|
TOWARDS A SET OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PUBLIC
AUTHORITIES ON FESTIVAL POLICIES
Reconstruction of the speech by Péter Inkei,
director of the Budapest Observatory, to introduce the final session of the
EFRP - Circle Round Table Conference "Festival Jungle-Policy Desert? The Festival Policy of
Public Authorities", held in Barcelona
on 19-20 October, 2007
Put festivals on the agenda
The four sessions of the conference have confirmed the
choice of the title of the meeting: alongside the ever escalating jungle of
festivals, the reaction of most public authorities can be characterised by the
metaphor of a desert. The national profiles and the case studies prepared for
this round table festival could point at only very few instances when
authorities have defined festival policies and worked along conscious strategy
lines. A few more cases were identified where the need for such coherent policy
was recognised and the intention is there to build and follow a festival
strategy.
Therefore, the first and probably most important
recommendation is that the issue of festivals needs attention. Festivals have
established a firm position at the expense of more conventional and continuous
manifestations of arts and culture. This position will most probably get more
prominent only in the near future. National, regional and local governments
need to define their festival policies, just as they have articulated theatre,
library or museum policies. In other words, festivals need to be "emancipated"
and policies concerning them
need to be institutionalised by public authorities. Raising the awareness of the authorities about the weight and
significance of festivals is the first priority, derived from this research and
debate.
Nevertheless, it is important to point at the utmost
versatility of festivals, which distinguishes them from most other institutions
of culture. There is much greater similarity among the theatre or library
policies of different public authorities, than what one can expect in case of
festival policies. Therefore, no blueprint can be hoped for: this cannot be the
task of this nor other conferences.
Define festival policies
Defining festival policies begins with the
identification of the nature and density of the festival occurrence in a given country, region or municipality; assessing to what
extent have festivals conquered various artistic fields. Precise mapping is not
limited to the festivals where the authorities are major stakeholders but covers
a broader scope of events. By scope the extent of the field is also meant: in
the absence of generally agreed definition, each authority will have to decide
for itself where to draw the boundaries of their festival policies.
When thinking about their festival policies,
authorities need to be aware not only about the great diversity of this species
of human activities, but also about the wide array of functions that festivals
play. These events contribute to the quality of life, entertain and respond to
the challenges of leisure, serve self-celebration of communities, catalyse
social interactions, have effects on social cohesion, enhance inclusion of different
groups of people but also of places, genres and issues from the margins,
cultivate traditions, open horizons, have various economic implications, create
jobs, boost spending and tax revenue, enhance a place's attraction for the
tourists, investors but also its own inhabitants, and last but not least
contribute to the flowering of culture. Preparing or upgrading festival
policies is also an opportunity for screening for these functions exerted by
festivals in a given place. Some of these just happen, as corollaries of
festivals, other functions are the realisation of goals set by festival
organisers, initiators and supporters - including public authorities themselves.
When preparing festival policies, public authorities
should therefore take stock of their own goals to be served by way of
supporting festivals. As in case of any policy making, priorities between
various interests and aspirations need to be established.
Constructing festival strategies
Defining means, measures and resources is already part
of setting a strategy about festivals. Financial intervention is the most
obvious resource in the hands of authorities. In this context the predictability
of public funds is at least as important as the actual amounts available.
Consistency and stability is compatible with project funding as well. Funding uncertainty
is the plague for festival organisers.
Besides funding, the demonstration of political attention
is similarly decisive. Creating trust is as important as setting up funds or
budget lines for culture. By defining festival policies, authorities must
consider forging various alliances. Alliances with cultural operators,
especially with the initiators, spiritual and organisational engines of
festivals - not infrequently difficult-to-handle personalities; co-operation
with permanent cultural institutions, be it allies or rivals; other layers of
the "subsidiarity-ladder" (national, regional and local governments); with
businesses in various roles, ranging from festival owners to charity
supporters, festival policies offer opportunities to build alliances with broad
groups of people who will benefit from better prepared and more professional
festivals.
Assessment, evaluation
Issues of assessment and evaluation should be
envisaged already at the stages when festival policies and strategies are
conceived. If the authorities succeed to define precise policy priorities and
strategy goals, the criteria for support given to individual festivals will
become clearer and will later lend themselves to translation into criteria of
evaluation. Precise goals do not necessarily mean quantitative indicators.
Often it is enough to have a more or less clear and consequent picture about
the order of preferences of a given authority amidst the wide and rich range of
goals and functions festivals are expected to serve.
It goes without saying, however, that exact indicators
are of enormous help for each party concerned, for all those who implement
policies, on both sides of the "counter": grant givers, festival organisers,
monitors and policy evaluators as well. An additional bonus is if indicators
serve as benchmarks, enabling meaningful comparison with how other authorities handle
their festivals.
In spite of the great many approaches at producing
evaluation instruments that measure not just the realisation of goals set and
promises given, but also the social, economic and other impacts of festivals, no
really successful and internationally advisable tools are at hand. What can be
recommended to authorities is to be careful with impact assessment - but never
to give up the search for indirect and longer term effects of their festival
policies.
|