Abstracts
Abstract
This article uses the national arts research network Mass Culture (MC) as a case study for assessing the strengths and limitations of participatory governance and community-based research for reimagining and enacting better futures in the Canadian arts sector. MC is currently the only digital network that takes such an approach to promote the equitable mobilization of arts research in Canada, which falls in line with broader trends and values associated with the participatory turn of cultural policy. At MC, this orientation is first reflected in the governance structure, which grew out of both grassroots processes and formal consultations involving key actors in the Canadian arts community. Here, I draw inspiration from Rosenau’s (Rosenau & Czempiel, 1992) definition of governance to refer to MC’s system of rule, which includes informal mechanisms such as intersubjective meanings, along with formally sanctioned regulations such as charters, terms of reference, etc. MC’s approach is also activated by the methods through which it designs, implements, and evaluates cross-sectoral collaborative projects at the national level. By experimenting with various community-engaged methods tailored to each of its initiatives, MC seeks to build the relational and data infrastructures that are needed to ensure that the research it produces is both relevant and easily accessible to potential users, from practitioners, artists, academics, arts funders, and policymakers, to those working at the intersection of several professional roles. By providing an in-depth account of MC’s emergence as a networked organization and by elaborating on its community-based approach to research, this article aims to contribute new knowledge about the value of various models of collaboration in the fields of cultural policy and cultural management.
Keywords:
- Mass Culture,
- cultural policy,
- community-based research,
- participatory governance
Résumé
Cet article utilise le réseau national de recherche artistique Mass Culture (MC) comme étude de cas pour évaluer les forces et les limites de la gouvernance participative et de la recherche communautaire pour réimaginer et mettre en oeuvre de meilleurs avenirs dans le secteur artistique canadien. MC est actuellement le seul réseau numérique qui adopte une telle approche pour promouvoir la mobilisation équitable de la recherche artistique au Canada, ce qui s'inscrit dans les tendances et les valeurs plus larges associées au tournant participatif de la politique culturelle. Chez MC, cette orientation se reflète d'abord dans la structure de gouvernance, qui est issue à la fois de processus populaires et de consultations formelles impliquant des acteurs clés de la communauté artistique canadienne. Je m'inspire ici de la définition de la gouvernance de Rosenau (Rosenau & Czempiel, 1992) pour faire référence au système de règles de MC, qui comprend des mécanismes informels tels que les significations intersubjectives, ainsi que des réglementations formellement sanctionnées telles que les chartes, les termes de référence, etc. L'approche de MC est également activée par les méthodes par lesquelles elle conçoit, met en oeuvre et évalue des projets de collaboration intersectorielle au niveau national. En expérimentant diverses méthodes d'engagement communautaire adaptées à chacune de ses initiatives, MC cherche à construire les infrastructures relationnelles et de données nécessaires pour garantir que la recherche qu'elle produit est à la fois pertinente et facilement accessible aux utilisateurs potentiels, qu'il s'agisse de praticiens, d'artistes, d'universitaires, de financeurs du secteur artistique, de décideurs politiques ou de personnes travaillant à l'intersection de plusieurs rôles professionnels. En fournissant un compte rendu détaillé de l'émergence de MC en tant qu'organisation en réseau et en développant son approche communautaire de la recherche, cet article vise à apporter de nouvelles connaissances sur la valeur des différents modèles de collaboration dans les domaines de la politique culturelle et de la gestion culturelle.
Mots-clés :
- Mobilisation culturelle,
- politique culturelle,
- recherche communautaire,
- gouvernance participative
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
Bibliography
- Alacovska, A., & Bissonnette, J. (2019). Care-ful Work: An Ethics of Care Approach to Contingent Labour in the Creative Industries. International Journal of Business Ethics, 169(2021), 135-151. doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04316-3
- Bain, A., & McLean, H. (n.d.). The artistic precariat. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 6(1), 93-111. doi:10.1093/cjres/rss020
- Banks, M., & O’Connor, J. (2020, November 8). Culture After COVID. Retrieved from Tribune Mag: https://tribunemag.co.uk/2020/11/culture-after-covid
- Beauregard, D. (2020). Culture in transition: The cultural policy legacy of the Massey Commission. In D. Beauregard, & J. Paquette, Canadian Cultural Policy in Transition (pp. 14-32). New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003134022-3
- Bonet, L., & Négrier, E. (2018). The participative turn in cultural policy: Paradigms, models, contexts. Poetics,, 66(1), 66, 64–73. doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2018.02.006
- Brook, I., O’Brien, D., & Taylor, M. (2020). Culture is Bad For You: Inequality in the Cultural and Creative Industries. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
- Brown, a. m. (2017). Emergent Strategy. Stirling: AK Press.
