kulturkulturLINKLINK FEHMARNBELT REGION

LIFE INININ AAA NEW CULTURAL RRREREEEGIONGION

Analysis of the Cultural Structures in the Fehmarnbelt Region ––– Market Research Study

June 2011

ews group gmbh LindenArcaden • Konrad-Adenauer-Straße 6 • D-23558 Lübeck Telefon 0451 - 480 55 0 • Telefax 0451 - 480 55 55 • Email [email protected]

The SStudytudy was assigned by

Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Lübeck Fackenburger Allee 2 23558 Lübeck

Contact: Nicola Lucas

Concept & Realisation ews group gmbh LindenArcaden Konrad-Adenauer-Straße 6 23558 Lübeck

Contact: Dr. Imke Lode Dieter Witasik

© ews group gmbh, June 2011

TTTABLE OF CCCONTENTS

111 MMMANAGEMENT SSSUMMARY ...... 1 222 GGGENERAL AND FFFIELD RRRESEARCH ...... 5 2.1 DESK RESEARCH ...... 5 2.1.1 General Features of the Region ...... 5 2.1.1.1 Historical Background of the Region ...... 5 2.1.1.2 Geographical Definition of the Region ...... 6 2.1.1.3 Infrastructure of the Region ...... 7 2.1.1.4 Cultural Features and Highlights of the Region ...... 8 2.1.1.5 Demographics ...... 9 2.1.1.6 Economy ...... 10 2.1.1.7 Innovation, Research and Development ...... 11 2.1.1.8 Level of Education ...... 12 2.1.1.9 Job Market and Employment ...... 12 2.1.1.10 Tourism ...... 14 2.1.1.11 Environment ...... 15 2.1.2 Assessment of Four Studies ...... 15 2.1.2.1 Key Results of Four Studies ...... 16 2.1.2.2 Key Learnings from Four Studies ...... 19 2.2 FIELD RESEARCH ...... 21 2.2.1 Fact Sheets ...... 21 2.2.1.1 General Information on Fact Sheets ...... 21 2.2.1.2 Results of Fact Sheet Enquiry ...... 22 2.2.1.3 Key Learnings from Fact Sheet Enquiry ...... 31 2.2.2 Workshop ...... 33 2.2.2.1 General Information on the Workshop ...... 33 2.2.2.2 Summary of Workshop Discussion on the Results of the Enquiry ...... 33 2.2.2.3 Key Results of Group Work ...... 35 2.2.2.4 Key Learnings from the Workshop ...... 36 2.2.3 Interviews with Six Experts ...... 37 2.2.3.1 Interview with Anna-Elisabeth Jensen, Museum Lolland-Falster ...... 38 2.2.3.2 Interview with Lars Holten, Sagnlandet Lejre ...... 41 2.2.3.3 Interview with Jesper Kjærulff, Municipality of Vordingborg / Cultural Region of Storstrøm .... 42 2.2.3.4 Interview with Rikke Skuldbøl, Faxe Library, and Karin Johansen, Næstved Library ...... 44 2.2.3.5 Interview with Carsten Behnk, Dept. of Culture, County of Ostholstein ...... 46 2.2.3.6 Interview with Nina Jakubczyk, Culture Office, Lübeck ...... 48 2.2.3.7 Key Learnings from Six Interviews ...... 50 2.2.4 Personal Interviews with Best Practice Actors ...... 51 2.2.4.1 Best Practice Region of Øresund ...... 51 2.2.4.2 Best Practice Region of Sønderjylland - Schleswig ...... 53 333 SWOT AAANALYSES ...... 55 3.1 SWOT ANALYSIS BASED ON GENERAL RESEARCH ...... 55 3.2 SWOT ANALYSIS OF SIX CULTURAL FIELDS ...... 56 3.2.1 Visual Arts ...... 56 3.2.2 Performing Arts ...... 57 3.2.3 Music ...... 58 3.2.4 Literature ...... 59 3.2.5 Film ...... 60 3.2.6 Cultural Heritage ...... 61 3.2.7 Cultural Category “Other” ...... 62 3.3 SWOT ANALYSIS OF CULTURAL LANDSCAPE ...... 63 3.4 HURDLES OF SETTING UP CROSS-CULTURAL CO-OPERATIONS ...... 64 3.5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT WITH KULTURLINK ...... 66 3.5.1 Cultural Players’ Needs for Cross-Cultural Co-Operations and the Virtual Culture Map ...... 67 3.5.2 Proposal: Ten Steps to Initiate Cross-Cultural Co-Operations ...... 68 444 CCCONCLUSIONS AND RRRECOMMENDATIONS ...... 70 555 SSSTRATEGY ...... 75 666 SSSOURCES ...... 78 777 AAAPPENDICES ...... 80 − Appendix 1: Management Summary of "Quantitative Analysis of the Destination ‘Fehmarnbelt’" − Appendix 2: Danish Fact Sheet (Questionnaire) − Appendix 3: German Fact Sheet (Questionnaire) − Appendix 4: Detailed Results of the Enquiry − Appendix 5: List of Cultural Actors − Appendix 6: List of Cross Border Projects

111 MMMANAGEMENT SSSUMMARY

As part of the planned construction of a firm Fehmarnbelt crossing between Denmark (island of Lolland) and Germany (island of Fehmarn) by the year 2020, new possibilities and potentials in cultural life and co-operation in a wider Feh- marnbelt Region will arise. Since culture will play a crucial role in building and strengthening a conjoint regional identity, the project kulturLINK has been estab- lished with the goals to increase the exchange between Danish and German art- ists and cultural institutions, and to initiate cross-border cultural structures and networking. In pursuit of these goals, this study determines the main features of the Region’s cultural landscape, its structure and networks, as well as its poten- tials for cross-cultural joint projects, analysing the hurdles and opportunities for kulturLINK to foster cross-cultural co-operations. This study serves as a first foundation toward a road map for kulturLINK’s subsequent activities, not claim- ing to be encompassing or representative of all details of the Region’s cultural life.

Quantitative as well as qualitative analyses of the Region’s cultural landscape were used to gather learnings for the project kulturLINK. This study operates on the basis of kulturLINK’s definition of “culture” by means of the following six plus one categories: visual arts, performing arts, music, literature, film, cultural heritage, and “other.” Limitations and possible expansions of this definition are indicated at various points of this study.

This study rests on key learnings gathered from existing analyses of the Feh- marnbelt Region in general, the cultural beacons of the Region of Sjælland (Sørensen, Kjølbæk & Bærenholdt 2009), the potentials of the Fehmarnbelt Re- gion’s cultural landscape (Stöber 2011), the culture industry in Schleswig- Holstein (ews 2008), and the potentials and hurdles of intercultural co- operations in the Fehmarnbelt Region (Universität Kiel / Syddansk University 2006).

Quantitative and qualitative feedback from cultural players has been sought to scrutinize and differentiate these studies’ key learnings: 1) A questionnaire was directed at ca. 600 Danish and 155 German cultural providers of the Region to gather information about their current structure and operation as well as needs for cross-cultural co-operation. 2) Six qualitative personal interviews with key cultural actors and leading administrators from Denmark and Germany were conducted and evaluated with the goal of attaining supplemental, deepening in- formation on the cultural landscape and its expected development. 3) The best

1

practice Regions of Øresund and Sønderjylland – Schleswig provided insight into the experiences and learnings from two already existing examples of cross- cultural co-operation.

The results of this analysis generated the following characteristics of the Feh- marnbelt Region’s cultural landscape:

− a highly varied cultural landscape of predominantly small to medium sized cultural players with diverse forms of organisation and highly different financ- ing and administrative structures, − strong cultural fields and activities in cultural history (esp. prehistoric and medieval), music (esp. classic) and the visual arts, − diverse understandings of “culture” among and between both national groups of cultural players, making its differentiation along the lines of categories, high – low culture, experiential edutainment, lay culture, commercial culture, cultural tourism, the relations of culture – nature and culture – science a fruitful, continuous issue of exchange, − shared opportunities and challenges to draw younger audiences, to deal with the demographic change, and to counter the competition of the entertain- ment industry, − high potential for cross-cultural work in the above mentioned strong fields as well as in the cultural format of joint events, − high potentials in expanding cultural activities in the fields of: “nature- culture” areas, cultural tourism, edutainment and participatory cultural offers, cultural projects across cultural categories including, e. g., higher education and the sciences, and joint investigations of “hidden cultural treasures,” − mutual openness and interest by cross-cultural players in a joint exploration of these potentials, considering the language barrier a challenge rather than a problem, − shared interest in sustainable, long-term cross-cultural relations and co- operations rather than short-lived projects. kulturLINK will need to address the following hurdles, which characterise the cultural landscape: − a lack of knowledge about each other and each other’s diverse cultural land- scape and providers, their financial and organisational structures, and the possibilities of joint fundraising, − little knowledge about common cultural roots in prehistoric and medieval times, − few direct contacts, co-operations, or networks across the Fehmarnbelt,

2

− intercultural differences in terms of scepticism / optimism, cultures of debate / consensus, or structural conditions and needs in joint pursuits of projects, − a Danish administrative structure of culture in an ongoing process of change, − insufficient tangible and sustainable support by politics, − no incentive funding or stable financial structures of support for long-term cross-cultural projects and co-operations, − remaining great geographical distances in the primarily rural Region, which need to be overcome even after the building of a firm Fehmarnbelt crossing.

To have sustainable effects on cross-cultural co-operations, the following con- clusions have been drawn:

− to foster especially personal meetings on an ongoing basis for an intercultural and informational exchange, since the individual persons and their relations are the key to a long-lasting cross-cultural work, − to nurture a continuation and expansion of these personal contacts, e. g. via online communication, − to focus on project-based cross-cultural co-operations in the categories of cultural strengths (cultural history, music, visual arts) and in the context of joint events as well as cultural roots (prehistoric and medieval times), − to follow a three-lane track of supporting beacon cultural institutions, experi- ential forms of culture (e. g., Viking centres), and lay participatory cultural activities / micro-projects (e. g., by cultural associations).

Beyond kulturLINK’s first phase, the following suggestions are recommended to be pursued after 2013: − to provide travel and (incentive) project funds and / or initiate a cultural foun- dation for the Region, − to create a regular Fehmarnbelt Region “culture award” and “kulturLINK Fes- tival Week,” − to take tangible measurement steps, − and to establish a professional “kulturLINK Cross-Cultural Services Office” in order to realise kulturLINK’s goals and to manage its virtual Culture MAP, PR and marketing, special events, award and funds on an ongoing basis. kulturLINK is recommended to capitalise on the curiosity and openness of a creative field of artists and cultural players toward the establishment of cross- cultural networks. Short-term measurements to establish personal contacts, share information and develop joint cultural ideas and projects can sow first seeds. To see these cross-cultural crops grow and to establish sustainable cross- cultural co-operations and a conjoint cultural identity, a shared culture will need

3

to be anchored in people’s hearts and minds, taking years. A long breath is needed as much as the willingness to consider culture in dynamic terms, con- tinuously re-defining it together when the process of cross-cultural co-operation unfolds. A rich cultural landscape with open-minded, active cultural players and a population, who consider culture an important factor in the Region, are readily available to be tapped and mobilised for the building of a firm cultural crossing over the Fehmarnbelt.

4

222 GGGENERAL AND FFFIELD RRRESEARCH

2.1 DESK RESEARCH

2.1.1 General Features of the Region

The analysis of the Region’s general features is mainly based on the SWOT- analysis of the Operational Programme, European Territorial Cooperation (IN- TERREG IVa), 2007 – 2013, Fehmarnbelt Region, and other sources like the quantitative analysis of the tourism project “Destination Fehmarnbelt” (Fach- hochschule Westküste, 2010). These sources’ results have been supplemented by evaluations and recommendations by ews group. This does not constitute, however, a new general analysis of the Fehmarnbelt Region; rather, the follow- ing survey is a summary of existing one and intended to provide a framework for the analysis of the Region’s cultural life and potentials.

2.1.1.1 Historical Background of the Region

The Fehmarnbelt Region in the South Western Baltic Sea area shares a diverse history of over 10.000 years. Especially during the Stone Age and Middle Ages, its inhabitants developed strong social and economic ties and engaged in trade. In the early 9th century, the Vikings built Haithabu near the now German town of Schleswig, which became one of the most important settlement sites and trade centres in Northern Europe. The Vikings dominated the area until the late 11th century, and the Danish kingdom expanded its dominance along the Southern Baltic Sea coast until the early 13th century. In 1227, the Hanse defeated the Danes at Bornhøved. The decline of Danish supremacy over Northern Europe began marked by the occupation of Vordingborg by the Hanse in 1364. – The Battle of Dybbøl in 1864, in which Denmark was defeated, resulted in its loss of the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein to Germany that had belonged to the Danish kingdom for centuries. Together with the German occupation during World War II, these more recent two historical events left painful scars in the Danish collective memory and mark relations with Germany until today. There- fore, some scepticism toward Germans prevails in Denmark.

However, major steps toward recognition and overcoming of these difficult his- torical ties have been undertaken during the last 10 years. In 2010, a German Ambassador was invited to the commemoration of the Battle of Dybbøl for the

5

first time. Interest in Germany is increasing among Danes; the Danish travel to their neighbour in the South more and more; Danish artists have established ties to Schleswig-Holstein’s cultural events and artists. On the other hand, especially Northern Germans have appreciated the Danish landscape, lifestyle, interior de- sign, and architecture for more than half a century and increasingly do so both as tourists, cultural visitors and consumers. – Furthermore, Germany and Den- mark share political views: in foreign affairs, they prefer an orientation toward policies based on ethical values; in the European Union, they both pursue solid budgetary policies. With regard to the price differential effecting trade along the German-Danish border (Danish Crown ↔ Euro in Germany), close economic ties and talks are maintained.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − An increased cultural and touristic exchange can provide a chance for an in- creased understanding and appreciation of joint historical roots, in particular of prehistoric and medieval times. − A shared dealing with and overcoming of the Danish “historical traumata” of 1864 and 1940-45 may be enhanced by an exchange of more knowledge about each other and better personal contacts.

2.1.1.2 Geographical Definition of the Region

The Fehmarnbelt Region comprises the Southern and Western Region of Sjæl- land with 14 municipalities on the Danish side and the counties of Ostholstein and Plön as well as the Hanseatic City of Lübeck in the Land of Schleswig- Holstein on the German side of the Fehmarnbelt. The Danish Fehmarnbelt Region of 7273 km² is very little populated with 806.000 inhabitants. The German Fehmarnbelt Region covers 2689 km² with a population of 553.530 inhabitants, making it still little populated, yet more than the Danish side.

© European Union, 1995-2010

6

Learnings for kulturLINK: − A low population density can be viewed as a benefit insofar as it allows an appreciation of the expanse and beauty of the rural landscape. − Challenges to bridge great geographical distances and bring people together need to be met to enable personal exchanges.

2.1.1.3 Infrastructure of the Region

The Region stretches along the axis of traffic betweenbetween the metropolises of CCo-o-o-o- penhagen and HamburgHamburg. Accordingly, the Fehmarnbelt Region can serve as a tie between these two metropolitan areas. On the other hand, the Region may only be used for transit, and new activities may not be held in the area. Highways E476/55E476/55, running North – South, and E20E20, running East – West, are going through Sjælland. Highway A1 runs North – South through Schleswig-Holstein and continues down to Hamburg. The connecting element between both geo- graphical areas is the ferry across the Fehmarnbelt between Rødbyhavn and Puttgarden. An increase in work places around the buildingbuilding sites of the FeFeh-h-h-h- marnbelt crossing will only be temporary until the tunnel has been built; after- wards, a decline of employment in both harbours and shipping companies is to be expected.

It is recommendable to meet this threat by focussing on the potential of the firm Fehmarnbelt crossing by strengthening joint activities in the Region.

The Region is marked by its maritime charactercharacter. The natural beauty of its coast lines, its harbours and ferry connection between Germany and Denmark points to the Region’s strengths with regard to tourism and economic development. Yet, the maritime features of the Region are not economically taken advantage of as they could be. Thus, it would be recommendable to strengthen the mari- time character of the Fehmarnbelt Region and to expand the term “maritime” toward an inclusion of services and industries beyond the existing ones.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − The Fehmarnbelt Region’s position between the metropolises Copenhagen and Hamburg needs to be considered as both potential (tie) and threat (tran- sit region). − The possibilities for activating the economic resources and profiting from in- creased transit traffic should be taken advantage of and considered in the development and / or strengthening of cultural institutions and actors.

7

− Economic activities will centre near the geographic locations of the tunnel – these may be important locations for selected new cultural offers. The natural beauty of the Region offers itself to be used for (eco-) tourism, including a cultural approach to nature in terms of a “nature-culture-zone” (cf. Sørensen, Kjølbæk & Bærenholdt, 2009). − The potential of the maritime character of the Region could be explored and marketed further in cultural and cultural touristic terms.

2.1.1.4 Cultural Features and Highlights of the Region

Region of Sjælland

The Southern and Western parts of Sjælland – with its two ferry connections in Gedser and Rødbyhavn – are marked by their rural character and a large number of farm houses and manors. The city of Sorø was a medieval trading town and today is the administrative capital and home of the Sorø Akademi, the oldest school of Denmark with its more than 400 years of history. The city of Næstved is the largest city of the Region and was an important religious centre during medieval times. Gavnø Castle, originating in the Middle Ages, is an important family attraction near Næstved, offering museum collections, a chapel and park. – The cultural history centre of Sagnlandet Lejre offers participatory edutainment and experiential approaches to prehistoric and medieval culture. The artist / writer communities of Odsherred and the islands of Stevns and Møn are impor- tant zones of cultural production and creativity in the Region’s cultural land- scape. Experiential offers like the BonBon-Land or Knuthenborg Safaripark are especially drawing families. – The city of Roskilde – capital of Denmark until 1443 – is renowned for its university and its cathedral, which is part of the UNESCO World Heritage, and the Roskilde Festival with 115.000 visitors per year. – Other cultural beacons of the Region are the Museum of Art Fuglsang in the municipality of Lolland and the Middle Age Centre in Nykøbing, Falster.

Hanseatic City of Lübeck

210.000 people live in the regional city of Lübeck. The Hanseatic city’s old town is part of the UNESCO World Heritage. The city is home to four universi- ties, among them the University of Music, Lübeck. The headquarters of the in- ternational Schleswig-Holstein Music Festival (SHMF) is located in Lübeck as well as numerous museums, theatres and the annual Nordic Film Festival. The city is home to three Nobel Prize winners – Thomas Mann, Willy Brandt and Günter Grass. – Having won the Germany-wide competition, Lübeck will be the

8

“City of Science” in 2012. – With its Travemünde harbour, Lübeck is a logistics and European ferry hub in the Baltic Sea as much as a point of attraction to sail- ing and seashore tourists.

The County of Ostholstein

The County of Ostholstein is visited by the largest number of tourists in Ger- many in relation to its 204.000 inhabitants. Tourists are especially drawn to seashore resorts of the Baltic Sea, but also explore the hinterland’s countryside, marked by numerous farm houses and manors. The town of Eutin is renown as a former medieval centre and especially as 18th century residence town, home of a castle, historic county library (Landesbibliothek Eutin), and the Eutin Music Fes- tival. Eutin has often been called the “Weimar of the North” in reference to the circle of writers, “Eutiner Kreis,” and other thinkers and artists of the 18th cen- tury. – A large leisure park near the Baltic Sea and the Wallmuseum (rampart museum) of Oldenburg, bringing early medieval history of the Slav settlement Starigard to live, are special regional attractions for families.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − The cultural beacons of the Region demonstrate both the diversity of the cul- tural landscape and shared medieval cultural treasures – offering connecting points and mutual learning opportunities for cross-cultural exchange and joint cultural projects (focusing on edutainment and experiential formats). − Literature / writers and music strike as prominent cultural fields in the Region. − The Region is rich in manors, farm houses and castles, providing a large joint potential for rural culture, for example “cultural packages,” events and cross- over cultural offers (including music, arts, crafts, life style and culinary cul- tural histories; participatory, experiential; for all generations of audience).

2.1.1.5 Demographics

Being marked by a low population density especially in the South and West, these regions of Sjælland expect a continued reduction of its 806.000 inhabi- tants until 2020. Yet, an expected increase of population in the Northeast will provide a 0.4% total increase of inhabitants for all of Sjælland by 2020. 17% of the population in Sjælland is above 65 years of age; this age-group is expected to grow up to 22% until 2020.

The German part of the Fehmarnbelt Region expects a stagnation or decrease of its population of 553.530 people by up to 0.3% by 2020. Currently, 20% of the

9

population is above age 65; by 2020, this group will make up 25% of the popu- lation, reflecting the national demographic changechange.

On the one hand, a larger number of older inhabitantsinhabitants will suggest an increased demand for leisure and cultural activities as well as offers in the healthcare sec- tor in the Fehmarnbelt Region. On the other hand, less younger and employed inhabitants will lead to a lack of available manpower as well as a decline of eco- nomic possibilities for innovation and production.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − Adjusting cultural offers to the demographic change implies more services at cultural sites, which address the needs of elder visitors and tourists. − New touristic offers for active senior citizens need to be developed and ex- panded (e. g. in the area of a cultural appreciation of nature).

2.1.1.6 Economy

The Danish growth rate amounts to 3.9% per year, and Sjælland contributes 10% to the Danish gross domestic product (GDP). The GDP per inhabitant in Sjælland lies below the overall Danish level of GDP. – This compares with 1.3% growth rate in Germany, whereby Schleswig-Holstein contributes 3.1% to the German gross domestic product (GDP). The GDP per inhabitantinhabitant in the German Fehmarnbelt Region corresponds with the European average GDP and, thereby, is 11% higher than in Sjælland.

The largest economic sectors in the Fehmarnbelt Region are servicesservices and tradetrade, making up 70% of the Region’s economic performance. Industry and processing trade are the next most important economic sectors in the Region with a share of 25% in Sjælland and 20% in Schleswig-Holstein of the overall economic per- formance. – One of the major strengths of the Region is their ties to the innova- tive milieus of the metropolises Copenhagen and Hamburg. On the other hand, there are few innovative environments to be found in the Region itself and only few economic clusters like food production, bio/medical technology, logistics, and geriatric care facilities in the city and region of Lübeck.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − The limited economic strength of the Region makes it necessary to recognize the cultural landscape’s economic potential in secondary terms: attracting new citizens, a well-educated potential labour force, and (cultural) tourists into the Region.

10

− Fostering culture and cross-cultural exchange includes the potential for fur- ther economic ties and revenues for the Region.

2.1.1.7 Innovation, Research and Development

The Fehmarnbelt Region needs knowledge and innovation in order to assert itself against the large players and metropolises. Centres of knowledge, research and development are the Roskilde Universitetscenter, the University of Lübeck, the Lübeck University of Applied Sciences, the Fraunhofer Institution for Marine Bio- technology, Lübeck. While good prpriiiimary,mary, secondary and tertiary education is available in the Fehmarnbelt Region, only few firms offer employment possibilpossibili-i-i-i- ties in research & developmentdevelopment. Links between research and tourism, e. g. in archaeology, are existent.

It remains a challenge to counter the brain drain of the Region, the trend of highly trained employees to move from the Fehmarnbelt Region to the metropo- lises of Copenhagen and Hamburg. Developing business networks enables to keep and share knowledge in the Region and to foster co-operation among re- gional firms.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − Colleges and universities entail, all in all, a culturally interested audience, of- ten engaged and experienced in international exchanges; special cross- cultural programmes or projects targeting these audiences may serve as model and incentive for other cross-cultural ties. − The higher educational strengths of the Region may be explored in terms of how they can serve and / or foster cultural projects – be it financially, through their own services, or by embedding scientific questions in the con- text of the Region’s cultural history. This may be particularly applicable to the medical and healthcare sciences, or medical and food technologies. − The Region’s maritime character and nature as a resource for scientific knowledge may be linked to cultural projects and jointly marketed; e. g., the ethical and cultural implications of the protection of biological diversity, or the „CRYO-BREHM,“ the German bank of wild animals’ cells at the Fraun- hofer Institution for Marine Biotechnology (cf. Fraunhofer EMB, 2011). − The new Centre for Research in Cultural History at the University of Lübeck (Zentrum für Kulturwissenschaftliche Forschung, 2011) may develop one fo- cus on the conjoint cultural history of the Fehmarnbelt Region.

11

2.1.1.8 Level of Education

On the Danish side of the Fehmarnbelt Region, a larger part of the population possesses a higher degree of education than on the German side due to different educational systems. In the near future, a decline in the level of education is to be expected on both sides.

The limited attraction of the Region for people looking for primary, secondary as well as tertiary education remains a great challenge – often, the Fehmarnbelt Region is only “second choice.” Exceptionally, medical studies at the University of Lübeck are often “first choice,” since students ranked them first or second of the medical faculties in Germany for several years.

The Fehmarnbelt Region has met the challenge of a brain draidrainnnn to the metropo- lises by an expansive development of its educational institutions and well- established networks in the educational sector.

Learnings for kulturLInk: − Successful educational networks, expanded educational institutions and an increase of educational quality may serve as model for cross-cultural devel- opment. − Cross-cultural projects may increase the attractiveness of cultural life, espe- cially in the country-side of the Region, thus helping to fend off the brain drain to the metropolises. − Access to science and research by the general population has been facilitated and fostered in Lübeck in the course of its application to become Germany’s “City of Science 2012;” it may serve as model and point of connection for providing access to (high-level) culture. − Lower levels of education may require cultural offers to be more experiential, participatory and event-oriented, learning from edutainment methods of pres- entation and appreciation by its users.

2.1.1.9 Job Market and Employment

The Danish Fehmarnbelt Region has a relatively low number of uneunemmmmploymentployment (ca. 4.0 – 4.5 %). However, the effects of the global economic crisis in 2009 are felt much stronger on the Danish than on the German side of the Fehmarn- belt. In December 2010, available places of employment in the Danish Fehmarn- belt Region decreased by 26%, and far more people were unemployed especially in the healthcare and social services sector than in December 2009.

12

On the German side of the Fehmarnbelt, unemployment in some parts of the Re- gion was more than double as high than on the Danish side. However, the econ- omy in Schleswig-Holstein recovered much faster from the global economic cri- sis. This was reflected in unemployment numbers: In December 2010, there were far less unemployed people to be counted than in December 2009. An in- crease in employment opportunities could be documented, especially in export- related business and industry sectors.

Number of unemployed in the Fehmarnbelt Region in December 2010. Source: Agentur für Arbeit Lübeck / Employment Agency of Lübeck, March 2011.

The Region’s future employment market is challenged by two factors: 1) The demographic increase of the Region’s population above 65 years of age will lead to a lower number of people employed. 2) Employees are still lacking the will- ingness to be mobile and work on the other side of the Fehmarnbelt.

Learnings for kulturLINK:

− Cross-cultural projects may contribute to support employee-mobility and the development of joint training programmes by targeting and including these groups of citizens, who work or commute to work across the border. − Cross-cultural projects, addressing the particular cultural needs and identity of cross-border commuters, may reduce barriers, which keep employees and workers from working on the other side of the Fehmarnbelt.

13

2.1.1.10 Tourism

The study “Quantitative Analysis of the Destination ‘Fehmarnbelt’” by the Uni- versity of Applied Sciences of the West Coast of 2010 examined the numbers of tourists in the Fehmarnbelt Region in 2008. According to this study, ca. 14.97 million days of stay could be documented for the Danish side, of which 2.98 million tourists came as day trippers. Ca. 96.90 million days of stay were counted on the German side of the Fehmarnbelt, of which 67.72 million tourists came only for a one-day visit. 40% of the tourists in the Danish region were for- eigners; 21% of those came from Germany. In the German region, only 7% of their tourists were foreigners, 2% of them were Danes. In economic terms, the added value of tourism amounts to 1.363 million Euros in the German part of the Fehmarnbelt Region, and to ca. 821 million Euro in the Danish part. For more details, see Appendix 1 “Management Summary, Quantitative Analysis of the Destination ‘Fehmarnbelt.’”

Tourism in both Danish and German parts of the Fehmarnbelt Region is largely focussed on the coastal areasareas, although in Germany, also the hinterland and cit- ies are centres of touristic attraction. A better developed infrastructure for tour- ists can be found on the German side of the Fehmarnbelt in comparison to the Danish one – largely, because tourism is of far greater economic relevance for the German area than for the Danish one.

Learnings for kulturLINK:

− Tourism is linked to cultural tourism and should be viewed and strengthened as an economic factor in the entire Fehmarnbelt Region. − Given the demographic change, attractive cultural touristic offers for older visitors should be created and promoted, taking advantage of the environ- ment. − It should be further explored, how far the division of Sjælland into four cul- tural zones like the “nature-culture-zone” (cf. Sørensen, Kjølbæk & Bæren- holdt, 2009) can be extended to the German side of the belt and then jointly marketed. − A joint “nature-culture-zone,” for instance, could be marketed as an attrac- tive area for cultural tourism and leisure activities like eco-tourism or pilgrim- age trail walks.

