This professional knowledge transfer cultural debate, part of the ”Beyond creation” project, produced by Formare Culturala platform, explores policy work and research methodologies for cultural advocacy.
Expert Tsveta Andreeva (Public Policy Manager, European Cultural Foundation) discusses the Cultural Deal for Europe initiative, research translation challenges, and innovative approaches to cultural economics with host Oana Nasui (cultural researcher).
European Cultural Foundation’s Historical Mission and Strategic Positioning
The European Cultural Foundation has operated since 1954 with a consistent mission to position culture at the heart of the European Union agenda.
Tsveta Andreeva explains how the organization works to ensure the EU represents more than just economic interests—coal, steel, and single market policies—by fostering European sentiment and belonging through cultural connections among diverse populations. The foundation faces the recurring challenge of reiterating culture’s importance with each EU policy cycle, as culture remains primarily a member state competency rather than a common EU policy. This creates an ongoing advocacy need, particularly when new political leadership takes office every five to seven years.
Oana Nasui contextualizes this within the broader framework of cultural advocacy, noting how organizations must balance competing emergencies and priorities while maintaining long-term strategic focus.
Crisis-Driven Innovation and the Cultural Deal Framework
The Cultural Deal for Europe emerged from crisis-driven necessity, beginning with the 2008 financial crisis and culminating during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Tsveta describes how the partnership between the European Cultural Foundation, Culture Action Europe, and Europa Nostra developed through successive crises, each revealing new vulnerabilities in the cultural sector. The COVID-19 pandemic particularly exposed the cultural sector’s structural weaknesses, affecting not just artists but entire support ecosystems. This crisis provided the critical mass of information and political consensus needed to secure emergency measures, including cultural sector representation in National Recovery and Resilience Plans.
The Cultural Deal name deliberately echoes the Green Deal, positioning culture as equally vital for addressing societal challenges. Nasui observes how the framework’s flexibility allows it to adapt to emerging crises while maintaining core advocacy objectives, representing an innovative approach to long-term cultural policy campaigning.
Research Translation and Policy Relevance
The discussion addresses the fundamental challenge of translating complex academic research into policy-relevant insights. Tsveta identifies a critical gap between sophisticated, interdisciplinary academic research conducted under programs like Horizon Europe and the practical needs of policy makers who often lack specialized cultural knowledge. She advocates for a European cultural economy observatory similar to the European Audiovisual Observatory, which successfully synthesizes complex industry data into accessible policy tools. This proposed observatory would address the synthesis challenge by creating digestible information volumes from the abundance of cultural data and research.
Oana raises questions about how organizations demonstrate the interdisciplinary nature of cultural work to policy makers, noting the difficulty of proving culture’s cross-sectoral value through traditional metrics.
Methodological Innovation in Cultural Economics
Tsveta discusses methodological shifts in cultural economics research, moving beyond the creative industries paradigm that dominated policy thinking for decades. She advocates for more nuanced, sector-specific approaches that recognize the fundamental differences between museums, audiovisual industries, music, crafts, and performing arts.
The discussion explores the global production network approach as a valuable analytical tool, revealing unexpected connections between local cultural activities and international networks. This methodology helps organizations understand how local festivals connect to global cultural flows, providing insights for both practitioners and policy makers.
Oana mentions spillover effects, questioning how to measure long-term cultural impacts beyond immediate economic benefits like accommodation and dining, particularly in contexts like European Capital of Culture programs.
Value-Based Evaluation and Impact Assessment
The discussion introduces value-based evaluation as an alternative to purely quantitative metrics.
Tsveta describes how this approach focuses on stakeholder values and meaningful change rather than simple attendance figures. The methodology involves identifying shared values at project inception, then measuring progress against these values throughout implementation. This approach addresses the limitation of traditional impact assessment by capturing what cultural activities actually mean to participants and communities. It allows for objective adjustment during project implementation, acknowledging that cultural work often involves experimentation and unexpected outcomes.
Oana raises critical questions about objectivity in cultural evaluation, noting the inherent challenges of measuring cultural value and the tension between quantitative demands from funders and qualitative cultural outcomes.
European Capital of Culture as Policy Innovation
The discussion examines European Capital of Culture programs as successful examples of competitive cultural policy. Tsveta argues that even unsuccessful bidding cities benefit from the strategic planning process, creating lasting cultural infrastructure and commitment that extends beyond the competition itself. This discussion challenges negative perceptions of competitiveness in cultural policy, demonstrating how structured competition can mobilize resources and create cultural strategies that outlast individual projects. The program’s success lies in its ability to generate investment in cultural planning even among non-winning cities.
Communication and Accessibility Challenges
The discussion approaches communication challenges in EU cultural policy. Despite improved digital tools and social media reach, many cultural practitioners still feel unequipped to engage with EU consultation processes.
Tsveta emphasizes the need for decentralized communication strategies that reach beyond informed policy circles. Oana observes how accessibility remains a significant barrier, noting that even user-friendly consultation tools require cultural confidence and awareness that many practitioners lack. This highlights the ongoing need for intermediary organizations that can bridge between EU policy processes and local cultural communities.
Research Ecosystem and Knowledge Networks
The discussion reveals the complex ecosystem of cultural research, from the Council of Europe’s Compendium of Cultural Policies to UNESCO’s global cultural reports. Tsveta describes how these knowledge networks create choices for policy makers while enabling cross-cultural learning and adaptation.
The discussion emphasizes the importance of applied research that serves specific advocacy goals, distinguishing this from academic research that may be highly sophisticated but difficult to translate into policy recommendations. This distinction helps explain why cultural advocacy organizations often commission targeted studies rather than relying solely on academic outputs.
/
Tsveta Andreeva is an expert in international cultural policies with over 15 years of experience, with a PhD in the economic contribution of cultural industries, working since 2009 as Policy Officer for Advocacy and Cultural Policy Development at European Cultural Foundation.
Oana Nasui is cultural manager and cultural researcher.
/
The discussion took place during Beyond Many 2025 conference, organised by Culture Action Europe.
The project “Beyond creation” is co-financed by the Administration o
Recent Comments