In most cases, we consider projects with organisers from two or more countries who co-produce or collaborate on a single initiative, or projects with a strong element of cooperation in terms of objectives & content.
Transversality: Showing interdisciplinary methods in the arts; making connections beyond the traditional cultural sector; & transcending existing links or hierarchies in the collaboration pursued.
Innovation: Combining resources (human, financial, material, etc.) & elements of the creative process in original configurations to stimulate new creative potential.
Intra-culturalism & Inter-culturalism: Revealing the constraints & obstacles that limit cultural exchange & dialogue.
Inter-local relationships: Revealing various aspects of different local contexts & assessing the impact of cultural actions on the dynamics of local development.
If you have an interesting trans-border project, we would like to hear from you! Contact us by submitting your project via the Add new content feature.
Premises
European cultural cooperation fulfils a primary role in comparing cultural paradigms, historical heritages and value systems. At the same time it pinpoints and enhances diversity, fostering knowledge and sharing processes. Cultural cooperation is a knowledge kit both for understanding cultural diversity and for sharing the richness of that diversity. Patterns of diversity are a source of artistic production, fuelling the creation of new cultural forms and hybrids.
Cultural cooperation aims to be a dynamic tool that nurtures creativity and a sense of belonging within the European cultural framework rather than standardising our experiences of what it means to be European.
Within this framework, the Gateway to Cultural Cooperation (G2CC) is primarily a means of promoting, supporting, discussing and inspiring – but it is not exclusively addressed to cultural operators. This collection of case studies and of projects in general should contribute to a mature reflection on the methods and instruments most suited to tackling the issue of cultural cooperation.
Objectives and goals
The key aim is to collect, order, analyse, index and present a significant number of case studies that can act as reference sources and, by identifying potential ‘routes’ and content for cultural cooperation, inspire cultural operators and institutions that support cultural activities.
Each case is unique and interesting because of their specific differences. Accordingly, for each project a context and specificity analysis is necessary in order to fully understand how it is implemented and to make an assessment of the tools used.
The fact that these features form a key element of the case studies implies that experiences and contexts cannot easily be transferred from one environment to another. The case studies section is not a tool kit that can be instantly applied in each situation. Otherwise context would be largely irrelevant: an approach that would conflict with the premises we have adopted.
‘Transferability’ is not excluded. However, in most cases it would be necessary to begin by interpreting, translating and adapting to the specific context. With the transferability of specific tools and methodologies likely to be a secondary aim, the case studies will first of all represent a rich source of inspiration for new cooperation projects. They will present possible artistic concepts, content structures, partnership typologies and the potential that can be derived from new combinations, uses and application of partnerships.
The case studies (and, in general, the projects in the database) have not just been chosen to sketch the situation as it is. We hope that they might also foster debates that will encourage the development of cultural cooperation, in line with LabforCulture’s other planned activities.
Field definition: the case studies’ representativeness and significance
The field of research in cultural cooperation is potentially unlimited. This is due to a number of factors: the geographical expansion of the European continent; the number of countries directly involved through the European Union; the relationships with neighbouring countries; and the complexity and breadth with which the concept of cultural cooperation has been defined.
In this context, presenting fully representative case studies is unrealistic and beyond our grasp. The main aim is not to propose a statistical portrait of current dynamics but to focus operators’ attention on examples that will stimulate further reflection and to offer a source of inspiration and reference for new projects.
This means shifting from a criterion of representativeness to one that gives weight to significance and meaningfulness. (For this reason, the correct term for defining collected projects should indeed be ‘case studies’ rather than ‘best practices’.) Just how significant and meaningful these case studies will be remains to be verified by users of LabforCulture.org. We look forward to hearing your thoughts and comments, and welcome feedback from cultural operators and funding organisations. [1]
For case studies to become truly significant for a large number of operators, they will need to cover a broad range of topics, artistic fields, geographical contexts and operational/methodological procedures. In line with such an approach, geographic differentiation is necessary. This is not to try and produce any ‘representative’ balance of countries (which would lead to an oversimplified sketchiness), but to include one key expression of the European cultural framework of diversity.
The selection of case studies foresees a progressive implementation. Following an initial search phase for significant cases, there should be a further phase in which information on case studies regularly flows in to the LabforCulture Editorial Group from visitors to the website. This would enable the emphasis to change from a search function to one of selection and in-depth analysis. It would also facilitate a more rapid implementation of the case study database and make it more possible to cover broader areas and sectors of experience.
Methodology: a macro-criteria grid
One main focus is to analyse the ways in which cultural cooperation practices and tools relate to diversity at different levels: fundamentally, an analysis of connection values among different elements. On the basis of such an abstract definition, it is possible to identify some macro-criteria that outline the case studies’ framework.
Transversality [2]
Transversality can be understood in three different senses:
1) The capacity to link different cultural issues that also implies interdisciplinarity beyond the traditional cultural sector (by involving, for example, the scientific, technological or social sectors).
2) The capacity to link operators and partners in the cultural sector with players and partners active outside the cultural sector (industry, economic sector, etc.).
3) The capacity to transfer operational tools, logics and paradigms belonging to other sectors to the cultural cooperation environment (and, ideally, vice versa).
Innovation
Innovation should be understood not as the capacity to invent, but rather as an ability to combine existing resources – whether human, financial or material – in a creative way in order to stimulate new creative potential. The intention is to inter-relate practices and paradigms that are apparently very different. Innovation can be found in the way different practices and cultural perceptions are bound together. It can also be found in specific tools of artistic implementation, project engineering, support and funding mechanisms.
