CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
234
The Creation and Management of Cultural Clusters Erik Hitters and Greg Richards This paper analyses two cultural clusters, the Westergasfabriek (WGF) in Amsterdam and the Witte de Withstraat (WdW) in Rotterdam, and evaluates their contrasting creative management strategies. The WGF has to date been fairly successful in creating an attractive mix of different cultural activities, based on the creative potential of the buildings on the site, its image as a cultural centre and the general atmosphere of creativity. The more ‘top-down’ approach of the Local Authority owned but commercially managed WFG has injected new commercial skills and investment into the cluster, and creates the conditions for innovation through managing the mix of creative functions. The WdW, on the other hand, takes a more ‘bottom-up’ approach to the problems of cultural management, and so far the participants have resisted the imposition of formal management. This may allow cultural and commercial functions to co-exist more easily, but, thus far, there seems to be less evidence of innovation.
Introduction
I
n an increasingly competitive global urban field, creativity is being extensively used as a tool for urban development and to create competitive advantage through developing innovation. The creative industries have a crucial role to play in this development, as many cities are developing cultural clusters or districts designed to stimulate creative activities and to act as a leading edge for economic and physical development. However, ensuring these clusters have the right climate in which new cultural enterprises can grow is a difficult business. Usually such endeavours require close collaboration between the wide range of actors involved in the management of such locations, drawn frequently from the private, public and voluntary sectors. Even if the right conditions can be created locally to allow new creative enterprises to flourish, their success is also increasingly dependent on the global cultural market. Not only is the media playing a growing role in the promotion of cultural consumption at an international level, but the growth of cultural tourism is making it increasingly possible to attract international as well as local audiences. New cultural clusters therefore have to consider their position in a local, national and international context if they are to succeed. This places extra pressure on the managers of
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
such areas to generate revenue and to raise their profile on the international cultural scene. The result is often a growing tension between the requirements of cultural management and the demands of commercial management. This paper considers the relationship between the management structures and styles of two cultural clusters in the Netherlands and their ability to generate innovation in cultural production and consumption. The relatively centralised management strategy evident at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam is compared and contrasted with the more open and less structured Witte de Withstraat cluster in Rotterdam. In order to provide a broader context for this analysis, the following sections consider the forces of globalisation and localisation stimulating the development of cultural clusters, the role of the creative industries in such clusters, and previous studies of cultural cluster development and management.
Globalisation and the Network Society Globalisation primarily refers to the continuous scaling-up of markets and the increasing growth of trans-national financial and economic networks (cf. Sassen, 1994; Waters, 1995). But this process is equally characterised # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
by the fading of national cultural identities, increasing geographical mobility, worldwide migration, ethnic hybridisation and apparent cultural homogenisation (Zukin, 1995). The corollary of globalisation, and inevitably linked with it, is the revival of local autonomy. This is apparent in the strengthening of local identities and ethnicities and in the growing strength of administrative and political intervention on a local level. This duality in the process of globalisation can be characterised by the term ‘glocalisation’. This process is precipitated in cities faced with the concrete consequences of economic and cultural globalisation. In the face of growing inter-urban competition, the increased mobility of capital and the diminishing importance of purely physical location factors cities attempt to distinguish themselves in terms of their social, cultural and symbolic characteristics. The recent work of the Spanish sociologist Manuel Castells (1996) on the ‘network society’ provides a powerful analytical background to the processes of globalisation, their causes and their consequences. The combination of an information society and a globally networked economy has introduced a new logic of economic space, which Castells defines as the ‘space of flows’. He opposes the space of flows to the ‘space of places’, the localities that shape people’s daily activities. Castells warns us that those two spaces become fundamentally separated form one another unless ‘cultural and physical bridges are deliberately built between those two forms of space’ (Castells, 1996: 428). What we will argue here, is that the creative industries can function as such a bridge. In doing so, however, cultural enterprises have to take account of the shift to a new business logic in the global and informational economy. Castells (1996: 61) points out that businesses operate in networks. According to Kelly (1998) this network logic is driven by perpetual and inevitable innovation. It involves three interrelated organisational principles: flexible specialisation, networking and competitive collaboration. Here then, it becomes clear that the physical agglomeration of businesses can be advantageous. Scott (2000) distinguishes three primary benefits to such agglomeration in general; firstly a reduction in transactions costs, secondly an accelerated circulation of capital and information and thirdly reinforcement of transactionally based modes of social solidarity. Likewise, Amin and Graham (1997: 415) have argued that ‘. . . the advantages of proximity, associated with the exchange of information, goods and services, [. . .] face-to-face contact, [. . .] incremental innovation, learning and the
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
235
exchange of tacit knowledge, are the assets of comparative advantage in a global context of increasingly ubiquitous forms of codified or scientific knowledge. Thus localisation is a source of dynamic learning that reinforces and is reinforced by the agglomeration of firms in the same industry’. This point is reinforced by the work of Camagni (1995) who has pointed out that innovation is most likely to occur in locations that can ground the space of flows through linking local actors. Locality or clustering becomes important in this respect because of: 1) The presence of ‘quasi-immobile’ human capital 2) The presence of informal contacts between local actors that create a certain ‘atmosphere’ 3) Synergy effects stemming from shared experience of the local which creates common representations and beliefs. Creating clusters of creative enterprises can therefore produce the conditions necessary for a ‘milieu of innovation’ to develop a bridge between global and local flows. Although such milieus can be spontaneously created and informally maintained, after a while more structure becomes desirable as endogenous and exponentially growing locational costs, which may be considered as the opportunity cost of utilisation of the ‘milieu’ and evident limits in the static or dynamic performance of the ‘milieu’ itself, push towards the creation of a new organisational and behavioural model, a new ‘operator’ enhancing the control capability of the firm upon its turbulent environment (Camagni, 1995:135). This also implies the need for careful management of creative clusters in order to produce the conditions necessary for innovation to flourish. This is particularly important given the central role of the ‘creative industries’ in most cultural clusters.
