In any country, state capital and cultural capital always walk hand in hand hence can not be separable. In many countries including the United States of America, most of the arts are administered by the private support; however many European countries like the United Kingdom are paying greater public support for the artists.
The value of the art that is produced by the artists is directly related to the strategy of the artist and the policy operation processes. There is no doubt that currently, the issue of the funding of the arts and culture in the United Kingdom is facing very many challenges.
As much as there is a lot of public debate around this topic, the government is greatly insisting on the adoption of the evidence-based policy in the funding of these groups. There is need to come up with more clear decision making policies and measures to ensure that the allocated funds are put to the correct and appropriate use.
The government is calling for the involvement of all public sectors so as to meet the overall objectives that are stipulated in the arts and culture funding policy. The sector of culture and arts has had a lot of developments hence has to demonstrate its stake in the development of the states.
In fact the art sector has been expected to play a key and major role in the economic development, overall marketing of the United Kingdom and play a major role in the social relations of the people of the United Kingdom. The government has got a lot of criticism when it targeted to reduce it spending and hence reduce the funding of the arts council; through this the public feels that the government is not showing the willingness to support the field of art.
This current development which target to reduce the funding of the cultural and art sectors has led to an increase in the criticism of the whole concept. On the other hand, it has been viewed that the achievements so far acquired are being used by the government to achieve their targets. This is however not beneficial to the artists themselves.
In fact, the government does not in way give special acknowledgement to the arts but simply categorize them as any other sector. This has been a great challenge as they face unique challenges that need to be addressed keenly. The government need to keenly focus on art because it is the best and most effective way that can link the government and other leaderships with the public.
It is through arts that people from different backgrounds can meet, participate and even watch together the various pieces of art. This will further foster national understanding, peace and good inter-relationship among the public.
This dissertation is therefore going to investigate the overall circumstances of art support policies in the U.K., examines the values the art has brought and what public support is needed constantly, according to particular economic situation and public interests of the people of the United Kingdom.
Public Support for the Arts and the supports Social Values
Since the creation period, art has always been part and parcel of mankind. It was until the middle age when art activities actually transformed to artwork since initially the artists were not aiming for the art itself but rather used art to spread propaganda over the authorities.
Also, in the medieval times, the status of artists had not been more than craftsmen, not until they became born again as ‘artists’ through the age of Renaissance. It was since the eighteenth century when the concept of art started to be defined and classified as in the modern sense, until then art had been understood mainly as having a meaning of techniques and skills.
By the understanding of intrinsic meaning of art, artist’s personal talent and capacity has attracted attention and been accepted by supporters and art lovers. Therefore, it was possible that patrons valued the artists’ abilities and supported their place or activities. The word, ‘patron’ means ‘a person who support’ which came from Latin word, ‘father’.
Oxford English Dictionary defines patron as ‘an individual or organization that support and protect various organizations and activities materially and mentally. Today, like the meaning of patron, there are a lot of subjects of supporting arts which include private individuals, organization or enterprise, and even the country.
From Renaissance period when artists in the same sense as appeared to the present, many of artists have worked depending on the order from the supporters. It was during the 20th century when the whole field of art changed because the number of artists greatly increased.
This led to the private support groups limiting their support prompting the United Kingdom government to decide to come up with supporting body to help the many artists. Especially after WWII, various positive values and social meaning of arts started to be reinterpreted. In many European countries began to recognize the necessity of state intervention in arts, which was state-level of public support and to draw an agreement on the intervention.1
History of public support for the arts in the UK
England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are the four countries that make up the vast and successful United Kingdom. Each of these countries has been having its own distinct culture and history. The funding of culture and art in the United Kingdom can be dated to as far as the 1940s.
Since United Kingdom wanted to create a free and democratic society, the political climate during that period initiated the funding debate that the government was to take a role in. It was during this period that an organization was founded to champion the interests of the art, the organization was names, the Council for the Encouragement of Music and the Arts (CEMA).
John Maynard Keynes is the one who founded this union in the early 1940s. He was an intelligent guy who had highly qualified in the field of economics.2 He had a vision which evolved CEMA into the art council of Great Britain in the year 1946. This was the first body to distribute funding to the arts fraternity independent of the political influence.
