Great art for everyone? An examination of arts policy on participation and participatory decision making in England from 1997-2013

This thesis examines government policy on participation in the arts and participation in decision making from 1997-2013, which it has been claimed in both academic literature and arts policy discourse, was a significant feature of this period. It explores the gap between policy and practice and investigates the drivers and barriers to change in the arts. It further considers the implications broadening the range of voices involved in decision making may have on artistic practice and on the people who engage with the arts. The research takes as its starting point the analysis of contradictory views on power, recognising that some argue that dominant voices are always able to force out alternative viewpoints while others argue that that changing the agents involved in decision making will not only change the structures and practices, but the decisions themselves.

Through analysis of grey literature, surveys of local authorities and elite interviews with cultural policy makers and advisers, consideration is given to whose voices are heard in policy making in the arts in England and how policy is interpreted and implemented. In addition, three case studies where participatory decision making has been used are analysed, in order to examine whether engaging a wider range of voices does yield different outcomes. The weight of empirical data collected moves this thesis beyond the theoretical perspectives described in the literature to examine the specifics of practice. By so doing it extends knowledge on the decision making process in the arts in England and fills a gap in research by illuminating the attitudes to and outcomes of different participatory decision making practices.

The research reveals that a narrow range of voices has been involved in decision making in the arts, and that the arm’s length principle has contributed to a crisis of legitimacy for arts funding, by reducing both the accountability and transparency of arts policy. Strategies to widen the range of voices involved, to include members of the general public not only in consultation, but in decision making, have met with resistance within the arts sector. There is a common perception, among professional arts practitioners, that such practices would undermine expertise, limit creative risk, and that the arts sector could face a hostile public response. The case studies of participatory decision making examined here demonstrate that such fears need not be realised. Rather, such participatory practices can have powerful outcomes in terms of both building public value in the arts, and developing and broadening artistic practice.

I confirm that the thesis is my own work; and that all published or other sources of material consulted have been acknowledged in notes to the text or the bibliography.

I confirm that thesis has not been submitted for a comparable academic award.