Cultural Policy and Creative Industries at Crossroads

Cultural Policy and Creative Industries at Crossroads, a Nordplus Horizontal funded network building platform between parties in the field of higher education, private sector and the public sector, has for the past year, worked in the aim to enrich the discourse within the scientific community researching culture and the creative industries (CCI’s) in the Nordic countries. Cultural policy in the developed world stands at a crossroads as the base justification for government expenditure relating to culture has changed. At the same time the importance and relevance of the creative industries has far from diminished. Over the past years awareness has grown as to the economic and sociological importance of these industries, which in turn calls for further research and statistical analysis. In the Nordic countries, there has been a shortage of systematic data collection, which would be useful in explaining this impact as well as for further research on the subject. The project has focused on the development of a network for international scientific collaboration and the sharing of resources between countries.

The Crossroads partners come from different fields, including representatives from statistical institutions, foundations for cultural research, universities, as well as from the private market. The project has nine initial partners; Bifröst University, Linnaeus University, Roskilde University, University of Tartu - Viljandi Culture Academy, CUPORE, Center for Cultural Policy Research, Telemark Research Institute, Statistics Iceland and the Tallinn Music Week/ Shiftworks OÜ and Tampere Hall Ltd. In June 2021 the network sought reinforcement and input from Kulturanalys Norden, the Nordic knowledge center for cultural policy. Kulturanalys Norden’s participation in the network building included a collaboration with the statistical institutes of the Nordic countries, a working group aiming to harmonize and improve CCI data in the Nordic region.

The growing network met, all in all, four times. First in June 2021 for introductions and organization. An online meeting was conducted in September same year and an online two day workshop at the end of January 2022. The final conclusion meeting of the network took place at the end of March 2022. Sadly the outbreak of COVID-19 disrupted plans of face to face meetings. The usefulness of the partnership and network building has already proved itself in an increased knowledge of neighboring countries' status of data collection and methodology. The augmentation of cooperation and the widespread notion of the importance of improvement of data collection, elevated sense of where to look for knowledge, shorter communication channels and better access to further collaboration have already been established.

Why do Culture and Creative Industries need stats?

Intellectual property rights are an important economic incentive as cultural production increases and consumption changes with technological progress. Without statistical data collection, it is difficult to measure these developments and understand the factors relating to individual branches of culture. From the network's discussions, it is evident that there is a great need for data development in culture and creative industries (CCI´s). Because there are different definitions of terms in various places, clear definitions are somewhat not available, different data are missing from national databases, and cultural differences affect how data is collected, the data cannot always be compared between countries. Knowledge building is also important to inform future policy.

By measuring, controlling, and communicating uncertainty, statistics provides the navigation necessary for controlling the progression of science and society. Data helps policymakers identify and measure problems and determine how to best use resources to address them. Also, statistics can shed light on how policy changes affect such problems, provide insights into policy analysis, serve as an evaluation tool as well as provide indicators of development.

Presentations from "Mind the Gap" workshop

How can we help? On statistical gap analysis

Erla Rún Guðmundsdóttir from Statisticsl Iceland

Mind the gaps - practical remarks about sectoral differences in classifying CCIs

Sakarias Sokka from Cupore Finland

Municipalities Cultural Data Scalability

Bård Kleppe from Telemark Research Institute Norway

The Cultural Trident Model in use

Joakim Borström-Elias from Cultural Policy Analysis Sweden

Statistical Data Meets Policy. Estonian Case Study

Jorma Sarv from Viljandi Cultural Institute, Tartu University

Workshop conclusions

Comparability

The workshop was divided into three groups, coming to terms with differences and similarities of the participating countries regarding cultural data. Following are the results of the group talks on comparability and scalability. The group was moderated by Dr. Margrét Sigrún Sigurðardóttir, associate professor at University of Iceland, and was composed of Bård Kleppe and Roy Aulie Jacobsen, researchers for Telemark Research Institute in Norway, Joakim Boström Elias, analyst for The Nordic Knowledge Center for Cultural Policy in Sweden, Kaisa Weckström from Statistics Finland, and Dr. Vífill Karlsson and María Kristín Gylfadóttir, project manager, both from Bifröst University.

