NESTA PROJECT: FINE ARTSITS AND INNOVATION

The study differentiates between what it describes as cultural
activities – the arts and media industries – and creative
activities – design, advertising and architecture. It argues
that the ‘creative’ sectors are where culture acts essentially
as an input into the production of non-cultural goods. In
other words, creative activities incorporate elements from
‘culture.’ Not all design applications have a cultural output –
car design is a good example - but the design is a creative
activity whose input is undoubtedly cultural, based in this
case on visual arts.
Cunningham (2006) objects to what he sees as the attempt
by Throsby and others to place the creative arts at the
centre of the wider creative economy. Simply because the
creative industries produce ‘non–cultural’ outputs, he
believes there is no reason to suppose they are less ‘core’
than other sectors.
However, a modified version of both Throsby and the KEA
model, with a series of concentric circles, has been adopted
by the DCMS as part of its creative economy review (Andari
et al. 2007). And many European policymakers are
particularly interested in the links between (subsidised)
cultural activities, creativity and innovation. Whether or not
this suggests a centre-periphery model is another matter.
One model of the cultural and creative sectors which seeks
to break away from the core/periphery model is that
produced by Burns Owens Partnership (BOP) and the
Manchester Institute for Popular Culture (MIPC) for NESTA
(NESTA, 2006b). Unlike either the DCMS or Throsby/KEA
models, this reflects differences in market structures,
distribution mechanisms and consumption patterns between
different cultural and creative industries.
It differentiates between four types of business or institution:
• Those producing originals, including the visual arts,
crafts and haute couture. Based on the manufacture,
production or sale of physical artefacts, their value
22