Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Publications and Recommendations

Reports on culture and the structural funds in some Member States

http://ec.europa.eu/culture/news/20120924-reports-structural-funds_en.htm

The European Commission asked the European Expert Network on Culture (EENC) to produce a critical analysis of how the unused potential of the cultural and creative sector might foster regional and local development in some Member States.

The countries that were covered are Bulgaria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. The reports contain an overview of available information on how structural funds have been used for culture, and on national and regional investment in the field, making detailed reference to existing data and studies, available mapping of Creative and Cultural Industries (CCI), existing best practices and examples of failure.

Most of them also contain a short SWOT analysis, showing for each country or group of regions within a country the strengths, the weaknesses, the opportunities and the threats of investment in the cultural and creative sector.

Reports on Culture and Structural Funds in

Bulgaria [879 KB]   -    France [689 KB]   -  Germany [736 KB]   -  Greece [985 KB]   -  Hungary [666 KB]   -  Ireland [769 KB]   -  Italy [2 MB]   -  Poland [639 KB]   -  Portugal [2 MB]   -  Romania [896 KB]   -  Slovakia [750 KB]   -  Spain [834 KB]

See as well:

Pier Luigi Sacco, (2011) „A new perspective for the EU 2014-2020 structural funds programming“. Presentation given at the European Cultural Forum, Brussels, Oct. 20 – 21, 2011

http://culture-forum-2011.ec.europa.eu/index.jsp

http://ec.europa.eu/culture/events/documents/programme-2011.pdf

Pier Luigi Sacco (2011) Culture and the Structural Funds in Italy. Paper written on behalf of the European Expert Network on Culture (EENC) for DG Culture and Education

http://www.eenc.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/PLSacco-Culture-and-the-Structural-Funds-in-Italy.pdf

 

Recommendations

Since the reports about how culture is being financed through the Structural Fund were much more geared towards helping to improve the negotiation between member states and Commission, how the 2014- 2020 programme shall be shaped by what forces having a voice will be critical. Generally speaking, the Cultural Sector has not received sufficient recognition to have a direct voice at European level.

For example, there took place a discussion about the KEA Study within the Cultural Committee in 2012. The debate was much too weak and too far removed from the real decision making process. As we know the latter involves Commission and Council but also the set-up of the managing authorities and political jurisdiction in accordance with them within the respective member states.

Thus the studies should analyse how the setting of terms for negotiation can take culture into consideration, and this should include:

The EU Structural Fund is geared towards establishing a new economic paradigm for the 2014-2020 period. This new paradigm is called 'economy of experience', a term which is highly controversial and equally problematic as it contradicts any criteria related to sustainable development. Consequently evaluation of how culture contributes to sustainability has to be included in any further going process of reflection and consultation. It cannot be linked to or confused a culture of consumption even if consumer confidence is an index for economic stability and growth. Given the level of sophistication especially in technological terms, a culture of consumption based on an 'economy of experience' can mean consuming ever more expensive things at at higher levels of luxury goods. But what can be considered as a success, when in such an affluent society which affords itself these luxury items has over 30% of the population in Europe living near or below poverty line? What has become of inclusive praxis and equality?

As guideline for future investments in culture and investments in general, the European Commission has proposed a new 11 thematic framework. These references for future investments in culture can be taken as departure point for a new discussion about the role of culture with regards to the economy. At the same time, investments in culture should be perceived not as subsidy but as real investments. Often the argument for such types of investments are not heard nor not developed well enough to be convincing. The latter may reflect a lack of insights into how culture works and what is needed to sustain such a process of cultural adaptation over time. The failure to invest in culture is also often due to a lack of knowledge of what it takes to to build-up culture in a consistent manner over time. There need to be distinguished bringing people together from making possible new forms of expression while the development of cultural resources over time can only be considered fruitful, if good decisions are made in time.

A good example was set by Eric Antonis and his work for Antwerp since 1993 when the city was European Capital of Culture and he its artistic director. After the year was over, the stayed with the city and continued to build up its cultural resources e.g. creation of a House of Letters with a key concept being a poet of the city to be hired for a three year time period in order to create exceptional projects.

Hatto Fischer

Athens 19.9.2012

^ Top

« Brief for Studies on Culture and the Structural Funds | The case of Greece: 11 thematic objectives of the Structural Fund »