The Creative Industries and Cultural Clusters Mommaas (2000) identifies the increasing strategic role of the creativity in the urban economy and the important role of cultural clusters in stimulating the development of creativity. The creative industries incorporate all branches of industry and trade that rely on imaginative creation and cultural innovation aimed at the production, distribution and consumption of symbolic goods. They include film, literature and publishing, theatre, recorded
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
236
music, concerts and performance, fashion, design, architecture, old (broadcast) and new media, visual art, crafts, museums and galleries (cf. O’Connor, 1999). These creative industries are central assets of the contemporary urban economy and the social fabric of the city. They operate through a specific spatial logic, by which they are strongly linked to the mutual dependency of culture and the city. Furthermore, they are highly dependent upon each other’s proximity, as this provides them with competitive advantages through creative exchange and networking (cf. Porter, 1998, Scott, 2000). Creative industries show a strong proclivity to clustering. This explains why specifically urban renewal areas in inner cities have provided the opportunities for such spatially concentrated industries to develop and for these new collaborations to emerge. In her study of the Northern Quarter in Manchester, Van Bon (1999) has found that especially small and medium sized cultural businesses apply such new management principles and thus opposes the global footloose economy with a renewed meaning and importance of locality. Further examples of initiatives that centre on this new concept of clustered creative industries are the Huddersfield’s Creative Town concept, Temple Bar in Dublin, Rotterdam’s Witte de Withstraat, the Gazi in Athens and the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam. The nature of the creative industries themselves also tends to stimulate clustering. Because of the difficulty of substituting capital for labour in most areas of cultural production, it is difficult to achieve significant economies of scale in the creative industries (Heilbrun & Gray, 1993). This means that economic advantage must be gleaned instead from economies of scope. Economies of scope tend to be generated in culture through spatial proximity of producers, which allows them for example to share production facilities, to draw on the same audience, or to engage in collaborative marketing. Exploiting such economies of scope, however, requires appropriate management of cultural clusters. The different management strategies that have been developed for cultural clusters can be identified through a review of previous studies.
Managing Cultural Clusters Recent decades have seen the development of a wide range of cultural clusters aimed at cultural and economic development in major cities in Europe and America. A number of studies have described these developments
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
and their effects on the cultural and economic life of their host cities, drawing divergent conclusions about their achievements and effectiveness. The ‘discovery’ of the cultural sector as a means of economic development during the 1980s (e.g. Myerscough, 1988) focussed attention on the development of cultural facilities in urban environments. Miles (1997) demonstrates how this idea was imported into the UK from the USA during the late 1980s and served to stimulate the development of ‘central cultural districts’ to act as magnets for industrial location and as sources of employment, particularly in declining manufacturing cities. The growing attention paid to the cultural industries in the 1990s led a number of authors to study the development of creative activities in the urban environment. For example Derek Wynne’s (1992) study of the role of the cultural industries in urban regeneration identified the emergence of ‘cultural quarters’ as important growth engines in a number of cities. He defined a cultural quarter as ‘that geographical area that contains the highest concentration of culture and entertainment in a city or town’ (1992: 19). Such clusters can grow organically or they can be stimulated and directed by the public sector. Bianchini and Parkinson (1993) took a wider, European perspective of these developments, and analysed the growing role of the cultural industries in cities such as Bilbao, Manchester and London. Their analysis indicated that a growing number of local authorities were taking a more active role in the development of cultural infrastructure, particularly in what they termed ‘declining industrial cities’ such as Glasgow and Rotterdam. In many of these cities the approach was to develop cultural clusters in order to provide a stimulus for economic as well as cultural development. A prevalent idea in the study of the cultural industries is the need to develop clusters of producers in order to produce the cultural climate and products necessary to attract consumers and their expenditure. For example, in considering the role of New York as a ‘cultural capital’ Zukin (1995: 150) argues that a culture capital must be a place where art is actually produced as well as sold and consumed. The transformation of urban space into ‘cultural space’ depends on developing the two sides of cultural capital. It requires not only the material capital of cheap space and attractive buildings, an arts labor force, and investment in culture industries, but also the symbolic capital of vision . . . It is
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
237
also critical to have a large infrastructure of men and women whose job is to translate the work of producers for a larger public. This need to combine productive and consumptive functions in urban areas produces pressure for producers to cluster in order to make themselves visible in the urban fabric and to distribute their products more effectively to a wider public. Very often, the public sector plays a key role in promoting such clustering and developing cultural networks. Brown et al. (2000) compared the development of two cultural quarters in Sheffield and Manchester, both of which have a strong music industry component. They point out the importance of local authority intervention in supporting the development of ‘soft networks’ to link global and local cultural flows. More recently, attention has been focussed on the way in which events have been used to support the development of cultural activity in cities and to stimulate the development of cultural clusters. For example Hitters (2000) presents an analysis of the development of Rotterdam as a centre for cultural consumption, which in recent years has been based on the staging of festivals and the designation of the city as the Cultural Capital of Europe in 2001. Richards (2000) compares the use of the Cultural Capital event in a number of European cities, and concludes that growing intraurban competition is making it increasingly difficult to derive long-lasting economic and cultural impacts from such events. Significantly, these events seem to be increasingly used to justify major infrastructure investments in order to try and capture long-term economic and image effects. Using events to kick-start cultural industrial development is not necessarily a new
idea, however, as studies of London’s South Bank attest (Smith, 2001; Newman & Smith, 2000). The South Bank area became a site of modern cultural production with the staging of the Festival of Britain in 1951, which left the South Bank centre with the Royal Festival Hall, National Film Theatre and Hayward Galleries as a cultural infrastructure legacy. In their analysis of the subsequent cultural strategy development of the South Bank, Newman and Smith (2000) identify three phases of policy: an initial phase of resistance to high cultural production (1980–92), a phase of embracing cultural production as an economic activity (1993–95) and a phase of promoting fragmented and market-driven cultural production (1995–present). This emphasises the fact that the development of cultural clusters is dependent on the strength and direction of public sector intervention, as well as the global cultural market. This is a point that has also been made by Brooks and Kushner (2001), who reviewed the operation of a number of cultural districts in major American cities. They analysed four different dimensions of management in these districts: administration, degree of public involvement, degree of physical change and programming. In terms of administration they identified a continuum of management strategies ranging from a relatively hands-off approach to centralised directive management (table 1). This continuum suggests that cultural clusters can be created and managed in different ways, with a greater or lesser degree of intervention. Brooks and Kushner (2001) conclude that successful cultural districts require effective leadership and intervention by multiple levels of government and the private and voluntary sectors. However, they compare
Table 1. Management strategies for cultural clusters (after Brooks and Kushner, 2001) Management Strategy
Characteristics
Designation
The local administration calls the area a ‘cultural district’ but makes no other specific interventions. Cultural district leadership is a catalyst for private participation and removing legal barriers to development. The administration actively seeks external funding for independent district arts organisations. District administration strategy includes some active planning. The district administration collects and distributes funds and engages in considerable planning efforts. The administration supports and directs all aspects of district development and activity.
