View
233
Download
4
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
TheValue-BasedApproach(VBA)toevaluate
theknowledgeandnetworkspilloversof
theRotterdamUnlimitedFestival
Autors:ArjoKlamer,LyudmilaPetrova,DorottyaKiss
klamer@eshcc.eur.nl,petrova@crearefoundation.nl,contact@dekiss.info
ThereportiscommissionedbytheEuropeanResearchPartnershiponCulturalandCreativeSpillovers(CCS),withfundingpartnersArtsCouncilEngland(ACE),theArtsCouncilofIreland,CreativeEngland,theeuropeancentreforcreativeeconomy(ecce),theEuropeanCulturalFoundation(ECF)andCreativeScotland,https://ccspillovers.wikispaces.com/home
2
TableofContents
1.Executivesummary 31.1.TheValue-BasedApproach:newmethodologyforspilloverevaluation:summary3
2.Presentationoftheresearchteam 9
3.Spilloversofculturalandcreativeindustries 103.1.EvaluationofspilloversofCCIs:stateofart 10
4.Presentationofthemethodology“Value-BasedApproach” 114.1.RationaleoftheVBA 114.2.StagesoftheVBA 134.3.Datacollectionmethods 144.4.InnovativeelementsoftheVBA 15
5.Presentationofthecasestudy 155.1.Theperformingartssector 155.2.RotterdamUnlimitedFestival 16
6.Mainhypothesesandsub-hypotheses 18
7.Methodologicalapproachoftheresearchproject 187.1.Datacollectionmethods 18
7.1.1.Datacollectionstage1 197.1.2.Datacollectionstage2 19
7.2.Dataanalysis 207.3.TimetableimplementationVBAforRU 20
8.Findings 218.1.Sharedcorevaluesandrelatedstakeholders 218.2.Demographicsofthevisitors 228.3.GeneralattitudeofRUvisitorstowardsculturalfestivals 258.4.ConcreteexperienceofRUfestivalbyitsvisitors 278.5.SpecificimpactofRUFestival 308.6.Findings:concludingremarks 37
9.Limitationsandfutureresearch 389.1.Limitations 389.2.BenefitsofapplyingVBAandfutureresearch 399.3.Feedbackoncollaborationwithcasestudyinstitution 39
9.4.ConditionsforapplicationofVBAtootherprojects39
10.Bibliography 4111.Annex1 42
3
1.ExecutivesummaryResearchobjectives
Culturalandcreativeindustries(CCIs)haveproventheirpotentialtoboost innovationinotherpartsofthe
economyandsocietybytherealisationof‘spillover’effects.However,verylittleresearchhasbeendoneto
evaluatethebroaderrangeofcontributionsofthoseindustrieselsewhere.Therefore,thisresearchaimsat
findingawaytocomprehendthecomplexityofthepracticesthatleadtoCCIspillovers.Thereisaclearneed
formorecomprehensiveevaluationofthecontributionofCCIspilloverstootherpartsoftheeconomyand
thesociety.Themostdifficult task is tograsp the intangiblequalitiesofCCI impact–culturalandsocial–
that,althoughnotobvioustomeasure,areessentialforthetransformationsthatCCIsgenerate.
Acknowledgingthisneedandfollowingtheconceptualandmethodologicalconsiderationsaddressedinthe
tender“TestinginnovativemethodstoevaluateculturalandcreativespilloversinEurope”,theresearchhas
proposed and applied amethod called Value-Based Approach (VBA) to evaluate in a systematic way the
various types of knowledge and network spillover effects of Rotterdam Unlimited Festival, RU (The
Netherlands).
TheresearchwascarriedoutbyagroupofculturaleconomistsandismanagedbytheCentreforResearch
andEducationinArtsandEconomics(CREAREFoundation).
Method:“TheValue-BasedApproach”(VBA)
Conventional measurements of impact tend to focus on instrumental values, while the Value-Based
Approach focuseson thegoalvaluesofanorganisation/aproject/asector,or inotherwords therangeof
qualities that an organisation/a project/a sector aims to achieve. The impact is assessed through the
affirmation,strengtheningorchangeofsuchvalues.TheVBAiscomprehensiveandtheoreticallyrootedina
culturaleconomicapproach. Itsconceptualframework is laidout inKlamer’srecentbook,“Doingtheright
thing: A value based economy” (2016). The notion of values and their valorisation are at the core of this
approach. Klamer (2016) argues that values emerge in a cultural context and derive meanings from the
context. Therefore, transformation of values goes along with transformation of culture and in order to
explain themechanism throughwhich spillovers are realised,weneed amore comprehensive framework
thatreflectonthesetransformations.
DetailsontheVBAarepresentedbelowinsection2.
ApplicationofVBAtoRUFestival
In the contextof theRotterdamUnlimited Festival the research tests the followinghypotheses aboutCCI
spillovers:
Hypothesis1:The (systematic)engagementwithculture-ledcreativeactivities facilitates thegenerationof
newtypesofsocialinteractions.Thisreferstoknowledgespilloversintermsofincreasingvisibility,tolerance
andengagementamongdifferentgroupsinthelocalcommunity(TFCC,2015).
4
Hypothesis 2: Experiencing and practicing culture-led creativity translates into new practices of social
collaborations and social cohesion in a community. This refers to network spillovers in terms of building
socialcohesion(TFCC,2015).
Thepilot test (phase1)of theVBAwasalreadyconducted in2015byHetAtelier,whichhaspreparedthe
groundworkthatwasenvisionedforthisresearch(phase2).
Findings:spilloversofRUFestival
Corevaluesandstakeholders
ThemostimportantvalueofRUFestival,asdefinedinstageoneofVBAapplication,issocialcohesion.Atthe
diagnosisstageof theVBA, the internal stakeholdersbuilt theirexpectationsaroundtheway inwhich the
socialcohesioncanbeoperationalisedinrelationtoRUobjectives.Accordingly,solidarityanddiversitywere
defined as the most important aspects (proxy attributes) of social cohesion. Further, solidarity was
articulatedasasenseofbelongingandtogetherness;anddiversity–asasocietalandanartisticdiversity.
ThemappingofRUFestivalprovesthattheprojectbringstogetherawidevarietyofstakeholders.Duetothe
limitedtimeandbudgetavailableforthispilottest(phase2),theresearchconsidersonlytwogroupsofcore
stakeholders–festivalvisitorsandpeers.
Evaluationofsolidarityanddiversity
TheapplicationoftheValue-BasedApproachtotheRUFestivalprovesthattheeventhasverystrongsocial
dimensionsbymeansofbringingtogetheradiversegroupofvisitorsthatexperiencesasenseofbelonging,
andconnectednesswhileenjoyingtherichanddiverseartisticprogramofthefestival.
TheanalysisalsoprovesthattheRUvisitorsnotonlyfindimportantingeneralthesocialandartisticdiversity
andconnectednessbetweendifferentsocialgroupswhenvisitinganyculturalfestival,butalsothemajorityof
thempositivelyexperiencedbothsetofvaluesduringRUfestival.Onecanassumethatthefestivalgainsan
image of an event not onlywith a distinctive program offer, but also provides possibilities to experience
considerable social impact and respectfully attracts visitors with a positive attitude towards the social
dimensionsofaculturalevent.
Withregardto itssocialandsocietal impact,theresultsshowthatallstakeholderssharethatthegreatest
(positive) impact is realised in terms of connectedness among people from different cultures, social
backgroundsandgenerations. Thosesocial/societaldimensionshavebeenenhancedinagreaterscopeby
andduringtheRUactualeventandassuchthefestivalcancontributetothesocialcohesioninthecity.
Intermsofimpactscope,themostimmediateonefromavisitor’sperspectiverelatestotheincreaseintheir
awareness andunderstandingof the people diversity andgained sense of belonging.However, during the
5
interviewstherespondentsalsoclearlydistinguishedbetween“awareness”and“understanding”,whereas,
accordingtothem,theRUfestivalhasstrongerimpactontheformerandmuchlessonthelatter.
ThevisitorsofRUFestivalanditspeersstronglyagreethatthefestivalverymuchcontributestothesocial
cohesion and cultural diversity in the city.However, the results of this research indicatepotential for the
festivaltocontributetothesocialcohesionamongitsvisitors,yetitistooearlytosaywhetheritleadstoa
socialcohesiononthecitylevel.Thelatterismarkedbyacomplexprocessthatinvolvesmultipledimensions
and complex relationships. Achieving strong social cohesion within the city of Rotterdam will take more
systematiceffortsfromdiversestakeholdersinthecity.
BenefitsandlimitationsofVBA.Futureresearch
Theapplicationofthemethodprovestobringreliableandcomprehensiveevaluationofthespillovereffects
ofRUFestival.Itespeciallyconsidersintangiblemultiplecontributionsintermsofsocialandculturalvalues.
The way VBA is implemented allows cultural organisations and their stakeholders to be involved in the
developmentandarticulationofevaluationmeasuresoftheirownwork.Nexttothis,themethodassesses
anactualimpactwhilecross-referringvariousexperiencesofthestakeholders.
Future research needs to focus on the collection of longitudinal data gathered prior to, during (when
possible)andpasttheactualevent.Thiswillallowfortestingandvalidationofvariouskeydimensionsofthe
impactthataregeneratedduringthefestivalandspreadbeyondthefestivalscope.Itwillalsobeinteresting
tobeabletotesttheapplicationofVBAtoevaluatespilloversformorethanoneeventinacityandassuch,
tobeabletoanalyseaggregateddatarelevantforCCIsspilloversforthecity.
ConditionsforapplicationofVBAtootherprojects
InordertoreachaneffectiveapplicationofVBAevaluationtootherprojects,itisindispensableto:
1)Establishagoodunderstandingwiththeleadersoftheprojectwhatthisevaluationcanmeanforthemin
termsofgettingcleartheirgoalvaluesandintermsoftheirresponsibilitiesintheprocessoftheplanning
andexecutionoftheevaluationamongthestakeholders.Thisrequiresinvestingtimeandbuildingthebasis
forthecollaborationbeforebeginningtheevaluationitself.
2)Investenoughtimeinthefirsttwostagesoftheevaluation(diagnosisofvaluesandidentificationof
stakeholdersandstrategies)untiltheresearchersandtheorganisationrepresentatives/leadersfeel
confidenttheyarereachingarelevantsetofproxiestobeevaluatedlater.Here,itisimportanttofinda
reliablemethodforthedeterminationofvaluesandexperiencesoftherelevantstakeholders,i.e.panels,
focusgroups,ethnographicalobservations,etc.
3)Investindatacollectionfromthevisitors/participantsbefore,duringandimmediatelyafterthe
event/activity,butalsorepeatthesurveymonthsaftertheendoftheactivityandcollectdatafromnon-
visitors/non-participants.
6
1.1. TheValue-BasedApproach:newmethodologyforspilloverevaluation
Rationales
Themethoddistinguishesandassessestheshort-andlong-termqualitativeimpactthatartsandculturecan
and/oraimtoachieve.Ittakesintoaccounttheinteractionbetweeneconomic,socialandculturalprocesses,
whileassessingvariousvaluesrelatedtotheseprocessesandinlinewiththepre-setgoals.Asopposedto
traditionaloutputevaluationmethods,thismethodexplicitlyusesstakeholders’perspectivesonthe
qualitativeimpactofdifferentvaluestheyexperience.Forexample,Itfocusesnotonsurfacephenomena
suchasthesatisfactionofvisitorsofanculturalevent,butonthevaluesofabroaderrangeofrelevant
stakeholders,i.e.visitors,beneficiaries,non-fundingpartners,fundingbodies,mediapartners,policymakers,
etc.Theassestmentofvaluesisjustifiedbyresponsestoquestionsaboutwhatisimportanttosomeoneora
groupofpeoplewhoarerepresentingthosestakeholdergroups.Theassumptionhereisthatthevaluesof
peopleinfluencetheirassessmentofownexperiences,andknowingthat,supportstheassessmentofthe
impactofthoseexperiences.