The chairman believed that the art council would temporarily exist during the recovery of the Second World War4. The councils funding from the government grew from GBP 235000 in the year 1945/46 to more than GBP 820000 in the years 1955/56. The standing commission on museums and galleries that was founded in the year 1931 advised the national government on museums policy to give financial aid to the national Museums.
This body, later become the museum and galleries commission in the year 1963 and later acquired it own charter in the year 1987. After this, the local authorities invested immensely in the museums by building and renovating the regional museums, theatres and public halls.
In addition they engaged in running of their own programs and functions that enlightened the people of its commitment in investing in the arts and culture. However, this funding remained permissive other than mandatory as it depended on the willingness of the regional governments to determine the amount of funding they are to provide.
It is this policy that led to the founding of the Business Sponsorship Incentive Scheme in the year 1984. There was a greater achievement when a partnership was created between arts council of Great Britain, British film institute, craft council, and the Scottish and Wale arts councils. All those bodies merged together to create the national arts and media strategy.
All these transformations happened in the year of 1990. A decision was arrived at in the year of 1994 that led to the devolving of the arts council’s duties to other devolved regional councils. This ensured that each nation runs its own independent arts funding in its region.
There was a great boost of the national arts council funding when a national kitty was created that ensured that it funded most of the artists and the other regional art and film councils. There as a change in the year 1997 after the election where the incoming labour government rebranded the department of national heritage.
It is through these efforts that the government has had to champion its efforts and goals which identified that arts and culture are very instrumental to the development of any given region. The government has also set up legislation that ensures that the local authorities participate and promote arts and culture in their specific regions.
There was a major transformation in April 2002 when the arts development agency for England, known as Arts Council England was formed. All this was as a result of the merging of the national council and all the other regional councils in the United Kingdom.3
The social values of arts
Through research, it has been proved that art is very important and instrumental tool of the civic or public renewal. It is through arts that the social well being of people and regions in the United Kingdom is being improved. In addition, through the arts the friendship among people is being strengthened and is assisting the various communities in the United Kingdom accept, appreciate and celebrate their heritage.
It is through such ways that there is the fostering of peace and understanding between people of various cultures. These findings have been underscored by trying to learn some of the impacts that can be created by the art sector. Some of the impacts experience included people opening themselves up when they are socialising with their friends, the people are also able to revisit and freely share of their past stories and history.
It is through these forms of socialization that led to create the sense of belonging among various communities living in the United Kingdom. In addition, the field of culture and arts gives the people the opportunity to live the life that they want and to freely express their feelings.
This is very important because people will express themselves fully other than behaving what they are not. In overall this will bring understanding between the different social groups. It is through art that leads to cultural participation and civic engagement.
It is through study that it is exposed that people who are constantly engaged in art are able to make wise decisions and carry out judgements during the political times. Just for the people attending and watching the pieces of arts together as a group is very important though it might be less effective as compared to them coming together to participate and do all those pieces of arts together.
It is through this interaction that the virtues of coordination and trust are developed hence in the long run creating very strong social bonds that can not be easily broken. Firstly, it is no longer enough to express commitments that more people ‘experience’ the arts.
Any region or sector that is faced with poverty, lack of education and frequent wars need to be engaged in arts. It through arts that people learn from people of other places how to relate with others. Through arts, peace and understanding are emphasized to the audience and even the performers.
Apart from the entertainment, people also learn economic activities and behaviour that will help improve their economic standard and even education. It is through these social values that the United Kingdom and other regions in the world should fully support the promotion of arts and culture.
This is because a region that does not put recreation, arts and culture in mind is likely to face any significant developments. Though various groups and people are coming up with theories and propaganda to try and kill these lucrative sectors, we should all oppose their intentions and invest in arts. This is through financial investments and even giving ourselves fully to ensure that there is progress in the art sector.
Economic and Intrinsic Values of the Arts
Since art can not maintain itself with its earnings only, individuals, organisations, and governments have supported it as described earlier. Baumol and Bowel in their ‘Performing Arts: The Economic Dilemma’4 argued that from fine arts, performing arts are labour-intensive and is in the field which not much as labour force reduction effect by the development of technology as in manufacturing industry.
