From the local to the global KE in the Creative Economy

AHRC Creative Economy Showcase Wed 12 March, Kings Place, London
Breakout session:
From the local to the global: geographic boundaries and opportunities for KE in the Creative Economy
Chair: Prof Hamish Fyfe
Facilitator: Laura Drane
Space: projected holding slide giving headline information, and four round tables for participants

Hamish Fyfe: welcome and introduction to the session

Richard Bromiley: context and overview of the four discussion topics for the session

  • From the local to the global
  • Language – opportunities and barriers
  • Knowledge exchange at distance
  • Case Study: UCAN

Laura Drane: explanation of method and timings

  • Allocation of one topic per table with printed question sheets
  • Participants to address both the opportunities and the challenges within that area of discussion
  • Using the allocated resources (flip chart paper, pens, post it notes, etc) to create, mind map, jot down, collate, things that they mention and think are significant
  • Instruction to think about some headlines to feedback to the whole group

Distributed discussion sheets were one per table as shown below:

From the local to the global

How can we take local culture and creativity, and market it globally? What are the best routes for marketing to maximise the benefits to the creative economy? How can we deliver a framework to ensure that creative output can harness global economic impact? Which globally accepted cultural norms and archetypes can accelerate propagation of local creativity to a global audience?

Language – opportunities and barriers

How can languages provide opportunities or boundaries for creative economies? What solutions to language-based problems can the UK help develop? In what ways can smaller nations such as Wales develop a core niche in delivering cross-border/cross-cultural benefits? What are the opportunities for establishing alliances between minority languages that could help to strengthen their presence in creative economy on a national and international level?

Knowledge exchange at distance

How can we replicate the face-to-face meeting in a virtual environment? How does the virtual assist the real? What framework might we look to create for knowledge exchange that works across distances? Which ways can serendipity of interactions and meetings ‘happen’ at distance? To what extent do the plethora of online communication and social networking tools fragment and confuse the knowledge exchange dialogue? Do we have a clear idea how (much) and under what circumstances to use the available online communication tools?

Case Study: UCAN

What are the opportunities and geographical boundaries for establishing a knowledge exchange network that could advance solutions aimed at enabling visually impaired people to confidently visit arts venues independently? What is the potential of social media for enabling a national and international dialogue that could improve organisational behaviour towards individuals with disabilities? How could we go about setting a standard of adjustments that art organisations should make in order to enable independent access and mobility confidence to visually impaired people when visiting arts venues?

Three roundtable discussions for 20 minutes:

  • Knowledge exchange at distance
  • Case Study: UCAN
  • One merged to have two topics – “From the local to the global” and “Language – opportunities and barriers”

Feedback from each group to the rest of the tables:

From the local to the global Market culture globally (local to global):

From the local to the global

  • Authenticity
  • Diversity
  • Avoid falsity and stereotypes
  • Film and TV streaming
  • Not always positive eg “reality”
  • Case studies: Gavin & Stacey and Brave
  • Viral content
  • Networking worldwide

The headline points reported back included:

  • The implication for viral content
  • Perpetuation of negative stereotypes
  • Thinking about “Brave” as a counterpoint to Gavin & Stacey, TOWIE, etc


Language – opportunities and barriers

Language – opportunities and barriers

Opportunities for alliances between minority languages to strengthen presence in the CE on national/ international level?

  • Literacy – most translation is written – technology needs to allow access in non-written forms
  • Not just minority, ancient too (revival)
  • Online communities can keep native languages in touch
  • Digitisation eg Gaelic songs (accessibility)
  • Pressure on software companies to include minority languages in software (eg spell check)
  • An alliance could be more affective – strength in numbers

Key points of interest

Key points:

  1. Need to develop trust and relationships
  2. Content needs to be engaging and to allow people to engage in their own way
  3. Effective communication – necessary
  4. Individuals or groups – who does what?
  5. Methodologies – ways of working for those circumstances

How can languages provide opportunities or boundaries for creative economies?

languages opportunities boundaries

Opportunities:

  • Access content in language of choice – new technology
  • International students – multiculturalism
  • Internationalisation of products
  • Visual
  • Audience accessibility
  • Translating/ writing multi-lingual instructions – eg Ikea uses diagrams
  • Drama – subtitling is more acceptable now/ Versions
  • Visual arts not tied to language
  • Non-textual interfaces to computing and information
  • Diaspora – access content in your language
  • Remote translation eg hospitals, courts. Global connection in real time

Boundaries:

  • Cultural differences
  • Cost of translation can lead to costs for business
  • Automatic translation eg of technology not being limited

The headline points reported back included:

  • The costs of translations/ the horrors of auto-translate
  • Growing market in relation to subtitled TV/ film
  • The internationalisation of products (esp translating instructions)
  • The use of new technology to allow access anywhere in the world to your language of choice
  • Overall lots more opportunities that barriers


Knowledge exchange at distance

Knowledge exchange at distance

Opportunities:

  • Social inclusion
  • Coproduction – people at a distance contributing actively and sharing ownership and more likely to work at a distance
  • Real time – add real to virtual -> funding
  • Reuse existing tech new people?
  • Define and articulate challenge
  • New IT/ Skype allows face to face
  • Basecamp and digest function
  • Flat screen – 2D or 3D?
  • Networks of local actors
  • Social media – Twitter, LinkedIn, Basecamp
  • Voice better than email
  • Mind map/ social tools
  • Reduced travel – reduced time wasted, constructive time
  • Build things – needs to be tactile – 3D printers?
  • Local animators for a network
  • Building citizenship and engagement

Barriers:

  • Cost/ time lost of real world/ face to face
  • Virtual/ IT are not the same as face to face
  • Is it more difficult to trust at a distance?
  • Gatekeepers role diminished
  • Excessive use of email
  • Real time discussion etc – not also distanced by time
  • Ensuring ongoing relationships
  • Can a network event allow all people to meet?
  • What type of outcomes do you want to achieve?
  • Bad experiences of video/ telephone conferencing “live” puts people off
  • Real time engagement vs online follow up
  • Face to face develops relationships but can be done through other routes – eg phone – as long as done before serious discussions start

The headline points reported back included:

  • The relative scale of geography (comparing Wales with New South Wales in Australia)
  • Use of platforms like Basecamp and utilities like 3D printers to broker real time/ real world/ digital engagement over distance
  • Content needs to be carefully pitched to be engaging and at the right level
  • This area allows space to develop trust and relationships through collaboration


Case Study: UCAN

Case Study: UCAN

  • Coproductions – experience and lived experience
  • What do artists need to do? Touch. Describe.
  • Universal design in the curriculum
  • Design audits must include visual/ tactile
  • Including audits of temporary exhibits etc touch tours
  • QR scanner on ticket and at building
  • How to tell other Vis about reviews
  • Where features exist eg rivets should notify users like Google ads
  • Audio equivalent of QR codes?
  • Build standards into architects’ specs
  • YouTube video guide to RNIB building

The headline points reported back included:

  • That these considerations should be considered when designing buildings and undertaking access audits
  • The need to share information is acute – how to share signposts and personalised information for particular buildings and space
  • Coproduction and the need to consult with individuals and about expectations since no two people are the same

Hamish Fyfe: closing remarks and thanks

Advertisements