Even though the diversity of cultural expressions cannot be measured or put into frames as human’s imagination has no limitations, nowadays the new forms of arts and culture puzzle the big challenge to existing policy generators and community. (Craik, p.55). It is important for the creative industries and government to commit the principles of balance and openness to what can be called cultural values. The themes of policies are closely linked to the ways in which people understand the value of culture. Cultural policy aims to measure this contribution through sustainable frameworks (Gray 2002). This topic arose the questions about recognizing either the single path or the multiplicity forms of cultural policy analysis. This essay claims that social and economic effectiveness of cultural policy can be partly measured by monitoring, collecting and analyzing information about the quality and functioning cultural development. But what exactly should be counted as culture and how? The essay will draw attention on the levels of measurement; the relationship between policy access and the exchange of cultural data; then suggest three points of what should be measured through certain evaluating judgments. References will be made to writings, mainly produced within a field of international cultural policy research, academic journals, cultural policy reports, online articles and lecture notes.
Since the middle of the twentieth century, many countries developed a comprehensive informational system to support the cultural and creative industries, artists and the heritage sector. The expanding of cultural forms has urged the government to identify sectoral specificities and the need for statistical data. Evaluation the effectiveness can be defined as a regular procedure for reporting and using information to apprise of policymaking operating. Cultural policy measurement helps to conduct an assessment and analysis of organizations
Before undertaking the metrics that could be examined for cultural policy, it is important to outline the tools and techniques of evaluation that are useful within cultural policy sectors. Arguably, the more money the government invests into cultural sector, more accurate data can be collected. The outlines of investment in the art and culture can be measured only from the basic data and numbers: ticket sales, the capacity of the venue etc. Efforts that has been taken to measure the results and effectiveness of cultural policy highlighted the significance of financial well-being rather than citizens' creative capital (Cunningham 2006). For instance, according to 'Global Sydney' research 'the contribution of cultural activity to the Australian economy is far greater that official figures show, the suggestion that there is greater potential for creative work to be recognized as part of the overall economy that in currently the case'. There, it can be said that social effectiveness of cultural policy can be measured by the very limited indicator. Furthermore, it seems difficult to justify how cultural policy actually works in a relation of changing public perception, such as audience post-impression and the development of cultural taste.
A system of governance traditionally applies to a variety of fundamental challenges to guide the collection of information (UNESCO Report). There are some of them: the equal access to share the information, not only compare and not only between 'developing' countries; legislative base to ensure free movement of artist and professionals; lack of awareness in governmental and public circles. The current concern with using of cultural policy measurement is about changing governmental attitudes towards cultural resources (Wangermée and Gournay, p. 74). The increasing emphasis that has been placed upon the “need” for arts and cultural policies to demonstrate that they generate a benefit over and above the aesthetic, has become a major development within political systems.
The understanding of "culture" has been changed because of the well-ground basis for the making of numerous types of cultural policy at various levels. Each of these structures contains their own particular clause for distinguishing what are suitable types of measurement, attribution and causal structure for analyzing and evaluation how they are working (Gray).
There are three levels of evaluation cultural policy: individual, organizational, industry environmental. Gibson (2008) argued that cultural policy choices present the views with respect to the value of individual's culture. Other practitioners such as Pierre Bourdieu (1984) asserted that the way an individual can measure the culture is the association with the social class judgments. To put it in other words, as higher levels of education, wealth, social status you hold, the higher level of engagement in assumptions and analyzing the forms of cultural activity you will have. On the contrary, Chan and Goldthorpe (2007) employed the definition of 'self-exclusion' rather than socially excluded from the arts. Nowadays, non-participation in the arts is very common, even if the individual have enough resources. Therefore, cultural policy effectiveness cannot be measured only on the individual level.