StagesoftheVBA
The VBA consists of three stages (fig.1.): (1) Diagnosis of goal values; (2) Realisation of values through
identification of stakeholders (internal and external) and strategies; (3) Evaluation of the impact of those
values.
Fig.1.Value-BasedApproachstages
Theevaluationconsistsofthreestages:
Stage1.Diagnosisofgoalvalues
The stage starts with a pre-evaluation to detect what each case study stands for. On the basis of
inquirieswithstakeholderswedeterminedthevaluesthatareofimportancefortheminrelationtothe
case study. The goal values are clustered in four different groups: personal, social, societal and
transcendental(fig.1.1.).
7
Fig.1.1.Value-BasedApproachdiagnosisofvalues
Stage2.Realisationofvalues:identificationofstakeholdersandstrategies
At this stage the method identifies how the undertaken projects/activities/interventions are
implemented in relation to the important values that they aim to achieve, by determining and
monitoring the strategies (activities, tools, workingmethods, communication) of the various external
stakeholders(beneficiaries,visitors,partners,policymakers,fundingbodies,media)involved.
Stage3.Evaluationoftheimpactofthosevalues
Inorder todetermine theaffirmation, strengtheningor changingof those values and the impact that
they have, the evaluation focuses on the values that have been identified earlier. For each group of
stakeholders,differentgridofproxies isusedwhich isbuiltduringtheprevioustwostages.Thosetwo
stagesareaveryessentialpartthatlaythefoundationfortheactualevaluationinstage3.Thesestages
assistboth(a)thedefinitionofthesharedgoalvaluesamongvariousstakeholdersand(b)theselection
of the proxies that indicate the impact to be realised. The development of the proxies, as value
attributes, builds both on theory and close interactionswith the stakeholders. The latter are derived
from surveys, interviews and focus groups with various stakeholders and from ethnographical
observations.
AtthisstagetheValue-BasedApproachprovidesanassessmentoftheimpactofdifferentvalues.Thatis
thegapbetweenwhatisvaluedbythestakeholdersandwhattheyexperience,i.ewhenpeoplechange
theiranswertothequestion“whattheyfindimportant”asaconsequenceoftheirexperienceswiththe
activity. The method can register changes, including changes in values, when repeated. The latter
outcome is important and novel for thatmatter, because theatre events, for example, usually aim at
changingvalues.Exposingsomestakeholderstodancemaychangetheirmindaboutitandlatertheysay
thatdancehasbecomemoreimportanttothemasanartformandthattheywanttobeinvolvedmore.
This isasocialand,possiblyalso,acultural impact.Thelatteroutcomeis importantandnovelforthat
matter, because theatre events, for example, usually aim at changing values. In some cases, it is
important the use of a referent group to crosscheck the self-reported changes among the various
stakeholders.
8
Datacollectionmethods
TheVBAincludespreliminary,continuousandpostevaluationsthathelpsystemisethecultural,social
andeconomicimpactofculturalandcreativeindustries.Dataiscollectedthrougharangeofqualitative
andquantitativemethods:surveys,individualinterviews,focusgroups,ethnologicalobservationsas
wellasanalysisofrelevantreports.
9
2.PresentationoftheresearchteamThecoreresearchteamconsistsofseniorresearcherswhohavealreadyworkedjointlyonthepilottestingof
theValue-BasedApproach (VBA)–prof.ArjoKlamer, LyudmilaPetrovaandDorottyaKiss. Inaddition, the
following senior researchers Leonie Kalkman, Chloé Brown and Sofie Post assisted the process of data
collection(fieldwork),collationofdata,andeditingofthereport.
ArjoKlamer isaProfessor inCulturalEconomicsandholds thechairofCulturalEconomicsat theErasmus
University, Rotterdam. His current research focuses on the cultural dimension of economic life and the
valuesofartsandculture.Heisamemberofthemanagementboardsofvariousculturalorganisations.Heis
President-ElectoftheAssociationforCulturalEconomicsInternational(ACEI).Hehasinitiatedandcurrently
leadstheacademicteamworkingon(VBA).Hisrecentbook,“Doingtherightthing:Avaluebasedeconomy”
(2016)isthefoundationoftheVBA.Since2014,hehasworkedasAldermanattheHilversumMunicipality,
responsiblefortheregionalsocialpolicy.
LyudmilaPetrovaisaresearchassociateinCulturalEconomicsattheErasmusSchoolofHistory,Cultureand
Communication. She is also a Director at the Summer School in Cultural Economics with the Centre for
Research and Education in Arts and Economics (CREARE). She is an active member (publishing and
presenting)of theculturaleconomicscommunity.She teachesanddoes researchoncultural industryand
social innovation, financingofarts, creativityand innovation,and international culturalpolicy. Since2013,
shehasbeenamemberof theacademicresearchteamthatdesignedthemethodology“TheValue-Based
Approach” and undertook its implementation as an (e)valuation tool for national and international
organisations.
Dorottya Eva Kiss holds two Master degrees in Cultural Economics and Entrepreneurship, and Arts and
Cultural Sciences. Her M.A. research paper focuses, on the one hand, on the knowledge gap between
cultural,economicandscientificknowledge,and(Dutch)culturalpolicymaking,and,ontheotherhand,on
thesociologicandeconomicfactorsoftheconstructionofvaluationofperformingartists inachangingart
world climate. Besides her almost 18 years of experience in creative entrepreneurial activities, Kiss is
currently a project manager, a consultant and a researcher at the foundation Het Atelier, a (freelance)
lecturer at the Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication, and a consultant / trainer in NLP
communications(NeuroLinguisticProgramming).
Managementoftheresearch
TheresearchismanagedbytheCentreforResearchandEducationinArtsandEconomics,TheNetherlands
(CREAREFoundation,www.crearefoundation.nl).Establishedin2011,CREAREhasundertakenthemissionof
advancing international research and education in cultural economics. It aims at providing a better
understandingof theparticularchallengesweencounterin the interactionamongculture, thesocietyand
the economy, and at diffusing knowledge about the new insights generated by research in various
disciplines.
10
3.SpilloversofculturalandcreativeindustriesTherecenttransitiontowardsa ‘new’economy(Baumol,2006)andtheriseofboththe‘knowledge-based
economy’ (OECD, 1996) and the ‘creative class’ (Florida, 2002) call for repositioning the cultural and the
creative industries(CCIs)acrosstheeconomyandsociety. Inpractice,theemergenceofnewtypesofCCIs
interventions all over Europe,marked by close collaborations, cross-fertilization andmutual learningwith
creatives (artists, designers, architects, scientists, etc.) has a considerable impact on the landscape of
innovation, by encouraging greater openness and inclusiveness across sectors and disciplines (Petrova,
2016). Inmany cases, CCIs prove their potential to boost innovation in other parts of the economy and
societyby the realisationof ‘spillover’effects (Potts,2011).CCIsopen theway foranewapproach to the
policiesforculturalandcreativeindustriesassectors,providingservicesofadifferentqualitytothesociety
andtootherpartsoftheeconomy.
Despitetherecent interest inthetopicofCCIspillovers,these industriesareactuallystillonthemarginof
researchand innovation (economicandsocial)policies.Very little researchhasbeendonetoevaluate the
broaderrangeofcontributionsofthoseindustrieselsewhere(TFCC)1.Verylittleisknownabouttheactual
place of arts, design andmediawithin the contemporary innovation systemor about themechanisms of
transferringtheirpositiveeffectselsewhere.
ThisresearchaimsatfindingawaytocomprehendthecomplexityofthepracticesthatCCIspilloversentail.
In light of this, there is a clear need for more comprehensive evaluation/assessment of their social and
culturalcontributionstotheeconomyandthesociety.
3.1.EvaluationofspilloversofCCIs:stateofart
Theconceptof‘spillover’effectshasitsoriginineconomictheoryandreferstotheprocessesoftransferring
benefits from one area to another. A recent report by TFCC (2015) suggests that spillovers of CCIs can
generateagreaterimpactthanpreviouslythought.Thereportproposesthefollowingdefinition,whichaims
tomeetthe‘strategicandpractical’needsofvariousstakeholders:“[T]heprocessbywhichanactivityinone
areahasasubsequentbroaderimpactonplaces,societyortheeconomythroughtheoverflowofconcepts,
ideas,skills,knowledgeanddifferenttypesofcapital.Spilloverscantakeplaceovervaryingtimeframesand
can be both intentional and unintentional, planned or unplanned, direct or indirect, negative as well as
positive” (2015, p. 15). The analysis of the 98 case studies distinguishes 17 different sub-categories of
spillovers,clusteredintothreebroadertypes:knowledge,industryandnetwork2.Theproposedclassification
ofspilloversgoesbeyond immediateconnotationsofeconomicvalues,and invitesamulti-perspective(i.e.
economic,socialandcultural)analysisthatinvolvesaninterdisciplinaryapproachofinvestigation.
However, the conventional measurements of spillover effects focus mainly on quantitative economic
indicators, suchasGDP,employment rate,numberofpatentsandbusiness transactions (Stamatal2008;
1 ThereportofTFCC(2015)reviews98casestudiesonCCIspillovers. 2Ibid.p.25.
11
Muller et al., 2009; Boschma & Fisch, 2007; Bakhshi et al. 2008), and includes a limited number of
quantitative indicators. Inmostof the cases, those studiesdonot take intoaccount theperspectives and
experiencesofthevariousstakeholdergroups. Itwasalsofoundthatvery littleresearchhasbeendoneof
theimpactonqualitativefactorssuchassubjectivewell-beingandsocialinnovation(ENCATC,2015).Inthis
respect,theTFCC(2015)report,forexample,concludesthatthemostcomplexandurgentresearchtaskis
to develop a mix of instruments for evaluation of the added values that the various CCI spillovers can
generate.Themostdifficulttaskistograsptheintangiblevalues–culturalandsocial,i.e.valuesthatarenot
obvioustomeasure,yetessentialforthechanges/transformationsthatCCIsgenerate.
Acknowledgingthisneedandfollowingtheconceptualandmethodologicalconsiderationsaddressedinthe
tender “Testing innovative methods to evaluate cultural and creative spillovers in Europe”, which was
launched at the beginning of 2016, the research proposed and applied a method called Value-Based
Approach(VBA)toevaluateinasystematicwaythevarioustypesofknowledgeandnetworkspillovereffects
of Rotterdam Unlimited Festival, RU (The Netherlands), by assessing the wider scope of RU intangible
contributions.Theapproachconsidersspilloversintermsofsocialandculturaladdedvalues.Asopposedto
traditionaloutputevaluationmethods, thismethodexplicitlyuses stakeholders’perspectiveson thevalue
shiftstheyexperience. Itsurpassesexistingmethodsofevaluationbydifferentiatingbetweenwhatvarious
stakeholders value and what they experience. In this way, the VBA provides a more reliable and
comprehensiveevaluationof thespillovereffectsbecause theaimsusuallyareachange invalues (likean
increaseinthevaluationofdiversityorartisticquality).
