Cultural creative industries or creative (cultural) industries?
Keane, Michael A. & Zhang, Weihong (2008) Cultural creative industries or creative (cultural) industries? In Hu, Huilin (Ed.) China's Cultural Industries Forum (Chinese publication). Shanghai Peoples' Publishing, Shanghai.
This essay examines changes in the role of cultural policy in Australia during the past two decades, a period that witnessed an increasing division between supporters of publicly-funded arts and those who identified with the economic value of the creative economy. By the end of the decade the term creative industries had become the preferred approach to policy making, even though there is yet no national creative industries policy, such as in New Zealand. The term 'creative industries' was first coined by Australian Labor Party policy makers in the early 1990s, a period of transition towards greater economic accountability in the arts and cultural industries. The ensuing 'creation nation' arts policy was influential beyond Australia' shores. It was the forerunner of international disruptions to the long-held tradition of the arts as special beneficiaries of government support.
In this essay we look at the way that cultural policy has subsequently embraced the turn towards enterprise and innovation. We begin with a discussion of the 'arm's lengths' model of cultural policy: the facilitator, patron, architect and engineer models. These models demonstrate degrees of government involvement. This four-part separation of powers, while useful, has failed to account for the knowledge economy and in particular the impact of media convergence. We provide a more contemporary four-model division of the cultural and creative industries: the welfare model, the normal model, the growth model and the creative economy model. The intention of this is to argue that government should be involved in making good policy, but that policy ought to encourage and facilitate innovation. We conclude by problematising the division between cultural and creative industries.
Impact and interest:
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Book Chapter|
|Additional Information:||Posted with the permission of the copyright owner for your personal use only. No further distribution is permitted without permission of the copyright owner.|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > STUDIES IN HUMAN SOCIETY (160000) > POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION (160500) > Arts and Cultural Policy (160502)|
|Divisions:||Current > Research Centres > ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation|
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Creative Industries Faculty
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2008 Michael A. Keane and Weihong Zhang|
|Deposited On:||16 Apr 2008|
|Last Modified:||11 Sep 2013 15:12|
Repository Staff Only: item control page