14

2.1.1.11 Environment

The Fehmarnbelt Region is characterised by a high amount of agricultureagriculture, focus- sing on crop growing and forestry, as well as many natural arareaseas and nature rre-e-e-e- servesserves. The low population density causes a moderate risk of environmental pol- lution. Traffic can be considered the highest cause of an environmental impact of waste; an economic development concentrated around highways can relieve rural areas from pollution.

Learnings for kulturLINK: − The growing development of alternative energy production, especially wind and sun, also off-shore, should be accompanied by cross-cultural reflection and projects on its socio-cultural and environmental effects. − The Region’s landscape – marked by the Baltic Sea, firths and lakes – holds many possibilities to develop cultural tourism and leisure activities while be- ing aware of the preservation of its natural resources, biological diversity and nature reserves (target group “best agers”). − The full potential of (cultural) eco-tourism should be tapped.

2.1.2 Assessment of Four Studies

Four studies have been selected for key learnings to contribute to this analysis of the cultural landscape of the Fehmarnbelt Region: a) “Creative Regions” by ews group / IHK Lübeck, 2008. A transfer of learnings regarding cultural development and co-operation in the Fehmarnbelt Region was the criterion to include this study on the culture and creative industry of Schleswig-Holstein. b) “The Fehmarnbelt Region – Potentials in the Cultural Sector” by Dr. Birgit Stöber, 2011. Many contents questions of this study overlap with Dr. Stöber’s study, which was based on interviews with selected experts from the Region. c) “Barriers and Potentials of cross-border Co-Operation in the Fehmarnbelt Re- gion” by the University of Kiel / Syddansk University, 2006. The economic factors of cross-border co-operation affects cultural cross- border co-operation and is thus of relevance to this analysis.

15

d) “Kulturelle fyrtårne i Region Sjælland“ by F. Sørensen, A. Kjølbæk and J.O. Bærenholdt, Center for Oplevelsesforskning, Roskilde Universitet, 2009. The analysis of the cultural beacons of the Region of Sjælland points to the relevance of cultural beacons in creating social capital, cultural identity and knowledge-based jobs as well as attracting tourists and business settle- ments.

2.1.2.1 Key Results of Four Studies a) Key Results of the Study “Creative Regions”

The cultural industry in the German Land of Schleswig-Holstein is characterised by heterogeneous and fragmented structures with little networking and lobbying, and without a master plan for a successful development of a creative and cul- tural industry. According to the cultural industry report of Schleswig-Holstein, the printing business, art trade, design, newspaper publishing houses, and the music market are the essential pillars, which generate the volume of sales. – As a result of expert interviews, more networking among the cultural industry is desired, e. g. a Baltic Sea Network and a virtual network and cultural platform. – In cultural tourism, an increment of growth could be found as well as cultural highlights like the Schleswig-Holstein Music Festival.

The potential to develop the Region by means of the creative and cultural indus- try is high, given that it is a major economic factor, which creates employment opportunities and emanates to other business sectors. For instance, the design industry has interfaces to sectors like tourism, industry, medical technology, the media, and the maritime sector. Furthermore, the strengthening of the cultural industry causes a qualitative and quantitative increase of cultural tourism.

In terms of its social affects, the creative and cultural industry has a positive impact on the quality of life and identification of the citizens with their Region as well as the image of Schleswig-Holstein as a creative land. Particular cultural fields with high potential have been found in the sector of cultural heritage, mu- sic (e. g. the S-H Music Festival) and film (Nordic Film Days). To develop the creative and cultural industry further in Schleswig-Holstein, regionally specific strategies, e. g. for the Fehmarnbelt or the Flensburg-Schleswig-Syddanmark Regions, should be pursued.

16

b) Key Results of the Study “The Fehmarnbelt Region – Potentials in the Cultural Sector”

In restructuring processes of regions with early developed industries, culture plays a major role. The economic growth of a region depends on its cultural in- novative force, be it as a location factor to attract business settlements, or as a basis for touristic development. 77% of the Danes and 65% of the Germans consider culture to be important. The Danish believe that in Germany a larger cultural diversity and openness prevails than in Denmark, especially in rural ar- eas. – Cultural differences are existent between the Danish consensus culture and the German culture of debate and criticism, being one reason why the Ger- man discussion of the firm Fehmarnbelt crossing has lasted much longer.

The Fehmarnbelt Region is no “naturally grown” region –in contrast to, e. g., the Ruhr Region or the Öresund Region – and therefore requires definition by people. Culture is a valuable instrument to charge a region with emotion, making it visi- ble and perceivable by these means. This is especially important since the beauty of nature and maritime character of the Fehmarnbelt Region can be per- ceived as attractive, yet also as deserted and boring with little vitality – thus, a definition process is crucial.

The borders of the Fehmarnbelt Region should be understood much broader to include the area from Southern Sweden to Hamburg in order to activate more potentials of the Region. – The Region’s low population density poses a chal- lenge, if the crossing of the Fehmarnbelt is to be more than merely a project of infrastructure, creating a transit region. – Another challenge lies in the differ- ences in administrative structures, making cross-cultural co-operation a complex undertaking.

Potential for cultural co-operation: To generate sustainable success, cultural co- operation should be built upon the existing cultural landscape – not on an artifi- cially created, new form of co-operation. To overcome language barriers, the visual arts and music offer themselves especially for cross-cultural projects. Art- ist residences can invigorate rural, structurally weak regions. Virtual media like a homepage, cultural calendar and contact possibilities can provide easy access to information on cultural activities.

Professionalism and co-ordinating management are necessary premises for cul- tural co-operation. The creation of a “cultural region” and network building can only occur if mutual interest in each other is existent. Cultural projects should be pursued under the premise of being sustainable, not only “to generate traffic.” –

17

Time is a crucial factor and many small steps instead of a large strategy should be pursued.

c) Key Results of the Study “Barriers and Potentials of cross-border Co-operation in the Fehmarnbelt Region”

Strategies to reduce barriers, which keep employees and workers from working on the other side of the Fehmarnbelt, are needed to generate streams of com- muters and trade across the border. Among these hurdles are administrative bar- riers as well as differences in tax and social legislation and support of the unem- ployed. In the long run, strategies of integration have a stronger impact than the mere construction of a firm belt crossing. It is important to include also those attractive partners in co-operation efforts, who are located outside of the de- fined Fehmarnbelt Region or in the metropolitan areas.

It is recommendable to constitute “information centres” to improve the lack of knowledge and information about “the other side” and the little amount of media coverage on regional cross-border topics.

d) Key Results of the Study “Kulturelle fyrtårne i Region Sjælland“

This study targets the Region of Sjælland and differentiates between five cate- gories of cultural beacons: 1. cultural institutions, 2. experiential worlds / theme parks and cultural industries, 3. creative artists, idealists, 4. associations (forenings, Vereine) and voluntary organisations, and 5. cultural milieus. This differentiation of cultural highlights departs from a definition measured by the amount of visitors and, instead, looks at the kind of cultural players, who are active in each cultural beacon. How much relevance each cultural beacon has in the community of its locale varies among these categories but, in general, can be determined in economic and social terms.

On the one hand, cultural beacons can contribute to a community’s innovation and attractiveness in terms of tourists, sales revenues, business settlements, or the creation of jobs (especially knowledge-based workplaces by cultural attrac- tions themselves). On the other hand, cultural beacons can initiate important social effects like the formation of identity and creation of social capital in form of networks, both fostering the sense of community in a cultural highlight’s re- gion.

18

Cultural institutions, voluntary cultural attractions as well as cultural milieus are particularly attributed with having strong social effects; they often entail a lim- ited relevance on their own but are of great importance when taken together as identity forming elements in their community and region.

Ultimately, the study concludes, to speak of cultural highlights is only possible when interrelations between cultural actors and beacons are considered. In this context, the study has identified four cultural zones in the Region of Sjælland: “zone of experiential culture / theme parks and cultural industry” across Lolland- Falster and Southern Sjælland, a “cultural historical zone” in the area around Roskilde, Lejre and Køge, a “nature-culture zone” reaching from the islands of Møn via Stevns into the regions of Middle and Northwestern Sjælland, and a “zone of creative artists” in Odsherred and on Stevns and Møn.

Among various suggestions, the study recommends

− to mobilise different types of cultural actors and highlights, − to place an emphasis on interrelations between different elements of cultural beacons, e. g., culture, nature, history, − to co-ordinate investments in the development of cultural highlights between municipalities, − to further examine the potentials of the identified cultural zones, − to emphasise innovation of cultural beacons in order to take full advantage of their hidden potentials of development.

2.1.2.2 Key Learnings from Four Studies

The initial situation of the Fehmarnbelt Region can be summarised as follows:

− It is not a “naturally grown” region. − It is a “regional construct,” which needs to be experienced by and made per- ceivable for the Region’s inhabitants. − It comprises specific potentials: rural character, few urban centres, and at- tractive nature. − But it is also marked by the existence of little cross-border knowledge and information about each other as well as few networks.

A firm Fehmarnbelt crossing includes numerous opportunities to develop co- operations, clusters, and tourism. At the same time, considerable risks for the Region are the development of traffic congestions and becoming only a “transit

19

region.” – Economic co-operation is constrained by administrative barriers and different structures of the job market and tax and social legislation.

Accordingly, it is recommendable

− not to draw regional borders too strictly to allow an inclusion of attractive partners from outside the Fehmarnbelt Region, − to develop early strategies for the reduction of cross-border barriers and for the support of co-operations, − to create an improved cross-border exchange of information (e. g., media co- operations, virtual platform of information, contact bureau).

Cultural coco----operationoperation in the Fehmarnbelt Region faces the following initial situsitua-a-a-a- tion:

− The inhabitants of the Region share much of a conjoint history, particularly during the Stone Age and Middle Ages. − Culture is of great relevance to the people of the Region. − The regional cultural landscape is highly varied in its structure. − The Region’s culture and cultural beacons need to be understood in differen- tiated categories according to their actors and interrelations. − So far, few cross-border cultural co-operations and networks exist.

Cross-cultural co-operation would imply the chances: to start low-threshold co- operations, to take advantage of and expand existing cultural highlights (e. g., music festivals) without language barriers, to develop a “real experience” of the Region, to foster cultural tourism, to profit from existing cultural zones and inter- relations between cultural players. At the same time, cultural co-operation in- cludes the risks of being artificially produced without sustainable success and of failing because of the large geographical distances that need to be overcome.

Accordingly, it is recommendablrecommendableeee

− to develop strategies for cultural co-operation according to the specifics of the Region and based upon the existing cultural life and interrelations be- tween cultural players, − to value and support the different economic and social effects, which actors of the five distinct cultural categories generate, − to bring together cultural players from both sides of the Fehmarnbelt, who are part of the same cultural category,

20

− to be aware of existing Danish cultural zones and to analyse the cultural landscape on the German side of the belt in such terms in order to establish cross-border relations between similar zones, − to foster cultural development and successful co-operations, which are char- acterised by true interest in one another, − to establish a professional and co-ordinating management of cross-cultural projects.

2.2 FIELD RESEARCH

2.2.1 Fact Sheets

2.2.1.1 General Information on Fact Sheets

The goals of the enquiry of more than 600 Danish and 155 German cultural in- stitutions and actors focused on establishing the status quo of the cultural life in the Region and on finding out about the wishes and needs of the cultural actors for cross-cultural co-operation in the Fehmarnbelt Region. The institutions and actors were selected by the 14 Danish consultants and the German project manager respectively. The selection reflected the variety of the Region’s cultural offers and structures and included small and large institutions as well as inde- pendent artists. However, the majority of surveyed cultural players are charac- terized by being recipients of at least some public funding. Accordingly, theme parks and the commercial entertainment industry were not part of this survey, although they could be considered cultural players as in the study by F. Søren- sen, A. Kjølbæk and J.O. Bærenholdt (2009).

210 cultural actors and representatives of cultural institutions filled out and re- turned the questionnaire; 11 of the returned questionnaires were invalid due to no indication of their respondent’s institution / background or too few replies to crucial questions. Of those valid 199 fact sheetssheets, 153 came from the Danish side of the belt and 46 from the German side – i. e., 77% of the replies came from Denmark, 23% from GeGerrrrmanymanymany.

The fact sheet or questionnaire was developed by ews group in conjunction with the Danish cultural scout and the German project manager in all terms (contents, format and length). It was made available to the respondents in a German and

21

Danish version, identical in contents and formulation (cf. Appendices 2 and 3: Danish Fact Sheet, German Fact Sheet). – The questionnairequestionnaire was sent out and cocolllllectedlected electronically by the 14 Danish consultants in Denmark and by the German project manager in Germany.

2.2.1.2 Results of Fact Sheet Enquiry

In the following text, key results of the fact sheet enquiry have been selected. For further details and documentation of the full results of the questionnaires, please see Appendix 4 “Detailed Results of the Enquiry.”

The size of cultural players in terms of their numbernumber ooff visitors indicates that the majority of them are small to mmeeeediumdiumdium: On the Danish side of the Fehmarnbelt 37% of the cultural providers have 101 – 1.000 visitors / year, followed by 23% having 1.001 – 5.000 visitors/year. On the German side, there is an even distribution of small to medium sized cultural institutions (26% = 101 – 1.000, 26% = 1.001 – 5.000 visitors/year). At the same time, larger institutions make up almost a third of the German respondents (28% = 10.001 – 50.000). A stronger consideration of larger cultural institutions in the selection process may explain partly their high amount among German cultural offerors in comparison to the Danish ones.

Visitors to and participants in cultural offers have been treated separately in the enquiry. It becomes apparent that on both sides, we are speaking of very small to medium sized cultural institutions in terms of their participantsparticipants. Yet, the Ger- man cultural players have a higher amount of participants than the Danish ones: a majority of 46% of Danish respondents indicates 1 – 100 participants / year, and a majority of 43% of German respondents indicates 101 – 1.000 partici- pants / year.

Of key interest in this analysis of the cultural landscape is the distribution of cucul-l-l-l- tural categories in both German and Danish parts of the Fehmarnbelt Region. The questionnaire asked the respondents to mark the cultural category, with which they identify their institution / themselves most. In their answers, both Danish and German respondents share “cultural heritage” as one of the most important cultural categories, making up almost a quarter of them (DK: 21%, G: 24%). On the Danish side, music plays an even more important role (27%) than cultural heritage, and the high amount of those, who marked “other” (21%), re- fers to the many cross-category cultural activities and experientially oriented cul- tural offers, which do not allow an easy categorisation. The visual arts (17%)

22

play a slightly lesser role in the Danish Fehmarnbelt Region. On the German side, cultural heritage is followed by the visual arts (20%), even before music (18%).

A strong difference between the two national sides can be found in the cultural field of literature: 16% of German respondents vs. 3% of Danish respondents indicated it, as becomes apparent in the results’ chart below.

Projekte nach Kultursparten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 192

Deutschland 30% 27% Dänemark 24% 25% 21% 20% 21%

18% 20% 17% 16%

15% 9% 9% 9% 10% 4% 3% 5% 2%

0% Bildende Kunst Darstellende Musik Literatur Film Kulturerbe Sonstiges Kunst

Results of Enquiry: Cultural Projects / Offers according to Cultural Category

This profound difference in the category of literature (G: 16% vs. DK: 3%) may have various reasons:

− Cultural institutions representing writers or literature (Buddenbrook House, Günter Grass House, etc.) and libraries are both included in this category, yet represent quite different forms of cultural offers. − The amount of Danish libraries having participated in the query is not very high and thus not representative, although libraries provide important cultural services in their function as community centres. − An untypically high amount of major cultural institutions in the Land of Schleswig-Holstein involves writers and literature.

The questionnaire enquired further into the specific cultural offers of the cultural players, as they may not be limited to one cultural category – after all, one fifth of Danish respondents indicated the general cultural category “other.” On the Danish side, cultural history is the by far leading cultural offer, followed by pop / rock music. Local history, visual arts, choral and classical music are of equally high relevance among the Danish cultural offers. – On the German side, cultural

23

heritage and history have been specified as the leading cultural offers. They are followed by spoken word offers, classical music and literature, after which the visual arts are mentioned.

If we look at the respondents’ goals and purposes ofof thetheiriririr cultural activitiesactivities, we note that participatory offers (63%) dominate on the Danish side, while educa- tion (60%) and cultural representation of the Region (60%) are pointed out most often on the German side. Strong differences between the two national sides of the Fehmarnbelt are to be found with regard to edutainment / event culture, which is of great relevance in Denmark (59%) and comparatively little in Ger- many (20%). Equally, representation of the Region (DK: 21%, G: 60%) and ser- vices for tourists (DK: 28%, G: 53%) are valued quite differently in both coun- tries; on the German side of the Fehmarnbelt Region, these purposes and goals are rated as very important.

Zielsetzungen der Kulturaktivitäten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 195, Mehrfachnennungen 63% Kulturangebote zum Mitmachen 47% 50% Edutainment / Erlebniskultur 20% 39% Unterhaltung 51% 53% Bildung 60%

34% Lehrgänge, Veranstaltungen etc. 31% 30% 38% Vorträge, Führungen usw. Deutschland 15% Dänemark Lernmaterialien 16% 20% Schulung (für "Profis") 13% 18% Unterricht für Laien 16% 21% Kulturelle Repräsentation der Region 60% 28% Kulturelle Dienstleistungen für Touristen 53% 34% Andere Zielsetzungen 36%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Results of Enquiry: Purposes and Goals of Cultural Activities

An important element, shared by both sides of the Fehmarnbelt, is the time frameframe, in which their cultural activities are offered: more than two thirds of all respondents say that they offer their cultural activities throughout the year, and only 25-29% indicate seasonal offers. In Germany, event-related offers play a larger role than in Denmark. Nonetheless, it seems apparent that the predomi- nantly year-round cultural offers on both sides of the Fehmarnbelt are targeting local residents far more than (seasonal) tourists with their cultural activities.

24

This assumption becomes validated by the enquiry’s results to the question re- garding the origin of the cultural players’ audienceaudience:audience 69% of the Danish and 48% of the German respondents specify local people as their main audience. On the German side, the regional audience plays a more important role (31%) than on the Danish side (19%), which may be owed to the large distances and sparse population in Sjælland.

In terms of the aaaudience’saudience’s aagege of the surveyed cultural players, the demographic change is already apparent on both sides of the Fehmarnbelt: 47% of the Danish and 42% of the German respondents indicate their predominant audience to be above the age of 50 years. Only 20% are below 20 years of age, and 15% (DK) respectively 11% (G) are between 21 and 34 years old. A quarter of the audi- ence on both sides is between 35 and 50 years old. Accordingly, attracting a younger and the youngest audience may be of concern to all cultural providers.

The legal basis or foundation of the cultural players’ work is marked by similari- ties as much as strong differences between the Danish and German sides. 70% of all respondents write that their cultural activities are based on articles of their association, organisation or company, whichever determines their institutional format. Yet, 85% of the Danish respondents marked “legislation” as the basis of their cultural activities in comparison to 42% of the Germans respondents. This contrast is even starker, if we look at the specifics of the legislation that rules the Danish respondents’ work: 62% of them marked national laws and 57% communal laws as relevant, while only 8% of the German respondents signified national laws, 21% communal laws as defining their work.

“Unincorporated associations” dominate the structurestructure and organisation of the cucullllturaltural providers up to 45% on the Danish side and 36% on the German side of the Fehmarnbelt. Since “associations” are an important form of cultural organi- sation or support, it is important to note some structural differences between Danish and German associations.

While in Germany, even large cultural institutions may be organised and finan- cially structured as incorporated Verein, in Denmark there are far more often un- incorporated forenings. On the Danish side, representatives of associations and museums rather meet on the “museums’ joint governing body, the Statens Mu- seumsnævn,” as Michael Lauenborg has explained (Lauenborg 2000, 28). On the German side, the cultural institution itself may be organised as an associa- tion and its managing director is hired and its final decisions are made by the association’s members.

25

Danish forenings are not obliged to be incorporated or registered. Accordingly, many communities only know of those associations, which are applying to use local and municipal public facilities for their meetings and activities. Danish cul- tural associations may not be known, if they meet at private locations, or are not part of joint boards of cultural institutions.

Following “unincorporated associations,” the next important structural format is “public organisation / institution” (DK: 21%, G: 16%). Otherwise, the organisa- tional structure of cultural institutions and actors in the Fehmarnbelt Region is highly diverse, as the overview of the enquiry’s results shows:

Organisationsstruktur (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 195

21% Öffentliche Organisation 16% Einrichtung des öff. Rechts 13% 7% 1% Gemeinnützige Organisation 13% 45% Verein 36% 2% private Organisation 9% 1% Kirchlich 2% Deutschland Bildungsorganisation 1% 0% Dänemark 9% Erwachsenenbildung/ Kinder und Jugendliche 0% 1% Gemeindebasiert / Ehrenamt 2% 5% Künstlerprojekt 7% 1% Saisonales Projekt 0% 1% Andere 9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Results of Enquiry: Organisational Structure of Cultural Institutions / Actors

The enquiry’s results regarding funding and financingfinancing of the cultural institutions and actors is most interesting: Comparing the main financial sources of the cul- tural offerors on both sides, they have a very similar 50 – 50 proportion of pub- lic and private funding sources (DK: 51% public, 49% private; G: 46% public, 54% private). When we look in more detail at the various financial sources of the cultural respondents, though, we obtain a quite different picture – financing of culture operates completely different in both countries of the Fehmarnbelt Region.

26

Communal funding is a source for 79% of the Danish respondents, yet only for 36% of the German ones. Since there is no Federal Land structure in Denmark, zero funding comes from the Land. But in Germany, it plays an important role: 24% of the German respondents indicate the Land as a financial source. – Foundations play the most diverse role: Only 4% of the Danish, but 40% of the German cultural players rely on foundations for funding. – A far lesser difference in funding could be found with regard to the audience or participants as a source: DK: 73%, G: 60% of respondents suggested this to be the case.

The chart below demonstrates this varied funding structure:

Alle Finanzierungsquellen (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) 6% Antw ortende: 191, Mehrfachnennungen EU 11% 28% Land/Nation 7%

Bundesland* 24% 15% Region/Kreis 24% 79% Gemeinde 36% 12% andere öff. Quellen 9% Deutschland 42% Dänemark private Sponsoren 44% 4% Stiftungen 40% 3% Kirche 4% 73% Publikum 60% 53% Eintrittsgelder 58% 36% Gebühren 20% 52% Mitgliedsgebühren 40% 34% andere priv. Quellen 29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Results of Enquiry: Indication of All Sources of Finances for Cultural Actors.

Interest in increasing funds through crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationoperation is present on both sides of the Fehmarnbelt. However, the Danes are more adamant and op- timistic about this potential funding possibility than the Germans: 49% of Dan- ish respondents and 33% of the German ones say “yes, I am interested,” while 38% of the Danes and 47% of the Germans expressed “maybe” being inter- ested in this option.

Matching the results of their audience’ origin, marketingmarketing of Danish and German cultural actors in the Fehmarnbelt Region is predominantly targeting local mar-

27

kets (DK: 100%, G: 80%). Regional marketing also plays a crucial role, since 50% of the Danish cultural players and 75% of the German ones point out that they do marketing in the Region. National (DK: 28%, G: 34%) and international (DK: 14%, G: 16%) marketing of cultural offers is of lesser relevance to all in- terviewees, yet plays a more important role to the German than to the Danish respondents.

With regard to the media used for public relationsrelations,, advertiadvertissssinging and marketingmarketing, the cultural offerors in the Fehmarnbelt Region provide very similar answers: 93% of the Danish, 96% of the German cultural providers use the internet; 98% Danish and 93% German respondents advertise in “traditional media” (newspa- pers, TV, radio; hand-outs, flyers). Furthermore, 64% of the Danish and 70% of the German cultural players market their offers and events through contacts in person. Only with regard to the use of merchandising, a significant difference can be found: 14% of the Danish and only 4% of the German cultural institu- tions and actors use merchandising as a means of marketing and public rela- tions.

The last third of the questionnaire targeted questions on the potential, hopes, wishes, and needs for cross-cultural co-operation among cultural providers of the Fehmarnbelt Region. The first question in this context enquired about the posspossiiiibilitiesbilities to coco----operateoperate crosscross----culturallyculturally with regard to the rules and articles of association / incorporation / company, whichever define a cultural player’s co- operating possibilities. The result: almost 100% on both sides of the belt are permitted to engage in cross-cultural co-operations. Yet, 50% of the Germans and only 39% of the Danish respondents point out “many possibilities” in com- parison to “some possibilities” (DK: 39%, G: 50%) to co-operate cross- culturally.

With regard to existing coco----operationsoperations – irrelevant whether local, regional, na- tional, or international –, the main difference between the Danish and German cultural providers was found in their national co-operations: 47% of the Danish, 33% of the German cultural players mention such collaborations. With regard to all other forms of co-operations, the replies show little difference in numbers: local = DK: 92%, G: 89%, regional = DK: 55%, G: 59%, international = DK: 28%, G: 26%.

CoCo----operationsoperations across the Fehmarnbelt exist only among an average of 19% of all cultural institutions and actors on both sides of the belt (DK: 18%, G: 20%). Here lies much potential for an expansion of cross-cultural contacts and collabo- ration. This is reflected in the replies to the question, whether or not or maybe the cultural players wish to coco----operateoperate more often crosscross----culturallyculturallyculturally: 47% of the

28

Danish and 36% of the German interviewees replied “yes,” 42% of the Danish and 45% of the German respondents answered “maybe.” It is noteworthy that 11% of the Danes and 18% of the Germans expressed “no” interest in further co-operations with each other – reflecting, perhaps, the scepticism among espe- cially German cultural players toward the firm Fehmarnbelt crossing.

Nonetheless, almost all (ca. 90% = “yes” + “maybe”) interviewed persons from both countries point out that they see a pppopoootentialtential for more cultural coco---- operation and an increased cultural life in the Fehmarnbelt Region. Again, the (likely culturally grounded) scepticism toward this potential for cultural growth is higher on the German than on the Danish side: 42% of the Danes, 56% of the Germans replied “maybe,“ and 49% of the Danes, 32% of the Germans an- swered “yes” when asked about their view on the potential for an increase in cross-cultural co-operations and an expansion of cultural activities.

All respondents to the enquiry see a strong potential for more coco----opopoperationeration in the cultural categories “events, festivals” and “music” – as ca. half of them specified these cultural areas to hold most prospects for development. The cul- tural categories “cultural heritage” (average of 37%) and the “visual arts” (34%) are considered the next relevant cultural fields with the potential for growth. The greatest difference between the two cultural sides of responses is to be found in the cultural area of “literature:” only 13% of the Danish, 23% of the German respondents believe this cultural category to have compelling possibilities for expansion.

Below, these results are shown in more detail:

Potentielle Kultursparten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 161, Mehrfachnennungen

Deutschland 56% 60% 54% Dänemark 48%

40% 40% 40% 34% 34% 34% 29% 24% 23%

16% 20% 14% 14% 13% 13%

0% Bildende Darstellende Musik Literatur Film Kulturerbe Veranstal Sonstiges Kunst Kunst tungen

Results of Enquiry: Cultural Categories with Greatest Potential for Growth.

29

The needs to enable or facilitate crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationsoperations are very diverse, but cultural respondents from both sides of the Fehmarnbelt share a view on what is needed most: 92% of Danes and Germans request more personal meet- ings, and a joint average of 74% wish for an increased communication. Among the German cultural actors, there is a higher need for information material (75% vs. DK: 55%), shared learning material (39% vs. DK: 27%), and shared market- ing and public relations (36% vs. DK: 23%). 53% of the Danish and 61% of the German respondents are interested in exploring “new possibilities” of funding.

Bedarf für Aufbau von Kooperationen ausgewählte Kategorien Antwortende: 168, Mehrfachnennungen

92% Persönl. Treffen 92% 37% Schulungen 39% 70% Verstärkte Kommunikation 78% 55% Informationsmaterial 75% 45% Gemeinsame Liste 50% 61% Neue Möglichkeiten 53% Deutschland 28% Änderung Gesetzgebung Dänemark 22% 27% Gemeinsame Entw icklung Lehrmaterialisen 39% 23% Gemeinsame Vermarktung / Kommunikation 36% 3% Sonstiges 8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Results of Enquiry: Needs to Develop Cultural Co-Operations.

Several Danish cultural players point out that a search for joint funds and a multi-lingual marketing would be of special importance to them in cultural cross- co-operations.

One element of the kulturLINK project involves the development of a joint virtual “culture map” of the Fehmarnbelt Region to serve the interested public with in- formation and – foremost – cultural institutions and actors to instigate cross- cultural co-operations. Accordingly, the enquiry asked the interviewees about their needs regarding the contents of this virtual culturculturee platform:platform Cultural pro- viders on both sides share a very strong wish (81 - 89%) for a cultural calendar and information on the cultural life of the Fehmarnbelt Region. German respon- dents expressed a larger need by 10% with regard to a shared contact list, the possibility to place announcements, and an information letter to be provided by the virtual platform.

