Re-scaling Governance in Berlin’s Creative Economy

Abstract

The paper aims at discussing the issue of governance in respect to creative scenes, a central structural element of the creative economy, exemplifying the case of Berlin. Berlin has a fast growing creative industry that has become the object of the city's development policies and place marketing. The core question is: What are the spatial-organizational driving forces of creativity in Berlin-can they be steered by public administration? I am using Berlin as a reference case to articulate the gap between 'state-led planning' on the one hand and the organisational practices of self-governed creative scenes on the other. I attempt to demonstrate why a perspective change in terms of re-scaling is necessary, in order to respond to the particular practices of emerging industries and their societal form 'scenes'. By re-scaling I mean the conceptualization of governance in different nonhierarchical organisational as well as spatial scales, based on the observation that scenes are considered to be a central element of the functionality of creative industries.

‘Living Space’ at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe: Spatial tactics and the politics of smooth space

“…The increasing use of flexible working practices has led to the creation of hybrid workspaces and the expansion of workspaces into the domestic realm and other social spaces (Castells, 1996;Halford, 2005;Wapshott and Mallet, 2012). Similarly, research into the creative industries has found that creative work is not confined to the office, but takes place in quasi-public 'third places' such as coffee shops, airports and shopping areas that exhibit many of the characteristics of the urban spaces that we have studied here (Florida, 2002;Lange, 2011). In both cases workers are necessarily forced into an active process of negotiation over the creation and use of their workspaces.…”

Artists and creative city policy: Resistance, the mundane and engagement in Stockholm, Sweden

“…For example, various studies have drawn attention to the tensions between creative policy imaginaries and the everyday realities of creative practices (Lange, 2011;McLean, 2014;O'Connor & Gu, 2010;van Heur, 2010). More broadly, this relates to an identified lack of understanding of the needs of creative producers, and how creative production and consumption rests on a complex ecology of scenes, networks, clusters and formal and informal interactions, which can also be loose and ephemeral (Comunian, 2011;Lange, 2011).…”

“…More broadly, this relates to an identified lack of understanding of the needs of creative producers, and how creative production and consumption rests on a complex ecology of scenes, networks, clusters and formal and informal interactions, which can also be loose and ephemeral (Comunian, 2011;Lange, 2011). For example, O'Connor and Gu (2010) note how, in Manchester, UK the Creative Industries Development Service (CIDS) acted as an intermediary between the distinct languages of policymakers and 'creatives'.…”

“…Therefore we also explore the possibilities for openness and dialogue which arise when rational, top-down planning and policy is left behind and new modes of governance are opened up (cf. Lange, 2011;Metzger, 2011). Following Gibson and Klocker (2005), what kind of 'new conceptual spaces' might facilitate the interaction, rather than opposition, of creative producers and policy makers?…”

Creative industries in the capital cities of the Baltic States: Are there innovations in urban policy?

“…As CI policy, due to its inter-disciplinarity, is a field of responsibility for several policy institutions, we may raise the question of whether the organizational structure of support is based on cooperation and enhances (new) forms of collaboration between different structures and institutions. A discussion has been growing in the theoretical discourse regarding whether the traditional structures of governance are suitable to CI due to its peculiar patterns of operation (Lange, 2009;Balducci, 2004;Kunzmann, 2004). CI challenges the structures and practices of governance in several ways, including: the blurring of borders between parties at the governance level and the intertwining of relations (Jessop, 1995;Rhodes, 1996); an increased need for cooperation, cross-sector policies (O'Connor, 2009;Throsby, 2008); the deinstitutionalization of public and private sector partnerships (Lange, 2009); and the increasing significance of the mediating institutions (Costa et al, 2008), etc.…”