Towards the Governance of the Creative Industries Production System?

The aim of this paper is to critically assess the notion of the creative cluster, and to consider whether it is an appropriate tool for the governance of the creative industries, or even a suitable point from which to begin an analysis of the creative industries. The paper argues that creative clusters are formally a sub-set of business clusters. A critique of the business clusters literature highlights its short comings: namely a focus on individual firm preferences and a lack of attention to non-economic, situated (temporal and spatial) variables; a lack of attention to the specificity of particular industries and their associated regulatory peculiarities; and, finally, information issues associated with the operationalisation of the cluster model. The paper concludes with a discussion of an alternative approach, namely looking at the creative industries production system, that would better meet the concerns of those seeking Page 1 Print: 7. Aug. 2004 Words: 0 to govern the creative industries and creative clusters. Introduction The creative industries1 are increasingly being hailed as the potential economic saviours of local and regional economies worldwide. Whilst novel data collection in some regions has provided an evidential basis for these claims the question of which policies, if any, might be best applied to these industries is still open. The current favourite policy idea and governance tool is the notion of the creative cluster. This paper sets out to examine if the notion of creative cluster is both robust and appropriate for such a task. It is important to add a caveat here. Not all creative industries are market orientated, and even those that are may not be so all the time: creative industries, and especially their practitioners, are commonly active across the margins of the arts and economic activities. This fact generates tensions between arts, social and economic policy makers and practitioners. However, there is not space to deal with this matter more fully here and this paper deals only with the 'market facing' aspects of the creative industries. The paper begins with an examination of the notion of the creative cluster as it has been interpolated in debates concerning economic policy and strategic development; especially on those concerning the application and operationalisation of the concept. Practically, this paper examines the view that creative clusters are a sub-set of business clusters, a concept articulated in the writings of Michael Porter (see Porter 1990, 1995, 1996; Porter and Ketels 2003) and policy makers in countries such as the USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand. Whilst I accept that this is a problematic starting point, it is a necessary and pragmatic one. The notion is problematic for at least four reasons. First, because there are numerous accounts of why and how clusters, or cluster-like groupings, form. Second, it has been Page 2 Print: 7. Aug. 2004 Words: 0 argued by some academics that Porter's work has an unclear and ambiguous conceptual foundation (see Martin and Sunley 2002). Third, there is neither agreement on the definition of, nor the actions that might promote, clusters. Finally, the notion of cluster has been applied liberally and flexibly by policy makers. However, it is important to acknowledge that cluster policies and strategies already exist and have considerable momentum. This requires a pragmatic response. The creative clusters agenda brings together two aspirations: of promoting local competitive advantage; and using the creative sector as a region or city’s leading high-growth sector. This combination is a heady brew for policy makers and politicians. While it is unlikely that this policy juggernaut can be reversed; the crucial stage of application can be a profitable site for new interventions aimed at remedying deficiencies in the creative clusters agenda. The central point of the paper is that weak or poorly articulated concepts are at best difficult, at worst impossible, to operationalise. In practical terms there is considerable vagueness as to how to empirically define a cluster (whether in terms of its size, number and co-location of firms, or social, cultural or economic interactions). Second, even having identified these interactions it is not clear which criteria of evaluation might be used to assess success of the clusters per se; and consequentially, what might be done to promote them. Third, there is dispute as to whether clusters can be created de novo. Fourth, it is not clear whether it is appropriate to apply a generic policy to all sectors, or whether some industries require separate treatment. Current debates about clustering view creative clusters as a sub-set of all industrial clusters. Page 3 Print: 7. Aug. 2004 Words: 0 As such, it is believed that creative clusters should be subject to the same economic forces and policy responses as all other industries. One response to this position has been to argue for cultural exceptionalism. This is the argument that creative clustersor cultural quarters as they are better known – are not simply, or primarily, focused on economic activities. As such they should be evaluated and planned for using other criteria.2 A second response and one employed in this paper, is that if we focus on the market orientated creative industries. This permits recognition of significant variations in organisation and practice suggesting the need for specific rather than generic policies for the creative industries. Inter alia, this argument also indicates the importance of a robust definition of the creative industries. While the concept of the business cluster is briefly reviewed here; this review is necessarily schematic rather than exhaustive (for extensive reviews see Martin and Sunley 2002; Gordon and McCann 2000; and, Pratt 2004 b). It is designed to highlight a key area of weakness in the cluster literature, namely the lack of attention to business organization. It is on this basis that I argue that the creative industries might be worthy of being viewed as 'exceptional' with the broader thrust of the argument being against generic business cluster policy for the creative industries and beyond. I argue that sensitivity to what are termed here 'governance issues' could inform a number of positive debates about definitions of clusters, about production processes, and concerning differences within the creative industries.3 The paper concludes with a discussion of an alternative approach, namely looking at the creative industries production system, that would better meets the concerns of those seeking to govern the creative industries and creative clusters. Beyond Transactions and Clusters: Governance Although it is the concept of the moment, the notion of clustering has been around for as long as industrialization itself. In this section I outline two dominant families of accounts of Page 4 Print: 7. Aug. 2004 Words: 0 clustering--transactions and clusters--and point to two areas of weakness--generalization and the focus on traded costs. I argue that the governance literature concerned as it is with organizational issues has more insights to offer at least the creative industries, and potentially all industries.