Andrzej KLIMCZUK
IMN Country Representative in Poland
At the beginning of 21st century growing importance of culture in
socio-economic development is observed. Cultural industries and the wider
creative industries represent the area that is the main source of economic
growth. In this article’sconclusion from the study of barriers to development
of creative industries in culturallydiverseregions will be discussed. Diversity
can provide both resources for endogenous development, as well as be a barrier
in communication or a source of conflicts between different ethnic and national
groups. Therefore implementation of strategies towards multicultural and
diversity management is important.
This article is based on a critical assessment of the main conclusions
from the Polish project“Diagnosis of Participation in Culture in Podlaskie
Voivodship” (Poleszczuk et al. 2012;
Klimczuk 2013a). It was completed in 2012 by The Aleksander Węgierko Drama
Theater in Bialystokand SocLab Foundation as a part of Culture
Observatoryprogram maintained bythe Ministry of Culture and National Heritage
of the Republic of Poland.The primary objective of this project was to provide
a complete, adequate, reliable and practical knowledge in the field of cultural
participation, needs and perceptions by the region’s inhabitants. A second aim
was to determine the quantitative and qualitative image of cultural institutions
and the assessment of artistic activity management.
Diagnosis includes the use of a range of research methods and techniques:
desk research, 4 focus group interviews, 5 individual in-depth interviews, computer-assisted
telephone interviews on the sample of 550 residents of Podlaskie Voivodship aged
15–74, pen and paper interviews with 150 high culture users from Bialystok as
well as computer-aided web interviews with 150 Drama Theater users. Conclusions
from these studies may be useful for researchers and managers of cultural
institutions in the culturally diverse regions.
Podlaskie Voivodeship is the part of Poland with the biggest populations
of national and ethnicminorities(GUS 2008). The region is characterized by the residence
and activities of representatives and institutions of the following
groups:Belarusians (46 thousand), Lithuanians(5 thousand), Ukrainians (1.4
thousand), Russians (0.6 thousand), Jews (several families), Tatars and
Roma(about 0.3 thousand). The region also inhabits religious-denominational
groups(Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Protestants, Old Believers), regional
communities (Bialystok, Lomza, Suwalki), communities distinguished by the
culture of origin/historicalnationality (peasants, post-nobility, small town) and
migrants.This diversity has been generally recognized by the authorities of the
region and considered as one of its key strengths in strategy development (UMWP
2006: 5).However, in the updated strategy, it was found that cultural diversity
has not resulted in the development of regional tourism and economy. Therefore
it was decided to move away from a regional vision in which the
multiculturalism policy was one of the guiding principles. A new vision is: “Podlaskie
Voivodeship: green, open, accessible and entrepreneurial” (UMWP 2013:19, 23).A.
Sadowski, a reviewer of the final report of the project“Diagnosis of
Participation in Culture in Podlaskie Voivodship”, stressed a similar
observation. He claims: “A review of statistical data on participation in
culture as well as culturaloffers conducted from the perspective of regional
cultural policy, especially two generalizations are worthy of highlight. The authors
suggest, in principle, the lack of regional cultural industries and the fact
that the cultural diversity of residents is not reflected in action programs”
(Sadowski 2012: 2).
Desk research of strategic documents in Podlaskie Voivodship showed that
cultural diversity was defined in a very general way. Actually carried out or
planned for the implementation projects and activities that encourage or
exploit related dimension of cultural capital resources were not pointed out in
the documents. For example, “Program for Cultural Development of Podlaskie Voivodeship
to 2020” very generally recognized this issue as a strategic aim VII “Creating
conditions for intercultural dialogue, supporting minorities, ethnic and
religious initiatives” and refers to it in objectives I “Protection of
monuments and cultural heritage” andV“Increase in the level of participation in
culture” (UMWP 2008: 16, 19, 21).Later “Regional Social Policy Strategy for
2010–2018” brings this theme only in the diagnostic layer, although it presumes
compliance with the missionof “Regional Development Strategy of the Podlaskie
to 2020”, which was: “Podlaskie Voivodeship as a region of active and
sustainable development with the use of environmental values, multicultural
tradition and the borderline position”(UMWP 2006: 33; ROPS2010: 106). In 2009,
multiculturalism constituted the theme of application to European Capital of
Culture contest for the city of Bialystok, the capital of the region (UMB
2010b). This proposal has been rejected due to too little involvement of
residents and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) into the construction of
cultural policy.
