Museums and other organisations have long grappled with the question of whether a price can be placed on the value of culture. But a raft of reports and initiatives in the past few months has brought it firmly into the spotlight once more.
In April, English culture secretary Maria Miller called on the sector to focus on “economic impact” and promote culture as a “commodity”, to justify public investment.
Lack of insight
Miller’s pronouncements and her department’s policy direction have been greeted with dismay in some quarters. Several cultural value experts felt that Miller’s speech betrayed an alarming lack of insight into their field of research – offering a narrow view of both the arts and their economic impact that completely ignored related benefits such as wellbeing and social justice.
In a move designed to highlight the gulf between the nations, Scotland’s culture minister Fiona Hyslop hit back last month with a speech reaffirming her belief that cultural life and heritage were valuable in themselves and not “merely products that can be bought and sold”.
Nevertheless, in the face of shrinking budgets, it is clear that policy makers in all nations are increasingly looking for a return on investment – and many arts bodies have responded.
In May, Arts Council England and the National Museum Directors’ Council jointly published a report on the contribution of arts and culture to the UK’s national and regional economies.
It found that in 2011, culture generated £5.9bn of gross added value to the UK economy and accounted for 1% of GDP. In addition, the impact of the sector on inbound tourist expenditure amounted to an estimated £856m.
Research by the Local Government Association recently estimated that cultural investment brought an average of £4 into local economies for every £1 spent.
But funding cuts are restricting organisations’ ability to measure value. The regional tourism agency Welcome to Yorkshire, for example, can no longer offer a detailed breakdown of the impact of individual venues on the local economy, making it harder to demonstrate the case for investment.
Alongside the political tussles, a debate has also been taking place among academics and cultural practitioners about how best to measure the visitor experience and the value of culture to the public.
In 2010, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) commissioned a report by cultural policy lecturer Dave O’Brien, who argued that organisations should be pragmatic and use economic valuation techniques recognised by the Treasury to make their case.
Building on this research, Brunel University’s Claire Donovan produced a report for the DCMS this year. She consulted with culture professionals for this, and began by posing questions on her blog (see box).
Holistic approach
She says her research made it clear that there is no one-size-fits-all approach and that large-scale analysis of economic impact would be prohibitively expensive for smaller organisations.
The report advocates a more holistic approach, using economic indicators where possible, in conjunction with quantitative and qualitative measures and narrative evidence. It also recommends creating guidelines and an online resource to bring information from across the sector together in one place.
Perhaps the most significant current research initiative is the Arts and Humanities Research Council’s £2m Cultural Value Project. The two-year initiative will distribute grants to participating higher education bodies (including eligible museums) for projects to explore the philosophy of what cultural value is and tools for assessing it.
Project researcher Patricia Kaszynska says the initiative, which will look at the public and private sectors, aims to “dislodge” the ideological divide between intrinsic and instrumental value that has dogged past projects.
It will explore the impact of cultural engagement on areas such as health, urban regeneration, wellbeing and community cohesion, as well as testing methodologies for gathering evidence, such as digital innovations that can capture the immediate visitor experience rather than asking people to reflect afterwards.
Many smaller projects are also assessing cultural value. Last year, Warwick University lecturer Eleonora Belfi ore launched a blog, the #CulturalValue Initiative, to explore the social impacts of culture and gather evidence that can influence policy.
The site aims to become a meeting place for practitioners, policy makers and the general public to share their thoughts.
The cultural sector has a powerful case to make about its value to society and the economy. The question is whether anyone outside the sector will listen.
http://culturalvalueinitiative.org
In April, English culture secretary Maria Miller called on the sector to focus on “economic impact” and promote culture as a “commodity”, to justify public investment.
Lack of insight
Miller’s pronouncements and her department’s policy direction have been greeted with dismay in some quarters. Several cultural value experts felt that Miller’s speech betrayed an alarming lack of insight into their field of research – offering a narrow view of both the arts and their economic impact that completely ignored related benefits such as wellbeing and social justice.
In a move designed to highlight the gulf between the nations, Scotland’s culture minister Fiona Hyslop hit back last month with a speech reaffirming her belief that cultural life and heritage were valuable in themselves and not “merely products that can be bought and sold”.
Nevertheless, in the face of shrinking budgets, it is clear that policy makers in all nations are increasingly looking for a return on investment – and many arts bodies have responded.
In May, Arts Council England and the National Museum Directors’ Council jointly published a report on the contribution of arts and culture to the UK’s national and regional economies.
It found that in 2011, culture generated £5.9bn of gross added value to the UK economy and accounted for 1% of GDP. In addition, the impact of the sector on inbound tourist expenditure amounted to an estimated £856m.
Research by the Local Government Association recently estimated that cultural investment brought an average of £4 into local economies for every £1 spent.
But funding cuts are restricting organisations’ ability to measure value. The regional tourism agency Welcome to Yorkshire, for example, can no longer offer a detailed breakdown of the impact of individual venues on the local economy, making it harder to demonstrate the case for investment.
Alongside the political tussles, a debate has also been taking place among academics and cultural practitioners about how best to measure the visitor experience and the value of culture to the public.
In 2010, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) commissioned a report by cultural policy lecturer Dave O’Brien, who argued that organisations should be pragmatic and use economic valuation techniques recognised by the Treasury to make their case.
Building on this research, Brunel University’s Claire Donovan produced a report for the DCMS this year. She consulted with culture professionals for this, and began by posing questions on her blog (see box).
Holistic approach
She says her research made it clear that there is no one-size-fits-all approach and that large-scale analysis of economic impact would be prohibitively expensive for smaller organisations.
The report advocates a more holistic approach, using economic indicators where possible, in conjunction with quantitative and qualitative measures and narrative evidence. It also recommends creating guidelines and an online resource to bring information from across the sector together in one place.
Perhaps the most significant current research initiative is the Arts and Humanities Research Council’s £2m Cultural Value Project. The two-year initiative will distribute grants to participating higher education bodies (including eligible museums) for projects to explore the philosophy of what cultural value is and tools for assessing it.
Project researcher Patricia Kaszynska says the initiative, which will look at the public and private sectors, aims to “dislodge” the ideological divide between intrinsic and instrumental value that has dogged past projects.
It will explore the impact of cultural engagement on areas such as health, urban regeneration, wellbeing and community cohesion, as well as testing methodologies for gathering evidence, such as digital innovations that can capture the immediate visitor experience rather than asking people to reflect afterwards.
Many smaller projects are also assessing cultural value. Last year, Warwick University lecturer Eleonora Belfi ore launched a blog, the #CulturalValue Initiative, to explore the social impacts of culture and gather evidence that can influence policy.
The site aims to become a meeting place for practitioners, policy makers and the general public to share their thoughts.
The cultural sector has a powerful case to make about its value to society and the economy. The question is whether anyone outside the sector will listen.
http://culturalvalueinitiative.org
Discussion points on the value of culture
- Why should funds be given to a museum or library rather than a school or hospital?
- Is to want evidence of cultural value the height of “philistinism”?
- Is the economic case the bottom line?
- Do non-economic approaches to valuation have anything meaningful to offer?
- Should cultural organisations be pragmatic, and speak whatever funding language they need to use?