4.Presentationofthemethodology“Value-BasedApproach”
4.1.RationaleoftheVBA
TheValue-BasedApproach(VBA)istheoreticallyrootedinculturaleconomicsprincipleandisdevelopedbya
groupofculturaleconomistsfromErasmusUniversity,ledbyProfArjoKlamer.Hisrecentbook,“Doingthe
rightthing:Avaluebasedeconomy”(2016)laystheconceptualfoundationoftheVBA.
Thebasic idea is that people andorganizationswant to realize values, orwhatever is important to them.
Beingawareofthosevaluesisonesideoftherealization,themakingthemtrue,ortovalorisethevaluesthe
other.Spilloversoccurwhenactivitiesvaloriseothervaluesthatthoseintended.Aculturalorganizationmay
seektorealizeartisticvaluesyetmaycontributetoasenseofcommunity--avalorisationofasocialvalue--or
contributestotheidentityofacity-asocietalvalue.
Culturaleconomists(Klamer,1996;Throsby,2001;Hutter,2011)distinguishamongvarioustypesofvalues,
namelycultural,social,personalandfinancial,allofwhichareofadifferentnature.Anyvalueisrelativeto
its contextandcanbeanalysedandassessedonly through its concretemanifestations.Klamerpointsout
thatvaluesevolvearoundthe“wayinwhichvaluesfunction”and“theactionthatcomeswithexperiencinga
12
value”(2003,p.198).Thissuggeststhatthesevaluesarenotfixedandtheirmeanings/attributionscanvary
whenfunctioningwithinadifferentcontext.Thisculturaleconomicperspectivecallsfortheexaminationof
thevaluesofculturalgoods(productsandservices)throughprocessesofpersonaland/orsocialexperiences.
Theprocessofvalorisationsignifiesthedevelopment,enhancementandstrengtheningofcertainvaluesand
involvesinteractionsamongvariousstakeholders(Klamer,2003).Inthissense,thevalorisationisaprocess
of value production through which the good gains a worth, while its value is under construction (Vatin,
2003).
Thevalue-basedapproachimpliesthatsuchvalorisationcomplieswithseveral logics,eachquitedistinctive
from the other.Mostwell-known are the logics of themarket (the valorisation bymeans of selling for a
price),governmentallogic(valorisationbymeansoforganisationalorbureaucraticprocessesasinthecase
of subsidies), the social logic (bymeans of informal relationships usually involving gifts, contributions and
sharing),thelogicofthehome(thinkofsupportbythefamily)andtheculturallogic(valorisingone'sideasin
therelevantculturalsetting).
CCIsspilloverscomeaboutinthisprocessofvalorisationbywayofanyoftheselogics–theyimply
thetransferofvaluesintermsofbenefits,impact,effects,etc.fromoneareatoanother.For
example,amusicianmayplease(ordisturb)herneighbourswhilepracticing.Oranarchitectmaybe
commissionedtoconstructabuildingthatdoesnotjustgeneratebenefitsfortheowner,butalso
forallpeoplepassingby.Insuchinstancesthevalorisationoftheworkgeneratesvaluesforother
stakeholdersthatwerenottheintendedbeneficiaries.Thebenefitsordamagesmaybesocial,
societal,artisticandalsofinancial,suchaswhenadjacentbuildingsgoup(ordown)infinancial
valuebecauseofthenewconstruction.
Duetheircomplexnature,therealisationofspilloversremainsdifficulttomeasure.Conventional
measurementsoftheimpactofculturalorsocialactivitiestendtofocusonfinancialvalues(suchas
changeinincomes,assetvaluesandthelike)andignoresocialandculturalimpacts(Petrova,2016).
TheValue-BasedApproachconcentratesonthelatter,atleastwhenthemainagentsresponsible
forsuchactivitiesdeclaresocialandculturalvaluesastheirmaingoals,andfinancialoutcomesas
instrumentalandthereforesubsidiary.Theimpactisassessedthroughtheaffirmation,
strengthening,orchangeofthevaluesaimedfor.
Themethoddistinguishesandassessestheshort-andlong-termqualitativechangesthatartsand
culturecanand/oraimtoachieve.Ittakesintoaccounttheinteractionbetweeneconomic,social
andculturalprocesses,whileassessingvariousvalues(qualities)relatedtotheseprocessesandin
linewiththepre-setgoals.Asopposedtotraditionaloutputevaluationmethods,thismethod
explicitlyusesstakeholders’perspectivesonthequalitativeimpactofdifferentvaluesthey
13
experience.Forexample,Itfocusesnotonasurfacephenomena,suchasthesatisfactionofvisitors
ofaculturalevent,butonthevaluesofabroaderrangeofrelevantstakeholders,i.e.visitors,
beneficiaries,non-fundingpartners,fundingbodies,mediapartners,policymakers,etc.The
assumptionhereisthatthevaluesofpeoplemayinfluencetheirassessmentoftheirown
experiences,andthatthevaluesmaychangebecauseoftheexperiences(asisusuallytheintended
outcomeoftheactivity).Thechangingofvaluesisasignofimpact.
Supposeagroupofstakeholdersevaluateanactivitytheyexperiencedasunchallengingornot
thought-provoking.Forpeoplewhovaluebeingentertained,thatisagoodthing,butforpeople
whovaluebeingchallengedandprovoked,theactivitywillbe"boring"or"uninspiring".Whenthis
istheoutcomeoftheevaluation,theorganisersandfunderscanthendoseveralthings.Theycould
maketheactivitymorechallengingtosatisfythechallenge-seekersortheycouldconvincethe
comfort-seekerstovaluebeingchallengedmore.Alternatively,theycouldconvincethechallenge-
seekerstoappreciatebeingentertainedfromtimetotime.Ofcourse,thebestpracticedependson
thevaluesthattheyaimfor.Whentheyaimforactivitiesthatmakeadifference,thatgetpeopleto
think,theycanbetterchooseforthefirsttwooptions.Herethepracticalsideofthemethods
shows.
4.2.StagesoftheVBA
Themethodologyconsistsofthreestages:
Stage1.Diagnosesofgoalvalues
This stage starts with a pre-evaluation to detect what each case study stands for. On the basis of
inquiries with (internal) stakeholders, the values of all stakeholders are determined. The VBA
distinguishes between four different groups of values: personal, social, societal and transcendental
(fig.2).
Fig.2.Value-BasedApproachdiagnosesofvalues
14
Stage2.Realisationofvalues:identificationofstakeholdersandstrategies
At this stage the research identifies how the undertaken projects/activities/interventions are
implementedinrelationtotheimportantvaluesthattheyaimtoachieve.
This is done by determining and monitoring the strategies (activities, tools, working methods,
communication)ofthevariousstakeholders.TheValue-basedApproachdistinguishesbetweeninternal
(an organisation’s or project’s team) and external (beneficiaries, visitors, partners, policy makers,
fundingbodies,media)stakeholders.
Stage3.Evaluationofthechangesthatcanbedetected
Inorder todetermine theaffirmation, strengtheningor changingof those values and the impact that
they have, the evaluation focuses on the values that have been identified earlier. For each group of
stakeholders, a different grid of proxies is used,whichwas built during the previous two stages. The
proxies describe attributes of personal, social and societal values. The first two stages are a very
essentialpartthatlaythefoundationfortheactualevaluationinstage3.Thesestagesassistboth(a)the
definitionofthesharedgoalvaluesamongvariousstakeholdersand(b)theselectionoftheproxiesthat
indicatethe impacttoberealised.Thedevelopmentoftheproxies,asvalueattributes,buildsbothon
theoryandcloseinteractionswiththestakeholders.Thelatterarederivedfromsurveys,interviewsand
focusgroupswithvariousstakeholders,andfromethnographicalobservations.
At this evaluation stage theValue-BasedApproach provides an assessment of the impact of different
values.Thatisthegapbetweenwhatisvaluedbythestakeholdersandwhattheyexperience,i.e.when
people change their answer to the question “what they find important” as a consequence of their
experiences with the activity. The method can register changes, including changes in values, when
repeated. The latter outcome is important and novel for that matter, because theatre events, for
example,usuallyaimatchangingvalues.Exposingsomestakeholderstodancemaychangetheirmind
aboutitandlatertheysaythatdancehasbecomemoreimportanttothemasanartformandtheywant
tobeinvolvedmore.Thisisasocialand,possiblyalso,aculturalimpact.Thelatteroutcomeisimportant,
andnovelforthatmatter,becausetheatreevents,forexample,usuallyaimatchangingvalues.Insome
cases, it is important the use of a referent group to crosscheck the self-reported changes among the
variousstakeholders.
4.3.Datacollectionmethods
The VBA includes preliminary, continuous and post evaluations that help systemise the process of
culturalchangeintermsoftheachievedprogressandtheweaknessesandthestrengthsoftheprocess.
Data is collected through a range of qualitative and quantitativemethods: surveys, individual interviews,
focusgroupsaswellasanalysisofthereportsontheproject.
15
4.4.InnovativeelementsoftheVBA
• Thecombinationofvariousqualitativemethodsallowsfortheassessmentofbroaderrangeof
impactratherthanonlythemeasurementofCCIseconomiccontribution.
• The method not only allows evaluation and assessment of spillovers as concrete tangible
outcomes/products, but also goes deep in the process of CCI spillovers, by recognising their
tangibleandintangiblecharacteristics.
• It can evaluate the affirmation, strengthening or changes of values at different stages of the
activity.
• Theindicatorstomeasurethe impactaretailoredconcretelyforeachprojectbydevelopinga
proxy grid. It was made as a result of engagement with the stakeholders from the very
beginningofthework.
• It assesses the changes of values using not only self-reference, but also the assessment by
referencegroups(otherstakeholdersinvolvedintheconcreteactivity).
• Itdetectsthedimensionsoftheimpactandexplainstheirscopeandwhytheytakeplace.
• It assesses real impact based on experience vs. intentional/optional/perceived impact. It is
appliedduringand/oraftertheproject/activitytakesplacesothattheinformationcollectedcan
measuretheactualexperienceandwhenitisappliedovertimeitcanevaluateimmediateand
longitudinaltrends.
• Itbuildsoninterdisciplinarycollaborations.
• It can be applied to small-, medium- and large-scale organisations, events, activities and
projects where data is not collected or is limited. It provides an opportunity to develop a
frameworkwheredatacanbeentered.
• Ithasclear-cutstagesinwhichthetoolkitcanbeeasilyapplied.
5.Presentationofthecasestudy
5.1.Theperformingartssector
Underthescopeofthisresearchtender,theVBAwasappliedtotheperformingarts.Adistinctivefeatureof
the performing arts, and especially in the case of the RotterdamUnlimited Festival (presented below), is
their realisation ina closed space toa limitednumberof visitorswithwide-ranging spillovereffects. Even
thoughtheproductionandexperienceofanartisticworkisthemaingoal,thespillovereffectscanbesocial,
cultural andeconomic. Forexample,oneof theassumptions sharedmostoften is thatbecausea theatre
performancebringspeopletogether, itmightcontributetosocial innovationrealisedasaneffectonsocial
cohesion and the strengthening of communities. The question is whether a festival such as Rotterdam
Unlimited canaccomplishall thatwith respect to several groupsof stakeholders involved.Apart from the
16
producersand thevisitors, the followinggroupscanbe involved: thewiderartistic community, the (local)
government,thebusinesscommunity,oraneighbourhood.
