4 results
Five - Varieties of creative citizenship
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 103-128
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
In this chapter we identify some varieties of creative citizenship, not with the expectation of achieving a comprehensive taxonomy, but in order to test the scope, robustness and potential value of creative citizenship, both as an idea and as a set of practices, with reference to the case studies undertaken in the Creative Citizen project.
Creative citizenship as a concept can help us consider how ‘everyday’ creative acts – such as cooking, dancing, knitting or debating – can generate community engagement. It gives us a way of rendering coherent an array of otherwise disparate phenomena: for example, when pictures and messages in social media from the streets of a turbulent neighbourhood become a catalyst for mobilising people around an issue or cause; or when cultural or artistic activities transform a planning consultation meeting into a creative experience, where urban issues are deliberated upon in a more collaborative and dynamic spirit. These are examples of creative citizenship in action.
‘Creative citizenship’ conceptualises the everyday creativity of ordinary people (that is, not just creative professionals) as a core civic resource, something that adds to the capacity of the community and which harnesses their combined energy for change. Such everyday creativity cannot be understood in isolation from the civic networks within which it is situated. Creative citizenship does not merely describe the acts of creative individuals. It depends upon and contributes to the civic networks where it occurs, especially now that the boundaries between producers and consumers are diminished by digital abundance. It is more about the creativity of groups than the creativity of individuals. This chapter explores a range of ways in which acts of creativity occur within a civic and communicative context.
We test our theoretical approach by applying it to case studies in the Creative Citizen project, including examples of activism, community journalism, hyperlocal publishing, insurgent and formal community-led planning practices, and to informal and formal creative practices developed around music and media production.
Rage, renewal and everyday acts: initiation and purpose
Acts of citizenship can be considered creative in various ways. They may be creative in the same way that Schumpeterian ‘creative destruction’ is, where innovation is disruptive or a threat in circumstances where renewal is needed.
Three - Citizenship and the creative economy
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 49-74
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The creative economy (Howkins, 2001) emerged as a concept in the first decade of the 21st century, linking the earlier idea of ‘creative industries’ (DCMS, 1998) with the role of creative inputs to the whole economy. The debates accompanying these changes have been summarised from an international perspective by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development reports (UNCTAD, 2008; 2010), which provided assessments of the creative economy and the factors that underpin its growth at differing stages of economic development.
The third iteration of the United Nations report on the creative economy, this time produced by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2013), adopts a different definition and approach from those of UNCTAD and focuses on ‘uncovering the economic and non-economic benefits’ of the creative economy in order better to support local pathways to development. The perceived ‘non-economic benefits’ stem from the wider contribution of cultural development and ‘can lead to transformative changes when individuals and communities are empowered to take ownership of their own development processes, including the use of local resources, skills and knowledge and diverse creative and cultural expressions’ (UNESCO, 2013: 17). Such benefits have been discussed intensively in the cultural economics literature and stem from the particular characteristics associated with the production and consumption of cultural goods, today more often called ‘creative’ (Towse, 2003). While the initial creative rhetoric of the early 2000s may have left aside some of these points to focus on the economic contribution of many cultural or creative activities (Hartley, 2005; O’Connor, 2010), the 2013 UNESCO report calls for a return to a more complex understanding of cultural and creative dynamics and the linkages between economic and non-economic acts of creativity. Such a tilt in thinking is highly relevant to the proposition that creative citizenship offers a value-rich way of thinking about the application of creativity in a civic setting, operating at the frontier between the public and private spheres, offering a route for policy makers to consider interventions supportive of the growth of creative citizenship.
As earlier work from Markusen (2010a) pointed out, taking into account the non-economic aspects of the creative economy implies recognising the links between the commercial and not-for-profit components of what she calls the ‘creative ecology’.
Eight - Asset mapping and civic creativity
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 181-204
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Throughout this book creative citizenship is explored theoretically and empirically as a concept that intrinsically leads to value generation. Acts of creative citizenship bring personal, cultural, economic, social and civic benefits, not only to individuals and communities directly involved in these acts, but also to the wider public. So, hyperlocal blogs may generate income for amateur journalists but also benefit local residents and businesses through communicating and raising awareness about issues that affect them, ranging from the weather and local services to political and planning issues (Nesta, 2013). Similarly, the benefits of community-led design enhance social value through civic participation, more democratic outcomes, creation of public goods, improved social capital and stronger community. In boosting qualities such as self-expression, confidence and skills, they also generate personal value. (Alexiou et al, 2013).
The Creative Citizen project is concerned not only with understanding and capturing current practice and its value, as enacted through the use of different media, but also exploring how this pursuit of value can be further supported and advanced.
One of the instruments we used to explore questions of value was asset mapping. In community engagement and community development theory and practice, the term ‘asset’ has long been used as an alternative for the term ‘value’. Assets are tangible or intangible resources that have a potential – they can grow or be better used to achieve something new. Drawing from the strengths of different existing approaches, asset mapping was innovatively used in the Creative Citizen project both as an analytic research tool for capturing people's values and perceptions of value, and as a practical tool to support community engagement and co-creation.
The chapter reviews different asset mapping or asset-based development approaches and presents the approach developed and used in the Creative Citizen project, discussing theoretical and methodological insights. The chapter links to Chapter 4, which is focused on appraising and articulating the value of creative citizenship through the lens of cultural value.
Approaches to asset mapping
Asset mapping is a methodology used with community groups and organisations to help unearth, capture and visualise existing resources and capacities, which may otherwise lie undiscovered and underused.
Seven - Conversations about co-production
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 153-180
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
When we first gathered as a team to construct the Creative Citizen project proposal, the terms co-production, co-creation and co-design were new to several round the table. The team's designers, for whom this was a well-understood way of working in partnership with individuals and communities to design a new building, service or product, initially brought these concepts forward. Other team members were familiar with the approach from working on community arts and media projects. But for some the approach was new and while it raised questions about objectivity in research, along with some ethical issues, we agreed that co-production would be fundamental to the team's work.
An approach based upon co-production felt right because creative citizenship involves shared goals and collaborative methods. We wanted to understand the different forms, meanings and value of civic creativity, but we also wanted to test ways of growing the potential of creative citizens. Co-production allowed us to work in partnership with communities on creative projects useful to them, whilst also contributing to the research team's insights gained through other methods, including interviews, observation, textual analysis and surveys. This range of methods also had the merit of drawing upon the research traditions of a multidisciplinary group. By focusing on the mutual benefits of co-production, we were responding to ‘a criticism that research conducted in communities often fails to meaningfully include communities in its design and undertaking’ (Durose et al, 2007).
The literature in design has much to say about co-production, co-design and co-creation, but surprisingly little to say about the perspectives of participants and the communities themselves (Durham Community Research Team, 2011). In light of this, we present here a series of informal conversations, articulating the views of our community partners or ‘creative citizens’ in their role as co-producers of the project. These conversations highlight various methodological and practical factors that helped or hindered them through the creative process and point to ways in which academic researchers might better support their community partners in future.
Terms of engagement
During the research we used the terms co-creation, co-design and co-production interchangeably. In the literature, co-creation usually refers to collective creativity in general, co-design to collective creativity as applied to the design process (Sanders and Stappers, 2008) and co-production to citizens playing an active role in producing goods and services of consequence to them (Ostrom, 1996).