DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCE
Cultural Diplomacy The Icelandic Way
The current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices
Master Thesis in Cultural Management Student: Bergþóra Laxdal Advisor: Dr. Gregory Payne Fall – 2016
ABSTRACT
This 30 ECT credit MA thesis is a case study that discusses the role of the Government of Iceland and the creative centers in Iceland when publicly funding cultural projects that take place internationally. The objective is to examine the current state of how the Government of Iceland conducts its cultural diplomacy practices. In examining the Government practices on this topic, the following three questions are pursued; is there an informal cultural diplomacy policy in place; what principles drive that policy and what strategic approach is in place to fulfill the policy? The participants were selected due to their expertise in the cultural affairs of Iceland, and were divided into two groups. The first group, the Expert Committee on Art and Culture Expert Committee on Art and Culture headed by Promote Iceland, was selected to identify the Government agencies from which the creative centers receive their public funding and to gain insight into how projects that receive public funding are selected to represent Iceland abroad. This group delivered their answers in a written open ended questionnaire. The second group, Government cultural representatives with responsibilities in distributing public funding, was selected to get an overview of how the distribution of funds takes place and delivered their answers through an interview. The results were analyzed according to theories about policy and policy streams and strategy processes. The results support the view of an informal cultural policy being in place. The creative centers are responsible for deciding what cultural projects receive public funding with the Government trusting in the center’s professional abilities, and handling the financial transactions through the creative centers. Thesis advisor was Dr. Gregory Payne, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Communication Studies at Emerson College in Boston, MA.
Keywords: Cultural diplomacy; Cultural Management; Cultural Policy; Culture; Iceland.
ii PREFACE
The thesis idea manifested itself as I was preparing for a panel discussion on the subject “How do the Nordic Countries implement their cultural diplomacy policies and how they can inspire and enhance the value of the arts in society and international relations?” The Origin Theater Company in New York hosted the panel. It became apparent as I researched the topic that no literature existed on Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices, so I undertook the challenge of mapping out Iceland’s current cultural diplomacy landscape. The process from thesis conception to delivery was an arduous one, requiring all the self-discipline I could muster.
I would like to thank all the participants for their time and patience, as without their effort this thesis would never have seen the light of day. I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Gregory Payne for not only guiding me through the thesis process but also for jumping on board at a time in the process when I thought I had seen the end of it. I would like to thank Hlynur Guðjónsson and my coworkers at the Icelandic Consulate/Mission in New York for their support and for enduring my scattered brain for months on end. I would like to thank my friends Henný Gylfadóttir, Angela Baglivo-Michaels and Brian Michaels for making not only my life easier but also my son’s life fun filled during the time it took to assemble the thesis. There wouldn’t be a hair left on my head without them. I would like to thank Arndís Dögg Arnardóttir from the bottom of my heart for being my star cheerleader in addition to proof reader, crisis manager and so on. Special thanks go to Linda Lea Bogadóttir for hiking alongside me through this thesis journey as well as through the valleys of Iceland. I’m forever thankful for that first day of classes when I found a friend in her. Above everyone, I want to thank my little guy, my best buddy, my son Alex Laxdal for enduring this time with me. His understanding, independence and compassion far surpass his 12 years of age. Lastly I want to thank Nike for providing an endless source of motivation. JUST DO IT! ______Bergþóra Laxdal
iii
TABLE OF CONTENT
Abstract ...... ii Preface ...... iii Table of content ...... v Pictures ...... vii 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. Goals, aims and research question ...... 2 1.2. Theoretical background and key works ...... 2 1.3. Concepts and terminologies ...... 3 1.4. Scientific value ...... 4 1.5. Construction of the thesis ...... 4 1.6. Timeline ...... 5 2. Definitions ...... 7 2.1. Culture ...... 7 2.2. Power ...... 9 2.3. Soft power ...... 9 2.4. Diplomacy ...... 10 2.5. Public diplomacy ...... 10 2.6. Cultural diplomacy ...... 11 2.7. National Cultural Policy of Iceland ...... 11 2.8. Government of Iceland ...... 14 2.9. Ministry of Education, Science and Culture ...... 14 2.10. Ministry for Foreign Affairs ...... 16 2.11. Promote Iceland ...... 18 2.12. The Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries ...... 19 2.13. Iceland Naturally ...... 25 2.14. Ministry of Industries and Innovation ...... 27 3. Theories and literature review ...... 29 3.1. Policy ...... 29 3.1.1. Cultural Policy ...... 29 3.1.2. Instrumental Cultural Policy ...... 31 3.1.3. Arm’s length principle ...... 32 3.1.4. Organized anarchy: A garbage can model ...... 33 3.1.5. Kingdon’s Policy Window Model ...... 36 3.2. Strategy ...... 37 3.2.1. Strategy as a plan or a pattern ...... 37 4. Methodology ...... 39 4.1. Participants ...... 39
