Capital Costs: Lottery Funding in Britain and the Consequences for Museums

Abstract

Funding for London museums has increased enormously in recent years. The lottery has contributed hundreds of millions of pounds for capital developments; central government revenue in the tens of millions goes to funding free admission to the national museums and galleries. The research described in this paper focuses on museums that opened lottery-funded capital projects in 2000, and on the relationship between this additional funding and museum attendance. The authors found that the extra money led to extra visits-and for the first time attempted to calculate what those visits cost. This research also looks at whether people chose improved museums over other museums, and briefly investigates the impact on attendance of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease and the downturn in tourism following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Future uncertain: Arts council England's vision for the future of the contemporary visual arts

“…They were due to report back by May 2005 in anticipation of the 2006 Spending ARTICLE IN PRESS 7 One of the legacies of national lottery funding, which has brought an additional £3billion plus to both the arts and heritage since 1994 has been that insufficient revenue was provided to maintain, if not sustain, the capital developments that it funded. This was, however, predicted from the start [61]. ACE's strategy of reflecting on past success constitutes a response to the demands of DCMS and the Treasury.…”

Sector Differences in Conference Facility Refurbishment

“…Grants were not permitted to act as a means to recoup lost revenue. As such there was a desire by museums to source alternative revenue streams to match additional or new financial commitments, which had resulted from HLF-funded capital developments (Rottenberg, 2002;Selwood and Davies, 2005;McPherson, 2006). This desire to diversify revenue sources mirrored further tenets in the Labour Party's post-Thatcherism social policy.…”

“…Capital developments including building renovation, installations of displays and extensive refurbishments at both the national and local levels, rather than the creation of new facilities have al occurred (Heritage Lottery Fund, 2002;Morris, 2005;Selwood and Davies, 2005). Grants were not permitted to act as a means to recoup lost revenue.…”

“…Prior to its commencement museums and galleries found obtaining funding difficult, remembering that the 1990s were a period of real term cuts in museum and gallery funding (Baxter, 2004). Prior to the National Lottery, British museums were described as "tatty and tired" in comparison to other European countries and North America (Selwood and Davies, 2005).…”

The national trust for talent? NESTA and New Labour’s cultural policy

“…While not a New Labour creation, the incoming government was undoubtedly a beneficiary of the relatively large sums of money generated particularly in the Lottery s early years Selwood and Davies 2005). The 1998 Lottery Act, enacted by New Labour, cut the proportion of funding available for the four original good causes arts sport charities and heritage in order to create the New Opportunities Fund iv , though this loss was more than offset by the amount of funds generated for the arts in subsequent years (Hewison, 2011 The proposed remedy for this was ambitious.…”