“Diagnosis of Participation in Culture in Podlaskie Voivodship” confirms
that the stimulation of cultural diversity potential in the region is one of
its key challenges (Poleszczuk et al.
2012:50–51).Experts during interviews indicated that cultural diversity is used
only in very commercialized forms, not associated with high culture. At the
same time there is a closing of the various minority groups in their own
borders (bonding social capital), limiting their openness to cooperation both
between themselves and with representatives of the Polish population. Migration
from the region of the creative persons that work or could work in creative
industry was also emphasized.Some experts considered that the construction of a
multicultural society in the region is becoming a kind of myth. These opinions
were supported by examples of closing the minority groups to cooperate and the
absence of benefits for the region through its promotion by multiculturalism in
comparing it to other regions of the country. It was noted that the region
lacks public debate around these issues, which would allow the development of
common positions and proposals for action to change the existing situation.
Culture
and creative industries in the
context of regional policy
In the conducted study of regional cultural policy it was pointed out
that in contrast to the idea of multiculturalism, concepts of culture and
creative industries are generally absent in public discourse in Podlaskie
Voivodship (Poleszczuk et al. 2012:
28–29). This contrasts with the observed world development trends and
recommendations from national and European strategic documents. Contemporary in
developed countries the transition from cultural sectors to the creative
industriesis observed (Klasik 2010: 50–51). A. Klasik noted that these first
outside public institutions include the production and distribution of cultural
goods and services conducted for profit companies and individuals. In the case
of creative industries the rules are: treatment of cultural activity as a
specific effort and outcome;emphasizing creativity, understood as the ability
to permanently create new goods and services, which have an economic value; and
diversity of intellectual property forms. In the project “Diagnosis of
Participation in Culture in Podlaskie Voivodship” a broad understanding of
cultural and creative industries was adopted according to C. Barker (2005: 415).
His theory assumes that these industries are shaped in the cities, by including
entities and institutions that, throughcommunications, media, art, music,
advertising and architecture among others are creating attractiveness of cities,
which is reflectedfurther into an increase of employment, attracting investors
and representatives of the creative class.
It should be noted that for some of the key cultural economics researchers,
as R. Towse (2011: 387–389), the terms “cultural sectors”/“cultural industries”
and “creative sectors”/“creative industries”are used interchangeably. According
to others, such as D. Throsby (2010: 103–105, 2011: 38–39), industries are only
part of certain sectors of the economy, while the concepts of “cultural
sectors”/“cultural industries” have a narrower meaning and relate mainly to the
traditional fields of art and culture, the mass products and services, like
music, video games, movies, books and fashion, press, radio and television. The
concepts of “creative sectors”/“creative industries” have their broader
significance because in addition they include creative activity within
not-traditional art and culture fields: the advertising industry, design,
architecture and related sectors, such as software development, education,
tourism, electronics, telecommunications. Creative industries contemporary are
the most important areas of growth in the modern global economy and generate
growth and employment in dependent industries, contribute to the revitalization
of space, innovation and the income growth(see:UNCTAD 2010; Klasik 2010: 52, 55–58;
Throsby 2010: 113–122; Kern 2011: 55–69).
Entities of the cultural sector in Podlaskie Voivodeship are largely
concentrated in its capital –city of Bialystok. The city has 294 thousand
inhabitants, which is almost 24.5% inhabitants of the region.According to the
non-government organizations database of Klon/Jawor (2013) in the region 246 NGOs
are working within culture sector, whereof 176 has its headquarters in
Bialystok (71.5%). Database of City Office in Bialystok (UMB 2013) contains 156
cultural sector entities, including public and commercial, while official NGOs
database contains 107 cultural sector entities (68.5%). Study of the Central
Statistical Office from 2009 show that in Poland each region have average 12
theaters, 48 museums, 525 public libraries, 22 galleries, 252 cultural
centersand 28 fixed cinemas (GUS 2010: 38–39). Podlaskie Voivodeship in terms
of all types of cultural institutions is below the national average. The region
has the lowest number of public libraries (2.9% of all national entities), underdeveloped
houses of cultureinfrastructure (4.2%) and of fixed cinemas (3.3%). Most
affordable to all residents of the region are fairly evenly spaced cultural
centers and public libraries.