Development Donation
Direction Domination
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
238
the cultural clusters at a fairly general level, without looking in detail at the management styles and strategies adopted in each cluster. Mommaas (2000) in his analysis of five cultural clusters in the Netherlands points out that cultural clusters usually assume a ‘hybrid form of cultural governance’ whose combination of private and public sector intervention enables them to be more flexible in a rapidly shifting urban economic/policy field. He sees the developments of cultural clusters being stimulated by a variety of public policy justifications: place marketing and positioning, stimulating an entrepreneurial approach to culture, stimulating innovation and creativity, finding new uses for old buildings and derelict sites, stimulating cultural democracy and diversity. This suggests that the management context of cultural clusters is more complex than the continuum of intervention levels drawn up by Brooks and Kushner. Mommaas shows in the case of Tilburg, for example, that the ‘bottom-up’ clustering of creative industries has been penetrated by transnational interests, including Warner Music and the Texas-based Clear Channel company. In his view the challenge of global and national capital interests to local cultural policies requires a more strategic interventionist approach on the part of local authorities. In order to assess the extent to which local authority intervention can be successful in developing coherent cultural clusters and in stimulating local creativity and innovation, we examine two case studies in the Netherlands. The local authority-led clustering strategy at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam is compared with a less centralised clustering of creative enterprises in the Witte de Withstraat in Rotterdam. This review of the cultural cluster literature indicates that most attention has been paid to the spatial clustering of creative functions, rather than the management strategies adopted by individual clusters. In this article we attempt to make a link between the management of two cultural clusters and their development of creativity and innovation.
Methods The analysis of the two case studies is based on both primary and secondary data analysis. The primary data were collected through interviews with cluster managers, local authority representatives, individual enterprises in the clusters and interviews with visitors. Secondary data was obtained from reports and studies undertaken during the development of these clusters.
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
In Rotterdam, information was collected on the different parties that were identified as having a significant influence on the development of the Witte de Withstraat and the centre of Rotterdam. This included studying the annual reports, policy documents, plans and research reports for the area. Semi-structured interviews were subsequently conducted with representatives of different interest groups and the local authority involved in the governance of the area. Subsequently a sample was selected of businesses and organisations located in the cluster. The interviews covered 30 organisations, including museums, galleries, shops, catering outlets and performing arts companies. The interviews focussed on the meaning of the cultural cluster for the enterprises and organisations in the local area. In addition 350 visitors to the area were interviewed at four different sites around the cluster in February 2001. The visitors were asked about their reasons for visiting the cluster, and the extent to which they saw the area as a unified cultural cluster. In Amsterdam, the Director of the WGF was interviewed personally, and interviews conducted with tenants and potential tenants of the site were subjected to secondary data analysis regarding the motivations for locating at the site. In total, 35 interviews were conducted with a wide range of cultural organisations, including performing arts organisations, media companies, arts administrators and servicing companies. The interviews covered the activities of the organisation, their target groups, extent of demand, catchment area and motivations for locating to the WGF (both in terms of ‘pull’ and ‘push’ factors). In the interviews held with site managers, particular attention was paid to the interplay between local and global forces, and the relationship between different levels of management and administration (enterprise, site, locality, city). In addition, the style of management adopted and the extent to which the supposed advantages of clustering were exploited were examined. The following sections present a description of the two clusters as well as an analysis of the management of creativity and innovation in each area.
The Westergasfabriek The WFG case study is particularly interesting because it represents a new model in cultural management in a Dutch context. Although the site is owned by the Local Authority, the buildings have been sold to a property development company, which is
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
responsible for their letting and management. This structure is supposed to inject new commercial skills and investment into the running of the site, but the overriding cultural function of the cluster is made clear in the strategic vision of the Westergasfabriek (2001: 3): ‘the management (of the WGF) must result in a financially viable operation that sustains the cultural function of the area’. The Westergasfabriek (WGF) is located in a former gas works west of the inner city of Amsterdam. Many of the Westergasfabriek buildings were demolished when the site closed in the 1960s. During the last decade, however, there has been a growing interest in and appreciation of old industrial sites as historically valuable urban areas, and today 13 of the factory’s 19 remaining buildings are state-protected monuments. The city council already started discussing possible new uses of the WGF complex in the late 1970s. Developing the site met with great difficulty, because of a lack of funds, the level of soil pollution and the lack of consensus among the various groups involved. In the meantime, in 1992, the buildings were put to temporary use, and leased for short periods to meet the growing need for ‘cultural’ spaces in Amsterdam at the time. Because of their different shapes and sizes the buildings proved to be very popular and for some a waiting list existed. The giant gas holder proved suitable for big events like house parties, pop concerts, operas and other manifestations. For a few big festivals the grounds as well as the buildings were used. In three years time over three hundred exhibitions, performances and concerts were held at the WGF and since 1995 the area has attracted some 250,000 visitors annually. In 2001 the use of the site has been limited by the redevelopment of the park surrounding the site, which has caused many users and events to move. The expectation is however that most of the tenants and events will return as soon as the redevelopment is complete.