Therefore, arts cannot sustain itself with its own income. Their studies were being placed on excellent paper so that they achieved a modern conversion of art economics. As they interpreted chronic deficit phenomenon of performing arts with the term, ‘Income Gap’, they diagnosed the overall administrative situation of performing arts in the 1960s as ‘cost disease.’
In other words, other fields can increase productivity by cutting labour forces and replacement by developed machines. However, reducing the numbers of players or actors in arts is directly related to the quality of the performance. Therefore, it is impossible to change balance gap which is constantly occurred in this field.
Nevertheless, since art has a character of a mixed good that contributes not only to private interests but also to public interests, Baumol and Bowel argue that public support for art is legitimate. Furthermore, they insist on the legitimacy of support by showing that art is related to honour, pride of a state and essential for the prosperity of the community, and should be maintained and developed for the future generations like a contribution of education.
Netzer supported their discussion of art as a mixed good by exemplifying ‘Positive Externality’.5 In other words, like opera, dance and performance arts share musical forms that they are interdependent on each other. Therefore, mixed goods move or there are shared chances of mutual employment.
Thus, a customer of art that belongs to one art genre is very likely to get some interest in another genre by other devices. However, even though his theory is right, we now experience that external effect does hardly contribute to increasing art organizations or artists’ economic interests.
While applied arts such as design and films of culture industry unlike fine arts can produce enormous profits by Window effect; fine arts desperately needs at the level of national support.6 Since applied art is considered almost an industry and dealt in the category, ‘cultural industry,’ the legitimacy of public support is treated in the same way as in other fields of industry.
However, fine art can hardly survive without support, and in the U.K., focus is put more on public support than private one. The art dealt in this paper is only fine arts except applied art which can be commercially survivable. As briefly examined in the previous part, art in the U.K. has a tradition which had depended market economy rather than public support.
The terms, ‘night watcher country’ and ‘invisible hand’ represents these ‘Laissez-Faire’ and ‘arm’s length principle’ traditions. However, after WWII, the government gradually started to intervene in arts. At the beginning, its main activity was sponsorship but after the establishment of The Arts Council in 1946 support became the main activities.
In the 1980s, under the Conservative regime, the Prime Minister Thatcher brought restrictions in the government financial expenses. She stressed on diversification of support for arts rather than depending on a single public support, the government.7 Especially, she emphasised supporting arts as combination of public and private supports with the most powerful private support, enterprise.
For this, the government established and executed a system of Business Sponsorship Incentive Scheme (BSIS) through Arts and Business (A & B), which links sponsorship to art organisations to greatly increase the enterprise’ support for art in hardship.
According to Business Sponsorship Incentive Scheme, when a new private supports 1 pound (at least 1,000 pound of support), the government supports 1 pound equality automatically, and for the later support for the same institution, the government shall support 1 pound for each 3 pounds (at least 3,000 pounds this time). And for the aids, the government supports up to 25,000 pounds.
This system began in 1984, and in 1995, it has been operated changing name to ‘The Paring Scheme.’ Through this system, art came to receive new support which never have existed before in a hard time, and the money supported in this way contributed the revitalization of arts. However, art industry received financial aids through this system while governmental aid would be reduced as much as the amount of it received from the enterprise.
This scheme made a concern that that unstable support is easily changeable by economic fluctuation and circumstances of enterprise would not replace the stable governmental support. However, the government tried to quiet this by emphasizing private support not as replacement of but as supplement for public support.
Also, as regardless of the quality of art, support for art that fits the enterprises increased, this system led to the raising questions of balanced development of the entire field of art by giving option in art support to enterprises rather than state having that.8
In fact, in the middle of 1970s of the U.K., as political, economic instability increased in the entire society, the government’s intervention of Arts Council became noticeable. The Conservatives became the party in power with the opposition party, Labour Party Prime Minister Harold Wilson, with more votes but fewer seats in January 1974.
