Cultural Policy Advisory

My latest op-ed in Il Sole 24 Ore (published today) examines a critical tension in the EU's new Culture Compass: while it represents the Union's most ambitious cultural strategy to date, it risks becoming "preaching to the converted."   The Compass offers four strategic directions and twenty flagship initiatives, an impressive framework. Yet it arrives at a moment when Europe's political priorities center on defense, security, and industrial competitiveness. The Draghi Report on competitiveness barely mentions culture.   The question isn't whether culture matters. It's whether cultural policy can speak the language of the chancelleries where budgets and strategies are decided. Despite their undeniable and even revolutionary importance, we need more than guidelines on culture and wellbeing, we need structural bridges to Europe's defining challenges.   The tools exist: the 2028-2034 budget could include culture-based innovation quotas in national schemes. Cultural heritage could be positioned more decisively in European diplomacy. Creative industries could be explicitly framed as drivers of territorial competitiveness.   The real test lies not in converting those who already champion culture, but in demonstrating to policymakers across all domains why culture is indispensable to the strategic battles Europe faces today.   Full article (English translation) available in the comments.   #EuropeanCulture #CulturalPolicy #EUStrategy #CultureCompass #EuropeanCompetitiveness

⚡ The UN’s Summit of the Future did not bring any political breakthrough for culture. So, what's next? At Culture Policy Room we are honoured to launch the Reflection Paper by Justin O'Connor 𝘎𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭 𝘊𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘳𝘰𝘢𝘥𝘴: 𝘙𝘦𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘶𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦. The paper identifies historical and current blind spots in the global policy approach to culture and suggests pathways for reframing today's paradigms. Here are a few takeaways: ⏳ The Pact for the Future did not make significant progress in recognising culture. Looking at the amendment process, it’s clear that 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐚𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐝; 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐝. Now more than ever, we need to be assertive in advocating for culture as a human right. ⏳ The ambiguity in defining culture is one of the barriers to effective cultural policy-making. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞: 𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐲, 𝐚 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫, 𝐚 '𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞', 𝐨𝐫 '𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞'? This is not just a linguistic battle; this is about defining the remit of the culture portfolio and the scope of cultural policies. ⏳ Cultural policy today has far less influence over the socio-cultural transformations it aimed for in the 1980s and 1990s. Over the past 40 years, it has been other forces, such as, for instance, the ‘welfare state’ paradigm, that have shaped society’s ‘souls’ and influence deep cultural change. 𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐰𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦 𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐲 𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐣𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐭𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐲? ⏳ 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 '𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐥 𝐯𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫' 𝐨𝐟 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐢𝐭 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞. While it’s important to avoid rigid silos and foster cross-cutting connections, cultural policy must have a place ‘at the table’ as a distinct sector, serving a unique public purpose, with the same identity, legitimacy, and capacity as other sectors. ⏳ There are various types of roles that culture plays: constitutive, giving people the opportunity to understand and cultivate their creativity; evaluative, the ability to make judgements of what we value; and instrumental, where culture translates into economic growth and other improvements in the quality of life. The instrumental role is just one of them, but it is neither the primary nor the most crucial. ⏰ The UN's invitation to define culture as a global public good (made back in 2021) has not yet been fulfilled, and time is running out. Read the paper here: https://lnkd.in/egd5uu7N

If public spending on culture is meant to sustain artistic work, we should ask a simple question: are artists better off in higher-spending countries? Nope - artists struggle throughout. In new work using harmonized EU-LFS microdata from 2009 to 2023 with Ioannis Laliotis, we document a persistent and widespread earnings and job-quality gap for artists across Europe. Once we condition on occupation, sector, and demographics, artists rank about 0.46 wage deciles below comparable salaried workers and about 0.28 deciles below other professionals. The apparent “premium” in raw data disappears once we compare like with like. The gap is not confined to a few outliers; it appears in most countries and persists over time. And actually, the artist employment disadvantage -- that is, the lower probability of finding employment as an artist -- is lowest in Greece. Artists are significantly more likely to work under temporary contracts, to hold multiple jobs, and to rely on part-time employment throughout the life cycle. Nearly 40-45% of arts graduates in their late 20s are predicted to hold temporary contracts, and the gap relative to other graduates persists well into mid-career. Formal arts education mitigates the wage penalty within artistic occupations. The interaction between being an artist and holding an arts degree is strongly positive, implying that training attenuates much of the within-occupation gap. But arts degrees are associated with lower employment probabilities outside the arts. Perhaps most strikingly, higher public cultural spending per capita does not systematically narrow wage or job-quality gaps for artists. In short, cultural policy functions more as a subsidy to cultural production than as an effective labor market policy for cultural workers. If we care about the sustainability of artistic careers, the policy question is not only how much to spend on culture, but how that support is structured and transmitted to individuals. #CulturalEconomics #LaborMarkets #PublicPolicy #CreativeEconomy #ArtsPolicy

🌍 Exciting News: The New Cultural Compass for Europe! 🌍 The European Commission has just unveiled the #CultureCompass2025—a strategic framework shaping Europe’s future through culture. This forward-looking initiative puts culture at the heart of the European project, driving inclusivity, resilience, and innovation across our societies. Key Highlights: - The Compass aims to guide EU policies in four core directions: - Upholding European values and cultural rights - Empowering artists and cultural professionals - Using culture and heritage for competitiveness, resilience, and cohesion - Advancing international partnerships and cultural diplomacy - Developed through extensive sector-wide consultation, the Compass sets out clear objectives for greater coordination, inclusive funding, and artistic freedom. - New policy actions include a European Artists Charter (for fair working conditions), a future-proof AI strategy for culture, enhanced access for young people via a Youth Cultural Ambassadors Network, and a plan for a robust EU cultural data hub. - There is a strong call for greater cultural investment—at least 2% of the next EU budget!—and an emphasis on culture’s vital role for democracy, sustainability, and social well-being. 🔗 Official resources & details: - More on the EU’s Culture Compass: https://lnkd.in/dW2EV_Vf - Background & sector reactions: https://lnkd.in/dkc9iq7N - Key partnerships & the Cultural Deal for Europe: https://lnkd.in/diEUH_b9 This is a bold step for Europe’s cultural and creative sectors. Now is the moment for cultural professionals, policymakers, and creative communities to unite and chart a visionary course for the future. #EuropeanCulture #CulturalHeritage #EUCulture #HeritagePolicy #CulturalCompass Wolfgang Dersch Toni Attard Jorge Pinto Else Christensen-Redzepovic Christer Gustafsson Plácido González Martínez Julia Rey perez Jordi Baltà Portolés Jordi Tresserras Juan Bernd Paulowitz Fergus Maclaren Susan Macdonald Aylin Orbasli Bénédicte Selfslagh Koenraad (Koen) Van Balen Paul Pietyra Michel Thomas-Penette Mikhael DE THYSE