Management and Administration Since 1994, a project team, led by project manager Evert Verhagen, has managed the development of the Westergasfabriek on behalf of the local authority. Liesbeth Jansen, Director of the WGF, has managed the activities, programming and letting of the site. The project team has been, and still is, a key element in the project’s success. In 1996 the Westerpark district council published a development plan for the WGF, prepared by
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
239
the project team. The plan provided a structure for the WGF in three themes: ‘park’, ‘culture’ and ‘cultural enterprise’. The future development of the WGF will take the shape of a public-private partnership. The need for private resources and management expertise to rehabilitate the buildings and operate the cultural venues was based on two premises. Firstly, it would increase the stability of the project. Were it to remain connected to the district council, it would be dependent on changeable politics with the risk of stagnation and disintegration. Secondly, the local authority budget was too small to allow them to invest in the WGF. At this moment the project requires an additional investment budget of 60 million guilders (27 million Euro). The necessary cash has been injected largely by property developer MAB, which has become owner of the buildings on the site. MAB expects the WGF in its current form to be sustainable for ten or twenty years, but to them only the profitability over the next five years is relevant. MAB will restore the buildings, and create 600 square metres of new building space. The new buildings will be made complementary to the existing site. This investment will add value to the site, making its sale profitable after five years. MAB will not invest in the park, which remains the responsibility of the District Council. The only risk for MAB is the possibility that they will not attract enough tenants – new occupants will have to pay and cultural organisations are notorious for being poor. Fuelled by market research and current negotiations with potential tenants, MAB is confident about the future of the WGF. (Buwalda et al., 1999: 48). The contracts between MAB and the District Council were finalized at the beginning of 2000. The project bureau is currently the operational unit for the Westerpark District. MAB has set up a new formal management corporation, which will become responsible for programming and management of the buildings. This corporation (‘Westergasfabriek BV’) will rent space from the owners and lease the spaces to tenants. Thus, the Project bureau will hand over control of the buildings to MAB and Westergasfabriek BV. A point of discussion is to what extent it is possible to retain low rents for current tenants, within a commercial setting. And is it possible to allow differentiation between old and new tenants, or for instance between non-profit and commercial users? Overseeing the sustainability of the cultural function of the project will be an important task for the managers of the site.
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
240
The district council, as owner, plays a key role in the privatisation of the buildings. The council has fixed the cultural use of the buildings, the rent levels, and rules for temporary and permanent leasing in the deeds of sale. Even though MAB owns the buildings and the management corporation Westergasfabriek BV, many formal and legal ties bind MAB to the local authority. As the land owner the council can fix functions in a land use plan and it is also responsible for construction of the park. The buildings are also designated as National Monuments, and therefore have restrictions placed on their redevelopment. An advisory board will also advise the Director of the Westergasfabriek BV, and it will have to approve of changes in the current planning (Daems et al., 2000). The District Council stresses the value of the site for the neighbourhood and it is expected that the council will foster the unity of the site as a cultural park, including both green space and buildings. The question here, is to what extent the politics of culture can prevail over the politics of economy.
Current Use and Management of the Area Because of the impending extensive restoration of the beautiful old buildings and the construction of the new park, most of the buildings are occupied by temporary tenants. Most of these are cultural or culturally-related organisations. They are, we would argue, typical of the creative industries. Between 1992 and 1997 400 contracts were given out for incidental rental. Half of these were for festivals, performances and exhibitions, the other half were for business events, fashion shows, movie and video recording and other non-public activities. Permanent tenants include the ‘Toneelgroep Amsterdam’, operating a venue for performing arts in the Transformatorhuis, ‘West Pacific’, a dining and dancing cafe´, ‘Studio Wenck’, a studio for video & movie productions, ‘Orkater’, a performing arts group & rehearsal studio, and ‘Dasarts’, a school for advanced education in performing arts. The local government development plan (Stadsdeel Westerpark, 1996) gave clear criteria for redeveloping the area. These were used by the project bureau as guidelines for the selection of temporary and long-term tenants: . A combination of visitor attractions and
cultural activities . A combination of cultural use and park use
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
. Cultural attractions should not be orien-
. . . .
.
