International Conference on Festivals and Event Research Orlando, Florida 20 January 2009 Please Don’t Stop the Music! An Exploratory Study of Alternative Approaches to Public Sector Evaluation and Funding Policies An Exploratory Study of Alternative Approaches to Public Sector Evaluation and Funding Policies for Cultural Events Preliminary Findings Dr. Rebecca Finkel and Dr. Joe Goldblatt, CSEP Kuan-wen Lin, MBA

Agenda Purpose and rationale of study History of Edinburgh and Glasgow Cultural Events Stakeholders Hypotheses and Research Questions Methodology Preliminary Findings Discussion

Purpose of Research 1.Identify potential sustainable sources of funding for Edinburgh and Glasgow cultural events. 2.Examine the emerging conflicts between public support and private interests (Myerscough and Bruce, 1988). 3.Develop sustainable models of funding for Edinburgh and Glasgow cultural events.

Rationale for Research Edinburgh and Glasgow cultural events are largely dependent upon public subsidy for their continuing operations. The public purse is reducing in size each year due to limited resources and competing demands (AEA Consulting, 2006). Historical expectation of public support by the cultural sector - the growth of public arts subsidies represented the cultural branch of the welfare state (McGuigan, 1996, 20).

Edinburgh and Glasgow

Stakeholders Festival and cultural events community Government (MSP’s, Local Council)‏ Bureaucrats Sponsors

Hypotheses and Research Questions

Research Methods Quantitative study of funding history of UK cultural sector and the Edinburgh festivals. Quantitative analysis of return on investment from Edinburgh festival public funding. In-depth semi-structured interviews with key informants from cultural, government and commercial sectors. Analyse quantitative and qualitative findings to identify potential sources of sustainable funding.

Preliminary Findings Quantitative: Gap between public purse and the productivity of the cultural sector. Instrumentalist argument informs and guides most cultural policy decisions (Holden, 2004; 2006; Mirza, 2006). Main concern is future stability due to short term funding approaches. Consensus between Glasgow and Edinburgh regarding the need for new sources of sustainable funding.

Preliminary Findings con't. General consensus is that these sources will include greater individual and corporate support through voluntary philanthropy. General consensus is that these sources will also require a redirection of council or federal taxes that are derived from businesses that directly benefit from the cultural sector. Disagreement about the future dependence by the cultural sector on public funding. Glasgow embraces new entrepreneurial government (Glasgow Culture and Sport) versus Festivals Edinburgh (Council initiative).

Discussion

References AEA Consulting (2006) Thundering hooves: maintaining the global competitive edge of Edinburgh’s festivals: Full report. Commissioned by the Scottish Arts Council in partnership with Festivals Edinburgh, City of Edinburgh Council, Scottish Executive, EventScotland and Scottish Enterprise Edinburgh and Lothian: Edinburgh. Holden, J. (2004) Capturing cultural value: how culture has become a tool of government policy. London: Demos. Holden, J. (2006) Cultural value and the crisis of legitimacy: why culture needs a democratic mandate. London: Demos. Mirza, M. (ed) (2006) Culture vultures: Is UK arts policy damaging the arts?. London: Policy Exchange. McGuigan, J. (1996) Culture and the public sphere. London: Routledge. Myerscough, J. and Bruce, A. (1988) The economic importance of the arts in Britain. London: Policy Studies Institute.