留学生作业代写 Economical power of culture
Individual And Industrial Business
In order to develop and foster the creative industries, the policy should be devised and considered in both personal and industrial aspects. The reason is that the sources of cultural industries are induced from individual creativity, whereas the driving force of industrialization is from the management of the company or organization.
As stated in the British DCMS’s definition about ‘creative industries’, the government policy is to construct an industrial value form the individual creativity. For example, the core idea of music, film, or fashion is made by individual efforts not by the systematic machines or organization. But, the industrialization power is to produce goods or services from the idea.
The purpose of the British DCMS’s policy is for increasing the productivity. In general, the policy can be interpreted as the investment for a profit. If the investment is not profitable, that is a failure in economical terms.
However, in case of Japanese government (as well as other countries), the Cultural affairs’ policies focused on subside for artistic activities in the private sector and for the operation of traditional facilities at the local government level. The most of the policy was for maintaining or keep the value at the lower (or individual level), not for the profitable value in the commercial market. (Yoshimoto, 2003, 6)
But, as the researchers carry out broadly regarding the productivity of creativity in terms of policy-making and marketing, the trend has been changing in order to create the market value. For instance, policy-makers now plan an infrastructure for non-profit creative activity as incubators, and designed a profit circulating structure in which goods and services create a profit. And in turn which the profit will be reinvested in private creative sector.
There are other considerations regarding cultural industries as below:
Tasks in the industries are undertaken in the project-based format. The project members are not working like normal office worker who are doing routines daily or monthly. The working force is embarked temporary contract basis such as composers, writers, actors etc. Generally, workers are chosen from specialists list or acquaintance individually. Consequently, there are more self-employment workers in cultural industries than other industries (Bilton, 2007, p. 27). Another matter here is that the work forces are not easily replaced.
There are not perfect substitutes for creative workers. This can be explained with Michael Kremer’s O-Ring theory. In His suggestion, the quality of substitutes should be as good as the original one in order to produce goods and services. However, the artists or culture itself, as a resource for the culture industry, cannot be replaceable effortlessly. In that case, the risk of the business will be higher and the imperfect substitutes bring failure to the business (Kremer, 1993).
And, this culture or trends can be circulated throughout the regions or countries. Moreover, culture as well as knowledge has a tendency to be cumulative. In other words, new creative product or discovery leads a potential inspiration to other potential products (Scott, 2006, p. 16).
Time is of the essence. The performing arts and creative activities involving complex crews or teams obviously require a sort of temporal coordination of their activities (Caves, 2000, p. 8). For instance, cinema filming is efficiently shot in a certain sequence over a few weeks, and music concert should be announced and prepared to take place at a particular time, during that all creative inputs must be available when needed.
Culture industries engross ‘a much wider range of economic activities’ (Christopherson, 2004, p. 17). Christopherson stersses intra-regional co-operation in the creative economy. This movement is knotted with arts, technological innovation, and local and regional marketing. In order to make successful outcome, not only understanding the artistic aspects of cultural product as a source is necessary, but also proper quality of economic development need to be followed.
So far, we have looked through the features of the cultural industries. These characters are the factors which can distinguish it from conventional industries. Without experimenting on these factors, policy-makers in a nation or management department in an organization cannot produce efficient way of nurturing or managing the culture industries. But, the importance of the policy-maker is more important than a strategy department in an individual organization because new economical power of culture is not producible without the background or an infrastructure as a foundation which costs enormously. For, it is true that private capital has no intention for making this expensive groundwork. Although this construct can induce the potential value to the society, this outcome is not directly connected to the investor and it also takes time to see the output.
Creative Clusters And Local Development
The outstanding feature of creative industries is that it tends to be developed in a certain district. In other words, creative industries have locality. In this respect, one congregation is referred as a ‘cluster’. This modern phenomenon of clusters in one form or another has been explored in a range of research. However, it cannot be anyalized by the border theory of competition or the competition theory in a global market because it has more complex organism inside (Scott, 1997).This congregating tendency is prevalent throughout the world. It is vital to observe how the congregation of creative sources has been developing to a cluster in order to make proper policy and nurture the industries.
As the creative sources congregate, this creative concentration takes the both external and internal advantages. In external advantages, there are localization economies and urbanization economies. These two economies are geographical synergies for the congregation. Regarding internal advantage, there is so-call ‘Buzz’ power. This ‘Buzz’ refers energy which results from the Face-to-Face contact among individuals or small groups within the creative area. These advantages of the both sides make the area have locality and also nurture itself.
The External Advantages Of Creative Congregation.
Among the three factors of production (which are land, labor, and capital), the roles of location have been diminished due to the changes in technology, transportation and competition. Capital, resources, technologies and other inputs are efficiently sourced in global market. Companies can access motionless inputs via corporate and globalized networks. It is no longer necessary for them to locate the factories near markets to supply the goods and services. This trend has been accelerated as culture and creativity have been commercial factors. In this respect, clusters have a prominent role (Porter, 1998, p. 2). Porter defines that ‘clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries and associated institutions’. In that, institutions are such as universities, national agencies, organizations, trade associations etc.
The clusters have two geographical synergies: one is in terms of localization economy, the other of urbanization economy. It seems to be similar notions. But, it is not. The discourse is now important in order to see the geographical influence over clusters economy. We need to exam the existence of systematic differences in the clusters that arise in small town or in urban regions. We shall sketch it out in this section.
The concept of ‘localization’ denotes clustering of economic activity that is interconnected with product offer and knowledge base and the notion ‘localization economies’ tells the positive externalities firms would take an advantage from such co-location. Localization economies are related to regional specialization and include various positive outcomes from local labour market, institutional specialization, and related firms. This unique feature of localization results in many positive outcomes (Frederiksen, 2008, p. 155).
First, there are the static externalities (Henderson, 1998) and flexible specialization (Piore, 1984). In other words, firms have relative stable alliances through the existence network. Due to the similarity of the business, they are likely to have chance to work together (temporary or project-based as we discussed above in chapter 1 3.5), and in this value chain, firms are very likely to exploit each other as specialized and capable subcontractors and customers. During this co-operation of the business, knowledge about products and marketing can be shared.
Second, competition for customers and labour may encourage efficiency: the local concentration will increase the current productivity, the capacity of cluster participants for innovation growth, and motivate new business platform which leads innovation and enlarge the cluster (Porter, 2000, p. 21). But, in some cases, the price of labour arises as local competition is getting fierce (Lorenzen, 2008, p.158).
Finally, the adjacent firms in clusters are able to take an advantage from the specialized institutions. In an area of highly specialized industrialization, there are formal institutions in the forms of public or semi-public services. This public agencies such as educational, technology centers and other knowledge-based institutions may provide firms with deepen skills within a specialized fiend. Additionally, there also exist informal institutions. Within a certain region, a lot of similar firms are gathering together. Their specific demands due to the features of the business generate another business. For example, where there are lots of film productions, there is a film-developing company. These non-public institutions will help the firms to save cost and time.
Conspicuously, localization economies are not located in the core of city regions. Firms managed to make use of relatively lower labour and land cost. Compared with city region, new industrial spaces are exposed to the new regulations in which local government made for the purpose of fostering the business sectors (Lorenzen, 2008, p.158).