30

Inhalte des Kulturatlas (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 184

48% allg. Merkmale 44% 81% Kulturleben 84% 83% Kulturkalender 89% 40% Rundschreiben 51% 36% Nachrichten Ticker 24% 57% gemeinsame Kontaktliste 67% 36% Deutschland Vertrags u. Förderstrukturen 40% Dänemark 29% Austauschforum 29% 55% Bekanntmachungen 67%

13% Anderes 9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Results of Enquiry: Desired Contents of the Virtual Culture Map.

2.2.1.3 Key Learnings from Fact Sheet Enquiry

The following key learnings from the fact sheet enquiry ought to be taken into consideration:

− The majority of the Region’s cultural players are small to medium sized in terms of their visitors and participants. This requires different kinds of cross- cultural projects and promotions of a conjoint cultural identity: The support of key projects between larger cultural institutions may be a wise short-term in- vestment to trigger high public attention – especially important during the early phase of kulturLINK. Yet, various people-to-people projects, also includ- ing lay cultural players, may have long-term benefits for anchoring a conjoint cultural identity in the Region’s general population – equally important. − Cultural heritage is the key common cultural category on both sides, followed by the visual arts and music; looking at cultural offers, classical music plays a shared important role. – Fostering these existing, joint cultural strengths as well as events and cultural offers across cultural categories may thus be the most effective investment – in particular, since the majority of the enquiry’s respondents indicate these fields as entailing the highest prospect for cross- cultural co-operation. − For various reasons, the category of literature – encompassing both libraries and literary cultural institutions – is strongly diverse in its representation on both sides of the Fehmarnbelt. Given their role as community centres, espe-

31

cially in Denmark, libraries may attain a particular role as multipliers of infor- mation on kulturLINK. − Half of the audience, visiting the Region’s cultural institutions, are above the age of 50 years. On the one hand, best agers should be addressed as a key audience with particular needs but also special resources to spend. On the other hand, cultural institutions in the entire Region seek to counter the demographic change and increasingly draw younger persons to their cultural offers. On both accounts, shared efforts – including, e. g., “family pack- ages,” a “cultural driving licence for kids,” or exchange programmes / pro- jects, targeting these audience groups – should be fostered.. − The cultural providers’ structure, organisation and financing are highly di- verse; associations play a dominant role in the entire Region. Yet, their legal foundation, forms of operation, and involvement in the decision making and funding / fundraising process of the cultural institutions differ on both sides of the Fehmarnbelt strongly. − A project-focussed development of and fundraising for cultural co-operation may be most advisable both to overcome and profit from these differences. − Incentive funding of conjoint projects may lay the ground for raising (third- party) funds from other sources. − Joint fundraising is a strong need by cultural actors, especially Danish ones; information and workshops addressing this need are recommendable. − About a fifth of all cultural players have experience in co-operation across the Fehmarnbelt, which can be built upon for future co-operations. − The vast majority of cultural players express to be open to co-operations. − Intercultural differences between Danish and German respondents to the en- quiry are apparent: the results show tendencies of German scepticism and Danish optimism toward the potential for more cultural co-operation and an expansion of the Region’s cultural life. 18% of Germans vs. 10% of Danish respondents even indicated no interest in further co-operations. − Intercultural trainings and information are needed to facilitate the realisation, counteract scepticism and demonstrate the benefits of co-operations. − Both Danish and German cultural institutions and actors are in profound agreement that personal meetings and increased communication are required: to exchange information, getting to know each other and each other’s cul- tural offers, and to initiate joint funding schemes and multi-lingual marketing. This illuminates that personal meetings will be the key to successful intercul- tural relations and cross-cultural projects. − Written and virtual forms of information, a calendar, networking, and ex- change are considered highly important to understand each other’s cultural life – requests, which can be met by kulturLINK’s planned Culture Map.

32

2.2.2 Workshop

2.2.2.1 General Information on the Workshop

Upon request of the Danish cultural scout and German project manager, a writ- ten survey of 14 Danish consultants and 3 German cultural key figures was re- placed by a workshop with the same target-group to facilitate an intercultural dialogue and exchange of ideas. The workshop was held after the fact sheet enquiry was conducted, using the results of the enquiry as a basis for discus- sion. Its goal was to reflect and deepen the survey’s results and to provide a better understanding of the Fehmarnbelt Region’s cultural landscape.

The workshop was held in Faxe, Denmark, and attended by 12 Danish consult- ants, 2 German cultural key figures, the Danish culture scout, a representative of the German project management, and a Danish trainee. Two ews group rep- resentatives moderated the workshop; they presented the results of the enquiry, followed by extensive discussions and group work in two culturally mixed teams, who discussed what could inspire cultural actors toward an intensified cross-cultural co-operation, and which needs having to be met by the Culture Map.

2.2.2.2 Summary of Workshop Discussion on the Results of the Enquiry

It was noted that the high differential in numbers of Danish and German partparticicicici-i-i-i- pants in the enquiry and the selection of larger German vs. smaller Danish cul- tural institutions and forenings (Vereine, associations) are distorting factors with regard to the survey’s resultsresults. Nonetheless, while the representative quality of the enquiry was questioned, its results still were considered to be valuable and valid in reflection of the general character and trends of the Fehmarnbelt Re- gion’s cultural landscape.

The high amount of “other” marked in terms of “cultural category” by the Dan- ish interviewees in the survey points toward the difficulties of determining and defining “culture.” What kind of a concept of cultureculture is meant? The discussion brought up various defining issues: for instance, does “literature” belong to “lit- erature” or “cultural heritage?” What about the many cross-category cultural events like street artist festivals, performance art, medieval centre activities, etc.? Where are design and architecture categorised? Do we talk only about “high culture” – which may be the case, given the six main categories of the survey – or also “low culture,” including, e. g., crafts, food, sports, interior de-

33

sign, participatory culture, or nature activities? Furthermore, the aspect of “profit-making” as an excluding factor for cultural institutions like cinemas to be part of the enquiry, was discussed. Are the creative industries not part of “cul- ture?”

It was concluded – though not agreed upon by all discussants – that the defindefini-i-i-i- tion of “culture” may have to be adjusted and re-defined

− to address the above questions, − to expand an understanding of culture, going beyond the six high culture categories of the fact sheet enquiry, − and to consider the key target audience of local inhabitants and cultural as- sociations when defining “culture” for kulturLINK in the future.

It was noted that the legislation affecting culture is changing all the time and continuously in Denmark, having great effect on the structure, administration and financing of the cultural institutions and actors. This continuous change needs to be considered in the development of cross-cultural co-operations.

The role of foundations and thirdthird----partyparty funding is in the beginning stages in Denmark. Public funding still plays the most important role, albeit dependent on national and municipal legal and political decisions.

In terms of the main audience being “best agers,” there is a consensus that it remains a challenge for both Danish and German cultural institutions and actors to attract a younger audienceaudience. Already many efforts by various cultural providers exist to draw children and teenagers to their cultural activities and offers, often in collaboration with schools and kindergartens. Yet, cross-cultural projects may serve best in meeting this challenge to bring young people to culture and to one another in cross-cultural exchanges.

According to the enquiry’s results, “literature” plays a much larger role on the German than on the Danish side of the Fehmarnbelt. It was pointed out by Dan- ish workshop participants that libraries provide many cultural services and play an important cultural role in the communities, which for various reasons is not reflected in the survey’s results. It was recommended that DDDaDaaanishnish libraries may be taken into more consideration during the analysis’ interviews.

34

2.2.2.3 Key Results of Group Work

The two intercultural groups had ca. 30 minutes time to discuss the following two questions: 1) “How will the cultural actors be inspired to increase their co- operations across the Fehmarnbelt?” 2) “Which needs should be reflected on the Culture Map?” A spokesperson from each group presented their team work’s results, which were discussed subsequently.

These were the main results of their group work determining the needs for more cultural co-operation (questionquestion 11):

− concentration on cultural activities and micro projects with “added value” − match making of similar cultural activities and actors − learning from “best practice” examples and cross-culturally from one another − financial support for cultural projects − opportunities to discuss and develop specific topics and projects together − personal meetings and opportunities for all kinds of groups to meet − exchange visits to learn more about the “other” culture − supporting cultural projects for young people (e. g. school exchanges) − “family packages” for cultural offers on both sides of the belt − language courses, intercultural trainings.

Discussing tthehe group work results regarding question 11, it was emphasised that the main target group of cultural providers are inhabitants, less tourists. Accord- ingly, the Fehmarnbelt Region’s cultural actors should focus on

− a realistic level of expectation regarding the quality of cultural activity and how much can be created in cultural cross-co-operation, − bundling common cultural activities and roles, − each side’s strengths, i. e. not trying artificially to create the attraction of a metropolis, − the particular cultural activities and opportunities connected to the Region’s rural and natural setting, − an inclusion of the cultural fields of design, furniture, fashion, etc., − projects with additional benefits for both sides, − generating an “emotional” identification with the (cultural) Region and making cross-cultural co-operation an “emotional thing.”

The following were the main results of the group work determining the needs and content requests for the Culture Map (questionquestion 22):

− money to advertise the Culture Map, − a similar function like “Facebook” to attract younger people,

35

− networking opportunities for artists / cultural actors, − precise definitions of the listed cultural players, also allowing for − a good research function and detailed search engine, − links to the homepages of cultural institutions and actors, − then, only little information about each cultural provider, − and no calendar needed (only as add-on), − regular updates of the platform.

Some scepticism prevailed how far tourists would “google” rather than use the virtual Culture Map – thus, the culture platform should focus on networking among artists and cultural offerors.

DisDiscussincussincussingggg the group work reresultssults regarding question 22, contributions supple- mented largely of what had been already presented:

− Besides a function like “Facebook,” there should be both closed project rooms as well as open spaces for exchange. − The platform should focus on networking to enhance the relation of huge, varied culture to and between small cultural institutions. − It has to be technologically fast, advanced and up-to-date, especially to at- tract young people. − It should include a blog, or site for comments. − The Culture Map should be conceived as a sustainable, long-term project, which continues to run beyond the duration of kulturLINK.

The workshop was perceived as informative and constructive, marked by much input and intercultural exchange of all participants.

2.2.2.4 Key Learnings from the Workshop

One of the overall key learnings of this intercultural workshop is the need to generate an “emotional” identification with the (cultural) Region and making cross-cultural co-operation an “emotional thing.” To do so, several measure- ments and key learnings need to be observed:

− to provide opportunities for personal meetings, discussing and developing specific topics and joint projects together, − to expand an understanding of culture, going beyond the six high culture categories of the fact sheet enquiry, including the cultural fields of design, furniture, fashion, etc.,

36

− to think about the key target audience of local inhabitants and cultural asso- ciations when defining “culture” for kulturLINK in the future, − to draw young audiences as an underrepresented joint target group, fostering cross-cultural exchanges, or offers like “family packages,” − to concentrate on cultural activities and micro projects with “added value,” generating mutual benefit on both sides, − to match make similar cultural activities and actors, bundling common cul- tural activities and roles, − to take advantage of the particular cultural activities and opportunities con- nected to the Region, − to learn from “best practice” examples and cross-culturally from one another, − to supply financial support for cross-cultural projects, − to expand third-party fundraising activities in the private sector, which is only at its beginning on the Danish side of the Fehmarnbelt, − to keep in mind that legislation affecting culture is in an ongoing process of change in Denmark, having great effect on the structure, administration and financing of cultural institutions and actors, − to consider the important role of Danish libraries as cultural players, since they serve – different from German libraries to this extent – very much as community centres and locales of exchanging information.

2.2.3 Interviews with Six Experts

For in-depth insight into key areas of cultural fields, their activities, financing, co-operations, and development plans in the context of a firm Fehmarnbelt crossing, four interviews with Danish and two interviews with German cultural experts were conducted by an ews group representative. Succeeding the results of the fact sheet enquiry and intercultural workshop, the interview partners were selected for the following reasons:

− two head cultural administrators in Germany, one in Denmark: to supplement the enquiry’s views of singular cultural players by obtaining a bird’s eye view of overall cultural structures and future plans regarding anticipated affects of the Fehmarnbelt crossing on their cultural landscapes; − the Museum of Lolland / Falster and Guldborgsund Archive: to obtain exem- plary insights into the continuous changes of the cultural administration, fi- nancing, structures, and opportunities for co-operation of Danish museums;

37

− the Danish libraries of Faxe and Næstved: to gather supplemental information in a Danish cultural category, which was underrepresented in the enquiry, and to understand their process of structural change and function as a pro- vider of cultural services to the community life and citizens; − the experiential learning centre of Lejre: to comprehend the needs and struc- ture of Danish private, non-profit institutions of culture, and the special im- portance of medieval cultural centres in Sjælland.

The talks with Danish interviewees were conducted in German or English in the cities of Nykøbing and Næstved; the interviews in Germany were conducted in German in the cities of Eutin and Lübeck. Audio-records of the interviews for confidential use by ews group were made upon permission of the interviewees. What follows is the summary of key information gathered in these interviews.

2.2.3.1 Interview with Anna-Elisabeth Jensen, Museum Lolland-Falster

The Museum Lolland-Falster is comprised of five sections, including two muse- ums of the history of civilisation, an open-air museum, an Old Grocer’s Shop, and a manor house with a park – all located at diverse places in Maribo, Nykøbing Falster, and Horslunde. Furthermore, the Archive of the Guldborgsund Municipality is part of the Museum, and around twenty smaller rural museums and collections have been administratively integrated into the Museum of Lol- land-Falster, or are in the process of becoming integrated in the next few years. This re-structuring process is largely owed to the Local Government Reform 2007 and the centralisation process of musmuseeeeumsums in the municipalities of Lolland and Falster under one roof since 20092009. This centralisation process seeks to save resources, to share management work, to provide also small rural museum with the cultural advice and curating of experts, to create synergy effects in shared projects, fundraising, conservation efforts, marketing, or public relations.

While Ms Jensen, Vice Director of the Museum Lolland-Falster, acknowledges the continued existence of some competition over finances, she emphasises the advantages of joint institutional services, divided responsibilities, substituting one another during vacations or sick leaves, local institutions’ possibilities to profit from larger institutions’ expertises, and the intensified opportunities for exchange and co-operation with other experts within the enlarged institution.

The museum’s and archive’s work – as well as all other Danish museums’ and archives’ work –is defined by the Danish Museum Act. No. 1505 in its latest revision of December 2006; this is administered by the Heritage Agency of

38

Denmark. “The Heritage Agency has the regulatory responsibility for sites and monuments, listed buildings and state-subsidised museums [. . .] and an annual budget of DKK 600 million” (http://www.kulturarv.dk/english/about-us/). The Heritage Agency controls how far a museum fulfils all criteria to qualify for pub- lic funding, and accordingly, provides state finances to museums and archives, primarily for operative expenses. These criteria for museums include the collec- tion, protection and conservation of cultural artefacts, research as well as the “public promotion of the nation’s cultural heritage” (Porsmose 2000, 26).

The Museum of Lolland-Falster and Guldborgsund Archive serve as the “regional memory” of their towns and cities, argues Ms Jensen, providing cultural and historical references for city planning, family roots, buildings’ history, etc. As part of these tasks – and profoundly different from the administrative division in Germany – the museum is also responsible for archaeologicalarchaeological monument cocon-n-n-n- servationservation. This means it holds the monopoly on any archaeological work neces- sary in the construction process of building in the municipalities of Lolland and Falster. The museum will also be the sole responsible institution for the archaeo- logical work accruing in the process of building the Fehmarnbelt tunnel on the Danish side.

Ms Jensen thus sees the museum and archive to play a “very important” role in local and regional cultural life, considering the preservationpreservation and representation of their culture as her institutions’ main tasks: “We are a ‘bank of knowledge’ [Wissensbank],” says Ms Jensen, “providing a resource of knowledge for every- body – our citizens, researchers, and tourists. As such, we receive recognition by politicians and citizens alike.” – Museum and citizens are entwined in their engagement for this cultural work: There are five local forenings (((Vereine, assasso-o-o-o- ciations) with up to 600 members / association in the various places of the mu- seum’s sites, which have been founded for the mere purpose of supporting and being involved in the cultural activities of the museum. These associations are represented on the museum’s boards and thereby involved in the museum’s cul- tural offers and work. Nonetheless, “exhibitions alone do not draw sufficient visitors,” Ms Jensen expounds. Interactive, experiential programmes like “bread baking,” lectures, etc. are a necessary supplemental offer, constituting the pos- sibility for additional cultural activities in the community.

The museum’s integration in the community becomes further evident in its long tradition of coco----operatoperatoperatiiiionsons with other local and regional partners like the music and arts schools, public and grammar schools (Gymnasien), among others. Dur- ing the last years, a municipally funded kulturdienst (cultural service) has taken on the tasks of co-ordinating such cross-institutional co-operations: Several pro-

39

jects, targeting children and teenagers as participants in various cultural activi- ties, which combine educational with entertaining, social and cultural elements, have been undertaken together – jointly conceived, fundraised for, and realised.

CoCo----operativeoperative projects are also the only means to generate additional, third-party funds, most of which are still found at public sources. Fundraising from private sources and foundations is still in its infancy and one of the museum’s main goals in the coming years. This financial situation can be considered similar in other Danish museums, as the rough financial division – 1/3 from the state, 1/3 from the municipality, 1/3 from private sources (associations, foundations; one- time private grants etc.) – holds generally valid for most of the ca. 140 state recognised and funded museums in Denmark (cf. Agerskov 2000, 31).

Accordingly, joint fundraising through joint projectsprojects is the key path, which Ms Jensen would like to pursue also in cultural co-operations with German institu- tions across the Fehmarnbelt. Given the profound structural and administrative differences between museums on the Danish and German sides, she considers prprproprooojectjectject----basedbased coco----operationsoperations the only successful path for cultural co-operation in the Fehmarnbelt Region. Her keen interest in such crosscross-cross---culturalcultural coco----operationsoperations is less based, though, on the potential of new financial resources – but on the fol- lowing aspects:

− her personal intercultural knowledge, − a past, very successful co-operative project with the Department of Archae- ology of the Hanseatic City of Lübeck between 2003 and 2006, − and her belief in the fruitful exchange and sharing of knowledge, research and cultural artefacts that − new co-operative projects promise in shared fields of cultural strengths.

Archaeology being one of the “secret golden treasureses,,,,”””” Ms Jensen would like to focus cross-cultural co-operations on such culturalcultural periods and arareas,eas, which DanDaneses and Germans in the Fehmarnbelt Region shareshare:::: archaeological artefacts of, e. g., the Stone Age, Ice Age, Bronze Age, medieval times on the one hand, or medieval church frescos, religious history (Mönchsweg / pilgrimage trail) as well as the sugar beet industry, or the history of train transportation on the other. These shared cultural histories and roots would allow “a look on the other side,” enabling new, joint cultural and identity-forming experiences.

40

2.2.3.2 Interview with Lars Holten, Sagnlandet Lejre

The Sagnlandet Lejre, the oldest experimental-archaeological science centre in Europe, is a private, nonnon----profitprofit institution since 1964, which Lars Holten leads as Managing Director since 2001. As it does not fulfil the Danish Museum Act’s conditions of heritage collection and preservation, Lejre is not recognised as a museum and thus does not receive state funding from the Ministry of Culture. As a “science based culture-historical institution, offering pedagogical activities for schools and tourists,” though, it is recognised by the Ministry of Education, enabling Lejre to receive public funding also for operating costs. It has co- operation agreements with the cross municipal Skoletjenesten (School Service) of Sjælland for educational programmes and projects, where its pedagogical strategy to communicatcommunicatee science as “time travel” and “storytelling in the Land of LeLeggggends”ends” comes to play.

Amusement parks are the key magnet among the 10 top Danish attractions and museums – they draw more than 50% of the total number of visitors to Danish attractions and cultural institutions. Thus, cultural history museums like Lejre are struggling to maintain and expand their 10% market share of over 2 million visi- tors per year. All Danish museums lost 27% of its visitors between 1994 and 2003 – primarily to the 6 amusement parks, 2 zoos and the cultural heritage focus of the Nationalmuseet. Lejre was no exception with a loss of 22% of its visitors. Having been the first to offer experimental learning and cultural history as “experience” in the mid-1960s, it finds itself today in strong competition with an experienceexperience----basedbased culture induindusssstrytry of entertainmententertainment. The unique quality of its own experiential offers – authenticity, learning through edutainment and active participation, connecting to the medieval myth of Lejre as the national birthplace of the legendary Scylfinger kings – is the key-lane, on which Mr. Holten seeks to redefine the outdoor cultural heritage museum to attract more and new visitors like families and grandparents.

Lejre is currently seeking to expand its facilities focussing on the possible devel- opment of unique food offers (e. g., a modern restaurant in a historical setting, offering regional, ecologically grown produce and historical dishes), physical ac- tivities (along the “Idrad”-myth, strengthening both body and mind), and role plays – to enhance its attractiveness for diverse visitors, especially young ones.

Strongly different from publically supported museums, the privately run “Land of Legends, Lejre – Centre for Historical-Archaeological Research and Communica- tion” (as it calls itself since 2009), is highly dependent on its ca. 55.000 visitors each summer and their entrance fees (2010: € 375.000) to survive. Accordingly,

41

Mr. Holten expresses little interest in public, crosscross-cross---culturalcultural funding programmes like INTERREG, if their main goals and outcome are one-time seminars with little or no sustainable effects of improving the infrastructureinfrastructure and quality of experexperi-i-i-i- ence for his centre’s visitorsvisitors.

His interests centre on developing the Fehmarnbelt Region as a totouristurist destindestina-a-a-a- tion, eventually marketing and branding it as a “cultural region.” This would re- quire the development of the touristic infrastructure of the Region especially in the countryside, including places to stay overnight and to eat. These touristic improvements are conditional to attract German culturalcultural tourists as an interest- ing target group for Lejre. Also, the cultural-historical connection points from the Stone Age until today could draw exchange visits of schoolschool----childrenchildren from the German side of the Fehmarnbelt, enabling them and Danish school-children to learn something about their conjoint history and about one another in intercul- tural terms. “To travel a long distance from Schleswig-Holstein to Sjælland, the reason for people to come is to experience something interesting and special,” Mr. Holten argues. Then, his motto for cultural cross-co-operations would be to search for “where is our common hihisssstory?”tory?”

2.2.3.3 Interview with Jesper Kjærulff, Municipality of Vordingborg / Cultural Region of Storstrøm

The Manager of the Cultural Region of Storstrøm, Jesper Kjærulff, considers the whole breadth of cultural categories to be present across the Region of SjæSjælllllandlandland. Since the above mentioned Local Government Reform 2007, Storstrøm was submerged to Sjælland like the former Amter of Vest Sjælland and Roskilde. The former Amt-area of Storstrøm could be characterised by its cultural strengths in cultural heritage (especially medieval times), classical and experi- mental music and experimental theatre, as well as a strong concentration of writers and artists on the Island of Møn and the Fuglsang Museum of Art in Fal- ster. In Vest-Sjælland and Midwest Storstrøm, the Stone Age, theatres as well as popular music and, also, a concentration of artists and writers play a more important role. Besides the small Open Dance stage with an annual dance festi- val in Roskilde, Mr. Kjærulff describes dance being of lesser relevance in the en- tire cultural Region of Storstrøm. Similarly, “film and music – especially jazz and blues – seem to be some of the fields, in which the Danes could profit perhaps from the experience of their German counterparts,” Mr. Kjærulff suggests. On the other hand, touring Theatre Street FFFestivalsFestivals like “Waves” – including panto- mime, dance, stage and performance art – are highly successful and can be en-

42

visioned as a cross-cultural project to continue in German cities across the Feh- marnbelt.

The manager of the Cultural Region of Storstrøm is optimistic regarding the vari- ety of cross-cultural co-operation possibilities in the Fehmarnbelt Region: After all, Danes are highly experienced with cross-cultural ties. The bridge connecting Denmark and Sweden taught them how well such co-operation can work, but also that 6-7 years were necessary “to build bridges”bridges” in the heads and hearts of people and to establish first cultural connections. Regarding the Fehmarnbelt tunnel, not so much time should be lost to build cultural ties and collaborations. Accordingly, Mr. Kjærulff will argue for the fosteringfostering of cultural ties, mmacroacro and micro projects across the Fehmarnbelt in his upcoming 44----yearyearyear----planplan (2012-2016) for the cultural Region of Sjælland – the current one is ending this year, and state cultural funding is always granted for four years only and has to be reap- plied for.

As a Cultural Manager of the Region of StorstrømStorstrøm, his function is one of a mmme-me-e-e- diator – between the municipalities of the Region and between the municipali- ties’ regional cultural plans and the central government. Due to the increased cecennnntralisationtralisation of cultcultureure and the direct involvement of the central government in municipal cultural and educational decisions and structuresructures, “co-operation” has become the municipal solution to cuts in funding and limits in the autonomy of municipal cultural wishes and decisions. In the Cultural Region of Storstrøm, they have begun to acquire experience in municipal coco----operationoperation by creating a joint fund for chamber music, contributed to and shared by five municipalities since last year. This collaboration will last for four years, and Mr. Kjærulff is very eager to create more and even stronger coco----operationsoperations between the municipalities of his Region in other cultural fields like the visual arts, pop music, or jazz.

As Cultural Manager of the Municipality of Vordingborg, he is responsible for, among other tasks, the operation of the facilities and venues in culture and sports. While municipal politicians define the directionsdirections of cultculturalural development in Vordingborg, their relation to the cultural managermanager is one of dialogue – obtain- ing advice on strategies and practicability of their political ideas from him. – To lower operational expenses, the versamling hus – the cultural meeting places in rural areas of the municipality – are now given as a gift to the rural communities by the municipality. The guiding idea is that they will co-operate with neighbour- ing communities to improve the breadth, variety and timing of cultural offers and events, to build networks, and that a community’s population will increasingly identify with their own versamling hus.

43

“Fostering the identification of inhabitants with their region” is one of the fore- most goals of Mr. Kjærulff during the next years. “If you have a strong identity, it is easier to co-operate with others of different identities,” he argues in view of the great potentials of cultural co-operation across the Fehmarnbelt

− to build networks, − to foster human encounters and relations − and to undo administrative and organisational difficulties.

“Human relations are of utmost importance in the field of culture”culture”, the cultural manager reflects upon his experience. The closer the cultural actors are to the site of the Fehmarnbelt tunnel, the stronger is their operational interest in co- operation via micro or people-to-people projects. The further away the cultural providers are, the more strategic is their interest in cross-border co-operations.

To pursue his motto for cross-cultural co-operation –“cultureculture without boborrrrdersdersders”– Mr. Kjærulff suggests to concentrate on

− meeting the challenges – not problems – of language barriers and great geo- graphical distances to overcome them, − sharing marketing activities and professional training plans (Aus- bildungspläne), − focussing on shared strengths as in classical and popular music, cultural heri- tage, or the visual arts.

2.2.3.4 Interview with Rikke Skuldbøl, Faxe Library, and Karin Johansen, Næstved Library

Like other cultural institutions mentioned above, also the libraries – “the jewel of Danish cultural policy since the end of the absolutist monarchy in the 1849 con- stitution” (Council of Europe/ERICarts 2011) – have undergone a restructuring process of centralisation subsequent to the Danish Local Government Reform 2007. In addition, since 2006, the Danish Library Association has encouraged Danish municipal libraries to develop modern librarylibrary premises, including ee---- libraries and enhanced library services (see Niegaard 2009, 7). Rikke Skuldbøl, Head of the Library of the Municipality of Faxe, elaborates these developments in her municipality, which integrated the municipalities of Fakse, Haslev and Rønnede into one and now serves 35.400 citizens, among them ca. 10.000 ac- tive library users.

44

The following changes have just gone or are going into effect in Faxe during the next months: 1) extending selfself----serviceservice electronic borrowing popossibilitiesssibilities during extended library loan hours until 10 pm without library staff being present, 2) merging lilibrarybrary services with ccitizens’itizens’ ssservicesserviceservices, requesting public service and library staffs to do their own and each other’s work, depending on the individual needs of the library’s / citizen centre’s visitor at a given time. These “new parpart-t-t-t- nerships” (Niegaard 2009, 8) of municipal libraries are part of new centralised services, which municipal public administrations are asked to perform.

At the same time, as Ms Skuldbøl and Ms Johansen, Vice-Head of the Library of the Municipality of Næstved, indicate, the new library system structure caused smaller rural branches to close and, instead, to expand e-lending functions to both evening hours (“open“open libraries”libraries”) and rural library points in supermarketssupermarkets.supermarkets At such a Bibliotekspunkt, borrowers can pick up their books, which they ordered online ahead of time, and drop off those that they finished reading. Given the wide use of electronic media by all generations of Danes, e-library functions are very extensive and address library users across all ages. Also, Danish libraries offer free workshops to learn how to use e-media and e-library functions.

In rural areas, the “open libraries” so far have proven to be a successful experi- ment; but Ms Skuldbøl is uncertain about its success in larger urban libraries as in Fakse and Haslev. – Library buses, substituting library services in two closed rural branches, did not prove successful and have been stopped.