Intra-culturalism and Inter-culturalism
This is the capacity to transform cultural diversity, and the constraints and barriers that characterise exchange between cultures, into creative material that promotes a true dialogue on differences, paradigms and the ‘significance habitat’ of different cultures. This could be as a result of a direct confrontation (through migrations) or a component of exchanges with different regions.
Inter-local relationships
These relationships represent the capacity to link, compare, validate and learn from different local contexts through cooperation projects, by assessing the impact of cultural actions on the dynamics of local development. Examples might include relations between sparsely populated areas of different countries, between city and country, city and city, and networks of locations.
It is worth remembering that international cooperation is often developed in a multi-local system, where connections follow a local-to-local development pattern, linking small sections of territories and affecting the (micro) local scenario more than the transnational one.
This macro criteria grid identifies the main ‘diversity sphere’ within which it is possible to look for case studies. It also identifies initiatives able to transform distance, cultural and social differences into material for cooperative projects and new relationships. At the same time, the search and analysis process will improve the criteria grid, by fine-tuning it according to the variety, nuances and sensitivity of actual experience.
Sources of information
Given these basic premises, the working approach for the initial selection of projects varies from source to source, but generally operates on four levels:
For projects
1.Desk research of online and off-line resources: analysis of existing project databases, information sources, portals, directories, newsletters, etc.
2.Acquisition of specific project documentation (catalogues, web pages, press releases, reports, etc.)
3.Direct contact with project managers and staff in order to clarify issues and gather additional information.
For cases studies
1.In-depth analysis: following a sound documentation process, face-to-face, phone, and email interviews with project managers and, where relevant, with participating artists.
Case studies – structure
The task is to frame the context of the case studies. The first areas of intervention are: [3]
1) Case study identification chart
Title and brief description, players, geographical dimension and thematic areas: a kind of index of core features to identify the case study.
2) Context and scenario
Contextual features: geographical references, socio-economic features, motives, opportunities, specificities and resources employed.
3) Project background and process
Project phases: conceptual, carrying out, implementation, evaluation and follow-up.
4) Stakeholder, governance, leadership
Resources, partners’ roles and relations, stakeholders (typologies, expectations and evaluation). Analysis of governance systems [4] and of leadership models.
5) Funding and support systems
Economic and social support mechanisms, [5] raising funds, support of political, institutional and social networks.
6) Constraints, opportunities, critical factors
Highlighting the main favourable and conflicting elements at the basis of project development. Identification of the means of tackling and managing critical factors.
7) Cultural and territorial impact
Analysis of results: cultural content and reference communities; cultural impact on the territory.
Expected results
The progressive implementation of case studies will highlight the complexity of the issues and of the approaches that belong intrinsically to cultural cooperation.
A precise focus on resources, obstacles and critical aspects as they are experienced in the different geographic and thematic contexts will nurture fruitful reflection on the best ways to support, facilitate and promote cultural cooperation. This support could later take the form of an implementation of tools within LabforCulture, or of guidelines at local and European level that could sustain the planning and implementation of cooperation.
Unsolved issues of cooperation – such as cultural and economic diversity, North and South/East and West conflicts – should find a concrete, localised and defined picture both through and in the case studies. This is because a model case study should convey, by means of a bottom-up approach, specific solutions or pathways for the management of complexity and diversity.
Notes
[1] If the aim of the case studies is to nurture debate, foster synergies and identify key issues, then cultural operators and organisations supporting culture should represent the main initial beneficiaries.
[2] Focus on transversality and innovation clearly does not imply excluding those cases with a more ‘standard’ approach to cultural cooperation, eg. collaboration between partners belonging to the same or to different artistic fields, or operating at similar or different levels.
[3] These initial areas might be enlarged and fine-tuned. The refining process will be linked to: a) needs and requests coming from the field (beneficiaries); b) new strategic topics emerging; c) acquired definition of cultural cooperation.
All projects will have to state and pursue clear artistic and cultural aims, possibly with an evident interdisciplinary approach. The chosen timeframe for the investigation is six years (2000-2006). This should allow us to follow short-term and medium-term developments. Where priority is given to current projects, then recently concluded examples will be analysed. Furthermore, projects that are just embarking on a starting phase will be considered. This will allow us to adopt a particular analytical vision, with initial analysis followed up after 6-12 months. A follow-up could also be planned for other particular cases.
[4]Resources management/partnership: The ideal partnership does not only include cultural operators, but is also inter-sectoral and involves organisations of different types and with different missions. Furthermore, it relies on a significant cluster of players at local level. An essential condition in the consideration of projects is that the main players must be actively involved in the project’s implementation (ie. not just acting as co-funders).
At local as well as international levels, the role of emerging leaders and young managers of international projects will be carefully considered. This means looking at initiatives that involve managers’ active participation, so as to familiarise ourselves with those of the next artistic and cultural generation, strengthening their visibility and analysing their working methods, capacities and deficiencies.
[5] All types of funding schemes will be considered. Particular interest will be shown in those cases where there is a clear responsibility from the partnership side in terms of co-investment (in cash or, more frequently, in kind).
LabforCulture is a partner initiative of the European Cultural Foundation. LabforCulture is grateful for the support provided by its funders.
