a bottom up approach to cultural policy making

The Force of Example Publication Series No. 3

p o l i c i e s f o r c u l t u r e

Editor: Emina Vini, with a contribution by Sanjin Dragojevi Publisher: policies for culture Translation: Tatjana Vlai Language Editing (English): Nicola Krikorian, tefania Ferchedu Language Editing (Croatian): Janja Sesar Coordination: Emina Vini, Oana Radu, tefania Ferchedu Design: Ruta Print: Smart Printing, Bucharest

policies for culture (ECUMEST Association and European Cultural Foundation, www.policiesforculture.org), 2008

This case study is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. The case study orelements thereof can be freely copied, distributed and modified provided you attribute authors and publishers.http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

CLUBTURE Network Svacicev trg 110000 ZagrebCroatiawww.clubture.org

ECUMEST AssociationPO Box 37-219Bucharest, Romaniawww.ecumest.ro

European Cultural Foundation5 Jan van Goyenkade 1075 HN Amsterdam,The Netherlands www.eurocult.org

A bottom-upapproach to cultural

policy-making

Independent culture and new collaborative practices in Croatia

p o l i c i e s f o r c u l t u r eamsterdam / bucharest / zagreb

2008

a Case Study prepared by Emina Vini with a contribution by Sanjin Dragojevi

This case study was originally based on a Policies for Culture action project CLUBTURE Poli-cy Forum: Towards a new position for the independent, non-profit and non-institutional cultural sec-tor in the policy-making process, developed between July 2002 January 2004, and on subse-quent follow-ups and connected initiatives undertaken up to 2007

Contents

Introduction[6]

1. (New)independentcultureinCroatiathecontextofactivitiesandthe

dynamicsofdevelopment[8]

2. Newformsofnetworkingandjointaction[16]

2.1) Collaborativeplatforms/tacticalnetworks[17]

2.2) TheClubturenetwork[19]

2.3) POLICY_FORUM[28]

2.4) ZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000[31]

2.5) SanjinDragojevi:On networks,platformsandparticipatory

culturalpolicies[34]

3. Advocatingchange:thecollectedexperienceoftheZagreb

initiative[40]

3.1) Acritiqueofthesystemandarequestforchange[41]

3.2) Strategies,tactics,methods,formstheexperienceof

theZagrebinitiative[48]

3.3) AdvocacyactivitiesinZagrebAnoverview[54]

PoliciesforCulture:Programmeframework[60]

Introduction

ThisisthethirdcasestudyofthepublicationseriesTheForceofExamplerelatingtoPoliciesforCultureassociatedactivities,projectsandtheirfollow-upthroughoutSouthEastEurope.ThecasestudywasoriginallybasedontheactionprojectCLUBTURE Policy Forum: Towards a new position for the independent, non-prot and non-institutional cultural sector in the policy-making process,developedbe-tweenJuly2002January2004.BoththisactionprojectandthepresentpublicationbenetedfromthesupportofthePoliciesforCulturepro-gramme,jointlydevelopedbytheEuropeanCulturalFoundationinAm-sterdamandtheECUMESTAssociationinBucharest(moredetailsaboutPfCareavailableintheProgrammeframeworksection).However,thecur-renttextcoversalongerperiodthanthatoftheprojectitselfasitpresentsinsomedetailthevariousactionsandphasesoftheadvocacyprocessun-dertakenuntil2007byawidecoalitionofindependentculturalandyouthsectorsinCroatia.Wehopethiswillgiveanaccuratepictureofbestprac-ticeintheeldoflocalculturaldevelopmentinSouthEastEurope.

Duringthelastfewyears,theindependentculturalsceneinCroatia,andespeciallyinZagreb,hasbeenactivelyengagednotonlyinculturalpol-icies,butalsoinotherpublicpoliciesthatarerelevanttothiseld.Itsplay-erscanberecognisedasthekey(andmaybeonly)forcetocontinuouslypressforparticipatoryculturalpoliciespoliciesthatincludeasmanystakeholdersaspossibleinthedecision-makingprocessesandinmonitor-ingtheirimplementation.Thiskindofengagementhastobeaconse-quenceofthecontextwithinwhichtheplayershavehadtooperate,onewhichissignicantlyinuencedbythedominanceofthepublicculturalsector(publicinstitutionssystem).Thismeansthatculturalproduction,aswellasneworganisationalformsrisinganddevelopingoutofthesystem,arebeingpushedtoitsoutermargins.Thus,independentplayershavetosecureforthemselvesastrongerpositionwithinthewiderculturalsystemreectingtheroletheyactuallyplay.Moreover,keyindependentorganisa-tionshavealsodirectedtheiradvocacyactivitiesatotherpublicpoliciesthatareeitherdirectlyorindirectlyconnectedtoissuesofculturalpolicy,namelyurbanpolicies,policiesofspacemanagementandyouthpolicies.Alladvocacypracticesarebasedonatleasttwoessentialelements:joint

7networkedactionandastrongpleaforcitizensparticipationinthedeci-sion-makingprocesses.

IntherstpartofthispublicationwelookatthecontextinwhichtheindependentculturalsceneinCroatiahasarisenandinwhichitisnowop-erating,whilealsopresentinganoverviewofitsdevelopment.Wehavetriedtopointtorelevantfactorsthathaveinuenced,atagenerallevel,theorientationoftheculturaleldtowardsactivenetworkinganditsjointef-fortsinthestruggleforparticipationinthecreationandimplementationofculturalandotherpublicpolicies.

Asresultofcriticallyreectingnotonlyontheirown,butalsointerna-tional,Europeancollaborationpractices,independentplayershaveworkedforalongtimeonthesettingupofanewmodelofcooperation,i.e.newwaysofnetworking.Thesehavebecomeparamounttopartoftheirpro-grammesandtoalltheiradvocacyactivities.Thus,thesecondpartofthepublicationisdedicatedtothepresentationofthismodel,bothonacon-ceptuallevelandinpractice.InthesectionentitledCollaborative platforms / tactical networksweprovideanoverviewofthebasicpremisesandcharac-teristicsofthesenewnetworkingformats.Thisisfollowedbythreesuc-cessfulexamplesofsuchcollaborations:thenationalnetworkClubture,theadvocacyplatformPOLICY_FORUMandthelocalcollaborativeplat-formZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000.ThesectionconcludeswithatextbySanjinDragojevi,oneofthemostimportantEuropeanexpertsinculturalpoliciesandnon-protmanagement,whoplacesthesenewnet-workingformatswithinthelargerEuropeancontext.

Inthethirdandnalpart,wepresenttheadvocacyexperiencesoftheZagrebinitiative.Thereisnodoubtthatthiswillbeusefultoallthoseen-gagedinparticipativepolicies,andespeciallytothosewhoshareasimilarinstitutionalframeworkandculturalinheritance.HerewehaveinmindtheregionofSouthEastEuropeandespeciallythecountriesthathavein-heritedfromtheformerjointstatethesameorasimilarculturalsystemto-getherwiththeproblemsthatarisefromit.ThereforeintheinitialsectionwedescribethekeyorientationsandcharacteristicsoftheZagrebinitia-tive.Afterthatwegiveanoverviewofthestrategies,tactics,methodsandformsofactionused.Thesectionendswithachronologyofthisinitiative.

(New) independent culture in Croatia

the context of activities and the dynamics of

development01

1

An institutional heritage untouched by the transition processes Asinmostofthepost-socialistcountriesofSouthEastEurope,the

generalculturallandscapeinCroatiaisdominatedbytheso-calledofcialculturecreatedbythemorepowerfulstateinstitutionsaswellasbyanun-wieldysystemofculturalbodiesintheownershipandunderdirectcontrolofthestateadministration(central,regionalandlocal).Thepublicculturalsector,inspiteofrapidanddeepchangesatpoliticalandeconomiclevelsaswellasineverydaylife,hasnotasyetexperiencedasignicantstructuraltransition.Eventoday,itfunctions,moreorless,inaccordancewithout-datedandinadequateprinciplesinheritedfromapreviousera.

However,itshouldnotbeforgottenthatthepoliticsofpreservationandconservationhavesomepositiveaspects,amongwhichthemostsignicantistheprotectionoftheculturalinfrastructure.Hencethema-jorityofpublicspaceshaveretainedtheirpublicpurposeandhavenotbeenabruptlytransformedintocommercialarenas.Asmuchasonecanberightlyunsatisedwiththeadministrationandprogrammesofthepublicinstitutionswhichrunthesevenues(culturalcentres,museums,theatres,etc.)itisextremelyimportantthattheycontinuetoexist.

Ontheotherhand,suchpoliticshaveresultedinaninstitutionalframework,thateffectivelypreventsanyattemptatsteppingouttowardsproactiveculturalstrategiesandpolicies,whichcouldsupportdiversity,dynamismandculturaldevelopmentinsteadofcontinuallyreinforcingnationalidentitythroughtraditionandtraditionalism.Oneoftheresultsofthiswayofthinking,andatthesametimeanindicatorofitsunsuccess-fuloutcome,isthestilllargelyunalteredsystemofpublicnancing.Alargeamountofpublicresourceisinvestedinkeepingtheculturalframeworkaoat,i.e.inmaintainingitsinfrastructureandpayingthesalariesofahighnumberofadministrative,technicalandartisticpersonnel.Asmaller

01 ThetextpartiallyreliesonthesupplementsofPolicy_Forumpublishedinaculturalmag-azineZarezandinthepapersofPolicy_Forumparticipantsduringpublicdebates,roundtablesandsimilaractivities.

10

amountisinvestedinculturalprogrammes,mostlyintheminimalpro-grammesoftheseinstitutions."Suchapolicycannotsignificantlyadvancethedevelopmentofaculturalandsocialcapital."Itsonlyrationalecanbetomaintainthefunctionsofthepublicculturalsector,i.e.tomaintainthestatusquo.

Self-determination: an independent culture Despitethis,inCroatiaanindependentculturalsceneoperatesalong-

sidetheestablishedordominantsystem,promotingnewculturalandar-tisticcontenttogetherwithinnovativeworkpractices.Thetermindepend-entculturecaninitswidestsenserefertoallthoseorganisationsthat(a)havenotbeensetupbythestateorbyotherexternalorganisationsbuthaveestablishedthemselves;(b)thatindependentlydecideontheirorgani-sationalstructures,bodiesandprocessesofdecision-makingandmanage-ment;and(c)thatdependneitheronthestateoranyotherentityfortheirprogrammecontentornances.Inthiscontextwearereferringtoaspeciceldofculturalactivitiesthatcanbedistinguishedonseverallev-elsfollowingthreecriteria:theformoftheorganisation,themannerinwhichitworks/isorganised,andthecontentsandorientationofitsactivi-ties.Asitisimpossibletogiveamoreconcisedenitionofthistermweshalltryinsteadtodescribetheculturaleldtowhichitrefers.

Hence,wearetalkingaboutnon-protorganisations,informalinitia-tivesandartisticorganisationsthatoperatethroughnewformsandworkpracticesandareopentowiderpublicparticipation.Inaddition,thesestructuresaremostlycharacterizedbydynamismandexibility,adirectcommunityapproach,andareadinesstoreactquicklywithamixtureofprofessionalismandenthusiasmandvoluntarywork.Theyarealsocharac-terizedbyactivitiesdevelopedinverydiverseeldsofcultureandartsaswellbyamutuallycreativeinteraction(contemporaryartsinallelds,pop-ularculture,contemporarytheory,newmediaandnewtechnologies,youthculture,etc.),involvingawidersocialconsciousnessandactivistorienta-tionwhicharenowveryevident.Inter-sectoralconnectionsandoverlap-pingprogrammesareverycommon(e.g.withintheyouthsector),aswellasastrongorientationtowardscooperation(atlocal,national,regionalandinternationallevels),mostlywithothercomplementaryculturalorganisa-tionsbutalsowithsocialorganisationsfromotherelds.Aworkingrela-tionshipwiththepublicandprivatesectorisalsocommon,althoughtoalesserdegree.