The research uses the case of Rotterdam Unlimited because it is: a) manageable, b) amenable to our
approach. In addition, it has already made a pilot test in 2015 by Het Atelier, which has prepared the
groundwork that was envisioned for the research (the activities undertaken by Het Atelier are described
undersection7.1.1.,p.16).
5.2.RotterdamUnlimitedFestival-background
RU is a festival that came to life in2013bymerging two festivals thathavebeenheld for3decades: the
DUNYAFestivalandZomercarnaval(SummerCarnival).In2013DUCOSProductionslaunchedthefirstedition
of Rotterdam Unlimited. The festival, of which Dunya Festival and Zomercarnaval are the foundation,
revolves around the multi-coloured identity of the city and takes it as a focal point for international
programming. The cross-cultural character makes this festival unique in The Netherlands. Rotterdam
Unlimitedwantstogrowtobecomeaninternationalcityevent,andsharestheseambitionswithRotterdam
Festivals(RF),oneofitssubsidiaries.
Theorganisation
Besidesthefestivaldirector,whoisresponsiblefortheoverallmanagement(GuusDutrieux),andtheartistic
director, responsible for the programming and the preservation of the artistic quality in relation to the
missionandgoalsofthefestival(ClaudiaRaven),thereare4otherpeopleinvolvedinthedailyoperationsof
the organisation: (1) a financial manager who is simultaneously responsible for the coordination of
productionmanagement;2)an internalaffairscoordinatorwho isalso responsible for thecoordinationof
theZomercarnaval;3)aPR-marketingcoordinatorand4)acoordinatorwhoisresponsibleforthefinancial
coordinationofthesponsorsandpartnerswithwhichthefestival is involved.Otherthanthisgroup,every
year, there are several project-based volunteers and short-term employees. There are several committee
andfoundationmembers(intotal15)whoonavoluntarybasispreservethemission,visionandgoalsofthe
festival.
Visitors
The festival attractsmore than900.000visitors frombothwithinandoutsideTheNetherlands.There isa
culturally diverse public with approximately 50% Western European (from The Netherlands, Spain and
Portugal)andanother50%non-WesternEuropeanethnicities (fromCuraçao,Aruba,Bonaire,St.Maarten,
CapeVerde,Trinidad&Tobago,Colombia,Peru,Bolivia,St.Domingo,Suriname,Saba,St.Eustatius,North-
WestAfricaforinstance).Withregardtosocialgroupsthefestivalisattractingawiderangeofvisitorsfrom
differentsocial,cultural,ethnical,andeducationalbackgrounds.
17
Objectives
Besideshavinganartistic/culturalobjective,thefestivalhasasocietalobjectivethatisstronglyconnectedto
the diverse programming as an instrument for reaching this purpose. The concept of social sustainability
playsanimportantroleinthemotivationofthefestival.BoththeGovernmentandthebusinesssectorare
increasinglyacknowledgingtheimportanceofasociallysustainablesociety.Byorganizingan(inter)national
artfestival,RUaimstocontributetoasocietywheresocialcohesionisacentralvalue,contributingtothe
abilitytocopewiththerapidglobalchanges.Inordertoachievechange,RUaimstoimprovetheclimatein
societysothatdiversityisseenasabuildingblockofacommonthinking.
Programming
RU is a 5-day city event (e.g. yearly festival) in Rotterdam (The Netherlands) presenting a wide range of
dance, music, film and poetry genres from acknowledged and upcoming artists for local, national and
internationalvisitorsofallethnicities,agesandsocialbackgrounds.Thefestivalentailsyearlyanapproximate
numberof79performancesbothindoors(theatreandculturalcentres)andoutdoors(onthestreet;street
parade). RU’s aim is to present a platformof a diverse cultural programming that is either affordable3 or
freelyaccessible.
Thefestivalhasauniquecharacterinthecountry.TheNetherlandscurrentlyhasnootherfestivalthattakes
themulti-ethnicculturalidentityofthemodernmetropolitanasastartingpointforitsprogramme.Thereis
nootherevent inwhich themassivenessofculturalhistory, traditions, thebackgroundsandcollaboration
betweenallthesecultureswouldstandintheforefront.RUrepresentsthemulticulturalcharacterofthecity
centreofRotterdamandaimsatexertingasocialimpact,therebyhavingapositiveinfluenceonthe‘sense
ofbelonging’andontheconnectionamongdifferentculturalgroupswithinthe(Rotterdam)community.
Fundingcontext
The festival isorganised throughpublic-private funding,althoughpublic fundingprevails. It receivesdirect
public funding (56per cent) from theRegional/ProvincialGovernment,RotterdamMunicipality, aswell as
subsidies from public funds (5 per cent) such as Rotterdam Festivals Foundation Promotion of People's
Power, Prince Bernhard Culture Fund, VSB Funds and PerformingArts Fund. The festival generates about
14,5percentofthetotalbudgetbyrealizingownincomeand24,5percentbysponsoringandrenting.The
private funders include Robin Online, Robin Mobile, Jupiler Belgian Beer, Coca-Cola, OLA, Mijnders
Transport,FaberVlaggen,Catharinenburg,LiptonIceTea,Palmuno2015CaribbeanandLatinFestival.Italso
receivesprivatedonations.
3Animpressionofsomeoftheperformancescanbefoundhere:
http://rotterdamunlimited.com/nl/programma/archief/2016
18
6.Mainhypothesesandsub-hypotheses
Initsmissionstatement,theRotterdamUnlimitedFestivalaimsatimpactonthesocialcohesioninthecity
ofRotterdam.Therefore,thisresearch,throughtheapplicationoftheVBA,teststhefollowinghypotheses:
Hypothesis1:The (systematic)engagementwithculture-ledcreativeactivities facilitates thegenerationof
newtypesofsocialinteractions.
Hypothesis 2: Experiencing and practicing culture-led creativity translates into new practices of social
collaborations and social cohesion in a community. Each hypothesis consists of different sub-hypotheses
(table1).
Table1.Hypotheses,sub-hypotheses,relevantindicators/proxiesandthedatacollectionmethodsrelatedtoRotterdamUnlimitedFestival.
Hypotheses Sub-hypotheses Indicators/proxies MethodsofdatacollectionHypothesis1The(systematic)engagementwithculture-ledcreativeactivitiesfacilitatesthegenerationofnewtypesofsocialinteractions.
1. Theprojectgenerates
sharedemotionalexperienceandaffectstheopennessamongdifferentparticipantsinthevisitors.
▪ Thevisitorsreach▪ Thediversityofthe
visitors(age,nationality,ethnicbackground,education)
▪ Thelevelofsharing▪ Thelevelofsolidarity
FocusgroupInterviewsSurvey
Hypothesis2Experiencingandpracticingculture-ledcreativitytranslatesintonewpracticesofsocialcollaborationsandsocialcohesioninacommunity.
1. Theprojectgeneratesa
senseofbelonging2. Itboostssolidarity3. Itencouragesintegration
inthecommunitythroughsocialdiversity
• Theincreasedawareness
andunderstandingamongdifferentsocialgroups
• Theincreasedsenseofbelonging
• Theincreasedsocialinteractionsamongdifferentsocialgroupsofthecommunity
InterviewsSurveys
With reference to the typeof spilloverspresented in the reportofTFCC (2015) thehypotheses related to
both:
• Knowledgespillovers:increasingvisibility,toleranceandengagementamongdifferentgroupsin
thelocalcommunity
• Networkspillovers:buildingsocialcohesion.
7.Methodologicalapproachoftheresearchproject
7.1.Datacollectionmethods
ForthepurposesofRUevaluationdataiscollectedthrougharangeofquantitativeandqualitativemethods:
surveys,interviews,focusgroupsaswellasanalysisofRUreports.
Thedatacollectionconsistsoftwostages:
19
(1) ThepilottestofVBAforRUundertakenbyHetAtelierduringandaftertheRUeditionin2015(this
stage is not funded by the tender “Testing innovative methods to evaluate cultural and creative
spilloversinEurope”);
(2) Complimentarydatacollectionduringandafter the2016editionof theRUFestivalundertakenby
CREAREFoundation(thisstageisfundedunderthetender“Testinginnovativemethodstoevaluate
culturalandcreativespilloversinEurope”).
7.1.1.Datacollectionstage1In2015,HetAtelierundertook the implementationofVBA for theRU. In2015 the research surveyed the
variousgroupsRUconsidersasitsmostimportantstakeholders:thevisitors,theculturalfieldprofessionals,
politiciansandinternalstakeholders(employees,committeeandboardmembers).
Datacollectioninternalstakeholders
• Onlinesurvey:15(outof17)respondedtoalllistedquestions;
• Focus group with the employees (excluding the overall management and the artistic director in
ordertopreservevalidityandreliability);
• Interviewswiththeartisticandfoundationdirector.
Datacollectionexternalstakeholders
• 150 completed online surveys with visitors (out of 190 collected), of which 118were filled in by
visitorsofthefestival.
• 8(outof22)interviewswithpoliticians.Thesampleincluded22individualswhowereonthelistof
RU. However, only 8 politicians responded in the first part and only 6 completed the entire
interview.
• 7(outof22)interviewswithpeers.Thesampleincluded22individualswhowereonthelistofRUas
themost importantartsandculturepeerstoquestion.However,only7managedtocompletethe
questionnaires.
7.12.Datacollectionstage2ThebiggestpartoftheadditionaldatacollectiontookplaceduringtheRUFestival(e.g.26-30July2016)and
aftertheeventtookplace(earlyAugust-September2016).Theconcretesamplesofrespondentswerebuilt
tocomplimentthepreviouslycollecteddatafromstage1.Theresearchfromstage1functionsasahighly
valuablepilotstudyonhowtomeasureanorganisation’ssocialcohesion/impactandisusedasasolidbase
forafutureresearchmethodtomeasureintangiblevaluesduringstage2.Tobetterevaluatetherealisation
ofthesocialandsocietallevels,thisstageincludes:
• 20interviewswithvisitors(13duringthefestivaland7afterthefestival);
• 20onlinesurveywithpeers(16completed);
20
• 198 survey questionnaires with visitors (98 face-to-face during the festival and 100 online). The
sampleforanalysisincludesonly145surveysthatwere100percentcompletedfromvisitorsofRU.
Thequestionnaires for the interviewswith visitors andpeers included closed- andopen-endedquestions,
while the questionnaires for the visitors survey included only closed-ended questions (Annex 1). To
operationalise the concept of social cohesion and its underlying values (solidarity, togetherness, and
diversity),theresearchtranslatedtheseintoconcreteattributions(proxies)andquestions.Thedevelopment
oftheproxies,asvalueattributes,buildsbothontheoryandcloseinteractionswiththestakeholdersduring
thepreviousstageoftheVBAtest.Tooperationalisethe impactofthefestival, thequestionnaires include
questionsontheexperienceofthefestival,whichiscross-referencedwiththequestionsonwhattheyfind
importantwhenvisitingaculturalfestivalingeneral.
7.2.Dataanalysis
DataanalysisinthisresearchbuildsonthemergeofdataofthevisitorsfrombotheditionsoftheRUin2015
and2016.Thequantitativedataisanalysed(answerstotheclosed-endedquestions)withSPSS.
