|
A memo sent to correspondents, friends and acquaintances of the
Budapest
Observatory (BO) in July 2007
We are certain to
receive at least a thousand out-of-office replies, their owners enjoying sun,
sand or other summer pleasures. Not so BO.
1078 cases of cultural co-operation
It always takes some
time before the Commission discloses the complete list of projects that received
grants in the previous year. BO had to wait till July to be able to start
mapping cultural co-operation bonds in the last, seventh year of Culture 2000. Here are the first
findings.
BO
counted 1078 cultural co-operation projects during the seven years of the Culture 2000 programme. They include
both annual and multiannual operations, cover all areas from heritage to books
and literature, but do not comprise translations grants - which are observed
separately.
  
The 1078 projects were
initiated by European cultural organisations 1077 times and once from Japan
(they are put into a little column with three more "3rd country"
organisers). The most striking feature is the Italian domination. Italians have
commanded over 20% of all winning projects and led the list in each of the seven
years. When trying to find explanation, people often point at heritage, where
Italians are particularly strong. However, they are equally successful in all
other Culture 2000 domains. Italians
are then the main engineers of European cultural co-operation. Also, the busiest
bees collecting nectar from the flower-bed of European funds for culture.
2007-2013 -
a new era?
The executive agency in
charge of EU cultural grants has already disclosed the names of the 78 winning
co-operation projects in 2007. From the list
we can judge whether the composition of the project leaders shows a different
pattern from 2000-2006. Not quite: in 2007 gold, silver and bronze went to the
same three nations as before. Project leaders are based in Italy 11, France 10 and Germany 9 times.
The east is closing up, the ten member countries together produced for the first
time more (12) leaders than Italy!
Italians of
the East
The Czechs hover above the rest like the
Italians do in the west. The 30 projects that Czechs guided to victory between
2000-2006 represent 26% of eastern-led operations; also their three in 2007 is
25% of the eastern twelve. Engineers, bees - ahoj!
Media
culture
Next to Culture 2007, the Union runs Media
2007, another cultural grants programme, which has released now a fact
sheet. The name is misleading, as the programme focuses on cinema, spending
€755 million on this art form between 2007-2013 (compared to the €400 of Culture 2007). Here is the percentage
structure of spending in Media 2007:
|
Distribution
|
55%
|
|
Development
|
20%
|
|
Promotion
|
9%
|
|
Training
|
7%
|
|
Horizontal
actions
|
5%
|
|
Pilot
projects
|
4%
|
Issuing the fact
sheet is not meant to herald the launch of Media 2007, which has been progressing
full steam ahead: seven
calls with ten deadlines have already been announced this year.
Facts about
private contribution to culture
So much is
spoken and written about cultural sponsorship - or more correctly, about private
support to culture - and there is so little statistical evidence. Data are
difficult to collect, most countries do not even bother. In the absence of
regular official registering, information must be gathered by way of research,
by interviewing selected cultural organisations (sometimes also businesses).
BO wonders
whether more systematic research is available somewhere than what Arts &
Business has been collating about the UK for
years. (Here is one of the rare examples.)
BO has browsed
the latest
A&B report. 2005-2006 appears to mark an inflexion point: entering a new
paradigm. Which, by the way, is the old pattern in the USA,
where rich individuals have always donated more on culture from their own money
than from their businesses. A&B research showed that in 2005-2006 British
individual donors for the first time spent more on culture than corporations and
corporate foundations together.
The research
compared the total sum of "private investment in the arts" (to use the British
formula) to the major public funds (the arts councils of England and Scotland,
including lottery funds), to find that these were somewhat bigger than all
private contributions taken together. Putting this into an equation
form:
[ individuals ~<= (corporations +
foundations) ]
~< public
funds
Maybe as soon as the
following year ~< for "somewhat bigger than" will become an
= or even roll over into ~>.
Benchmarking private contribution to
culture
Few English words have made a greater
career lately than benchmark, a point of reference for a measurement. Besides the equation above,
BO has extracted two more easy-to-remember benchmarks from this
UK study against which the nature of
private contribution to culture can be compared.
1) The
1 - 10 - 100
formula. In 2005-2006 in the UK the amounts of private givings to
literature - festivals - heritage followed the hierarchical string of 1 - 10 -
100.
2) Heritage = double the performing arts.
Heritage, the great winner in the UK, attracted twice as much from the
private sector as the various forms of performing arts (theatre, dance, music,
opera) together.
(The A&B notion of heritage does not
include museums, libraries and archives, which institutions also have important
magnetic power vis-à-vis British donors.)
Cultural
policy and academia
Cultural policies lack the rigour of most
other fields of public policy. Nonetheless, considerable number of professionals
(and students) expected to deepen their knowledge about cultural policy making
in the post-communist countries, in the frames of a summer course held in July at the
Central European University in Budapest with BO involvement. Some of those who
attended might also show up in Istanbul in next August at the fifth
international conference
on cultural policy research (ICCPR) .
Nina - Jaka
- Marcello - Amanda
Jaka's name was missing
from the entry
on the cultural
policy research award in the latest BO memo -
nesretan! The quartet is now complete.
|