Despitethepossibleclumsinessandambiguousinterpretationofthetermindependentculture,wepreferthistoalternativeculture,youthculture,urbanculture,sub-culture,contra-culture,andsoforth.Theseandothersimilartermsmaybeseenasreferringonlytooneaspectoftheculturaleld.Inotherwordstheycanbetakentomeanaspecicso-cialfunction(e.g.youthculturalactivitiesortheurbanculturalpatternof

11 (New)independentcultureinCroatia

leisure)ortheymayrefertoatime-relatedunderstandingofwhatconsti-tutesmainstreamcultureanddescribeaculturewhichisnotmain-streambutinoppositiontoit(alternativeorcontraculture),orami-norityculture(subculture).Byusingsuchterms,thesenewanddifferentformsofculturalactivitiesmaybeinterpretedsolelyinthedegreeoftheircontrasttotheso-calleddominantculture,thusrestrictingtheirapplica-tion.Inmorefavourableinterpretations,independentculturecanbeseenasanopportunityforpotentialinnovation,whichwithtimewillbetransposedandadapttotheexistingdominantsystemwhilealsoinuencingit.Thosewhoarenotlikelytobelieveinsuchaprocessmayviewindependentcultureasirrelevant,operatingontheedgeandlack-ingincontent.However,inallcasesindependentcultureisseenasbeinginoppositiontothedominantculture,andiseitherpatronized,ignoredorgivennovaluebythedominantfaction.

Theindependentculturewearetalkingabouthasnotdevelopedinoppositiontoanyothereldnorisitgivenasanalternativetoanindenablemainstream,norisitexclusivelyrelatedtoso-callednew,fresh,youngforces,norisitmarkedbyanurbancharacterincomparisontosomeothernon-urbanone.Ithasappearedandisconstantlyevolving,stimulatedbyitsown,andotherformsandpracticesofcultural-artisticandwidersocialengagement.Thus,intermsofcontemporaryculturalpol-iciesitshouldbeviewedasaseparateeld,andnotassomethingelsethatexistsandactsprimarilyinoppositiontoanothereld.Thisiswhyitisalsoworthmentioningthatthekeyplayersoftheeldarereferringtotheelditselfbyusingpreciselythetermindependentculture.

Whatusedtobeconsideredasalternativeyesterdayisnowmain-stream,themaincurrentofcreativeforcesandpossiblytheonlyproductiveculturalforcecapableofmaintaininganequalfootingwiththerestoftheworldandoffollowingcontemporaryartisticdebatesrelatingtonewsocialandmediatheories.Itisthetypeofculturalforcewhichnotonlyabsorbsinuencesfromabroadbutalsoprocessestheinformationitgleans.Itiscapableofreectingontheglobalsituation,andofdisseminatingtoafor-eignaudience,indifferentmediaformats,theresultsofitsowncreativethinkingandwork.Forexample,duringthelastfewyearssomeofthemostinterestingcontemporarytheoreticians,artistsandcuratorshavevisitedZagrebattheinitiativeofandguidedbyindependentculturalinitiatives,especiallywhencomparedtopreviousdecades.Theimportanceoftheseexchangesandinuencesonnewgenerationsofartistswillonlybecomeevidentintheyearstocome.

02 Policy-forumnewsletter,Zarezbr.5/101,March27th2003

12

Independent culture primary growth and development Thebeginningsofthedevelopmentofthecurrentculturalscene,

whichhasmovedawayfromtheextremesocialandpoliticalpolarizationof10s,canbetracedtotheendofthisperiod.Neworganisationsandinitia-tivesproducingspecicprogrammesappeared,givingrisetoadiversicationintheeldofculturalactivities.Theorganisationsweremostlyself-centredtheyworkedmoreorlessindependently,andthewholeeldofindependentculturebecameatomized.Otherformsofcollabora-tivepractices,programmesbuiltonpartnershipsorjointpublicactivitiesapartfromthoseaddressingsocialissuesthroughtheculturalandartisticguildsdidnotexist.National,aswellaslocalculturalpolicieshadnotbeendeveloped,andculturalpolicywasstilldealingwiththeissueofrepre-sentation.Publicauthoritieseitherwerenotawareoforignoredtheactivi-tiesoftheindependentculturalscene,andthereforetheyneithernancednorsupportedthem.

Inasecondphase,whosebeginningscanbepinpointedtotheturnof2001/2,severalorganisationsfromtheindependentculturalscenestartedtocollaborateamongthemselves.Theprocessofstrengtheningtheseiniti-ativeshascontinuedandthenumberofparticipantsisincreasing.Thesceneincludesdiverseinformalinitiatives,non-governmentalorganisa-tions,non-protclubsandartisticorganisations,thuscreatingaspeciceldofinteractivityanddiversepractices:contemporarycultureandartsofthemostdiverseformandcontent,socialactivism,theory,education,newmedia,publicactivities,etc.Thiskindofsceneproducesanewculturalandsocialcapitalandthusbecomesrecognizableinthelargerculturalandsocialcontextinwhichitoperates.Incomparisontotherstphase,whenindividualorganisationsweremostlyinward-lookingandconcentratedoncreatingspecializedeldsofactivities,nowtheoverridingtendencyisoneofinteractionandcollaborationwiththeaimof(orconsequenceof)pro-ducingaframeworkwithinwhichtheindependentculturalscenecanoper-ate.Themostprominentexamples,atnationallevel,aretheprogrammenetworkClubture,andatlocallevel,thecollaborativeplatformZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000.

Inthisphase,overrecentyears,boththenationalandseverallocalcul-turalauthoritieshavestartedtorecognizethelegitimacyoftheindepend-entscenebyopeningfundinglinesfortheirprojectsandprogrammes.Hence,theformerCouncilforMediaCulture(presentlytheCouncilforNewMediaCultures)wasestablishedaspartoftheMinistryofCulture,andtheCommissionforUrbanandYouthCulture(nowtheCouncil)wasestab-lishedaspartoftheOfceforCultureoftheCityofZagreb.Nomatterhowsignicantastepthismayprovetobe,onlyalimitedpartofthenancialresourcesdedicatedtoculturehasbeengrantedtotheindependentscene,whichclearlyshowsitscontinuingmarginalization.Theprogrammesoftheindependentculturalscenearealsonancedwithintheframeworkof

13 (New)independentcultureinCroatia

thetraditionaleldsofactivities,suchastheatreanddance,visualarts,lmandaudiovisualmedia,etc.However,theseindependentplayersarediscriminatedagainstwithintheseactivitiesandthefundsallocatedareseveraltimeslowercomparedtothosegrantedtotheestablishedinstitu-tionsortootherparticipantsclosertothoseinpower.

An unfavourable framework endangers further development Nationalandlocalculturalandotherrelevantpublicpolicieshavebe-

comeincreasinglyimportantforthesurvivalandfurtherdevelopmentoftheindependentculturalscene,sincepreviouslyneitherthenecessarycon-ditionsforthesustainabledevelopmentofanindependentculturenorthebasicresourcesforthestabilityofindividualorganisationswereinplace.Theirimportancegrewwithasuddenincreaseandwithdrawalofinterna-tionalfundsattheendoftherstphaseoftransitionanddemocratization(atthebeginningofthe2000s).Thisaffectednotonlythenancingofpro-grammes(almosttheonlyinstrumentusedinestablishingculturalpoli-cies),butalsowiderlegislativechanges(e.g.taxdeductions)aswellasbasicchangesinthesystemofplanning,selectingandevaluating.

However,ashasalreadybeenemphasised,theexistinginstitutionalframeworkforculturalactivitiesinCroatiaisstillnotdevelopment-orient-ed.Itisnotbasedonprogrammelogicnorisitsignicantlydeterminedbytheevaluationofaprogramme.Itisservice-oriented,basedontheclosedlogicofprovidingforexistinginstitutionsassuchitislocatedinavacu-umfarremovedfromthesphereofsocialdynamics.Moreover,thisframe-workmakesimpossiblethelong-termplanningofprogrammesandactivi-ties.Amongthevariousinstrumentsusedtodeneculturalpoliciesitonlydrawsonthenancialones.(Legal,economic,organisationalandvalueel-ementsareneglected.)Inthisway,notonlyistheindependentscene(whichisinternationallyrecognizedasthestimulusfornewculturalcon-tentandthedynamicelementinwiderculturalproduction)placedinadis-advantagedposition,butalsothesystemitself,withitsstrictdivisionbe-tweentheinstitutionalanduninstitutionalculturalelds,doesnotencour-agecompetitivenessandthedevelopmentofeitherofthesetwoelds.

Inspiteofthenewlycreatedfundingpolicyinstruments,theindepend-entculturalsceneisstilllackingrecognitionandsupportforitsnewmod-elsofculturalproductionandcollaboration.Itisstillseenasalternative,totheinstitutionsoftheso-calleddominantculture,andremainsinasub-servientrelationshipinwhichpublicauthoritiesprovidefortherealiza-tionoftheprogrammesandsupportindividualactors.Itstransformativepotentialcannotberecognizedbythecurrentculturalsystem,partlyduetoitsownorganisation.Thissystem,initscurrentform,followsaservicesanctionedlogicandcannotrespondtotransformativeneeds.Primarilygearedtomeettheongoingandunmitigatingsocialandinfrastructuralneedsofthepublicculturalinstitutions,theirprogrammedevelopmentisalsonotsupported.

14

Ontheotherhand,publicsupportprovidedfortheindependentscenesolelyatthelevelofthelimitednancingofprogrammescannothaveasignicantpositiveinuenceonitsstability,sustainabilityandlong-termdevelopment.Theexistingsystemdoesnotallowinstitutionalmonitoringtosafeguardsustainability.Theindependentsceneisoftenseenasanama-teur,voluntaryandhobby-orientedsector,andnotasaprofessionalone.Thisisalsoreectedinthesystemofnancebeinggivensolelyforpro-grammes.Theinabilityofthepublicsectortoprovidemulti-annualfund-ingforprojectsandprogrammes,particularlyinthiseld,closesthedoorforstrategicprogrammeplanninganddevelopment.Almostinallcitiesthelimitedavailabilityofspaceresourceunsolvedproblemsofexisting(orrecentlyexisting)independentspacesandthelackofadequatevenuesfortheactivitiesofanumberofotherorganisations,forcedtoworkinpri-vateapartmentsorinpremisespaidatmarketprices(usingupasubstan-tialpartoftheirprogrammebudgets)ortemporarilyusingspaceswithlim-itedaccessownedbyotherinstitutionscausesaspecicformofinstabili-tyandcanleadtothedisappearanceoftheseorganisations.Thissituationmakesimpossiblenotonlythelong-termstabilityoftheorganisationsbutalsothedevelopmentofanylong-termprogramming.

New networks and policy initiatives at grassroots level (a bottom-up approach)

Bymid-2004anew,thirdphaseofdevelopmentintheindependentscenecanbediscerned.Followingindividualprojectsandactivitiesofvari-ousorganisations,andthenjointventuresundertheauspicesofplatformsorindividualpartnerprojects,theindependentscenegainedlegitimacyforitsexistenceandestablisheditscredibility.Afterclearlyanalyzingthesituationandmakingeffortstoensureitsvisibilitytoawideraudienceaswellaswithinthesystem,theindependentsceneshouldfocusitseffortsonchangingthesysteminordertohaveitstransformativepotentialrecog-nizedandaccepted.Initsownrapidanddynamicway,theindependentscenehasenteredaphaseofpursuingadifferentpolicywithintheoverallculturalscene.Sincethesystemcannotrecognizethedynamicmodelsofprogrammingandcollaboration,thekeyplayersoftheindependentsceneinCroatiahavebeguntounderstandthattheyneedtostarttalkingintermsthatthesystemunderstands.Byengagingintheinfrastructureandinsti-tutionalframework,byproposingpossiblelong-termsolutions,byorganis-ingpublicdebatesandmediacampaigns,theindependentscenewillnotonlyensureitsowndevelopmentbutalsoactasatransformativeplayerwithintheoverallculturalsystem.Thekeypointisthattheindependentscenecontinuestobeintegratedintoalreadyestablishedandsuccessfulnetworksandplatforms(e.g.Clubture,Zagreb-CulturalKapitalofEurope3000)andatthesametimecreatenewones(e.g.theinitiativeRighttotheCity),allthewhiledevelopingandtestingthebasicmodelofitsactivities:tacticalnetworking.

New forms of networking and joint

action

2

17

2.1. Collaborative platforms / tactical networks03

Intensivecollaborativeplatforms,i.e.tacticalnetworks,representanewformofemergingsocio-culturalpracticewithtwomainpurposes:ex-pandingthedenitionofculturalactionanddevelopingnewcollaborativepracticesandmodels.

Ifweconsidertheissuestheydealwith(publicdomain,socialtransi-tion,hybridmodelsofpublic-privatepartnerships,intellectualproperty,etc.)aswellasthemethodstheyemploy(activism,civilassociation,advoca-cy,transferoftechnologicalandotherpracticesintotheculturaldomain,socio-theoreticalactivities),wecansafelysaythattheygreatlyexpandtheculturaldomainbydeningitnotasartsandheritage,whichisthetradi-tionalapproachthathasdominatedEuropeanculturefordecades,butratherasadomainofdirectinteractionbetweensocial,technologicalandartisticlevels.Inthiswaytheyhelptocreatethepotentialforculturetore-assumeitsproactive,dynamicandcriticalfunctioninsociety.

