• Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. CULTURAL STRATEGIES AND URBAN-REGIONAL REGENERATION John Lovering School of City and Regional Planning Cardiff University
  • 2. The prehistory of cultural regeneration
    • C20th Urbanism- the tradition of exploring the connections:
        • Benjamin
        • Gramsci
        • Munford
        • Peter Hall
      • The C21st notion of urban culture as something that policy makers can – and should - induce
        • Richard Florida ‘The Creative Class’
  • 3. The academic background: the ‘rediscovery’ of culture
    • The ‘cultural turn’ in the social sciences
      • Culture/civil society as the medium of economic interdependencies (Granovetter, etc. A.J.Scott/UCLA school..)
      • Cultural specificity and the varieties of capitalism (Albrecht, David Coates…)
      • The idea of a late C20th ‘new phase’ of capitalist development centred on the commodification of space (H.Lefebvre) and of signs (F.Jameson)
  • 4. The new policy orthodoxy favouring the cultural industries
    • The early 1990s:
      • the notion that advanced (western) economies are driven by ‘symbolic analysts’ (Robert Reich), i.e. the ‘cultural industries’ broadly interpreted
      • The idea of ‘global’ cities as ‘post-industrial’ (Sassen, Castells, Tony Travers – London)
    • The mid 1990s:
      • the fashion for the ‘weightless’ economy (Geoff Mulgan, Tony Giddens)
    • The early 2000s:
      • the idea that ‘cultural industries’ in particular are particularly important and should receive special favours from policy makers (taken up by Blair government, CEC, and theorised by R.Florida)
  • 5. The Consultants move in on the act..
    • The new policy formula:
      • Culture = Cultural Industries = the new ‘Creative Class’ = Innovation, dynamics, pluralism
    • So… ‘urban regeneration’ should mean measures that include promoting ‘Cultural Industries’
  • 6. The new cultural instrumentalism
      • ‘’ the use of culture as an instrument for achieving wider social and economic goals is nowhere more apparent than in cities’
        • R.Griffiths (2006) Evidence from the competition to select the European Capital of Culture 2008 European Planning Studies 14
  • 7. The new global urban policy discursive orthodoxy
      • The rhetoric of urban renaissance’ cities are back’ (Michael Parkinson)
      • Cool, relaxed, creative,= prosperous, competitive (Richard Florida)
  • 8. The British Government agrees
  • 9. The new ‘culturalist’ sophistry (the world according to Richard Florida ….
  • 10. The governance dimension: proliferation of urban policy makers
      • The ‘New Regionalism’ blurs into the new ‘City-regionalism’
      • Sc ott, Storper, Soja, etc: there are ‘300+ city regions’
    • And the related rise of the Urban-Regional Service Class
      • Together give rise to a a fashion for global ‘benchmarking’ – comparison of simple statistics for urban policy
  • 11. Consultants, and their clients, love making up lists…
  • 12.  
  • 13. ‘ Culture-led regeneration’ and ‘symbolic policy’
  • 14. The economic effects
    • Experience has been ambivalent: e.g.:
      • Promotion of arts festivals: short term tourist boom
      • Promotion of ‘arts districts’ – main effect a real estate boom (Barcelona, London, Dublin..)
      • Many ‘displacement effects’ (from indigenous to imported/commodified culture, and from local to imported artists/performers) (the Galata project?
  • 15. The labour market effects
    • Culture-led development is not automatically beneficial
      • ‘ cultural industries ’tend to be even more elitist in employment terms than industries in general
        • e.g. London ethnic minority pop = 40%,
        • E.Ms in cultural industries =11%
  • 16. The social effects
      • Encouraging ‘cultural industries’ can often merely accelerate Gentrification
      • Globalisation of modes of consumption
      • The ‘Starbucks’ phenomenon
      • Exacerbating social divisions?
      • (A paticularly hideous example: April 2006: The Rolling Stones play China = rock n’ roll for the rich
  • 17. The paradoxical cultural effects
    • The ambivalence of instrumentalist policies for culture
    • Who chooses them?
    • What groups are involved in networks?
    • Where does the investment come from?
    • Common hazards:
    • Creation of identikit ‘portable’ indicators of ‘culture’ (festivals, modern art galleries, promotional advertising etc – ‘what the other cities have got we must have too’
  • 18. Some other aspects of the emphasis on urban cultural strategy
      • A fetish for the Visual
        • Neoliberalism and The Spectacle (Debord inverted)
        • Remaking Cities for the Gaze
        • (Daniel Bahrenbohm’s 2006 Reith Lectures)
      • A magnet for municipal politicians, marketers, the articulate arts/culture ‘community’, convergence with tourism and real estate interests
      • = ‘boosterism’
  • 19. Nevertheless, its' global
  • 20.  
