In 2006 John Holden wrote a Demos provocation piece entitled A Change in the Climate, a perceptive analysis of the problems facing local authorities and their role as key cultural providers and community leaders.
Holden argued that the picture was not universally gloomy, but for many local authorities, cultural provision was in trouble "because of the way culture is treated - legislatively, financially and philosophically" and that "the situation is going to get worse unless we do something about it now".
Holden concluded that culture should be seen as a public good, as important as health and education in shaping places, and central to the lives of citizens and the achievement of local authority aims.
But the cuts continue. The rhetoric of "culture and regeneration" and "place shaping" is still there, but often not matched by real vision or action. So, how will culture fare following the global recession?
If things were looking bleak in 2006, they must now be worse for local authorities, which, as part of the public sector, will have to pay for the increases in government borrowing. They need to save £5.5bn by April 2011. After then, who knows?
Some authorities are better than others, and the hubs should be OK, surely? Well, not from recent readings of Museums Journal. Despite the fact that local authorities receiving Renaissance funding entered into agreements with the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) to maintain budgets at a certain level, some seem intent on making cuts that have the potential to go below those thresholds.
This is surely the time for the MLA to get tough with authorities deluded enough to believe hub funding will prop up museums while they reduce core budgets. Renaissance made a huge difference to local authority services. In many cases it saved them, enabling them to reinvent themselves as truly viable organisations contributing towards local and national agendas.
For most, hub status was a reward for failure to invest in buildings, displays and people, addressing a crisis born of penny-pinching and short-termism over decades. Let's hope the Renaissance review recognises the situation is still fragile and that hub funding, like arts council regularly funded organisation status, is a long-term project.
After the credit crunch, the public sector and the creative economy must think and act differently. As recognised in May's Museums Journal, ambitions can be out of sync with the resources available.
Many are stuck with a legacy of dilapidated buildings, stores and galleries as yet untouched by Renaissance and the Lottery. Survival in the post-crunch world will require imaginative leadership. Difficult times demand new solutions. If the formulae of the 1970s and 1980s are used again, many will be in a worse state than they were prior to Renaissance.
Any ideas then? A good place to start is After the Crunch edited by John Holden, John Kieffer, John Newbigin and Shelagh Wright. Drawing together more than 40 contributions from across the creative industries, here are starting points when considering how to position your organisation.
One article provokes thoughts on a current concern: have we got the right business model and should we change it? In Close to Home, Charles Leadbeater states that those based on the creation and secure delivery of content to consumers are going to suffer in an age of fragmented markets where consumers want to share, contribute and access increasingly free content.
He sees cultural experiences as pre-industrial (books, theatres, museums), industrial (TV, film) and digital web (YouTube, Twitter). These experiences can be categorised as enjoy (for example, go to a play); talk (and talk about it later) and do (get involved by blogging, web networks, drawing).
Modern consumers move between the forms easily. Museums are actually well placed, as a visit is a combination of enjoy, talk and do. What we need to understand is that the ratios are changing and that talking and doing are going to take up more of people's time. It's about audiences.
Audiences are increasingly creators, producers, curators, critics, partners, networkers and brokers. A generation has grown up with participation as a given. And yet, we are still sociable and need human connections. Virtual hugs are not enough.
We still need museums. There can be no question that good museums will continue to be vital to the lives of communities as shared spaces rich with possibilities.
To deliver this in the current climate requires hard choices, especially in the local government world of multiple priorities. Leaders within local government need to understand Holden's premise that culture is a universal good and then start to re-model their services to navigate the storm.
Mark Suggitt is a cultural consultant
Holden argued that the picture was not universally gloomy, but for many local authorities, cultural provision was in trouble "because of the way culture is treated - legislatively, financially and philosophically" and that "the situation is going to get worse unless we do something about it now".
Holden concluded that culture should be seen as a public good, as important as health and education in shaping places, and central to the lives of citizens and the achievement of local authority aims.
But the cuts continue. The rhetoric of "culture and regeneration" and "place shaping" is still there, but often not matched by real vision or action. So, how will culture fare following the global recession?
If things were looking bleak in 2006, they must now be worse for local authorities, which, as part of the public sector, will have to pay for the increases in government borrowing. They need to save £5.5bn by April 2011. After then, who knows?
Some authorities are better than others, and the hubs should be OK, surely? Well, not from recent readings of Museums Journal. Despite the fact that local authorities receiving Renaissance funding entered into agreements with the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) to maintain budgets at a certain level, some seem intent on making cuts that have the potential to go below those thresholds.
This is surely the time for the MLA to get tough with authorities deluded enough to believe hub funding will prop up museums while they reduce core budgets. Renaissance made a huge difference to local authority services. In many cases it saved them, enabling them to reinvent themselves as truly viable organisations contributing towards local and national agendas.
For most, hub status was a reward for failure to invest in buildings, displays and people, addressing a crisis born of penny-pinching and short-termism over decades. Let's hope the Renaissance review recognises the situation is still fragile and that hub funding, like arts council regularly funded organisation status, is a long-term project.
After the credit crunch, the public sector and the creative economy must think and act differently. As recognised in May's Museums Journal, ambitions can be out of sync with the resources available.
Many are stuck with a legacy of dilapidated buildings, stores and galleries as yet untouched by Renaissance and the Lottery. Survival in the post-crunch world will require imaginative leadership. Difficult times demand new solutions. If the formulae of the 1970s and 1980s are used again, many will be in a worse state than they were prior to Renaissance.
Any ideas then? A good place to start is After the Crunch edited by John Holden, John Kieffer, John Newbigin and Shelagh Wright. Drawing together more than 40 contributions from across the creative industries, here are starting points when considering how to position your organisation.
One article provokes thoughts on a current concern: have we got the right business model and should we change it? In Close to Home, Charles Leadbeater states that those based on the creation and secure delivery of content to consumers are going to suffer in an age of fragmented markets where consumers want to share, contribute and access increasingly free content.
He sees cultural experiences as pre-industrial (books, theatres, museums), industrial (TV, film) and digital web (YouTube, Twitter). These experiences can be categorised as enjoy (for example, go to a play); talk (and talk about it later) and do (get involved by blogging, web networks, drawing).
Modern consumers move between the forms easily. Museums are actually well placed, as a visit is a combination of enjoy, talk and do. What we need to understand is that the ratios are changing and that talking and doing are going to take up more of people's time. It's about audiences.
Audiences are increasingly creators, producers, curators, critics, partners, networkers and brokers. A generation has grown up with participation as a given. And yet, we are still sociable and need human connections. Virtual hugs are not enough.
We still need museums. There can be no question that good museums will continue to be vital to the lives of communities as shared spaces rich with possibilities.
To deliver this in the current climate requires hard choices, especially in the local government world of multiple priorities. Leaders within local government need to understand Holden's premise that culture is a universal good and then start to re-model their services to navigate the storm.
Mark Suggitt is a cultural consultant
Links
After the Crunch can be downloaded from www.creative-economy.org.uk
After the Crunch can be downloaded from www.creative-economy.org.uk