Whencomparedtoothermodelsofnetworkingandcollaboration,theirpotentialexceedsthetype,complexityandintensityofactivitybeingdevelopedelsewhere.Itmightthereforebemoreappropriatetorefertothemascollectivenetworksorintensivecollaborativeplatforms.Theyhaveseverallevelsofactivity,structureandprocedurethatareaimedatachiev-ingcommongoalsbydifferentmeans.Thisdistinguishesthemfromsim-plecooperativeprojectswheretwoormoreentitiestry,throughcoopera-tionatproductionorsomeotherlevel,toachieveparticularartisticorcul-turalattainments.Theyrepresentcomplexsocio-culturalendeavours.

Basedonthesecharacteristics,intensivecollaborativeplatformsre-quirefourbasicprerequisitestoeffectivelydealwithcomplexproblems:

03 Textdescribingtheconceptofcollaborativeplatformsistakenfromthedocumentsofthecollaborativeplatform:Zagreb_CulturalKapitalofEurope3000.

18

1. Aimsandgoalsneedtobesetupthataresuitableforthetypeofproj-ect,includingasociallyrelevantagendaandstrongpolicyofintent;

2. Themesandmaterialneedtobeorientedtowardgenuinecollaboration;

3. Transdisciplinaryactivitiesarerequiredtobringtogetherparticipantsfromdifferentartistic,culturalandsocialeldstocollaborateandworktogether;

4. Multi-level,modularandcomplexstructureswithdenedprotocolsandproceduresneedtoserve:(a)asamethodofbuildinginformativeandcommunicativegoverningformatsand(b)asatransformativeap-proachtowardachievingtargetedaimsandgoals.Theformatofintensivecollaborativeplatformsneedstodifferfrom

themembershipnetworks,theagenciesthatprovideprogrammecontent,thegrant-givingoroperationalfoundations,thesimplecollaborativeprojects,projectsthatprovidetouringpackages,distributivetouringmod-els,thewideplatformswithnoclearagendaandonlyasuggestionofacommongroundbehindsimilartypesofactivities,etc.Amorebasicdis-tinctionneedstobedrawnbetweenintensivecollaborativeplatformsandthecurrentmembershipbasednetworks.Thesenetworksarebasedontherepresentativelogicofidentitytheyproduceademagogyofdecentraliza-tionwhileatthesametimecreatinganewlevelofcentralized,non-effec-tivebureaucracythatfailstoproduceeffectiveprogrammesorprojects.

Inthefollowingchapters,thecollaborativeplatformsClubtureandZa-grebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000arepresentedasexamplesoftacti-calnetworks.Furthermore,examplesofcollaborativepolicyandadvocacyactivitiesPOLICY_FORUMandZagrebsinitiativeofindependentcultureandyoutharehighlighted.

1 Newformsofnetworkingandjointaction

2.2. The Clubture04 network05

Culture as a process of exchangeClubtureisanon-prot,participatorynetworkoforganisations,which

aimstostrengthentheindependentculturalsectorthroughprogrammenetworking,raisingpublicawareness,encouragingorganisationaldevelop-mentwithinthesector,aswellaspromotingchangeintheinstitutionalframework.

Culture as a process of exchange remainsClubturescoreconcept.Clubturewasconceivedasacatalysttobringaboutthelong-term

strengtheningandlinkingoftheindependentculturalsceneintoacoope-rativenetwork,encompassingaseriesofnon-prot,independentcivilorganisations,theirclubsaswellasinformalinitiatives,withasharedviewofpermanentanddirectcollaborationevidencedbyanexchangeofprogrammes,partnershipbuildingandcombinedworkonprojects.

Thecoreofthenetworkisinjointlyconceivedprogrammesandprojects.This,infact,meansthatthenetworkcannotexistwithoutmutual-lyrealizedprogrammes,whicharecarriedoutonadirect(peer-to-pear)levelbetweenorganisationsinaccordancewithaninnovativestructuralmodelsetinadvance.Atthesametimeasenablingthestabilizationandfurtherdevelopmentofexistingcollaborations,themodelsupportstheex-pansionandestablishmentofnewcooperativeventures,thusdrawinginagreaternumberofparticipants,activeinvariouseldsandforms.Sincethemodelisbasedonahighlyparticipatoryprocessofmutualdecision-mak-ingintermsofstrategy,programmeandnance,thetraditional,inade-quateprincipleofevaluationbasedonclosedandoutdatedaestheticandpoeticcriteriaisavoided.Onthecontrary,thekeyevaluationcriteriaareasetofsocio-culturalvalueswhichformpartofaspecicprogramme,i.e.thepotentialtopositivelyinuencethedevelopmentofasocio-culturalcapital.

04 www.clubture.org 05 PartofthetextistakenfromthepublicationClubture:Data

20

Togetherwiththedevelopmentofsmall,mobile,exibleorganisationsthatcanquicklyadoptnewcommunicationpractices,whichintechnologi-calandmediatermscanhybridizeandmix,oneofClubture'sbasicaimsisthedevelopmentofinnovativemodelsforthegradualdecentralizationofculturalproduction.Bycreatinglessexpensive,morediverseandfrequentprogrammesClubtureencouragesfreeinteractiononthebasisofpro-grammeneed,thusfacilitatingthetransferofknowledgeandexperienceamongdiverseorganisationsandvariousactivecommunities.

Network management through participatory decision-makingTheClubturenetworkhasdevelopedaspecicparticipatorydecision-

makingmodelsothatalltheorganisationsandinitiativesthatwishtopro-poseprogrammescanevaluatethembymeansofatransparentandaccu-ratescoringandvotingsystem.Furthermore,anAssembly,madeupoftherepresentativesofallactivemembersofthenetwork,isthedecisionmak-ingbodyoftheorganisation.Whenitcomestomainprogrammeactivities,everyorganisationparticipatingintheprogrammecanbuildupitsownsmallnetworkwithinwhichitcanshareitsprogrammes.Allotheractivi-tiesareapprovedbytheAssemblyandaredesignedintwoways:(1)thespecicorganisationdevelopsitsownsetofactivitiesinaspeciccontextandtakesresponsibilityfortheirimplementation(forexampleinlocalad-vocacy);(2)ontheotherhand,therearesomeactivitiesthataredesignedtoservethenetworkasawhole(ortheindependentculturalsceneingeneral)andareimplementedbystaffincooperationwithnetworkmembers(suchastheportalorthemagazine).

Thenetworkisbasedonaparticipatoryanddynamicmodel,afunda-mentalachievementthatdistinguishesClubturefromanyotherformofmember-basednetworkbeitacontent-providing/distributionagencyorgrant-giving/fund-redistributionorganisation.Themembershipisbuiltonanopenmodelofinclusionbasedonprogrammeparticipation.Eachor-ganisationthatinitiatesandimplementsaprogrammebecomesafullnet-workmember,whileeachorganisationthathostsaprogrammebecomesanassociatenetworkmember.Moreover,thereisnocentralauthoritytoor-ganiseculturalcontentdistribution.Thenetworkfunctionsonapeer-to-peerprinciple,whichmeansthattheorganisationsplanandimplementprogrammeactivitiesindirectcollaborationwithoneanother,whetherornottheyarenetworkmembers,whileClubtureitselffunctionsastheover-archingplatformthatencouragesprogrammesharingandprojectpartner-ship.Furthermore,everyonewhoproposesaprogrammecanalsoevaluateotherprogrammesbeingoffered.Inthismanner,theselectionofpro-grammesisfacilitatedaswellasthedecisiononnancingparticularpro-grammesfromacommonbudget.


Reacting to a narrow cultural context connecting isolated independent initiatives

In2001theMultimediaInstitute[mi2](Zagreb)initiatedtheformationofaplatformofindependentculturalorganisations,initiativesandnon-protclubsinresponsetothegeneralsituationprevailingatthattime.TheCroatianculturalscenewasthenprimarilymarkedbysluggishandtradi-tionalproductionfromtheexistingculturalinstitutionsandbynon-recog-nitionofnew,innovative,independentculturalandartisticpractices.Thesewerebeingignorednotonlybytheso-calledofcialculture,butalsobythemediaandthewiderpublic,andalsothroughthenon-existenceofanystableandsustainablepracticeofinteraction,collaborationandnet-working.Lateron,aswehavealreadyseen,thisinitiativeresultedinthees-tablishmentofthenetworkClubture.Theprocessstartedatgrassrootslev-el(abottom-upapproach)inthattherstcircleofthemorestableorgani-sations(15ofthemthroughoutCroatia)gatheredand,basedontheirexist-ingneedsandproblems,denedtheirkeygoals,activitiesandanewmod-elofcooperationandmutualdecision-making.Basedontheirproposedactionplanathree-yearpartnershipwiththeOpenSocietyInstituteCroatiawassubsequentlyestablished.TherstactivitiesstartedinFebru-ary2002.Threemonthslater(May2002)therstformalmeetingofthenet-worksAssemblywasheld.

Inveyearsofcontinuousactivity,thenetworkhasgatheredover80or-ganisationsandinitiativesfromallaroundCroatiaandastableplatformhasbeencreated.Theplatformenablesamutualcooperationandinterac-tionbetweengroupsfromdiverseeldssuchasurbanculture,socialactiv-ism,performingarts,newmediaandtechnologies,visualculture,music,contemporaryart,theory,comics,youthcultureandsoon.Inthiswaytheplatformnotonlyrepresentsnewformsofcollectivityandself-organisa-tion,butalsogeneratesaspecicsocialsolidarity,realizedthroughanopencollaborativesystemandthestimulationofcriticalthinking.

Transition period and further developmentTheClubturenetworkwasprimarilyestablishedwithoneveryspecic

goal.Thedrivingideawastostrengthenculturalorganisations(andthein-dependentculturalsectorasawhole)bydevelopingamodelthatwouldstimulateintensiveprogrammeandprojectcollaborationbetweenthenet-workmembersaswellasotherstructuresinterestedinsharingthediffer-entcontentproduced.However,theimplementationofsuchanambitiousanddemandingmodelledtoastructuralanalysis,whichindicatedseverallevelsofdeciencyintheorganisationsparticipatinginthenetwork.Thereweretwoassumptionsthat,inpractice,haveprovedtobewrong.Therstwasthatthegreaterquantityandqualityofartisticcontentonoffer,alongwithwiderpublicawarenessanddiversicationofactivity,wouldalsoleadtoanincreasedstabilizationandstrengtheningofcapacity.But,whatinef-

22

fecthappenedwasthat,onlywheretheyreceivedextrasupportdidthepro-grammeandprojectcontentleadtothesubstantialdevelopmentofthein-dividualorganisations.Furthermore,itwasassumedthattheorganisa-tionswouldachieveagreaterimpactontherelevantpublic(localandna-tional)decision-makingbodiesandthattheywouldmoreeasilybeabletoexertinuenceontheimprovementoftheirownframeworkofactivitiesthroughtheexpansionandvisibilityoftheirprogrammes.Butagainthisdidnothappenautomatically.Thegaininpublicawareness(primarilyinlocalcommunities)providedonlyamarginallysolidbackgroundfororgan-isationstobeabletostartadvocacyactivitiesinordertoimprovetheir(pri-mary)localinstitutionalframeworks.

Ontheotherhand,thereareanumberofcircumstancesthathavepre-ventedthemorerapiddevelopmentofthenon-governmentalculturalsec-tor.Ahuge,stableandinertpublicculturalsector(publicinstitutions)didnotundergoanysortoftransformation,while,atthesametime,continuedtowastehugepublicresources.Becauseofthisinertianoallowancewasmadeatthegeneralculturalpolicylevelthatcouldmaketheoverallsystemmoredynamic.Aninadequateinstitutionalframework(stateandlocalad-ministration,culturelegislation,nancialandscallimitations)precludedtheindependentculturalorganisationsfromsecuringanyadequateinsti-tutionalmechanismformonitoring,nancialsupportandevaluationoftheiractivities.

Atthebeginningof2005,afterthreeyearsofpermanentprogrammeactivityandseveraleffortstoconsiderpublicawarenessandtheculturalpolicy(themostnoteworthyactivitiesbeingundertheauspicesofthePoli-cy_Forum),thenetworkstarteditstransitionprocessandexpandedthescopeofitsengagementsinseveraldirections.