But in the same year, Labour Party defeated the Conservatives and Harold Wilson was reappointed the Prime Minister. However, he resigned in March 1976 when the economy dropped and his political status weakened, James Callaghan took it over. In the same year, it was an inevitable consequence of the calling for loan form IMF by the Callaghan government and the U.K. entered under the management of IMF.9
The 1977 Arts Council annual report titled ‘The Arts in Hard Time’ suggested that the Council has been in economic differences in the middle of 1970s. Moreover, the title for the annual report in 1977 was ‘Value for Money.’ During these periods, economic pressure sharply increased due to the crisis of welfare state, changes for the promotion of economic efficiency in all the parts of British society.
These changes brought the fundamental modification of the governmental support for arts and culture with privatization of government-run organisations. Consequently, Thatcher government in the early 1980s cut millions of pounds from art support funds of the government, while stressing on economic efficiency and trying to maintain tight-money financing.
It began to put pressure on art organizations not to depend on the government only but to secure plural funding in various places such as private institutions or corporations. ‘Value for Money’ was the virtue that became a policy by law in Thatcher government to promote the value of money spent by the central government offices and other public institutions in the context of economy, efficiency, effectiveness, which are three principles of liberalist market economy.
At this time, a book which was focused primarily on economic importance of art was published and attracted attention of people. As the government cut support for art from harsh economic situation with the reasons of ‘no economic value’, the book titled ‘The Economic Importance of the Arts in Britain’ which argued that the governmental support for art should continue since it has economic value refuting based on the economic efficiency.10
John Myerscough, a proponent of art, wrote this book sponsored by Gulbenkian Foundation and the Arts Council with other scholars in this field.11 In this book; he analyzed the trend of the common art support in western countries. Culture and art organizations would gradually depend more upon private supports while the subject of public support would also go from the central government to local councils.
In this topic of the thread, the ideas of Myerscough took a position that the arts will be evaluated as value for money, as the economic standard and its significance. He asserted that the evaluation about the economical property of arts support is necessary by several classified reasons. Firstly, the arts promote the employment effect. According to his book, statistically the arts have 2.1% of direct creating employment of the total.
It is worth noting that the developments in any given region are always directly proportional to the level of success of the arts industry. As the arts organisations entered in the relevant area, the visual imagery of the area will be improved and it will be changed to a better place for living. Moreover, the arts bring other effects such as tourism promotion.
If the arts organisations are established, the people who want to see performance are gathering so the related industries such as restaurants, shopping, transportation and accommodation are also developed. He emphasized the fact that the foreign exchange earnings from exports of arts in Britain are enormous.
In addition, the arts are closely linked to the development of diverse areas such as fashion, architecture, design and photography etc. These opinions satisfied with the philosophy of ‘Value for money’ in Thatcher era, but opponent of this idea asserts that it ignores the intrinsic value of arts but pursues only the economic aspects.
Therefore, it has problems to regard the arts as some kind of industry. For this reason, Myerscough’s opinion is challenged with objections in two major aspects. First thing is related to the problems of statistical and numerical accuracy about economic contribution of arts and another aspect is that the arts should be treated in terms of intrinsic essential value not in economic terms.
According to ‘the Economic Unimportance of the Arts in Britain’, John Pick asserted that more than 60% of tourists would have visited Britain without purpose of arts by the quotation of statistics of British Tourist Office and proved that there is only 7% of tourists who want to cancel the travel for the reason that there is no arts for watching.
In addition, he pointed out that the study on the artistic economy by Myerscough has been exaggerated by showing the facts that there were only 7% of foreign tourists who has the most important purpose of visiting Britain as arts.12 This has greatly changed after the government initiated the art funding program also joined in this controversy and criticized in some respects of study on general artistic economic significance.13 First, the economic effects are too exaggerated.
She asserted that the people who insisted the artistic economy calculated the consumption of arts, employment effects and tax revenues etc. but they should consider whether the consumption and employment creation of art are new and additional. Second, she asserted that the arts funding contributes to economic development but the effects of funding on the other things except arts is passed over.
In order to prove their claim, spending the same amount of funding for other things have more effects than for arts is proved though it is not conducted.14 Thirdly, the evaluation of art is inappropriate. In other words, the arts aim to cultural development but evaluating by creating jobs and economic development is wrong for its purpose. In addition, the most important thing to evaluate arts is that the arts should be judged in the perspective of reform and improvement of quality of people’s life rather than the perspective of revenue growth or creating employment.
