Periodic Reporting for period 2 - UNCHARTED (UNCHARTED: Understanding, Capturing and Fostering the Societal Value of Culture)
Okres sprawozdawczy: 2021-08-01 do 2022-07-31
The social values of culture are multiple. In the European case, the strategic nature of culture is especially noticeable. This is true for several reasons. The wealth that Europe treasures in terms of heritage and cultural expression is the basis of the strength of its CCIs, which translates into an exceptionally high volume of employment. But the economic dimension is not the only relevant aspect in this respect. Culture is also an element of crucial importance for Europe because it constitutes a fundamental resource in the face of some of the most pressing problems today: the integration of immigrant populations; social cohesion, weakened by the crisis; and the necessity of strengthening of the critical capacity of citizenship. In this sense, it is particularly important that culture in Europe is valued in all its intrinsic diversity.
However, the plural strategic value of culture is largely lost due to the economism that currently prevails in politics. In recent decades, with the growing emphasis on the creative economy, culture has tended to be increasingly seen in political circles under the exclusive lens of the economy and its contribution to it. Cultural policy, although imbued with the idea of the plurality of values of culture, has also been led to adopt this perspective. It has not been able to produce an alternative vision and generate other evaluation systems that could be opposed, in the political arena or public discourse, to the persuasive evidence of monetary measures. The economic perspective obscures the non-economic dimensions of culture and makes it difficult for politics to take on the effective promotion of the plurality of its values.
In our view, a meaningful understanding of the plurality of the values of culture in Europe is only possible if we consider the multiplicity of agents who participate in valuation processes and the diversity of evaluative practices in which they engage. Consequently, our work focuses on the valuation practices of the actors involved in cultural life. This project distinguishes three main areas and three types of fundamental actors in the value dynamics of culture: the field of cultural participation, in which citizenship is the protagonist; the field of cultural production and heritage, where the professionals of creation and preservation take the initiative; and the field of cultural administration, where the experts and politicians decide. The project takes these three areas and this basic typology of actors as a starting point to structure the study of the different aspects involved in this evaluative dynamic: the emergence of values, the configuration of a value order and the political impulse of values.
However, the plural strategic value of culture is largely lost due to the economism that currently prevails in politics. In recent decades, with the growing emphasis on the creative economy, culture has tended to be increasingly seen in political circles under the exclusive lens of the economy and its contribution to it. Cultural policy, although imbued with the idea of the plurality of values of culture, has also been led to adopt this perspective. It has not been able to produce an alternative vision and generate other evaluation systems that could be opposed, in the political arena or public discourse, to the persuasive evidence of monetary measures. The economic perspective obscures the non-economic dimensions of culture and makes it difficult for politics to take on the effective promotion of the plurality of its values.
In our view, a meaningful understanding of the plurality of the values of culture in Europe is only possible if we consider the multiplicity of agents who participate in valuation processes and the diversity of evaluative practices in which they engage. Consequently, our work focuses on the valuation practices of the actors involved in cultural life. This project distinguishes three main areas and three types of fundamental actors in the value dynamics of culture: the field of cultural participation, in which citizenship is the protagonist; the field of cultural production and heritage, where the professionals of creation and preservation take the initiative; and the field of cultural administration, where the experts and politicians decide. The project takes these three areas and this basic typology of actors as a starting point to structure the study of the different aspects involved in this evaluative dynamic: the emergence of values, the configuration of a value order and the political impulse of values.
Following, we list some of the key aspects in the construction and definition of cultural values in Europe and their tensions detected:
(1) Intrinsic values vs. extrinsic values. Several of the reports highlight a shift in the values of culture. This shift is marked by the loss of centrality of the intrinsic values of culture (linked to the autonomy and independence of art) in favour of extrinsic values (linked to the instrumentalisation and use of art and culture for other economic and social purposes). This shift is pointed out as part of the presence of "marketisation practices" in cultural policies, but also appears to be linked to the emergence, consolidation and legitimisation of diversity in the cultural sphere.
(2) Economic orientation vs. social orientation. The instrumentalisation of culture opens up a set of tensions between its social and economic purpose, which is reflected in the orientations of cultural policies, but also appears at the centre of disputes in the urban sphere. The processes of urban transformation led by culture have generated tensions between the economic values that guide this kind of process and the social values embodied in the cultural practices of the local communities that resist them. This tension is particularly evident, for example, in heritage use and policies, since, due to their importance in the construction of identities and associated values, they include both the expression of identity by local communities and the need for their adaptability to an external view that turns heritage into a tourist product.