Thequalitativedata from theopen-endedquestions is analysedbyATLAS.The (predetermined) codes for
thequalitative analysis inter alia emerge through theunderlyingmeanings (‘sub-values’) of social impact/
socialcohesion.
7.3.TimetableimplementationVBAforRU
A.EvaluationofRUsocialimpact V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII
Set-upphase
Structuralpreparationfortheevaluationphase,incl.
Preparationofsurvey/interviewswithvisitorsandpeers
Datacollection
Survey+interviewswithvisitors 26-30
Interviewswithotherstakeholders
Transcriptionoftheinterviews
Dataanalysis-evaluationofchanges
Analysis
Evaluationreport-1stdraft
Finaldraftevaluationreport 15
B.Communicationandreportingforbothcasestudies
Internalcommunicationwiththeextendedteam
CommunicationwiththeEuropeanResearchPartnership-ERP
21
8.Findings
Taking into consideration the rationale and the stages of the Value-Based Approach, the findings are
presentedhereasfollows:(1)Sharedcorevaluesandrelatedstakeholders;(2)Demographiccharacteristics
ofvisitors;(3)GeneralattitudeofRUvisitorstoculturalfestivals(expectations);(4)Visitors’experienceofRU
Festival;(5)SpecificoutcomesandimpactofRUFestival–accordingtothefestivalvisitorsandpeers.
8.1.Sharedcorevaluesandrelatedstakeholder
The Value-Based Approach distinguishes between internal and external stakeholders. Themapping of RU
festivalprovesthat theprojectbringstogetherawidediversityofstakeholders (table2).However,dueto
the limited time and budget available for this pilot test (second stage), the research considers only two
groupsofcorestakeholders–highlightedinthetable–i.e.festivalvisitorsandpeers.
Table2.Categoriesandsub-categoriesofstakeholdersofRUfestival
Internalstakeholders Externalstakeholders
RUteam Beneficiaries Partners
Policymakers/politicians
Fundingbodies Media
Organisationteam
Committeemembers
Foundationmembers
VisitorsCitizensRotterdam
PeersAssociations
PoliticiansCivilservants
Grant-givingfoundationsCompaniesCorporatefoundationsAwardingbodies
BroadcastersPrintmediaSocialmedia
ThecorevaluesofRUweredefinedduringthefirststageoftestingtheVBAforRU(2015).Followingadesk
research,focusgroupandinterviewswiththeorganisation,themostimportantvaluesofRUinrelationtoits
social impact is identified as social cohesion. At this stage the internal stakeholders also built their
expectations around what way the social cohesion can be operationalised in relation to RU objectives.
Accordingly, solidarity and diversity were identified as the most important aspects/attributes of social
cohesion(table3).
Table3.ValuesmaprelatedtocorestakeholdersofRUfestival
Values Proxies StakeholdergroupSolidarity:
• Senseofbelonging• Togetherness–shared(emotional)
experience
InternalstakeholdersVisitorsPeers
Diversity:
• Societaldiversity(multicultural,intergenerationalandthecohesionofalllayersofsociety).
• Cultural/artisticdiversity
InternalstakeholdersVisitorsPoliticians
22
8.2.Demographicsofthevisitors
Theanalysisof thedemographiccharacteristicsof thesampleof respondents (2015-2016)proves thatRU
attractsvisitorswithquiteadiversityofdemographiccharacteristics.
Gender,Age,Nationality/Ethnicity,Placeofresidence
Biggershareofthevisitorsarewomen(66percent).Themajorityoftherespondentsarebetween20and
40years(62percent,fig.1).Thevisitorsbetween40and50yearsandbetween50and60yearsareevenly
represented(14percent).
Fig.1.Sharesofvisitors(%)byage,2015/2016
Withregardtonationality,thegreatestshareofthevisitors isDutch(93percent).Nevertheless,themost
important factor to consider is the ethnical background of the visitors based on the family origin (fig. 3).
Morethanhalfofthevisitors(56percent)isofDutchorigin,andmorethan25percentrepresentsdifferent
ethnicities(Antillean,Ecuadorian,Surinamese, Indonesian,etc.).About8percentcomefromfamilieswith
mixedDutch–otherethnicityorigins.Thenon-Dutch,Westernpublicwasrepresentedbyasmallershare(5
percent).
Fig.2.Sharesofvisitors(%)bynationality,2015/2016
0 20 40 60 80 100
Under20
20-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61andup
visitorsshares(%),n=263
age
0 20 40 60 80 100
African
Asian
Dutch/Euroepan
NorthAm
SouthAm
Notspecified
visitorsshares(%),n=263
natio
nality
23
Fig.3.Sharesofvisitors(%)byfamilyorigin,2015/2016
Education,AverageYearlyIncome
Morethan50percentoftherespondentshaveahighereducation(University,HBO), (fig.4)andagreater
share (37 per cent) earn and yearly average income (about €30,000 and €40,000), (fig.5). Except for the
highest income level, above €55,000 (only 10%), other income levels between are also sufficiently
representedamongtherespondents.
0 20 40 60 80 100
Dutch
Dutch/Ethnic
Ethnic
Notspecified
Otherwestern
visitorsshares(%),n=263
familyorig
in
24
Fig.4.Sharesofvisitors(%)byeducation4,2015/2016
Fig.5.Sharesofvisitors(%)byyearlyincome,2015/2016
4Respondentscouldindicatetheirlevelofeducation.IntheNetherlands,therearedifferenttypesofprimary,secondaryandhigherlevelofeducation.Despiteitsmorepracticalorientation‘HBO’isconsideredasa(closeto)universitylevelofeducation.LBO,VMBOafterprimaryeducation,aretwopossibilitiestoconsider.OnlyVMBOmakesitpossibleforstudentstohavetheoptionsforhighereducation (university level for instance). If a student did LBO for example he/she needs to go toMBO and only then could beacceptedtoahigherlevel.
-
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
80.000
90.000
100.000
visitorsshares(%
),n=
263
typeofeducation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Verylow Low Average High Veyhigh Unknown
visitorsshares(%
),n=
263
yearlyincome
25
8.3.GeneralattitudeofRUvisitorstowardsculturalfestivals
Thissectionprovidestheanalysisofthedatacollectedfromthevisitors’surveysandinterviews. Itaimsto
revealthegeneralattitudesofRUvisitorstowardsculturalfestivalsandthustheirgeneralexpectationswith
respecttothecorevaluessolidarityanddiversity(programandvisitors)whenvisitinganyculturalfestival.
On the scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (the most important), the visitors identified their general
preferencestowardsanyculturalfestival(fig.6andfig.6.2.).Theanalysisisbasedontheaggregateddatafor
2015and2016.
Programdiversity:expected
Acloserlookatthevisitorexpectationsconcerningtheprogramdiversity(fig.6.)suggeststhatthevisitorsof
RUingeneralhavealmostequallyhighexpectationsforabroadrangeofartforms(3,9),followedbyabroad
range of emerging and well-known artists (3,86) from different generations (3,85) who are presenting
culturallyandethnicallydiversearts (3,8) fromabroadrangeofgenres (3,71).Themajorityof thevisitors
(between65percentand71percentforthecombinedperiod2015-2016), findmainly importantorvery
importanttheprogramdiversitywhenvisitinganyculturalfestival(fig.6.1.).
Solidarityandsocialdiversity:expected
Thecohortof theRUvisitorsassessedas important (3,5)andmostly important (4,3) the social aspectsof
visiting cultural festival (fig. 6.2.). The analysis of their assessment reveals that in general the visitors find
significantly important (4,3) to have fun with friends when attending cultural festivals. Other equally
importantsocialvaluesthatthevisitorspursueingeneralwhenattendingculturalfestivalsaremulticultural
communication (3,7), communication among different generations (3,5) and the communication among
diversesocialgroups(3,6).Itisinterestingtoacknowledgethatthebiggershares(between55%to90%)of
RU visitors in 2016 registered slightly higher positive expectationswith respect to those social sub-values
whencomparingtothecohortin2015(fig.6.3.).
26
Fig.6. Visitors’expectationsforprogrammediversitywhenvisitingcultural festivals-byextentof importance:1 (notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
Fig.6.1.Visitors’expectationsforprogrammediversitywhenvisitingculturalfestivalsbyshareofvisitors(%)whovaluepositivelythoseaspects.
Fig.6.2.Visitors’expectationsforsocialdiversityandsolidaritywhenvisitingculturalfestivalsbyextentofimportance:1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Broadrange
ofartforms
…ofemerging
andwell-
knownartists
...ofartists
fromdifferent
generations
…ofculturally
andethnically
diverseart
…ofgenres
externtofim
portance
Visitors'expectationsforprogrammediversitybyextentof
importance,n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
0
20
40
60
80
100
Broadof
emergingand
well-known
artists
…ofartforms ...ofartists
fromdifferent
generations
…ofculturally
andethnically
diverseart
…ofgenres
Visitors'expectationsforprogrammediversitybyvisitorsshares(%),n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
0
1
2
3
4
5
Funwithfriends Multicultural
communication
Communication
amongdiverse
socialgroups
Intergenerational
communication
extentofim
portance
Visitorsexpectationsforsolidaritysocialdiversitybyextentof
importance
2015 2016 2015+2016
27
Fig.6.3.Visitors’expectation for socialdiversityandsolidaritywhenvisitingcultural festivals -byshareofvisitors (%)
whovaluepositivelythoseaspects.
In addition to theaforementioned social aspects, the research in2016 includes also another sub-valueof
solidarity, i.e. sense of belonging. When compared to the expectations of sharing (3,6) and solidarity
(togetherness)(3,8),theaverageimportanceofthisvalueisconsideredratherlow(3,3)intheexpectations
ofthevisitors(fig.6.4.).
Fig.6.4.Visitors’expectationofsocialvalueswhenvisitingculturalfestivalsbyextentofimportance,2016.
1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
8.4.ConcreteexperienceofRUfestivalbyitsvisitors
Thissectionfocusesonthevisitors’concreteexperienceofRUFestival.
In terms of visitors’ overall concrete experiences with RU Festival, figures 7 to 7.4. summarise themain
findings.Theresponsesaresetonthescalefrom1(notimportant)to5(themostimportant)foreachyear
individuallyandforthecombinedperiodof2015and2016.
Programmediversity:experienced
Forthecombinedperiodof2015-2016,onaverage,theexperienceofdiverseartists’generations isvalued
themost(3,9)andthebroadrangeofgenrestheleast(3,6)bytheRUvisitors.Theparticipationofemerging
andwell-knownartistsaswell as theexperienceofethnicallyandculturallydiverseart arealmostequally
0
20
40
60
80
100
Funwithfriends Multicultural
communication
Communication
amongdiverse
socialgroups
Intergenerational
communication
visitorsshares(%)
Visitors'expectationsforsocialdiversityandsolidaritybyvisitorsshares(%),n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
0
1
2
3
4
5
SHARING SOLIDARITY BELONGINGextentofimpo
rtance
Visitors'expectationsofsocialvalues,n=145
28
valued(3,8).Theexperienceofdiverseart forms isassessedasmainly important (3,7) (fig.7).Respectfully,
themajority (70percent)of thevisitors findmainly importantandvery important in theirexperiencethe
diverseartists’generations;(67percent)theparticipationofemergingandwell-knownartists;(64percent)
theexperienceofethnicallyandculturallydiverseart; (60per cent)broad rangeofart forms and (51per
cent)theexperienceofbroadrangeofartforms(fig.7.1).