Libraries make up ththeeee largest part of the municipal cultural budgetsbudgets. Serving, e. g., the 80.000 citizens in the municipality of Næstved, the municipal library system received DKK 35 million for the year 2011. The head of the library can distribute these funds to her branches and various budget items autonomously. DKK 250.000, or less than 1% of the entire library budget, has been allocated to cultural activactiviiiitiesties in the Library of Næstved – “yet far more than the German libraries have available for this purpose,” Ms Johansen remarks. The main tasks of the libraries are “to promote information, education and cultural activity by making available books, magazines, audio-books and other suitable materials such as musical recordings and electronic information resources, including inter- net and multimedia” (Ms Skuldbøl, quoting the Danish Libraries Act of 2000). Furthermore, libraries provide extensive e-learning services to schools, paid for by the educational institutions. – Danish libraries are free of charge except for late fees and, occasionally, entrance fees for selected cultural activities – thereby maintaining “accessibility for everybody.”

Far more than German libraries, Danish libraries are cultural meeting cecennnntrestres for their communitiescommunities, providing a cultural programme with lectures, readings, con-

45

certs, exhibitions, performances, meeting musicians on weekends, workshops on, e. g., electronic media, etc. Such a community service is enhanced by the fact that often libraries and citizen offices are both located in the same building of the community centre – which prepares the ground for the new trend of inte- grating both services at the same desk.

So far, only individual, no institutional contacts with German libraries exist. However, both librarians from Faxe and Næstved indicated strong interest in such collaborations in the context of the Fehmarnbelt Region, be it to provide services to tourists, to pursue joint research projects, or exchange (rare) books. To develop cross-cultural relations, they would need, first of all, pepersonalrsonal cocon-n-n-n- tact and meetings to exchange information, develop networks and “library parpart-t-t-t- nershipsnerships.”

In addition, the libraries can serve as a distributor for information about the Fehmarnbelt kulturLINK, enhancing the cultural exchange of knowledge to their communities’ citizens and library visitors – helpinghelping to actually “build a bridge and connect pepeoooople.”ple.”

2.2.3.5 Interview with Carsten Behnk, Dept. of Culture, County of Ostholstein

In contrast to the centralisation efforts of the Danish state and overarching con- cepts of cultural structures and funding, Carsten Behnk provides insight into the strongly decentralised and autonomous operation of the cultural institutions uun-n-n-n- der his centralised auspices as Managing Director of the Kulturstiftungen in the County of Ostholstein. The two Foundations of Culture are 100% owned by the county of Ostholstein, one of them focussing on the historical library Landesbib- liothek Eutin with valuable 18th century holdings and a special collection of his- torical travel literature and russica. The Foundation of the Landesbibliothek has an annual budget of € 624.000, the other Foundation of Culture of Ostholstein operates with a volume of € 2.5 million / year, most of which is distributed to the Ostholstein museum, the county library, and the county music school.

Furthermore, € 54.000 of the Foundation of Culture isisis available for individual cultural projectsprojects. The foundation pursues a course of “co“co----financing”financing” as many regional cultural projects as possible, i. e. providing very small to small incentive sums that enable cultural actors to apply for other public or private funds, which often make co-financing by the Kulturstiftungen conditional for their own contri- butions. This funding strategy, distributing € 24.000 to a large number of small

46

cultural projects, has proven successful. The remaining € 30.000 are used to support the Eutin Music FestivalFestival, which has not been as flourishing as desired during the last years, hoping to regain its radiance as one of the cultural beacons of the county of Ostholstein in 2011.

During the last few years, the county of Ostholstein centralised all public tasks regarding the support of culture in Mr. Behnk’s function as Administrative Man- ager of the Department of Education, Culture, and Sports and as Managing Di- rector of the Foundations for Culture. He describes the mode of communication and debate with politicians – approving the financial resources – and the direc- tors of the cultural institutions – determining the actual use of these funds in their institutions – as highly constructive. Although the foundations’ board of trustees are entirely made up by politicians – and thus potentially threatened by volatile political majorities and particular notions regarding concepts and prac- tices of culture – Mr. Behnk speaks of no dissents in the board’s work or co- operation with the institutions’ directors. “They all share a positive attitude to- ward culture,” he describes their well-disposition toward the board’s and various institutions’ work. By the same token, he does not interfere with the cultural institutions’ plans and activities, for which he provides them with money.

Accordingly, a central coconnnnceptcept of culture for the county with particular attention to certain audiences, cultural themes, activities, or co-operations has not been pursued, nor is it considered necessarynecessary. Regular meetings for exchanges have fostered co-operations among the local and regional cultural players in the past and are seen as a resource for future co-operations. “After all, the individuals active in cultural projects and institutions define the quality, potential and growth of their offers and collaborations,” Mr. Behnk explains.

Equally, international coco----operationsoperations are well developed in the county of Osthol- stein – e. g. the Oldenburg Rampant Museum (Wallmuseum) co-operates with the medieval centre in Nykøbing and is expanding its experience-based cultural activities. – The Mönchsweg-project with the Museum Lolland-Falster did not succeed to obtain INTERREG funding, but interest in mutual support and co- operation for future joint projects prevailed in Nykøbing and Eutin. Centring on, expanding and jointly marketing exisexistingting cultural strengths, events and festivals is the path, which Mr. Behnk would like to see continued in cross-cultural co- operations.

Cultural providers in Eastern Holstein serve not only tourists but mainly inhabinhabi-i-i-i- tants of the region. Culture in the hinterland is thus of great relevance to prevent the area from becoming a “transit region” in the context of the firm Fehmarnbelt crossing. Mr. Behnk sees great potential to move “from“from the edges to the centre

47

of Northern Europe” with the construction of the Fehmarnbelt tuntunnnnelnelnel;” then, the location factor of culture will play a major role. Ostholstein is in a good position with its broad spectrum of cultural providers, eagerly interested in peoplepeople----totototo---- people projects to establish contacts and sustainable cultural relations and net- works. “Such personal meetings are essential to createcreate a mental bridgebridge,” Mr. Behnk elaborates; intercultural language courses should be offered, e. g. by the adult learning centre (VHS), to deepen communication and relations, fostering the foundation of “aa cucullllturaltural bridgebridge.”

2.2.3.6 Interview with Nina Jakubczyk, Culture Office, Lübeck

The Hanseatic City of Lübeck also possesses a highlyhighly broad spectrum of cultural activities and offerorsofferors, ranging from, e. g., many small cultural associations, theatres, or music schools to numerous large, internationally renowned cultural institutions like the Buddenbrook House, the Holstentor Museum, or the five medieval churches in the UNESCO World Heritage old town centre. Ms Ja- kubczyk values how much Lübeck’s citizens are contributingcontributing to the cultculturalural landscape of the city, e. g. through participatory activities in medieval or mari- time cultural associations, presenting themselves and representing the city.

As Head of the Lübeck’s Culture Office, Ms Jakubczyk provides funding for the operational costs of many cultural players and for some co-financing of cultural projects. Within the general financial and political framework of the township council and its cultural board, Ms Jakubczyk has thethe freedom ––– and responsibiresponsibil-l-l-l- ity ––– to consider all cucullllturaltural players in her distribution of fundsfunds. Her other main task is one of a mediator and consultaconsultantntntnt, advising small cultural providers in funding applications, or filling in as institutional applicant for individual artist’s funding bids. Lübeck is the home of many foundations and a variety of compa- nies, supporting regional cultural projects. “Altogether,” Ms Jakubczyk says, “Lübeck has good funding structures despite the city’s great financial con- straints, because culture is positively regarded and moved forward by its citizens and politicians alike, the Theatre of Lübeck being an excellent current example.”

In recent years, Lübeck partook in two successful archaeological projects with cultural partners on the Danish side of the Fehmarnbelt. Also for future joint prpro-o-o-o- jects across the FehmarnbeltFehmarnbelt, Ms Jakubczyk considers common cultural strengths like medieval history and archaeological monuments from prehistoric times an excellent resource to start from.

48

Yet, she emphasises that at least as important are personal contacts and oppor- tunities to establish sustainable relations by means of workshops and shared informational events: “To find a common ground is the far most important goal to make kulturLINK work,” she argues, “as the successsuccess and sustainability of cucul-l-l-l- tural coco----operationsoperations are dependent on human relrelaaaationstionstions.”

Culture is a main location factor and sosourceurce of identificationidentification for the hanseatic city’s inhabitants and a point of attraction to thousands of tourists, many of them from Denmark. New possibilities for cultural coco-co---operationoperation could also open up by connectconnectinging culture with touristourismm in “cultural tourist packages:” for in- stance, a route of manors in the countryside on the Danish and German sides of the Fehmarnbelt, framed by a cultural programme of music, lectures, or culinary offers. Prominent cucullllturaltural themes of the region offer similar opportunities: the churches of medieval times (pilgrimage trail); a path following field stone burial sites; cloister and church garden tours; trails along industrial cultural monu- ments, or maritime culture. Local history showing everyday culture can also serve as a bridge for exchange. In all these undertakings, low level cultural of- fers, edutainment and event culture may be drawn on to connect “high culture” with a culture of sensual experienceexperience. In this context, mmmuseummuseum educational seser-r-r-r- vices are one major tool to be used to integrate the population of the Fehmarn- belt Region in cultural co-operations. Then, “what may be required is a definition of cuculllltureture in broader termsterms,” Ms Jakubczyk suggests.

Collaborations between libraries would be generally feasible, yet financially chal- lenging, as the public libraries of Lübeck are continuously facing strong budget constraints. – It is difficult for her to estimate the amount of attraction of Lübeck as “City of Science 2012”2012”, emanating to the Danish side of the Feh- marnbelt – yet, she considers it a strength to market, in particular as it focuses on the general public’s involvement in scientific explorations and experiments.

To make cultural coco----operationsoperations work across the FehmarnbeltFehmarnbelt, Ms Jakubczyk considers several aspects necessary: eeexteextextennnnsivesive information about the other side to keep up interest, babarrrrrierrierrier----freefree forms of participation in cultural exchange and co-operations, easily compressible modalities of funding applications for travel and joint marketing, and continued funding possibilities for sustainable co- operations between artists beyond kulturLINK. “ToTo ingrainingrain cultureculture,,,,” it needs more than “getting to know and strengthening common grounds,” Ms Ja- kubczyk contends, but “to find and ddeeeevelopvelop rootsroots.“.“.“.“

49

2.2.3.7 Key Learnings from Six Interviews

As different as the roles and tasks of the various interviewees are, as similar are their requests for cross-cultural co-operations and the learnings for kulturLINK, which can be drawn:

− More than any other area, culture is dependent on the people, who work in this field, and how they relate in co-operative projects and undertakings; op- portunities to meet and exchange are, therefore, a necessity and foundation to build a mental and subsequently cultural bridge and to develop cross- cultural activities. − In consequence of the Danish Local Government Reform of 2007, basically all publically supported cultural institutions – be they museums, libraries, or others – are in an ongoing process of centralisation and structural change, making cross-cultural co-operations challenging. − Consequently, project-focussed cross-cultural co-operation rather than insti- tutional one is recommendable. − Joint projects could centre on shared cultural historical periods, i. e. prehis- toric and medieval times, Christianisation, or industrial culture, and build upon past or existent successful co-operations as in the field of archaeology, or between Viking cultural centres. − Cultural projects and presentations should include participatory and experien- tial offers to draw younger and diverse audiences across generations and to compete successfully with the culture and entertainment industry of events and theme parks. − New possibilities for cross-cultural co-operation can emerge from cultural tourism (“cultural packages”) and connecting “high cultural” offers with “low” or sensual cultural experiences, expanding the term “culture” toward more cross-category cultural projects and events.

Furthermore, from individual interviewees we can learn for kulturLINK: − The managers of the Cultural Regions hold an important role as mediators between the central state and the municipalities and – due to their double role as cultural manager of a municipality – between politicians and cultural institutions / actors. This mediating role and interface is helpful in anchoring and publicising kulturLINK among the Region’s cultural players, administra- tors and politicians. − Co-operation among the municipalities of Cultural Regions toward joint fund- ing and administration of selected cultural areas – like, e. g., chamber music – may provide a fruitful ground for kulturLINK. E. g., kulturLINK may want to

50

initiate and financially support cross-cultural projects that are anchored in these existing co-operations to have a most widespread and efficient effect. − Inhabitants’ identification with their region is the foundation of relating to people of other regions; this is an important function of culture and, thus, valuable to be fostered. − Privately run cultural institutions have different needs for financial and struc- tural support than public – or, mainly publically funded – ones. − Long-term economic benefits (usually: more visitors / participants) drive pri- vate cultural institutions’ main interest in cross-cultural co-operation. − Cross-cultural co-operation can entail “international cultural tourism,” seeking to develop and market the brand “cultural region.” − Danish libraries make up the largest part of municipal cultural budgets, reach a vast population, and serve as community centres with a breadth of cultural, educational, and social services. Thus, they can serve well as multipliers of information on kulturLINK, as tie between kulturLINK projects and the general public, and as possible site for own cross-cultural kulturLINK projects.

2.2.4 Personal Interviews with Best Practice Actors

2.2.4.1 Best Practice Region of Øresund

The Region of Øresund is comprised of the Swedish province of Skåne and the Danish Region of Sjælland, connected across the Baltic Sea by the Øresund Sound Bridge. The Øresund Region’s development strategy is founded on “ÖRUS 2020 – The Øresund Region’s strategic document to meet the future” (Stamming 2011). In this strategy plan, “cultureculture andand leisureleisure” have been deter- mined as one of four fields of development until the year 20202020.2020 Culture and lei- sure have been chosen because the cultural sector, leisure industry and tourism are gaining in relreleeeevancevancevance.

The Swedish / Danish Øresund Region is pursuing the following strategy in the field of “culture and leisure:”

− strengthening their co-operation in media, film, music, and design, − improvement of the general conditions for innovation in the event industry, − enhancement of a shared usage of venues and cultural institutions, − joint marketing of international events for international visitors, − support of cultural activities for, with and by children and adolescents.

51

The following measurements are part of the strategy

− to make the Region visible internationally, − to seek hosting events like EXPO 2020, − to develop co-operation models for more international tourism, − to intensify co-operation regarding topics like “historical culture landscape,” “new media,” − to improve “artist in residence”-programmes by organising them more profes- sionally and internationally, − to foster the cultural and creative industry and instigate an exchange with the business sector, − to strengthen cultural and school exchanges of children and adolescents.

Today, the Øresund Region has over 10 years of experience in cultural co- operation and can point to a large number of joint cultural projectsprojects:

− The Kulturbro Festival – the largest cultural event of the Region, which is held every two years since 2000. The festival encompasses over 100 muse- ums, concert halls and theatres. − www.cultureoresund.com – a comprehensive internet platform of information and a virtual Culture Map. The website depicts the cultural actors, event venues, festivals, organisations, funds, media, and cultural administrations according to the three criteria geography, category and institution. They are marked on the cultural map and included in the list of cultural players. – The section “co-operation & network” is under construction. − Other examples of projects have been workshops, people-to-people projects, cultural meetings, or initiatives to explore joint fundraising possibilities.

Most of the projects could only happen through funding by INTERREG pro- grammes.

The following learnings and recommendations can be gathered from one decade of experience in the field of culture and leisure time in the Øresund Region:

All activities should be addressing various levels from people-to-people projects to the political level. They should aspire to pursue long-term strategies and fi- nancing. This implies the development of a vision that a) carries a cultural under- taking beyond a 3-year project with INTERREG funding, and b) gathers the commitment of politics to continue its financing thereafter.

An internet platform should have a clear added value of information and ex- change. It needs to be interactive and provide the opportunity for cultural play- ers to add a link to their homepages on the platform.

52

The Øresund Region is interested in an exchange and establishing contact with kulturLINK. They are especially interested in an exchange of political steering groups with the goal of an intensified co-operation between the Øresund Region and Northern Germany.

2.2.4.2 Best Practice Region of Sønderjylland - Schleswig

The co-operating Region of Sønderjylland – Schleswig was founded in 1997. It includes the municipalities of Sønderborg, Tønder, Haderslev and Aabenraa and the Region of Syddanmark on the Danish side of the border, and the counties of North Friesland and Schleswig-Flensburg as well as the city of Flensburg, which constitutes a county in its own right, on the German side.

In 2007, the Declaration of Partnership between the Region of Syddanmark and the Land of Schleswig-Holstein was renewed, including an agreement on regu- lating their co-operation by annual “work plans,” in which the field of culture attains high priority and pursues a strategy of strengthening cultural identity, pointing up lines of tradition, and initiating cultural collaborations.

Their measurements to realise this strategy include people-to-people projects, cultural weeks, and the cultural activities in educational institutions and acad- emies. Furthermore, they are seeking to expand the field of archaeology, inten- sify conservation efforts, attain recognition by the UNESCO world heritage fund, and increase tourism.

The regions of Sønderjylland and Schleswig are pursuing joint cultural projects since the mid-1990s. In 2003, their first INTERREG-project for cultural co- operation started. All their activities are coordinatedcoordinated by a joint professional cucul-l-l-l- ture groupgroup.

Two projects have been of particular relevancerelevance:

− From 2008 until 2011, the kulturbro ––– Kulturbrücke project provided support for cross-border thinking and micro projects, operating as a “cultural bridge” in the fields of culture, activities related to children / adolescents, sports and language. − Since 2011, the project KulturDialog fosters German – Danish culture and youth projects, aspiring to create dialogue and contacts, to open doors and to exchange knowledge.

In the course of their experience in cultural coco----operationoperation in the Region of Sønder- jylland – Schleswig, an emphasis has been placed on people-to-people projects

53

and sustainable collaborations, on a non-bureaucratic, easy procedure to obtain support and manage cultural projects, and on innovative forms of co-operation in terms of organisation and structure.

A large number of projects manifest this experience:

− folkBALTICA Festival with concerts, workshops, and exhibitions − SummerJazz Festival with workshops, concerts, and lectures − various festivals focusing on circus performance, fairy tales, drumming or rock music − literature and poetry festivals, children theatre, puppet theatre − weekends for orchestras, choir concerts − culture of remembrance for senior citizens − “Prof. Dr. ABC” – teacher trainees teach history (European Language Prize 2009) − symposium for the associations of artists to initiate co-operations − series of radio plays on “cultural mentality.”

Furthermore, the Region of Sønderjylland – Schleswig awards a “prize in cul- ture” and regularly holds inspirational events for cultural players to learn from each other and best practice cultural actors within and outside the Region.

The following learnings and recommendations can be gathered from the experi- ence of the Region Sønderjylland –Schleswig:

All co-operative cultural activities should be anchored in regional politics, being sure of its commitment. The creation of a joint professional culture group to co- ordinate all activities contributed strongly to the success of their cultural pro- jects. A joint administrative office enhanced networking among cultural players. In the beginning phase of the Region’s co-operation, it also initiated new collabo- rative projects and accompanied them in their start-up phases.

Inspirational events with up to 200 participants proved to be equally successful: Sharing best practice examples and positive experiences of other cultural pro- jects strongly motivated cultural actors to develop their own cultural activities along the lines of these models.

54

333 SWOT AAANALYSNALYSESES

3.1 SWOT ANALYSIS BASED ON GENERAL RESEARCH

The following SWOT analysis is based on the general research and key learnings from the four studies examined in section 2.1.2, taking both sides of the Feh- marnbelt into account.

Strengths Weaknesses - maritime and rural character of - rural structure with low population natural beauty (touristic strength) density and weak economic struc- - proximity to the metropolises of ture Copenhagen and Hamburg - aging population (demographic - economic clusters (medicine, medi- change): shrinking work force cal technology, food industry, lo- - no distinctive image gistics) - constructed region, not naturally - largely shared history and conjoint grown cultural heritage from prehistoric - existence of few networks across and medieval times the Fehmarnbelt

Opportunities Threats - touristic potential of nature and - border as hurdle: administrative culture, e. g. for eco-tourists or barriers, different structures of job best agers (demographic change) markets - Region’s inhabitants consider cul- - brain drain to metropolises ture to be important - transit region: activities cannot be - building cultural co-operations upon retained in the Region existing attractions - geographically long distances can - including the metropolises, func- cause co-operations to fail tioning as link between them - growing co-operation of employ- ment agencies

55

3.2 SWOT ANALYSIS OF SIX CULTURAL FIELDS

The following SWOT analysis of the six cultural fields, as determined in the fact sheet enquiry, includes results from all sections of this study’s general and field research. This SWOT analysis does not separate between the German and Dan- ish sides of the belt but considers the cultural landscape of the Fehmarnbelt Re- gion as a whole.

3.2.1 Visual Arts

Strengths Weaknesses - substantial share of cultural land- - museum highlights are concen- scape (17-20%) in the Region trated at few locales - beacons: Museum of Art Fuglsang, - high degree of individualisation of Museum for Contemporary Art artists Roskilde, Anneberg Collection (of - hardly any cross-border networks glas) in Nykøbing, museums of Cul- tural Foundation of Lübeck - Light over Lolland Art/Culture Festi- val - Odsherred / Roskilde / Vest Sjæl- land Art Days - integrated in cultural heritage and local history museums

Opportunities Threats - cross-cultural co-operation beyond - few indications of co-operations language barriers without financial incentives - high potential for cross-cultural co- operation (34% indicate visual arts) - possibilities for fast start-ups of co- operations among few visual art partners of high quality - overlooked joint treasure: medieval church frescos

56

3.2.2 Performing Arts

Strengths Weaknesses - diverse structures and sizes of cul- - only makes up 9% of cultural play- tural offerors ers in Fehmarnbelt Region - integrative across cultural catego- - dance is a subfield of little rele- ries and audiences vance - beacons: Danish street festival “Waves;” Lübeck Theatre

Opportunities Threats - increased integration in festivals - other cultural categories dominate - potential of integration in interac- - few indications of co-operations tive edutainment projects and cul- without financial incentives tural centres (e. g. role play) - fundamental language barrier (spo- - taking more advantage of open-air ken word in theatre) venues and events

57

3.2.3 Music

Strengths Weaknesses - one of the most important cultural - limited networks across the belt sectors in the Region (18-27%) - expenses for large venues - beacons of music festivals: - some music festivals are focused Roskilde Festival, Schleswig- on urban centres only Holstein Music Festival, Eutin Music Festival, Summer Concert on Castle

Ledreborg, Roskilde Jazz Days, Femø Jazz, Blues Festival Eutin, Vordingborg Festival Week, Maribo Jazz Festival, Suså Festival - University of Music, Lübeck - church music, esp. in Lübeck - taking advantage of rural venues

Opportunities Threats - cross-cultural co-operation beyond - financial constraints language barriers - audiences of some music subcate- - cultural category with one of the gories are not necessarily interested highest potentials for cross-cultural in other fields of music co-operation (indicated by 40-56%

of cultural players)

- expanding existing cross-cultural co-operations through festivals - increasing participatory offers for audience - joint marketing - exploring new audience groups - micro and people-to-people projects

58

3.2.4 Literature

As indicated earlier, the field of literature obtained unusual results in the enquiry regarding its representation of cultural institutions and actors. As a cultural category it appeared strongly underrepresented on the Danish side (3%) and rather high (16%) on the German side of the Fehmarnbelt. Libraries and literary museums / cultural institutions are both summoned under this category, albeit providing highly different cultural offers and representing very different forms of cultural players. Danish libraries – more so than their German counterparts – are important cultural community centres, offering broad cultural, social, and IT- supported educational services. On the other hand, literary museums and the historical library Landesbibliothek Eutin in the State of Schleswig-Holstein are cultural beacons with entirely different purposes than community service. – These issues need to be taken into consideration in the following SWOT analysis of the category “Literature.”

Strengths Weaknesses - 16% of German cultural players - only 3% of Danish cultural players indicate the category of literature indicate category of literature - beacons: Günter Grass House, - 13% of Danes, 23% of Germans Buddenbrook House, Landesbiblio- consider literature to have potential thek Eutin, literature festivals, for cross-co-operation e. g. on Island of Møn, in Lübeck; communities of writers on Møn - historical library collections

Opportunities Threats - co-operation of libraries with - fundamental language barrier schools - libraries: continued reductions in - libraries: new paths for co- funding operation (historical resources, re- - lack of e-media usage across gen- search, tourist services) erations in Germany - learning from Danish libraries to - libraries have no experience in teach e-media to all generations cross-cultural co-operation (demographic change) - new media increasingly play more - libraries as PR tool for kulturLINK important role than literature (exhibitions, information), reaching local citizens

59

3.2.5 Film

Strengths Weaknesses - beacon: Nordic Film Days, Lübeck - marginal share of cultural landscape - communal cinemas (2-4%) - film collections at public libraries - 13% of Danes, 14% of Germans consider film to hold potential for cross-co-operation - few existing networks

Opportunities Threats - increase of intercultural understand- - other cultural categories dominate ing through popular medium and - financial constraints Nordic Film Days - few indications of co-operations - taking the Nordic Film Days as without financial incentives model to initiate micro projects, e. - language barrier g. in schools, associations - films for children, attracting younger audiences

60

3.2.6 Cultural Heritage

Strengths Weaknesses - the most important joint cultural - archaeological projects need to be category in the Region (22,5%) more audience-centred and mar- - beacons e. g.: Castle Eutin, Middle keted to attract visitors Age Centre Nykøbing, Behn House - shared historical roots in prehistoric Lübeck, Wall-Museum Oldenburg, and medieval times are not com- Sagnlandet Lejre; UNESCO World monly known or marketed Heritage sites in Lübeck, Næstved, Roskilde; Medieval Festival Nysted - joint strength: high number of archaeological monuments - joint strength: many castles, man- ors and adjacent parks

Opportunities Threats - understanding joint historical and - cross-over collections of artefacts cultural roots can make it more difficult to find - one of the most important cultural the “right cross-cultural partner,” or category for cross-co-operation potential funding resources (marked by 34-40% of respondents to enquiry) - increasing museum educational ser- vices / experiential culture activities - country-side manors, taking advan- tage of growing interest in “coun- try-side living and culture” - developing industrial cultural history sites and joint industrial cultures (e. g. sugar beet industry) - exploring joint maritime culture - addressing design and architecture as part of cultural heritage and cul- tural history - connecting to the new Centre of Cultural History Research at the University of Lübeck

61

3.2.7 Cultural Category “Other”

The cultural category “other” has been marked by 21% of Danish and 9% of German respondents to the fact sheet enquiry; and an average of 15% cultural offerors consider it to be a potential field for cultural co-operation across the Fehmarnbelt.

Therefore, this general cultural category cannot be neglectedneglected, although it en- compasses a large variety of cultural activitiesactivities: for instance, the middle age cen- tres, the crafts, diverse festivals (e. g. the Sjælland Basket Weaver Festival, the Slagelse Festival Week), culture across categories, mixed media art events but also industrial culture, design, or architecture. – Given the lasting German inter- est in Danish design and architecturearchitecture, these cultural fields entail much potential for cross-cultural exchange and cultural tourism. They are in danger, though, to be absorbed by the culture industry under the heading “Danish life-style.”

The Danish Wandrefestival in Odsherred may serve as a good example for naturenature related cultural events and activities (and cultural tourism) and expanding such cultural offers to cross-cultural contexts. HHHighHigh potential lies in the field of cucul-l-l-l- tural explorations in the countrycountry----sideside and rich nature of the Fehmarnbelt Region, widening the “nature-culture zone” (Sørensen, Kjølbæk & Bærenholdt 2009): tours of manors, cloister and church gardens, the pilgrim’s trail, or eco-touristic and cultural explorations of the large number of natural reserves, among others.

62

3.3 SWOT ANALYSIS OF CULTURAL LANDSCAPE

Strengths Weaknesses - highly heterogeneous cultural land- - heterogeneous structures of cul- scape of mostly small cultural insti- tural players, making cross-cultural tutions and actors co-operations difficult - cultural heritage and cultural history - very diverse and different financing are common strengths structures - internationally renowned music fes- - majority of audience above 50 tivals (e. g. Roskilde, SHMF) years of age (42-47%), only 20% - target audiences: mostly local and of audience below 20 years regional inhabitants - lack of touristic infrastructure to - mostly year-round offers attract more (cultural) tourists - almost 100% of cultural actors are - no joint marketing permitted to co-operate cross- - lack of information about each culturally other - average of 19% of cultural players have/had co-operations across the Fehmarnbelt

Opportunities Threats - events and festivals have been in- - language barrier and intercultural dicated jointly by 48-54% of all re- misunderstandings spondents as the most important - geographically large distances cultural category for cross-cultural - profound differences in administra- co-operation tive, organisational and financial - field of archaeology: numerous structures sites from prehistoric times (e. g. - differences in tax and social ser- Ice Age, Stone Age, Iron Age, Me- vices legislation as well as in the dieval Age) in the entire Region structure of job markets may ob- - micro projects and people-to-people struct the exchange / employment projects, especially in the fields of of cultural actors from “the other music and cultural heritage side” - music, especially classical music - co-operation efforts and the com- and music festivals mitment to and realisation of joint - extending the visual arts, cross- cultural projects depend highly on over and “other” culture individual partners

63

- fostering of participatory cultural - culture becomes only perceivable offers, edutainment, cross-over cul- as “event” in an effort to reach di- tural events verse audiences - expanding the definition of culture - research on own collections is in- to include “low culture,” design, creasingly limited due to predomi- architecture, culinary culture nant needs to re/present and mar- - cultural tourist packages, e. g. in ket artefacts the country-side to manors - exploring nature as cultural cate- gory (cultural eco-tourism) - associations: potential for cultural people-to-people projects - new target audiences: families, best agers (taking advantage of demographic change)

3.4 HURDLES OF SETTING UP CROSS-CULTURAL CO-OPERATIONS

There are numerous hurdles to overcome if one wishes to initiate, maintain and expand cultural co-operations across the Fehmarnbelt. These hurdles are defined by the predominant wish on both sides of the belt toto build long-long---termterm sustaisustainnnnableable cultural relationsrelations. Interest in one-time workshops, personal meetings, ex- changes, or projects could not be found among Danish or German cultural play- ers in the Fehmarnbelt Region – an important difference from experiences and according strategies in the Region Sønderjylland – Schleswig.

