Overview of the project and timelines

Phil Jones

School of Geography, Earth & Environmental SciencesUniversity of Birmingham

What do we want to get from project continuity days

• A sense of how the different elements of the project fit together

• How the project needs to evolve from its original conception

• Review of work we’ve undertaken and how we could improve things

• Things that we’ve missed, potential avenues to explore

Creating an unequal economy

• 30 years of deindustrialisation and transition to a ‘creative’ economy

• Widening gap between rich and poor

Creative economy impacts

• DCMS 2007 40% of creative workers have degrees compared to 25% non-creative

• Arts increasingly justified instrumentally as generating economic growth

• Powerful influence of discourses such as ‘creative class’ reinforcing neoliberal urbanism

• Polarisation of connected, creative communities and deprived service class

Connected Communities Programme

• Runs across UK Research Councils, but led by Arts and Humanities Research Council

• “to mobilise the potential for increasingly inter-connected, culturally diverse, communities to enhance participation, prosperity, sustainability, health and well-being by better connecting research, stakeholders and communities.”

How the project came about

• Connected Communities ‘Creative Economy Workshop’ December 2010

• Call for projects linking creative economy with the idea of connected communities

• We won 6 months of funding to develop a larger project bid

• Competition between five teams, three of which were funded

• University of Manchester: Understanding everyday participation and its role in creating social and cultural value

• Cardiff University: Understanding the value of the creative citizen

• University of Birmingham: Connecting communities in the creative urban economy

The research problem we identified

• If the ‘creative economy’ is significant, then who is benefiting from it?

• How is the creative economy (broadly defined) connected to different communities?

• What processes of ‘cultural intermediation’ operate to make these connections?

Creative vs. cultural

• Slippage between terms ‘creative’ and ‘cultural’ industries– Tendency to subsume cultural within creative

industries• ‘Cultural economy’ allows us to think wider

and think about contribution that museums, galleries etc. can make– More than simply direct economic output

What is ‘cultural intermediation’?

• Bourdieu’s (1984): intermediaries as agents who tell communities what cultural phenomena to passively consume

• Broader notion of ‘intermediation’ as processes linking cultural economy to the wider world– individual artists, public arts venues, creative

industries, agencies/networks supporting the arts, etc. etc.

Intermediation as connection

• Implicit assumption that connecting more people to the creative economy will reduce inequality

• Cultural intermediation already exists• But– Is cultural intermediation the best way to make

connections?– Does it function in the most effective fashion?– Can modes of working be found that improve this

‘connecting’ role?

Overall aim

To identify means of enhancing the effectiveness of cultural intermediation as a mechanism for connecting different communities into the broader creative economy

Research Questions

• To develop techniques to capture the value of cultural intermediation (WP1)

• To examine how cultural intermediation has developed historically, whose interests it has served and what lessons this provides for understanding best practice today. (WP2)

• To critically evaluate the role of intermediaries in the changing governance of cultural economy initiatives and how different actors undertaking cultural intermediation operate within the sector (WP3)

• To explore how intermediation connects communities into the creative economy and how this can be enhanced to break down the tension between hard-to-reach communities and inaccessible cultural resources. (WP4)

Research Questions

• To design and deliver practice-based interventions with local stakeholder panels of academics, policy-makers, community groups and artists to improve the effectiveness of cultural intermediation. (WP5)

• To contribute to academic, policy and practitioner debates on the value of cultural intermediation in shaping creative economy initiatives (WP6)

• To reflexively examine and evaluate the process of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary working through innovative project design and delivery (WP6)

• To produce high-quality academic, policy and artistic outputs based on best practice in knowledge exchange (WP0-6)

WP1 Valuation & MappingLead: Dave O’Brien

Critical Friend: Andrew Dubber

WP6 CIRCUS

WP2 HistoricLead: Ian GrosvenorRF: Natasha McNabb

Critical Friend: Beth Perry

WP3 GovernanceLead: Beth Perry

RF: Site Researcher x2Additional Input:

Antonia LayardCritical Friend: Dave O’Brien

WP4 CommunitiesLead: Paul LongAdditional input

Manchester case study: Paul Heywood

RF: Site Researcher x 2Critical Friend: Phil Jones

WP5 InterventionsLead: Phil JonesAdditional input

Manchester case study: Paul Heywood

Additional input Birmingham case study:

Andrew DubberRF: Site researcher x 2

Critical Friend: Kerry Wilson

Seminar SeriesLead: Kerry Wilson

ReflectionLead: Tim May

New MediaLead: Richard Clay

Technical input: Russell BealeRF: 1 x part time

Site CoordinationManchester: Beth PerryBirmingham: Phil Jones

1x PhD Intellectual Property

Supervisor: Antonia Layard

1x PhD Universities as Intermediaries

Supervisor: Tim May

WP0 Scoping & Theory BuildingLead: Phil Jones

Additional Input: Research team

Mapping exerciseLead: Lisa De Propris

RA: 6 months data processing

Critical Friend: Yvette Vaughan Jones

Integrated interdisciplinary design

• Arts & humanities approaches embedded in the project framing

• Valuation mapping exercise identifies case study themes...

