Culture Financing Culture Paradox: Why Fair Working Conditions Are Essential in the Arts
This article aims to spark a debate about the Culture Financing Culture Paradox, shedding light on artists’ complex situations. By emphasizing the intrinsic value of culture and the urgent need for sustainable support, we can encourage immediate action towards fostering artistic creation and cultural development in cities and countries.
Why are arts unique?
Many aspects make the arts unique, but in this article, we focus on the unique aspect of the artist's motivation to carry out their work compared to other professions. As Hans Abbing discusses in his book “Why Are Artists Poor?”, artists have a much higher intrinsic motivation than most other professions, meaning that internal rewards are much more important than external ones. This means that art is a profession where, in most cases, the greatest reward is in the creation itself, as the lack of financial compensation does not deter the artist from creating.
This reality implies that artists who do not receive sufficient economic compensation for their art-related work often need multiple jobs to support themselves, a fact supported by data that Sound Diplomacy collects across our projects and many other studies. One study by Throsby (1994), based on surveys, shows that the hours artists invest in artistic creation are positively influenced by their two sources of income: income related to their art and income unrelated to their art. In other words, when artists earn more from non-artistic work, they can afford to dedicate more time to creating art. However, this creates a paradox: as artists take on more non-artistic work to support their creative pursuits, the limited hours in a day force them to spend less time on their art. This challenge affects the majority of artists.
Culture as a public good
At the 2022 Mondiacult Conference organized by UNESCO, culture was declared a global public good that needs to be included in national, local, and international policies. If culture, according to Mondiacult, is a public good due to its relevance to the sustainable development of nations and the nature of how it is consumed, shouldn't the same consideration be extended to those who produce this public good?
In Culture is Not an Industry, Justin O’Connor highlights the importance of culture as an essential tool for social cohesion and collective well-being. He contends that treating culture merely as an economic entity undermines its broader societal role and value. This perspective emphasizes the need for cultural policies that recognize and support the unique contributions of artists beyond mere economic metrics.
We all enjoy culture. We consume it digitally by listening to a song on YouTube or Spotify or physically through CDs or vinyl records. We enjoy it live in street theater performances or fancy opera houses. We appreciate it when reading a book or a short story on Twitter. When we are immersed in culture, the common denominator of all these moments is generally a feeling of joy triggered by the emotions and sensations it evokes, the impact it has on our surroundings, or the admiration it inspires.
Demonstrators protest against Suffolk county council’s proposed cuts to arts funding. Photograph: Jason Bye/The Guardian
Behind this enjoyment are many contributors, but the primary ones are the artists. The spectrum of artists is very diverse: from established to emerging, some dedicated full-time to their art, and others who, out of necessity or choice, create or perform in their spare time. The key to enabling artists to create is creativity. This factor can and should be stimulated through public policy to ensure creativity flows and channels into more compositions, more music, more literature, or more graffiti (among others) for societies to enjoy. As stated in UNESCO's Recommendation on the Status of the Artist:
“Recognizing that the arts, in their broadest and most comprehensive sense, are and should be an integral part of life and that it is necessary and desirable for governments to contribute to creating and maintaining not only a climate conducive to freedom of artistic expression but also the material conditions that facilitate the manifestation of this creative talent”
The paradox
In all the projects where we work to design musical and cultural strategies for cities, we encounter a common problem: artists cannot cover their basic needs with their income from artistic creation. Considering only professional artists surveyed by Sound Diplomacy we find that, on average, 27% can meet their basic needs through their creative work, while 73% cannot. This finding is concerning because, according to the data gathered, professional artists are dedicated almost full-time to their artistic work, meaning they have few other income sources. Most of their total income (an average of 75%) comes from sources related to their artistic work, compared to their non-artistic income (an average of 25%).
The situation is often even more challenging for semi-professional and amateur artists. These individuals typically have fewer opportunities to earn income from their art, often relying on other jobs to sustain themselves. The financial disparity is more dramatic in these groups, as they juggle multiple roles while trying to nurture their artistic passions.
However, as already mentioned, this does not stop them from creating due to their higher intrinsic motivation. Meanwhile, they continue to boost the creative and cultural offerings in the cities where they live, allowing citizens to enjoy this expanding cultural landscape. This phenomenon is what we define as the paradox of culture financing culture.
Even though the nature of artistic creation does not rely on extrinsic recognition (in this case, money), meaning artists will continue to create, there should be recognition from governments and society of this situation, as primary beneficiaries of this paradox. Citing again UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Status of the Artist:
“Considering that the artist plays an important role in the life and development of societies and should be able to contribute to their development and to exercise his responsibilities on an equal basis with all other citizens while preserving his creative inspiration and freedom of expression.”
Time to reflect
It's common not to reflect on the chain of people involved in producing what we consume culturally (and otherwise), often taking it for granted. While we agree and advocate for universal access to culture, believing that more culture translates to greater well-being for the population, it is crucial for society as a whole—from citizens to governments—to consider what lies behind a song on YouTube, a juggler at a traffic light, or a graffiti artwork. We must recognize the artists’ economic challenges behind these cultural offerings.
Justin O'Connor's analysis underscores the need to move away from viewing culture solely as an industry and instead embrace its role as a public good. This approach calls for policies directly supporting artists, recognizing their essential role in enriching society.
We are at a historical moment where culture is given the prominence it deserves in political and urban agendas for sustainable development. There is also evidence that people are consuming culture increasingly rapidly. Today, one of the best ways to foster a sense of community, encourage civic participation, reduce social segregation, and move away from an individualistic and materialistic perspective (a critical factor in combating excessive consumerism that harms the environment) is to give greater importance to cultural policy and achieve more cultural participation. Increasing national or local participation rates would also have a positive impact on citizens’ well-being and mental health (Węziak-Białowolska, Białowolski and Sacco, 2018).
However, we must not forget that cultural policies exist because there exists culture to be managed policy-wise, which is created by artists. An expansive cultural policy strategy must consider this and ensure that artists are not left to carry out the work (increasing cultural participation through cultural creation and exhibition) that should be in a big way carried by the public sector.
While this article does not propose specific measures to address this issue, there are existing tools that could be utilized. For example, the recently launched Fair Culture Charter, coordinated by the German Commission for UNESCO, provides a valuable framework for promoting a fairer creative ecosystem. This charter advocates for better working conditions, fair remuneration, and rights protection for artists and cultural workers. You can find more information on this initiative at Fair Culture. It serves as a key instrument for addressing the Culture Financing Culture Paradox by fostering more equitable cultural practices globally.