Financial hurdles for crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationsoperations in the Fehmarnbelt RegionRegion::::

− no or little knowledge about each other’s funding schemes, financial re- sources, or ways of fundraising − profound differences in how cultural institutions and actors finance them- selves and raise money, especially o high reliance of German cultural players on foundations and up to 25% on public funds of the Land of Schleswig-Holstein o high reliance of Danish cultural players on public resources (up to 80% from their municipality), also in project-related third-party fundraising

64

o little experience in fundraising from private resources on the Danish side, but considered as growing financial source in the future − high instability, continuous threats as well as actual occurrence of cuts in public funds for cultural activities − limited public funding stability, often up to 3 or 4 years, not longer − differences in administrative and organisational structures and legal founda- tions, making joint funding applications difficult, especially if they were to target institutional co-operations, not project-related co-operations − instability and ongoing changes in the structural organisation of cultural insti- tutions in Denmark due to the Local Government Act 2007 and subsequently changed legislation on culture − no or little experience in joint fundraising − lack of financial incentives for sustainable cross-cultural projects − lacking prospects of financial continuity for sustainable cross-cultural projects − lacking long-term financial commitment by politicians.

Conclusion: Without stable, long-term funding prospects, support by politics and opportunities to develop joint fundraising efforts, sustainable cultural co- operations across the Fehmarnbelt remain a huge challenge.

Hurdles in terms of contacts and networking for crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationsoperationsoperations::::

− very little knowledge about the “other side” exists − few institutional and personal contacts exist − little cross-cultural co-operation experience − few existing networks − lack of personal meetings and opportunities to build relations, which are of high importance to make cross-cultural co-operations work − language barrier, though often seen as a “challenge” rather than a “problem” − intercultural differences, e. g. administrative structures are different in terms of hierarchies, culturally defined communication and responsibilities − geographical distances between each other − travel expenses − lack of financial support for personal meetings, especially for more than one meeting − lack of financial incentives for sustainable cross-cultural network building.

ConclusionConclusion: Basically, we are starting from scratch if we want to build mutual knowledge, contacts, human relations, and cultural networks across the Feh- marnbelt on behalf of cultural co-operations – but a strong interest to do so can be found.

65

Hurdles in terms of the contents and framework of cultural coco----operation:operation:

− local and regional focus of the majority of cultural players − predominantly small size and high structural diversity of cultural players − half of their audience is above age 50 − little knowledge about the cultural landscape, strengths and beacons of the other side − cultural treasures “in hiding:” little awareness of the potential of joint pre- historic culture and archaeological sites, industrial cultural sites, medieval church frescos, among others − little knowledge and exploration of the potential of cultural activities related to nature and the country-side − hesitant exploration of the potentials of the relation: culture – cultural tour- ism − competition of cultural offers with the leisure and entertainment industries − lacking political commitment to sustainable, long-term support of cross- cultural co-operative work.

ConConclusion:clusion: Lack of knowledge about the other’s cultural landscape and its po- tential, diverse structures of cultural institutions as well as the local / regional focus of most cultural actors are the greatest obstacles in building cross-cultural co-operations.

3.5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT WITH KULTURLINK

To begin developing sustainable projects by cultural institutions and actors, it is crucial to increase awareness of joint cultural historieshistories and the potential of cucul-l-l-l- tural coco----operationsoperations in the Fehmarnbelt Region and to provide the framework in which to meet and getting to know each other and each other’s cultureculture. This is the field, in which kulturLINK could achieve most.

66

3.5.1 Cultural Players’ Needs for Cross-Cultural Co-Operations and the Virtual Culture Map

Cultural actors have articulated several needs for crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationsoperationsoperations, which could be addressed by kulturLINK:

− personal meetings: 92% of Danish and German cultural players indicated this as their foremost need to enable cross-cultural co-operations − increased communicationcommunication: 70% of Danish and 78% of German cultural play- ers considers this a necessary condition to build relations − information about each other is requested by 55% of the Danes, 75% of the German cultural actors − joint fundraisingfundraising: almost 100% of cultural players of the enquiry expressed to be “maybe” or “surely” interested in this option, and an average of 57% considered it a “need” to enable co-operations.

One way to get in contact with each other, to communicate, and to gather in- formation may be addressed by the planned Culture MapMap,Map developed by kultur- LINK. The following needs have been articulated by cultural players and institu- tions to be served by this virtual platform:

− apparent added value of networking and information, going beyond existing platforms to ensure traffic, − up to date information on cultural life and culturalcultural calendar, both requested by over 80% of cultural players, − excellent search engine based on an encompassing databasedatabase,database including cul- tural offers that cannot be easily categorised, − predominantly serving artists and cultural playersplayers, while tourists and inter- ested citizens remain second priority as a target-group, − excellent networking possibilities for artists and cultural players, − joint list of contactscontacts, requested by an average of 61% of cultural players, − possibility to place links to homepages of cultural actors, − possibility to make announcements of cultural offersoffers (indicated by an average of 61%).

67

3.5.2 Proposal: Ten Steps to Initiate Cross-Cultural Co-Operations

As indicated above, little knowledge about the other side and its cultural players exists, making it indispensable to enable ways to find out about each other’s existence and contact data. kulturLINK’s planned Culture Map would be able to provide this highly important service for artists and cultural players with a 10- step instruction list to find out: “How do I go about initiating a cultural co- operation across the Fehmarnbelt?” Based on the learnings of this study, such a 10-step instruction list could look like the following one, which includes ele- ments written in italics that still would need to be developed:

1. Check out our list of existing coco----operationoperation projectsprojects, which may serve you as model or best practice example. Also, potential co-operation partners may be found among existing projects.

2. Post your project idea on ththiiiiss platformplatform, describing and indexing the details of your planned cross-cultural undertaking and search for a particular co- operation partner. This way, people can find you.

3. GGGoGo to the “““search function””” of our database (LINK), if no project in your line of interest already exists, or no potential co-operation partner has re- sponded to your posting. Enter your cultural category, theme, activity, or artistic medium, for which you are seeking a co-operation partner; or, if you are looking for a partner in a particular town or area of the Fehmarnbelt Re- gion, enter its geographical name. Your search results will show you a list of potential partners.

4. Check out the potential partners of your search results by following the links to their homepages and exploring their offers and contact information.

5. Contact your potential coco----operationoperation partner and determine interest and first details about the possibilities to co-operate. If general agreement and joint interest can be determined, consider a first personal meeting for a more de- tailed exchange.

6. Organise a first meeting and visit with your potential partner. Should you need support of your travel expenses for your initial meeting, go to our “list of funding resources” (LINK) and follow the application instructions, indi- cated on the homepage of each individual funding source.

7. Develop a plan of your joint projectproject, including reasoning and expected sus- tainable benefits of your co-operative project, your joint needs in terms of material, organisation / personnel and finances, a time plan, expected visi-

68

tors / participants, your public relations / marketing plans, your “after- project” plans. – This joint project plan will help you to clarify any possible intercultural misunderstandings between you and your cross-cultural part- ner/s, to determine your shared steps to realise your project, and to apply for funding if needed, among other benefits.

8. If needed, apply for funding by exploring our “list of funding resources” (LINK) and following the application instructions, indicated on the home- page of each individual funding source.

9. Engage in public relations and marketmarketinging of your joint projectproject, e. g., by an- nouncing it on the Culture Map’s following page (LINK) and networking with others about your project. – If you need funding for PR, marketing, or establishing a homepage, please go to our “list of funding resources” (LINK) and follow the application instructions, indicated on the homepage of each individual funding source.

10. Establish a homepage of your joint project either on your existingexisting homhome-e-e-e- pagepage, or on a new one. It is recommendable to indicate sponsors and fund- ing sources of your project on your homepage, if you had any.

As has been indicated in italics in the above text, these elements are conditional to be provided to make such a 10-step “how-to-do” service work.

69

444 CCCONCLUSIONONCLUSIONSSSS AND RRRECOMMENDATIONS

To draw conclusions and recommendations from this study’s learnings, let us first recapitulate the study’s results regarding the existent framework of the Fehmarnbelt Region’s cultural landscape for cross-cultural co-operations:

− a highly diverse cultural landscape of primarily small to medium-sized cultural players, − strong cultural fields and activities in cultural history (esp. prehistoric and medieval), music (esp. classic) and the visual arts, − high potential for cross-cultural work in these strong cultural fields, − high potential in expanding joint events, edutainment and experiential cultural offers, cultural projects across cultural categories including, e. g., higher education and the sciences, cultural tourism, “nature-culture” areas, and joint investigations of “hidden treasures” in cultural history, − mutual interest in a joint exploration of these potentials for sustainable, long- term cross-cultural co-operations, considering the language barrier a chal- lenge rather than a problem, − shared view of the Region’s citizens that culture plays an important role in the Region and contributes to their quality of life.

Furthermore, the cultural landscape is marked in complex terms by − intercultural differences in terms of scepticism / optimism, different structural needs in how to pursue joint cultural projects, or a culture of debate and criticism vs. a consensus culture, − various understandings of “culture” (its differentiation along the lines of categories, high – low culture, experiential edutainment, lay culture, com- mercial culture, cultural tourism, the relations of culture – nature and culture – science), − a rich natural beauty, but also great geographical distances in the primarily rural Region, which need to be overcome even after the building of a firm Fehmarnbelt crossing, − opportunities and challenges in consequence of the demographic change with regard to audiences of regional cultural offers.

Challenges lie in − little knowledge about common cultural roots in prehistoric and medieval times, − no sufficient knowledge about each other and the diversity of the cultural landscape in general and its cultural offerors in particular,

70

− few direct contacts, co-operations, or networks across the Fehmarnbelt, − a Danish administrative structure of culture in an ongoing process of change, − highly diverse and different organisational and funding structures on both sides of the belt, − increasing pressure to rely less on public, more on private funding sources, − no incentive funding or stable financial structures of support for long-term cross-cultural projects and relations, − no sufficient knowledge about joint financing possibilities, − no active help and scouts for cross-cultural projects until kulturLINK, − no tangible sustainable support by politics, − and no existing conjoint cultural identity in the Region.

Accordingly, the cultural landscape of the FehmarnbeltFehmarnbelt Region is a complexcomplex and chachallengingllenging one. It holds promising potential for a conjoint cultural life due to its open and interested cultural playersplayers, several strong culturalcultural fieldsfields, and many pppo-po-o-o- tential cultural areas of activity with mutual benefitbenefit.benefit By all accounts, though, it does not allow easily referring to the experiences of best practice regions like Sønderjylland – Schleswig or Øresund as role models for the Fehmarnbelt Re- gion.

Rather, given the learnings from this study, kulturLINKkulturLINK needs to develop its own path in how to make tthehe Fehmarnbelt Region known as a common cultural rre-e-e-e- gion by means of conconjointjoint cultural coco----operationoperation and projects. kulturLINK is rec- ommended to capitalise on the curiosity and openness of a creative field of art- ists and cultural players toward the establishment of cross-cultural networks. It should employ ssshortshorthort----termterm measurements to establish personal contacts, share information and develop joint cultural ideas and projects can sow first seeds. To see these cross-cultural crops grow, a long breath by the cultural actors is needed as much as commitment on the political level and sustained fundingfunding bbe-e-e-e- yond the initial startstart----upup phasesphases. This is mirrored by the shared request of cultural players and administrators to develop sustainable, longlong----termterm crosscross----culturalcultural relrela-a-a-a- tttionstions rather than short-lived cultural projects – this request is to be taken into account for all strategic steps and planned measurements. At the same time, the differences in organisation and funding between Danish and German cultural in- stitutions and the ongoing changes in Danish administrative structures cannot be overlooked. They let us conclude that a projectproject----basedbased format of crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationsoperations – rather than institution-based cultural connections – is recom- mendable.

71

To ensure a sustainable eeffectffect of these project-based cultural co-operations, one path would involve professional public relations andand joint marketingmarketing. A joint pro- fessional PR and marketing implies

− a multi-lingual publicising and advertising of kulturLINK projects in general, − determining, publicising and marketing best practice projects, − establishing and marketing kulturLINK and the Region as a conjoint “cultural region” in the heads and minds of both citizens and tourists through o regular and special PR and marketing campaigns inside and outside of the Region, o as well as special kulturLINK events.

This kind of professional PR and marketing work can only be achieved by some- thing like a “kulturLINK Cross-Cultural Services Office,” as should be envisioned for the time after kulturLINK’s duration until 2013 (see details further below).

The second path to ensure a sustainable effect of cross-cultural projects in- volves the fostering of continued relations between individual and groups of cucul-l-l-l- tural actorsactors. The results of all parts of this study of the cultural landscape document a profound need for personal meetings to get to know one another individually and interculturallyinterculturally, and to exchange informationinformation and ideas for joint cultural undertakings. The individual people involvedinvolved and the rerellllaaaationstions they are able to build on behalf of their cultural projects will be the key to a sustainable susucccccesscess for their cultural coco----operationsoperations across the Fehmarnbelt and need to be reflected in the strategy of cultural development. This is as valid for people-to- people projects as for projects of internationally more experienced cultural insti- tutions across the belt. For example, even experienced cultural players learn from bestbest----practicepracticepractice----eventseventsevents, inspiring to develop new ideas and to find new co- operation partners.

Intercultural learning needs to be fostered through continual workshops and ooop-op-p-p- portunities to meetmeet, which kulturLINK can initiate. Changes in personnel and structures at cultural institutions make sustained personal meetings and (topic- focussed) culculturaltural events and conferences an important contribution to building “firm bridges of human relationsrelations”””” across the Fehmarnbelt. For example, a shared dealing with and overcoming of the Danish “historical traumata” of 1864 and 1940-45 may inspire cultural co-operations in form of an event across cultural categories; at the same time it is also a topic, which likely requires an ongoing process of cultural exchange and to be addressed in conjoint projects for many years to come.

72

Travel funds for personal meetings, workshops, events, and conferences to de- velop cross-cultural relations and projects are a crucial condition. Financial hur- dles – connected to travelling across large geographical distances and the ex- penses of cultural undertakings – can be high and can prevent kulturLINK from being successful. Accordingly, also financial supportsupport in form of incentive or full funding possibilities, professional reference services to other funding resources as well as information and workshops on joint fundraisingfundraising oppoopportunrtunrtuniiiittttiiiieses should be part of kulturLINK’s work.

The process to create sustainable cross-cultural co-operations and a conjoint cultural identity needs time and can be begun during kulturLINK’s three years. TTToTo anchor crosscross----culturalcultural relations in people’s hearts and minds on a longlong----termterm basisbasis, though, the Region’s citizens and cultural laypersonslaypersons will need to be iin-n-n-n- volved beyond kulturLINK’s initial people-to-people projects.

The following midmid---- to longlong----termterm measurements would be essential to reach the Region’s citizens and to create a “cultural intelligence,” the growing ability to collaborate beyond cultural differences:

− an expansion of the “definition of culture” to include the broad cultural cate- gory “other,” reaching from interactive cultural activities, medieval centres, festivals incorporating various cultural practices, nature-related cultural activi- ties to design, architecture, or culinary culture, − cultural formats that involve both critical and playful methods in dealing with cultural topics, or involving the sciences or nature-related themes, − a shifting toward more participatory cultural projects for cultural laypersons, e. g., in cross-cultural workshops of cultural associations, exchanges of or- chestras, choirs, school groups, etc., − creative conjoint projects addressing children and teenagers, e. g. a “cultural driving license for kids” of the Region, − connecting ties to “cultural tourism,” − exploring the potential of nature-related culture.

It is thus recommendable to promote culture on threethree levels from the beginning, ideally parallel to each other: beacon cultural institutions, experiential forms of culture (e. g., Viking centres), and lay participatory cultural activities (e. g., by associations). A strategic road map toward a short-, mid- and long-term promo- tion of cross-cultural co-operations should take such a three-level-approach into account, as our recommended strategy in the chapter below further details.

Associations in Denmark serve to create networks bbeeeetweentween citizenscitizens, promote cultural activities after work, and cultural identificationidentification with traditions and cus-

73

toms – very similar to German lay cultural associations. As an awareness of one’s own cultural identity may facilitate an understanding of someone else’s cultural identity, the possibility of developing a conjoint cultural identity in the Fehmarnbelt Region is growing. Therefore, cultural associations can be of impoimpor-r-r-r- tance in micro and peoplepeople----totototo----peoplepeople projects – anchoring cultural identity in the minds and hearts of the Region’s citizens and widening our understanding of what “culture” may entail.

In short, the definition of culture and, accordingly, cultural projects and co- operations, need to remain dynamic and part of the cross-cultural exchange in and after kulturLINK – to reflect and serve the Fehmarnbelt Region’s cultural landscape, practitioners and its citizens, and to allow for the development of a dynamic regional (cultural) identity, being “united AND diverse.”

74

555 SSSTRATEGY

Our recommended strategy suggests concentrating on the following aspects, which involve both kulturLINK and subsequent projects, continuing kulturLINK’s initial work beyond 2013: a) increasing interest in and knowledge about each other b) concentrating on key cultural fields, activities and projects c) providing financial incentives and added value d) initiating tangible measurements e) anchoring cross-cultural co-operation in politics and the Region.

a)a)a) Increasing interest in and knowledge about each other is recommended to occur on various levels:

− to provide workshops, conferences and other forms of personal exchange of information, − to facilitate personal exchange of information through travel funds, even if limited, − to offer the virtual platform Culture Map as source of information and net- working, − to develop media partnerships for publicising information and a sustainable marketing of kulturLINK and ongoing cultural projects, − to activate own existing channels of communication and multipliers of infor- mation (chambers of commerce, chambers of crafts, municipal and local bod- ies, public libraries, adult education centres, community and youth centres etc.).

b) Concentrating on key cultural fields and activitiesactivities guides the principle of a focussed, project-based rather than wide-spread form of support:

− expanding existent, strong cultural categories: cultural heritage (including ar- chaeology, prehistoric and medieval [Viking, Hanse, Slav] culture), music, and the visual arts, − fostering festivals and events, which are conceived as one of the most po- tential fields of development in cross-cultural terms by more than half of cul- tural players, − addressing and including all cultural players and offerors beyond cultural categories through an annual “contest of cross—cultural project ideas,”

75

− running a three-track strategy of low-level micro projects for broad cultural participation by the Region’s smaller cultural institutions on the one hand, and fostering selected museums and larger cultural institutions for prominent start-up projects (Botschafterprojekte) to install kulturLINK in people’s aware- ness and minds, on the other. A third track should target experiential cultural activities and projects.

c) Providing financial incentives and added value addresses the need that cross- cultural co-operations require basic funds in the initial phases of long-term pro- jects. Starting largely from scratch in building cultural relations across the Feh- marnbelt, the hurdles to overcome in terms of geographical distances, language barrier, or lack of mutual knowledge – to name just a few – are already high. One of the highest is the financial hurdle – its decrease or dismantling will en- able and motivate cultural players to take up the challenge of initiating cross- cultural relations and to envision the added value of cross-cultural projects. Ac- cordingly, financial support – even if only in form of small incentive funds – is an ongoing topic, starting in and reaching beyond kulturLINK’s term.

ddd)d) Initiating tangible measurements for the time after 2013, involving the fol- lowing steps:

− determining a theme for each year, under whose heading cultural activities are sought to be developed and fostered, − establishing a “kulturLINK Festival Week,“ − developing and bestowing a “culture award” of the Fehmarnbelt Region on a regular basis − initiating one (or two) prominent cross-cultural project between two large in- stitutions, e. g. art museums or middle age centres / museums, during the phase of the opening of the Fehmarnbelt Tunnel, − holding a special “kulturLINK event” every couple of years, looking at the lat- est results, presenting best practice projects and an outlook to coming pro- jects and events; such an event would function as a hinge to future cross- cultural co-operations, projecting the “cultural crossing” to be a continuous undertaking.

e) Anchoring crosscross----culturalcultural coco----operationoperation in politics and the Region implies on a mid- to long-term basis

− developing and committing to a long-term vision,

76

− making it an integral part of politics on the municipal and Land levels, − creating sustainable structures of support, − providing long-term finances by establishing, e. g., a “kulturLINK Cultural Fund,” − establishing a joint “kulturLINK Cross-Cultural Services Office” in the Region to continue the work of kulturLINK’s first three years and organise the above mentioned tangible measurements.

As indicated above, such a future joint “kulturLINKkulturLINK CrossCross----CulturalCultural Services OOf-f-f-f- ficefice” could play an important role. Its professionalprofessional management tasks would in- volve − the virtual Culture Map, − personal information and networking services, − intercultural workshops and guidance to translational services, − kulturLINK travel and project funds, − a “kulturLINK Cultural Fund” − a “culture award” of the Region, − a regular “kulturLINK Festival Week,” − kulturLINK special events, workshops, conferences, − guiding the debate around a dynamic definition of “culture,” − multi-lingual public relations and marketing, − reports and consulting politics.

The establishment of a “kulturLINK Cross-Cultural Services Office” could be part of a subsequent kulturLINK project after 2013.

Also, the suggested tangible measurements and anchoring of cross-cultural co- operations in politics and the Region are recommendedrecommended to be integrated in a strstra-a-a-a- tegic road map for an increased cultural networking. Already, a high number of cultural institutions and actors have been activated to partake in kulturLINK. Ex- pectations of these cultural players thus are running high and want to be ful- filled. This study noted a strong readiness and interestinterest in being part of the estaestab-b-b-b- lishment of crosscross----cultcultculturalural coco----operationsoperations – but without structural and financial support, especially for the first personal meetings and people-to-people projects, these co-operations will not take off and disappointeddisappointed expectations may even be countercounter----productiveproductiveproductive. Accordingly, a high responsibility but also great opportunity lies ahead of kulturLINK.

77

666 SSSOURCES

Agerskov, Søren (2000): Facts about Danish museums. In: The Museum Service (ed.), Danish Museums. International Issue 2000, 30-31.

Barten, U., Bröcker, J., Herrmann, H., Klatt, M., University of Kiel, Syddansk University (2006): Barriers and Potentials of Cross-Border Co-Operation in the Fehmarnbelt Region. By: Institut für Regionalforschung - Christian-Albrechts- Universität Kiel, 2006.

Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011): Der Arbeitsmarkt in der Fehmarnbelt-Region. Agentur für Arbeit Lübeck. http://www.arbeitsagentur.de/nn_536184/Navigation/Dienststellen/RDN/ Luebeck/Agentur/Zahlen-Daten-Fakten/Fehmarnbelt-Region/Fehmarnbelt-Region- Nav.html, visited May 18, 2011.

Council of Europe/ERICarts (2011): Compendium of Cultural Policies and Trends in Europe, 12th edition. http://www.culturalpolicies.net/web/denmark.php?aid=534, visited May 23, 2011. ews group / IHK zu Lübeck (2008): Creative Regions. By: ews group, 2008.

Fachhochschule Westküste (2010): Quantitative Analyse der Destination „Feh- marnbelt.“ By: Institut für Management und Tourismus (IMT), 2010.

Fehmarnbelt Region – Operationelles Programm Europäische Territoriale Zusam- menarbeit (INTERREG IV A) 2007-20013 (2007CB163PO057). http://news.eformation.de/v3/client/media/386/data/16058.pdf, visited Jan. 06, 2011.

Femern A/S (2010): Fakten über die Fehmarnbeltregion. http://www.femern.de/Material+folder/Documents/2011/Zahlen,+Daten,+Fakt en+-+Die+Fehmarnbelt+Region.pdf, visited Dec. 10, 2010.

Fraunhofer EMB (2011): Wir über uns. Fraunhofer Einrichtung für Marine Biotechnologie. http://www.emb.fraunhofer.de/institutsprofil/index.jsp, visited May 28, 2011. http://www.fehmarnbeltregion.net, visited Dec. 10, 2010.

Kulturarv. Heritage Agency of Denmark (2011): About Us. http://www.kulturarv.dk/english/about-us/, visited May 18, 2011.

Lauenborg, Michael (2000): Joint institutional services – a unique feature. In: The Museum Service (ed.), Danish Museums. International Issue 2000, 28-29.

78

Niegaard, Hellen (2009): Something is Changing in the State of Denmark: Six aspects of current Danish library development. In: Hellen Niegaard, Jens Laurid- sen and Knud Schultz (eds.): Library space - Inspiration for Buildings and Design. Copenhagen, Danish Library Association, 2009, 7-10.

Porsmose, Erland (2000): Museums and research. In: The Museum Service (ed.), Danish Museums. International Issue 2000, 26-27.

Sørensen, F., Kjølbæk, A. & Bærenholdt, J.O. (2009): Kulturelle fyrtårne i Re- gion Sjælland. Center for Oplevelsesforskning, Roskilde Universitet, 2009.

Stamming, Mikael (2010): ÖRUS 2020 - The Øresund Region's strategic docu- ment to meet the future. http://www.oresund.org/it/news2/opinion/oerus-2020-the-oeresund-region-s- strategic-document-to-meet-the-future, visited on May 24, 2011.

Stöber, Birgit (2011): The Fehmarnbelt Region – Potentials in the Cultural Sec- tor. In: Femern A/S (eds.): Feste Fehmarnbeltquerung: Regionale Entwicklungs- perspektiven. Copenhagen, Odense, 2011, 342-363.

Zentrum für Kulturwissenschaftliche Forschung (2011). Einladung zur Eröffnung des Zentrums für Kulturwissenschaftliche Forschung am 31.05.2011. http://hanse-trifft- humboldt.de/images/stories/pdf/Einladung_und_Programm_ZKFL- Erffnungsfeier_am_31.5.2011.pdf, visited May 28, 2011.

79

777 AAAPPENDICES

− Appendix 1: Management Summary of "Quantitative Analysis of the Destination ‘Fehmarnbelt’" − Appendix 2: Danish Fact Sheet (Questionnaire) − Appendix 3: German Fact Sheet (Questionnaire) − Appendix 4: Detailed Results of the Enquiry − Appendix 5: List of Cultural Actors − Appendix 6: List of Existing Cross Border Projects

80

Appendix 1: Management Summary of “Quantitative Analysis of the Destination ‘Fehmarnbelt’”

Fachhochschule Westküste Institut für Management und Tourismus Hochschule für Wirtschaft & Technik

Quantitative Analyse der Destination „Fehmarnbelt“

Bearbeitung: Fachhochschule Westküste Institut für Management und Tourismus (IMT) Fritz-Thiedemann-Ring 20 25746 Heide/Holstein 19. Februar 2010

Quantitative Analyse der Destination „Fehmarnbelt“

1. Management Summary

Zentrale Ergebnisse „Quantitative Analyse der Destination Fehmarnbelt“

Fehmarnbelt-Region Fehmarnbelt-Region Kennzahlen Deutscher Teil Dänischer Teil

geschätzte Aufenthaltstage 2008 96,90 Mio. 14,97 Mio. darunter: Übernachtungstourismus 29,18 Mio. 11,99 Mio. Tagestourismus 67,72 Mio. 2,98 Mio.

geschätzte Bedeutung der Segmente Camping: 29% Verwandten-/ Bekanntenbesuche: 34% des Übernachtungstourismus 2008 Verwandten-/ Bekanntenbesuche: 26% Parahotellerie: 20% Parahotellerie: 13% Camping: 14% Priv. Beherbergung (< 9 Betten): 12% Eigene Ferienhäuser: 10% Freizeitwohnsitze: 9% Verliehene Ferienhäuser: 6% Hotellerie: 8% Hotellerie: 6% Vorsorge- und Rehakliniken: 3% Privat vermietete Ferienhäuser: 5% Festivals: 3% Yachthäfen / Marinas: 2%

Regionale Verteilung der statistisch Kreis Ostholstein: 74% Sydsjælland: 49% 1,4 erfassten Übernachtungen 2008 Kreis Plön: 13% Vestsjælland: 42% Hansestadt Lübeck: 13% Østsjælland: 9%

Saisonalität 2008 (Gini-Koeffizient)2,5 0,344 – deutliche Saisonalität 0,186 – moderate Saisonalität

Anteil ausländischer Gäste 20082,6 Ausland gesamt 7% 40% davon: Deutschland bzw. Dänemark 2% 21% Schweden 2% 10%

geschätzte Bruttoumsätze 2008 2.967 Mio. € 1.055 Mio. €

geschätzte Wertschöpfung 2008* 1.363 Mio. € 821 Mio. € darunter: 1. Wertschöpfungsstufe (direkt) 878 Mio. € Differenzierung nach Wertschöpfungs- 2. Wertschöpfungsstufe 485 Mio. € stufen nicht möglich * Deutscher Teil: inkl. direkten und indirekten Effekten. Dänischer Teil: inkl. direkten, indirekten und induzierten Effekten.

geschätzte Beschäftigungsäquivalenz 73.060 13.213 2008

Betriebe, Betten / Stellplätze sowie Auslastung darunter: Betriebe Betten Auslastung Betriebe Betten Auslastung

2,5 gewerbliche Beherbergungsbetriebe 1.403 64.936 31% 60 12.139 36%

Camping3,7 115 9.975 44% 62 11.701 17%

1 Basis - deutscher Teil: gewerbliche Beherbergungsbetriebe ab 9 Betten und Touristikcamping 2 Basis - deutscher Teil: gewerbliche Beherbergungsbetriebe ab 9 Betten 3 Basis - deutscher Teil: Touristikcamping 4 Basis - dänischer Teil: Hotels (≥ 40 Betten), Ferienzentren (≥ 40 Betten), touristisch vermietete Ferienhäuser, Campingplätze (≥ 75 Stellplätze) 5 Basis - dänischer Teil: Hotels (≥ 40 Betten) und Ferienzentren (≥ 40 Betten) 6 Basis - dänischer Teil: Hotels (≥ 40 Betten), Ferienzentren (≥ 40 Betten), Jugendherbergen, touristisch vermietete Ferienhäuser 7 Basis - dänischer Teil: Campingplätze (≥ 75 Stellplätze) Achtung: Die Vergleichbarkeit der Analyseergebnisse für den deutschen und dänischen Teil der Fehmarnbelt-Region ist (teilweise deutlich) eingeschränkt!