tated to the mass-market, but mixed cultural forms of subsidised and commercial activities Opportunities for starting organisations through differentiated rents Day and night activities to spread the number of visitors Flexible use of the buildings Use of a number of buildings by the inhabitants of the area (local organisations, cultural education) Intercultural character
One of the priorities stated in the development plan is the need to attract established cultural organisations because of their ‘involvement in change and renewal’ and because they ‘are not aimed at a mass audience, but are the leaders of networks’ (p. 10). The networks developed in the district were assumed to be strengthened by clustering cultural entrepreneurs from different sectors. Clustering is also a conscious policy of the new management, De West. In their view leisure facility supply is growing fast, so any cultural cluster needs to offer a unique combination of activities and links with the locality. They argue that clustering can provide better services, more opportunities for collaboration, stimulating the development of a cultural climate and increasing the profile of culture in the city as a whole. The development of dynamic networks of cultural entrepreneurs was seen as a vital element in creating the necessary ‘cultural atmosphere’ in the area: In the permanent, by definition static presence of the historic buildings there is continual change. Change is one of the basic characteristics of the cultural park that the WGF must become. This creates a paradox. You can’t grasp change, it must be stimulated or if necessary forced (p. 12). In order to establish the attractiveness of the WGF for cultural organisations, research was conducted among current and potential users of the site. The organisations were interviewed about their present activities, their future activities, the reasons for their interest and their expectations and requirements for working in the area. The main reasons why organisations were interested in renting space in one of the buildings were the mix and clustering of cultural organisations, the cultural and creative image of the area and its accessibility. Table 2 indicates that the major ‘pull factor’ for the WGF is accessibility, underlining the importance of central location to cultural organisa-
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
241
Table 2. Reasons for Locating to the Westergasfabriek Pull Factors
Number of Respondents
Accessibility Clustering, collaboration Cultural profile Cultural atmosphere New, challenging environment Isolated, peaceful Buildings
14 13 9 6 3 2 2
Push Factors Lack of space Poor accessibility Lonely/isolated Cost Lack of inspiration
10 5 3 2 1
tions. This is particularly important where they fulfil a consumptive as well as a productive function. Locational factors were also important because of the lack of space in other parts of the city, emphasised by the large number of respondents indicating that lack of space and poor accessibility were ‘push factors’. However, the role of cultural factors, such as the clustering of cultural organisations, the development of a cultural image for the location and a cultural ‘atmosphere’ on the site provided the bulk of the motivations for locating at the WGF. The cultural organisations obviously recognise the advantages of clustering in a competitive-collaborative way, particularly in terms of developing the creative ‘atmosphere’ described by Camangi (1995). Their main interest in the area is being a part of a mixed cultural environment. The respondents clearly state that it is important to be surrounded with other cultural organisations and organisations indirectly involved with culture. This is also the view of the managers of the site, who see the ‘mix’ of tenants as crucial to developing and maintaining the cultural ‘atmosphere’ that is crucial to producers and consumers alike. The clustering process has therefore been developed through formal mechanisms, such as the selection of tenants for the area and the drawing up of letting contracts. One of the considerations for the managers of the site is the way in which the cluster of tenants develops synergies. As Westergasfabriek manager Liesbeth Jansen emphasises:
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
We look at what elements are missing in the mix of tenants. For example at the moment we see that a printer or a bike courier firm would be useful. These are not cultural functions, but they are services that all cultural producers can utilise. Therefore the selection of tenants is made on the basis of function. The basic question is – why is this tenant useful for the WGF? (interview 6th June 2001). The mix of tenants is also important from the perspective of the consumer. Unless there is activity all the time, people will tend to restrict their visits to particular times of day, which will in turn tend to decrease the overall attractiveness of the site: The mix of production and consumption functions has been laid down in the development plan. Roughly 35% production, 35% consumption and the rest support functions. The mix of production and consumption is not in itself so important, but it is important to make sure that there is always life on the site. Festivals only happen in the summer. It is also important to make sure that the tenants have an open door – it would be easy to let the space to architects, but they would not welcome visitors. Therefore it is better to have a sculptor who has an open workshop. This creates contact with the public, and also lays the basis for collaboration with other tenants. It is also important that tenants have some economic link with the site or the local community – otherwise they become footloose and create no added value (interview 6th June 2001). In addition to the functionality of each tenant, there is also the need to develop a collective identity for the site. This creates a need for collective marketing: Collaborative marketing has been an important element in identity formation – and this needs to be encouraged by the management. Otherwise the individual participants find it hard to agree on common activities – they are all concerned with their own agenda (interview 6th June 2001). Creating a collective image for the cluster is not just important for the sake of collective identity – it has real economic implications too: One of the advantages of clustering is that it raises the cultural profile of the zone, which in turn increases the value of the site. This is important because the total value of the site is determined by the rental
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
242
income and the site value. So the cultural image of the WGF creates value. The need to create income of course means that the decision about lettings is a balance of rent and function. But the function is usually more important. A metalworker who can provide services for other tenants has a greater added value for the network. There is also a need to broaden the mix beyond art alone. There also needs to be room for crafts and other functions (interview 6th June 2001). Even though the foundations for collaboration have been laid through the letting contracts, actual collaboration between the users of the site has emerged organically, rather than being directly stimulated by the managers of the site. The managers have tended to take the view that direct intervention is not conducive to cultural innovation. However, the new management of the site are likely to take a more pro-active role in order to ensure that collaboration develops on a more structured basis.
Leadership One of the important aspects of the WGF has been the leadership given to the project by the interim management installed by the district council. Without the development of a clear vision, it would not be possible to create synergy between the tenants on the site, or to create a coherent image for the WGF. As Lisbeth Jansen emphasised, ‘everybody has to share a vision, motivated people have to work there’. The need for a shared vision is underlined by the BRO report, which outlines the following conditions for effective ‘site-orientated management’: – – – –
a shared vision willingness to collaborate organisational framework adequate financial resources
In order to create a ‘shared vision’ the report suggested that a ‘tenants association’ should be formed consisting of permanent and temporary users as well as public and nonpublic orientated users. This vision seems to be shared by many users. Interviews with tenants revealed a desire for an independent foundation consisting of different actors involved with the site, with significant representation for themselves. This fits the Dutch model of consensus management. However, creating a shared vision is not always an easy matter, since the individual tenants of the site often see themselves as
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
being engaged in a zero sum game. One of the problems is that each of the major cultural organisations in the WGF can play its own political game to try and gain the best deal for itself in the city. This sometimes leads to friction between the participants. Another potential source of internal conflict is the fact that the management team of the WGF has two functions – business management and artistic management. This often creates tensions, but splitting the functions also leads to problems. Liesbeth Jansen does not want to split the functions because it is important to create a unified organisational culture, rather than an ‘us and them’ culture. However, there is also a tension between creativity and structure. In order to stimulate creativity you have to ensure that the right conditions are in place. But by providing those conditions you may well take away the stimulus for creativity. There is equally a tension between the need to provide leadership and defending the cultural function (day to day management) of the area. The management of the WGF has therefore tried to walk a fine line between leadership and management, between cultural management and management of culture and between collective interests and individual needs. The ’hands-off’ approach adopted in terms of the development of innovation and cultural collaboration has tended to limit the amount of innovation so far. The tendency has been for existing cultural organisation and events to move to the site, rather than the WGF becoming a centre for new initiatives. The only notable exception so far has been the Think Global, Act Local festival, which was a ‘spontaneous’ innovation developed by tenants at the site.
