Cultural intermediation in the creative urban economy

Phil Jones

School of Geography, Earth & Environmental SciencesUniversity of Birmingham

28 February 2013Cultural Value Project Workshop, Birkbeck

Background

The research problem we identified

• Florida, DCMS, AHRC etc. all tell us how important the creative economy is

• If the ‘creative economy’ is significant, then who is benefiting from it?

• How is the creative economy connected to different communities?

• What processes of ‘cultural intermediation’ operate to make these connections?

What is ‘cultural intermediation’?

• Bourdieu’s (1984): intermediaries as agents who tell communities what cultural phenomena to passively consume

• Hesmondhalgh (2006) argues that the ways of thinking through production-mediation-consumption need to evolve– Reflects changes in these relations through the

rise of the creative industries

Intermediation as connection

• Implicit assumption that connecting more people to the creative economy will reduce inequality

• Cultural intermediation already exists• But

– Is cultural intermediation the best way to make connections?

– Does it function in the most effective fashion?– Can modes of working be found that improve this

‘connecting’ role?

Overall aim

To identify means of enhancing the effectiveness of cultural intermediation as a mechanism for connecting different communities into the broader creative economy

Project

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

WP0 Scoping & Theory Building

WP2 Historic

WP3 Governance

WP1 Valuation & Mapping

WP4 Communities

WP5 Interventions

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

WP0 Scoping & Theory Building

WP2 Historic

WP3 Governance

WP1 Valuation & Mapping

WP4 Communities WP5 Interventions

Research Questions

• To develop techniques to capture the value of cultural intermediation (WP1)

• To examine how cultural intermediation has developed historically, whose interests it has served and what lessons this provides for understanding best practice today. (WP2)

• To critically evaluate the role of intermediaries in the changing governance of cultural economy initiatives and how different actors undertaking cultural intermediation operate within the sector (WP3)

• To explore how intermediation connects communities into the creative economy and how this can be enhanced to break down the tension between hard-to-reach communities and inaccessible cultural resources. (WP4)

Research Questions

• To design and deliver practice-based interventions with local stakeholder panels of academics, policy-makers, community groups and artists to improve the effectiveness of cultural intermediation. (WP5)

• To contribute to academic, policy and practitioner debates on the value of cultural intermediation in shaping creative economy initiatives (WP6)

• To reflexively examine and evaluate the process of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary working through innovative project design and delivery (WP6)

• To produce high-quality academic, policy and artistic outputs based on best practice in knowledge exchange (WP0-6)

Birmingham

Manchester

Ten:8 magazine1975-1985 (1979)

• Founded by Bishton, Brian Homer and John Reardon in 1979. Title derived from the standard size of photographic paper. Initially funded by WM Arts later Arts Council GB.Inspired by Camerawork, East London photographers' collective.

• Aim was ‘to represent the working class and migrant communities’ (Brittain in Dewdney, 2011, p.263) of Birmingham.

Interventions

• Using a practice-based approach to engage participant creativity

• BUT it’s the participants who commission the practice in the first place

• Most flexible part of the project– Part of the budget not predefined except earmarked for

commissions by local panels• How do we measure the value of these?

– (against our aim of connecting communities into the creative economy)

Evaluation

evaluations of cultural projects: general problems

• Data collection, statistics and evidence are a longstanding issue in the cultural sector

• Reflects the problems of defining culture (e.g. Gray 2006, Miles and Sullivan forthcoming)

• And defining what cultural policy is for• ‘the sector is hindered by its failure to clearly articulate

its value in a cohesive and meaningful way, as well as by its neglect of the compelling need to establish a system for collecting evidence around a set of agreed indicators that substantiate value claims’ Scott (2009:198)

Impact measurement

• Social impact (Matarrasso 1997)• Economic impact (ACE 2013)• Cultural impact (WolfBrown 2008)• ....all of which have been critiqued• Economic valuation (O’Brien 2010)• ....is both expensive and controversial in the

cultural sector

Proposed evaluation

• Participatory evaluation• Based on work with young people (Sabo Flores 2008, Miles et

al 2013)• Training sessions for artists, community participants and

academics• Aiming to understand what the participants value about the

projects....• And to help them to capture it....• Whilst providing robust data for academic discussions• Shared ownership and co-creation of research