White paper on creativity - ebla center

Part IVgoods. Hence the need for state action in supplying public goods in quantities whichshould meet social requirements.Inverting the logic, we can see that ideas, the key element in a culture, are initially privategoods, but once they have been revealed, they are transformed into a pure public good.One of the consequences of the rise of the intellectual and intangible component of goodsis that the field of application of the concept of exclusive ownership has been modified.While we can exclude from further consumption everything that is material, simply byprotecting, caring for and using it, the same cannot be done for intellectual goods: theshape of a clock, the innovation of the quartz mechanism – in short everything that can bereduced to an idea is a non-excludable public good, which can be copied and appropriated.You cannot “physically” protect an idea, because once revealed, it can be copied and usedwithout the author’s permission. And since we live increasingly immersed in a universe ofideas applied to and incorporated in material things which are part of our daily life, there isan ever greater risk of intellectual piracy and counterfeiting.Another property of public goods is their capacity to produce externalities and positive andnegative external effects. These effects elude market valuation and generate distortions inthe efficient quantities produced and consumed. For example, the use of large museumsand their related cultural policies increases the average level of education of the people inthe city where they are situated. This positive effect is not usually taken into account as oneof the material economic benefits of the museum. The sum of the benefits is based ontickets and accessory services sold, and therefore refers to a hypothetical balancing ofsustainable costs and obtainable benefits. But this unduly limits the resources allocated tothe museum. So yet again we find a good reason for corrective public action.Cultural and art goods, moreover, have a use value and some non-use values, such asexistence value (i.e. how much a community is prepared to pay for the mere existence of acultural good), option values and the inter-generational value. These values eluderecognition by the market and enhance the notion of externality.The properties associated with the goods of the cultural heritage and art goods in generalinclude that of being considered as meritorious goods. Their self-evident merit is to enrichculture and diffuse a sense of beauty and aesthetic quality. Yet citizens often fail toacknowledge this aspect: by refusing the logic of an implicit contract, they do not agree tothe production of public goods. If we take, for example, a proposal to build a museum ofcontemporary art and ask a representative sample of citizens to express their opinion onwhere it should be funded, there will more against than in favour. The opportunity to havea museum is thus missed. But had the museum been built, in the future everyone willconsider it as an important collective value. The implicit contract is thus managed by thestate, counter to the preferences of citizens who are short-sighted or unable to grasp thefuture value of current choices. This line of reasoning can be applied to all goods in thehistorical and artistic heritage.WHITE PAPER ON CREATIVITY 252