• ...shaping the historical project which...• ...informs examination of contemporary

governance which...• ...identifies different communities who are

asked to co-construct the research...• ...and commission creative interventions

Deep case study approach

• Allows the creative economy eco-system to be explored in each city

• Topical– Birmingham LEP/enterprise zone ‘creative city’– Salford Media City

• How well do community needs/aspirations map onto cultural policy and the activity of intermediaries– What are the circles of influence / cliques that exist.

How do these include / exclude groups?

Two case study teams

Greater Manchester• Coordinator: Beth Perry• 3 year research fellow• Working across

– Governance– Communities– Interventions

Birmingham• Coordinator: Phil Jones• 3 year research fellow• Working across

– Governance– Communities– Interventions

Community-led research

• How visible is intermediation activity within communities (‘hard-to-reach institutions’)?

• Training for community members to undertake research themselves

• De-centre the power of intermediation to have communities determining priorities for action

• Community membership of local panels commissioning £140k of intervention activity

CIRCUS

• Collaborative Interdisciplinary Research Connecting Urban Society

• Seminar series, interfacing with KE hubs• Major public activities with Library of

Birmingham, BMAG, Manchester International Festival and others

• Museum-grade multiplatform outputs• Ongoing reflexive study of the research practice• Dissemination of best practice

Non academic partners

Visiting Arts, Arts Council England, Unity Radio, Sampad South Asian Arts, MADE, Un-Convention, DCMS, Birmingham City Council, Mitra Memarzia, a-n The Artists Information Company, Brighter Sound, The Seedley and Langworthy Trust, Institute of Contemporary Arts, RSA, Manchester City Council, Manchester International Festival, Birmingham and North Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust, City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, Grand Central

Scoping studies

• We have a budget for commissioning 12 review papers

• Interdisciplinary vs. International• Potential value of reviewing state of cultural

economy and intermediation practices in BRIC countries

Scale of the project

• 4 years• £1.5m, but...– Salaries & overheads £1.1m– PhD studentships £80k– Travel / subsistence £21k– Equipment £4k– Commissions £140k– Seminar series £20k– Transcription £20k– Etc. Etc.

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

WP0 Scoping & Theory Building

WP2 Historic

WP3 Governance

WP1 Valuation & Mapping

WP4 Communities WP5 Interventions

Management CommitteePhil Jones (PI/WP5)Dave O’Brien (WP1)Ian Grosvenor (WP2)

Beth Perry (WP3)Paul Long (WP4)Tim May (WP6)

Steering GroupMitra Memarzia (AIR)Clayton Shaw (Sampad)Chris Jam (Unity FM)Yvette Vaughan Jones (Visiting Arts)Manchester International FestivalBrighter SoundManchester City CouncilThe Community Development TrustRuth Daniel (Un-Convention)Anthony Ruck (MADE)Tony Whyton (Uni of Salford)Kate Mcluskie (Uni of Birmingham)

Virtual panelSusan Jones (AN)Rachel Smithies (ACE)Ed Pickering(DCMS)Paul Collard (Creative Partnerships)Paul Benneworth (Uni of Twente)

Birmingham TeamPhil Jones (coordinator)Site Researcher RF 1Andrew DubberPaul Long

Manchester TeamBeth Perry (coordinator)Site Researcher RF2Paul Heywood

Cross cutting teamPhil Jones (coordinator)Dave O’BrienLisa de PropisRichard ClayIan GrosvenorNatasha McNabbYvette Vaughan JonesAntonia LayardTim MayKerry Wilson

Birmingham Local Panel

Commissioning interventions. Composition to emerge from

activities in WP3 & WP4

Manchester Local Panel

Commissioning interventions. Composition to emerge from

activities in WP3 & WP4

Summary

• Intermediation is a key process in the creative economy but has lacked critical scrutiny

• Project takes an interdisciplinary, deep case approach to analyse the sector in an integrated fashion

• Creative, action-oriented approach driven by communities

• Context of localism, big society and (big) cuts make reappraisal urgent

• Opportunities for major impact through rigorous outputs and dissemination strategy