By Taiwan Association of Cultural Policy Studies.
Image credit: 10.29 副總統出席「2021池上秋收稻穗藝術節」 by 總統府 / Flickr: CC BY 2.0 DEED.
The special issue of Taiwan Insight presents five cultural policy strategies that emerged from the four expert forums co-convened by the Taiwan Association of Cultural Policy Studies (TACPS) and the Foundation for Future Generations, Taiwan. Through the collective efforts of scholars, practitioners, and professionals in various fields, it is hoped that the ideas will allow Taiwan’s future leaders to better understand and address the pressing issues in current cultural policies, especially in their political agendas for the upcoming elections, and provide insights for the next generations of citizens. As discussed in the previous articles of this special issue, Taiwan needs policies and systemic changes that support the cultivation and development of talent and create a supportive and sustainable environment for everyone working in the art and cultural industries in Taiwan in order to truly achieve cultural sustainability. This article draws attention to the danger of continuing the current take on artistic labour. Further, it provides insights and recommendations for the improvement of the labour environment for workers in related industries, particularly focusing on building more connections with local communities.
The essence of cultural policy lies in nurturing and stimulating social creativity, which involves both the preservation of classics and the kindling of future possibilities. The durability of policy development hinges on the transmission of memory and skills. Rather than being a political display, citizens occupy a central role in artistic performance, whether as creators or audience members. Does the support for creators aim to ensure the vitality and competitiveness of society, to enhance cultural production, or does its impact merely extend to safeguarding welfare measures?
Outsourcing and the “festivalisation” of cultural policies may indeed boost intensive artistic and cultural production. However, they often neglect the well-being of creators and the fundamental aspects of social creativity. When art production becomes contract-oriented, it tends to result in homogeneity, repetition, and mass-produced works akin to factory output. This not only shortens creators’ career development opportunities but also jeopardises the sustainable growth of art, particularly in genres that require long-term incubation.
In order to sustain their creative work, artists often experience inconsistent employment statuses. Given the unique nature of artists’ work, policies should aim to find a balance between providing artists with suitable working conditions and preserving their genuine creativity. It is important to recognise that in the realm of arts and cultural policies, the focus should be on the creative community rather than employers, and the objective is not to enforce policymakers’ preferences or political agendas.
Art festivals that promote long-distance travel for audiences are often less impactful than facilitating collaborations between artists and local cultural organisers. It is through these connections that creativity, local insights, cultural and historical heritage, and production capabilities can be effectively harnessed to drive the growth of the local economy. This may include knowledge-oriented leisure consumption or in-depth tourism experiences.
In the current phase of cultural policies, it is essential to conduct a comprehensive assessment of resources on a broader scale. It is pressing to network cultural heritages, commercially viable assets, and endeavours related to environmental issues involving both governmental bodies and citizen organisations. Such a network facilitates the creation of a sustainable collaboration platform, fostering alliances and the development of local arts, culture, and the regional economy.
With such a network in place, art centres located in various regions can be strongly encouraged to transform their operational models. Their mission should extend beyond being mere venues for occasional performances and encompass roles that drive regional artistic, cultural, and economic vitality. Forward-thinking cultural policies must be more progressive than the current state of affairs, advocating for flexible and inclusive governance structures. These structures should be able to counteract the increasing inclination to prioritise administrative logic over creativity and sustainability within government agencies.
Furthermore, the trend of corporationalising sovereign cultural entities has contributed to sustaining professionalism in the cultural domain. This includes fields like curatorial work, art administration and management, event marketing, as well as preservation professions. However, the mere existence of sovereign cultural corporations does not guarantee the continuous development of these professions. Addressing the pressing issues of proposing a progressive career path for cultural talents to meet future demands and effectively recruiting and retaining professionals, especially those involved in functions that demand long-term investment in acquiring profound knowledge and developing personal attributes, has become imperative.
Yet even before any promotion for cultural talents is planned by current cultural policies, new challenges have emerged. In addition to the disproportionate growth in construction costs and workforce investments in various local museums, these institutions often grapple with concerns about political misinterpretation of their cultural missions. Public representatives may mistakenly view public cultural missions as operating subsidies for cultural organisations with profit-oriented objectives and, as a result, may advocate for an increasing reliance on self-financing.
The administrative aspect of public cultural policy should maintain its stance rather than fixating on statistics such as implementation rates or responding to political pressures or immediate benefits. To ensure the accountability of cultural policies, there should be a limitation on the mission to promote populist, consumerist activities and the privatisation of cultural endeavours as a means of balancing income.
Considering that the vitality of artistic talents can serve as a source of inspiration and create value for society at large, which is far more valuable than the mere calculation of the self-financing ratio or popularity scale, cultural policies must strongly advocate for the public benefits of culture. These benefits should not be superficially measured by numbers.
Summarising the five major cultural policy demands, as elaborated respectively in the five articles of the special issue, we believe that through the deepening of Taiwan’s cultural sustainability and democratic governance, the state should enrich the diversity of the forms and contents of the common people’s arts and cultural life, nurture the network ecosystem of Taiwan’s cultural and creative economy, promote the cultural well-being of the people and arts and cultural workers, and emphasise the public value and sustainable impact of culture, so as to make it a public treasure to be shared by the people of Taiwan in the 21st century. Culture should never be absent from the nation’s future projects.
The special issue is a critical report that outlines the five strategies for sustainable cultural policy. The report is compiled and organised by Dr Jerry C. Y. Liu (Graduate School of Arts Management and Cultural Policy, National Taiwan University of Arts), Dr Fang-Jay Rong (Department of Environmental and Cultural Resources, National Tsing Hua University), Dr Chih-hung Wang (Graduate Institute of Building and Planning, National Taiwan University), Dr Li-Jung Wang (Department of Hakka Language and Social Science, National Central University), and Dr Chieh-Hsiang Wu (Department of Arts in the National Changhua University of Education; Director of TACPS). The articles in this special issue are edited by Chee-Hann Wu with slight modifications made to enhance the readability for readers of Taiwan Insight.
This article was published as part of a special issue on Cultural Sustainability and Democratic Governance in Taiwan.
Taiwan Insight 