PUBLIC POLICYPRESENTATIONCULTURAL POLICY AND CULTURAL COMPLEXESHIROYASU SUDO MARCH 2012
TODAY’S NEWS
AGENDA• Issue: Arts Funding• Countries: Canada, the US, Japan• Situations in each country• Cultural complex in each countr...
ISSUE: ARTS FUNDING• Arts Funding – Public or Private• Why? – Public Goods, Philanthropy, Diplomacy…• Trend – Decreasing (...
CANADA• Objective: National Pride/ Social Cohesion/ Diversity• History: Formed after WWII, American Influence• Type: Publi...
THE UNITED STATES• Objective: Public Goods, Diplomacy• History: In line with active philanthropy (Carnegie)• Type: Private...
JAPAN• Objective: Public Goods, Preservation, Economic Growth• History: Westernization = Modernization, WWII• Type: Public...
COMPARISON                             Canada                          USA                           Japan                ...
CULTURE COMPLEX• Cultural Hub• Encourage arts/culture• Provide facilities (Theatre, Gallery, etc.)
HARBOURFRONTCENTRE• Non-profit (established as a  crown company)• Artistic Innovation, Cultural  Engagement• 4 Theatres, 2...
LINCOLN CENTER• Non-profit (most donation from Rockefeller)• Initiated by The Mayors Slum Clearance Committee• Urban Renew...
ROPPONGI ARTDISTRICT• Mix of Non-profit and For-profit• Economic Development• 3 Museums (2 Private Museums and 1 National ...
CONCLUSION• Harbourfront Centre needs to be more commercial• But cannot compromise its mission• Could learn from the US or...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

MBA Cultural Policy Comparison - USA, Japan and Canada

903 views

Published on

This presentation aims at comparing the cultural policies of the United States, Canada, and Japan. We can see the history and culture of each country are reflected to the current policies (path dependency). Also, we can see external influences to each of the countries (punctuated equilibrium).

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
903
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

MBA Cultural Policy Comparison - USA, Japan and Canada

  1. 1. PUBLIC POLICYPRESENTATIONCULTURAL POLICY AND CULTURAL COMPLEXESHIROYASU SUDO MARCH 2012
  2. 2. TODAY’S NEWS
  3. 3. AGENDA• Issue: Arts Funding• Countries: Canada, the US, Japan• Situations in each country• Cultural complex in each country• Suggestion
  4. 4. ISSUE: ARTS FUNDING• Arts Funding – Public or Private• Why? – Public Goods, Philanthropy, Diplomacy…• Trend – Decreasing (i.e. Global Competition, The Crisis)• ‘Creative Class’ theory -- Instrumentalism
  5. 5. CANADA• Objective: National Pride/ Social Cohesion/ Diversity• History: Formed after WWII, American Influence• Type: Public Funding is larger• Culture: Individualistic, slightly socialistic• Trend: Decreasing, yet the scope is broadening
  6. 6. THE UNITED STATES• Objective: Public Goods, Diplomacy• History: In line with active philanthropy (Carnegie)• Type: Private Funding is substantially larger• Culture: Individualistic, Capitalistic (Democratic)• Trend: Recovering from the Crisis
  7. 7. JAPAN• Objective: Public Goods, Preservation, Economic Growth• History: Westernization = Modernization, WWII• Type: Public Funding is marginal (fear of public intervention)• Culture: Collectivist, Capitalistic• Trend: Recovering from the Crisis, Collaboration with Private
  8. 8. COMPARISON Canada USA Japan National Pride/Social Cohesion Public goods Preservation Objective Economic Development Diplomacy Economic DevelopmentPolicy Change PEF ACF PDFPublic/Private 27:23 13:43 6:12.2 ratio 117% 30% 49% Culture Individualist - Socialistic Individualist - Capitalistic Collectivist - Capitalistic• Punctuation Equilibrium: External Influence• Advocacy Coalition: Linear• Path Dependency: Disconnected Evolution• Policy tools: Direct, Indirect, Hybrid
  9. 9. CULTURE COMPLEX• Cultural Hub• Encourage arts/culture• Provide facilities (Theatre, Gallery, etc.)
  10. 10. HARBOURFRONTCENTRE• Non-profit (established as a crown company)• Artistic Innovation, Cultural Engagement• 4 Theatres, 2 Galleries• Decreasing Public Funding• Increasing Private Funding
  11. 11. LINCOLN CENTER• Non-profit (most donation from Rockefeller)• Initiated by The Mayors Slum Clearance Committee• Urban Renewal• Opera house, Concert Halls, Music School• Marginal Public Funding
  12. 12. ROPPONGI ARTDISTRICT• Mix of Non-profit and For-profit• Economic Development• 3 Museums (2 Private Museums and 1 National Arts Center)• Form the Arts Triangle• Resulted in commercial success
  13. 13. CONCLUSION• Harbourfront Centre needs to be more commercial• But cannot compromise its mission• Could learn from the US organizations about private funds• Programming should be aimed at ‘creative class’• The Japan case tells that the government can support the initiative for economic growth<Takeaways>• Country comparison let us see a bigger picture• This leads to deeper understanding of the issue• Results in a better suggestion

×