(3) Homogenisation vs. cultural diversity. One of the greatest effects of cultural globalisation in terms of values is homogenisation and uniformity. In the field of cultural production, the emergence of a global culture (accentuated by digitalisation and the concentration of major cultural industries) has led to the appearance of equally standardised cultural products. However, a trend linked to the emergence, institutionalisation and legitimisation of cultural diversity in the field of specialised culture and cultural administrations has also been observed. This trend appears to be associated with processes of social differentiation and the incorporation of women as part of the workforce and the growing international labour mobility. In the field of cultural policies, the tension between homogenisation and diversity is present between the values of cultural democratisation (linked to universal access to cultural goods and services), and cultural democracy (linked to recognition, diversity, pluralism and participation).
(4) Impositions (top down) vs. resistances (bottom up). There is a plurality of values in different cultural contexts, which often enter into tension and conflict. These tensions reflect unequal structures between the social agents that participate in different cultural environments. These conflicts can be interpreted as power relations that put in opposition dominant actors (institutional position, legitimacy, symbolic capital), with an interest in the status quo, and dominated actors, with an interest in subverting the reference values. These tensions manifest, for example, in value conflicts between gentrification agents vs. displaced inhabitants or, inner cities' inhabitants against overtourism pressures in the contexts of urban transformation through culture; or between the forces of cultural globalisation (manifested in the concentration of major cultural industries) and elements of resistance to cultural standardisation in the field of cultural production.
(1) Intrinsic values vs. extrinsic values. Several of the reports highlight a shift in the values of culture. This shift is marked by the loss of centrality of the intrinsic values of culture (linked to the autonomy and independence of art) in favour of extrinsic values (linked to the instrumentalisation and use of art and culture for other economic and social purposes). This shift is pointed out as part of the presence of "marketisation practices" in cultural policies, but also appears to be linked to the emergence, consolidation and legitimisation of diversity in the cultural sphere.
(2) Economic orientation vs. social orientation. The instrumentalisation of culture opens up a set of tensions between its social and economic purpose, which is reflected in the orientations of cultural policies, but also appears at the centre of disputes in the urban sphere. The processes of urban transformation led by culture have generated tensions between the economic values that guide this kind of process and the social values embodied in the cultural practices of the local communities that resist them. This tension is particularly evident, for example, in heritage use and policies, since, due to their importance in the construction of identities and associated values, they include both the expression of identity by local communities and the need for their adaptability to an external view that turns heritage into a tourist product.
(3) Homogenisation vs. cultural diversity. One of the greatest effects of cultural globalisation in terms of values is homogenisation and uniformity. In the field of cultural production, the emergence of a global culture (accentuated by digitalisation and the concentration of major cultural industries) has led to the appearance of equally standardised cultural products. However, a trend linked to the emergence, institutionalisation and legitimisation of cultural diversity in the field of specialised culture and cultural administrations has also been observed. This trend appears to be associated with processes of social differentiation and the incorporation of women as part of the workforce and the growing international labour mobility. In the field of cultural policies, the tension between homogenisation and diversity is present between the values of cultural democratisation (linked to universal access to cultural goods and services), and cultural democracy (linked to recognition, diversity, pluralism and participation).
(4) Impositions (top down) vs. resistances (bottom up). There is a plurality of values in different cultural contexts, which often enter into tension and conflict. These tensions reflect unequal structures between the social agents that participate in different cultural environments. These conflicts can be interpreted as power relations that put in opposition dominant actors (institutional position, legitimacy, symbolic capital), with an interest in the status quo, and dominated actors, with an interest in subverting the reference values. These tensions manifest, for example, in value conflicts between gentrification agents vs. displaced inhabitants or, inner cities' inhabitants against overtourism pressures in the contexts of urban transformation through culture; or between the forces of cultural globalisation (manifested in the concentration of major cultural industries) and elements of resistance to cultural standardisation in the field of cultural production.
During WP2, each partner carried out an explorative analysis of the emergence of values linked to culture in four fundamental arenas of cultural practice identified in the UNCHARTED project: cultural participation in live arts and culture, cultural participation through media, cultural production and heritage management, and cultural administration.
The results of the four reports will be discussed at the first workshop of the project in Porto in September 2021. The workshop will gather advisory boards members, all the partners and relevant stakeholders recruited in the various fields studied. The workshop will also serve to clarify the field of tensions and dissonances between the different values of culture. After the workshop, the consortium as a whole will produce a synthetic document, which will show the existing diversity of the social values of culture, drawing a complete cartography of agents, speeches / representations, resources and practices evoking the different values of culture along Europe. This cartography will identify axes of convergence and / or dissonance in a map of tensions in the valuation of culture.
The results of the four reports will be discussed at the first workshop of the project in Porto in September 2021. The workshop will gather advisory boards members, all the partners and relevant stakeholders recruited in the various fields studied. The workshop will also serve to clarify the field of tensions and dissonances between the different values of culture. After the workshop, the consortium as a whole will produce a synthetic document, which will show the existing diversity of the social values of culture, drawing a complete cartography of agents, speeches / representations, resources and practices evoking the different values of culture along Europe. This cartography will identify axes of convergence and / or dissonance in a map of tensions in the valuation of culture.