Solidarityandsocialdiversity:experienced
Whenaskedabout the socialdimensionsof theirexperience, thevisitors sharedquitehigh satisfactions–
between4,2and3,7,fig.7.2.(forthecombinedperiod2015-2016).Asignificant81percentofthevisitors
experienced the benefit of having funwith friends, which on averagewas important as of 4,2 (fig. 7.3.).
Another highly valued social outcome for the bigger part of the visitors (70 per cent) is the possibility to
interact and communicate with people from different cultural backgrounds. Its average importance is
assessedas3,9.ThevisitorsofRUhighlyandequallyvalued(3,7)thefactthattheycouldcommunicatewith
peoplefromdifferentgenerationsandwithpeoplefromdifferentsocialgroups.Eachaspectisexperienced
positivelyfrom70percentoftherespondents.
Fig.7.Visitors’experienceofprogrammediversityduringtheRUfestivalbyextentofimportance,
1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant).
0
1
2
3
4
5
Broadrangeof
artistsfrom
different
generations
…ofemerging
andwell-
knownartists
…ofculturally
andethnically
diverseart
…ofartforms …ofgenres
extentofim
portance
Visitorsexperienceofprogrammediversitybyextentofimportance,n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
29
Fig.7.1.Visitors’experienceofprogrammediversityduringtheRUfestivalbyshareofvisitors(%)whovaluepositivelythoseaspects.
Fig.7.2.Visitors’experienceofsocialdiversityandsolidarityduringtheRUfestivalbyextentofimportance,
1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
Fig.7.3.Visitors’experienceof socialdiversityand solidarityduring theRU festivalby shareof visitors (%)whovaluepositivelythoseaspects
0
20
40
60
80
100
Broadrange
ofartistsfrom
different
generations
…ofemerging
andwell-
knownartists
…ofculturally
andethnically
diverseart
…ofartforms …ofgenresextentofimpo
rtance
Visitors'experienceofprogrammediversitybyvisitorsshare(%),n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
1
2
3
4
5
Funwithfriends Multicultural
communication
Communication
amongdiverse
socialgroups
Intergenerational
communicationextentofimpo
rtance
Visitors'experienceofsocialdiversityandsolidarityduringtheRUfestivalbyextentofimportance,n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
0
20
40
60
80
100
Funwithfriends Multicultural
communication
Communication
amongdiverse
socialgroups
Intergenerational
communication
visitorsshare(%
)
Visitors'experienceofsocialdiversityandsolidarityduringtheRUfestivalbyshareofvisitors(%),n=263
2015 2016 2015+2016
30
In 2016, the visitors of RU were also asked to assess to what extent they find important the sense of
belongingintheirexperiencetothefestival.Onaverage,theexperienceofsolidarity(3,9),sharing(3,8)and
belonging(3,8)arealmostequallyhighlyvaluedbytheRUvisitors(fig.7.4.).
Fig.7.4.Visitors’experienceofsocialvalueswhenvisitingRUbyextentofimportance,2016
8.5.SpecificoutcomesandimpactofRUFestival
InthissectiontheanalysisfocusesonthespecificimpactofRUinrelationtothesocialandculturalvaluesit
aimstorealize.Theimpactofthefestival isassessedonthebasisofthedifferenceitmakesfor itsvisitors
and representatives of the cultural and arts sector (experts and peers), by comparingwhat they value in
generalwith their assessmentof thosevaluesduring theactualevent. Thegapbetweenboth (actual and
expected)means,illustratesoneoftheimpactsforbothgroupsaspartoftheirculturalandsocialbenefits
fromthefestival.Thebiggerthegap,thegreaterthepositiveimpactwas.
ImpactofRU,2015-2016:visitorperspectives
Fig.8and fig.8.1. summarised the resultsof impactofRU for the visitors.A closer lookat the social and
artisticdimensionsprovesabiggerimpactofthecoresocialdimensionsofthefestival(fig.8).
Intermsofwhatthevisitorsingeneralfindimportantwhenvisitingculturalfestivals,thegreatestmajorityof
thevisitors(87percent)valuethemosttohavefunwithfriends.Onaveragethissocialaspectwasvalued
themost(4,3)incomparingtotheothers.However,thiswasexperiencedpositivelyduringthefestival,but
toaslightlylesserextent(4,1)andfromasmallershareofthevisitors(81percent).Withregardstothe
communicationsamongpeoplewithdifferentculturalbackgrounds,fromdifferentgenerationsanddiverse
socialgroups,theseaspectsareseenasimportantingeneralformorethanhalfofthevisitors,andwere
experiencedevenmoresobyanaverageof8percentmoreofthevisitorsduringtheactualevent.The
biggestgap,thusthegreatest(positive)impactwasrealisedwithregardtomulticulturalcommunication(3,7-
3,9),followedbyintergenerationalcommunication(3,5-3,7)andcommunicationamongdiversesocialgroups
(3,6–3,7)(fig.8).
1
2
3
4
5
SHARING SOLIDARITY BELONGING
extentofimpo
rtance
Visitors'experienceofsocialvaluesbyextentofimportance,n=145
31
Withregardtotheartisticdiversity,thebroadrangeofartformsandgenreswasexperiencedduringtheRUtoalesserextentthanvalued(fig.8).Althougha
considerably large shareof thevisitors, respectively71and65per cent, valued theseartisticdimensionsas important (3,9;3,7),onlya smaller shareof the
visitors,60percentand51percent,experienced them.Themajorityof thevisitors, from64 to71percent (fig.8.1.),experienced theprogrammingof the
culturallyandethnicallydiverseart,theparticipationofdifferentgenerationsofartists,bothemergingandwell-known,assignificantlyimportant(3,8-3,9).These
mettheirexpectationsofdiversityintheartisticprogramming(fig.8).
Fig.8.Visitors’perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvs.experiencedbyextentofimportance,2015/2016;1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
1.00001.500002.00002.500003.00003.500004.00004.500005.0000
Funwithfriends Broadrangeofartsforms
…ofemergingandwell-known
artists
…ofartistsfromdifferent
generations
…ofculturallyandethnicallydiverse
art
…ofgenres Multiculturalcommunication
Communicationamongdiversesocialgroups
Intergenerationalcommunication
extentofimpo
rtance
Visitors'perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvsexperiencedbyextentofimportance,n=263
Expected Experienced
32
Fig.8.1.Visitors’perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvs.experiencedbyshareofvisitors(%)withpositiveattitude,2015/2016
In addition, in 2016 the visitors were asked to rate their actual experience of social dimensions. The importance for the visitors of sharing, belonging and
solidarityduringtheactualeventisratedhigherwhencomparedtothemeansgiventothesevaluesingeneral(fig.8.2.)Withregardstotheimpact,thegreatest
gapofmeans,thusgreatestimpactisestimatedfortherealisationofsenseofthebelonging(3,4to3,8),followedbysharing(3,6–3,8)andsolidarity(3,8–3,9).
Fig.8.2.Sharing,solidarityandbelongingexperiencedduringthefestivalbyextentofimportance,2016.
1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
.000020.000040.000060.000080.0000100.0000
Funwithfriends Broadrangeofemergingandwell-
knownartists
...ofartsforms …ofartistsfromdifferent
generations
…ofculturallyandethnicallydiverse
art
…ofgenres Multiculturalcommunication
Communicationamongdiversesocialgroups
Intergenerationalcommunication
visitorsshares(%),n=263
Visitors'perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvsexperiencedbyshareofvisitors(%)
Expected Experienced
1
2
3
4
5
SHARING SOLIDARITY BELONGINGextentofimportnace
Sharing,solidarityandbelongingexperiencedduring
thefestivalbyextentofimportance2016 ,n=145
EXPECTED EXPERIENCED
33
Fig.8.3.Sharing,solidarityandbelongingexperiencedduringthefestivalbyshareofvisitors(%),2016
The interviews with visitors also shed a light on the possible reasons for their strong experience of the
togetherness/senseofbelonging (fig.8.4.).For themajorityof therespondents theatmosphereof theRU
eventwasdescribedas“great”,“nice”,“partyfeeling”,“celebration”,“relaxed”,or“fun”. Theinterviewed
visitorsassociated the feelingof togetherness/belongingwith the“energyof thegroup”,“enthusiasmand
diversityofthecrowd”,“opennessamongdiversepeople”,or“happiness,joy,groupfeeling”.Forasmaller
portionoftherespondentstheeventremainedtoo“messy”and“busy”anddidn’tmeettheirexpectations.
Fig.8.4.Visitors’descriptionoftheirexperienceofRU,2016–“wordcloud”image
ImpactofRU,2015-2016:peerperspectives
ThecohortofpeersassessedpositivelyboththesocialandartisticimpactofRU.Ingeneralpeershavemuch
lower expectations than the visitors - valued on average about 3 on the scale of 1 to 5 – but in their
experienceoftheactualeventthepeersencounteredmoresocialandprogrambenefitsthanexpected(on
average up to 3,8). The biggest gap, thus the greatest (positive) impact was registered in regards to
communicationamongdifferentgenerations(3-3,9)andtheculturallyandethnicallydiverseprograming(3–
3,7),(fig.9).
0102030405060708090
100
SHARING SOLIDARITY BELONGINGvisitorsshares(%),n=145
Sharing,solidarityandbelongingexperiencedduring
thefestivalbyshareofvisitors(%)
EXPECTED EXPERIENCED
34
Withregardstotheartisticdimensionsofthefestival, thepeersvaluedthefestival’sartisticadditiononaclearly lowerscale(about3),buttheyexperienced
thosedimensionsratherpositively,especiallytheculturalandethnicprogramingandthediversityofartistsfromdifferentgenerations.
Fig.9.Peers’perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvs.experiencedbyextentofimportance,2015/2016:1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Funwithfriends Broadofemergingandwell-known
artists
Multiculturalcommunication
Communicationamongdiversesocialgroups
Broadrangeofartistsfromdifferent
generations
...ofartsforms Intergenerationalcommunication
Broadrangeofgenres
…ofculturallyandethnicallydiverse
art
extentofimpo
rtance
Peers'perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvsexperienced byextentofimportance,n=23
Expected Experienced
35
The interviewswith thepeers,also showthatat the festival thatpeersgenerallyhighlight the festiveand
approachablecharacteristicofthefestivalthatisverymuchbaseduponthediversityofartformsandgenres
that, all in all, are attracting a wide range of audiences that is a well-suited reflection of the Rotterdam
society(fig.10).
Fig.10.Peers’descriptionoftheirexperienceofRU,2016–“wordcloud”image
KeydimensionsofRUimpact,2016:visitors’perspectives
In2016,theresearchincludedotherdimensions–awarenessofpeoplediversityandsenseofbelonging-as
key dimensions of the impact that were assessed by the visitors. In terms of the core social values, the
festivaldidmakeadifferencefortherespondents(fig.11).Foralmosthalfoftherespondents(48percent),
theirattendanceofthefestivalincreasedtheirawarenessandunderstandingofthepeoplefromadifferent
socialandculturalbackground.Attendingthefestivalalsoenabled53percentofthevisitorstogainasense
ofbelonging.Onaverage,bothchangesareconsideredrather importantandvaluedrespectivelybetween
3,4and3,8onthescalefrom1to5.
Fig.11.KeydimensionsofimpactfortheRUvisitorsbyshareofvisitors(%)whovaluepositivelythosechanges,2016.