Organisationsfromdiversecommunitiesofallsizeshavenowac-quiredabasicknowledgeofculturalpolicy-makinglobbying,advocacyandmonitoringofpublicpolicies.Ofevenmoresignicanceisthefactthattheyhavestartedadvocacyactivities,whilecontinuingtoactdirectlyintheirownlocalcommunities,wheretheyhaveachievedconcreteresultsandacquiredsignicantexperiencewhichtheyhavespreadthroughoutthenetwork.Apartfromthis,arelevantnumberoforganisationsarenowequippedforthestrategicplanningoftheirownorganisationalandpro-grammedevelopment.Theyhavealsoacquiredotherrelevantknowledgeintermsofnon-protculturalmanagement,whichhassignicantlystrengthenedtheirownstabilityandfurtherdevelopmentasindividualor-ganisations,aswellastheoverallscene.Ontheotherhand,throughestab-lishedmediaprogrammes,anewpublicarenaisnowbeingaccessed.Notonlyisindependentculturalproductionbecomingmorevisibleinthisare-na,butspacefordifferentandcriticalreectiononrelevantsocio-culturalcontextsisbeingcreatedandamoreadequatediscourseisbeingshaped.Simultaneously,furtherdevelopmentandexpansionofprogrammeex-


changeandprojectcooperationbetweenorganisationsinCroatiaiscon-tinuingtogrow.Atthesametime,theprocessofaninternationalizationofprogrammeactivityhasalsobeeninitiated.Consequently,Clubturehassetuparegionalprogrammeplatformwhichhasresultedsofarineightcol-laborativeprojectsconnectingorganisationsfromCroatiawithorganisa-tionsfromSerbia,Slovenia,BosniaandHerzegovinaandMacedonia.Alltheseprocesseshavebeenaccompaniedbyintensiveorganisationaldevel-opmentandastrengtheningofthenetworkscapacity.

The ve pillars of ClubtureSinceClubturewasconceivedasaprogrammenetwork,thebasesofits

existenceareitsprojectsandprogrammes.Throughoutitsve-yearexist-ence,thenetworkhasdevelopedvemainprogrammes,someofwhichhavechanged,someareintheirnalphases,whileothersareafundamen-talpartofthefurtherstrategicdevelopmentoftheorganisation:1. CLUBTURE HR Programme exchange2. CLUBTURE'S REGIONAL INITIATIVE3. MEDIA PROGRAMME a) Kulturpunkt.hr b)04megazine4. KULTURA AKTIVA5. EDUCATION FOR STRATEGIC CULTURAL MANAGEMENT

1. clubture hr programme exchangeProgrammeexchangeisakeyactivityoftheClubturenetworkandone

ofthemainreasonsforitsexistence.Itisbasedonthedirectcollaborationbetweenindividualmembers(non-governmentalorganisations,informalinitiativesandartisticorganisations),whichshareculturalcontentand/ormutuallycreateprojectsandprogrammes.Thekeytotheve-yearsuccessofthisprogrammeisthatitensuresgenuinecollaborationbetweenalargenumberofparticipantsandagreaterdiversityofmaterial.Themodeldenescollaborationaccordingtotwocriteria:timefrequencyandoneoftwopossibleformsofcollaborationgeographicaldispersionorco-pro-ductionofcontent.Inordertomeetthesecriteriafourcategoriescanbein-ferredthroughspecicactivities:Programmeexchange,Projectcoopera-tion,Exchangeofpartsoffestivals,Exchangeofpartsofprojects.Itisim-portanttoemphasisethatthefundamentalcriteriaremainunaltered,whiletheirapplicationinpossiblecategoriesalters,changes,widensornarrowsdependingonneedsandpossibilities.Thus,thestabilityandefciencyofthisprogramme,aswellasofthewholenetwork,arebasedontwoseeminglycontrastingtraits:rmcriteriaandfundamentalvaluesononehandanddynamismandexibilityontheother.

Apartfromtheabovementioned,theseare,ingenreterms,uncondi-tionallycreatedprogrammesthatenableandstimulateacombinationof

24

diversetypesofactivity.Thus,individualprogrammesmaybepresentedindiverseforms(newmediaandmultimediaprogrammes,exhibitions,lmprogrammes,musicperformances,workshops,danceandtheatreplays,lectures,etc.).Similarly,theycancoverdiverseeldsofactivities(perform-ingarts,newmediaandtechnologies,visualculture,music,contemporaryarts,theory,comics,urbanculture,youthculture).Itgoeswithoutsayingthat,long-termplanningandjointapplicationstoexistingfundsaswellasthemodelofmutualdecision-makingremainextremelyimportant.

Signicantresultsthatareeasilymeasuredandvisible,evenonaquan-titativelevel,havebeenachieved.Thus,intherstveyearsofactivity,morethan80organisationsandinitiativesfromallaroundCroatiahavebe-comeinvolved.Itisimportanttonotethatalmosthalftheseorganisationsandinitiativeshavebeenactiveasleadersoftheprogramme,whileothershavetakenpartashostpartners.Theresultofthecooperationbetweentheseorganisationsismorethan100programmes,includingaround1200diversepubliceventsthathavetakenplaceinmorethan50cities.Itisim-portanttonoticethatallcitiesparticipateonanequalfooting,regardlessofsize.Inspiteofageneraltendencyformostculturaleventstotakeplaceinthecapital,throughthisprogrammethenetworkhasmanagedtoachieveitsaimofdecentralization,whichhasresultedinmorethan80%oftheeventstakingplaceoutsideofZagreb.

Inadditiontothedirectapplicationofbasicpolicyprinciples,suchnetworkprogrammingenablesnotonlymorefrequentprogrammes,butalsoahighlevelofnancialefciency:relativelysmallnancialassetscanyieldaqualityandquantityofculturalproductdistributedinseveralplacesonacontinuousbasis.

2. clubture's regional init iativeTheClubturenetworkhastakentheleadintheprocessofcreatinga

sharedregionalprogrammeandanetworkforprojectcollaborationinsev-eralex-Yugoslavcountries.Thebasicideaoftheprogrammeistoestablisharegionalcollaborativeplatformwithinwhichindependentculturalorgan-isationscancollaborateonjointprogrammes.AlthoughtheClubturenet-workinitiatedthisprogramme,awidecircleoforganisationsandpotentialpartners,fromCroatiaaswellasothercountries,havebeeninvolvedindeningitsbasicaimsandgoals.Atthesametime,therehasbeennoin-tentionofsimplyapplyingacollaborativemodelthatfunctionsinCroatiathroughouttheregionthemodelwascreatedonthebasisofaconcretepartnershipprojectimplementedduringtheprogrammespilotphase.Thiscooperationwasnotfoundedonalreadyobsoleteandinefcientrep-resentativemodelsofbilateralcooperation,buthasintroducedanew,moredynamic,morecost-effectiveandmoreefcientmodelofpro-gramme-basednetworking.Itreectstheprogrammecollaborationanddecision-makingparticipationprinciplesthatwerebuiltintotheClubtureHRmodel.


Thepilotphase,togetherwiththeprogrammeactivities,startedinMarch2006.TherewereeightdifferentcollaborationprojectsthathavebeenimplementedaspartnershipprogrammesbetweenorganisationsfromCroatia,Serbia,BosniaandHerzegovina,SloveniaandMacedonia,leadingtoeventsthathavetakenplaceinallthesecountries.

Ifweconsiderthefactthatinthisareatherearenootherformsofor-ganisedlong-termculturalcooperation,thenwecanseethattheindepend-entculturalscenenowhastheopportunitytoassumeapioneeringroleinestablishingasolidandsustainablemodelofculturalexchangeinthere-gion.Thusthenalgoalofthisprogrammewillbethesettingupofanet-workforindependent,polycentric,regionalprogrammecooperation.

3. media programmesTheClubturenetworkplaysanimportantroleinraisingpublicaware-

nessofthespecicqualitiesoftheindependentculturalsceneanditsgreaterpresenceinthepublicarena.Intherstdevelopmentphase,theeventsorganisedforawideraudiencepresentedprogrammesandcontri-butionsbythenetworkaswellasbytheentireculturalscene.Themostnoteworthyeventtomarkthebeginningoftheseconddevelopmentphase,wastheexhibitionClubture:Data(producedinpartnershipwithWhat,HowandforWhom WHW,Platform.81 andtheMultimediaInstituteasapartoftheZagrebCultureKapitalofEurope3000project),whenthere-sultsoftwoyearsofnetworkingactivitieswerepresented.Theexhibitiondrewpublicattentiontothediscussionofthemarginalizationoftheinde-pendentculturalsceneandthepromotionofitssuccesses.

AsareactiontoadversemediacoverageinCroatia,Clubturethenstart-edseveralmediaprogrammesinordertoimprovetheinformationdissem-inationprocessandthevisibilityofthewholesectornotonlyatpubliclevelbutalsowithinthesectoritself(developingthewebsite,webportal,printedmagazine,mailinglists,communicationandPRactivities).

a. Kulturpunkt.hrIn2005theportalKulturpunkt.hrwasstartedwiththeaimofpromot-

ingandpresentingrstly,theculturalproductionofindependentscene,andsecondly,thecivicinitiativesconnectedtoitthatarerunningtheproc-essofpublicadvocacyfocusedonwidersocialissues.Apartfromtheseaims,Kulturpunkt.hrencouragesananalyticalandcriticalapproachto-wardsculturalthemesingeneral,takingcaretoavoidthetendencytowardacultureofsensationalism.

Apartfrombeinganinformationservice,theportalKulturpunkt.hrdisplaysarticlesandinterviewsfromawidelydenedareaofculture,in-cludingpopularculture,followstheCroatiandailynewspapersculturalsections,andshowstheoreticaltextsonculturalpoliciesinSouthEastEu-rope.Apartfromthis,theportalsystematicallypublishesinformationonvariousprojectcallsandopportunitiesthusbecomingausefulpointofin-

26

formationforstudentsandprofessionalsintheeldofcultureandarts.ThecontentstructureofKulturpunkt.hr,setupinthismanner,createsme-diaspacethatsupportscommunicationandthefreedomofexpression.Atatimewhenspacegiventoculturaltopicsisdiminishingorcompletelydis-appearingfromothermedia,Kulturpunkt.hrisbecominganimportantsiteforobtainingcomprehensiveinformationoncultureinCroatia.

InspiteofthewidespectrumofthemeswhichtheportalKulturpunkt.hroffersitsaudience,itisrecognizedasaplacethatparticularlypromotesandsupportsyouthculture,urbanandclubculture,contemporaryartsandculture,socialactivism,newtechnologies,alternativeeconomies,freesoft-wareandsoon.Inthisway,theportalhasbecomeanimportantwindowforthisscene.Furthermore,byinterpretingthescenescontextandman-nerofactivitiesitdrawsinawideraudience,atthesametimeengagingtheinterestofothermedia.Simultaneously,theportalbringscontemporarythemes,whichitanalyticallydevelopsandexplains,totheattentionofawideraudience.

b. 04megazine04,megazineforrealityhacking,wasamagazine,foundedin2004,

surveyingindependentculturalproductioninCroatia(primarilydirectedtowardsawidersocialengagement),andsettingitinthecontextofsimilarinternationaltrends,especiallyintheimmediateregion.Atthesametime04haspursuedbroadersocialissuesbyencouragingculturaldiversityandpluralismandbyfollowingthemesrelatedtothetheoreticalandsocialreceptionofcontemporarydomesticandforeignculture,civilinitiatives,etc.Primarilyaddressingayoungeraudience,04hascreatedaspaceforintensivecommunicationbetweentheproducersandconsumersofcultur-alprogrammes,aswellasabalanceforthecommercialyouthmagazines.Bycreativelyconnectingandcriticallydiscussingcontemporaryyouth,pop-ularandurbanculture,andbyplacingitinthecontextofbroadersocialtendencies,04hasbroughtafreshnessandnoveltytotheexistinginde-pendentmediascene.Withitscontentanddesign04haslledavoidintheCroatianmediaastheonlyindependentcriticalmagazineforyouthtoinform,educateandencourageyoungpeopletoactivelyparticipateinandcreatetheirownculture.

Atthebeginningof2006,themagazineenteredanewdevelopmentphase,anditwaspublishedregularlyonamonthlybasisuntilthemiddleofthatyear.However,ithasbecomeevidentthatinthecurrentenviron-mentthereislittletoensurethesupportforthistypeofdevelopment(insignicantpublicresourcesforfunding,non-availabilityofdedicatedin-ternationalfunds,lackofspaceforbiggercommercialsponsorshipsorsalesofadvertsduetothecriticalcontentandactivistorientationofthemagazine,non-protabilityandsoon).Inthelastfewyearsthemediaandpublishingeldshavebecomeincreasinglydominatedbythecommercialmarketandactivist-orientated,sociallyandeconomicallycriticalmaga-


zinescannotsurviveinsuchconditions.Thisisfurtherborneoutbythegeneralsituationintheentirepublicarena,wherenon-protmediapub-lishingmostlymanagestosurviveonlyontheinternet.Theproductionofprintmediawhichisnotsolelycommercialandprot-orientedhasbe-comealmostimpossible.