For these reasons, she insists that the purpose of new method to determine types of value in other different cultural areas can be classified with following four types as ‘new artistic creation’, ‘tradition and creation of advanced culture’, ‘preservation and transfer of cultural heritage’ and ‘broad-based participation for everybody and development’.
She advocated that the standard of arts should be treated connecting to the values such as its intrinsic value, excellence, public education etc. rather than to measure its standard as economic quantities. There is a very big misunderstanding between economists and arts policymakers, leaders and funders about the funding of the arts by the government.
The prolonged debate about the funding of the arts sector in the United Kingdom has greatly been due to the big misunderstandings. These misunderstandings have been mainly due to the failure to agree between the instrumental and the intrinsic expenditure of the already allocated funding. The major problem has been that the responsible personnel have been unable to acknowledge the intrinsic benefits.
Therefore they should not try to eliminate the economic criteria but in stead improve the economic practice. The field of arts should not be judged and criticized on the basis of the products that are produced by the artists. The class to blame is the artists themselves because once an artist is bad, there is no doubt he or she will produce poor pieces of art.
One of the vital intrinsic values that need to be addressed is the value of good decision making. Decision making is necessary as it will ensure that there is smooth running of the funds that are allocated to any sector by the government. These good decision making skills move hand in hand with the field of economics.
This then calls for the embracing of the good and correct economics and economists in the running of the arts council funds. Putting in mind of these values and requirements will ensure that the expectations of the public are fully met. The public expects that with the funding, there is going to be a drastic improvement in the arts and cultural sectors.
Recent British Art Policies and Supporting Excellence
There is no doubt that currently, there exists a stumbling block in the funding of the national arts council. This has created a major debate in the United Kingdom political class as many people want the arts council funded fully. However, the government is strict and committed on ensuring that all the policies are going to be put in place to ensure that any decisions are based on some specific evidence.
This is because the government has set out targets hence the need to ensure that all the decisions being made will be driving towards the achievement of these targets. All public sectors must contribute to the achievement of New Labour’s overall objectives as part of the implementation of ‘third way politics’. The sector of culture and arts has had a lot of developments hence has to demonstrate its stake in the development of the states.
In fact the art sector has been expected to play a key and major role in the economic development, overall marketing of the United Kingdom and play a major role in the social relations of the people of the United Kingdom. After the starting of New Labour’s Party led by Tony Blair in 1997, the reforming sectors of the U.K. based on young and fresh image of Tony Blair went beyond the views of the society, policy and economy.
They come in with a force that had in mind the issue of investing in arts and culture.15 In order to change the existing old and conservative British image, young Prime Minister asserted the political slogan as ‘Creative Britain’, ‘Cool Britannia’ which is focused on making creative Britain by the creative industries and creative education. Under these circumstances, the significance of culture was highlighted all over in the British policy.
The governmental department included name ‘culture’ for the first time in the British cultural administration history.16 As the Department for Culture, Media and Sports were established, the budget for the British culture increased almost to double. This was one of the major indicators of the government’s willingness to greatly fund the culture and arts sectors.
The increased government funding for culture and art, supporting programs in cultural fields gave the best records as compared to the former government. It is during this time that the United Kingdom prime minister celebrated his achievements of British cultural identities during a speech at Tate Modern Museum that the Golden age of British culture has come in 2007 after a ruling for 10 years.17 In one word of New Labour’s arts policy, it can be described as a policy based on social and economic effects.
It was a characteristic having the same way of ‘Policy for majority’ as their party motto, and it reflected difficulties of judgment on artistic values in the cultural diversity. In addition, this new government insisted that the art supported by public funding can be justified by majority of people could enjoy and participate in it.
Thus the accessibility of arts became important basis of art support and arts and culture were used for the main medium of social integration. It is through the use of the arts as a form of social integration that has further enhanced the intrinsic and social values in the United Kingdom. This has ensured there is understanding being the various communities and cultures.