47.6 52.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
Increasedawarnessandunderstanding
ofpeoplediversity
Gainsenseofbelonging
visitorsshares(%),n=145
KeydimensionsofimpactfortheRUvisitorsbyshareofvisitors(%)
36
Nevertheless, this positive result, the visitors who were interviewed also clarify that the festival actually
mightincreasetheawarenessofthediversityinthecity,butdoesnotnecessaryaddtotheunderstandingof
thosediversegroups.Inthisrespect,atleasthalfoftherespondentswereveryexplicitaboutthedifferences
between“awareness”and“understanding”.Forexample,thevisitorssuggestedthefollowing:
“Yes, it gives everyone the opportunity to taste and experience the atmosphere and the traditions of other
cultures,butitistooshorttohaveaneffectontheunderstanding.”
“Weweredefinitelyawareof thediversityofculturesof thepeopleat the festival,both in thepublicand in the
performances,butIwouldn'tsaythatmyunderstandingforthemhasincreased.Iwouldsaythatthefestivalincreased
ourawarenessofthediversityofRotterdam.”
“Inpart,it[thefestival]makesitclearthatyouliveinacitywithpeoplewithmanycultures.But,Isincerelyhope
thatforotherpeopleitmattersandmakesthemwanttoseewhootherpeopleare.Butdoesthisworkthisway?Thatis
thequestion.”
Inaddition,itwassuggestedthatthelatterrequiresmoreeffortoverthelong-term.
It is also interesting to discover that RU visitors and peers, perceived the positive impact of RU to the
diversityoftheartisticoffer inthecityandtothesocialcohesion (fig.12.). Thevisitorsconsiderbothofa
high and an equal importance (4) and the peers perceived higher (4,6) the impact of RU on the artistic
diversityinthecity.Nevertheless,thesestatementsneedtobeinvestigatedfurtherwithpost-eventresearch
including a broader sample representing more than just the RU visitors. At this moment, this might be
consideredonlyasillustrationofthepotentialimpactofthefestivalthanitsrealimpactonthecity.
Fig.12.VisitorandpeerperspectivesonRUimpactonthesocialcohesionandartisticdiversityinthecitybyextentof
importance,2016;1(notimportant)-5(themostimportant)
1 2 3 4 5
Audience
Peers
extentofimportance
VisitorandpeerperspectivesonRUimpactonthesocialcohesionandartistic
diversityinthecitybyextentofimportance,2016
Diversityoftheartisticoffersin
thecity
Socialcohesionwithinthecity
37
8.6.Findings:concludingremarks
ThemostimportantvalueofRUFestivalasdefinedduringthediagnosesstageofapplicationofVBA,issocial
cohesion,forwhichthemostimportantattributesforRUwereidentifiedassolidarityanddiversity.Solidarity
wasarticulatedassenseofbelongingandtogetherness;anddiversity–associetalandartistic.
ThemappingofRUFestivalprovesthattheprojectbringstogetherawidediversityofstakeholders.Dueto
thelimitedtimeandbudgetavailableforthispilottest(stage2),theresearchconsidersonlytwogroupsof
corestakeholders–festivalvisitorsandpeers(artsandculturalsector).
TheapplicationoftheValue-BasedApproachtotheRUFestivalprovesthattheeventhasverystrongsocial
dimensions by means of bringing together a diversity of visitors that experiences a sense a belonging,
togetherness,solidaritywhileenjoyingtherichprogramdiversityduringthefestival.TheRUgathersquitean
ethnicdiversityof visitors andbrings togetherdiversegenerationsandpeoplewhoareevenlydistributed
amonglowandhighyearlyincomeandeducation.
Generallyspeaking,whenattendingany festivalRUvisitorsvaluehighlybothsetofvalues–solidarityand
programdiversity -whereas theprogramdiversity (asa combinationofdiverseart forms, genres,diverse
artists,etc.)isconsideredslightlymoreimportantthanthesocialaspectsoffestivalattendance.
The analysis also proves that the RU visitors not only finds important in general the social and artistic
diversityandconnectednessbetweendifferentsocialgroupswhenvisitinganyculturalfestival,butalsothe
majority–between50and80percent–ofthevisitorspositivelyexperiencedbothsetofvaluesduringRU
Festival.ThevisitorsconsideredtheirexperiencewithRUonaveragetobemainlyimportant(3,6)andvery
important(4,2).Respectively,onecanassumethatthefestivalgainsanimageofanevent,notonlywitha
distinctive program offer, but also as providing possibilities to experience social impact and respectfully
attractingvisitorswithapositiveattitudetowardssocialexperiences.
With regard to its social/societal impact, evaluated by the gap between what was expected and actual
experience, theresultsshowthatall stakeholdersshare that thegreatest (positive) impactwasrealised in
termsof connectedness amongpeople fromdifferent cultures, social backgroundsandgenerations. Those
social/societaldimensionshavebeenenhancedbyandduringRUactualevent.
Intermsofkeydimensionsofthe impact,themost immediateonefromthevisitors’perspectiverelateto
the increase in their awareness and understanding of the people diversity in the city andgained sense of
belonging.However,duringtheinterviewstherespondentsalsoclearlydistinguishedbetween“awareness”
and“understanding”,whereas,according to them, theRU festivalhas stronger impacton the formerand
much less on the latter. In terms of RU spillovers, this might mean that in order for the social capital
generated during the festival to have a lasting effect for the city social cohesion, it might take more
systematiceffortsfromvariousstakeholdersinthecity.
38
Hereitisimportanttodistinguishthattheresultsofthisresearchindicatethatthefestivalcontributestothe
socialcohesionamongitsvisitors,yet it istooearlytosaywhether it leadstoasocialcohesionatthecity
level (a spillover for the city) as it is a complex process that involves multiple dimensions and complex
relationshipsthatneedtobestudiedfurther.
9.Limitationsandfutureresearch
The following section deals with the opportunities and challenges of the Value-Based Approach when
appliedtoeventsofRUFestivalscope.
9.1.Limitations
Inrelationtothevisitors,thecollectionofdatapresentedseveralchallenges.Thestudywasdealingwitha
complex issue: the valueof social cohesion.Despite the fact that the sub-values (‘solidarity/togetherness’
and ‘diversity’) somewhat simplified the multifaceted value of social cohesion, several questions in the
survey might have been complicated to some respondents (for example the differences between
“awareness”and“understanding”oftheothercultures).Whilethismightbeachallengefortherespondents
to the online survey and in the face-to-face survey, the interviewers were able to clarify some of the
questions.Nevertheless, the aspect needs to be considered in relation to the robustness of the data if a
biggerdatasetwouldbeexecutedinthefuture.
The reach of respondents for the online survey was also limited by the less effective communication
between the research teamandRUorganisation (meanwhile theRU teamwent througha reorganisation
and,atsomemoments, itwasdifficulttogettheirattentionforthefieldworkoftheevaluation).Another
limitationforthedatacollectionandthereachoftherespondentswasthetimingofthefestival.Afestival
only truly ‘lives’ when it is taking place. The research dealt with data collection that was executed both
duringandafter the festival’sevents.Duringand rightafter theevent tookplace, thecollectionof visitor
survey responses was very effective. Yet, executing interviews afterwards was rather challenging. One
possiblesolutiontoavoidthisobstacleistoallocatemoreresources(humanandfinancial)andcollectallthe
visitorsurveysduringtheeventitself.
The response of the peers to take part in the interviews/surveys was also affected by the timing of the
festival and the limited time for data analysis afterwards (after the holiday period from July to August,
gettingexperts’attentioninSeptemberwasratherdifficult).Thisaffectedthenumberofsurveysfilledin.
Futureresearchthereforeneedstogivemoreattentiontoengagementwiththeseexternalstakeholdersin
eitherthequantitativeand/orthequalitativedatacollection.Inaddition,specialattentionneedstobegiven
to the peers and politicians with regard to their real experience of the event. All these aspects also will
requiredifferentresources–financialandhuman–inordertoimplementVBAinitsfullscope.
39
9.2.BenefitsofapplyingVBAandfutureresearch
Despite the data collection and coordination challenges encountered during the second stage of the
evaluation of RU Festival, the application of the Value-Based Approach to assess the intangible
benefits/impactofaculturalfestivalachieveditsinitialobjectives.Theapplicationofthemethodprovesto
bringreliableandvalidatedanalysisofthesocialandculturalcontributionsandthusspilloversofRU.
The way VBA is implemented allows cultural organisations and their stakeholders to be involved in the
developmentandarticulationofmeasuresofevaluationoftheirownwork.Thesignificantqualitativepartof
theevaluationcanbeverybeneficialforvariousstakeholders(especiallythevisitors)tolearnhowtotakea
critical assessment. Next to this, the method assesses an actual impact while cross-referencing various
experiencesandcomparingthemtoexpectations..
Future research needs to focus on the collection of longitudinal data collected prior to, during (when
possible)andpasttheevent,whichwillallowfortestingandvalidationofvarioustrends,notonlyduringthe
actual event, but also afterwards. It will also be interesting to be able to test the application of VBA to
evaluatespilloversformorethanoneeventinacityand,assuch,tobeabletoanalyseaggregateddata.
9.3.Feedbackoncollaborationwithcasestudyinstitution
The collaboration with the RU institution was not as optimal as planned. Despite the fact that the
organisationwasveryopenandwillingtohelpandcontributewhereveritwasneeded,bothduringthepilot
researchin2015andtheresearchforthistender(2016),thereareseveralaspectsthatmadetheefficiency
ofthecollaborationonthisevaluationchallenging.Thewillingnesswaspresent,yettheactionstakenwere
farfromeffective.TheorganisationofRUseemstobeoperatingaroundafewcoordinators,whoseemto
have too much to deal with. In addition, the PR-Marketing coordinator left the organisation during the
course of the research,which resulted in an unnecessary delaywhile collecting the data. This resulted in
slow,ineffectiveandtime-consumingcommunicationwithoutreachingtheintendedresults.
Conductingthesetworesearchprojectshasenhancedtheorganisation’sawarenessoftheirspillovers.Asa
result,theyhavestrengthenedtheircommunicationandmarketingeffortstohighlighttheimportanceofRU
spillovers. The organisation did hope that their aim to have a societal effect (spillover) would indeed be
realised.AccordingtoRU,thishasbeenconfirmedbythesetworesearches.
9.4.ConditionsforapplicationofVBAtootherprojects
InordertoreachaneffectiveapplicationofVBAevaluationtootherprojects,itisindispensableto:
1)Establishagoodunderstandingwiththeleadersoftheprojectwhatthisevaluationcanmeanforthemin
termsofgettingcleartheirgoalvaluesandintermsoftheirresponsibilitiesintheprocessoftheplanning
andexecutionoftheevaluationamongtheirstakeholders.Thisrequiresinvestingtimeandbuildingthebasis
40
forthecollaborationbeforebeginningtheevaluationprocess.
2)Investenoughtimeinthefirsttwostagesoftheevaluation(diagnosisofvaluesandidentificationof
stakeholdersandstrategies)untiltheresearchersandtheorganisationrepresentatives/leadersfeel
confidenttheyarereachingarelevantsetofproxiestobeevaluatedlater.Here,itisimportanttofinda
reliablemethodforthedeterminationofvaluesandexperiencesoftherelevantstakeholders,i.e.panels,
focusgroups,ethnographicalobservations,etc.