Quelle: Institut für Management und Tourismus (IMT), 2010, eigene Berechnungen gemäß Hauptbericht

3

Quantitative Analyse der Destination „Fehmarnbelt“

Wie steht die Destination „Fehmarnbelt“ aus quantitativer Sicht dar? Die Bilanz ist sehr positiv und lässt sich wie folgt zusammenfassen:

Das Institut für Management und Tourismus (IMT) der Fachhochschule Westküste schätzt die Summe der insgesamt getätigten Übernachtungen im deutschen Teil der Fehmarnbelt-Region (Kreise Ostholstein und Plön, Hansestadt Lübeck) im Jahr 2008 auf rund 29 Mio.; im dänischen Destinationsteil (Region Sjælland) auf ca. 12 Mio. In beiden Teilregionen entfallen jeweils über zwei Drittel des Übernachtungsaufkommens auf die Segmente „Verwandten- und Bekanntenbesuche“, „Camping“ und „Parahotel- lerie“. Gewerbliche und private Ferienhäuser, -wohnungen und -zentren stellen in bei- den Destinationsteilen eine bedeutende Beherbergungsform dar. Die dänische Teilre- gion steht verhältnismäßig stärker in der Gunst ausländischer Gäste und konnte im Jahr 2008 in der Summe der Segmente Hotels und Ferienzentren (je ab 40 Betten), Jugendherbergen und touristisch vermieteten Ferienhäusern einen Übernachtungsan- teil von 21% durch deutsche sowie 10% durch schwedische Gäste verzeichnen. Für den deutschen Teil sind Dänemark und Schweden mit je 2% der Übernachtungen in Beherbergungsbetrieben ab 9 Betten die bedeutendsten Auslandsmärkte. Der Tages- tourismus nimmt auf deutscher Seite mit geschätzten 68 Mio. Tagesreisen in 2008 einen deutlich höheren Stellenwert ein als in der dänischen Teilregion (ca. 3 Mio.).

Die positive Bilanz zur touristischen Nachfrage äußert sich auch in den wirtschaftli- chen Effekten, die die Destination „Fehmarnbelt“ durch den Tourismus generiert. So hat das IMT auf Grundlage unterschiedlicher Prämissen für die deutsche Teilregion im Jahr 2008 einen touristischen Bruttoumsatz in Höhe von rund 2.967 Mio. Euro errech- net; für den dänischen Teil führten die Untersuchungen zu einem Umsatz von ca. 1.055 Mio. Euro. Hieraus ergibt sich für den deutschen Destinationsteil eine geschätz- te Gesamtwertschöpfung in Höhe von 1.363 Mio. Euro. Die Einkommenseffekte für die dänische Teilregion belaufen sich auf rund 821 Mio. Euro. Damit liegt die touristische Wertschöpfung je 1.000 Einwohner auf deutscher Seite bei etwa 2,5 Mio. Euro, in der dänischen Teilregion bei rund 1 Mio. Euro. Durch die Umlage der Wertschöpfung auf eine Beschäftigung mit Durchschnittseinkommen ergibt sich für den deutschen Teil der Fehmarnbelt-Region ein Beschäftigungsäquivalent von 73.060 Personen, für den dänischen Teil von 13.213 Personen, deren Einkommen vom Tourismus abhängig ist.

Die allgemein höhere Bedeutung des Tourismus im deutschen Destinationsteil äußert sich auch in den bereitgehaltenen Beherbergungskapazitäten: So stehen in der deut- schen Teilregion 64.936 Betten im gewerblichen Bereich zur Verfügung; auf dänischer Seite sind es in Hotels und Ferienzentren (ab 40 Betten) 12.139 Betten.

Da die Abgrenzung des Tourismus sowie die Methoden zur Quantifizierung des Rei- severkehrs und seiner wirtschaftlichen Effekte in Deutschland und Dänemark in Teilen deutlich voneinander abweichen, unterliegen alle Ergebnisse einer (teilweise erheb- lich) eingeschränkten Vergleichbarkeit.

4

Appendix 2: Danish Fact Sheet (Questionnaire)

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

Spørgeskema

Respondent: (V1)______

Stilling i institutionen / projektet (V2)______

Navn på institutionen / projektet (V3)______

Adresse: (V4)______

(V5) (1) Danmark  (0) Tyskland

Sæt venligst kryds ud for den region, som din institution / dit projekt kommer fra(V6):

 (1)Faxe  (2) Guldborgsund  (3) Holbæk  (4) Kalundborg

 (5) Lejre  (6) Lolland  (7) Næstved  (8) Odsherred

 (9) Ringsted  (10) Roskilde  (11)Slagelse  (12) Sorø

 (13) Stevns  (14) Vordingborg

 (15) Hansestadt Lübeck  (16) Kreis Ostholstein  (17) Kreis Plön

Mail: (V7)______Hjemmeside: (V8)______

Telefon: (V9)______Fax: (V10)______

Må vi have lov til at kontakte dig igen, hvis vi har flere spørgsmål? (V11) (1) ja  (0) nej

Dato: (V12)______

Introduktion I overensstemmelse med aftalen mellem Danmark og Tyskland, dateret den 3. september 2008, vil Femern Bælt-tunnelen stå færdig i 2020. Tunnelen vil forbinde Tyskland og Danmark, og dermed er grundlaget skabt for den såkaldte Femern Bælt Region, som i Interreg IVa programmet er defineret som den region, der strækker sig fra Lübeck til Plön/Eutin over øerne Femern, Lolland og Falster til Midt- og Nordvestsjælland. Det 3-årige tysk-danske projekt kulturLINK understøtter opbygningen af en kulturregion på tværs af grænserne, blandt andet ved at udarbejde et “kulturatlas” og at etablere såkaldte people-to-people projekter. Som et første arbejdstrin i dette projekt ønsker vi - ved hjælp af dette spørgeskema - at analysere det kulturelle landskab og liv i Femern Bælt Regionen. Spørgeskemaet sendes ud til alle kulturinstitutioner, aktører, foreninger mv. i marts måned 2011. Vi håber at kunne drage stor nytte af din viden inden for dit kulturelle felt.

Svar venligst på følgende spørgsmål og sæt venligst kryds ud for alt det, som vedrører dig og din institution / projekt / kulturel aktivitet. Dine svar anvendes udelukkende til anonyme statistiske formål. - Det tager ca. 20 minutter at udfylde dette spørgeskema.

1

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

1. Hvilket kulturelt felt hører din institution / dit projekt mest ind under? (V13)

(1)Billedkunst

(2) Scenekunst

(3) Musik

(4) Litteratur

(5) Film

(6) Kulturarv

(7) Andet

2. Hvilke kulturelle tilbud står din institution / dit projekt for? Sæt venligst kryds ud for alle relevante punkter. 2.1. Billedkunst

 Maleri (V14)

 Videoinstallation (V15)

 Skulptur (V16)

 Land Art (V17)

 Installationskunst & Performance Art (V18)

 Kunsthåndværk (V19)

 Design (V20) 2.2. Scenekunst

 Teater (V21)

 Opera (V22)

 Dans (V23)

 Performance (V24)

 Cirkus (V25)

 Revy (kabaret etc.) (V26) 2.3. Musik

 Klassisk (V27)

 Rytmisk (pop, rock, underholdningsmusik) (V28)

 Jazz (V29)

 Moderne kompositionsmusik (V30)

 Korsang (V31) 2.4. Litteratur

 Prosa (V32)

 Fiktion / skønlitteratur (V33)

 Fagbøger (V34)

 Poesi (V35)

 Det talte ord (slam poesi, historie-fortællinger, oplæsninger etc.) (V36)

 Grafiske romaner (V37)

2

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

2.5. Film og nye medier

 Dokumentarfilm (V38)

 Spillefilm (V39)

 Kortfilm (V40)

 Nye medier (V41) 2.6. Kulturarv

 Kulturhistorie (V42)

 Folkeslag og kulturer, etnologi, arkæologi (V43)

 Folklore og lokalhistorie (V44)

 Højkultur og intellektuel historie (V45)

 Kunsthistorie, litteraturhistorie, musikhistorie (V46)

 Naturhistorie (geologiske seværdigheder, naturparker osv.) (V47)

 Mindesmærker (V48)

 Folkelig kultur (folkemusik, dans, lege, særlige folketraditioner, etc.) (V49) 2.7. Særlige kulturelle tilbud (f.eks. arkitektur; arrangementer på tværs af kulturelle felter / projekter), som ikke nævnes ovenfor: ______(V50)

3. Angiv venligst stedet for dine kulturelle aktiviteter; flere svar er muligt:

 Museum (V51)

 Galleri (V52)

 Uddannelsescenter / skole (V53)

 Bibliotek (V54)

 Teater (V55)

 Biograf (V56)

 Friluftsscene (V57)

 Kirke (V58)

 Historisk bygning (V59)

 Oplevelsescenter (V60)

 Frilandsmuseum (V61)

 Forlystelsesparker (Tivoli, BonBon-land etc.) (V62)

 Private rum (f.eks. foreninger) (V63)

 Offentlige rum (V64)

 Andre rum, angiv venligst hvilke: (V65) ______(V66)

3

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

4. Angiv venligst tidspunktet / perioden for dine kulturelle aktiviteter; flere svar er muligt:

 Hele året (V67)

 Sæsonbestemt (vinter, forår, sommer, efterår) (V68)

 Afhængig af stedfundne begivenheder (bl.a. festivaler) (V69)

5. Angiv venligst målsætningen for dine kulturelle aktiviteter; flere svar er muligt:

 Kulturelle tilbud med egen deltagelse/medindragelse (f.eks. for børn og unge, seniorer).(V70)

 Edutainment / kulturel oplevelse (V71)

 Underholdning (V72)

 Uddannelse (V73)

 Kurser, workshops, arrangementer, projekter (V74)

 Foredrag, udstillingsture etc. (V75)

 Undervisningsmateriale (V76)

 Uddannelse (for "professionelle", f.eks. kor, musikanter, udøvende kunstnere, etc.) (V77)

 Undervisning for lægmænd (V78)

 Repræsentation af kommunen og dens kulturarv (V79)

 Service for turister (V80)

 Andre målsætninger for din institution / dit projekt / din kulturelle aktivitet: (V81)

______(V82)

6. Hvordan forholder det sig med strukturen af dit publikum, deltagerne og medlemmerne hvad angår dine kulturelle tilbud?

6a. Oprindelse, hvad angår dit publikum og deltagerne

Lokalt; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V83) Regionalt; ikke lokalt, dvs. undtagen din nærmeste by / område); procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V84)

Nationalt; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V85)

Internationalt; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V86) (= 100 %)

6b. Alder, hvad angår dit publikum og deltagerne

Under 12 år; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V87)

13 - 20 år; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V88)

21 - 34 år; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V89)

35 - 50 år; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V90)

Over 50 år; procentdel af det samlede publikum: ______% (V91) (= 100 %)

4

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

6c. Antallet af dine besøgende (publikum), medlemmer og deltagere:

Besøgende (publikum): (V92)

(1)1 – 100 / år (4) 5.001 – 10.000 / år (7) mere end 100.000 / år

(2)101 – 1.000 / år (5) 10.001 – 50.000 / år

(3)1.001 – 5.000 / år (6) 50.001 – 100.000 / år

Medlemmer: (V93

(1)1 – 100 (3) 501 – 1.000

(2)101 – 500 (4) mere end 1.000

Deltagere: (V94

(1) 1 – 100 / år (3) 1.001 – 5.000 / år

(2)101 – 1.000 / år (4) mere end 1.000 / år

7. Hvordan er din institution / dit projekt primært organiseret og struktureret? (Sæt

venligst kun ét kryds) (V95)

(1)Offentlig organisation / institution / offentligt projekt

(2)Selvejende institution

(3)Non-profit organisation (almennyttig organisation)

(4)Forening

(5)Privat organisation / institution / projekt (profitskabende)

(6)Kirkelig forening / kirkeligt projekt

(7)Uddannelsesmæssig organisation / institution / projekt

(8)Aftenskole / uddannelsestilbud for børn og unge (f.eks. aftenskole/ungdomsskole)

(8)Samfundsbaseret kulturel aktivitet / projekt på frivillig basis

(10)Kunstnerisk projekt, som er iværksat og ledes af dig som kunstner / kulturel aktør

(11)Sæsonbestemt projekt (som f.eks. sommerprogram / sommerskole)

(12)Anden form for organisation / struktur - angiv venligst hvilken:

______(V96)

8. Hvordan er din institution / dit projekt / din kulturelle aktivitet finansieret, og hvorfra?

8a. Hvordan finansieres din institution / dit projekt primært? (V97)

(1)Offentligt finansieret institution / projekt

(2)Privat finansieret institution / projekt

5

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

8b. Angiv venligst alle kilder, som giver økonomisk støtte til din institution / dit projekt:

Det offentlige (ca. ______% af det samlede finansieringsvolumen) (V98)

 EU (V99)

 Statslig (nationen) (V100)

 Region (V102)

 Kommune (V103)

 Anden offentlig kilde, angiv venligst hvilken: (V104)

______(V105)

Private kilder (ca. ______% af det samlede finansieringsvolumen) (V106)

 Private sponsorer (firmaer, enkelte personer etc.) (V107)

 Stiftelser (V108)

 Kirke (V109)

 Publikum, deltagere og medlemmer (V110) (ca.____% (V111)af det samlede finansieringsvolumen). Sæt venligst kryds ud for alle nedenstående finanskilder, der vedrører dig:

 Entréer (V112)

 Gebyrer for undervisning, uddannelsestilbud, workshops, ekskursioner etc. (V113)

 Indtægter fra medlemskab (V114)

 Andre private kilder, angiv venligst hvilke: (V115)

______(V116)

8c. Økonomisk synspunkt og udviklingen af din institution

Hvilket økonomisk bidrag yder du efter din mening til din lokale/regional kulturindustrii? (V117)

(1)Stort

(2)Medium

(3)Lille

(4)Ved ikke. Har du nogen planer om i den nærmeste fremtid eller på et senere tidspunkt at ændre på måden, hvorpå du skaffer støttemidler, eller hvordan du finansierer din kulturelle institution / dit projekt? (V118)

(1)Ja

(0)Nej

Hvis "ja", hvordan? ______(V119) Er du interesseret i at udvide dine økonomiske ressourcer ved et samarbejde med kulturelle institutioner / projekter på "den anden side" af Femern Bælt? (V120)

(1)Ja

(2)Måske

(3)Nej

6

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

9. Grundlag og regelsæt for så vidt angår arbejdet og samarbejdsformen i din institution / dit projekt

9a. I henhold til hvilke grundlag, regelsæt eller lovgivning arbejder din institution / dit projekt? Sæt venligst kryds ud for alle de punkter, der vedrører dig.

 Lovgivning fra (V121)

 EU (V122)

 Staten (national lovgivning) (V123)

 Regionen (V125)

 Kommunen (V126)  Grundlag og andre regelsæt for din institution / dit projekt i relation til

 Forskning (V127)

 Krav til kulturelle tilbud tilknyttet jeres virke (V128)

 Tema (bl.a. perioder, stilarter) (V129)

 Deltagere (bl.a. antal, alder) (V130)

 Adgang (bl.a. åbningstider) (V131)

 Former for formidling og præsentation (V132)

 Andre reglementer og regelsæt; angiv venligst hvilke: (V133)

______(V134)

9.b Hvilke muligheder har du ved et samarbejde med andre institutioner/aktører for så

vidt angår grundlaget? (V135)

(1) Mange muligheder

(2) Nogle muligheder

(3) Ingen muligheder

10. Hvem samarbejder du med, hvad angår dine kulturelle aktiviteter / projekt(er)? Flere svar er muligt.

 Ingen samarbejdspartnere (V136)

 Lokale kulturelle institutioner / organisationer / projekter / kunstnere, f.eks.: (V137) ______

______(V138)  Regionale (der ligger uden for dine nærmeste lokale omgivelser) kulturelle institutioner /

organisationer / projekter / kunstnere, f.eks.: (V139)______

______(V140)

 Nationale kulturelle institutioner / organisationer / projekter / kunstnere, f.eks.: (V141)

______(V142)

 Internationale kulturelle institutioner / organisationer / projekter / kunstnere, f.eks.: (V143)

______(V144)

7

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

Har du samarbejdspartnere „på den anden side“ af Femern Bælt? (V145)

(1) ja

(0) nej Hvis "ja", angiv venligst dine grænseoverskridende partnere, som eksisterer allerede nu / har eksisteret: ______(V146) Har du lyst til at udvide dit samarbejde med kulturelle institutioner / organisationer / projekter

/ kunstnere i den dansk / tyske Femern Bælt Region? (V147)

(1) ja

(2) måske

(3) nej Hvis "ja" eller "måske", angiv venligst en eller flere mulige partnere, som du kunne tænke dig at samarbejde med: ______

______(V148)

11. Offentlighedsarbejde og markedsføring hvad angår din institution / dit projekt / din kulturelle aktivitet:

11a. Hvor udfører du dit offentlighedsarbejde og markedsføring?

 Lokalt (V149)

 Regionalt (V150)

 Nationalt (V151)

 Internationalt (V152)

11b. Hvordan udfører du dit offentlighedsarbejde og markedsføring? Markér venligst alle relevante svar.

 Internet / virtuelle medier (V153)

 Online (kulturelle) aktivitets-kalendere og netsteder (V154)

 Egen hjemmeside (V155)

 Blog, Twitter (V156)

 Platforme, der bygger på sociale medier (såsom Facebook) (V157)

 Reklame i traditionelle medier (V158)

 Aktivitets-kalendere (V159)

 Handouts, flyer, plakater (V160)

 Annoncering af kulturelle tilbud i aviser, tidsskrifter, TV, radio (V161)

 Artikler, anmeldelser i aviser, tidsskrifter, TV, radio (V162)

 Annoncer i aviser, tidsskrifter, TV, radio (V163)

 Personligt (V164)

 Aktiviteter/events (V165)

 Personlige invitationer (V166)

 Markedsføring via merchandising (reklameprodukter) (V167)

8

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

11c. I forbindelse med styrkelsen af Femern Bælt Regionen ville du da overveje en

udvidelse eller ændring af dit offentlighedsarbejde og din markedsføringsform? (V168)

(1) ja

(2) nej Hvis "ja", hvad ville du ændre ved din kommunikationsform og markedsføringsform?

Angiv venligst: ______(V169)

12. Kan du se noget potentiale for et øget kulturelt liv og flere kulturelle

samarbejdsprojekter i Femern Bælt Regionen? (V170)

(1) ja

(2) måske, til en vis grad

(3) nej Hvis "ja" eller "måske", hvilke kulturelle felter rummer efter din mening det største potentiale for udvikling af kulturelle samarbejdsprojekter og fælles aktiviteter / projekter?

 Billedkunst (V171)

 Scenekunst (V172)

 Musik (V173)

 Litteratur (V174)

 Film (V175)

 Kulturarv (V176)

 Arrangementer, festivaler, angiv venligst: (V177) ______(V178)

 Andet, angiv venligst: (V179)______(V180)

13. For at det skal lykkes at intensivere det kulturelle liv og opbygge et kulturelt samarbejde i Femern Bælt Regionen, vil vi godt vide, hvilke behov du har i den retning? Sæt venligst kryds ud for alle de punkter, der vedrører dig.

 Personlige møder (V181)

 med repræsentanter for andre kulturelle institutioner / projekter (V182)

 med interkulturelle mellemmænd (V183)

 i fælles workshopper / seminarer, såsom fælles projekter eller (V184) i forbindelse med ansøgninger om støttemidler

 i forbindelse med "brainstorming"- & netværks-arrangementer (V185)

 andre former for personlige møder, angiv venligst: (V186)______(V187)

 Oplæring / uddannelse (V188)

 Sprogkurser (V189)

 Interkulturelle uddannelser (V190)

 Andre former for uddannelse/oplæring, angiv venligst hvilke: (V191)

______(V192)

9

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

 Forbedret kommunikation (V193)

 med assistance fra interkulturelle mellemmænd (V194)

 uden assistance fra interkulturelle mellemmænd (V195)

 vha. internettet, mail, telekonference (V196)

 vha. virtuelle rundskrivelser med aktuelle kulturelle udviklinger (V197)

 via en internetplatform mhp. Informationsudveksling (V198)

 vha. andre former for kommunikation, angiv venligst hvilke: (V199)

______(V200)

 Informationsmateriale (virtuelt eller på tryk) via (V201)

 "den anden side" af Femern Bælt (V202)

 andre metoder, f.eks.: (V203)______(V204)

 Fælles liste med kontaktpersoner (V205)

 Nye muligheder hvad angår støttemidler og finansiering (V206)  Ændring af lovgivning for at gøre det muligt med f.eks. fælles grænseoverskridende

finansiel støtte, samarbejde og projektudvikling (V207)

 Fælles udvikling af kulturelt undervisningsmateriale, tilbud om uddannelse & udvekslinger (V208)

 Fælles udvikling hvad angår markedsføring og kommunikation, handel (V209)

 Alle andre behov, der ikke er opført ovenfor: (V210) ______(V211)

14. Projektet kulturLINK er ved at udvikle et internetbaseret "Kulturatlas" for Femern Bælt Regionen med det formål at understøtte andre kulturelle aktiviteter og netværk. Hvilke informationer skal der efter din mening lægges ind på sådan en platform? Sæt gerne flere krydser.

 Informationer om Femern Bælt Regionens generelle karakteristika (V212)

 Informationer om Regionens kulturelle liv (V213)

 En kulturel kalender for regionen (V214)

 Rundskrivelse med informationer om aktuelle arrangementer i Regionen (V215)

 Nyhedslister (V216)

 Fælles liste med kontaktpersoner (V217)

 Informationer om de danske og tyske kontrakt- og finansieringsstrukturer (V218)

 Et forum med mulighed for udveksling af kommentarer (V219)

 Mulighed for bekendtgørelser/annoncering (V220)

 Andet, som der efter din mening bør være i kulturatlasset? Angiv venligst: (V221) ______

______(V222)

10

Kontaktperson ved spørgsmål: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

15. Til sidst vil vi godt have lov til at trække på din kulturelle ekspertise og bede dig om at give os dine kommentarer og forslag, hvad angår udvikling af stærkere kulturelle bånd mellem alle kulturelle aktører og beboere i Femern Bælt Regionen. ______

______(V223)

16. Desuden beder vi dig venligst om at anbefale os en eller flere kulturelle aktører,

som efter din mening bør inddrages i KulturLINK projektet videre frem: (V224)

Institution / Projekt Person – Navn Hjemmeside* eller postadresse

* Hvis den pågældende ikke har nogen hjemmeside, angiv venligst postadressen.

Tusind tak for din indsats, og for at du har taget dig tid til at udfylde denne formular!

11

Appendix 3: German Fact Sheet (Questionnaire)

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

Fragebogen

Befragte Person: (V1)______

Position in der Institution / im Projekt: (V2)______

Name der Institution / des Projekts (V3)______

Adresse: (V4)______

(V5) (1) Dänemark  (0) Deutschland

Bitte kreuzen Sie an, aus welcher Region Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt kommt(V6):

 (1)Faxe  (2) Guldborgsund  (3) Holbæk  (4) Kalundborg

 (5) Lejre  (6) Lolland  (7) Næstved  (8) Odsherred

 (9) Ringsted  (10) Roskilde  (11)Slagelse  (12) Sorø

 (13) Stevns  (14) Vordingborg

 (15) Hansestadt Lübeck  (16) Kreis Ostholstein  (17) Kreis Plön

E-Mail: (V7)______Homepage: (V8)______

Telefon: (V9)______Fax: (V10)______

Dürfen wir Sie kontaktieren, wenn wir weitere Fragen haben? (V11) (1) ja  (0) nein

Datum: (V12)______

Einführung Gemäß dem Abkommen zwischen Dänemark und Deutschland vom 3. September 2008 wird der Fehmarnbelt-Tunnel im Jahr 2020 fertig gestellt sein. Der Tunnel wird Deutschland und Dänemark verbinden und die sogenannte Fehmarnbelt-Region schaffen, die in dem Interreg IVa-Programm als diejenige Region definiert ist, die von Lübeck bis nach Plön/Eutin, den Inseln Fehmarn, Lolland und Falster entlang bis zu den mittleren und den nordwestlichen Regionen von Seeland reicht. Das drei Jahre andauernde deutsch-dänische Interreg IVa-Programm kulturLINK unterstützt den Aufbau einer länderübergreifenden Kulturregion, unter anderem durch die Erstellung eines "Kulturatlas" und die Schaffung von so genannten people-to-people Projekten usw. Ein erster Schritt in diesem Projekt ist eine Untersuchung der Kulturlandschaft und des kulturellen Lebens in der Fehmarnbelt-Region in Zusammenarbeit und im Austausch mit Ihnen als Kulturexperte. Der Fragebogen wird deshalb an Kulturinstitutionen, -akteure und Vereine in der Fehmarnbelt-Region im März 2011 verschickt.

Beantworten Sie bitte nachstehende Fragen und markieren Sie bitte alles, was Sie und Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt / Ihre Kulturaktivität betrifft. Ihre Antworten werden ausschließlich für anonyme statistische Zwecke dieser Studie verwendet. – Das Ausfüllen dieses Fragebogens dauert ca. 20 Minuten.

