Measuring the value of culture

Bille, Trine

doi:10.1080/10286639509357988

Cited by 49 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is a challenge that not only consultants have risen to, for which they have been amply rewarded, but also academics who should have known better, and it is this that has resulted in the proliferation of methodologically unsound impact studies that have been the subject of some quite extensive scholarly critique (eg. Hansen, 1995;van Puffelen, 1996;Belfiore, 2002;Merli, 2002). Thirdly, considerably more time and resources have been spent on looking for 'proof' of impacts than on actually trying to understand them.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the Social Impacts of the Arts

Belfiore

Беннетт

2007

International Journal of Cultural Policy

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents a critical discussion of the current debate over the social impacts of the arts in the UK. It argues that the accepted understanding of the terms of the debate is rooted in a number of assumptions and beliefs that are rarely questioned.The paper goes on to present the interim findings of a three-year research project, which aims to rethink the social impact of the arts, with a view to determining how these impacts might be better understood. The desirability of a historical approach is articulated, and a classification of the claims made within the Western intellectual tradition for what the arts 'do' to people is presented and discussed.Key words: social impacts of the arts, cultural history, civilising mission, intellectuals and cultural policy, unconscious and un-measurable impacts, negative impacts; evidence-based policy.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the Social Impacts of the Arts

Belfiore

Беннетт

2007

International Journal of Cultural Policy

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The methodologies that have been so far applied to the evaluation of the socio-economic impacts of the arts have been subjected to extensive criticism both by arts professionals -who have also been lamenting the excessive instrumentalization of the arts that, they argue, has accompanied these developments (see, for example, Brighton 1999Brighton , 2006Hytner 2003;Tusa 2000Tusa , 2002Tusa , 2007 -and academics, who have exposed the flaws, ideological bias and advocacy purposes lurking in many of them (Belfiore 2002;Hansen 1995;Merli 2002;van Puffelen 1996;Selwood 2002). Nevertheless, impact evaluation, and performance evaluation more generally, are still popular, not just in the arts and culture, but in the public sector as a whole (Flynn & Hodkinson 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the “Toolkit Approach”: Arts Impact Evaluation Research and the Realities of Cultural Policy‐Making

Belfiore¹,

Беннетт²

2010

Journal for Cultural Research

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a reflection on the possibility and potential advantages of the development of a humanities-based approach to assessing the impact of the arts, which attempts to move away from a paradigm of evaluation based on a one-size-fits-all model usually reliant on empirical methodologies borrowed from the social sciences. A "toolkit approach" to arts impact assessment, as the article argues, demands excessive simplifications, and its popularity is linked to its perceived advocacy potential rather than to any demonstrable contribution it may make to a genuine understanding of the nature and potential effects of artistic engagement. The article also explores the relationship between research, advocacy and the actual realities of policy-making with a view to proposing a critical research agenda for impact evaluation based on Carol Weiss's notion of the "enlightenment" function of policy-oriented research. In particular, the article attempts to highlight the contribution that cultural policy scholars working within the humanities could make to this area of policy research.

show abstract

“…Criticism has been moved against methods for evaluating the social impacts of arts programmes, and the quality of the 'evidence' produced has been criticized for being anecdotal and unsupported by adequate systems of data collection (with the result of making comparisons over time impossible) (Belfiore 2002;Merli 2002, Selwood 2002a). Similar arguments have been made against the alleged economic impacts of the creative sector (Hansen 1995;van Puffelen 1996, Belfiore 2003 James Heartfield, in a pamphlet meaningfully entitled Great Expectations: The Creative Industries in the New Economy, argues that the creative industries are far from being the amazingly productive sector that they are claimed to be in the government's official rhetoric. Indeed, he cites an EU survey, carried out in 1999, according to which Britain performs above average in manufacturing innovation but lags behind with regards to innovation in the service sector (a bizarre result for what claims to be a 'creative economy').…”

Section: Instrumental Cultural Policy: Problematic Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Auditing culture

Belfiore¹

2004

International Journal of Cultural Policy

185

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the effects of the spread of the principles and practices of the New Public Management (NPM) on the subsidized cultural sector and on cultural policymaking in Britain. In particular, changes in the style of public administration that can be ascribed to the NPM will be shown to provide a useful framework to make sense of what has been felt as an 'instrumental turn' in British policies for culture between the early 1980s and the present day.The current New Labour government, as well as the arm length's bodies that distribute public funds for the cultural sector in Britain, are showing an increasing tendency to justify public spending on the arts on the basis of instrumental notions of the arts and culture. In the context of what have been defined as 'instrumental cultural policies', the arts are subsidised in so far as they represent a means to an end rather than an end in itself. In this perspective, the emphasis placed on the potential of the arts to help tackle social exclusion and the role of the cultural sector in place marketing and local economic development are typical examples of current trends in British cultural policymaking. The central argument purported by this paper is that this instrumental emphasis in British cultural policy is closely linked to the changes in the style of public administration that have given rise to the NPM. These new developments have indeed put the publicly funded cultural sector under increasing pressure. In particular, it will be shown how the new stress on the measurement of the arts' impacts in clear and quantifiable ways -which characterizes today's 'audit society' -has proved a tough challenge for the sector and one that has not been successfully met. The paper will conclude by critically considering how the spread of the NPM has affected processes of  The author would like to thank Prof. Oliver Bennett and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

show abstract

Measuring the value of culture

Cited by 49 publications

References 3 publications

Rethinking the Social Impacts of the Arts

Rethinking the Social Impacts of the Arts

Beyond the “Toolkit Approach”: Arts Impact Evaluation Research and the Realities of Cultural Policy‐Making

Auditing culture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About