4. kultura aktivaTheprogrammeconsistedofvariousadvocacyandmonitoringactivi-

ties,aimedatimprovingtheinstitutionalframeworkrelevantfortothecul-turalsector.Mostoftheactivitiesareaimedatdevelopingtransparentcul-turalpolicymodelsinlocal(regionalandcity)administration.Incitiesand4counties,localorganisationcoalitionshavecontinuedtoimplementdiverseadvocacyactivities.Theissuesofpublicpolicythathavebeenad-dressedcanbedividedintotwospecicelds.Firstly,thosethatrelatetolo-calculturalpolicies,morespecicallytothosethatdirectlyinvolvetheneedsoftheindependentculturalscene,suchasworkingspace,orthemethodanddurabilityoffundingprogrammes,andquestionsofevaluationandvisibilityoftheachievementsofthissectorinthelocalenvironmentetc.Secondly,thosethatrelatetothefunctioningoflocalcultureandthepublicsectorasawhole(implementationand/orapplicationofprocedures,trans-parencyandparticipationindecision-makingprocesses,moretransparentandmoreeffectivedecisionimplementation,cooperationbetweenpublicinstitutionsandthenon-governmentalsector,etc.).Ontheotherhand,aeldthatcanberegardedascomplementarytotheonealreadymentioned,isthatofthepublicpolicyforyouth,especiallyinregardtoproblemsoflei-sureandyouthculture,informingandparticipatinginthedecision-makingprocess,etc.Theprogrammealsohadaneducationalsection,where,throughworkshopsandtrainingaswellastheexchangeofexperience,theorganisationshaveacquiredrelevantknowledgeandskillsintheeldofpolicyprocesses,mostnotablyintheeldofadvocacy.

5. education for strategic cultural managementClubturedevelopsandimplementseducationalprogrammeswhose

aimisstrengtheningthecapacityofnon-prot,independentorganisationsintheculturaleld,andwhichcanbeappliednotonlyatnationalbutalsoatinternationalandregionallevels.In2005theprogrammeEducationforstrategicculturalmanagementwasinitiated.Thisprogrammedirectlyre-spondstotheneedsofthewholenon-protculturalsector,wherethepri-maryneedistoacquireknowledgeandtoapplythisintheeldsoforgani-sationaldevelopment,strategicplanning,culturalmanagementandcul-turalpolicies.Theseprogrammesareimplementedwiththeaimofimprov-ingcapacityintermsofhumanresources,nances,spaceandtechnicalre-sources,thestabilizationofactivitiesandtherealizationofmorefavoura-bleinuenceinthepublicandculturalsectorsatlocal,national,regionalandinternational,particularlyEuropean,levels.

28

2.3. POLICY_FORUM06

ThePOLICY_FORUMisaplatformwhichbringstogetherdistin-guishedorganisationsandindividualswhooperateintheareaoftheinde-pendentculturalsceneand/orareinterestedincreatingnewdevelopmentmodelsofculturalpolicies.POLICY_FORUMisaninformal,dynamic,oatingplatform.Itworksasagroupwhichoccasionallymeetsinordertomonitorthosepublicpoliciesthatinuencethedevelopmentofinde-pendentculturebothatnationalandlocallevel,andwhichadvocateschangestoarelevantinstitutionalframework,bothinpracticeandinlegis-lation.ThegroupgatheredaroundthePOLICY_FORUMhasanundeter-minednumberandstructure,whichchangesoroatsinrelationtotheissuesitdealswithwhenaddressingdiversesubjects(theClubturenet-work,thecollaborativeplatformZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000,theinitiativeRighttotheCity,individualorganisationsandsoon).

ThePOLICY_FORUMwasinitiatedbytheMultimediaInstitute[mi2](Zagreb),whichgatheredtogetherseveralnon-governmentalculturalor-ganisations,inordertoincludeboththoseaffectedbytheimplementationofculturalpolicies(diverseculturalplayers)aswellasawidercommunityofexpertsintheprocessofdecision-making.Equally,POLICY_FORUMre-sultedfromtheneedtopubliclyarticulateproposalsforinstitutionalchanges,toinitiatetheseandtofurthermonitorthedevelopmentofthein-dependentculturalsector.

Followingitsinitialphase,POLICY_FORUMwasproject-structured.ItwasproposedandimplementedbytheMultimediaInstituteonbehalfofClubtureandasapartofthePolicies for Culture programme oftheEurope-anCulturalFoundation(Amsterdam)andoftheECUMESTAssociation(Bucharest).ItisimportanttoemphasisehowPOLICY_FORUMwasformed,butalsothatithascontinuedtoworkindependentlyoftheinitial

06 www.policy-forum.org


project.ThePOLICY_FORUMasaprojectconsistsofseveraldifferentactivities

thatdealwithspecicissuesofculturalpolicyandstrategyinthenon-gov-ernmentalculturalsectorandtheactivistscene.Namely,thismeansvari-ouseventsandactions,e.g.lectures,roundtablesandpublicdebates,etc.thatdealwithspecicpolicytopics.

Theprojectwaslaunchedearlyin2003,whentherstmeetingswereorganised.Duringthosemeetingstheeldsofactionweredened,severalotherorganisationsandindividualswereinvited(atonepointthereweremorethan25peoplepresent)andthreeteams(oneforeachrespectiveeldofaction)weresetup:anadvocacyandlobbyingteam,anevents-organis-ingteamandadocument-writingteam.

ThePOLICY_FORUMmeetingsaresemi-privateforumswherediffer-entculturalpolicyissuesandproblemsrelatingtothecivilsectorinculturecanbethoroughlydiscussed:issuessuchasmarginalizationoftheinde-pendentculturalscenebythepolicyanddecision-makinginstitutionsatnationalandlocallevels;under-capacityoforganisationswithregardtostaffandmanagerialskills(intermsofnumberandtraining)andtovenuesforpublicprogrammes;lackofnancialresourcesespeciallyatthetimeofthesecondtransitionwhentheOpenSocietyInstitute(themainnon-gov-ernmentalorganisationsdonorinCroatiainthe10s)cutdownandeventuallyterminateditsfunding,etc.

Abasic,small-scalesurveyexaminingtheindependentscenewascar-riedout:morethan20organisationsweresurveyedandtheiractivities,plans,structuresandcapacitieswerepresented.Alongwiththatinforma-tion,arsttextaimedatdeningthisculturaleldwaspublishedinthesupplementofaculturemagazineZarez.Thissupplementwasdistributedtoindependentorganisations,individualexpertsandrelevantgovernmen-talandlocalinstitutions.Afterwards,itwasusedinotheractionsandadvo-cacyprocesses.Moreover,theOfceforCultureoftheCityofZagrebusedtheproposeddenitionsintheirattemptstodenethedomainofinde-pendentcultureintheirculturalpolicy.

ThePOLICY_FORUMstillfunctionsasanindependent,informalbodythatgathersdifferentorganisationsrepresentativesandindividuals.Moreimportantly,ittakesaproactiveroleininuencingpublicpolicies,namelythoseintheeldsofcultureandyouth.Thepubliceventsthathavebeenorganisedhavegatheredtogetherawiderpoolofexperts,culturalopera-torsandotherinterestedpartiesandhavebroughtsomeunderlyingprob-lemsintothepubliceye.

InMarch2004itactedveryeffectively,shortlyaftertheMinistryofCul-turestartedtheprocessofchangingtheCulturalCouncilsActinaninap-propriateandnon-transparentwaywiththeintentionofshuttingdownsomeoftheexistingcouncilsandreducingtheirdecision-makingroleinthematterofpublicculturalfunding.Theaimwastoenactalawwithout

30

anypublicdebateandfollowinganurgentprocedureinParliament.TheClubturenetworkreactedveryrapidly(within24hours)andacivilinitiativewassetupundertheauspicesofthePOLICY_FORUM.Morethan50repre-sentativesofnon-protorganisationsfromthroughoutCroatiagatheredinZagreb.Theinitiativesparkedoffpublicdiscussionontheplannedchang-es.Finally,itsucceededinpreventingtheabolitionofthecouncilthatwasresponsibleforthenewformsofculturalproduction.Theindependentcul-turalsceneinCroatiashowed,forthersttime,thatitissufcientlystrongandcloselyconnectedtoimpactontherelevantinstitutionalframeworknotonlywithinitsowneldofactivity,butalsoontheinstitutionalframe-workofculturalproductioningeneral.

Oneofthemostimportantlong-termeffectsofthisactionisthedocu-mentproposedbythePOLICY_FORUMtotheMinistryofCulture.ThisdocumentdenestheeldofactivityandthemainevaluationcriteriaforaNewMediaCultureCouncil,thecouncilresponsiblefornewculturalforms.ThedocumentwasrstconsideredbytheCouncil,whichacceptedthesuggestionsandsentitforwardtotheNationalCulturalCouncil,whichalsoagreedonit.Therepercussionswereimmediatelyvisible.Namely,thefollowingcallforproposalsforpublicfundingforculture,andallsubse-quentones,have,sincethen,beenusingnewapplicationforms.TheformfortheprojectssubmittedtotheNewMediaCultureCouncilisdesignedaccordingtothecriteriapresentedinthedocument.

Inspiteofoverambitiousaimssetoutatthebeginningregardingthewiderchangesofculturalpolicies,whichwerenotfullyrealizedintheini-tialplannedschedule,thePOLICY_FORUM,throughitsactivities,hasmadeatleastoneotherfurthersignicantstepforward.Ithasintroducedandmaintainedthepracticeofallquestionsrelatingtopoliciesaffectingculturaldevelopmentculturalpoliciesaswellasotherpublicpolicies(forexampleurbanpolicies)beingdiscussedinpublic.Thus,forexample,thepublicdebatesthatstartedin2005,accompaniedbyaseriesofactionsdealingwiththestatusanddevelopmentoftheindependentculturalandyouthsectorsinthecityofZagreb,whichhavebeenongoingeversince,wereinitiatedthroughthePOLICY_FORUM.


2.4. Zagreb Cultural Kapital of Europe 300007

ZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000isacollaborationplatformcreatedasajointprojectoftheCentreforDramaArtCDU,MultimediaInstitutemi2,Platform.81andWhat,HowandforWhom-WHW.BLOK,Kontejner,ShadowCastersandCommunityArtjoinedtheplatformlateron.TheprojectwasdevelopedtogetherwiththeGermanpartnerprojectrelations,andwiththenancialsupportoftheKulturstiftungdesBundes(GermanFederalCulturalFoundation)andKontaktArtsandCivilSocietyProgrammeofErsteBankGroupinCentralEurope.TheCul-turalKapitalfostersthecollaborationsbothbetweentheprojectinitia-torsandlocalandinternationalinitiativesthataddresschangesinsocialconditionsforculturalproduction,developthestructuralpositionoftheindependentculturalsceneandquestionthedominantregimesofculturalrepresentation.TheCulturalKapitalprogrammeactivitieshaveincludedconferences,artfestivals,exhibitions,workshops,lectures,presentations,publications,mediaproductions,etc.Animportantpartoftheprojecthasbeenrepresentedbyculturalpolicyactivitiesaimedatreformingtheinsti-tutionalsettingforindependentcultureincreasingitsinuenceandstrengtheningitsresources.

Theprojectaimsatrepositioningculturalproductiononasocialcapi-tal,andlesstowardsrepresentativecultureandacultureofidentities.Byredeningtherepresentativemodelastheculturalcapital,theprojectquestionstheconceptofacityintermsofthedynamicsofinterrelation-shipbetweenculturalcapitalandsocialandeconomiccapital,thusof-feringanalternativemodelofreectiononculturalpoliciesandstrategies.

The ConceptThebasicconceptualpremisesofthiscollaborativenetworkareim-

plicitinthenameitcarriesanironicwordplayontheEuropeanCapitalofCulture.ItsimplystatesthatTheconceptofculturalcapitalisoutofjoint.