Witte de Withstraat The Witte de Withstraat (WdW) is a cultural cluster located in the centre of Rotterdam, within easy reach of Central Station and other attractions in the city. The cultural cluster centred on the Witte de Withstraat links the Museum Park in Rotterdam (home to the Boymans van Beuningen Museum, the National Architecture Institute and the Kunsthal) with the Maritime Museum situated on the old Leuve Harbour. The WdW therefore acts as a ‘cultural axis’ linking these two areas. Unlike the WGF, however, the cluster is not a clearly defined terrain, but a loose collection of streets surrounding the Witte de Withstraat. 15 years ago the WdW was a disadvantaged area affected by drugs and crime. A
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
turning point in the downward spiral of social and physical decay was the creation of the local tenants association, which wanted to stimulate the economic recovery of the area. The tenants association joined forces with the Rotterdam Arts Foundation, which was in charge of some galleries in the area. Together they launched a plan to turn the area into a cultural route or ‘museum boulevard’. Although the area itself was in decline, its location close to important cultural centres at the Museum Park and the Maritime Museum provided the basis for recovery. The aims of the WdW were somewhat different to those of the WGF, as in Rotterdam culture has been used to stimulate urban redevelopment, whereas in Amsterdam redevelopment has provided the support for cultural activities. Towards the end of the 1980s changes began to be visible in the WdW area, but real progress was not made until the 1990s. The Neighbourhood Development Company, founded in 1990 was a major catalyst for revitalisation, stimulating the development of a number of galleries, the Witte de With arts centre and trendy bars and restaurants that attracted a culture-loving clientele. Festivals and events were organised in the area, which increased its attractiveness with consumers still further. The area now has a diverse selection of shops, cafes, restaurants, cultural organisations and galleries. Collaboration between the different organisations has created a strong cultural cluster and has made the area more attractive for enterprises, residents and visitors.
Management and Administration Interviews with the local authority indicated that public sector interest in the development of the WdW cultural cluster is high. However, most of this interest lies in the Economic Development Department and the Urban Development and Housing Department. There is no direct involvement by the Cultural Affairs Department in the cluster. There are close links between the local authority and representatives of the WdW area, including the tenants association and the local business association. These parties come together on a regular basis in the ‘Witte de Withstraat Advisory Group’ to discuss the development of the area. However, this Group has no administrative power, nor do any of the other parties involved have a central management role. The overall management of the area is of a diffuse and informal nature.
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
243
In the view of the local authority the WdW cluster plays an important role in its strategy to raise the profile of the inner city. By linking the relatively isolated clusters of economic and cultural activity in the city Rotterdam hopes to stimulate local economic development. This will be achieved mainly by strengthening the functional infrastructure and attractiveness of the city, increasing the length of stay and expenditure of visitors. The local authority sees the development of a different ‘cultural axis’ between the Central Station, Museum Park and the Kop van Zuid on the south bank of the River Maas as an important element in this strategy, which will increase the accessibility of the WdW cluster. The aim is to increase the liveliness of the area and to make the boundaries of the area less distinct, so that the cluster becomes less isolated from the rest of the inner city. Both the local authority and the local enterprises want to maintain the intimate nature of the cluster. The area will be made more attractive for residents through building renovation, and the entertainment functions of the area will also be strengthened. The overall aim seems to be the creation of a ‘Latin Quarter’ for Rotterdam. However opinions differ in terms of the cultural development of the area. The Urban Redevelopment Department of the local authority and the visual arts centre feel that more active intervention is needed to consolidate the cultural development of the area. However many voluntary sector organisations such as the Rotterdam 2001 Foundation and the Cultural Axis Foundation argue that the cluster is no longer a problem area, and can therefore be left to stand on its own two feet. Further development would in their view leave less room for new and spontaneous initiatives.
Current Users of the Cluster An analysis of the cultural organisations in the WdW cluster underlines the dynamic nature of recent developments. Most organisations are relatively young, with the majority having been established in the past seven years. Only the museums that form the anchors of the cultural axis of the WdW cluster are significantly older. Most organisations are also relatively small, with the vast majority being ‘micro-enterprises’ with less than ten staff. The organisations in the area indicated that the incentives provided by the local authority were the most important reason for them to locate in the WdW cluster. Many respondents
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
244
also saw the presence of other cultural organisations in the area as important. Many respondents also indicated that the flow of visitors to the area created by the clustering of functions is a major benefit. The interviews revealed very little structural collaboration between organisations located in the WdW cluster. Most contacts were informal, and based on the exchange of information, knowledge and occasionally resources. The most frequent collaboration is between the galleries located in the cluster, who participate in joint openings and festivals. In the opinion of the gallery managers such collaboration is purely the result of geographic proximity. Other co-operative activities within the cluster are largely ad hoc and sporadic. Cultural organisations also see little need for an increase in collaboration within the cluster. In spite of this, there was widespread support for increased information exchange between cluster participants. In practical terms the WdW cluster seems to deliver few of the supposed cultural and economic advantages associated with cluster formation. The anchors of the cultural axis, the museums, on the other hand, see themselves as independent organisations that are functionally and geographically removed from the WdW cluster. Their perception is that the WdW cluster leans on their role as cultural attractions for the city, but the WdW adds little to the attractiveness of the museums. However, most cluster participants do feel themselves to be members of a specific cluster, if only in a geographic sense. The central location of the WdW cluster in Rotterdam is also seen as a major advantage by most organisations. It seems that the WdW area can only be identified as a cluster in terms of the geographical concentration of cultural and supporting organisations in the area. There are very few functional links between the different members of the cluster. This tends to suggest that the WdW cluster relies heavily on the consumption-related advantages of clustering, rather than production related factors. The major benefit seen by the cultural organisations in the area is the ability of the cluster to attract a wide range of visitors who may then make use of different elements of the cultural supply in the area. This view was confirmed by the visitor research carried out in the WdW cluster in February 2001. The visitors were relatively highly educated, two thirds having had some form of higher education, and almost half had an occupation related to the cultural sector. Almost 30% were professional or managers,
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
and 23% were students. This indicates that the area is largely visited by representatives of the ‘new middle class’ or ‘new cultural intermediaries’. Their main reason for visiting the area was to visit a museum or gallery or for eating and drinking. Over half the respondents had combined two or more different functions in their visit, either visiting more than one cultural attraction, or combining a cultural visit with a restaurant or cafe´. The most frequent impressions of the area given by visitors were that it was ‘diverse’, ‘lively’ and ‘attractive’. Almost 80% of visitors thought that the WdW cluster was distinct as an area of the city, but only 51% recognised a relationship between the different elements of the cluster. The visitor research therefore tends to confirm the image of the cluster as a geographically-defined consumption-led cluster.