- Campbell, M. (n.d.). Reimagining the creative industries in the community arts sector. Cultural Trends, 30(3), 263–282. doi:10.1080/09548963.2021.1887702
- Côté-Boileau, É., Gaboury, I., Breton, M., & Denis, J.-L. (2020). Organizational Ethnographic Case Studies: Toward a New Generative In-Depth Qualitative Methodology for Health Care Research? International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19. doi:10.1177/1609406920926904
- Davies, M., & Selwood, S. (2012). In search of cultural policy. Cultural Trends, 21(3), 201–204. doi:10.1080/09548963.2012.698470
- Gattinger, M. &.-P. (2010). The “Neoliberal Turn” in Provincial Cultural Policy and Administration in Québec and Ontario: The Emergence of ‘Quasi-Neoliberal’ Approaches. Canadian Journal of Communication, 35(2), 279-302. doi:10.22230/cjc.2010v35n2a2185
- Gibson-Graham, J. K., & Collective, T. C. (n.d.). Cultivating Community Economies. Tools for Building a Liveable World. Washington, D.C.: The Democracy Collaborative. Retrieved from https://www.communityeconomies.org/sites/default/files/2019-03/Next%20System%20Project%2C%20Community%20Economies%2C%20Final.pdf
- Gourgues, G., Mazeaud, A., & Nonjon, M. (2022). From the participatory turn of administrations to the bureaucratisation of participatory democracy: Study based on the French case. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(4), 1141–1158. doi:10.1177/00208523211003122
- Hadley, S., & Belfiore, E. (2018). Cultural democracy and cultural policy. Cultural Trends, 27(3), 218–223. doi:10.1080/09548963.2018.1474009
- Litzenberger, S. (2022, May 3). State of emergence: Why we need artists right now. Retrieved from The Philanthropist Journal: https://thephilanthropist.ca/2022/05/state-of-emergence-why-we-need-artists-right-now/
- Loveless, N. (2019). How to Make Art at the End of the World: A Manifesto for Research-Creation. Durham: Duke University Press.
- Luka, M. E. (2022). The ‘New Main Street’: Reshaping the Canadian creative ecosystem. In D. P. Beauregard, Canadian Cultural Policy in Transition (pp. 210-221). New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003134022-18
- Luka, M. E., & Millette, M. (2018). (Re)framing Big Data : Activating Situated Knowledges and a Feminist Ethics of Care in Social Media Research. Social Media + Society, 4(2), 1-10. doi:10.1177/2056305118768297
- Mackay, L. (2021, July 19). Getting to Know Mass Culture. Retrieved from Rozsa Foundation Blog: https://www.rozsafoundation.com/post/getting-to-know-mass-culture
- Maggs, D. (2021, June). Art and the World After This. Retrieved from Metcalf Foundation: https://metcalffoundation.com/publication/art-and-the-world-after-this
- Marx, L. (2019). Participation as policy in local cultural governance. Cultural Trends, 294-304. doi:10.1080/09548963.2019.1644786
- Mass Culture. (2020). Policy and Procedure Handbook. Retrieved from Mass Culture: https://massculture.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Mass-Culture-Handbook-of-Policies-Procedures_2020.pdf
- Mass Culture. (2023, January). "What's Next? Reimagining The Arts Sector" with Zainub Verjee. Retrieved from Mass Culture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYCAnlzhJdg
- Mass Culture. (n.d.). What’s Mass Culture’s Story? (FAQs for Press Release). Retrieved from Mass Culture: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Himi7vWlbA-bFhrfqDBRD2-cATxkFMWuR3W6iz0DB4M/edit
- Nonjon, M., & Mazeaud, A. (2018). Le marché de la démocratie participative par Alice Mazeaud, Magali Nonjon. Retrieved from COOP UQAM: https://www.coopuqam.com/581070-Le-marche-de-la-democratie-participative-produit.html
- Rifkin, J. (2000). The Age of Access: How the Shift from Ownership to Access is Transforming Capitalism. London: Penguin Books.
- Rosenau, J. N., & Czempiel, E.-O. (1992). Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511521775
- Thompson, C., & Campbell, M. (2022). Creative Industries in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Publishers.
- Walmsley, B. (2013). Co-creating theatre: Authentic engagement or inter-legitimation? Cultural Trends, 22(2), 108-118. doi:10.1080/09548963.2013.783176
- Zask, J. (2016). De la démocratisation à la démocratie culturelle. Nectart, 3(2), 40-47. doi:10.3917/nect.003.0040