We started the day with a ‘Question Time’ style discussion based on theme of researchers’ roles in participatory decision-making, with Chair Leila Jancovich and panellists:
* Dr Dave O’Brien (Lecturer in Cultural Industry Studies, City University London)
* Karen Brookfield (Deputy Director of Strategy and Business Development, Heritage Lottery Fund)
* Helen Featherstone (Senior Officer, Engagement & Audience, Arts Council England)
* Dr Helen Graham (Research Fellow in Tangible and Intangible Heritage, University of Leeds)
Here's a summary of the responses to the questions.
1. What are the challenges involved in facilitating participatory decision-making without influencing the outcome? (Sarah Harvey Richardson)
Responses - consider approaches that negotiate within the process itself, perhaps it's not so much a question of influence if you can be led by the decision-making process rather than by the decision. On the other hand, some parameters can be useful, as long as they don't exert an undue influence e.g. Disability guidelines might inform decisions about text size in participatory projects like collaborative exhibitions. It is a difficult issue to negotiate since there is often pressure within larger organisations to engage in tokenistic participation, suggesting that often the outcome has already been decided. Sometimes it can be difficult to engage people on policy/decision-making questions.
Questions raised - Is there such a thing as cultural policy? How is it to be defined? Is it possible that participatory approaches have a greater chance of success if you ask people to engage with something they have a strong connection to, e.g. Place?
2. If we are striving for a collaborative environment in which researchers and policy makers work together in cultural decision-making, how do we ensure that the practitioners and artists who deliver the culture are not excluded from this process? What platform do you consider the best upon which to give them a voice? (Niki Black)
Responses - There is a problem when a strong dialogue between elites becomes exclusionary, and decisions are taken without involving other stakeholders. Do artists constitute one such elite? Perhaps, when they are well established but not early on in their careers. Just as researchers and policy makers should be able to work together, so too should practitioners be able to contribute (without occupying a privileged position). Scale is important when considering how best practitioners and artists can contribute to policy/projects. Maybe for smaller scale community projects (which perhaps involve a commissioned artwork) it's more important.
3. When the timing of research and policy-making are so different, how can researchers ensure that their work doesn't get 'left behind' by the speed of the policy making process? (Bethany Rex)
Responses - One way of thinking through the implications of research is as effecting change as part of the process (see above, research that negotiates within the process itself and is practice-led). However, while potentially beneficial, policy usefulness is not the main criteria ECRs will be judged on so it is important not to try and base the value of your research on that. If there are organisations who you want to collaborate with, be proactive about contacting them but try to ensure you use policy friendly language, i.e. cultivate a clear, non-academic writing style.
4. What is the difference, if any, between 'participation' and 'co-production'? (Claire Forbes)
Responses - Participation implies clear authorship or ownership of a project on one side, whereas (the modern usage of) co-production suggests a more equitable relationship between two parties. However, definitions are often contested and it is important to clearly define the terms in your projects/research from the outset (e.g. participation, co-production).
5. The UK model for public subsidy of cultural organisations has come under serious pressure since the last general election. Political priorities have changed and the economic case for the arts is under question. But to what extent do these changes reflect a loss of connection between the British public, in whose name policy is made, and the cultural sector? What can the sector do to revitalise its public mandate? (Jon Price)
Responses - There is a continuity in funding models which perpetuates exclusion, i.e. the largest organisations often get the largest share of funding, so opera, ballet and theatre, which appeal to a relative minority receive disproportionate funds. There is an issue of principles vs. practice here; the hypothetical willingness to fund different types of cultural activity to encourage engagement, vs. what is actually funded.
6. If a 'bottom up' approach to identifying heritage and planning conservation require facilitation skills, what might be the value of the heritage experts skills in archaeology, art history and architecture etc? (Sophie Norton)
Responses - The expertise of heritage professionals can be of great value in a combined approach to planning; it's a case of bringing expertise and know how (the knowledge of different groups and communities) together. Different levels and strands of knowledge can enhance project outcomes, and several current projects (see, e.g., Arts Council England) adopt this approach.
7. Could the panel suggest, perhaps based on their own work, what have been some of the most effective ways to connect participatory modes of research to the making of policy interventions and organizational change? What strategies have you yourselves employed? (Jon Gross)
Responses - While it's often easier said than done, trying not reinvent the wheel is important; participatory models should not be used for the sake of it. Projects that involve participatory decision-making are often hard to negotiate in terms of geography and communication, and the potential for disaster is quite high in adopting this kind of approach. However, it is again a question of scale; while it may be difficult to scale up to a national level, at the level of local government, there can be positive outcomes from participatory approaches (representational democracy model).
No comments:
Post a Comment