Why we need European cultural policies: the impact of EU ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

policy areas and the ensuing transfer of methodology will indirectly bring about improvements inthe capacities of statistical offices of the new member states; this should benefit all sectors.However, at least in the first period, areas which are not directly affected by data-gatheringrequests from the EU will remain marginalized. Even though many researchers of culturalpolicies in transition countries put the improvement of cultural statistics as a high priority, giventhe ambiguous position of culture in the Treaty and the lack of a legal basis for more directinvolvement of the Eurostat, it is not surprising that most of the questionnaire respondents andthe reports which I analyzed, expressed the view that UNESCO and the European Audio-visualObservatory remained the chief resource for the improvement of statistics in the newmember states.These provisional conclusions cannot overlook the impact of cultural financing on trends in culturalpolicy. Community funding programmes brought many changes and indirectly contributed to thereform of cultural financing in new member states, to increased openness in the way projects arefunded, and to the transfer of knowledge. They also initiated new partnerships and new formsof cooperation.Sometimes these funding programmes offered a direct incentive for cross-border projects andcooperation. Even though Culture 2000 has been fiercely criticized for its bureaucracy andmodest funding, it has certainly had a very positive impact in the new member states. The roleof cultural contact points – part of the structure of Culture 2000 – as places for information andhelp in applying to the Community programmes has also contributed to better cultural cooperationbetween artists and cultural operators in new EU member states.Culture was marginalPreliminary assessment of the impact of the enlargement on cultural policies in countries ontransition confirms that the EU did not have any specific enlargement policy referring to culture.The long-established policy of excluding culture from harmonization and leaving it in under theaegis of individual member states, meant that the specific needs of future member states in thecultural field were not addressed during enlargement. Because there was no formulated policy,there was also no direct need for reforms of cultural systems or specific incentives for structuralchanges in the cultural field.It is obvious that cultural budgets and other internal issues which make up most of the methodsfor putting cultural policy into practice, should be left to the EU’s individual states to decide.However, the issue of a having a Èuropean policy on culture’ will not go away until theEU adequately discusses, from a cultural point of view, those policy areas that have an indirecteffect on culture.Even officially proclaimed EU goals of enhancing unity in diversity, protecting and promotingcultural diversity, and contributing to Èuropean added value’, were not addressed during the66Part 2 Preliminary assessment of the impact of EU enlargement
process of enlargement. Perhaps people believed that these goals would be achieved as a naturalconsequence of the process itself. Recalling this study’s earlier exploration of the difficulty ofdefining cultural policies, it is not hard to see that besides the lack of political will, the lack ofclarity on this point was certainly the most important reason for the lack of clearly establishedpriorities and policies. This explains why, even in fields where it was obvious that accession wouldhave an indirect impact on cultural policies, there were no formal consultations on how to copewith the changes.The process of enlargement really did not bring any significant improvements, guidelines ordirections for cultural policies of new member states. This left coordination of cultural policiesmostly on the level of informal discussions among politicians, or cultural operators andresearchers, as it was before.Preliminary assessment of the impact of EU enlargement67
Page 1 and 2:
Why we need European cultural polic
Page 3:
06081116171822252829313737404343454
Page 6 and 7:
Prologue When I decided to research
Page 8 and 9:
If I had the opportunity of startin
Page 10 and 11:
Measures directly referring to cult
Page 12 and 13:
obstacles encountered during the pe
Page 14 and 15: Part 1Theconceptualframe ofthe stud
Page 16 and 17: argument referred to identifying ex
Page 18 and 19: Gray called for comparative researc
Page 20 and 21: The Council of Europe and comparati
Page 22 and 23: a broader understanding of culture,
Page 24 and 25: The first one is a `macro’ dimens
Page 26 and 27: Part 2European Union,culture andcul
Page 28 and 29: narrow sense - still remains exclud
Page 30 and 31: Niedobitek (see page 29) drew atten
Page 32 and 33: Even though the author thought that
Page 34 and 35: In spring 2005 two founding members
Page 36 and 37: I am focussing more on the technica
Page 38 and 39: while enlargement negotiations were
Page 40 and 41: ights.56 Since the mid-1990s, the E
Page 42 and 43: This included information about Cha
Page 44 and 45: Gradual development and introductio
Page 46 and 47: of the background presented earlier
Page 48 and 49: Èventually, a solution was found,
Page 50 and 51: In regard to other taxes, opinions
Page 52 and 53: meet the recently introduced regula
Page 54 and 55: introduces the possibility of makin
Page 56 and 57: One of the recommendations in the F
Page 58 and 59: IPR legislation into line with Worl
Page 60 and 61: Preliminary assessmentof the impact
Page 62 and 63: Changes in taxation policies were n
Page 66 and 67: Part 3What willthe futurebring?68 P
Page 68 and 69: Manuel Barroso, President of the Eu
Page 70 and 71: has been embraced by the European m
Page 73 and 74: Instead of a conclusionThe aim of t
Page 75 and 76: 1 The French term acquis communauta
Page 77 and 78: 14 When deciding on the methodology
Page 79 and 80: 30 OJ C 336, 19/12/1992.31 1st Repo
Page 81 and 82: 45 After the signing and entry into
Page 83 and 84: 65 See Annex 1 for a copy of theque
Page 85 and 86: 81 32001G0731(01) Council Resolutio
Page 87 and 88: culture, which needs to be exempt f
Page 89 and 90: Aubry P, (2000)The `Television with
Page 91 and 92: Draus F, (2001)Èst-Ouest, le dit e
Page 93 and 94: Futo P, Cuculić J, et al (2002)Met
Page 95 and 96: Laher L, (2001)Trapped in the notio
Page 97 and 98: Puchala D J, (1971)Òf blind men, e
Page 99 and 100: Weidenfeld W, Wessels W, (1997)Euro
Page 101 and 102: 2. In your opinion, have the cultur
Page 103 and 104: 13. Have there been any changes in
Page 105 and 106: Annex 3List of CPRA jury membersMil
Page 107 and 108: Political Economy Cultural Economic
Page 109 and 110: Annex 4GlossaryAcquis communautaire
Page 111 and 112: Cultural marketsA term used to desc
Page 113 and 114: Third countriesEU documents sometim
Page 115:
Author: Nina ObuljenEditor: Janet H
show all

Why we need European cultural policies: the impact of EU ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?