1

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

1. Zu welchem Kulturbereich gehört Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt am ehesten? (V13)

(1)Bildende Kunst

(2) Darstellende Kunst

(3) Musik

(4) Literatur

(5) Film

(6) Kulturerbe

(7) Sonstiges

2. Welche Kulturangebote bietet Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt an? Bitte kreuzen Sie alles an, was zutrifft. 2.1. Bildende Kunst

 Malerei (V14)

 Video-Installationen (V15)

 Skulptur (V16)

 Land Art (V17)

 Kunstinstallation & Performance Art (V18)

 Kunsthandwerk (V19)

 Design (V20) 2.2. Darstellende Kunst

 Theater (V21)

 Oper (V22)

 Tanz (V23)

 Performance (V24)

 Zirkus (V25)

 Revue (Kabarett usw.) (V26) 2.3. Musik

 Klassische Musik (V27)

 Pop, Rock / Unterhaltungsmusik (V28)

 Jazz (V29)

 Zeitgenössische Musik (V30)

 Chorale Musik (V31) 2.4. Literatur

 Prosa (V32)

 Fiktion / Belletristik (V33)

 Sachbücher (V34)

 Poesie (V35)

 Das gesprochene Wort (Slam Poetry, Geschichten-Erzählen, Lesungen usw.) (V36)

 Grafische Romane (V37)

2

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

2.5. Film und Neue Medien

 Dokumentarfilme (V38)

 Spielfilme (V39)

 Kurzfilme (V40)

 Neue Medien (V41) 2.6. Kulturerbe

 Kulturgeschichte (V42)

 Völkerkunde, Ethnologie, Archäologie (V43)

 Volkskunde und Heimatgeschichte (V44)

 Hochkultur und Geistesgeschichte (V45)

 Kunstgeschichte, Literaturgeschichte, Musikgeschichte (V46)

 Naturgeschichte (geologische Stätten, Naturparks, usw.) (V47)

 Denkmäler (V48)

 Volkskultur (Volksmusik, Tanz, Spiele, besondere Volkstraditionen, usw.) (V49) 2.7. Sonstige Kulturangebote (z. B. Architektur; Kulturbereich-übergreifende Veranstaltungen / Projekte), die oben nicht genannt werden: ______

______(V50)

3. Geben Sie bitte den Ort Ihrer Kulturaktivitäten an; mehrere Antworten sind möglich:

 Museum (V51)

 Galerie (V52)

 Bildungszentrum / Schule (V53)

 Bibliothek (V54)

 Theater (V55)

 Kino (V56)

 Freilichtbühne (V57)

 Kirche (V58)

 Historisches Gebäude (V59)

 Erlebniszentrum (V60)

 Freilichtmuseum (V61)

 Themenpark (Tivoli, das BonBon-Land usw.) (V62)

 Private Räumlichkeiten (z. B. Vereine) (V63)

 Öffentliche Räumlichkeiten (V64)

 Andere Räumlichkeiten, geben Sie bitte an, welche: (V65) ______(V66)

3

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

4. Geben Sie bitte den Zeitpunkt / Zeitraum Ihrer Kulturaktivitäten an; mehrere Antworten sind möglich:

 Ganzjährig (V67)

 Saisonal (Winter, Frühjahr, Sommer, Herbst) (V68)

 Ereignisbedingt (Festivals u.a.) (V69)

5. Geben Sie bitte die Zielsetzungen Ihrer Kulturaktivitäten an; mehrere Antworten sind möglich:

 Kulturangebote zum Mitmachen (z.B. für Kinder, Jugendliche, Senioren) (V70)

 Edutainment / Erlebniskultur (V71)

 Unterhaltung (V72)

 Bildung (V73)

 Lehrgänge, Workshops, Veranstaltungen, Projekte (V74)

 Vorträge, Führungen usw. (V75)

 Lernmaterialien (V76)

 Schulung (für "Profis", wie zum Beispiel in Chören, Musikanten, Darsteller usw.) (V77)

 Unterricht für Laien (V78)

 Kulturelle Repräsentation der Region und deren Kulturerbe (V79)

 Kulturelle Dienstleistungen für Touristen (V80)

 Andere Zielsetzungen Ihrer Institution / Ihres Projekts / Ihrer Kulturaktivität: (V81)

______(V82)

6. Wie sehen die Strukturen Ihres Publikums, Ihrer TeilnehmerInnen und Mitglieder hinsichtlich Ihrer Kulturangebote aus?

6a. Der Herkunftsort Ihres Publikums und Ihrer TeilnehmerInnen

Lokal; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V83) Regional (ohne lokal; d. h. außer Ihrer unmittelbaren Stadt / Ihres unmittelbaren Bezirks; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V84)

National; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V85)

International; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V86) (= 100 %) 6b. Das Alter Ihres Publikums und Ihrer TeilnehmerInnen

Unter 12 Jahre; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V87)

13 - 20 Jahre; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V88)

21 - 34 Jahre; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V89)

35 - 50 Jahre; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V90)

Über 50 Jahre; prozentualer Anteil des gesamten Publikums: ______% (V91) (= 100 %)

4

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

6c. Die Anzahl Ihrer Besucher (Publikum), Ihrer Mitglieder und TeilnehmerInnen:

BesucherInnen (Publikum) : (V92)

(1)1 – 100 / Jahr (4) 5.001 – 10.000 / Jahr (7) mehr als 100.000 / Jahr

(2)101 – 1.000 / Jahr (5) 10.001 – 50.000 / Jahr

(3)1.001 – 5.000 / Jahr (6) 50.001 – 100.000 / Jahr

Mitglieder: (V93)

(1)1 – 100 (3) 501 – 1.000

(2)101 – 500 (4) mehr als 1.000

TeilnehmerInnen: (V94)

(1) 1 – 100 / Jahr (3) 1.001 – 5.000 / Jahr

(2)101 – 1.000 / Jahr (4) mehr als 5.000 / Jahr

7. Wie ist Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt organisiert und strukturiert? (Hauptsächliche

Organisationsform! Bitte nur eine Antwort auswählen.) (V95)

(1)Öffentliche Organisation / Institution / Öffentliches Projekt

(2)Einrichtung des öffentlichen Rechts

(3)Gemeinnützige Organisation (gGmbH usw.)

(4)Verein

(5)private Organisation / Institution / Projekt (profitorientiert)

(6)Kirchliche Vereinigung / kirchliches Projekt

(7)Bildungsorganisation / -institution / -projekt

(8)Erwachsenenbildung / Bildungsangebote für Kinder und Jugendliche (z. B. Volkshochschule)

(9)Gemeinde-basierte Kulturaktivität / Projekt auf ehrenamtlicher Basis

(10)Projekt, das durch Sie als Künstler/in oder kultureller Akteur initialisiert u. geleitet wird.

(11)Saisonales Projekt (zum Beispiel Sommerprogramm / Sommerschule)

(12)Andere Organisationsform oder -struktur, bitte geben Sie an welche:

______(V96)

8. Finanzierung und Förderung Ihrer Institution / Ihres Projekts / Ihrer Kulturaktivität

8a. Wie wird Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt hauptsächlich gefördert? (V97)

(1)Öffentlich geförderte Institution / öffentlich gefördertes Projekt

(0)Privat geförderte Institution / privat gefördertes Projekt

5

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

8b. Geben Sie bitte alle Quellen an, die Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt finanzieren:

Öffentliche Quellen (etwa ______% des Gesamtfinanzierungsvolumens) (V98)

 EU (V99)

 Das Land (Nation) (V100)

 Das Bundesland (V101)

 Die Region / der Kreis (V102)

 Die Gemeinde (V103)

 Andere Quellen der öffentlichen Hand, geben Sie bitte an welche: (V104)

______(V105)

Private Quellen (etwa ______% des Gesamtfinanzierungsvolumens) (V106)

 Private Sponsoren (Firmen, Einzelpersonen usw.) (V107)

 Stiftungen (V108)

 Kirche (V109)

 Publikum, TeilnehmerInnen u. Mitglieder (V110) (etwa ___% (V111) der Gesamtfinanzierung): Bitte markieren Sie alle für Sie zutreffenden Finanzquellen dieser Gruppen:

 Eintrittsgelder (V112)

 Gebühren für Unterricht, Bildungsangebote, Workshops, Exkursionen etc. (V113)

 Mitgliedsgebühren (V114)

 Andere private Quellen, geben Sie bitte an welche: (V115)

______(V116)

8c. Finanzielle Perspektive und Entwicklung Ihrer Institution

Wie betrachten Sie Ihren aktuellen wirtschaftlichen Beitrag zur Kulturwirtschaft Ihrer Region? (V117)

(1)Stark)

(2)mittelmäßig

(3)schwach

(4)weiß nicht. Planen Sie eine Änderung der Art der Mittelbeschaffung und Finanzierung Ihrer

Kulturinstitution / Ihres Kulturprojekts in der nahen oder fernen Zukunft? (V118)

(1)ja

(0)nein wenn "ja", wie? ______(V119) Sind Sie daran interessiert, Ihre Mittel durch eine Zusammenarbeit mit Kulturinstitutionen /

Kulturprojekten auf der "anderen Seite" des Fehmarnbelts zu erweitern? (V120)

(1) ja

(2) vielleicht

(3) nein

6

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

9. Auftrag und Grundlagen der Arbeit und Kooperationen Ihrer Institution / Ihres Projekts

9a. Gemäß welchem Auftrag, welcher Grundlage oder Gesetzgebung arbeitet Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt? Bitte kreuzen Sie alle für Sie zutreffenden Punkte an.

 Gesetzgebung (V121)

 der EU (V122)

 des Landes (nationale Gesetzgebung) (V123)

 des Bundeslands (V124)

 der Region / der Kommune (V125)

 der Gemeinde (V126)

 Satzungen und andere Grundlagen Ihrer Institution / Ihres Projekts mit Bezug auf (V127)

 Forschung (V128)

 Anforderungen an Profil, Anspruch, Angebote etc. (V129)

 Thematik, Perioden (V130)

 TeilnehmerInnen (Anzahl, Alter u. a.) (V131)

 Zugänglichkeit (Öffnungszeiten u. a.) (V132)

 Formen der Vermittlung und Darstellung (V133)

 Sonstige Grundlagen und Regeln, bitte geben Sie an, welche: (V134) ______

9b. Welche Möglichkeiten der Zusammenarbeit mit anderen Institutionen / Akteuren

haben Sie auf der Grundlage Ihrer Satzung / Regeln? (V135)

(1) Viele Möglichkeiten

(2) Einige Möglichkeiten

(3) Keine Möglichkeiten

10. Mit wem kooperieren Sie hinsichtlich Ihrer kulturellen Aktivitäten / Ihrer Projekt(e)? Mehrere Antwortmöglichkeiten sind möglich.

 Keine KooperationspartnerInnen (V136)

 Lokale kulturelle Institutionen / Organisationen / Projekte / Künstler, zum Beispiel: (V137) ______

______(V138)  Regionale (außerhalb Ihrer unmittelbaren lokalen Umgebung liegende) kulturelle

Institutionen / Organisationen / Projekte / Künstler, zum Beispiel: (V139)______

______(V140)

 Nationale kulturelle Institutionen / Organisationen / Projekte / Künstler, zum Beispiel: (V141)

______(V142)

 Internationale kulturelle Institutionen / Organisationen / Projekte / Künstler, zum Beispiel:

(V143)______(V144)

7

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

Haben Sie KooperationspartnerInnen „auf der anderen Seite“ des Fehmarnbelts? (V145)

(1) ja

(0) nein Wenn "ja", geben Sie bitte Ihre grenzüberschreitenden PartnerInnen an, die jetzt schon vorhanden sind / vorhanden gewesen sind: ______

______(V146) Möchten Sie Ihre Zusammenarbeit mit kulturellen Institutionen / Organisationen / Projekten /

Künstlern in der dänisch / deutschen Fehmarnbelt Region erweitern? (V147)

(1) ja

(2) vielleicht

(3) nein Wenn "ja" oder "vielleicht", geben Sie bitte ein oder mehrere mögliche Partner an, mit denen Sie sich eine Zusammenarbeit vorstellen könnten: ______

______(V148)

11. Öffentlichkeitsarbeit und Marketing Ihrer Institution / Ihres Projekts

11a. Wo betreiben Sie Ihre Öffentlichkeitsarbeit und Ihr Marketing?

 Lokal (V149)

 Regional (V150)

 National (V151)

 International (V152)

11b. Wie betreiben Sie Ihre Öffentlichkeitsarbeit und Ihr Marketing? Geben Sie bitte alle zutreffenden Antworten an.

 Internet / virtuelle Medien (V153)

 Online (kulturelle) Veranstaltungskalender und Webseiten (V154)

 Eigene Webseite (V155)

 Blog, Twitter (V156)

 Social Media Plattformen (wie z.B. Facebook) (V157)

 Werbung in herkömmlichen Medien (V158)

 Veranstaltungskalender (V159)

 Hand-Outs, Flyer, Poster (V160)

 Ankündigen von Kulturangeboten in Zeitungen, Zeitschriften, TV, Radio (V161)

 Artikel, Rezensionen in Zeitungen, Zeitschriften, TV, Radio (V162)

 Anzeigen in Zeitungen, Zeitschriften, TV, Radio (V163)

 Persönlich (V164

 Veranstaltungen/Events (V165)

 Persönliche Einladungen (V166)

 Marketing durch Merchandising (Werbemittel) (V167)

8

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

11c. Könnten Sie sich vorstellen, durch die Stärkung der Fehmarnbelt-Region Ihre

Öffentlichkeitsarbeit und Ihr Marketing auszuweiten oder zu ändern? (V168)

(1) ja

(0) nein Wenn "ja", was würden Sie hinsichtlich Kommunikationsform und Werbung ändern?

Geben Sie bitte an, was: ______(V169)

12. Sehen Sie ein Potential für ein verstärktes Kulturleben und mehr kulturelle

Kooperationen in der Fehmarnbelt-Region? (V170)

(1) Ja

(2) Vielleicht, zum Teil.

(3) Nein Wenn "ja" oder "vielleicht", in welchen kulturellen Bereichen sehen Sie das größte Potential für die Entwicklung kultureller Kooperationen und gemeinsamer Aktivitäten / Projekte?

 Bildende Kunst (V171)

 Darstellende Kunst (V172)

 Musik (V173)

 Literatur (V174)

 Film (V175)

 Kulturerbe (V176)

 Veranstaltungen, Festspiele usw., geben Sie bitte an: (V177) ______(V178)

 Sonstiges, geben Sie bitte an: (V179) ______(V180) 13. Welchen Bedarf haben Sie, damit die Intensivierung des Kulturlebens und der Aufbau kultureller Kooperationen in der Fehmarnbelt-Region ein Erfolg wird? Bitte kreuzen Sie alle zutreffenden Antworten an.

 Persönliche Treffen (V181)

 mit Vertretern anderer kulturellen Institutionen / Projekte (V182)

 mit interkulturellen Vermittlern (V183)  in gemeinsamen Workshops / Seminaren, wie z. B. in gemeinsamen Projekten oder

bei Anträgen auf Fördermittel (V184)

 durch "Brain Storming" & Netzwerk-Veranstaltungen (V185)

 andere Formen von persönlichen Treffen, geben Sie bitte an: (V186)______(V187)

 Schulungen / Bildung (V188)

 Sprachkurse (V189)

 Interkulturelle Trainings (V190)  Andere Bildungs-/Schulungsformen, geben Sie bitte an:

(V191)______(V192)

9

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

 Verstärkte Kommunikation (V193)

 mit Hilfe von interkulturellen Vermittlern (V194)

 ohne Hilfe von interkulturellen Vermittlern (V195)

 durch das Internet, E-Mail, Tele-Konferenz (V196)

 durch virtuelle Rundschreiben mit aktuellen kulturellen Entwicklungen (V197)

 durch eine Internet-Plattform für den Austausch (V198)  durch andere Kommunikationsformen, geben Sie bitte an welche:

(V199)______(V200)

 Informationsmaterial (virtuell oder gedruckt) über (V201)

 "die andere kulturelle Seite" des Fehmarnbelts (V202)

 andere Themen, zum Beispiel: (V203)______(V204)

 Gemeinsame Liste mit Kontaktpersonen (V205)

 Neue Möglichkeiten hinsichtlich Fördermittel und Finanzierung (V206)  Änderung der Gesetzgebung, um gemeinsame grenzüberschreitende finanzielle

Unterstützung, Kooperationen und Projektentwicklungen zu ermöglichen (V207)  Gemeinsame Entwicklung von kulturellen Lehrmaterialien, Bildungsangeboten &

Austauschmöglichkeiten (V208)

 Gemeinsame Entwicklung hinsichtlich Vermarktung und Kommunikation, Handel (V209)

 Sonstiger nicht oben aufgeführter Bedarf: (V210)______(V211)

14. Das Projekt kulturLINK ist dabei, einen Internet-basierten “Kulturatlas” der Fehmarnbelt-Region zu erstellen, um weitere kulturelle Aktivitäten und Netzwerkbeziehungen zu unterstützen. Was sollte Ihrer Meinung nach auf einer solchen Plattform zu finden sein? Kreuzen Sie bitte alle Antworten an, die sich auf Sie und Ihre Institution / Ihr Projekt beziehen.

 Informationen über die allgemeinen Merkmale der Fehmarnbelt-Region (V212

 Informationen über das Kulturleben der Region (V213)

 Kulturkalender der Region (V214)

 Rundschreiben mit Informationen über aktuelle Veranstaltungen in der Region (V215)

 Nachrichten-Ticker (V216)

 gemeinsame Liste mit Kontaktpersonen (V217)

 Informationen über die dänischen und deutschen Vertrags- und Förderstrukturen (V218)

 Ein Austauschforum mit Kommentaren (V219)

 Möglichkeiten für Bekanntmachungen (V220)  Anderes, das Ihrer Meinung nach im Kulturatlas zu finden sein soll? Geben Sie bitte an

was: (V221)______

______(V222)

10

Kontaktinformationen für Fragen: Nicola Lucas, IHK zu Lübeck, +49 (0)451 6006 168, [email protected] Helen Sværke, Næstved Kommune, +45 5588 3024, hesva@næstved.dk

15. Schließlich möchten wir auf Ihr kulturelles Fachwissen zurückgreifen und Sie bitten, uns Kommentare und Vorschläge zu unterbreiten, wie kulturelle Beziehungen zwischen allen kulturellen Akteuren und der Bevölkerung der

Fehmarnbelt-Region entwickelt und verstärkt werden können. (V223) ______

16. Empfehlen Sie uns bitte kulturelle Akteure, die Ihrer Meinung nach in das Projekt

kulturLINK langfristig einzubinden sind: (V224) Institution / Projekt Person – Name Homepage* oder Postanschrift

* Wenn keine Homepage verfügbar ist, geben Sie bitte die Postanschrift an.

Vielen Dank für Ihre Bemühungen und dafür, dass Sie sich die Zeit genommen haben, diesen Fragebogen auszufüllen!

11

Appendix 4: Detailed Results of the Enquiry Cultural Actors: number of visitors

Akteure nach Besuchern / Jahr (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 163

40% 37%

28% 30% 26% 26% Deutschland 23% Dänemark

20%

13% 13% 11% 9%

10% 5% 6% 3% 2% 0%

0% 1100 1011.000 1.0015.000 5.00110.000 10.00150.000 50.001100.000 > 100.000

Noteworthy: Denmark: 37% = 1011.000 visitors, Germany: even distribution (average 27%) = 1011.000, 1.0015.000, 10.00050.000 visitors.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: number of participants

Akteure nach Teilnehmern / Jahr (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 108

46% 50% 43% 39%

40% 32% Deutschland

Dänemark 30%

20% 13% 13% 9%

10% 4%

0% 1 – 100 101 – 1.000 1.001 – 5.000 mehr als 5.000

Noteworthy: Denmark: majority of 46% = 1100 participants/year Germany: majority of 43% = 1011.000 participants/year

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: cultural category

Projekte nach Kultursparten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 192

Deutschland 30% 27% Dänemark 24%

21% 25% 20% 21%

18% 20% 17% 16%

115%5% 9% 9% 9%

10% 4% 3% 5% 2%

0% Bildende Darstellende Musik Literatur Film Kulturerbe Sonstiges Kunst Kunst

Noteworthy: In both countries: cultural heritage = very important In Denmark: music = most important, cultural heritage & “other” = equal. important In Germany: cultural heritage = most important, followed by visual arts Strong difference: literature = far more important in Germany than in Denmark

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: cultural offers in Denmark

Stärkste Kulturangebote nach Sparten (760 Nennungen insgesamt) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Malerei Skulptur Kunst

Bildende Bildende Kunsthandwerk Theater ende ende Kunst Tanz Darstell Pop, Rock / Unterhaltungsmusik

usik Klassische Musik Musik Chorale Musik Das gesprochene Wort (SlamPoetry, Lesungen etc.) Prosa Literatur Dokumentarfilme

Neue Neue Neue Medien Medien Film und und Film Kulturgeschichte

be Volkskunde und Heimatgeschichte Kulturer

e Sonstige Kulturangebote stig Son

Noteworthy: In Denmark: cultural history = by far leading cultural offer, followed by pop/rock music. Local history, visual arts, choral and classical music = of equal high relevance as cultural offers.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: cultural offers in Germany

Stärkste Kulturangebote nach Sparten (227 Nennungen insgesamt) 0 5 10 15 20

Malerei Kunsthandwerk Bildend e Kunst e Revue (Kabarett usw.) ende ende Kunst Theater Darstell Klassische Musik

Musik M Jazz Das gesprochene Wort (SlamPoetry, Lesungen etc.) Fiktion/ Belletristik Prosa Literatur Sachbücher Dokumentarfilme und und Film Neue Neue Spielfilme Medien Kulturgeschichte

be Volkskunde und Heimatgeschichte Kulturer

e Sonstige Kulturangebote stig Son

Noteworthy: In Germany: Cultural heritage and history = leading cultural offers. Spoken word, classical music and literature follow; then visual arts.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: goals / purpose

Zielsetzungen der Kulturaktivitäten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 195, Mehrfachnennungen

63% Kulturangebote zum Mitmachen 47%

Edutainment / Erlebniskultur 50% 20% 39% Unterhaltung 51% 53% Bildung 60%

34% Lehrgänge, Veranstaltungen etc. 31% 30% Vorträge, Führungen usw. 38% Dänemark 15% Deutschland Lernmaterialien 16% 20% Schulung (für "Profis") 13% 18% Unterricht für Laien 16% 21% Kulturelle Repräsentation der Region 60% 28% Kulturelle Dienstleistungen für Touristen 53% 34% Andere Zielsetzungen 36%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Noteworthy: Denmark = participatory offers (63%) Germany = education (60%) & cultural representation of the region (60%) Strong differences: edutainment; representation of region; services for tourists

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: time/s of cultural offers

Zeitpunkt / Zeitraum der Kulturaktivitäten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 196, Mehrfachnennungen

100% 77% 76%

80%

Deutschland 60% Dänemark

29% 40% 25% 23% 12% 20%

0% Ganzjährig Saisonal Ereignisbedingt

Noteworthy: More than 75% of culture is offered throughout the year, only 28% seasonal. No difference between Germany and Denmark in terms of time of cultural offers.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: legal basis / foundation

Auftrag des Akteurs (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 180, Mehrfachnennungen

100% 85%

68% 71% 80%

Deutschland

60% Dänemark 42%

29% 40% 26%

20%

0% Gesetzgebung Satzungen sonstige Regelungen

Noteworthy: Both countries: ca. 70% based on articles of association/ organisation/ company Strong Difference (additional data supplemented): in Denmark 85% based on legislation (62% national, 57% communal laws) in Germany 42% based on legislation (8% national, 21% communal laws)

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: audience – origin

Herkunft der Besucher (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 161 69%

70%

60% 48%

Deutschland 50% Dänemark 40% 31%

30% 19% 17% 20% 9% 5% 4% 10%

0% lokal regional national international Noteworthy: Local audiences are most important in both countries: Denmark = vast majority (69%) Germany = almost half (48%) Regional audience: more important in Germany (31%) than in Denmark (19%) © ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: audience – age

Altersstruktur der Besucher (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 163

Deutschland 47% 50% Dänemark 42%

40%

25% 30% 24%

20% 15% 11% 11% 11% 9% 9% 10%

0% Unter 12 Jahre 13 20 Jahre 21 34 Jahre 35 50 Jahre Über 50 Jahre

Noteworthy: Almost half (45%) of audience = above age 50 Only 20% = under age 20 No difference between Denmark and Germany in terms of the age of their audience.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: structure / organisation

Organisationsstruktur (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 195

21% Öffentliche Organisation 16%

13% Einrichtung des öff. Rechts 7%

1% Gemeinnützige Organisation 13%

Verein 45% 36% 2% private Organisation 9% 1% Kirchlich 2% Dänemark Deutschland 1% Bildungsorganisation 0%

Erwachsenenbildung/ 9% Kinder und Jugendliche 0% 1% Gemeindebasiert / Ehrenamt 2% 5% Künstlerprojekt 7% 1% Saisonales Projekt 0%

1% Andere 9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Noteworthy: Unincorporated associations (DK 45%, G 36%) dominate. Next important structure = public (DK 21%, G 16%) Very diverse structures; majority = notforprofit or public.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: finances – general sources

Hauptsächliche Förderung der Institution (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 184

49%

Privat geförderte 54% Dänemark

Deutschland

51%

Öffentlich gefördert 46%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Noteworthy: Almost no difference between countries regarding general source of funding. Both are financed ca. 50% by public and ca. 50% by private sources.

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: finances – various sources

Alle Finanzierungsquellen (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 191, Mehrfachnennungen 6% EU 11% 28% Land/Nation 7%

Bundesland* 24% 15% Region/Kreis 24%

79% Gemeinde 36% 12% andere öff. Quellen 9% 42% Dänemark private Sponsoren 44% Deutschland 4% Stiftungen 40% 3% Kirche 4% 73% Publikum 60% 53% Eintrittsgelder 58% 36% Gebühren 20% 52% Mitgliedsgebühren 40% 34% andere priv. Quellen 29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Noteworthy: Financing of culture operates completely different in both countries. Communal funding is a source: Denmark = 79%, Germany = 36% Land funding is a source: Denmark = 0%, Germany = 24% Foundations are a source: Denmark = 4%, Germany = 40% Lesser difference in audience / participants as a source: DK = 73%, G = 60%

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: finances – co-operation

Interesse an Mittelerweiterung durch Zusammenarbeit (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 196

49% ja 33%

Dänemark 38% Deutschland vielleicht 47%

13%

nein 20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Noteworthy: Over 80% in both countries have a positive view on increasing finances through crosscultural cooperation, but Danish more optimistic: Denmark: 49% = yes, 38% = maybe Germany: 33% = yes, 47% = maybe

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: marketing / public relations – where?

Reichweite der Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (Anteile in Deutschland und Dänemark) Antwortende: 196, Mehrfachnennungen

94% 100% 80% 75% 80%

Deutschland 51% 60% Dänemark

34% 40% 28%

16% 14% 20%

0% Lokale Regionale Nationale International

Noteworthy: Little difference between both countries: Denmark: almost 100% marketing & PR = local, ca. 50% = regional Germany: 80% marketing & PR = local, 75% = regional

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: marketing / public relations – how?

Art der Öffentlichkeitsarbeit - Überblick Antwortende: 199, Mehrfachnennungen

96% 98% 93% 93% 100%

70% 80% 64%

Deutschland 60% Dänemark

40%

14% 20% 4%

0% Internet Werbung in Persönlich Merchandising herkömml. Medien Noteworthy: Both countries use almost equally: internet, traditional media & personal contacts Difference in merchandising: Denmark = 14%, Germany = 4% Supplemented info on social media platforms: Denmark = 41%, Germany = 13%

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: permission to co-operate

Verankerung von Möglichkeiten zur Zusammenarbeit in Satzung Antwortende: 192

39%

Viele Möglichkeiten 50%

Dänemark 57% Deutschland Einige Möglichkeiten 48%

3% Keine Möglichkeiten 2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Noteworthy: Little difference: almost 100% of cultural actors = some or many possibilities to cooperate crossculturally. See many possibilities for cooperation: Denmark = 39%, Germany = 50%

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: existing co-operations

Kooperationspartner heute (Anteile in Deutschland und Dänemark) Antwortende: 199, Mehrfachnennungen

92% 100% 89%

80% Deutschland 59% 55% Dänemark 60% 47%

33% 40% 28% 26%

20% 7% 4%

0% Keine Lokale Regionale Nationale International Kooperationspartner

Noteworthy: Little difference between countries: ca. 100% = local cooperations close to 60% = regional cooperations Ø 27% international cooperations Greater difference in national cooperations: DK = 47%, G = 33%

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: co-operations across the Fehmarnbelt

KooperationspartnerInnen „auf der anderen Seite“ des Fehmarnbelts heute (Anteile in Deutschland und Dänemark) Antwortende: 189

18% Dänemark Ja 20% Deutschland

82% nein 80%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Noteworthy: No difference between both countries regarding current or past cooperation partners across the Fehmarnbelt. Both countries: only few (Ø 19%) current or past crosscultural cooperations

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: wish for more co-operation

Wunsch nach erweiterter Zusammenarbeit in der Fehmarnbelt Region (Anteile in Deutschland und Dänemark) Antwortende: 195

47% ja 36%

Dänemark 42% Deutschland vielleicht 45%

11%

nein 18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Noteworthy: Some differences between countries regarding wish for more cooperation across the Fehmarnbelt: Denmark: close to 50% = yes, ca. 10% = no Germany: close to 40% = yes, almost 20% = no

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: potential for more co-operation

Potential für ein verstärktes Kulturleben und mehr kulturelle Kooperationen Antwortende: 187

49% ja 32% Dänemark 42% Deutschland vielleicht 56%

10%

nein 12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Noteworthy: Both countries share positive view (ca. 90% = yes + maybe) on potential for more cultural cooperation across the Fehmarnbelt. Denmark sees stronger potential (49%) than Germany (32%).