Conclusion The Westergasfabriek and the Witte de Withstraat present interesting case studies of cultural cluster formation with differing policy objectives, management strategies and functional outcomes. Coming back to the original question posed in this paper, to what extent have the cultural clusters analysed been successful in creating an effective ‘milieu of innovation’? In terms of policy, the local authority has been actively supportive in both areas, although the degree of intervention has been much greater in the case of the WGF, which tends towards Brooks and Kushner’s (2001) ‘direction’ or ‘domination’ strategies. The WdW, on the other hand, has been directed largely in terms of urban redevelopment rather than cultural development, and in view of the limited intervention in terms of cultural cluster formation it can probably be seen as a ‘donation’ strategy. This difference in terms of public sector intervention has led to differing outcomes in terms of the mix of organisations in each area. Conscious efforts have been made at the WGF to produce an appropriate blend of cultural and supporting organisations in the cluster, which has been possible thanks to the total control that managers have over letting contracts. In the WdW, however, growth in this city centre location has been far more organic, with the mix of organisations occurring more or less on an ad hoc basis. There is limited functional integration in the WdW cluster. The major link between members of the cluster is their common interest in the varied ‘postmodern’ audience that the cluster attracts.
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
Another striking similarity between the two clusters is the fact that both have developed in spite of, rather than because of, deliberate cultural policy on the part of the local authority. In the case of the WGF, one of the advantages mentioned by the management team was the fact that the local council did not have a cultural policy at all, which left them free to determine their own cultural strategy for the cluster. In Rotterdam the Cultural Affairs department was not actively involved in the development of the cluster, which was primarily driven by urban redevelopment and housing policy. This underlines the tendency for cultural development to be driven increasingly by economic considerations rather than cultural needs in the postmodern urban economy. In spite of management efforts in both clusters to create a milieu of innovation, it seems that innovation has been driven largely through spontaneous activities rather than structured management intervention. At the WGF managers have tried to shape the conditions for innovation by controlling the mix of cultural organisations on the site. This has led to a number of innovative events being staged at the site, but most organisations are still primarily concerned with their own agenda. In Rotterdam the WdW cluster has produced little in the way of collaboration, and the advantages of clustering are seen far more in terms of access to audiences than in functional links between producers. At both sites, however, producers and consumers stressed the importance of the ‘atmosphere’ of the cluster in making it an attractive place to work or visit. This indicates that of the three advantages of clustering identified by both Scott (2000) and Camangi (1995), the ability of informal contacts between producers to create atmosphere is most important in these clusters. There is far less evidence that the two other factors, human capital and synergy effects, are significant in the WGF or WdW. The role of consumers and visitors, then, may well be an important factor in the logic of cultural clustering. Nevertheless, there is certainly an indication that the WGF has been successful in creating what Camangi terms ‘common representations and beliefs’, particularly in the ‘pioneer spirit’ shared by tenants of this newly-developing area. But this has yet to produce any tangible synergy effect. This may be because the local networks, arguably needed to support synergy effects, are not yet well developed enough. If the clusters have yet to produce significant innovation, to what extent have they been able to build the ‘bridges’ that Castells considers crucial to linking the space of flows
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
245
with the space of places? In the case of the WGF there is a heavy emphasis on the advantages of clustering from a global perspective, encapsulated in the role identified for the WGF in raising the cultural profile of Amsterdam. In addition the site has been linked into global capital flows through the involvement of international property developer MAB. These global interests are balanced by the influence of the local authority as owner of the site, and the involvement of local interest groups in the management of the site. However, the embedding of cultural organisations in the local area through creation of the cluster is less certain. The tenants remain relatively ‘footloose’ and are not shy of pursuing their own political agenda outside the bounds of the cluster. In Rotterdam the embedding of the WdW cluster in the local context is somewhat firmer, thanks to its central location and the mixed cultural, business and residential functions. But here too the local foundation is not all that secure, since many organisations see the centrality of the location and its ability to attract a wide audience as the main binding agent of the cluster. This indicates that the WdW cluster is primarily based on consumption functions, and as such operates mainly in the globalised space of flows. This is underlined by the predominantly new middle class audience for the area, even though it is physically close to areas of urban deprivation. The WdW is basically a consumption space, rather than a local place rooted in Rotterdam. Therefore, we stress the importance of consumptionbased agglomeration benefits to the understanding of the innovative potential of these clusters. These case studies underline the difficulties of managing cultural clusters. Creating an atmosphere conducive to collaboration and innovation may well be easier in a cluster that mixes cultural and other functions. Cultural producers recognise the advantages of locating together to attract an audience, but actively working together to develop innovative cultural products is still relatively rare. This seems to be true whether the management style is strongly interventionist or not. In the case of the WGF, which seems to have more active public sector intervention, what innovation there is still happens spontaneously. The major advantage of public sector intervention seems to be a clearly defined identity for the cluster and a closely controlled programming policy. However, there are indications that the high degree of control required may contrast with the openness required to stimulate innovation. Innovation is taking place through informal
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
246
contacts between organisations placed in proximity to each other through the letting policy of the WGF, but this is largely dependent on the creative programming abilities of the management. In the case of the Witte de Withstraat, which has a more loose designation strategy, the public sector has adopted a more handsoff approach, which is also openly supported by cultural organisations in the cluster. Innovation here is also happening spontaneously and on an ad hoc basis, but at a much lower level. In addition, the identity of the cluster is more vague, which is perhaps not surprising given the deliberate policy of the local authority to blur the edges of the cluster. But this does make it more difficult to stimulate collective action or to mobilise local support in the face of pressures from the global economy. The contrasting management styles adopted by the WGF and the WdW have responded to differing external conditions and have produced differing outcomes in terms of creativity and innovation. In the case of the WGF the cultural emphasis of the cluster results in more incubation spaces being created for enterprises with supposed common interests. In the WdW case creative clustering has been a more ad hoc result of general urban development. Both management styles have produced identifiable spatial clusters of creative functions and enterprises, but the image and identity of the WGF is much clearer. In spite of the involvement of international property developers the public sector leadership in the WGF has maintained the cultural priorities of the cluster. This has arguably protected the mix of functions as a breeding ground for innovation. In the WdW individual creative enterprises are more subject to market pressures owing to the general urban redevelopment function of the area. Without more active direction of the cluster this may eventually lead to creative functions being forced out as property values rise. This would ultimately undermine the creative and innovation functions of the cluster.
