Progress report for the research project:
Why we need European cultural policies:
Impact of the EU enlargement on cultural policies in Countries in Transition



Nina Obuljen, research fellow
Institute for International Relations, Zagreb, Croatia
nina@irmo.hr

Introduction

The announcement of the Cultural Policy Award winner was made during the Sharing Cultures Conference in July 2004 and I commenced the research project in October 2004. I have devoted much of my time since then studying the available literature concerning the historical treatment of culture in the EU and analyzing the most important texts from the field of cultural policy. I have also reviewed texts which more generally deal with the questions of European enlargement

The process of European integration, although primarily driven by economic and political interests, also brings many changes in cultural policies. Culture and cultural policies were not considered priorities during the first period of the EU integration and were put on the table only later. There is also a current consensus in favor of establishing a certain degree of co-operation in the cultural field. Even though a majority of member states reject the idea of formulating “common cultural policy” and insist on the principle of subsidiarity, many cultural initiatives require European-level co-ordination or lead to a common cultural dimension.

While debates across Europe still mainly focus on the question of the need for “European cultural policies”, I agree with those authors who say that a de facto European cultural policy already exists, even though it is not yet clearly articulated. Provisions from various common policies have an impact on culture. This can include both instruments aimed specifically at culture and those that apply more generally. Published studies on:
• obstacles to the mobility of artists;
• cultural goods and services;
• analysis of employment opportunities across Europe;
• tax systems;
• copyright; or
• liberalization of marketplaces,

all demonstrate that cultural policies depend on, and are influenced by, provisions and rules arising from other spheres of public policies.

Authors such as Colin Mercer correctly point out that, in some ways, research on cultural policies is “lagging behind” other public policies, primarily as a consequence of inadequate connections between theory and policy (Mercer 2002). This must change if we are to avoid a situation where other public policies come to have more influence on cultural policies simply because cultural policies fail to transform and respond to the challenges of modern development.

In the European Union it is possible to observe the trend where other public policies significantly influence the cultural sector. Notwithstanding the principle of subsidiarity or numerous “exceptions of culture from general rules,” the space for intervention by national governments is narrowing. Policy transfer changes traditional divisions between different policy areas. This is particularly visible in transition countries and in new EU member states that have not yet completed the process of structural changes and have barely begun to adjust their cultural markets to the new rules of the market economy (see Mucica 2002).

Current situation in transition countries

The impact of EU enlargement has certainly been one of the most debated topics among researchers in all public policy fields in the transition countries. The goal of becoming a member of the EU has been accompanied by a fear of the potential consequences of joining. Since the early 1990s, studies of EU enlargement have focused primarily on the harmonization of legislation with the Acquis, as well as the economic costs and benefits of the process. Culture has been mostly neglected or, if it appeared, it was usually to support the thesis that enlargement not only brings economic benefits, but also enriches European cultural diversity.

There are many interesting studies on specific sectoral policies, such as book policy, audio-visual policy and copyright issues which address situation both in “old” and “new” EU member states. However, in overall the field of cultural policy has been generally labeled as “less affected” and there have been no comprehensive studies assessing the possible impact on it of the European enlargement.

From the information gathered so far, one can identify at least three reasons for this lack of interest and research about the topic.

First, in Europe (new and old EU member states as well as future members) there are continuing debates concerning the EU and culture, primarily about whether it is necessary, or not, to move towards the adoption of common cultural policies. This shifts the focus of the debate from possible impact of EU policies on culture to the very existence of European cultural policy. Following one of the basic principles of researching public policies, which is that public policy is comprised both of a government’s action and inaction in a specific field (Dye 1976; Parsons 1999; Heidencheimer, Heclo 1990), my research quotes numerous instruments that directly or indirectly affect culture, and tries to show how a de facto European cultural policy already exists. For culture, it would simply be much better if this policy were more clearly articulated (compare with Ruffolo, 2001).

Another reason for the lack of research is the absence of some basic comparable information and statistics on the European level – a problem already identified, analyzed and explained during the process of the assessment of the Council of Europe’s project on National Reports on Cultural Policy. The research shows that many of the obstacles evoked during the period of evaluation of the results of the Council of Europe’s project also apply when trying to understand the confusion in the treatment of culture on the EU level.

The third reason for the lack of comprehensive research is the diversity of policy approaches within the cultural sector itself. Some believe that this supports an approach of studying specific policy fields, such as book policy, audio-visual policy or copyright issues. However, some transversal topics, such as mobility of artists and cultural professionals, or regulation of markets for cultural goods and services, require a more holistic approach that goes beyond the sectorial analysis. It is important to note that many of those valuable studies on specific sectors have been used for this research because it was impossible and would have been redundant to try to gather original information on each of these issues.

Preliminary results of the research

Preliminary findings gathered through the Questionnaire and interviews with researchers and policy makers in several new member countries show that, in this first stage, cultural policies were not affected by the process of the enlargement as much as other policy fields. They also show that debates about possible consequences of the EU enlargement on culture and cultural policies have remained on the margins of the general debate, which was focusing on fields of public policies considered to be more important.

The preliminary results of the research also show it is much too early to make a serious evaluation of the impact of the EU enlargement on culture or to draw more specific conclusions on its positive or negative consequences. One of the main questions of this research was to examine to what extent changes in other policy fields, such as tax policy, competition policy and state aid have had an impact on cultural policies and measures in the new member countries. It is interesting to observe that, in this first phase, either they have not had any significant impact or the link with changes in the cultural sector was not drawn by the respondents.

If this is compared with the current developments in so-called old member states where recently there have been several cases against EU members based on allegations that certain cultural policy measures are not compatible with state aid or competition rules, it is interesting to see that these issues have not yet been perceived as relevant for cultural policies in the new member countries.

In this context, and primarily based on the reviewed literature, one of the final questions addressed in the research is the following dilemma. When looking at the impact of existing measures and instruments from other policy fields on culture, the lack of a clearly defined European cultural policy, while perhaps beneficial for those member states that want to preserve their traditions and policies, might represent a challenge for new member states or those that might become candidates in the future.

Through the example of EU integration and attempts to deal with cultural diversity issues, the aim of this study is also to promote the concept that cultural policy and other public policies are converging. This will enable cultural policies to better adjust to the changing realities brought to culture from other fields and will lead to a conclusion that an innovative approach to cultural policy-making is needed, one that will inform the development of cultural policies in transition countries by policy-makers.

In the final part of the study, the question is asked about the potential outcomes if the EU member states decide not to proceed with more proactive policy-making in the field of culture. Examples from policy-making in the audiovisual field show that there is a way to by-pass the subsidiarity principle, and provisions of Article 151 (see Niedobietek 1997, Aubry 2000) can also have a major impact on the future of European cultural policy-making.

While briefly evoking some recent developments relevant for European cultural policies such as negotiations in UNESCO on the Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions or the mobilization of the cultural sector against the proposed Bolkenstein Directive, as well as a slow transformation of cultural markets in new EU member states, I arrive at the question of whether there should be one or more European-level instruments on culture, to respond to the particular needs of the sector, similar to those addressed in the UNESCO draft Convention.

The affects of the principle of “l’exception culturelle” has dominated European cultural policy making and has been designed and inspired in many ways to shelter or protect existing policies. This no longer seems to be adequate, either for the new EU member states which are still undergoing fundamental changes and need models and guidance to adapt their cultural markets to the new requirements, or for other member states confronted by the negative consequences of policies primarily driven by the interest and logic of the free market.