07 www.culturalkapital.org

32

AtwofoldambivalencetraversestheconstitutionoftheprojectofculturalcapitalsitistornbetweenthecentralityofcapitalsandthetransversalityofCapital,andthisis,inturn,reectedinanincreasedhybridityofculturalproductionpittedagainstthepositionsofnational-culturalidentities.Thepoliticaleconomyofculturalrepresentationhasbeentransformedim-mersedinglobalizedcommunicationalexchanges,representationisnolongeramatterofpresentingarepresentative,dominantand(re)producedculturewithintheconnesofanationstatetoanabstractculturalconsum-er.Itratherconnectsconcretesubjectsinspecializedeldsofpracticeandknowledgewhichactwithinamutualcontextofglobaleconomicproduc-tionaproductionhelpedbytheverymeansofsociality:communicationalexchanges.Andjustasthedomainofcapitalbecomessocial,sodoessocialbecomethedomainofculture.08

Thisglobaltrendmanifestsitselfinaparticularwayespeciallyintran-sitionalsocieties:Inourtransitionalcontext,culturalcapitalreengagesthequestionofsocialagency.Iftheprocessoftransitionhascometode-notetwothingssurrenderingtothepullofmarketforcesandrelinquish-ingsocialprojects(orrather,thesocialasaproject)itsforemosteffecthasbecometheuncontrollableandnon-transparentassertionofprivateinterestinthemanagementofthepublicdomain.Thetangibleabsenceofsociallegitimacyismirroredinthedepletionofpublicresources.Andsometimes,asisbestexempliedbyourossiedinstitutionalcultureanditstributarysystemofpublicfunding,maintainingthestatusquomeansbeingattheforefrontofthisprocess.Andwhiletheonlydynamicsofchangeintherelationbetweenthestateandtheinstitutionsitsupportswhich,despitedifferentreadingsintothestrategiesofculturaldevelop-ment,remainsthedynamicsofparticularizedinterests,specialsocialanddevelopmentalrelevanceisacquiredbythoseindependentplayerswhoareabletorearticulateculturalagencyintermsofsocialaction,andsocialagencyintermsofcriticalculture.

Theanswerofferedtothesituationdescribedaboveiscollaborationacounter-propositionforculturalcapital.TheplatformZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000hasasagoaltoreinforcetheincipientcollabora-tionbetweentheindependentculturalsceneinitiativesthatinvestigate,eachinitsownandverydifferenteldofexpertise,thechangingcondi-tionsforculturalandsocialaction,thathavecomeaboutasaconsequenceofthegrowinglocalimportanceofregionaleconomicandcommunicativeexchanges,andthatworkonreformingtheinstitutionalframeworktoin-creasethepresenceandparticipationoftheindependentculture.(...)be-causeculturalcapitalnolongermeansinfrastructures,butrathercollabo-rations,forcollaborationisitsinfrastructure.

08Quotationstakenfromthelibrarytexts,web-siteandotherdocumentsoftheplatformZagreb Cultural Kapital of Europe 3000


Collaborative experienceCulturalKapital,asaproject,startedin2003,andsincethenhaseffect-

edanumberofinterdisciplinarycollaborationsonprojectsby:presentingandengaginginnewgroupdynamics,newcollectivestrategiesandnewworkingformatsinculturalproduction;counteractingandhybridizingthecontrolofproductivitythroughintellectualproperty;advocatingthepro-tectionofthepublicdomainwithregardtoprivatization,etc.Theorganisa-tionswhichformtheplatformhaverealizedtogetheranumberofculturaleventsinvariousforms.Moreinformationontheseprogrammesaswellastheorganisationsisavailableatthefollowingwebpagewww.culturalkapital.org.

ZagrebCulturalKapital 3000holdsakeyplaceininitiatingandim-plementingvariousactivitieswhichadvocateparticipatoryculturalpoli-cies,aimedatdevelopingandstrengtheningtheindependentculturalsec-tor,aswellasthosewhicharerelatedtopoliciesofurbandevelopment.0Inspiteofitscommitmenttolocalactivities,thisplatformhastriedtoexpanditsinuenceoverthebordersofitsowntransitionalcontext.ApartfromtakingpartinacollaborativeprojectPeripherie3000,StrategicPlatformforNetworkedCentres(Dortmund,2006,www.peripherie3000.de),ZagrebCulturalKapitalactivelyjoinedinthediscussiononEuropeanculturalpolicies.Thus,inOctober2004itorganisedapre-conferencefortheBerlinConferenceforEuropeanCulturalPolicyunderthetitleEmergingcollab-orativepracticesshapingEuropeanculturalframeworkincooperationwiththeClubtureNetwork(Zagreb),theFelixMeritisFoundation(Amster-dam)andtheArtforSocialChangeplatforminitiatedbytheEuropeanCul-turalFoundation(Amsterdam).Thepresentations,meetingsanddiscus-sionsprovidedanopportunitytoreectonhowinnovativepracticesandplatformsofsocio-culturalcollaborationandtacticalnetworkingineast-ernEuropecanbebroughttobearontheagendaofEuropeanculturalpoli-cyandEuropeanpoliticalculture.

09 Activitiesmentionedherewillbepresentedlateron.

34

2.5. On networks, platforms and participatory cultural policies

New forms of cultural cooperation in the non-prot sector in Croatia bySanjinDragojevi

Description of European cultural tendencies from the 1970s onwardsThesecondhalfofthe170s,andofthe180singeneral,wasaperiod

overlookedbutneverthelesscrucialtothedeepinnerstructuralcrisisaf-fectingnationalculturalpoliciesinEurope.Thecrisisarosefromtheneedtoredene,rstandforemost,theroleofpublicandinstitutionalculture;atthesametimethereweredemandsforstrengtheninglocalregionalde-velopment.Areadysolutiontocounterthecripplingblowsthreateningtheestablishedformsofculturalorganisationsandoftheentireculturalsys-temwastoimportAnglo-Saxonknowledgeandskills,whichsincethenhavebeencodiedunderthetermsofculturalmanagement.Thechallengewaspossiblytoogreat,butitalsoimpliednecessarymeasuresfortheover-allculturaldynamicsbothofindividualstatesandofinternationalculturalcooperationwithinEurope.AgeneralansweratEuropeanleveltothischal-lengewasfoundinanetworkformofcommunication.Consequently,to-daywehavemorethan400networksintheeldofculture,10andthisformofcommunication,networking,isconsideredtodaytobeavitalglobalphenomenon.11

10 Thisnumbercanvarydependingonthesource,sincethetermnetworkwasthendenedasthemostdiverseformofcollaboration,includingforexampleguideassocia-tions,nationalassembliesofinstitutionsandsoon.Theprovisionsofthetermareun-clearandcannotbeeasilydemarcated,especiallyifweconsidertheinternationallevel.Forthisreasonanetworkisoftennegativelydened,i.e.anetworkisnot...(Dragievi-ei,Milena;Dragojevi,Sanjin.Intercultural mediation on the Balkans,Sarajevo:Bibli-otekaUniverzitetskaknjiga/TheEye,2004;Graovac,Ksenija.European Cultural Net-works,Beograd,Balkankult,2005;Jelini,DanielaAngelina.Guide to the Culturelink Net-work,CulturelinkPublications,3,Zagreb:InstituteforInternationalRelations,2002)

11 Castells,Manuel.Information Age I, The rise of network society,Zagreb:GoldenmarketingTehnikaknjigad.d.,2000.


MorethantwodecadesofEuropeannetworking,overnetworkingandnetworking-outhaveresultedinakindoffatigueandacaving-in.Itseemstobegenerallyagreedthatnetworkscancaterperfectlyfortheneedsofin-troduction,theexchangeofexperience,andanoverviewofEuropeancul-turalactivities,butthattheydonotinthemselveshavesufcientcapacityfortheestablishmentandimplementationofprojects.Hence,theempha-sistodayisonproject-orientedandoperationalnetworksratherthanpure-lycommunicativenetworks.12

Concurrentwithregionaldevelopmenttherehasbeenastrongintensicationofcitydevelopment.CitiesconsciouslysharethebestEuro-peanpractices.Thusitisnoaccidentthatthegreatestcompetitivenessamongthembecomesevidentintherun-upfornominationsforthestatusofEuropeanculturalcapital.13HencetodaysupremeculturalprestigeisnotonlyreservedforthebigEuropeanmetropolis.Nowmiddlesizedandsmallcitiesexpresstheirownculturalpotentialandinnovativenessand,indoingso,havealsobecomecentresinwhichtrueEuropeancollaborativeprojectsareundertaken.Withoutanydoubt,theyarebecomingthecentralgeneratorsofoverallEuropeanculturaldynamics.Individualpost-transi-tioncountries,primarilyPolandandthentheCzechandSlovakRepublics,havejoinedthisurbanphenomenon.

A non-prot cultural sector in South East Europe and CroatiaOnecannotafrmthatthesepracticesaresharedbyallthecitiesand

countriesthroughoutSouthEastEurope.14Quiteapartfromobjectiverea-sonssuchasthedisappearanceofformerfrequentsteadycontacts,thene-cessityforvisas,continuouseconomiccrisesoraninsufcientlydynamicdevelopment,mostlyitisthelackoftrust,longstandingdisagreementanddwindlinginterestthataffectsthem.Ifweaddtothesefactorsthewith-drawaloftheinternationalorganisations,thefoundationsandtheprojectschemesfrom2000onwards,wecanseethatregionalculturaldynamics

12 ThisisparticularlyevidentinthecurrentcrisisoftheCirclenetwork,whichhassplitintwodirections:thosewhobelievethatthenetworkservesnopurposeandthereforeshouldbeabolished,andthosewhoseeitspurposeasgatheringtogetherapoolofre-searchersintheproductionofknowledge.

13 EversincetheGreekministerofcultureatthetimeMellinaMercouriin1985estab-lishedtheschemeoftheEuropeanculturalcapital,thetendencytohighlighttheculturaldevelopmentofsomesmallerandlargercitiesisbecomingmoreandmorepowerful.Ev-ersinceAthens(1985),whichwastherstEuropeanculturalcapitalandparticularlyafterthesuccessfulexampleofLille(2004),thisawardhascarriedasignicantprestige.Addi-tionally,thecitieswhichsuccessfullyimplementedtheprojectsinthisframeworkhavebecomecentresofknowledgeandgatherings.

14 Itisverydifculttodiscusssub-nationalregionsinSouthEastEuropebecausetheyaredenedneitherterritoriallynoradministratively,economicallyorculturally.Itispossiblethatsomeofthecountrieshavestrongtraditionalregionalidentitiesandtry,primarilyinCroatiaandIstria,tooperatewithinthem.

36

andexchangehasbecomeweakenedtothepointofstagnation.Oneofthemostimportantresultsoftheculturaleffortsandinvestmentsofthe10swastheemphasisontheimportanceofthenon-protsectorinallthecountriesoftheregion.Regardlessofthisclearlydenedpriority,rstsetoutbytheinternationalorganisations15andlaterinthenationalculturalpolicies,thedynamicsofdevelopment,whencomparedthroughoutthere-gion,hasnotbeennorisitequal.Inspiteofthehope,thatthepotentialequaldevelopmentofthenon-protsector,bothatregionalandnationallevel,wouldconsequentlyleadtoageneraldemocratizationnotonlyofthesesocietiesbutalsooftheinnerstabilizationoftheirculturalsystems,thedynamicshaveonlybeensustainedanddevelopedmostlywithinthelargercities,orinthecapitals.16Duetoarelativelyfavourablesituation,theexampleofZagrebstandsoutintheregion.NotonlydidCroatiannationalculturalpolicybecamesustainablein17,17butfrom2000onwards,col-laborationwasdevelopedatprojectlevelwithanumberofinitiativesfromthenon-protsector.Furthermore,thecityauthoritiesdealingwithcultureatthattimeunderstoodthecurrentandpotentialimportanceofthemostdiversenon-institutionalinitiatives.Newschemesofco-nancingwerein-troducedinordertoreviveurbanculture,whichhadafavourableoverallef-fectonthedevelopmentofthenon-protsector.

DuetoanongoinginvolvementininternationalculturalcooperativeprojectsandanawarenessofnotonlythetrendsofEuropeanculturalde-velopmentbutalsoofthecrisismentionedabove,themembersofZagrebsnon-protculturalsceneplacedaparticularemphasisondeningpartici-patoryculturalpolicies,primarilyatnationalandcitylevel.18Sincetheor-ganisationsfromtheindependentsectorclearlyunderstandthatthisre-

15 AparticularlygoodexampleistheOpenSocietyInstitute,i.e.theSorosFoundation,whichwasextremelyactiveintheregionduringthe1990s,beingalmosttheonlydonorthatsupportedandconsiderablycontributedtotheestablishmentandfurtherdevelop-mentoftheindependentculturalorganisationsthroughouteasternEurope.

16 ProbablythemostimportantexceptioninthisregardisBulgaria,i.e.Soa,whosecultur-aldevelopmenthasparalleledthatofcitieslikePlovdiv,VarnaandBurgas.

