Reclaiming ‘value’ from the econocrats : Reflections on the cultural value debate

1. ICCPR 2012, Barcelona, 9-12th of July 2012 Reclaiming ‘value’ from the econocrats: Reflections on the cultural value debate Dr Eleonora Belfiore Centre for Cultural Policy Studies University of Warwick, UK e.belfiore@warwick.ac.uk @elebelfiore on twitter & #culturalvalue

2. So, where is the paper, then? • No fully formed ‘paper’ as such… rather: • A manifesto for a renewed research approach to ‘cultural value’ • A call for a rediscovery of the political and of an emancipatory agenda in cultural policy research • A call to arms: I can’t do this on my own: join me! • At least, please talk to me! e.belfiore@warwick.ac.uk @elebelfiore #culturalvalue

3. Why cultural value? • A topical issue that is here to stay – possibly the defining cultural policy debates for the years to come • From a research perspective, allows agenda to move beyond the obsession with technical problems (e.g. toolkit mania) • A way out of the unhelpful instrumental/intrinsic value dichotomy? • A way to re-inject cultural politics into cultural policy research (cultural authority) • Towards an emancipatory cultural policy research agenda?

4. Reclaiming value from the hegemony of economics… • An epistemological problem: • ‘a modern form of “economic imperialism” in the realm of the intellect’ (Rothbard 1989) • It foments the current ‘measurement fetishism’ • An important moral and political dimension that has been so far overlooked (the moral limits of markets & the shift from a market economy to a market society – e.g. Michael Sandel) • Why research this? What is the point of cultural policy research? What should we aim for beyond critique?

5. Cultural value & the neoliberal ‘monoculture’ ‘In these early decades of the twenty-first century, the master story is economic; economic beliefs, values and assumptions are shaping how we feel, think, and act. The beliefs, values and assumptions that make up the economic story aren’t inherently right or wrong; they’re just a single perspective on the nature of reality. In a monoculture though, that single perspective becomes so engrained as the only reasonable reality that we begin to forget our other stories, and fail to see the monoculture in its totality, never mind question it’ (Michaels, F. S. 2011, p. 9)

6. The challenge: Bourdieu (1998) neo-liberalism= an ‘uncrossablehorizon of thought’ = all-pervading form of economic fatalism, which is ‘becoming a sort of universal belief, a new ecumenical gospel’. When market logic is transformed into “a universal common sense” (Bourdieu & Wacquant 2001), is there any space in public policy for values beyond economic value? The call to arms: we need to reclaim the value debate from the ‘econocrats’ who operate on the basis of ‘the belief that there exist fundamental economic tests or yardsticks according to which policy decisions can and should be made’(Self 1975, 5).

7. George Lakoff’s(2004) frame theory • Approach developed within cognitive science: ‘Frames are mental structures that shape the way we see the world. As a result, they shape the goals we seek, the plans we make, the way we act, and what counts as good or bad outcome of our actions. In politics our frames shape our social policies and the institutions we form to carry out policies. To change our frames is to change all of this. Reframing is social change’. • Frames are part of the ‘cognitive unconscious’ ‘Reframing is changing the way the public sees the world. It is changing what counts as common sense. Because language activates frames, new language is required for new frames. Thinking differently requires speaking differently’.

8. The econocratic frame in action: The Treasury frames, the cultural sector had better comply!! From O’Brien (2010, 4) Measuring the value of culture: […] in recent years there has been recognition, both within central government and in parts of the publically funded cultural sector, of the need to more clearly articulate the value of culture using methods which fit in with central government’s decision-making. Thus the cultural sector will need to use tools and concepts of economics to fully state their benefits in the prevailing language of policy appraisal and evaluation (emphasis added).

9. The de-politicization of the value debate • Cost-benefit analysis a way to bypass the problem of the articulation of the values and ideologies at the root of policies • Political questions (making the case for the arts) are reformulated as technical problems (e.g. focus on problems of impact assessment or cost-benefit calculations) • The cult of the measurement as a strategy of legitimation • A sector that is more comfortable with talking about ‘value for money’ than money for values

10. The long reach of economism • A 1980s revival: • Economic impact is back in fashion: • “Cultural Capital: A Manifesto for the • Future” for the You can Bank on Culture • campaign - March 2010 • Blurb below title: “Investing in Culture • Will build Britain’s Social and Economic • Recovery” • David Shrigley’s vide o for the Save the Arts Campaing

11. http://www.lost-arts.org/

12. The economic framing constrains… Cultural value in an artist’s own words… WolfangTillmans’ answer when asked in 2010 “What’s the best argument you can put forward for not cutting the arts?: “It makes sense on an economic level. Britain doesn’t have much to export but the creative industries are a huge export industry. I don’t want to sound too economical but that is the only language this government seems to understand”.

13. Towards developing a richer cultural value frame ‘Do not use their language. Their language picks up a frame – and it won’t be the frame you want’ (Lakoff, 2004) • A SERIOUS DISCUSSION OF ‘VALUE’ IN ECONOMICS • VALUE IN PHILOSOPHY (PHILOSOPHY OF VALUE) • RELIGION/SPIRITUALITY, THEOLOGY • SOCIOLOGY: SOCIOLOGY OF VALUES (BOTH IN THE SENSE OF HOW VALUES OPERATE IN SOCIETY BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF THE RECENT (RE)DESCOVERY OF THE NORMATIVE) • AESTHETICS (AESTHETIC VALUES; INTRINSIC/EXTRINSIC • PUBLIC VALUE THEORY

14. Reframing ‘cultural value’ as a progressive, transformative project Envisioning ‘real utopias’ through cultural policy? Real utopias = ‘utopian ideas that are grounded in the real potentials of humanity, utopian destination that have accessible waystations, utopian designs of institutions that can inform our practical tasks of navigating a world of imperfect conditions for social change’ (Wright 2010). 3 steps: • elaborating a systematic diagnosis and critique of the world as it exists • envisioning viable alternatives • understanding the obstacles, possibilities, and dilemmas of transformation

15. Towards reframing cultural value: • Definitional matters: cultural value? Cultural values? Value of culture? Is it just semantics? • Dethroning economics:an interdisciplinary/post-disciplinary & reflexive approach • An inclusive research agenda: Reaching beyond academia/ a collaborative agenda? A broadening of perspectives • An engaged agenda: • Aim for ‘experiments that break with the dominant vision of the world’ and which work on ‘ the critique of and resistance to the neoliberal doxa’ (Bourdieu 2003) • Cultural value debate as a contribution to an ‘emancipatory social science’