MBA Cultural Policy Comparison - USA, Japan and Canada

Post on 26-Jun-2015

501 views 1 download

Tags:

description

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).

Transcript of MBA Cultural Policy Comparison - USA, Japan and Canada

PUBLIC POLICY PRESENTATION

CULTURAL POLICY AND CULTURAL COMPLEXES

HIROYASU SUDO MARCH 2012

TODAY’S NEWS

AGENDA• Issue: Arts Funding

• Countries: Canada, the US, Japan

• Situations in each country

• Cultural complex in each country

• Suggestion

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

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

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

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

COMPARISON

• Punctuation Equilibrium: External Influence

• Advocacy Coalition: Linear

• Path Dependency: Disconnected Evolution

• Policy tools: Direct, Indirect, Hybrid

Canada USA Japan

ObjectiveNational Pride/Social Cohesion

Economic DevelopmentPublic goods

DiplomacyPreservation

Economic Development

Policy Change PEF ACF PDF

Public/Private 27:23 13:43 6:12.2

ratio 117% 30% 49%

Culture Individualist - Socialistic Individualist - Capitalistic Collectivist - Capitalistic

CULTURE COMPLEX• Cultural Hub

• Encourage arts/culture

• Provide facilities (Theatre, Gallery, etc.)

HARBOURFRONT CENTRE• Non-profit (established as a

crown company)

• Artistic Innovation, Cultural Engagement

• 4 Theatres, 2 Galleries

• Decreasing Public Funding

• Increasing Private Funding

LINCOLN CENTER• Non-profit (most donation from Rockefeller)

• Initiated by The Mayor's Slum Clearance Committee

• Urban Renewal

• Opera house, Concert Halls, Music School

• Marginal Public Funding

ROPPONGI ART DISTRICT• 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

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