17 Sincethen,thepublicstateresourcesforculturehavebeenincreasing;ananalysisofcul-tureatnationallevelwasundertakenthankstothestudyCulturalpolicyoftheRepublicofCroatiaNationalReport,preparedfortheCouncilofEurope(1998);apartiallegaldecentralizationofculturalpolicyhasbecomerealityandthereismoredirectinterna-tionalcooperation.

18 Theemphasisonthesetwolevelsofactivitiesisnotacoincidence.Thecapacitytodeneandimplementgoals,instrumentsandmeasuresofthegeneralculturalpolicyofCroatiaexistsonlyatstateandmajorcitylevel.Theso-calledmiddlelevelofactivitiesofthecul-turalpolicyinCroatiareferstocountieswhicharetoosmallandwithinadequatere-sourcesparticularlyintermsofexpertsfordeningandimplementingindependentcul-turalpolicy.Thelevelofmunicipalitiesisthemostproblematicinthissensebecauseal-most30%ofthemdonothaveaminimalscalcapacity.Hence,notonlyaretheynotca-pableofhavingaprogrammeofculturaldevelopmentbutalsotheycannotcoverbasicex-pensesrelatedtotheregularfunctioningofthepublicadministration.


latestothegeneralframeworkoftheiractivities,theyrstlyfocusonacleardenitionofthegoalsandprioritiesofculturalpolicies,whilealsoadvocat-ingtheneedforproceduraltransparency.Bybecomingvisiblepublicplay-ersinthiseld,theyhavebecomeawareoftheirowncommunicationalandorganisationalweaknessesandinadequacies.Forthisreason,from2001onwards,rstlyinphasesandthensystematically,theyhavecontinu-allyworkedontheorganisationalbuildingandstabilizationofthenon-protsectorinCroatia.Ononehandtheylabelmediaactivityandtheen-largementofthepublicdomainofdecision-makingasextremelyimpor-tanttools,ontheother,themethodsofstrategicplanningandorganisa-tionaldevelopment.Asaresult,bytakingintoconsiderationthegeneraldynamicsoftheprocesstheyhavecreatednewcollaborativerelationshipsandformats.Inordertoestablishnewcontactsintheprocessesofdeci-sion-makingintheculturaleld,theindependentculturalscenehassetupanewformofnetworkorganisationknownasanoperationalnetwork.Ini-tiallytheactivitiesoftheseoperationalnetworksbasedthemselvesontheformatofintensivecollaborativeplatforms.Theformoftheplatformisnotdeterminedinadvance,butitmainlydependson(1)theexpertiserelatedtoaspecializedeldofactivities(e.g.implementingaspecicactionoflobbyingandadvocacyinordertondsolutionsfortheinfrastructuralis-suesofthesector),(2)theclearlystatedinterestoftheplayersinvolvedand(3)coordinatedmethodsandactivities(publicandmediacampaign,artis-ticandactivistprojects,involvementofwiderpublic,deningoffurtheroperationalactivities).Thiscombinationofformsandmethodsofactivitysubstantiallyenhancestheprocessofdeningandsystematizingkeyknowledgeandknow-how.Theprocessalsobringswithitapermanentanddeeptrustbetweenthemembersoftheoperationalnetworkaswellasareadinesstocontinueworkingproductivelytogether.Thisexperience,pub-liclyrecognizedandconrmed,atthesametimesupportsthesustainabili-tyanddevelopmentoftheentirenon-protsector.

TherelevanceandsignicanceofthisprocessisrecognizedmoreinthewiderEuropeancontextthanintheregionalone.ThisisarelevantEu-ropeanculturalpractice1whichistransferable.

19 TherelevantEuropeanculturalpracticeconsistsof: 1.clearlydeningabasicconceptandthenimplementingmethodsrelatedtoit; 2.thecapacitytotransferthiscodiedknowledgenotonlytoanarrowexpertaudience, buttoawider,possiblygeneralaudience; 3.thecapacitytoengageinaprocessandlong-termactivities; 4.thecapacityandtheopennesstoredeneallbasicpremisesandmethodsofactivities.

38

Which way ahead?Inthelightofpreviousexperience,theinterestshownaswellasthe

culturalresourcebase,thefollowingpriorityactivitiescanbedened:1. Thesettingupofintensivecollaborativeplatformsineldswherecom-

moninterestandculturaldevelopmentpotentialshavebeendened,especiallywhendeningtheartisticandactivistprojects,capacitybuilding,educationofculturalprofessionalsandactivitiesaddressinglocalculturalpoliciesintheregion;

2. Thesettingupofanadequateandwell-equippedculturalinfrastruc-ture,particularlyinZagrebbutalsoinothercitiesinCroatia,inordertoenablethecontinuousanddynamicdevelopmentofthenon-protculturalsector;

3. Theestablishmentofnewformsoforganisedactivitiesintheeldofculture,particularlyintermsofverticalinter-sectoraldevelopment,i.e.cooperationbetweenthepublicandnon-protsector;

4. Onthebasisofexpertinsightandinterestshown,theestablishmentofhorizontalinter-sectoralconnectionsandcooperationprojectspartic-ularlybetweentheeldsofculture,tourism,health,science,youthpol-iciesanddevelopmentpoliciesintheurbancontext;

5. ToensurethetransferofknowledgeandrelevantEuropeanpracticesbothinCroatiaandinthewiderEuropeancontext;

6. Toimpactonformal,academicallyrecognizedandinformalpro-grammesandformsofeducationinculturewithaparticularemphasisontheknowledgerelatedtothedevelopmentofparticipatoryculturalpolicies.

Advocating change: the collected experience of

the Zagreb initiative

3

41

3.1. A critique of the system and a request for change

Cultural and other public policies Theactionsoforganisationswithintheindependentculturalscenein

Zagrebtoaddresschangesintheinstitutionalframeworkaffectingtheirworkareanexcellentexampleofclearlyestablished,articulate,consistentandpersistentpublicpressureinoperation.Theirstartingpointhasbeentheirpleaforparticipationintheprocessofdecision-makingintermsofpublicpoliciesrelatingtothesector.Thispersistencehasmainlybeendi-rectedtowardculturalpolicies,butalsotootherpublicpolicieswhichmoreorlessdirectlyaffectthestability,growthanddevelopmentofthein-dependentculturalscene.Amongtheseitisnecessarytodrawattentiontotheurban,spacemanagementandyouthpolicies.

Itisobviousthatcultural policyanditsimplementationdirectlyaffectsthepositionandpossibilitiesofprogrammeandotherdevelopmentnotonlyofindividualorganisationsandotherplayers(informalgroupsandin-dividuals)butoftheculturalsceneasawhole,bothatnationalandlocallevel.CulturalpolicyinCroatia,atleastintheareacoveringindependentculture,ismostlydependentonasingleinstrument:statefundingsecuredfromcentralorlocalbudgets.TheuseofthisinstrumentbecameavailableforindependentculturalproductioninCroatiaaswellasinZagrebonlyafewyearsago,andtoagreatextentitstilldoesnotfunctioninasatisfactoryway.Inadditiontoseveralothercritiques,keyobjectionsinclude:availabil-ityofonlyprogrammefunding,lackofgrantsformulti-annualprojects,andalackofclearcriteriaandparametersintheevaluationprocessandawardingofgrants.Allthesefactors,togetherwiththeweakornon-exist-entuseofotherdecision-makingtools,stillplaceindependentculturalproductioninCroatiainasignicantlylessfavourablepositionthanthepublicculturalsector,representedbyagroupofinstitutionsfundedbylo-cal,regionalornationalstateadministration.

Urban policyisstillonlyindirectlyconnectedtothepoliciesofculturaldevelopment.Onlylatelyhasitgainedamoreimportantplaceinthepublicdomain.However,acomprehensivestrategyespeciallydesignedtodeter-

42

minethelong-termvisionanddirectionofthecitysdevelopmentstilldoesnotexist.Hence,decisionsonthedevelopmentofZagrebareoftentakeninahaphazardway,whiletheideaofmaintainingtheexistingpublicspacesandcreatingnewgenuineonesveryoftenremainsamarginalissue.Conse-quently,forinstance,commercialvenuessuchasshops,barsandrestau-rants,areoftenpresentedasbearersofpublicfunctionswhileatthesametimevenueswhichshouldfullculturalandothersocialfunctionsaredis-regarded.Theissueofasystematicculturaldevelopmentandparticularlythedevelopmentofindependentcultureanditssubsequentroleinthede-velopmentofthecityremainsmarginal.

AllthecitiesofCroatiaandparticularlytheCityofZagrebhaveattheirowndisposalvaluableimmovableassets,while,atthesametime,theydonothaveclearlydenedandtransparentpolicies of space management.Theseassetsareverydiverserangingfrommassivebuildingswhosepub-licfunctionsaremostlynotanissue(administrativebuildings,culturalandsportvenues,etc.),throughsmallerbusinessorresidentialbuildings,tolargeabandonedindustrialbuildings.Thebestindicatorofhowsuchas-setsaremanagedisthefactthatthereisnoofcialpubliclistingofwhatisownedbytheZagrebmunicipality,andthereforenotransparencyastowho,inwhichwayandunderwhatconditionsusesaparticularvenueintheCitysownership.Consequently,therearenoclearproceduresforallo-catingparticularpremises,eitherforcommercialornon-protpurposes.Preciselyforthatreason,theculturalmapofZagreb,incommonwithothercities,suffersfromashortageofpublicspaceopenandavailabletoculturalandsocialinitiatives.Therearenonewofcialspacesforinde-pendentculture,whiletheexistingones(e.g.clubMovaraSwamp)repre-senttheoutcomeofafavourablepoliticalmomentortheexpressionofgoodwillbyindividualswhoataparticulartimeheldapublicpositioninthelocal(city)government.Theyaredenitelynottheoutcomeofdenedandtransparentplanning.

Theyouth policies,denedwithinthenationalandcitystrategicactionplanasinter-sectoralpolicies,partiallyrefertothatsegmentofactivityintheindependentculturewhichismostcommonlyknownasyouthculture.These(onpaperatleast)supportyouthself-organisation,theircreativityandtheirparticipationinculturallife,thusgivingessentialsupporttotheadvocacyactivitiesoftheindependentculturalscene.ThisisparticularlyevidentintheZagrebinitiativewiththeemergenceofitstacticalpartner-shipwiththeyouthsector.Eventhoughaconnectionwithyouthculturehasmanyadvantages,thereisstilladangerwhichneedstobedealtwith.Morepreciselythelocalauthorities,withatendencytooversimplifyandunderstandissuesinlimitedterms,tendtoviewindependentcultureasawholeasyouthculture,thusdealingwiththissectornotthroughthemorespecicinstitutionsandinstrumentsofculturalpolicybutthroughamoregeneralyouthpolicy.Thisapproachcanleadtothecompleteexclu-sionofamostsignicantsectionoftheindependentculturalscenewhich

43 Advocatingchange:thecollectedexperienceoftheZagrebinitiative

hasnothingtodowiththeyouthsectornordoesitrepresentculturalpro-ductionmeantonlyforyoungpeopleorsolelyproducedbythem.

Through national to local activities Intermsofthenumberoforganisationsandtheircapacitydevelop-

mentaswellasofdynamicsandqualityofprogramming,Zagrebsinde-pendentsceneisthemostdevelopedoneinCroatia.Thisisnotsurprising,particularlyifonetakesintoconsiderationthesocio-economicadvantageswhicharisefromitsroleasacapitalcityinahighlycentralizedsystem.Af-teraninitialphaseofdevelopmentoftheindependentculturalscene,fundingmechanismsbecameavailablebothatnationallevel(MinistryofCulture)andatlocallevel(CityOfceforCulture).Theexistenceofsuchmechanismsshowedthattheindependentscenehadbecomerecognizedasaplayerintheculturaleld,eventhough(thenandstilltoday)onlyamarginalone.Atthesametime(thebeginningofthenewcentury)thekeyinternationaldonor,whoduring10shadsupportedtheestablishmentofthisscene,startedtheprocessofwithdrawalofitssupport.ThisrelativelypositivesituationwasusedbyZagrebsorganisations,takingtheleadwithotherssuchastheMultimediaInstitute,notonlytostrengthenthemselves,buttoalsoconnectwithotherplayersrstlyatnationallevel(theClubturenetwork),andlateratlocallevel(thecollaborativeplatformZagrebCul-turalKapitalofEurope3000).Thusafundamentalstrategicdecisionwastheresultoftheclearunderstandingthatthesuccessandfurtherdevelop-mentofanyindividualorganisationisnecessarilyrelatedtothegrowthanddevelopmentoftheculturalsceneasawhole.Thiscouldbedoneandtheinitiatorsofnewtrendsontheindependentscenewerefullyawareofthatbyintroducingcertainchangeswithintheframeworkinwhichthesceneoperates,inthiswaygeneratingnewrelevantpublicpoliciesforindepend-entculture.Butinordertostartthesechanges,itwasnecessarytotakecer-tainstepsinordertostrengthenthescenefromwithinandtodetermineitsroleasamoreorlesssignicantplayerontheculturalaswellasthewholesocialscene.