Through the arts, the people have had to live peacefully without any suspicion of any other tribe or race. Since the ruling by New Labour Party, the cultural accessibility expanded remarkably by various institutional supports, increased cultural budget and social integration policies.
Moreover, by the expansion of cultural infrastructure and increasing numbers of applying lottery fund for arts, British cultural environment has changed and improved.18 However, on the other hand, there was a criticism that the principle of art support preceded the artistic excellence and it harms the freedom of arts. Besides, there was a rising concern that these schemes could neglect the quality of arts due to too much wider approaches.
In particular, the artists should spend long time for writing application report for showing their works’ contribution to the society or economy. Consequently, there were complaints that the substantial expansion of funding for arts is almost same as non-exist, due to the spending of too much money on the education and participation rather than the creation of excellence.
It is logical that most of the money should actually be spending on the pieces of art themselves. Compare with the times with Conservative government when the support for art was shrunk by the emphasizing the efficiency and economics, last 10 years of Labour party’s contribution to arts became immense amounting to more than GBP 7.2 million.
Nevertheless, a lot of artists and people in art organisations asserted that the culture policy of Tony Blair is not big different with Margaret Thatcher’s strategy because of aiming on the economic profits and social roles of arts rather than focusing on the artistic excellence. In other words, there was doubt about the British cultural policy which was valuable for developing the intrinsic value of art and for creating excellent working environment for the artists.
There is a proposed DCMS-base centre that deals with excellence for cultural economics; this will help increase the studies of arts in the United Kingdom. It is expected that this, with the help of the research council and the arts council will be a success. There are still some other steps that will help as the intrinsic and social benefits are a necessity.
Due to the fact that artistic measures are not fully reflected in the market measures, most of the art simply holds the characteristics of just being publicly good.19 This now calls for the decision markers to ensure that the piece of art gets the true values they receive while in the market. This therefore calls for the increase in the in the public measures and investments to ensure that this dream is met.
This slow response to the issue of the value of art has been mainly due to reluctance to the economic methods. Therefore, there is need to embrace this economic methods and do away with the archaic methods that are proving of no use to the artists. In this process, ‘Supporting Excellence in the Arts: From the Measurement to Judgment’20, was published with the contention that the basis of art support should focus on the artistic excellence.
A review of this report was carried out in the year 2007 that was trying to establish the best ways that the art council could be funded. Through the same project, several ways were to be analysed to try and tap in the rich potential of United Kingdom in terms of arts and culture. McMaster (2008) in his report says that arts in the United Kingdom is facing a very rough times hence the need of engaging on the revival agenda.
The report further indicates that the Great Britain is rich in the field of art and culture which needs to be tapped. In the report, he further suggests and explains how the public subsidies can be used to ensure the flourishing of the arts sector.
McMaster further gives some recommendations in his report which included; the government should employ at least two artists or practitioners on the board of the “supporting excellence in the arts” committee. It is through the employment of these artists at the local level that will ensure that artists at the local level are identified and natured. This will discover the hidden potentials that are being held by people in the local places.
This will equally link up these small local art centres to the national art council and in the process improve the management. He further recommends that the funded organizations be assessed based on self evaluation and peer review that based on objective judgement depending with the situation of each organization. The report had its basis that excellence forms the backbone of living hence becomes very necessary to every person.
The report further acknowledges that there are more excellent work in the United Kingdom but insists that if tuning of approach cultural policies is done, there is still a greater potential for the United Kingdom. The McMaster report has received a lot of support and encouragement from the British government and the art council; however, there are concerns that the word “excellence” is not defined.
Excellence is the overall success of the field of art in the United Kingdom as it is the overall impacting of the social and intrinsic values to the society. In addition, this report does not provide the measures with which excellence can be judged. There is no doubt that excellence is one of the major aspects desired in the field of art. According to McMaster, excellence is being described as an aspect that occurs when the experience affects or changes an individual.
The funding of the arts council has also been further reduced; According to the spending review 2010, as every governmental department tightened their budget, DCMS also announced their combined capital and resource will be cut 25 per cent from 2010 to 2014. In addition, the funds were further reduced when there was the change of the government in 2010 from the labour to the conservative.21
However, currently the government has discovered that these financial cuts are influencing the arts sector negatively. Therefore the government is to minimize wasteful and inefficient spending by the cultural system. After the significant cut of cultural budget, DCMS and ACE still declare that the McMaster’s idea is their main goal. Mention any successful economy and get a government with rich artistic and cultural resources.