• Reliability of data is a problem everywhere – but use of data leads to more reliable data.

  • A well-defined use of the data will lead to reliability in the long run

• An all-inclusive comparison is impossible due e.g. to differences between countries.

  • Defining a few points that can be compared creating indexes/ratios that can be compared between countries.

  • Potentially based on the work from Norway by Telemark Research Institute

    • Comparison between the countries on need to be discussed for each variable.

• A Nordic collaboration on defining 4 level digits for the new Nace codes.

  • This could lead to a better understanding between the Nordic countries in what is comparable. And what is not comparable.

• Two ways to approach the issue of comparability

  • Define the most useful data and work towards reliability

  • Define categories and figure

Datagaps

The group focusing on datagaps was composed of Erla Rún Guðmundsdóttir Statistics Iceland, Line Gjermhusengen from Norwegian Statistics office, Daniel Johansson from Linnaeus University in Sweden, experienced researcher specializing the music industry in Sweden and Paulina Ahokas CEO of Tampere Hall in Finland, the biggest cultural center and events company in Finland and even on a Nordic level. Anna Hildur Hildibrandsdóttir, course leader for creative industries studies at Bifröst University, moderated the talks.

The question on why there are datagaps is difficult to answer. There are many different reasons. Daniel pointed out that for a researcher the source of data can come from many places. To some extent we need to ask ourselves what we need to answer the questions that we have. When we have an overview of what we have it is easier to decide what gaps need to be filled and how best to do so. We addressed the question of whether harmonizing the Nordic classifications and practices would be a desirable goal. The conclusion in that conversation is that the aim should not be to harmonize the data but to map what data we are working with on a pan-Nordic and pan-Baltic level.

To do so our suggestion is that we use this platform that we have created here to explore and create a proposal for a research and or mapping project. The mapping would be intended as guidelines that could be used by stats offices, researchers and in academia. These guidelines could include explanations of terms for example how to define an artist as the creators of culture as they have been defined in Norway. Generally we would benefit from understanding better our neighbors and each of us could learn from best practices but also we could benefit from having an overview of how our Nordic collaboration in culture and creative industries works.

We could also compare best practices. Erla told us about an initiative where she is looking through membership lists of arts organizations and comparing their ID numbers to where they are in the NACE/ISCO codes – and that way possibly finding out how many members of these organizations work as artists.

Alongside this it would be great to do case studies about best practices. In this context Line told us about a very interesting project she is part of at the stats office in Norway redefining the cultural heritage sector. In essence they are creating a new stats approach for the cultural heritage sector through a long period of broad consultancy where a lot of the actors in the field contribute.

It was also discussed that in Finland a big report is being written by a group of experts on the future of Culture and in Sweden there is a new policy strategy being written at the moment for the culture and creative sector.

Daniel emphasized that a mapping needs to be performed in an agnostic way. Who are the actors? What do they collect? How do they do it? What is the methodology?

Policy

The policy group was composed of the moderator, Dr. Njörður Sigurjónsson, dean of the department of Social Sciences at Bifröst University, Sakarias Sokka, researcher for CUPORE, Jorma Sarv, junior lecturer at University of Tartu, Erling Jóhannesson, director of the Federation of Icelandic Artists, Sigursteinn Sigurðsson, cultural representative of The West Iceland Regional Office and Erna Kaaber, researcher and project manager from Bifröst University.

Although a strong research base, including rigorous research findings on key issues, is lacking in many areas, the workgroup concluded that the fragmentation in the field of culture and creative industries has resulted in a far worse situation than in many other industries. The increased use of policies and action planning and the interactive policy processes on the administrative level call for more evaluations and reliable evidence on the effectiveness of policies. Not being the only form of evidence, Statistical data helps make informed decisions, document results, and improve public accountability. We also need to be aware that the evidence or knowledge based policies can as well be thought of as policy based evidence. A systematic data collection is a part of building knowledge in the field. There is more need for evidence and politicians are asking for data that would be easy to understand and use. I.e., need for information that is detailed but not too complicated (policy briefs, infographic, etc.) - but these cannot be produced without a database extensive enough.