Inthissense,asarststep,theMultimediaInstituteincooperationwithotherorganisationsfromZagrebinitiatedthenationalcollaborativeprogrammenetworkClubture.Fromitsbeginning(2001)untilnow,thisnetworkhasbeenworkingonthestrengtheningofcollaboration,onthedisseminationofdiverseprogrammecontentthroughoutCroatia,onthecapacitybuildingoforganisationsand,whatisfromthisperspectiveamostimportantissue,onthestrengtheningofthevisibilityandrecogni-tionofthisspecicandnewculturalscenebyexpertcirclesandlargerau-diencesaswellasbythedonors.Bycreatingnewmodelsofcollaborationandnetworking,newculturalandsocialvalueshavebeenformedandgrad-uallytransferred.Inessencethisbuildsthefoundationforanewvantagepointfromwhichfurtherrequestsforchangecan(ormaybemust)bedemanded.

44

Asoneoftherststepstoactivelyengageinculturalpolicies,againattheinitiativeofMultimediaInstitute,thePolicy_Forumwasestablishedasaninformalgroupofindividuals,expertsandculturaloperators,connect-edtotheindependentculturalscene.ThePolicy_Forumisprimarilyrelat-edtothenationalnetworkoforganisations(Clubture)andatthebegin-ningitsactivitieswereaddressedatnationallevel.ItskeystepforwardandachievementwastheactionofsavingtheCouncil for New Media Cultures,aninstitutionthatfunctionedunder theMinistryofCulture.Thiswasfol-lowedbyparticipationinthedesignoftheCouncilseldofworkaswellasbytheparticipationofindividualplayersfromtheindependentculturalsceneintheworkoftheCouncil.Thus,arelativelystablesupportforinde-pendentprogrammeswasensuredatnationallevel,andanarenaforactivi-tiesatbothlevels(nationalandlocal)wasopened.Ononehand,therewereeldpreparationsforpotentialinterventioninthesystemaimingaten-suringalternativemechanismsforthecapacitystrengtheningofindepend-entorganisations.ThisresultedintheproposaltosetuptheFoundationforIndependentCulture.Ontheotherhand,theorientationtowardslocalpublicpolicieswasclearparticularlyinthecapital.Inadditiontothepri-maryneedtomaketheiractivitiesmoresustainable,Zagrebsorganisa-tionsfoundothermeansofmotivationaswell.BeingawarethatthroughpotentiallysuccessfulimplementedprojectsinZagrebtheirexperiencecouldbetransferredtolessdevelopedcommunities,theseorganisationsworkedinsuchamannerastoproducetransferablemodelsandstruc-tures,inordertosharethesewithorganisationsfromothercitiesthroughtheClubturenetwork.20Forthisreason,organisationsfromothercitiesbe-cameassociatesandsupportersofthisinitiative.Consequently,twona-tionalnetworks,ClubtureandCroatianYouthNetwork,areverymuchinevidenceinallZagrebsactivities.

Recognizing the social environment and its momentumWewouldliketopointoutthatthetimingandapproachtotheeldof

advocacyandassessmentforcertainpolicieshasbeenneitherarbitrarynoraccidental.Morespecically,theinitiatorsoftheseactionshavebeenverymuchawareofthecontextinwhichtheyareoperating.Ononehand,theyunderstandverywell thefunctioningof their own sector,aswellastheworkpracticesofnotonlytheirownbutofotherorganisationsaswell.Theyhaveacquiredthisknowledgedirectlythroughcollaborativepractice,andtheyareperfectlyawareoftheirownstrengthsandweaknessesaswellasoftheoverallprogrammesofthescene.Moreover,theseinitiatorsarewellawarethat,althoughtheindependentculturalscenehasgainedlegiti-macythroughitsprogrammesandvariousactions,atthesametimeitisstilltreatedasmarginal.Ontheotherhand,independentoperatorsregu-

20 SeetheKulturaAktivaprogrammeinthechapterTheClubtureNetwork.


larlyandproactivelymonitoreverychange,eventhesmallestone,regis-teredwithinthecultural system.Theyareverymuchawarethateventhesystem(byusingthededicatedfundingmechanisms)hasrecognizedtheirexistence.However,theyalsoclearlyunderstandthat,fromtheviewpointofthesamesystemwhich,fortheforeseeablefuture,isunlikelytoswitchitsfocusfrompublicculturalinstitutions,thedesireoftheindependentscenetochangeitsstatusfrombeingalternativeandtomoveawayfromthemarginalpositionallocatedtoit,willnotbesoeasilyrealized.Simulta-neously,independentoperatorsareawarethatinternationalfundersarewithdrawingtheirgrantsandalsothatforeignfundsarebecominglessandlessaccessible.Theyclearlyunderstandtheslowreactionandthelowefciencyofmostofthepublicinstitutionsaswellasthegeneralinertiaandlackofopennesswithintheentireculturalsector,whichapparentlyisstillnotreadyforsignicantchange.Inthissituation,slowingthedevelop-mentprocessbecomesarealdangerwiththepossibilityofregression,ifnotofthecompletedestructionofapartorofthewholescene.Ononehand,thesecircumstancesrepresentarealobstacleforthedevelopmentoftheindependentscene,ontheothertheresourcesforfurtherdevelopmentbroughtaboutbythenewformsofculturalproductionstillremainopen.

Furthermore,independentculturaloperatorsareundoubtedlyawareoftheothersystemtowhichtheyalsobelong,and,ascivilsocietyornon-governmentalorganisations,theytakeaproactiveinterestinthecreationandimplementationofcivil society developmentpolicies.Hence,theirownpositionisnotbasedonlyonthespecicityoftheireldofactionthatofculture-,buttheycanenforceitsincetheyarealsopartofabroaderscene.Thisisoneofthereasonswhytheyareinterestedindevelopingco-operationprojectswithorganisationsfromothersectors.Inthiswaythecredibilityofthescene/organisations/individualsasplayersinthewiderso-cialeldisalsobuiltup.

Moreover,theseoperatorskeepthemselveswellinformedofnewtrendswithinthegeneralsocio-economic environment,andtheyidentifytherelativelyfastdevelopmentofthecapitalcitynotonlyasanimportantachievementbutalsoasapotentialdanger.Forthisreason,theyhaveex-pandedtheireldofactivitysothattheyhavebecomewidelyknownplay-ersintheadvocacyprocessforthepreservationofexistingandthecreationofnewpublicspacesandfortheparticipationofcitizensinthedecision-makingprocessesconcerningtheseissues.

Eventhoughtheymainlyoperateatalocallevel,theyareawareoftheirpositionintheinternational contextandtheyworkatstrengtheningtheirexistinginternationalconnectionswhileatthesametimedevelopingnewones.Thus,akeylocalproject(theplatformZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000)isdenedasaninternationalcollaborativeproject.Addition-ally,theinitiatorsoftheseadvocacyprocessesarealsoengagedinlargeradvocacyactivities,pleadingforchangesinEuropeanculturalpolicyby

46

participatingintheBerlinConferenceforEuropeanCulturalPolicy.Thus,throughinternationalcollaborationtheirowncredibilityatlocallev-elisalsostrengthened;theycriticallytakepartininternationalprojectstheyinitiatethetransferofgoodEuropeanpracticesbyadjustingthemtotheirownenvironmentbutarealsoawareoftheirweakpointswhichtheyopenlycriticiseandtrynottorepeat.

Theorganisedandwell-synchronizedZagrebculturalscenebothatna-tionallevel(Clubture)andatlocallevel(ZagrebCulturalKapitalofEu-rope3000),whichenjoyswell-establishedinternationalrelations,clearlyandcorrectlyrecognizesthecontextwithinwhichitisactive.Withsolidex-periencebehindit,itiscapableofrecognizingandtakingadvantageofkeypoliticalmomentsinwhichtocallforaction,inordertoraiseandkeepvi-talissuesconcerningitsowndevelopment(andsurvival)aliveandinthepubliceye.

From a critique of the system to concrete solutions The Zagrebadvocacycoalitionhasneitherspecicallyaddressedgen-

eralissuesrelatingtotheculturalsystem,thedecision-makingprocessanditsimplementationinthegeneralsphereofculturalpoliciesnorlimiteditsactivitiesbyattemptingtosatisfytheparticularneedsofindividualorgani-sationsorgroups.Moreover,eventhoughthemembersofthiscoalitionprimarilyaddresslocalissues,intheirdemandsandargumentstheytendtorefertothewidercontextofthewholesystematnationallevel.Theis-suestheydealwithareonlyatrstsightonalocallevel.Theyaresubse-quentlyplacedinawidercontextandthedemandsandproposalsofthein-dependentscenenearlyalwaysprovidelong-termandstructuralsolutions.

Followingthesettingupofarelativelystableframeworkforpro-grammeactivitiesatnationallevelthroughtheCouncilforNewMediaCul-tures,amoreactiveengagementinlocalissueshasbeenundertaken.Atthesametime,thenetworkbuiltupatnationallevel(Clubture)hasbecamefunctionalandstableanditsinitiatorshavebeenabletosetupstrongcol-laborative platforms at local level byapplyingthesameprincipleoftacti-cal,operationalandprogrammenetworking.TheplatformZagrebCul-turalKapitalofEurope3000wascreatedinthiswayandithassuccessfullyfunctioneduptonow.ThePolicy_Forumisalsorelatedtoit.

Theexistingtravelling21policyplatformisusedasanameinitselforatleastasasortoflabelforanorganisedgroupofdiverseindependentplayersreectingtheculturalandwidersocialsysteminwhichtheyworktheproducersofanewculturalandsocialcapital,whoarticulatenewcon-ceptsandvaluesresultingfromit.Atthesametime,theindependentoper-

21 Aslistedinthetextpresentingthisplatform,thegrouparoundthePolicy_forumchangesintermsofnumberandstructuredependingonthecurrentfocusandisthusconnectedwithvariousprojects(Clubture,thecollaborativeplatformZagrebCulturalKapitalofEurope3000,theinitiativeRighttotheCity,individualorganisations,etc).


atorsinvolvedintheplatformactivelycriticisethesystemfornotbeingca-pableofacceptingnewapproachestoculturalproductionandsocialen-gagement,andthusnotbeingabletoapplynewmodelswiththeaimofchangingandrevivingculturalproduction.Theymaydecidetochangetac-ticsandorientation,whilstbeingawareoftheshortcomingsoftheireffortsbecauseofaworkingenvironmentwhichdoesnotallowanyinterferencewiththeexistingsystem,andwiththeunderstandingthattheneededchangecanonlybeachievedslowly(whichinevitablymeanstoolongfortheindependentculturalscene)inorderforcrisesandupheavalsoftheen-tireculturaleldtobeavoided.Startingfromacritiqueofthesystem,theymoveontoarticulating concrete solutionsdesignedtoensurethesurvivalandfurtherdevelopmentoftheindependentculture.Thesesolutionsaredeterminedbythreekeyaspects:(1)strengtheningthecapacityoftheinde-pendentorganisationsbysettingupadditionalfundingmechanismsinor-dertocoverneedsthatarenotdirectlyconnectedtothebasicprogrammeproduction(suchasgeneralinfrastructuralcosts,nancingofcooperationactivities,education,etc.);(2)creatingaframeworkforresearchandvalida-tionoftheexpertisegainedbytheindependentculturalsceneandaframe-workforthecodicationandtransferofknowledge;(3)ensuringadequatespaceresources.Allincludeandemphasisecollaborationasbeingessen-tialacooperationnotonlybetweentheorganisations,butalsobetweenpublicandcivilsectorsatvariouslevels:local,national,regionalandinternational.

48

3.2. Strategies, tactics, methods, forms using the experience of the Zagreb initiative

Itisnotourintentiontocreateamanualwithrecommendationsonhowtosuccessfullyadvocateforchangesinculturalpolicy,buttoexplainthestrategies,tactics,methodsandformswhichwebelievetobethekeyassetsofthisinitiative.Inthisrespectwehaveselectedthefollowingtenkeyareas.

1. The setting up of a stable collectivity / Production of colle

a bottom up approach to cultural policy making

Documents

cultural policy

i c i e s f o r c u

independent culture

emina vini

case study orelements

t u r e editor

croatiap o

culture translation