3)Investmoreindatacollectionbefore,duringandimmediatelyaftertheevent,insteadofindatacollection
monthslaterviaonlineplatforms.
41
Bibliography
Bakhshi,H.,McVitte,EandSimmie,J.(2008)CreatingInnovation:Docreativeindustriessupportinnovation
inthewidereconomy?,London:NESTA
Baumol,W. J. (2006) The Arts in the "New Economy",Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, D.
ThrosbyandV.Ginsburgh,ed.,Elsevier,vol.1,pp339-358
Boschma R., M. Fritsch. (2007). Creative Class and Regional Growth − Empirical Evidence from Eight
EuropeanCountries,JenaEconomicResearchPaperNo.2007-066.
ENCATC,2015.Reportonthesymposium:BeyondtheGDP
Florida,Richard.(2002).TheRiseoftheCreativeClass.NewYork:BasicBooks.
Hutter, M. (2011). Experienced goods, R.Towse (ed.), A handbook of cultural economics, second edition.
Cheltenham:EdwardElgar.
Klamer,A.(2003).Apragmaticviewonvaluesineconomics,JournalofEconomicMethodology10:2,
Routledge
Klamer,A.(2016).Doingtherightthings:AValuebasedeconomy,Hilversum:SEC
Klamer,A. (ed.) (1996)TheValueofCulture:ontherelationshipbetweeneconomicsandart.Amsterdam:
AmsterdamUniversityPress.
Müller,K.,Ch.Rammer, J.Trüby (2009).The roleof creative industries in industrial innovation. Innovation:
Management,Policy&Practice:11,InnovationPolicyintheCreativeIndustries,pp.148-168.
OECD(1996).TheKnowledge-basedEconomy.Paris:OECD
Petrova, L. (2016). Spillovers and the process of cultural valorization: cultural economic perspective.
ProceedingsoftheICCPRconferenceinSeoul,SouthKorea.
Potts,J.(2009).Introduction:creativeindustries&innovationpolicy.Innovation11(2),pp138-147
Potts,J.(2011).Creativeindustriesandeconomicevolution.EdwardElgarPublishingPress.
TFCC(2015).CulturalandcreativespilloversinEurope:reportonapreliminaryevidencereview
Throsby,D.(2001),EconomicsandCulture.Cambridge:Cambridgeuniversitypress
TNSSofres, (2013).Europeancitizen’sperceptionof thehigh-endculturalandcreative industry.Report for
theEuropeanCulturalandCreativeIndustriesAlliance
Vatin,F.(2013).Valuationasevaluatingandvalorizing,ValuationStudies,1(1),pp.31–50
42
Annex1
Surveyvisitors
DeorganisatievanRotterdamUnlimited(inclusief'Zomercarnaval'en'DunyaFestival')wilgraagwetenwatuvanhun
activiteitenvindt.Omeengoedbeeldtekrijgen,hebbenwijuwresponshardnodig.Devragenlijstzalslechtsenkele
minutenvanuwtijdinbeslagnemen.Devragenlijstisanoniemenuwantwoordenzullenvertrouwelijkworden
behandeld.
1. Demografischegegevens
GeslachtM/V
Leeftijd:………………
Nationaliteit:……………………
Afkomstmoeder:……………
Afkomstvader:……………….
Hoogstgenotenopleiding:
Lagereschool,VMBO,MBO,HAVO,VWO,HBO,WO………….
Woonplaats:…………………..
Gemiddeldjaarlijksinkomen(omcirkeljuisteoptie):
• <10.000;
• 10.000-20.000;
• 20.000-30.000;
• 30.000-40.000;
• 40.000-50.000;
• 50.000<
2. Welkevandevolgendeaspectenvindtuinhetalgemeenbelangrijkalsueencultureelfestivalbezoekt?Beoordeel
alstublieftderelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk).Pleziermakenmetvrienden/familie.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendecultureleachtergronden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendeleeftijden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendesocialeachtergronden.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstvormen(bijv.muziek,dans,film,poëzie,etc.)
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstgenres
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaancultureelenetnischdiversiteitinmuziek,dans,film,poëzieetc.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaanartiesten
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanbekendeenopkomendeartiesten
3. Hoebelangrijkishetvooruomuwfestivalervaringterplekkesamenmetanderentedelen?
Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk).4. Hoebelangrijkishetvooruomzichsolidair(verbonden)tevoelenmetanderentijdenseencultureelfestival?
Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk).
5. HeeftutijdensuwbezoekaanRotterdamUnlimitedeenvanvolgendedingenervarenenzoja,inwelkematewas
ditbelangrijkvooru?
Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk).Pleziermakenmetvrienden/familie.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendecultureleachtergronden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendeleeftijden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendesocialeachtergronden.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstvormen(bijv.muziek,dans,film,poëzie,etc.)
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstgenres
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaancultureelenetnischdiversiteitinmuziek,dans,film,poëzieetc.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaanartiesten
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanbekendeenopkomendeartiesten
6. Bentuheteensmetdevolgendebeweringen?
43
Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1tot5
Hetfestivalheeftmijnbewustzijnenbegripvoormensenmeteenanderesocialeofcultureleachtergrondenandere
leeftijdscategorievergroot.
Ikbenmetmensenomgegaanvaneenanderesocialeofcultureleachtergrondenandereleeftijdscategoriealsikzelf.
Ikvoeldemijonderdeelvaneengroteresamenleving.
Ikhebmeegemaaktdatmensenmetverschillendeachtergrondenzichmetelkaarverbondenvoelden.
RotterdamUnlimiteddraagtbijaandesocialecohesieinRotterdam.
RotterdamUnlimiteddraagtbijaandediversiteitvanhetcultureelaanbodinRotterdam.
7.Hoezouuhetgevoelvandeonderlingecommunicatie/interactietussenmensenvanverschillendeachtergronden
tijdensRotterdamUnlimitedbeoordelen?(1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk))
8.Hoezouuhetgevoelvanverbondenheid(meteengroep)tijdensRotterdamUnlimitedbeoordelen?(1(erg
onbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk))
9.HoezouuhetgevoelvansolidariteittijdensRotterdamUnlimitedbeoordelen?(1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(erg
belangrijk))
Interviewsvisitors
DeorganisatievanRotterdamUnlimited(inclusief'Zomercarnaval'en'DunyaFestival')wilgraagwetenwatuvanhunactiviteitenvindt.Omeengoedbeeldtekrijgen,hebbenwijuwresponshardnodig.Devragenlijstzalslechtsenkeleminutenvanuwtijdinbeslagnemen.Devragenlijstisanoniemenuw
antwoordenzullenvertrouwelijkwordenbehandeld.
1. Demografischegegevens
GeslachtM/V
Leeftijd:………………
Nationaliteit:……………………
Afkomstmoeder:……………
Afkomstvader:……………….
Hoogstgenotenopleiding:
Lagereschool,VMBO,MBO,HAVO,VWO,HBO,WO………….
Woonplaats:…………………..
Gemiddeldjaarlijksinkomen(omcirkeljuisteoptie):
• <10.000;
• 10.000-20.000;
• 20.000-30.000;
• 30.000-40.000;
• 40.000-50.000;
• 50.000<
2. Welkevandevolgendeaspectenvindtuinhetalgemeenbelangrijkalsueencultureelfestivalbezoekt?Beoordeel
alstublieftderelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk).Pleziermakenmetvrienden/familie.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendecultureleachtergronden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendeleeftijden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendesocialeachtergronden.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstvormen(bijv.muziek,dans,film,poëzie,etc.)
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstgenres
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaancultureelenetnischdiversiteitinmuziek,dans,film,poëzieetc.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaanartiesten
44
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanbekendeenopkomendeartiesten
3. Watzijnuwredenenvoorhetbezoekenvanditfestival?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4. KuntubeknoptuwervaringbijRotterdamUnlimitedbeschrijven?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. DraagtRotterdamUnlimitedbijaanuwbegripvoormensenmeteenanderecultureleensocialeachtergronden
andereleeftijd?
Zoja,kuntudittoelichten?Kuntuverschillenaanduidenmetandereculturelefestivalervaringen?
Zoniet,kuntuaangevenwaaromniet?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Interviewspeers
DeorganisatievanRotterdamUnlimited(inclusief'Zomercarnaval'en'DunyaFestival')wilgraagwetenwatuvanhun
activiteitenvindt.Omeengoedbeeldtekrijgen,hebbenwijuwresponshardnodig.Devragenlijstzalslechts15
minutenvanuwtijdinbeslagnemen.Devragenlijstisanoniemenuwantwoordenzullenvertrouwelijkworden
behandeld.
1. BentubekentmetRotterdamFestivals(en/ofZomercarnaval/DUNYAFestival)
o Ja
o Nee
o Eenbeetje
2. Inwelkevandevolgendeaspectenzoueencultureelfestivalvolgensumoetenvoorzien?Beoordeelalstublieft
derelevantievaniederstatementopeenschaalvan1(ergonbelangrijk)tot5(ergbelangrijk).
3. Welkevandevolgendeaspectenvindtuinhetalgemeenbelangrijkalsueencultureelfestivalbezoekt?
Pleziermakenmetvrienden/familie.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendecultureleachtergronden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendeleeftijden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendesocialeachtergronden.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstvormen(bijv.muziek,dans,film,poëzie,etc.)
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstgenres
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaancultureelenetnischdiversiteitinmuziek,dans,film,poëzieetc.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaan
artiesten
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanbekendeenopkomendeartiesten
4. KuntuvertellenwelkefunctievanhetfestivalRotterdamUnlimiteduvooralinteressantvindt?Watvindtuin
hetspecifiekinteressantaanhetfestival?Gelieveteverklaren.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. KuntuaangevenhoeuRotterdamUnlimited(inclusief‘Zomercarnaval’en/of‘DUNYAFestival’)ervaart?
Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederebeweringopeenschaalvan1(zeermeeoneens)tot5(zeermeeeens)
Pleziermakenmetvrienden/familie.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendecultureleachtergronden.
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendeleeftijden.
45
Communicerenmetmensenvanverschillendesocialeachtergronden.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstvormen(bijv.muziek,dans,film,poëzie,etc.)
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaandiversiteitvankunstgenres
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaancultureelenetnischdiversiteitinmuziek,dans,film,poëzieetc.
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaan
artiesten
Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanbekendeenopkomendeartiesten
6. Inhoeverrebentueensmetdevolgendestellingen?
Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederebeweringopeenschaalvan1(zeermeeoneens)tot5(zeermeeeens)
Hetfestivalverhoogthetonderlingebegripenbewustzijnvanmensenvanallerleiachtergronden(bijvoorbeeld
verschillendeculturen,leeftijdenensocialeachtergronden).
RotterdamUnlimiteddraagtbijaandesocialecohesie(verbondenheid)inRotterdam
RotterdamUnlimiteddraagtbijaandediversiteitvanhetcultureelaanbodinRotterdam.
7. Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederebeweringopeenschaalvan1(zeerzwak/laag)tot5(zeer
sterk/hoog).
Hoezouuhetgevoel/ervaringvandeonderlingecommunicatie/interactietussenmensenvanverschillende
achtergrondentijdensRotterdamUnlimitedbeoordelen?
Hoezouuhetgevoel/ervaringvanverbondenheidmeteengroeptijdensRotterdamUnlimitedbeoordelen?
Hoezouuhetgevoel/ervaringvansolidariteittijdensRotterdamUnlimitedbeoordelen?
Recommended