Despite a growing number of valuable, and valid, critiques, the notion that ‘creativity’ has a special role to play in the future success of post-industrial societies has proved to be remarkably persistent. Cultural Policy Observatory Ireland was delighted to host Dr. Peter Campbell on 23rd October 2018 at the Brian Friel Theatre. He presented findings from an upcoming publication, which considers this persistence and examines how ‘creativity’ has become entrenched within a range of discourses and practices, particularly since the turn of the century.

1. Peter Campbell
Senior Lecturer
Dept. of Sociology,
Social Policy & Criminology
University of Liverpool
peter.campbell@liverpool.ac.uk
@Peter_Soc
petersoc.com
‘Persistent Creativity’. Queen’s University Belfast. 23rd October 2018.

2. How ‘creativity’ has become entrenched within a range
of discourses and practices, particularly since the turn
of the century.
The specific means by which the role of creativity has
been established.
The role for research, policy, statisticians and
methodological practices in this process.
The continuing project to construct a convincing
‘evidence base’ regarding creativity, and the ways in
which this evidence is utilised.
The types of evidence used to make the case for
culture in urban regeneration over the past twenty
years.
The claims made regarding the nature and role of
‘creative industries’ over the same period.
The role played by national and international‘capital
of culture’ competitions.
What I said I would cover

3. Persistent ‘creativity’ (1998-2018)

4. 1998:
Chris Smith, secretary of state for DCMS, publishes ‘Creative Britain’, positioning creative industries as
“where the wealth and the jobs of the future are going to be generated from” , and his government’s
goal as being to “put these industries properly on the political map for the first time ever”. Creativity is
also identified as bringing many wider benefits, such as fostering “social inclusion through shared
emotions”.
2008:
DCMS publish ‘Creative Britain’, in which creative industries were positioned as being important “in
the coming years”, as important to the government in their aim of creating “the jobs of the future”
(p.4) and as “increasingly vital” to the UK economy (p.6):“in ten years’ time […] the local economies
in our biggest cities [will be] driven by creativity” (p.6). In addition to this economic role, however, it
was noted that such industries “also bring wider social and cultural benefits”
2018:
In Nesta’s ‘Creative Nation’ report, the UK’s Minister for Digital and the Creative Industries
emphasised the value of creative industries – “British creative industries […] are an engine of growth”
– and notes that supporting them will ensure that the country is “fit for the future”.
Persistent messages

5. DCMS / DCMS-commissioned reports on
‘creative industries’:
1998:
“where the wealth and the jobs of the future are
going to be generated from”
2006:
“certain to become even more important in the
future”
2017:
In a “future economy” some fifteen or twenty
years hence,“in every scenario the Creative
Industries are of central importance”
Due to persist for some time yet?

6. A dramatic shift from the 1980s?

7. Or even the 1990s?
Mark Banks and Justin O’Connor on Manchester in the 1990s:

8. Tangled roots make for strong foundations
* Existing justifications for cultural policy, particularly from the
early 19th century
*The “explosion of numbers” in this period
* An analogous process ‘reducing’ value to economic value in the
late 20th century
*The rise, and encouragement, of a ‘new economy’ in this period
*The drive for ‘regeneration’ in which culture, the arts & creativity
become increasingly emphasised at the turn of the 21st century

9. A particular emphasis on the economic performance of the ‘creative industries’
The first decade:
“The sector accounted for 5 percent of total national
income in 1998”
“The creative industries accounted for 8.2 percent of
GVA of the UK economy in 2001”
“The Creative Industries accounted for 8% of UK GVA in
2002 [and] grew by an average of 6% per annum between
1997 and 2002 compared to an average of 3% for the
whole of the economy“
"In 2004 the creative industries accounted for 8% of UK
GVA, compared to 4% in 1997;The creative industries
grew by an average of 5% p.a. between 1997 and 2004,
compared to an average of 3% for the economy as a
whole“
“[In 2007, Creative Industries] make up 7.3 per cent of
the economy, and are growing at 5 per cent per year
(almost twice the rate of the rest of the economy).”