Table
1. Cultural institutions in Bialystok and Podlaskie Voivodeship in 2011
(Source: GUS 2013)
Institutions
|
Bialystok
|
Podlaskie
Voivodeship |
Bialystok/ Podlaskie
Voivodeship |
Library facilities
|
17
|
247
|
6.88%
|
Research, professional
libraries
|
27
|
57
|
47.37%
|
Fixed cinemas
|
3
|
14
|
21.43%
|
Museums including branches
|
5
|
27
|
18.52%
|
Drama theater
|
1
|
2
|
50.00%
|
Puppet theater
|
2
|
3
|
66.67%
|
Philharmonic
|
1
|
2
|
50.00%
|
Galleries and art salons
|
3
|
8
|
37.50%
|
Cultural establishments,
centers, clubsand community centers
|
15
|
158
|
9.49%
|
Table
2. Cultural institutions in Poland by voivodships in 2009 (Source:GUS 2010: 37)
Specification
|
Theaters*
|
Museums
|
Public libraries
|
Galleries**
|
Houses of culture***
|
Fixed cinemas
|
Poland
|
186
|
774
|
8392
|
346
|
4027
|
448
|
Dolnośląskie
|
18
|
58
|
643
|
19
|
262
|
44
|
Kujawsko-pomorskie
|
8
|
29
|
450
|
13
|
199
|
16
|
Lubelskie
|
6
|
46
|
601
|
10
|
188
|
28
|
Lubuskie
|
3
|
15
|
260
|
4
|
90
|
13
|
Łódzkie
|
12
|
46
|
561
|
40
|
238
|
28
|
Małopolskie
|
22
|
111
|
762
|
69
|
480
|
43
|
Mazowieckie
|
40
|
113
|
991
|
56
|
256
|
53
|
Opolskie
|
3
|
13
|
320
|
3
|
232
|
11
|
Podkarpackie
|
3
|
40
|
690
|
5
|
324
|
30
|
Podlaskie
|
7
|
24
|
246
|
9
|
169
|
15
|
Pomorskie
|
13
|
59
|
336
|
20
|
226
|
19
|
Śląskie
|
20
|
60
|
816
|
36
|
387
|
52
|
Świętokrzyskie
|
3
|
24
|
296
|
11
|
130
|
11
|
Warmińsko-mazurskie
|
4
|
25
|
319
|
14
|
146
|
23
|
Wielkopolskie
|
12
|
86
|
718
|
19
|
379
|
41
|
Zachodniopomorskie
|
12
|
25
|
383
|
18
|
321
|
21
|
*Only the main stage, having
its own team; **Institutions engaged primarily or exclusively in exhibition
business; ***Cultural establishments, centers, clubs and community centers.
Cultural sector in Bialystok stands out positively comparing to
Podlaskie Voivodeship. However city took the last place in the index of culture
sector development that was taking into account all 18 provincial capitals in
Poland (Namyślak 2013: 115). First place went to Cracow (result 0,731 in
Hellwig’s taxonomic method), second was Warsaw (0,648) and the third Opole
(0,545). Cultural attractiveness of Bialystok resulted with 0,055 and was
significantly lower than other cities from the poorer eastern Poland (e.g.
Kielce 0,237; Lublin 0,224; Rzeszów 0,223). Index was calculated as a synthesis
of five indicators from 2010 public statistics: (1) cultural institutions per
10,000 residents; (2) visiting cultural institutions per resident; (3) section
R.90.0 of Polish economic entities system per 10,000 residents; creative sector
associated with culture and entertainment; (4) expenditures per resident (in
PLN) for cultural development and the protection of Polish national heritage;
(5) revenue per resident (in PLN) from sources associated with cultural
institutions and institutions protecting Poland’s national heritage.
While in Podlaskie exists entities representing cultural and creative
industries their pro-development role is not quite the object of interest of
public authorities or residents. According to Plawgo et al. (2011) the region needs more studies on: the state of the
creative industry; its share in socio-economic development of the
region;relations in projects of the cultural and creative sectors entities with
related/dependent sectors;on the concept of development of such industries.
Important barrier to the development of creative industries in the region is
also the lack of adequate strategic approach of Bialystok authorities. In“Bialystok
City Development Strategy for 2011–2020 plus” in a total area of culture,
sport and tourism within the priority D.4. “Fostering entrepreneurship in the
sphere of tourism and cultural activities”as one of the directions of action
was D.4.1. “Creating conditions for the development of cultural industries in
the city” (UMB 2010a: 128).
