• Share on Facebook
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Linkedin
  • Share by email
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Linkedin
  • Share by email

Liz Hill welcomes news of renewed efforts to measure the impact of the arts in more valid ways.

Almost exactly ten years ago Eleonora Belfiore, then a PhD student and now Associate Professor of Cultural Policy at the University of Warwick, wrote for AP about the value – or otherwise – of ‘economic impact’ studies  of the arts. She pointed out that “impact studies have failed, so far, to convincingly sustain the claim that in order to help economic development the best option is to invest in the arts”, and concluded: “the impacts on the national cultural life, on the population’s quality of life, identity, and creativity (which are the areas where the arts could really represent a long-term investment in the development of society) don’t lend themselves to a short-term economic evaluation…” As far as I can tell, nothing much changed over the following decade to undermine Dr Belfiore’s assertions; but judging by the number of organisations that went on to conduct just this type of research, enough stakeholders and funders were taken in by the shaky statistics and dodgy economic arguments these studies inevitably generated to make it worthwhile producing such figures for lobbying purposes.  

Thankfully the tide is turning at last. The Arts and Humanities Research Council’s Cultural Value Project, which is funding research into new methods of evaluating how arts and cultural activities bring value to individuals and to society, should be music to our ears; and the RSA / Arts Council England seminars covering a range of different  arguments for investment in arts and culture will hopefully deliver a welcome injection of new thinking to some of the flawed economic rhetoric that has until now dominated the instrumental arguments surrounding public support for the arts. It’s a shame that it has taken the ongoing cuts to prompt this sudden interest in developing a more valid and robust approach to impact measurement, but better late than never.

And on that note, it’s probably a good point at which to share our own news: prompted by the rapidly changing digital environment, we have decided that the time is right to say goodbye to print,  which now serves a minority of our readers. But after 12 years following arts issues – ‘economic impact’ measures are just one example – we have no intention of giving up now. Instead we will be concentrating our efforts on providing the very best service to the arts sector online, on email and on social media, so if you haven't already, why not register online to sign up for our emails, follow us on Twitter @artspro, @artsjobfinder and @artspro_events, and find us on Facebook. Do join us in the digital realm – we look forward to meeting you there. 

 

Liz Hill is the Managing Editor of ArtsProfessional
 

Link to Author(s): 
Liz Hill