Data should be accessible and available for all to be of use for further research and for evidence informed policy. In discussing data we have to distinguish between analysis and data and beware of the dangers of thinking that we can produce natural data. Reliable data is the important factor, preferably comparable data with minimum quality assurance. By collecting data we can affect decision making but there are limitations to positive science guiding policy makers. We have to distinguish between science and policy making. Good analysis and data can have important effects but there will always be limitations.

Data is scarce and scattered. The data has to measure the field as it is. The nature of the environment is fragmentation. Coordinated data bases cannot be produced without collaboration between different parties active in the field. No one is coordinating the data and different agents produce the data. The whole picture is not accessible. We also need to think about how data is used. We have different actors with their own agendas and no one has the whole picture. We have many different actors with very fragmented presentations.

Regarding governmental support it is important to think on why the government wants to support the industry. Is it funding, is it investment, is it bouth? The public funding of culture often has many small streams, much more than in other sectors. The fragmentation of the field is on many levels. It comes down to why culture is important. Mental health, security, ect. We need to understand different links between culture and societal factors. Data on public funding of the CCI’s is not easily accessible. The public funding of culture is fragmented and it is hard to get an overall picture. Unlike other sectors who seem to have a clearer vision.

Evidence informed policy would lead to a more effective policy. Increased data collection and policy formation and evaluation would as well give us a possibility to deal faster with crises, such as the COVID outbreaks. Traditionally participation in culture is high in the Nordic region, although it can be stated that data is missing in places. The COVID crisis poses a critical lesson. It reveals a fragile field and proposes changes.

From better and smarter data to better policies:

• We want better policies. We can improve the policies by using data in a better and smarter way
• It’s not always the lack of data - it can also be our ability to handle current knowledge
• There are various risks on the level of coordination and/or communication that we need to observe
• Case study: importance of culture and explaining the impacts

The Crossroads network participants and collaborators

Anna Hildur Hildibrandsdóttir, Course Leader for Creative Industries, University of Bifröst.

Erna Kaaber, Researcher, University of Bifröst.

Daniel Johansson, Researcher and journalist, Linnaeus University, School of Business and Economics

Rasmus Rex Pedersen PhD, Associate Professor, Roskilde University - Department of Communication and Arts - Institut for Kommunikation og Humanistisk Videnskab

Juko-Mart Kõlar, Director, University of Tartu, Viljandi Culture Academy

Jorma Sarv, program manager of the cultural management curriculum, University of Tartu Viljandi Culture Academy, Performing Arts Department.

Bård Kleppe, Senior Researcher, Telemark Research Institute.

Roy Aulie Jacobsen, Researcher, Telemark Research Institute.

Sakarias Sokka, Specialist Researcher, CUPORE - Centre for Cultural Policy Research.

Anna Kanerva, Senior Researcher, CUPORE - Centre for Cultural Policy Research.

Erla Rún Guðmundsdóttir, Specialist in Culture Statistics, Statistical Iceland.

Helen Sildna, CEO, Tallinn Music Week/ Shiftworks OÜ

Paulina Ahokas, CEO, Institution Tampere-talo Oy - Tampere Hall Ltd

Joakim Boström Elias, investigator/analyst, Swedish Agency for Cultural Policy Analysis/Cultural analysis Norden

Jenny Johannisson, Analyst, Swedish Agency for Cultural Policy Analysis /Cultural analysis Norden

The Nordic Cultural Statistics collaboration working group (NKKS)

Ragnar Karlsson, Statistics Iceland, 

Claus Werner Andersen, 

Statistics Denmark, 

Kaisa Weckström, Statistics Finland, 

Jógvan Bærentsen, 

Statistics Faroe Islands, 

Line Gjermshusengen, 

Statistics Norway 

Fredrik Lindström, Kulturanalys, Sweden.