Making a Few Distinctions

In a recent report to a client I have argued that they need to invest in developing future capability. I have drawn the following distinctions which they have accepted:

a) Planning for expansion is different than planning for growth

b) Planning for developing capacity to deliver is different from capability to deliver in the future

c) There are strong interfaces between the local economy and culture.

When local economies Fail to flourish

This scenario presents major losses to the local Cultural economies if cultural planning was to fail and local provision is not enhanced to meet the demands of new or expanding markets.  A worst-case scenario prevails where 

1. Arts and cultural producers, community groups, local authorities, arts funders and business sponsors fail to analyse and scrutinise their options for growth by promoting culture as a driver for the local economy 
2. Cultural planners are unable to attract skilled workforce or invest in their training 
3. Lack of planning frustrates the development of capacity to deliver cultural output 
4. Cultural programmers may be driven to procure new artistic work from other       countries at the expense of alienating local producers 
5. Lack of investment in partnerships fails to leverage resources into the economy 
6. Lack of planning fails to identify co-dependencies, namely the delivery of secondary services such as catering,  
7. Lack of development of culture as a cross-cutting agenda precludes new investment for capital infrastructure.(Source unknown)

What do you think?

As I have argued before, the need to plan for London Olympics 2012 is paramount. Local Authorities cannot afford to adopt “hit-and-miss” approach. Local authorities also should not aim to implement half hearted approaches.

What should local authorities be doing?  If your local economy is failing, how can you help to rescue and revive it?