Home > National > People

[In depth interview] Analyzing where cash and culture collide

Published: 10 Nov. 2009, 20:28

David Throsby Economics professor, Macquarie University

There are certainly things in life that you just can’t (or shouldn’t) put a price tag on. And culture, many would agree, is one of them.

After all, it’s not easy to calculate the worth, the marketability or the profitability of things like artifacts, mummies or temples hundreds of years old, or folk rituals practiced by generation after generation.

But there are those who argue that it’s crucial to investigate the economic aspects of culture and arts. They call themselves cultural economists.

Cultural economics is a relatively young academic field with experts tracing it back to the 1960s, when Canadian-American economist John Kenneth Galbraith (1908-2006) published “The Liberal Hour.”

One leading contemporary figure in the field is the Australian academic David Throsby. A professor of economics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia, Throsby has been a consultant to the World Bank, the OECD and Unesco, as well as many government organizations and private firms.

Koreans are just beginning to grasp the notion of environmentally sustainable development. Yet Throsby has been, for some time now, talking about “culturally sustainable development.” He has been published widely on the economics of culture and the arts. His publications include “Economics and Culture,” “The Economics of the Performing Arts” and others.

Throsby was in Seoul last week to give a keynote speech at the Culturelink Asia-Pacific Cultural Policy Conference, organized by the Korean National Commission for Unesco to provide a venue for cultural policy makers from the Asia-Pacific region to mingle and network.

With the issue of identification and preservation of cultural heritage enjoying greater media coverage and public awareness than ever before in Korea, the JoongAng Daily sat down with Throsby for his insight on the relationship between the economy and culture.

Q. What do you think is the key to understanding the economy of culture?

A. I think the essence here is that there’s the value the economy produces and the value culture produces in financial, monetary terms. And it is important not to regard the two as separate. There is a certain link between economy and culture, and it is key to investigate that link. If you think about the urban economy, there isn’t just strong economic content, but also equally strong cultural content and goods like artworks, paintings, sculptures. And especially at the present time, cultural industries contribute greatly to economic development.

But how would you describe that relationship between economics and culture?

Ideally it’s one that’s beneficial to both. And with the emergence of creative industries, this has become more evident. For instance, digital media often has not only rich cultural content but also a sound economic basis. And this makes it possible for the government to see the importance of coming up with supportive policies. The same goes for a theater company that is both artistically and economically strong. It will get more subsidies and sponsors.

In Korea, often we hear about important cultural properties eclipsed by city development projects. I think they are the classic example of how cultural content can be endangered in the name of economic development. With that said, aren’t there times when the relationship between economy and culture isn’t so beneficial?

I wouldn’t want to pretend that linkage is always beneficial. If economic development is uncontrolled, it can change the path of culture, particularly cultural heritage. But I do want to point out some cases where the adaptation worked well. I think Cheonggye Stream in Korea [a historic stream that fell into disrepair, but was restored from 2003 to 2005] is a good example. There are also cases in other countries of the adaptive use of old buildings, like reusing old warehouses for other purposes. There is also a case in Australia where the government announced measures to support Aboriginal art, seeing it as viable visual arts content.

You sound very optimistic.

I guess I am an optimist.

But there are other chronic problems with Korea’s cultural policies. This year many of Korea’s cultural properties have been added to Unesco lists, yet Korean policy makers are still largely divided over the issue of preserving cultural properties versus opening them to the public. What’s your view on this?

It’s a really difficult question. When cultural properties get inscribed to Unesco cultural heritage lists, they become popular attractions, luring more people. While being more loved, they also find themselves in the danger of being spoiled. It’s important to find a balance. And I do believe it is possible to find that balance. There is a concept in tourism called carrying capacity as a certain threshold level of tourism activity. And I think over the years we’ve got better at understanding that level, like what number of visitors an attraction can be handle.

You are an advocate of the economic evaluation of cultural content. But many are still unfamiliar as to just how you would measure the value of cultural content. Could you tell us about the methodology?

It’s difficult to evaluate the non-market or public-good values and effects of heritage. How do you put a value on a beautiful landscape or a lovely forest? But there is a sophisticated framework developed for environmental studies. In that framework, people are surveyed with questions like, “How much would you pay for a certain heritage item?” The evaluation of the financial benefits and costs of heritage is an essential aid to policy making and decision-making in the heritage arena.

You mention the importance of cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. But amid today’s globalization, when there is increased intercultural exchange, isn’t there also the danger of assimilation as opposed to diversification?

I do agree that there can be sharing too much, and of course, some side effects from it - like you said, assimilation. Kids today may wear Nike shoes, drink Coca-Cola and watch “The Simpsons.” But I seriously doubt that they would want themselves to be Americans. Also, I know some Koreans living in Australia, speaking English and blending with the environment. But I know that they consider themselves Koreans. On my part, I would communicate and interact with them not because I want to be Korean, but because I would like to know what it’s like to be Koreans. That’s the dialogue I’m talking about.

You have also highlighted the concept of “culturally sustainable development.” What do you mean by that?

To be sustainable in cultural terms, development must take a long-term view and not compromise the capacities of future generations to access cultural resources and meet their cultural needs. Cultural capacity is an important right just as any other needs like food and clothes. Culturally sustainable development must also provide equity in access to cultural production, participation and enjoyment to all members of the community on a fair and non-discriminatory basis.

*Provided by the Korean National Commission for UNESCO

By Kim Hyung-eun [[email protected]]