The organizational level has been recognized as a more comprehensive assessment of the variety of cultural sector measures. Effective broadband infrastructure within the cultural sector is guided by national policy (Department for Culture, Media and Sport; Department for Education etc.) that providing careful investment and programs to enable them to be the best that they could be. For example, the National Lottery has changed the cultural landscape and increased cultural policy effectiveness through a sustained investment of Grant-in-Aid funding: there was a 10 percent increase of art engagement between 2006 and 2013 (Art Council England 2013). However, the multiple organizations, plans, types of policy increase the possibilities of failure in establishing any form of measurements of cultural effectiveness.
Another way of measuring cultural policy is an environmental level. The world has become more and more united. This change can be explained not only by technological revolution but also by the way people experience the arts and culture changes. UNESCO very often called as a world ministry of culture (Singh). With the involvement of international organizations, the lack of both official and independent cultural policy information and data collection infrastructures in many countries can be resolved. Cultural diplomacy is an outspoken cultural policy tool that deals with ideologies beyond state power's border. It is a common technique of persuasive communication and a world's heritage conversations between all countries. However, songs, painting, music and so forth that people recognize without any hesitation as art are usually overbalancing the things that can be recognized only when you are familiar with a particular culture. So put it in other works, not all areas of cultural policy can be captured by using overstatements and statistical methods on the worldwide level.
The impact of measurement can be described as a technology for evidence-based policymaking with involving a myriad of concerns about using data, statistics and the analysis in the cultural sector. It would be useful to formulate the problems that may be the obstacle in a way of collecting and monitoring information about cultural policy effectiveness. The organizational level can limit the possibility of developing effective cultural policy in a practical sense, for example, over-production of data and the lack of judiciousness when compared to other countries policymaking system. Tools for organizing cultural statistics face with the difficulties of political choice about how the policy sector should be managed within political system; the question of ideology (for example, Cultural revolution in China in 1966) plays a key role in "establishing a conceptual model for defining culture for statistical purposes" (Teaiwa, p.32).
Cultural policy effectiveness can be measured through metrics described below. Firstly, being an international artist, I would underline the importance of artists' mobility. Countries (EU, the USA, Canada, Australia and others) whose cultural workers can travel without requiring visas are presenting 'the relative power of nationals to move around internationally' (UNESCO). Before the cultural exchange on the international platforms will happen, the main concern for international non-European cultural professionals is obtaining the necessary visa which demonstrates a global inequality in terms of freedom of movement. According to Convention Global Report (2015), the average number of policies targeting international collaboration and mobility is mainly elaborate in Europe. As an example of special visa for creative workers, it can be seen in the UK Tier 5 visa(Gov.uk, 2017). But obviously, it costs a lot of money and time, one of the requirement is the evidence of financial stability. What if you are a talented artist and were invited to international Art Fair, but you are below the financial requirements for a given visa? Although the economic context offers a plenty of challenges to making grants to individual artists, from my point of view, a number of grants and funded programs which are going to cultural mobility promotion are important to measure for cultural policy effectiveness. So the impact of government funds can be taken as "an attempt to fit cultural policy intro the broader changes in public administration" (O'Brien, 2011).
Secondly, cultural policy effectiveness can be measured not simply by considering cultural participation in "what people used to recognize as art", but also by including participation in religious places such as church, mosque, synagogue or other ritual activities that are central to cultural identity (Teaiwa). For some countries, this type of more deep analysis of effectiveness plays a key role in social cohesion and community development. Since 2005 New Zealand has created a Social Survey for the majority of the population and minority like Maori tribe, measuring socio-economic and cultural values, exploring the importance of cultural traditions and address the social dimension of culture. This approach highlights the issue of cultural diversity on the national level, how differently people see their lives in one country and we can measure what they understand by well-being, how fluent individuals see themselves. Thirdly,
Brown and Novak (2007) noticed that the impact of cultural policy measurement is "the unique symbiosis between artist and audience…. and should not be used as a means of evaluating or comparing artists or the worthiness of their performance".