Through the arts and culture, the communities learn to stay together peacefully and engage in the economic and social development. It is because of this that a lot of support is required for the arts industry. This support will ensure that there is production of finer pieces of art which will further motivate the children and other people to venture or participate in art.
Through this study, I have developed a keen interest in the fields of culture and arts. The problems that are being experienced in the government and the arts council about the funding and the allocation of funds to artists need to be addressed urgently so that the experience the expected excellence.
The obvious fact is that the public demand and expectations are very high; this calls for more efforts to ensure that most of the public demands are met. There are various recommendations I have highlighted in this dissertation which aims at ensuring that the public and the artists actually experience the intrinsic and social values of art.
This will further improve the inter-relationship of the people and foster both economic and educational development. It has been clearly shown that there is no contradiction in the decision making about the funding of the projects. One can either use the economic or the rational choice method.
There is no doubt that there is no contradiction in the decision making about the funding of the arts. It has also been clearly shown that the economic methods could be the best funding methods. This is only possible if they are known and applied properly. In addition, there is a clear indication that the art sector has a lot to gain from the economic funding methods hence in the end embrace the intrinsic and the social values to the people.
In conclusion, there is a proposed DCMS-base centre that deals with excellence for cultural economics; this will help increase the studies of arts in the United Kingdom. It is expected that this, with the help of the research council and the arts council will be a success.
There are still some other steps that will help as the intrinsic and social benefits are a necessity. Due to the fact that artistic measures are not fully reflected in the market measures, most of the art simply holds the characteristics of just being publicly good. This now calls for the decision markers to ensure that the piece of art gets the true values they receive while in the market.
This therefore calls for the increase in the in the public measures and investments to ensure that this dream is met. This slow response to the issue of the value of art has been mainly due to reluctance to the economic methods. Therefore, there is need to embrace this economic methods and do away with the archaic methods that are proving of no use to the artists.
In conclusion, this study need to form the basis of how the overall issue of the funding of the arts council is going to be addressed. This will equally provide the policy makers to come up with more efficient policies that will ensure a great development in the arts sector.
A good number of problems and controversies have been highlighted; these conflicts about the funding scheme are greatly affecting the overall performance and success of the arts council and the arts industry. The intrinsic and social values highlighted in this dissertation are very necessary; hence the United Kingdom government should put in a lot of effort to ensure that it meets the public expectations22.
Arts Council of England, ‘What People Want from the Arts London’, Arts Council England, 2008, Retrieved from <http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/downloads/whatpeoplewant.pdf>.
Bakhshi, H, A Freeman & G Hitchen, ‘Measuring intrinsic value’, how to stop worrying and love economics, 2009, retrieved <http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14902/1/MPRA_paper_14902.pdf>
Baumol, WJ & WG Bowen, Performing Arts, The Economic Dilemma, The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, 1966, p.605.
Carey, J, What Good are the Arts?, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 2005, p.29.
Cowen,T, Government and the Value of Culture. DCMS, London, 2004, p.46.
Hansen, TB, ‘Cultural Economics and Cultural Policy’, A Discussion in the Danish Context, European Journal of Cultural Policy, vol.22, no. 2, 1995, pp.87-104.
John, E, ‘Art and Knowledge’, in B Gait & D McIver lopes (eds), The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, Routledge, London and New York, 2001, pp.204-237.
John, H, Capturing Cultural Value, Demos, London, 2004, pp.302-394.
John, H, ‘Democratic culture’, opening up the arts to everyone, Demos, 2008, retrieved <http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Democratic_Culture.pdf>.
John, H, Publicly Funded Culture and the Creative Industries, Arts Council England, London, 2007, p.48.
Junghee K, Civilization, Culturism, Enterprise Culture, SNU Press, Kansas, 2010, pp134-135
Keyens, JM, The End of Laissez-Faire, McGraw-Hill, London, 1926, pp. 12-16.
