different policy levels, and point to the democratic deficits of the EU governance system and EU policies. Selected contributions address a further focal shift of EU culture policies toward an economistic orientation to culture, while others address the need for a more critical approach that moves beyond predominantly positivistic and normative approaches to cultural policy research in Europe.