CultureBanks: Resources

For example, I am going to a conference in Finland next week which is costing me an arm and a leg but I think will be of interest to other people who can't go, so maybe here I can share some of the resources - does that work?

Well timed! Was just about to do same - there's collaboration for you :-) I will post up some specific sub- headings - and welcome suggestions from other members too - to keep things relevant. Bringing a bit of expertise back from Finland sounds great (just finished George Lakey's Viking Economics - v Good) thanks Marion.

I'll post the conference schedule, even that is an interesting resource. It's called Nordic Urban Lab and is a cultural planning conference. In this context, culture refers to the way we live - planning is thinking about it

('Culture' in this case is far more restricted in its use. Here we are dealing with activities and products creatively produced, license-able and providing an ROI - either social or economic.)

Creative? Culture?

@liammurphy what is 'creative' production please? What is 'non-creative' production? I'd say this is a very dangerous distinction to be trying to build a practice on. Especially in relation to a 'commons' ethic.

Yes, licensing is a reasonable concern, to do with maker-right and the ethical-political relationship between a maker and a wide community and system of trade. But ROI? Oh come on! Why fall into that commercial vein? What's wromng with 'social outcome' or 'social benefit' (or 'common-weal'), coupled with 'resourcing', 'funding' or even 'generosity' or 'gifting'? Why think for even a moment in terms of 'investment', which is tainted to the roots with mercantilism and capital?

I suspect that the anthropological usage of culture that @marion94 brings is much more sound, and helps guard against the elitism, luxury orientation or preciousness that occurs in 'art' and 'craft' traditions, from Morris to the Cultural Industries. I think sharing your personally costly resources is a great, generous thing to do Marion, thank you.

I'd also say that 'skill' is a much more sound - deeper, more catholic - basis than 'creativity' for cultivating making-and-producing practices in a context of commons. It has an intrinsic reference to value, which is lacking in 'creativity' (unless we fall in with Romantic notions). Skill is closely connected with 'labour power' - which then gets us well into a collective recognition of maker-capability and well away from Romantic Art-individualism. In that frame, 'culture' equals the totality of labour power - the capacity to vision, organise, make, mobilise, review and value - in a bundle of communities. Now we're talking real commons! IMHO

Just to add that through the Our Cultural Commons initiative it's becoming clear that we need new ways of resourcing long term cultural 'assets' that can sustain creative cultural activities for and with people and places.....so the approaches you are suggesting here are important to explore

Indeed! No point talking about making anything you’ve no system to manage. Just irresponsible... and no excuse, given the platform coop, not to ensure financial resources go direct to the point of need and value creation; Grenfell being an exemplar of all that’s not working in ‘aid’... I am sure that very soon the Arts Council, the BBC, Kings College, Gulbenkian et al will be clamouring to finance ‘their own versions’ of these ideas! (Sic). Kevin - I might need to be more explicit about this - it's a serious point: In our traditional 'Partnership Funding' approach to projects and social objectives, it is very likely a large foundation or some other might seek to fund (Voluntary Arts or 'Big Local for example) commons initiatives. They can't. This sentence sums up a reason why:

"Big Local Trust was established by Local Trust and the Big Lottery Fund with a National Lottery grant of £196,873,499. The grant is an endowment, which has to be spent by December 2026. It funds Big Local, supporting 150 communities in England to make their areas even better places to live".

The model here is still 'short term money we spend til its gone'. In that sense capital investment which expects a return is better in some ways for sustainability but obviously not possible for commons. The Commons must be OWNED by commoners. If the Big Local TRust was interested in creating a Commons Legacy ('Commons TRust'?) from 2026 - I would support that. Likewise funding commons must be reciprocal - we give and get back - rather than provisional - we give til it's gone. Essentially Big Local is not giving to it's Commons, it is giving to it's clients. Very different. The latter being enclosed in a framework of established Intellectual Property of the organisation.

The commons can't be 'withdrawn' - like an endowment, since they are always held in common, can always be added to and , in purest form, can't be extracted from by private interests. I'll try to reflect something of this in the Coalition statement... L

Missed this.

Yes, agree with all that! If it’s not animal, vegetable or mineral, it’s Culture! But that’s too big to build a business model around. ROI in this case is precisely about directing cash to value through creativity - and skills.

Liam

PS Mike, I’m also re-appropriating the term ‘banking’ - re choice of language etc.

I made a comment on concepts, which Liam suggested was moved to here. Done.