gBDkI

Chapter 4. Concluding remarks
So, use the measurements and figures and labels that you can,
when you need to, in order to convince the rest of the governmental
system of the value and importance of what you’re seeking to do.
But recognise at the same time that this is not the whole story, that
it is not enough as an understanding of cultural value. (Smith, 2003)
4.1 Cultural participation: Policy issues and implications
“Participation in cultural activities, together with access to them, forms the backbone of human
rights related to culture”. Laaksonen’s (2010) words perfectly sum up the essence of the political
implications of cultural participation. This is the core of cultural rights, an essential component of
human rights, and as such it is a general policy concern. To allow people to enjoy these rights,
institutions and policymakers have a duty to develop a favourable legal framework and specific
cultural participation policies, at both local and national levels, to implement ratified international
agreements and declarations (even if the follow-up procedures and practical implications are not
always clear). Yet, cultural participation policies often appear weak and the argument used is that,
given the scarcity of public resources, other more urgent interventions (e.g. health care, social
security, etc.) are prioritised. Still, “keeping cultural rights in the margin of human rights and
keeping culture in the margin of the development of participatory policies means maintaining an
elitist vision of culture – namely expression, creativity and enjoyment of cultural opportunity remain
a privilege of well-educated high-earning citizens” (Ibid).
Defining and measuring cultural participation has political implications, since studies on people’s
and audiences’ behaviour provide the evidence basis for cultural policies. Many authors have
reviewed the evolution of cultural participation studies in the 20 th Century. 13 Cultural participation
studies were initiated in the framework of the ‘democratisation of culture’ approach of the 1960s, as
(non-neutral) tools to measure progress in the democratisation of (elite) culture as a consequence
of public intervention (Pronovost, 2002). The concept of cultural democracy fosters the idea that
every person and every community (cultural minorities included) have cultural rights and
requirements that must be respected and met. These include the promotion of cultural diversity
and active participation in cultural life, the facilitation of access to decisionmaking processes, and
an equal access to cultural services. The focus of participation studies has evolved and now
shifted from access to elite arts facilities towards active participation in local community events
which advance social cohesion and cultural identity as governments seek to support cultural
diversity and civic engagement.
Currently in the EU and developed countries, attention is being paid to two main issues, namely
the social impacts of participation in the arts and the need for new definitions of participation itself.
The first concerns the impacts cultural participation may have on other areas of individual and
community experience, attitudes and actions, and how to achieve desirable long-lasting results.
Measurement of the instrumental role of the arts and culture towards social goals can provide
governments with new ways of approaching difficult social issues (e.g. poverty, social exclusion,
health, etc.), as well as answer their demand for greater accountability for public funds spent on
these issues. Yet, doubts remain about the links between cultural participation and the social
impacts desired by policymakers (Australian Expert Group in Industry Studies, 2004), and methods
of judging the impact of cultural engagement still need to be improved (O’Brien, 2010). Attention
13 See, among others, LEG, 2002; Schuster, 2007; Laaksonen, 2010.
- 69 -