10. How did these numbers get so high?

11. A consistent sense that artistic, expressive practices are central
2010:
“It is commonly acknowledged that
the arts are the bedrock of the
creative economy”
– Alan Davey, Chief Exec.
Arts Council England
2011:
“Student fears about finding work in
the arts need to be challenged. Chief
executive [of Universities UK] Nicola
Dandridge points out that the UK has
“one of the largest and most
successful creative sectors in the
world”.

12. Software
Approx.
30% of employment
40% of GVA
50% of enterprises
in the ‘creative industries’ are in
software, with this proportion
generally rising year-on-year.
When celebrating the success of
the creative industries, it seems
odd that this is virtually never
mentioned.
% of Creative Industries GVA attributable to ‘software’
Source: DCMS 2009

13. Creative work
Creative industry employment in software is largely in these categories:

14. Then, a shift
Removed in 2010
Removed
in 2011
Part of this
code
removed
from DCMS
figures in
2011.

15. Justified, but problematic
“Codes 62.02 and 62.01/2 were removed as the industries these captured were more
related to business software than to creative software.”
This move in 2011 reduces GVA attributable to the creative industries by half,
and total creative employment by 65%.
At this point, DCMS “agreed with stakeholders” to stop publishing figures until “a
new classification” was decided, as “inconsistencies […] have emerged with the
passage of time”.
In 2014, a new definition is agreed on.
Software returns.

16. Growth in software vs. other creative industries
(1997=100%)
Source: DCMS 2016
Software resumes its domination
% of Creative Industries GVA attributable to ‘software’
Source: DCMS 2016

17. …but cultural activity positioned at the heart of such figures
DCMS press releases:
2014: “Official statistics published today reveal that the UK’s creative industries, which
includes the film, television and music industries, are now worth £71.4 billion per year to the
UK economy”
2015:“From Art to Architecture, Film to Fashion, British talent leads the world. The UK’s
Creative Industries,which includes the film, television and music industries, are now worth
£76.9 billion per year to the UK economy.”
2016: “The UK’s creative industries are now worth a record £84.1 billion to the UK
economy, figures published today reveal. British films, music, video games, crafts and
publishing are taking a lead role in driving the UK’s economic recovery.”
2017: “The UK’s booming creative industries made a record contribution to the economy in
2016, new statistics show. Industries including advertising and marketing, arts and film,TV
and radio, and museums and galleries are all part of this thriving economic sector, which is
now worth almost £92bn”

18. Or ‘the arts’
“Business Secretary Greg Clark said:
“The UK's creative industry is one of our fastest-growing sectors, employing over two
million people and it contributed nearly £90 billion to the economy in 2015.””

19. A change is gonna come?
“Cultural interests have benefited from their
blurring with the creative industries, insofar
as it has allowed them to take credit –
directly or indirectly – for the £87 billion in
GVA generated by the creative industries,
when in fact as much as 43.5 per cent of it is
accounted for by ‘IT, software and computer
services’ alone. […]
The conflation between creative industries
and cultural policy has, we argue, been
detrimental to the UK’s interests. It has
meant that insufficient attention has been
paid in economic policy to the biggest drivers
of creative industries growth which,
notwithstanding important economic
spillovers from the arts, are largely in service
sectors like software, advertising and design”

20. New numbers
% of total UK employment
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Creative Economy
Creative Industries
Cultural Sector
Source: DCMS (2018)

21. Uneven distributions
Total GVA by UK region – 2016 (£m)
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000

22. Uneven distributions
DCMS-defined creative industries GVA by UK region – 2016 (£m)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000

23. Uneven distributions
DCMS-defined cultural sector GVA by UK region – 2016 (£m)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000

24. A call for different evidence
“Taking a ‘breather’ from the creative
industries may mean moving into even more,
albeit necessarily contested territory.
Evidence for the relations between culture
and social inclusion, technological diffusion
and health need to be marshalled.”

