The Value-Based Approach (VBA) to evaluate the … The Value-Based Approach (VBA) to evaluate the knowledge and network spillovers of the Rotterdam Unlimited Festival Autors: Arjo

1

TheValue-BasedApproach(VBA)toevaluate

theknowledgeandnetworkspilloversof

theRotterdamUnlimitedFestival

Autors:ArjoKlamer,LyudmilaPetrova,DorottyaKiss

[email protected],[email protected],[email protected]

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


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


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


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,


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


communication

Communication

amongdiverse

socialgroups

Intergenerational

communicationextentofimpo

rtance

Visitors'experienceofsocialdiversityandsolidarityduringtheRUfestivalbyextentofimportance,n=263

2015 2016 2015+2016

0

20

40

60

80

100


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.


.000020.000040.000060.000080.0000100.0000

Funwithfriends Broadrangeofemergingandwell-

knownartists

...ofartsforms …ofartistsfromdifferent

generations


art

…ofgenres Multiculturalcommunication


Intergenerationalcommunication


Visitors'perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvsexperiencedbyshareofvisitors(%)


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


Broadrangeofartistsfromdifferent

generations

...ofartsforms Intergenerationalcommunication

Broadrangeofgenres


art

extentofimpo

rtance

Peers'perspectiveonRUsocialandculturalimpact:expectedvsexperienced byextentofimportance,n=23


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


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.









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.








44


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.







Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaan

artiesten


4. KuntuvertellenwelkefunctievanhetfestivalRotterdamUnlimiteduvooralinteressantvindt?Watvindtuin

hetspecifiekinteressantaanhetfestival?Gelieveteverklaren.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. KuntuaangevenhoeuRotterdamUnlimited(inclusief‘Zomercarnaval’en/of‘DUNYAFestival’)ervaart?

Beoordeelalstublieftderelevantievaniederebeweringopeenschaalvan1(zeermeeoneens)tot5(zeermeeeens)

Pleziermakenmetvrienden/familie.



45





Hetmeemakenvaneenverscheidenheidaanoptredensvanjongeenoude(verschillende)generatiesaan

artiesten


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?

Documents

The Value-Based Approach (VBA) to evaluate the … The Value-Based Approach (VBA) to evaluate the knowledge and network spillovers of the Rotterdam Unlimited Festival Autors: Arjo