The needs for growth of entrepreneurship in the sphere of culture were
highlighted here as well as to stimulate the creation of a private impresario
agency, which would create in a city a prestigious event recognized nationally
and internationally. These actions have not been started so far due to a lack
of political will. At the same time the document is missing a vision of
creating a coherent strategy for cultural policy and industries by proposition
to develop five different, thematic programs so the cultural field is divided.
These programs are:(1) infrastructure development in the fields of culture,
tourism, sport and recreation; (2) activity development in the fields of
culture, tourism, sport and recreation; (3) construction of sport and
recreational facilities; (4)city cooperation with NGOs in the field of
culture, art, protection of cultural and national heritage; (5) protection of
monuments, cultural heritage and contemporary cultural goods.There is a lack of
monitoring and evaluation of these tasks implementation. Information about the progress
of those programs is not available for public.
“Diagnosis of Participation in Culture in Podlaskie Voivodship” made
possible to note a further barriers to the development of cultural and creative
industries in the region(Poleszczuk et al.
2012: 137–139). Regional cultural policy insufficiently explored the potential
of NGOs, informal groups and commercial entities. Support for cultural
initiatives in a the area of social entrepreneurship and social economy, such
as those involving tourism and handicrafts are also slightly. An important
barrier is the long-standing perception of the Podlaskie as a peripheral and
borderline region.
Conclusions
andrecommendations
The article had an aim to describe general barriers to the development
of creative industries in culturally diverse regions on the example of Podlaskie
Voivodship from Poland. Selected theoretical concepts and conclusions ofthe
research project “Diagnosis of Participation in Culture in Podlaskie Voivodship”
were discussed. Attention was paid to the possibility of using cultural sector
entities potential as well as conclusions regarding the implementation of the
cultural policy at the regional level and in its capital – the city of
Bialystok.
One of the key challenges of the region is diagnostic and programming
work for the construction of a regional model of a creative industry that would
take into account local economic specialization and relationship with the innovation
system (cf.Poleszczuk et al. 2012;
143–153). This objective should be achieved by creating a cross-sectoral
cooperation and common diagnosis of local cultural resources in the context of
supporting entrepreneurship. This process should involve regional authorities,
cultural institutions, higher education, business environment and NGOs.
Other areas of cooperation in this context may be: cyclical,
cross-sectoral meetings of experts for the promotion of culture; establishing a
system for monitoring the effectiveness of promotional activities; combining the
activities of cultural institutions by shared calendars and events; joint
projects rooted in local history, associated with the local heritage and
monuments, aimed at solving specific problems residents. It is reasonable to
build medialab –interdisciplinary cultural institution focused on cooperation,
including scientists, artists and IT specialists (Klimczuk 2013b). The starting
point for the construction of creative industry can also be development of
“silver economy” as a policy for the creative ageing and old age. It is also
possible to create the an rebate system between cultural, sport and commercial
entities. It is also important to build cooperation between cultural
institutions and local media in accordance withcorporate social responsibility
and with the objective of wider promotion of culture.
References
Barker, C. 2005.Studia
kulturowe. Teoria i praktyka (Polish translation of: Cultural studies: theory and practice, 2003).Cracow: UJ.
GUS, Central Statistical Office of Poland. 2003. NPR i PSR 2002. Raport z wyników spisów powszechnych - Województwo Podlaskie. GUS, Warsaw, Bialystok.
GUS, Central Statistical Office of Poland. 2008.Ludność według deklarowanej narodowości oraz
województw w 2002 r. Communication of Central Statistical Office of
Polandfrom 15.07.2008 [online], [cited 14 March 2014]. Available from internet:http://old.stat.gov.pl/cps/rde/xbcr/gus/nsp2002_tabl3.xls
GUS, Central Statistical Office of Poland. 2009.Prognoza ludności na lata 2008–2035. GUS, Warsaw.
GUS, Central Statistical Office of Poland. 2010.Instytucje kultury w Polsce w 2009 roku.GUS, Warsaw.
GUS, Central Statistical Office of Poland. 2013.Bank Danych Lokalnych [online], [cited
14 March 2014]. Available from internet: www.stat.gov.pl/bdl
Kern, P. 2011.Polityka kulturalna: nowe trendy w Europie, in B. Jung
(Ed.).Ekonomia kultury. Od teorii do
praktyki. Warsaw: NCK, 55–69.
Klasik,
A. 2010. Od sektora kultury do przemysłów kreatywnych, in A. Gwóźdź (Ed.).Od przemysłów kultury do kreatywnej gospodarki.
Warsaw: NCK, 47–63.
