A global methodology for capturing cultural statistics: Designing the UNESCO Framework (2009)
Submitting Institution
University of LeedsUnit of Assessment
Music, Drama, Dance and Performing ArtsSummary Impact Type
PoliticalResearch Subject Area(s)
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration
Language, Communication and Culture: Cultural Studies
Summary of the impact
Research by Taylor, Pratt and Burns Owen Partnership formed the
basis of a new Framework for
Cultural Statistics, published in 2009 by UNESCO. The direct route
to impact can be evidenced by
the extent to which UNESCO formally adopted the researcher's proposed
recommendations and
revisions to the 1986 Framework, including a new category "Performance and
Celebration". The
Framework, which monitors and measures cultural trends at national and
international level,
provides policy-relevant data for UNESCO and member states to
conceptualise, categorise and
analyse culture and to assess the impact and relevance of cultural
policies and initiatives.
Underpinning research
Research participants:
Academics: Calvin Taylor (Professor in Cultural Economy,
University of Leeds), Andy Pratt (City
University, London)
Industry partner: Burns Owen Partnership
Dates: 1997-2007
Underpinning research:
In 2005, the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) Institute
for Statistics, the lead agency in the UN system for global statistics on
culture, agreed to update
the 1986 Framework for Cultural Statistics. Academics Taylor
and Pratt together with Burns Owen
Partnership (BOP), a consultancy specialising in cultural statistics, were
subsequently
commissioned by UNESCO to review the 1986 Framework and the team submitted
its `Expert
Scoping Study' [1] offering specific recommendations for its
revision in 2005.
Taylor was selected by UNESCO for this consultancy project
following some ten years of field
research conceptualising, categorising and analysing culture and
developing and testing indicators
of its impact. Between 1997 and 2007, Taylor had devised and
completed some 28 field projects,
proposing solutions to a number of central research problems in cultural
statistics; cultural meta-
data and scale scope (from local to global); the classification of
cultural activities; data compatibility
protocols and refined indicators. Insights had also been gained into
operationalisation including
data management and usability.
As well as positioning Taylor as an expert in this field, the
revision recommendations also drew
upon this research, which can be summarised below in three key projects:
(i) Three studies were conducted between 1997 and 2000 for the EU Special
Initiative `The
Huddersfield Creative Town Initiative' (HCTI), which aimed to produce a
comprehensive
classification of culture for statistical purposes [2]. The United
Nations Global Alliance for Cultural
Diversity describes the HCTI as `[t]he most commonly cited example'
of urban regeneration
through culture' (UNESCO, 2004)
(ii) The Cultural Industries Baseline Study (2000-2002). This project
(consisting of 13 field studies)
tested the scalar application of the methodology developed in `The
Huddersfield Creative Town
Initiative' to the whole of the Yorkshire and the Humber region. This
project was funded by the
European Commission and produced ten key data reports.
(iii) The Creative Yorkshire Project (2002-2005). This field-work
(consisting of 5 field studies) re-
evaluated evidence-based approaches to regional cultural policy-making in
light of the new policy
trend towards linking culture with economic development. This project
built on the previous two
studies by deepening the categorisation of culture and by nuancing the
analysis for public policy
purposes (e.g. guiding cultural investments). [3]
Taylor's contribution to the UNESCO Framework drew upon these
three periods of research with
specific reference to the categories used to classify cultural activities
and indicators designed to
measure impact. The core of the recommendations for the UNESCO Framework
consists of three
elements: cultural domains, the culture cycle and a suite of indicators.
The revision
recommendations were that it should be capable of capturing culture in a
digital age, to include:
small scale cultural activities and practices as well as large-scale
international cultural flows; the
social diversity of culture irrespective of its specific mode of
production; new models of distribution,
consumption and participation, and, critically, cultural practices and
experiences across both public
and private modes of governance/institutionalisation.
References to the research
[1] Pratt, A., Taylor, C. & Burns Owen Partnership
(2005) Creating Global Cultural Statistics:
Expert Scoping Study, Montreal: UNESCO Institute of Statistics,
pp1-61. This item was included in
RAE 2008.
[2] Wood, P. & Taylor, C. (2004) Big Ideas for a
Small Town: The Huddersfield Creative Town
Initiative, Local Economy Vol. 19, No. 4, pp 380-395. DOI:
10.1080/0269094042000286864. Peer
Review Status: This item was double-blind peer reviewed and was included
in RAE 2008.
[3] Taylor, C. (2006) Beyond Advocacy: Developing an
Evidence Base for Regional Creative
Industries Strategies. Cultural Trends Vol.15. No.1. pp.3-18. 2006.
DOI:
10.1080/09548960600615871. Peer Review Status: Cultural Trends is the
leading journal for
cultural statistics and its debates. This item was double-blind peer
reviewed and was included in
RAE 2008.