Myerscough, J, The Economic Importance of the Arts in the Britain, Policy Studies Institute, London, 1988, p.80.
Netzer, D, the Subsidized Muse, Cambridge Univ. Press, London, 1978, p.23
Pick, J, ‘The Economic Unimportance of the Arts’, Journal of Arts Policy and Management, vol. 3, no.3, 1989, pp.11-12.
Richard, E, Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce, Harvard University Press, New York, 2002, pp.199-288.
Tessa, J, Government and the Value of Culture, DCMS, London, 2004, retrieved <http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/valueofculture.pdf >.
Tyler, C, Good and Plenty; The Creative Successes of American Arts Funding, 1st edn, Princeton University Press, Woodstock, 2008, p.511.
Upchurch, A & JM Keynes, ‘The Bloomsbury Group and the Origins of the Arts Council Movement’, funding of arts council, 1990, pp. 58-67, retrieved <http://leeds.academia.edu/AnnaUpchurch/Papers/258493/John_Maynard_Keynes_the_Bloomsbury_Group_and_the_Origins_of_the_Arts_Council_Movement>.
Vasari, G, Lives of the Artists, trans. J. Bondanella & P. Bondanella, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991, pp.312-3.
1 WJ Baumol & WG Bowen, Performing Arts, The Economic Dilemma, The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, 1966, p.605.
2 JM Keyens, The End of Laissez-Faire, McGraw-Hill, London, 1926, pp. 12-16.
3 A Upchurch & JM Keynes, ‘The Bloomsbury Group and the Origins of the Arts Council Movement’, funding of arts council, 1990, pp. 58-67, retrieved <http://leeds.academia.edu/AnnaUpchurch/Papers/258493/John_Maynard_Keynes_the_Bloomsbury_Group_and_the_Origins_of_the_Arts_Council_Movement>.
4 T Cowen, Government and the Value of Culture. DCMS, London, 2004, p.46
5 D, Netzer the Subsidized Muse, Cambridge Univ. Press, London, 1978, p.23.
6 G Vasari, Lives of the Artists, trans. J. Bondanella & P. Bondanella, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991, pp.312-3.
7 J Tessa, Government and the Value of Culture, DCMS, London, 2004, retrieved <http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/valueofculture.pdf >.
8 Arts Council of England, ‘What People Want from the Arts London’, Arts Council England, 2008, Retrieved from <http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/downloads/whatpeoplewant.pdf>.
9 K Junghee, Civilization, Culturism, Enterprise Culture, SNU Press, Kansas, 2010, pp134-135.
10 J Myerscough, The Economic Importance of the Arts in the Britain, Policy Studies Institute, London, 1988, p.80.
11 H John, Publicly Funded Culture and the Creative Industries, Arts Council England, London, 2007, p.48.
12 J Pick, ‘The Economic Unimportance of the Arts’, Journal of Arts Policy and Management, vol. 3, no.3, 1989, pp.11-12.
13 TB Hansen, ‘Cultural Economics and Cultural Policy’, A Discussion in the Danish Context, European Journal of Cultural Policy, vol.22, no. 2, 1995, pp.87-104.
14 John, E, ‘Art and Knowledge’, in B Gait & D McIver lopes (eds), The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, Routledge, London and New York, 2001, pp.204-237.
15 C Tyler, Good and Plenty; The Creative Successes of American Arts Funding, 1st edn, Princeton University Press, Woodstock, 2008, p.511.
16 J Carey, What Good are the Arts?, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 2005, p.29.
17 H John, Capturing Cultural Value, Demos, London, 2004, pp.302-394.
18 H John, ‘Democratic culture’, opening up the arts to everyone, Demos, 2008, retrieved <http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Democratic_Culture.pdf>.
19 Cowen,T, Government and the Value of Culture. DCMS, London, 2004, p.46.
20 E Richard, Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce, Harvard University Press, New York, 2002, pp.199-288.
21 H Bakhshi, A Freeman & G Hitchen, ‘Measuring intrinsic value’, how to stop worrying and love economics, 2009, retrieved <http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14902/1/MPRA_paper_14902.pdf>
22 J Carey, What Good are the Arts?, London, 2005, p29