Klimczuk,
A. 2013a. Przemysły kultury i kreatywne w regionie zróżnicowanym kulturowo.
Bariery i wyzwania z perspektywy polityki regionalnej, in R. Ulatowska (Ed.).Przemysły
kreatywne 2.0.12.Cracow: Fundacja
Rozwoju Kina, 72–80.
Klimczuk, A. 2013b. The role of medialabs in regional
cultural and innovative policy, in Š. Hittmár (Ed.).Management trends in theory and practice.Žilina: University of
Žilina, 130–132.
Klon/Jawor.2013.Bazy
ngo.pl [online] [cited 14 March 2014]. Available from internet:
http://bazy.ngo.pl Namyślak, B. 2013.Zróżnicowanie poziomu rozwoju sektora kultury w
miastach wojewódzkich w Polsce, Prace
Geograficzne 134: 101–120.
Plawgo,
B.; Grabska, A.; Klimczuk-Kochańska, M.; Klimczuk, A.; Kierklo, J.; Żynel-Etel,
J. 2011.Startery podlaskiej gospodarki.
Analiza gospodarczych obszarów wzrostu i innowacji województwa podlaskiego:
sektor produkcji oprogramowania komputerowego. Wojewódzki Urząd Pracy w
Białymstoku,Bialystok.
Poleszczuk,
J.; Sztop-Rutkowska, K.; Kiszkiel, Ł.; Klimczuk, A.; Mejsak, R.J.; Winiecka, K.
2012.Diagnoza partycypacji w kulturze w
województwie podlaskim. Teatr Dramatyczny im. Aleksandra Węgierki, Fundacja
SocLab,Bialystok.
Regionalny
Ośrodek Polityki Społecznej w Białymstoku (ROPS). 2010.Wojewódzka Strategia Polityki Społecznej na lata 2010–2018.
Regionalny Ośrodek Polityki Społecznej w Białymstoku,Bialystok.
Sadowski,
A. 2012.Recenzja wydawnicza pracy
zbiorowej pt.: „Diagnoza partycypacji w kulturze w województwie podlaskim”,unpublished
review of research report in access of Teatr Dramatyczny im. Aleksandra Węgierki and Fundacja SocLab.
Throsby, D. 2010.Ekonomia
i kultura (Polish translation of:
Economics and culture, 2001).Warsaw: NCK.
Throsby,
D. 2011. Ekonomika kultury i polityka kulturalna: co łączy te dziedziny?, in B.
Jung (Ed.).Ekonomia kultury. Od teorii do
praktyki.Warsaw: NCK, 33–43.
Towse,
R. 2011.Ekonomia
kultury. Kompendium (Polish translation of: A Textbook of Cultural Economics, 2010).Warsaw: NCK.
Urząd
Miejski w Białymstoku (UMB). 2010a.Strategia
Rozwoju Miasta Białegostoku na lata 2011-2020 plus. Urząd Miejski w
Białymstoku,Bialystok.
Urząd
Miejski w Białymstoku (UMB). 2010b.
Sztuka Współistnienia. Wniosek aplikacyjny o tytuł Europejskiej Stolicy Kultury
– Bialystok 2016. Urząd Miejski w Białymstoku, Fundacja M.I.A.S.T.O. Bialystok,Bialystok.
Urząd
Miejski w Białymstoku (UMB). 2013.Official
website of the Municipal Office in Bialystok.
www.bialystok.pl [14.03.2014].
Urząd
Marszałkowski Województwa Podlaskiego (UMWP). 2006.Strategia Rozwoju Województwa Podlaskiego do 2020 roku. Urząd
Marszałkowski Województwa Podlaskiego,Bialystok.
Urząd
Marszałkowski Województwa Podlaskiego (UMWP). 2008.Program Rozwoju Kultury Województwa Podlaskiego do roku 2020. Urząd
Marszałkowski Województwa Podlaskiego,Bialystok.
Urząd
Marszałkowski Województwa Podlaskiego (UMWP). 2013.Strategia Rozwoju Województwa Podlaskiego do roku 2020.Urząd
Marszałkowski Województwa Podlaskiego, Bialystok.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
(UNCTAD). 2010.Creative economy: a
feasible development option. United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development, Geneva.
Suggested
Citation:
A.
Klimczuk, Barriers to the development of creative industries in culturally
diverse region, „Coactivity: Philosophy, Communication”, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014,
pp. 145-152.
No comments:
Post a Comment