25. Issues with ‘evidence’ of the role of the arts
1991: UK Audit Commission notes that local authorities often made little effort to ascertain what
was achieved as a result of their grants for provision of the arts.
Mid-1990s: “Performance measurement [in the arts] was generally considered inappropriate and
was effectively avoided” (Selwood)
2002: “Widespread consensus among commentators that there is a lack of robust evaluation and
systematic evidence of the impact of arts projects, or cultural services, more broadly, despite a
wealth of anecdotal evidence” (Reeves for Arts Council England)
2004: A “lack of evidence about long-term legacies and the limited understanding of social and,
particularly, cultural impacts” (García on Evans & Shaw report for DCMS)
2006: “Evaluation is regarded as under-developed and is poorly documented” (Selwood)
2009: “For all the evaluation and performance measurement requirements imposed on the sector,
such incontrovertible evidence of impact simply is not there” (Belfiore)
2014:“A lack of longitudinal or comparative studies” (Arts Council England)
2016: “For personal wellbeing, educational attainment, life chances and soft power, more work is
needed to refine how we measure the specific impact that culture makes” (DCMS)

26. Why such consistency?
* Short term research / long term outcomes
* (Ever more) limited resources
* Unclear terms for research
* Over-emphasis on the economic
* Mixed messages

27. The issue of resources seems to be ever more pressing

28. On the other hand, we ‘know’ success very quickly
After Liverpool’s tenure as ‘European Capital of Culture’ in 2008:
It had demonstrated how “culture and creativity are part of the answer to tough
economic times” - Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport Andy Burnham, 2009
“European Capitals of Culture such as Lille, Liverpool and others show that investing in
this sector creates jobs.” – European Commission, 2010
“Look at how Liverpool benefited from being the European Cultural Capital in 2008 […]
jobs in the creative industries increased by half” - Prime Minister David Cameron, 2010

29. (Although it might not be accurate)
“Firms with one or no employees
make up between 90 and 94 per cent
of businesses operating within the
arts and culture industry.”

30. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend
“During Liverpool’s Capital of Culture
year, the local economy generated almost
£754m of additional income”
This figure comes from research into
spending by visitors on items including
food & shopping as part of their visit
to a cultural festival, not to the direct
economic output of creative
industries, apparently valued for their
own rates of employment and growth,
rather than for their ability to induce
spending on accommodation by
tourists.

31. If visitor levels are the most important outcome, consider Tate Liverpool
Excluding 2008, the average
number of visits per year in
this period was ~600,000.
Tate director Lewis Biggs in
1996:
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Average number of monthly visits to Tate Liverpool, 2005-2017
Source: DCMS (2018)

32. The wider context should not be ignored
“Glasgow ECOC 1990, together with the other events and awards that the City has
received in the past 14 years are not about tackling Glasgow’s structural problems, the
social divisions, the inequalities and the poverty.”
“In 2016, media reports emphasised that the city, like other locations in the UK facing the
same constraints, [Liverpool] could soon ‘run out of money’ (Murphy 2016), with reports
in 2018 stating that the city is “staring over a financial cliff edge”.”
“An audit carried out for Derry City and Strabane District Council has concluded that
only 300 to 400 new jobs were created during 2013, lagging well behind the 2,800 initially
forecast in the old council’s ‘legacy plan’. […] Oonagh McGillion, Director of Legacy at
DC&SDC said the failure to meet the more ambitious job creation targets was due in
large part to the economic recession, which “affected both private and public sector
investment plans, which were key to many of the projected economic impacts”.”

33. But 2018 brings good news!
“Government funding for Hull of £15 million
unlocked £3.3 billion worth of investment in the City
since winning the [UKCoC] nomination in 2013.
Analysis shows that changes in the perception of the
City is attributed as a key factor in securing that
investment. Hull’s culture led regeneration plan has
created 7000+ jobs.”
“In Hull nearly 800 jobs have been created and
almost £220 million invested in Hull’s tourism and
cultural sectors since the city was named UK City of
Culture 2017”

34. …and a fight back?