Usce2013   event policy - ritual to regeneration
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Usce2013 event policy - ritual to regeneration

on

  • 537 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
537
Views on SlideShare
522
Embed Views
15

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

2 Embeds 15

https://twitter.com 14
http://www.creativefutur.eu 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Usce2013 event policy - ritual to regeneration Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Event Policy: Journeys from Ritual to RoutledgeRegeneration Due date August 2010Professor David McGillivray, Chair in Eventand Digital CulturesUniversity of the West of Scotland @dgmcgillivraydgmcgillivray.posterous.comdavid.mcgillivray@uws.ac.uk
  • 2. EVENT MANAGEMENT: A CRITIQUE•  Uncritical and self-congratulatory•  Unconcerned with notions of moral regulation•  Myopic about generations of critical study in other fields on questions of power, control and resistance•  Overly focused on the organisation, logistics, efficiency & risk management
  • 3. WHY EVENTS DO MATTER?They are, indisputably, of local, national and international importance
  • 4. They are important signifiers of personal, community, national and globalised identity
  • 5. They are political and politicised, ritualistic and regenerative
  • 6. They are written into history and can be utilised to alter it
  • 7. They are planned and unplanned, small and large, sporting and cultural, hallmark, special and ‘mega’
  • 8. EVENTS: AN EMERGING FIELD OF STUDY•  We need to ensure students (and Stage Characteristics practitioners) are exposed to 1. Events management (including Instrumental production and design) Practical experience stages2i & 3 Bowdin, Shone & Parry,Van de Operational/logistical•  Working from the belief that Wagen, Ritchie, Goldblatt, etc. Creative/technological ‘events have policy implications Micro-level concerns Abundant literature that cannot be ignored and they 2. Events policy (Foley et al, Macro-level contextualisation are not the sole domain of event 2009) Policy angle evident producers and managers’ (Getz, Hall, Getz,Thomas,Veal, etc Social, cultural and economic 2007: 3). effects (or impacts) of events considered•  This requires a engagement with Allocation of scarce resource theoretical frames or ways of for externalities seeing the world Paucity of specialised literature•  Developing its own ontological, 3. Events studies (Getz, 2007) Considers wider socio- epistemological and historical context for events Macro-level concerns methodological commitments Informed by a range of academic disciplines Emerging literature
  • 9. SIGNS OFPROGRESS?
  • 10. EVENT POLICY PERSPECTIVES•  Rationales •  Shift in form and function of events - ritualistic practices and markers tied closely to ideas of time, space, community and the locality •  20th C - increasingly ‘planned’ and part of (economic) policy objectives •  Now conceived and exploited for regenerative imperatives which venerate the new, the transitory, the contrived to secure a plethora of social, political and economic externalities •  But, as ‘who gains’ & ‘who pays’ becomes open to public dialogue legitimation issues arise•  Formations •  Neo-liberal, urban entrepreneurial governance ‘frames’ event policy objectives: •  Events to be supported must align with destination brand and generate economic return (e.g. Glasgow: Scotland with Style) •  Principal risks associated with events are borne by a highly active entrepreneurial (local) state, incentivising private sector involvement: •  But social & cultural ‘capital’ debates draw attention to inequality, marginalisation and social polarity (Smith, 2002) - the ‘hard outcomes of neo-liberalism’: •  Overestimated benefits, underestimated costs (Whitson & Horne, 2006); corporate and political elite beneficiaries •  In the intense inter-urban competition to secure lucrative events, the power ratio between private capital, event owners (e.g. IOC, FIFA, UEFA) and local state in favour of the former
  • 11. EVENT POLICY IMPLEMENTATIONS•  Glasgow 2014: Planned & governed to secure policy externalities or ‘legacy’ •  Dubai – Planned but with professed ‘openness’ on the basis of inbound tourism •  Sport event visibility the key strategy •  Ruling family patronage and absence of need for democratic consent provides competitive advantage in competition for global events•  New Orleans Mardi Gras: Apparently ‘unplanned’ yet with desire for governance and planning •  Caught between ‘freedom’ – a laissez faire governance - and ‘regulation’ - the desire for a more interventionist, micro management of the Mardi Gras celebrations •  Singapore: Planned but with a focus on local ‘indigenous’ citizen involvement: •  Representative democracy exists (in name) but authoritarian approach to governance •  Local festivity promoted but then used for global positioning (e.g. Chingay & Thaipusam)
  • 12. POLICY DIRECTIONS •  you need to be able to understand, critique and programme for planned externalities, subtly GOVERNED EVENTS & PLANNED EXTERNALITIES
  • 13. CASE STUDY:LONDON2012 READING EVENTS AS ‘TEXTS’
  • 14. CONCLUSIONS•  Events are now, undoubtedly, a public policy tool and not just in the liberal democracies of the west offering access to the planned externalities that neo-liberal policy makers are seeking•  Events (the circuses) represent a good news story in times of political, economic and social uncertainty, but to undermine the open, citizen-involved and fluid function of festivity threatens the very basis of the policy outcomes being sought•  To succeed you need to be competent but critical; globally aware but locally connected and; self assured and not self-congratulatory…