Details of the impact
UNESCO's Institute for Statistics is the world's only inter-governmental
body dedicated to culture,
serving 195 member states and 8 associate members, as well as a range of
intergovernmental and
non-governmental organizations, research institutes and universities. It
is seen as a central tool for
providing statistical analysis for policy development and evaluation in
such areas as cultural
heritage conservation; the monitoring of international cultural trade;
cultural labour markets, and
the role of culture in social and economic development. The data and
analysis forms an important
source of evidence for both UNESCO and member state policy-making,
offering information that is
vital to understanding how culture can contribute to the well-being of
individuals and member
states.
When UNESCO Institute for Statistics agreed in 2005 that it was
imperative to launch a revision of
the Framework — its first revision since 1986 — it was critical to
establish new methodologies for
capturing cultural statistics at international and national level in order
to reflect global changes in
culture. This involves necessarily complex intellectual and political
challenges in developing
concepts, definitions and indicators for collecting cultural data as much
cultural activity is not
readily amenable to being codified and quantified. Moving from the
national to the international
sphere represents considerable challenge in securing the support and
agreement of a wide range
of organisations (e.g. national ministries of culture, international
multilateral agencies).
Research demanded that any new Framework needed to address the changes in
the way people
create and consume culture, to include digital technologies and the
development of `interrelated
notions of "creative" industries' (E/CN.3/2010/21) [A]. The new
fit-for-purpose Framework would
then provide modern policy-relevant data to members states so they could
better measure the
impact and relevance of cultural policies and initiatives.
Taylor and collaborators therefore offered a new comparative lens
to view culture, through revising
the intellectual framework and existing indicators used by member states.
The process of
developing the recommendations included analytical comparisons of all
existing frameworks
(approximately twenty); synthesizing and aggregating the findings from the
team's own prior
research projects, and designing new classifications and indicators and
testing their viability
against existing sources of cultural data. The Expert Scoping Study [1]
summarised the findings
from this work in the form of recommendations to UNESCO for the revision
of the Global
Framework.
Following the submission of the Expert Scoping Study, UNESCO managed an
extensive global
consultation on the recommendations made with UNESCO Member States, with
International
organisations including EUROSTAT, the UN Conference on Trade and
Development and the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. A total of 203
countries were consulted
on the recommendations and 104 responded, with the final draft overseen by
a Steering Group
which included Professor David Throsby, the world's leading cultural
statistician. Where the
response rate to the original consultation call was lower, further
workshop-based consultation on
the recommendations of the Expert Scoping Study occurred in 2008-9 to
elicit responses from
African, Arab, Asia-Pacific and Latin American regions, testing the
report's findings in 14 regional
workshops attended by academics, practitioners and policy-makers. No
significant changes to the
Study's recommendations were made during this consultation process. The
contribution of the
Expert Scoping Study is acknowledged in the published Framework, ratified
in 2009, which makes
this relationship clear, naming the authors of the report and describing
the Framework as being
`based on an initial report' by the team (p.iv) [A]. The Framework
is now set to guide the
comparisons, assessments and evaluations of globally significant cultural
developments for the
next two decades should the previous revision timetable be echoed again.
To demonstrate the relevance and application of the Framework, there is
clear evidence of its use
within the global community of cultural agencies, such as the
International Federation of Arts
Councils and Culture Agencies [B] and the data and analysis it
produces forms an important
source of evidence for both UNESCO and member state policy making. There
is also a current
programme aimed at integrating the UNESCO Framework into the European
statistical standard
[C].
Even in its first review in 2011, Usero and Brio identify three
`significant contributions' of the new
Framework: `which', `how' and `how much': 1) the delimiting of cultural
activity (what is and what is
not included within a cultural domain) and 2) how to make these
definitions and 3) how to measure
culture's social and economic impact. (2011: 194). It concludes that the
new 2009 Framework
makes "a substantial contribution" to the achievement of its goals by
clearly delimiting the cultural
sector (2011: 197) [D].
Sources to corroborate the impact
[A] United Nations Economic and Social Council (2009) Statistical
Commission, Minutes of forty-first
session: "United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization: 2009 UNESCO
Framework for Cultural Statistics" - E/CN.3/2010/21. (This Minute records
the adoption of the
Framework by UNESCO and explains the extensive and rigorous nature of the
reach and
significance of the post-drafting consultation before adoption, for
example, 104 countries
responded to the draft).
[B] International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies
(2010) Launch of the 2009
UNESCO Framework for Cultural Statistics.
http://www.ifacca.org/publications/2010/01/19/launch-2009-unesco-framework-cultural-statistics.
[C] European Statistical System — Culture (2009) Cultural
Statistics Work Programme at
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/pls/portal/!PORTAL.wwpob_page.show?_docname=2920315.PDF
(Web
pages accessed on 14th November 2013. Please copy and paste
this URL into your
browser to avoid receiving an `error' message).
(This programme of research and developed, launched by the European
Commission under the
aegis of the European Statistical System aims to integrate the UNESCO
Framework into the
European statistical standard).
[D] Usero, B. & J.A. del Brio (2011) The 2009 UNESCO Framework
for Cultural Statistics. Cultural
Trends 20(2), 193-197. (This is the first peer reviewed academic review of
the Framework itself).