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: categories for more co- operation

Potentielle Kultursparten (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 161, Mehrfachnennungen

56% 60% 54%

48%

40% 40% 40% 34% 34% 34% Deutschland 29% Dänemark 24% 23%

20% 16% 14% 14% 13% 13%

0% Bildende Darstellende Musik Literatur Film Kulturerbe Veranstal Sonstiges Kunst Kunst tungen Noteworthy: Both countries see strong potential for more cooperation in category “events” (ca. 51%) and “music” (Ø 48 %; DK more = 56%, G = only 40%) “cultural heritage” (Ø 37%) and “visual arts” (34%) Difference for category “literature”: Denmark = 13%, Germany = 23%

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: needs for more co- operation

Bedarf für Aufbau von Kooperationen ausgewählte Kategorien Antwortende: 168, Mehrfachnennungen

92% Persönl. Treffen 92% 37% Schulungen 39% 70% Verstärkte Kommunikation 78%

55% Informationsmaterial 75% 45% Gemeinsame Liste 50% Dänemark 61% Deutschland Neue Möglichkeiten 53%

Änderung Gesetzgebung 28% 22% 27% Gemeinsame Entwicklung Lehrmaterialisen 39%

23% Gemeinsame Vermarktung / Kommunikation 36% 3% Sonstiges 8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Noteworthy: Both countries need: more personal meetings (93%), more communication (Ø 74%) Higher need in Germany than in Denmark for: infomaterial (75% vs. 55%), shared learning material (39% vs. 27%), shared marketing / PR (36% vs. 23%)

© ews group 2011 Cultural Actors: culture map

Inhalte des Kulturatlas (Anteile in Dänemark und Deutschland) Antwortende: 184

48% allg. Merkmale 44% 81% Kulturleben 84% 83% Kulturkalender 89% 40% Rundschreiben 51% 36% Nachrichten Ticker 24% Dänemark 57% Deutschland gemeinsame Kontaktliste 67% 36% Vertrags u. Förderstrukturen 40% 29% Austauschforum 29% 55% Bekanntmachungen 67% 13% Anderes 9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Noteworthy: Ca. 50% of both countries want info on general features of FehmarnbeltRegion. Both countries share: very high (8090%) wish for info on cultural life & cultural calendar.; Germans ca.10% higher wish for: contact list & announcements (67%), info letters (51%)

© ews group 2011

Appendix 5: List of Cultural Actors

List of professional and non-professional unions and actors in the region (including recommended cultural players by german and danish respondents to enquiry)

Cultural Category Institutions / Actors Place Contact Person Visual Arts Aabne Atelierdøre Guldborgsand Nykøbing Falster Katherine Olldag Mazanti Visual Arts Aabne Atelierdøre stevns Faxe Strøby Ulla Thornberg Visual Arts Æglageret (Holbæk Kunstforening) Holbæk Jan Ibsen Visual Arts Ausstellungsgemeinschaft Neustadt in Holstein Dahme Ilka Koch Visual Arts Bispegårdens Billedværksted Kalandborg Helle Mollerup og Kis Nielsen Visual Arts CaCO3 Strøby Ulla Thornberg Visual Arts Emmaus Gallerie and Kursuscenter Haslev Grethe Olsen Visual Arts Ernst Ludwig Kirchner Verein Fehmarn e.V. Fehmarn Bärbel Anna Neumann Visual Arts Essigfabrik Lübeck Peter Messerschmidt Visual Arts Förderverein Visual Arts Ostholstein ev. Eutin Britta Klang Visual Arts Fuglsang Kunstmuseum Toreby L. Anne Højer Petersen Visual Arts Galerie Essig Lübeck Peter Messerschmidt Visual Arts Galleri Maltha Gørlev Birthe Maltha Petersen Visual Arts Gemeinschaft Lübecker Künstler e.V. Lübeck Susanne Adler Visual Arts Guldagergaard Skaelskør Mette Blum Marcher Visual Arts Guldborgsand Kommunes Billedkunstråd Nykøbing F. Katherine Olldag Mazanti Visual Arts Jugendkunstschule Villa Seelust Dahme Ilka Koch Visual Arts Kongegaarden Korsør Finn Mikkelsen Visual Arts KuBA - Kunstforeningen for Billedskabende Aktører Næstved Susanne Mortensen Visual Arts Kulturforum Lys over Lolland Søllested Susanne Grue Jørgensen Visual Arts KulturLINK Fehmanbelt-Region bzw. Atelier³ Timmendorferstrand Reinhard Kessel Visual Arts KUNST trifft HANDWERK in Eutin Eutin Christian Grantz Visual Arts Kunsternergruppen Storebaelt Korsør Torben Landsted Visual Arts Kunstforeningen Ravnen Horslande Beth B. S. Brædder Søndergaard Visual Arts Lerkenfeld Jerslev Finn Lerkenfeld Visual Arts Malerei St. Fuglede Lotte Hempel Visual Arts Malerei Hanne Ingversen Visual Arts Museet For Samtidskunst Roskilde Sanne Kofod Olsen Visual Arts Museum für Kunst and Kulturgeschichte, St. Annen Kunsthalle Lübeck Dr. Thorsten Rodiek Visual Arts Næstved Kulturforening Næstved Hernan Gonzalez Visual Arts Nørre Alslev Kunstforening Nørre Alslev Mogens Jørgensen Visual Arts Nykøbing Falster Kunstforening Nyk.F. Knud Lynge Visual Arts Overbeck Gesellschaft - Verein von Kunstfreanden e.V. Lübeck Marlies Behm Visual Arts OVNHUS Kunsthåndværkermarked Nykøbing Sj. Karin Sauer Visual Arts Paper 25 Slagelse Anni Fiil Visual Arts Sølyst Artist in Residence Jyderup Tine Bandgaard Visual Arts Stiftung Schloß Eutin Eutin Dr. Juliane Moser Visual Arts Gabriele Kasten Grömitz Gabriele Kasten Visual Arts Hilke Keßeböhmer Bad Schwartau Hilke Keßeböhmer Visual Arts Verein der Freande der Museen für Kunst and Kultur Lübeck Dr. Christian Dräger Visual Arts Anja Es, Künstlerin Anja Es Visual Arts Vestsjællands Kunstmuseum Charlotte Sabroe Visual Arts 44 moen galleri Moen Christina Jørgensen Visual Arts Atelier & Galleri Art & Word Rørmosen Roskilde Henrik Theilgaard Høyer Visual Arts Design Peter Messerschmidt Visual Arts Grafisk Vaerksted Naestved Jan Kiowskz Visual Arts and Literature Gemeindebücherei Ahrensbök Ahrensbök Ingrid Finnern Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Music Hjørnet fritids og ungdomsklub Viby Sjælland Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Music, Danmarks Rockmuseum Roskilde Danmarks Rockmuseum Literature, Film, Cultural Heritage, Others Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Music, Roskilde kulturskole Jyllinge Annette Salvad Literature, Film, Others Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Music, Multihuset Sydpolen Næstved Literature, Others Visual Arts, Music Roskilde Musiske Skole Roskilde Tom Henriques Performing Arts Cantabile 2 Vordingborg Susanne Danig Performing Arts Holbergteatret0 Kalandborg Niels Vandrefalk Andersen Performing Arts Holmegaard amatør teater Holmegaard Jens Hansen Performing Arts kalandborg Børne og ungdoms Teater Jyderup Birgit E. Nielsen Performing Arts Kalandborg Museum Kalandborg Martin Borring Olesem Performing Arts Krabasken (Armatørteater) Slagelse Jesper Nygaard Performing Arts Kulturscheune Süsel Süsel Anne Vehres Performing Arts Musicalscenen Dalmose Flemming Bendixen Performing Arts odsherred teater nykøbing sj simon vagn jensen Performing Arts Stevns Friluftsscene Rødvig Stevns Ebert Pedersen Performing Arts Stevns Teaterforening Rødvig Stevns Leif Sinius Nielsen Performing Arts Taschenoper Lübeck Lübeck Margrit Dürr Performing Arts Teatret Handsken Kalandborg Jette Mortensen Performing Arts Teatret Masken Nykøbing Falster Hannah Karina Mikkelsen Performing Arts Theater Combinale Lübeck Ulrich Hausmann Performing Arts Theater Partout Lübck Herr Sandau Performing Arts Vestlollands Teaterkreds Nakskov Leo Rasmussen Performing Arts Figurentheater Lübeck Lübeck Natalie Brüggen Performing Arts Lübecker Sommeroperette Lübeck Michael P. Schulz Performing Arts Lübecker Wasser Marionetten Theater Lübeck Wolf Malten Performing Arts Niederdeutsche Bühne e.V. Bad Schwartau Hannelore Kastorff Performing Arts TanzOrtNord Lübeck Shiao Ing Oei Performing Arts Theater Lübeck gGmbH Lübeck Christian Schwandt Performing Arts Holbæk Teater Brian Kristensen Performing Arts NørregadeTeatret Ole Jørgensen Performing Arts Grønnegade Teater Performing Arts and Cultural Heritage Reiseleiter bei LOF Haslev, Vorsitzender Haslev Theatervereinigung Haslev Jens Thøsing Andersen Film Filmklubben Guldborgsand Kettinge Sven Aagaard Film Kino Koki Lübeck Arne Feddesen Film Mørkøv Kino Mørkøv Bente Frandsen Film Nordische Filmtage Lübeck Lübeck Linde Fröhlich Film Freandeskreis der Nordischen Filmtage Lübeck e.V. Lübeck Pia Walter Cultural Heritage AG HeimatKD.Oldenburg Göhl Hinrich Scheef Cultural Heritage Andelslandsbyen Nyvang Holbæk Tom Christensen Cultural Heritage Arkivrådet i Guldborgsand Kommune Nykøbing Falster Anna-Elisabeth Jensen Cultural Heritage Dance Royal, Herskabsdanse Praestø Bent Andersen Cultural Heritage Det sorte Museum Lokalgeologisk samling Gedser Grethe Larsen Cultural Heritage Dorfmuseum Ratedau Ratekau Harald Gerhardt Cultural Heritage Eutiner Landesbibliothek Eutin Dr. Frank Baudach Cultural Heritage Falsters Egnshistoriske Arkiv Nykøbing Falster Thomas Bogtoft Møller Cultural Heritage Fensmark Folkedanserforening Næstved Poul Flemming Nielsen Cultural Heritage Förderkreis Kloster Cismar e.V. Grömitz Bernd Picker Cultural Heritage Formidlingscenter Fugledegård St. Fugleded Ole rasmussen Cultural Heritage Freandeskreis Schloss Eutin Eutin Dr. Lutz Werner Cultural Heritage Gedser Remise bevaringsforening Gedser Per Skov Mortensen Cultural Heritage Gedserstoriske Arkiv Gedser Harriet Elmgreen Cultural Heritage Grænseforeningen Guldborgsand Nykøbing Falster Anders Godtfred Larsen Cultural Heritage Kulturhistorisk museum Bøtø Nor Gl. Pumpestation Vaeggerløse Birgit Hansen Cultural Heritage Landbomuseet Cultural Heritage LOF Guldborgsand Ø. Ulslev Flemming von Würden petersen Cultural Heritage LOF-Ringsted Ringsted Mogens Larsen Cultural Heritage Lokalhistorisches Archiv fuer Korsør and Umgebung Korsør Jytte Skaanning Cultural Heritage Lokalhistorisk Arkivfor Sorø og Omegn Sorø Per Damsbo Andersen Cultural Heritage Lokalhistorisk Forening for Jernløse Tølløse Peter Korsgaard Cultural Heritage Lokalhistorisk Forening for Tølløse Egnen Tølløse Eigil Piil Petersen Cultural Heritage Lolland-Falsters Historiske Samfand Nakskov Ole Arpe Munksgaard Cultural Heritage Museum Stubbekøbing Cultural Heritage Museum Haus Hansestadt Danzig Lübeck Hans Boike Cultural Heritage Museum Lolland-Falster Nykøbing Falster Anna-Elisabeth Jensen Cultural Heritage Museumshof Lensahn Lensahn Inga Latendorf Cultural Heritage Næstved Museum Næstved Nanna Funch Cultural Heritage Nakskov Lokalhistoriske Arkiv Nakskov Heidi Pfeffer Cultural Heritage Nordfalsters Folkeuniversitet Eskilstrup Hans Mølsted Jørgensen Cultural Heritage Ostholstein-Museum Eutin Dr Julia Hümme Cultural Heritage østsjaellands Museum Store Heddinge Helle Aalsbøl Cultural Heritage Roskilde Kloster, Den Skeel-Juel-Brahe'ske Stiftelse Roskilde Søren Lyder Jacobsen Cultural Heritage Roskilde lokalhistoriske Arkiv og Roskilde Stadsarkiv Roskilde Eva Tønnesen Cultural Heritage Roskilde Museum Roskilde Iben Bækkeland Jagd Cultural Heritage Stouby Mølle Væggerløse Jens Hvolbæk Cultural Heritage Stubbekobing Lokalhistoriske Arkiv Stubbekobing Karin Suhr Rasmussen Cultural Heritage Sydvestsjællands Museum Sorø Ea Stevns Matzon Cultural Heritage Toreby Lokalhistorisk Forening og Arkiv Toreby L Cultural Heritage Verein zur Sammlung Fehmarnscher Altertümer e.V. Fehmarn Uwe Erich Cultural Heritage Wallmuseum Oldenburg i. H. gemeinnützige Betreibergesellschaft mbH Oldenburg in Holstein Dr. Stephanie Barth Cultural Heritage zeiTTor - Museum der Stadt Neustadt in Holstein Neustadt in Holstein Dr. Frank Wilschewski Cultural Heritage Academia Baltica Lübeck Dr. Christian Pletzing Cultural Heritage Archäologische Gesellschaft Lübeck Alfred Falk Cultural Heritage Archiv Hansestadt Lübeck Lübeck Dr. Jan Lokers Cultural Heritage Burgkloster - Förderverein Museum Burgkloster e.V. Lübeck Prof. Dr. Rolf Hammel-Kiesow Cultural Heritage Gesellschaft Weltkulturgut Hansestadt Lübeck e.V. Lübeck Eike Lehmann Cultural Heritage Hansevolk zu Lübeck e.V. Lübeck Gudrun Köhler Cultural Heritage Deutsche Auslandsgesellschaft e.V. Lübeck Martin Herold Cultural Heritage Gesellschaft zur Beförderung gemeinnütziger Tätigkeit Lübeck Antje Peters-Hirt Cultural Heritage Possehlstiftung Lübeck Renate Menken Cultural Heritage von-Keller-Stiftung Lübeck Claus Strätz Cultural Heritage Heimatmuseum Petra Mischke Cultural Heritage Museum für Kunst and Kulturgeschichte der Hansestadt Lübeck Lübeck Cultural Heritage Verein zur Sammlung Fehmarnscher Altertümer Fehmarn Rainer Rahlff, 1.Vorsitzender Cultural Heritage Bereich Archäolgie der Hansestadt Lübeck Lübeck Literature Aarestrup-foreningen i Nysted Nysted Kirsten Nor Mansø Literature Buddenbrookhaus Lübeck Holger Pils Literature Bücherei der Gesellschaft zur Beförderung gemeinnütziger Tätigkeit Lübeck Anne Kohfeldt Literature Deutsches Randfunkarchiv/Heinrich Mann-Gesellschaft Potsdam-Babelsberg Dr. Peter-Paul Schneider Literature Die Gemeinnützige Lübeck Lübeck Anne Kohfeldt Literature Erich-Mühsam-Gesellschaft Lübeck Sabine Kruse Literature Förderkreis Kreisbibliothek Eutin e.V. Eutin Ute Griep Literature Förderverein Buddenbrookhaus e.V. Lübeck Birgitt Mohrhagen Literature Förderverein Günter Grass-Haus Lübeck Thomas Schröder-Berkenthien Literature Kreisbibliothek Eutin Eutin Beate Sieweke Literature Lübecker Autorenkreis e.V. Groß Sarau Klaus Rainer Goll Literature NæstvedBibliotekerne Næstved Nanna D. Stryhn Literature Stadtbücherei Fehmarn Fehmarn Susanne Hansen Literature Stadtbücherei Heiligenhafen Heiligenhafen Anja Pohle Literature Stadtbücherei Neustadt in Holstein Neustadt in Holstein Sabine Stryga Literature Thomas Mann-Gesellschaft Lübeck Prof. Dr. Hans Wißkirchen Literature Verdenslitteratur på Møn Stege Marianne Hiort-Lorenzen Literature Vordingborg Bibliotekerne Vordingborg Michael Gottfredsen Literature Landesbibliothek Eutin Eutin Dr. Frank Baudach Literature Literature im Weissen Haus Prof. h.c. Doris Runge Literature LitteraturSelskabet af 2009 Marianne Hiort-Lorenzen Literature LollandBibliotekerne Literature Biblioteker Literature / Visual Arts Günter Grass Haus Lübeck Jörg-Phillip Thomsa Music Brahmsinstitut Lübeck Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Sandberger Music Cantemus Koret,Næstved Næstved Netta hansen Music Chor des Johanneum zu Lübeck Lübeck Gernot Maetzel Music Chöre in St. Gertrud Lübeck Peter Wolff Music Ensemble Music for the Mysteries Roskilde Hanne Tofte Jespersen Music Faxe Musicschule Haslev Lena Schnack Mertz Music Foreningen RINGSTEDKORET Ringsted Karen Nielsen Music Guldborgsand Musicskole Nykøbing Falster Allan Gardersøe Music Holbæk & Omegns Musicskole Grevinge Finn Reiner Music Horbelevkoret Horbelev Sonja Mahler Music Internat. Dieterich Buxtehude-Gesellschaft Lübeck Dr. Joachim Walter Music Internationale Dietrich-Buxtehude-Gesellschaft Lübeck Lübeck Prof. Dr. Ton Koopmann Music Kammerchor "I Vocalisti" Lübeck Hans-Joachim Lustig Music Kantorei St. Jakobi Lübeck Dr. Ulf Wellner Music KirchenMusic Kath. Propsteigemeinde Herz Jesu Lübeck Lübeck Heiner Arden Music Klosterkirkens Kor Nykøbing F Sven Verner Olsen Music Koret Di Vers Roskilde Jesper Holck Music KØS og Guldborgsand Gospelkor Nykøbing F Helle Bjørn Music KreisMusicschule Ostholstein Eutin Markus Föhrweißer Music Kulturcafé Ludvig Sorø Henrik Bulskov Music Kulturforeningen Oskar Stubbekøbing Peter Abrahamsen Music Kulturhus Gimle Føllenslev Dieter Steffen Music Kulturhusfaellesskabet Culthus Nykøbing Falster Katherine Olldag Mazanti Music Kulturkreis Malente e.V. Bad Malente-Gremsmühlen Susanne Naue Music Lolland Brandvæsens Orkester/Nakskov Brass Band Festival Nakskov Dorte Frederiksen Music Lolland Musicskole Nakskov Jørgen Petersen Music Lübecker Domchor Lübeck Prof. Dr. Hartmut Rohmeyer Music Lübecker Knabenkantorei an St. Marien Lübeck Michael D. Müller Music Lübecker Musicschule Lübeck Gerhard Torlitz Music musicbuero Eutin Martin Karl-Wagner Music Music- og Kulturskolen, Næstved Næstved Jørgen Graven Nielsen Music Musicforeningen Cæcilia Vordingborg Mogens Frandsen Music Musicforeningen Drauget Hørve Anker petersen Music Musicforeningen Vershuset Næstved Jens Morten Hansen Music Musisk Skole Kalandorg Kalandborg Leder Music Skole- Kalandborg Music Nykøbing Sjælland Stadsorkester Rørvig Addy Gade Rasmussen Music Østersø Orkestret Stubbekøbing Ulla Hejlskov Music Probsteikirche Herz Jesu Cantus Lübeck Lübeck Heiner Arden Music Radsted Jazzklub Sakskøbing Tom Pedersen Music Ringsted Music- og Kulturskole Ringsted Børge Blume-Jensen Music Roskilde Garden Tune Henrik Dyrvig Music Roskilde Musicforening Roskilde Klaus Singer Music Roskilde spillemandslaug Roskilde Hans Jørgen Tonnesen Music SakskøbingTambourkorps&Brassband Sakskøbing Helle Borchersen Nielsen Music Selandi Canzoni Slagelse Nikolaj Selandi Music Slagelse Musicschule Slagelse Berit Paludan Music Sognegårdens Venner Rørvig Dóra Simonsen Music Sorø Internationale Musicfestival Sorø Kristine Christensen Music Sorø Musiske Skole Sorø Peter Mensink Music Sparkasse Holstein / Sparkassen-Stiftungen Eutin Hans-Ingo Gerwanski Music Stiftung Schleswig Holstein Music Festival Lübeck Prof. Rolf Beck Music Storstrøms Kammerensemble og Storstrøms Symfoniorkester Toreby L Music Sydfalster koret Nykøbing F Søren Svaneeng Music SYDHAVSGOSPEL Nykøbing F. Desiree Thygesen Music Timmerhorst Musicgruppe Scharbeutz OT Haffkrug Joachim Hinz Music Travemünder KammerMusicfreande e.V. Lübeck Olaf Silberbach Music Verdenslitteratur på Møn Tappernøje Anne Grete Kamilles Music Vestsjællands Kammerkor Kalandborg Ellen Blemmer Music vig festival Vig morten weidemann Music Ulla Rönnborg, Cellistin Ulla Rönnborg Music DGI Storstrømmen Dans og Music//Danske Folkedansere Music Guldborgsand Gospelkor andertegnede Music Herlufsholm Kirkes kammerkor Herlufsholm Karsten Gyldendorf Music Maribo Jazz Festival Music Musicon Music Musichochschule Lübeck Lübeck Music Næstved Musicforening Næstved Flemming Johansen Music Storstrøms Kammerensemble Storstrøms Maria Frej Music Tappernøje Music Festival Tappernøje Sune Mandrup-Møller Music Chor der Singeleiter Lübeck e.V. Lübeck Barbara Baumann-Severin Music Dom zu Lübeck, KirchenMusic Hartmut Rohmeyer Music / Visual Arts Music- and Kunstschule Lübeck GmbH Lübeck Rolf Bauer Music / Performing Arts Lübecker Ballettfreande e.V. Lübeck Michael P. Schulz Others Königlich Dänisches Honorarkonsulat c/o Fa. Skanbo Lübeck Carsten Bliddal Others Bauspielplatz Roter Hahn e.V. Lübeck Jörn Puhle Others Aktive Kvinder i Korsør and Halskov Kirke Korsør Others AOF østsjaelland Haslev John Christensen Others AOF Sydvest Sjælland Slagelse Hanne Liechti Others Bevaringsforeningen Gedser Vandtårn Gedser Kurt W. Jørgensen Others Byhusforeningen i Nysted Nysted Henrik Juul Others Den Gamle Smedje Sakskøbing Others FOF Syd- og Vestsjælland Slagels Ingrid Dyhr Tof Others FOF Sydøst Stubbekøbing FOF Sydøst Others Guldborgsand Zoo og Botanisk Have Nykøbing Steen Frederiksen Others Guldborgsand-bibliotekerne Nykøbing F. Eva S. Larsen Others Hajkutter Regatta Nystedt - Rostock Nysted Finn Hermansen Others Holbæk Bibliotek Holbæk Bjørn Ulrik Larsen Others Holbæk kommunes Idrætssamråd Holbæk Carsten Iveren Others Hyllede Bryggerlaug Faxe-Ladeplads Susanne Hjelm Bernhard Others KultTour Oldenburg in Holstein GmbH Oldenburg in Holstein Michael Kümmel Others Kulturelt Samråd i Guldborgsand Nørre Alslev Gunnar Vilhelm Huge Others Kulturhus i Faxe Kulten noch nicht festgelegt Vorsitzender Kulturhaus-Verein Others Kulturkasernen Mikkel Thorning Others Kunst Camp Svebolle Kis Nielsen Others Live Rollespils Klubben Forest Wizards Nordskoven Nellie Bradsted Others Loen Paa Omø Skaelskør Heinz G. Schmidt Others LOF Slagelse John Robert Christensen Others LOF Holbæk Holbæk Lise Bollhorn Others LOF Kalandborg Kalandborg Irene Wiborg Others LOF-Haslev Haslev Henning Ryberg Others Ringsted Sportcenter Ringsted Ringsted Sportcenter Others Roskilde HavneForum & Havnens Venner Roskilde Others Sakskøbing turistforening Sakskøbing Birte Aagaard Others Sorø Bibliotek Sorø Helen Saibnsky Others Stubbekøbing Motorcykel- og Radiomuseum Stubbekøbing Vagn Wiberg Others Sydhavsøernes Frugtfestival Sakskøbing Birte Aagaard Others Uddannelsescenteret i roskilde - slagteriskolen Roskilde Rune Roepstorff Nissen Dt. Verband Frau and Kultur e.V. - Gruppe Lübeck Groß Grönau Dr. Jutta Sczakiel 44Moen, Vestsjællands kunstmuseum Moen Rene Block Billedkunsternernes forband BJKE Nina Wittmack Borreby Joakim Castenschiold Band Umwelthaus Neustädter Bucht Neustadt in Holstein Martina Stapf Bygningsbevaringsforeninger Center for Leisure Management Culthus, internatinaler Koordinator Bo Otterstrøm den lille turisme Susan Odborg Gedser anderholdningsforening Kurt W. Jørgensen Guldborgsand Kommune Haslev Kirche Haus der Natur Cismar Dr. Vollrath Wiese Historiske samfand i Kreis Ostholstein og Lübeck Hjørnet fritids og ungdomsklub Brian Svane Høiberg Hjørnet fritids og ungdomsklub Jesper Grann Idestrup arkiv Korsør Miniby Korsør Kreis OH Carsten Behnk Frank Thomozy: Kuenstler, Projektmanager Frank Thomozy Kulturarvsstyrelsen Kulturgruppen Reersø Reersø Marianne Slot Kulturregion Storstrøm Storstrøm Kunsthal 44, Møn Moen René Block Kunsthøjskolen Kunstnergruppe CACO3 Kunstnet Slagelse Jette Isaksen / Anni Fiil Kys Frøen LAG Kunst Schleswig-Holstein Martina Wittmack Landeskulturverband S.-H. Landesmuseum, Kloster Gismar Dr. Radke LASA Lions Club Haslev Lokale besøgssteder Lokale herregårde Lokale møller Lokalhistoriske foreninger Lolland Billedskole Mini Blume Lolland Kommune Lübecker Kirchengemeinden der Innenstadt Lübeck Marjatta Bredeshave Bernhard Schmidt Museerne Lolland-Falster Anna-Elisabeth Jensen Museerne Vordingborg Vordingborg Museum Bad Schwartau Bad Schwartau H. Kaczkowski Museum Lolland Falster naturvejleder Bent Friis Petersen Nordfalster arkiv Nysted arkiv Nysted Odsherreds Kunstmuseum Jesper Knudsen onservatorierne i Lübeck, Rostock m.fl Papmaché-kunstner Isis de Seguira Projekt Kulturvækst Sjælland Line Bjerregaard Jessen SAIR - Sølyst Artist in Residenc Tine Bandgaard SAIR Jyderup Jyderup Sven-Aage Larsen Sakskøbing arkiv Sakskøbing samme Till Junkel samtidskunstnere på Møn Moen Thomas Bagge Skoletjenesten på Sjælland Poul Vestergaard SLA Sølyst Sponsoren gmbH SHMF Stiftung SHMF Lübeck Andreas Eckel Stadt Eutin Eutin Anette Rudolph Tingsted og Systofte arkiv Toldcafeen i Gedser Gedser Anette Olsen Toreby arkiv Toreby Turistbureauet Nakskov Nakskov Lise Simon Universitetet i Kiel Kiel Universitetet i København København Universitetet i Odense Odense Væggerløse arkiv Væggerløse Vestsjællands arbejdende kunstværksteder VisitGuldborgsand Timandra Brunne Voldmuseum Oldenburg Oldenburg in Holstein y- Men Haslev Haslev Alison Michell Alison Michell Kuno Kjærbye Kuno Kjærbye Björn Engholm Björn Engholm Ingrid Friedrichsen Ingrid Friedrichsen

Appendix 6: List of Existing Cross Border Projects

List of Existing Cross Border Projects

Institution Cooperation Partner Det sorte Museum Lokalgeologisk samling Eiszeit-Museum Emmaus Gallerie und Kursuscenter Artist Walter Green from Klein Ruench, Artist Alexander Steffes from Bergisch Gladbach Essigfabrik Painter from Ry, Bodil M. Lund Grænseforeningen Guldborgsund Twin City Rabenkirchen in Nordschleswig Guldborgsund Musikskole Kreismusikschule Ostholstein Hajkutter Regatta Nystedt - Rostock Hanse Sail Rostock Kreismusikschule Ostholstein Guldborgsund Musikskole / Nyköbing Kulturforum Lys over Lolland Artists from Germany, Poland, Baltic States and Russia KulturLINK Fehmanbelt-Region bzw. Atelier Artists in Ebeltoft LOF-Ringsted Danish Minority in Südschleswig Museum Lolland-Falster Archaeology of city of Lübeck Museumshof Lensahn Museums Andelslandbyen Nyvang/Holbaek Nordische Filmtage Lübeck Danish Film Institute Nørre Alslev Kunstforening Art exhibition in cooperation with Ahrensbök (former twin city of Nørre Alslev Kommune) Paper 25 Artists from Germany Radsted Jazzklub Artists Reiseleiter bei LOF Haslev, Vorsitzender Haslev Theatervereinigung Lions-Club in Eutin Sølyst Artist in Residence WYSPA kunstcenter, GDansk Storstrøms Kammerensemble og Storstrøms Symfoniorkester Rostock Symphonieorchester and City of Rostock; some artists , componists, singer, musicians Timmerhorst Musikgruppe Visefestival in Guldborg 2010 Wallmuseum Oldenburg i. H. gemeinnützige Betreibergesellschaft mbH Mittelaltercentrum Nykobing zeiTTor - Museum der Stadt Neustadt in Holstein Museum Maribo