References Amin, A. and Graham, S. (1997) The Ordinary City. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22, 411–429. Bianchini, F. and Parkinson, M. (1993) Cultural Policy and Urban Regeneration: the West European Experience. Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK. Brooks, A.C. and Kushner, R.J. (2001) Cultural districts and urban development. International Journal of Arts Management, 3(2), 4–15.
Volume 11
Number 4 December 2002
Brown, A., O’Connor, J. and Cohen, S. (2000) Local music policies within a global music industry: cultural quarters in Manchester and Sheffield. Geoforum, 31, 437–452. Buwalda, D., Delalex, G., Sluiter, F., Valentin, C. and Van Bon, S. (1999) Westergasfabriek. The culture factory. POLIS Group Report 1998/99, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. Bon, S. van (1999) The cultural industries: fostering the local in the network economy. A case study of the Northern Quarter in Manchester. POLIS MA thesis. Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. BRO (1997) Marktonderzoek functiemix Westergasfabriek, Amsterdam. BRO, Vught, Netherlands. Camagni, R. (1995) The concept of innovative milieu and its relevance for public policies. Papers in Regional Science, 74, 317–340. Castells, M. (1996) The information age: Economy, society and culture. Volume I: The rise of the network society. Blackwell, Oxford, UK. Daems, G., James, K., Kerchmar, C. and Andreen, I. (2000) The Westergasfabriek. POLIS Group Report 1999/2000, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. Heilbrun, J. and Gray, C. (1993) The Economics of Art and Culture: an American Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Hitters, E. (2000) The Social and Political Construction of a European Cultural Capital: Rotterdam 2001. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 6, 183–200. Kelly, K. (1998) New rules for the new economy. 10 radical strategies for a connected world. Penguin, New York, USA. Miles, M. (1997) Art, Space and the City. Routledge, London. Mommaas, H. (2000) Cultural clusters and the post-industrial city: remapping urban cultural governance, paper presented at the conference Cultural Change and Urban Contexts, Manchester, September 8–10. Myerscough, J. (1988) The Economic Importance of the Arts in Britain. Policy Studies Institute, London. Newman, P. and Smith, I. (2000) Cultural production, place and politics on the South Bank of the Thames. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24, 10–24. O’Connor, J. (1999) The definition of cultural industries. Unpublished paper. Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK. Porter, M. (1998) On competition. HBS Press, Boston, USA. Richards, G. (2000) The European cultural capital event: strategic weapon in the cultural arms race? International Journal of Cultural Policy, 6, 159–181. Sassen, S. (1994) Cities in a world economy. Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, CA. Scott, A.J. (2000) The cultural economy of cities. Sage Publications, London, UK Smith, M. (2001) Bridging the gap through cultural regeneration: the future of London’s north-south divide. In Toivonen, T. and Honkanen, A. (eds) North-South: contrasts and connections in global tourism. ATLAS, Tilburg, Netherlands pp. 227–238. Stadsdeel Westerpark (1996) Ontwikkelingsplan voor de Westergasfabriek. Amsterdam.
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
CULTURAL CLUSTERS
Waters, M. (1995) Globalization. Routledge, London, UK. Westergasfabriek (2001) Profiel Westergasfabriek. WGF, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Wynne, D. (1992) The Culture Industry: the arts in urban regeneration. Avebury, Aldershot, UK. Zukin, S. (1995) The Cultures of Cities. Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
Erik Hitters is senior researcher at the Department of Culture and the Arts of Erasmus University Rotterdam in The Netherlands. He has published on culture and the city, patronage and philanthropy in the arts (sponsorship, private giving etc.) and culture and leisure policy and management issues. His research interests include contemporary patterns of intervention in
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002
247
the field of culture and leisure, cultural clustering, urban cultural tourism, and urban cultural infrastructure. He is coordinator of the ‘culture and the city’ research group of the Erasmus Research Centre for Culture and the Arts. Greg Richards lectures in leisure studies at Tilburg University in the Netherlands, and has led a number of EU funded projects in the fields of tourism education, cultural tourism, sustainable tourism, tourism employment, conference tourism and ITC in tourism. His main research interest is cultural tourism, and has edited books on Cultural Tourism in Europe (1996), Crafts Tourism Development and Marketing (1999), Tourism and Sustainable Community Development (2000) and European Tourism and Cultural Attractions (2001).
Volume 11
Number 4
December 2002