  • 21. Famous (UK) successes.. Manchester
  • 22. Cultural icons of urban regeneration - London
  • 23. Much exaggerated - Bilbao
  • 24. Dubious - Cardiff
  • 25. Where becoming ‘European Capital of Culture’ encourages property-development driven regeneration: Liverpool
  • 26. The central dilemma
    • City planners have few real economic powers
      • Yet they increasingly have to act as if they do – urban-regional policy autonomy (a central component of the global neo-liberal policy orthodoxy)
      • So: they are under pressure to focus efforts of high-visibility activities
      • Policy is influenced by the Urban Service Class – including many ‘cultural layers’
      • Nothing is more high visibility than ‘culture’
      • = hence the slippage towards ‘ boosterism ’
  • 27. Common consequences
    • Diversion of public resources , esp. via planning, to activities which in reality have
    • Minor economic significance
    • Limited and uneven employment effects
    • Unclear sustainability
    • Ambivalent impact in terms of social inclusion
      • (equality of ‘respect’ - Richard Sennett)
    • BUT
    • Have high visibility
    • Are supported by and satisfy the most articulate and media-savvy elites (the ‘Begolu Bourgeoisie’?)
    • And converge with real estate interests – the key drivers of C21st urban regeneration
  • 28. An alternative conceptualisation of the Cultural Industries
    • Layer 1: everyday commodified popular culture (the ‘play economy’)
      • Determinants: Private corporations, market regulation
    • Layer 2: ‘Formal arts and culture’
      • Determinants: Publicly subsidised facilities and organisation
    • Layer 3: Related to Boosterism/Property development (typical examples: new sports stadia, casinos, galleries, conference centres…)
      • Determinants: Speculators assessments, boosterist coalitions
      • (J.Lovering (2006) Capital City University of Wales Press)
  • 29. So, cultural strategies and urban regeneration, rethinking the theory
    • Much hype: causal directions ambiguous
      • E.g. Florida– do ‘tolerant cities’ attract creative people and ‘cultural industries’ or is it the other way round? – Florida’s theory begs the real questions
    • The economics of urban cultural strategies: in reality is mostly about enabling real estate development
      • (e.g. London-Olympics 2012)
    • The politics of urban cultural strategies: in reality tend to be mainly ‘symbolic’
      • to demonstrate visibly that the authorities are ‘ performing regeneration ‘
  • 30. The cultural ironies of ‘culture-led regeneration’
      • Much (most?) culture-led urban regeneration is neither cultural nor about ‘regeneration’
      • But it is a globally convenient title for the (partisan) commodification of space and place
        • =The ‘Starbuckisation’ of the planet?
        • E.g. London’s Canary Wharf – a US-style office paradise; but very ‘suburban’ at street level..
  • 31.  
  • 32. The ‘new culturalist’ economic analysis – an American bias?
    • . .. few have doubted* that the fundamentals of the US model – its enterprise culture, lightly regulated labour market competition between states and regions, world class science … openness to migrants .. provide the best strongest position for competitiveness over the next generation’
      • Florida and Tingali (2004) Europe in the Creative Age
    • * actually, many doubt it
    • The analysis also often exaggerates the importance of private Service Sector industries in cities …
  • 33. What the consultants never tell you: most of the new jobs in UK cities have come from the public sector
  • 34. In reality its not so simple: even London still has nearly 300,000 in manufacturing
  • 35. Concluding thoughts: The European Capital of Culture
        • 1: How to win it
        • Emphasise social inclusion, and ‘the expression of local identity’
        • E.g. Liverpool: ‘ magnet for transatlantic migration’
        • Bristol ‘ the world in one city’
        • (= same as London’s Olympic bid discourse)
        • Promise to ‘build bridges between communities’
        • Produce much publicity displaying happy diversity (ethnic, gender, age etc)
  • 36. 2: but don’t expect too much from it
        • I:‘ Culture; here is narrowly defined (by whom?)
        • ‘ There is little sign.. of culture being viewed as a medium for collective emanciptaion, of culture s a file oppositional of struggle and resistance, of culture as a source of identities’ (Griffiths 2006)
        • II: little recognition that the main economic impact of ‘culture-led regeneration’ is usually from
        • (1) commodifying place (e.g. image and tourism)
        • (2) real estate - gentrification
  • 37. Worrying signs in Istanbul
    • Becoming European Capital of Culture 2010 will (according to www.istanbul2010.org)
      • Boost ‘urban renewal’ and ‘create jobs’ (2/14)
      • Boost tourist visitors and ‘the brand’ (6/14)
      • Make Istanbullis more ‘art conscious and ‘proud of their city’ (2/14)
      • Demonstrate Istanbul's ‘European significance’ (2/14)
    • Implications? Don’t hope for too much (unless you are a hotelier or real estate agent)
  • 38. Summary: not ‘culture-led regeneration’ but an explicit cultural strategy
      • Panglossian claims (a la Richard Florida) are usually based on
        • Little evidence
        • Muddled causalities
        • US-centric visions of urbanism
        • Neo-liberal assumptions about urban development
      • 2: A cultural strategy should be just that – have explicit cultural goals, not be a disguised ‘real estate/tourism’ strategy