v 4.2. Design ...... 40 4.3. Method ...... 41 4.4. Procedures ...... 42 4.5. Analysis ...... 44 4.6. Limitations ...... 45 4.7. Researcher’s position and ethical concerns ...... 47 5. Questionnaire Summaries ...... 48 5.1. Federation of Icelandic Artists ...... 48 5.2. Iceland Design Centre ...... 49 5.3. Icelandic Art Center ...... 53 5.4. Icelandic Film Centre ...... 56 5.5. Icelandic Literature Center ...... 57 5.6. Iceland Music Export ...... 57 5.7. Performing Arts Iceland ...... 58 6. Interview Summaries ...... 61 6.1. Ministry of Education, Science and Culture ...... 62 6.2. Ministry for Foreign Affairs ...... 63 6.3. Promote Iceland ...... 64 6.4. Iceland Naturally ...... 66 7. Results from Analysis ...... 68 7.1. Arm’s Lengths Principle ...... 68 7.2. Cultural Diplomacy Policy ...... 69 7.3. Instrumental Cultural Diplomacy Policy ...... 69 7.4. Organized Anarchy ...... 70 7.5. Kingdon’s Policy Window Model ...... 70 7.6. Strategy As a Plan Or a Pattern ...... 71 8. Conclusion ...... 74 8.1. Summary ...... 74 8.2. Discussion ...... 76 Bibliography ...... 79
vi PICTURES
Picture 1. Duelund's cultural pyramid ...... 8 Picture 2. Organizational chart for the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture ...... 16 Picture 3. Organizational chart for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs ...... 17 Picture 4. Organizational chart for Promote Iceland ...... 18 Picture 5. Organizational chart for Iceland Design Centre ...... 21 Picture 6. Organizational chart for the Icelandic Art Center ...... 22 Picture 7. Organizational chart for Iceland Naturally ...... 27 Picture 8. Organizational chart for the Ministry of Industries and Innovation ...... 28 Picture 9. Kingdon’s Window of policy ...... 36 Picture 10. Theme-Identification Techniques ...... 45
vii 1. INTRODUCTION
Iceland is a small country with no military power of its own. The country relies mostly on soft power in its foreign policy, and cultural diplomacy is one means of soft power used to achieve set goals. Little has been written about Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practice and procedures to date, and the country’s first cultural policy was implemented 3 years ago in 2013. The concept of cultural diplomacy might seem new in Iceland, but cultural diplomacy has been practiced throughout history by small groups and large nations alike, in order to establish interconnections and promote understanding. The most recognized cultural diplomacy effort took place during the Cold War when the U.S. Government injected the Soviet Union with a notion of the vibrant, diverse quality of American cultural life which was a stark contrast to what the Soviet people were accustomed to under the Soviet Communist Regime (“Cultural Diplomacy and the National Interest,” n.d.). To accomplish this, the U.S. strategically planted cultural “ambassadors” (writers, musicians, radio etc.) in the Soviet Union through cultural exchange in order to change people’s perception of the U.S.
The role of cultural diplomacy is becoming increasingly important in the 21st century’s globalized world - where corporations, governments and individuals are more integrated than ever before, and the ability to exchange information is faster and more effective than in previous times. With this added importance, the demand for understanding how cultural diplomacy works and identifying its best practices is increasing. As a step in the attempt to answer this worldwide demand, the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy (ICD) was founded in 1999. ICD, with its headquarters in Berlin, has made it its ultimate goal to promote global peace and stability by supporting intercultural relations at all levels.
The use of the concept of cultural diplomacy faces challenges because it is difficult to define, as Cynthia P. Schneider addresses in her article “Cultural Diplomacy: Hard to Define, but You’d Know It If You saw It” (2006a). Cultural diplomacy is a multi-layered, multi surfaced concept that is subject to individual interpretation, yet once it’s been put into practice and utilized to its full potential, there’s no doubting the force driving the success.
1 This thesis, “Cultural Diplomacy The Icelandic Way: The current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices” is a 30 ECT credit MA thesis in Cultural Management at Bifröst University that seeks to identify and define the current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices and its place within Iceland’s foreign policy. The thesis advisor is Dr. Gregory Payne, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Communication Studies at Emerson College in Boston, Massachusetts, and thesis work took place in summer and fall of 2016.
1.1. GOALS, AIMS AND RESEARCH QUESTION
The aim of the thesis „Cultural Diplomacy the Icelandic Way: The current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices.” is to lay out how cultural diplomacy practices are conducted at present by Iceland. The thesis attempts to explore if there is a cultural diplomacy policy in place, even if it is not in the form of a public (formal) governmental policy, and what policy theory such practices follow. This thesis doesn’t attempt to examine or discuss financial contributions in terms of numbers, but solely focuses on the policy and strategy process.
1.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND KEY WORKS
In order to identify if there is a cultural diplomacy policy in place, this thesis follows the analysis of Harry Hillmann Chartrand and Claire McCaughey on the Government’s role in publicly funding the arts - by identifying what forces (economics, political or welfare) drive the funding, and what role (facilitator, patron, architect or engineer) the Government plays in order to achieve the policy’s objectives (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989). This thesis examines if the Government adopts the arm’s length principal in its procedures, by looking at the decision making process and how financial transactions are handled (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989). This thesis also examines the theories of Belfiori, to determine if the policy is instrumental, serving purposes other than culture for its own sake (Belfiore, 2004a). To establish how the policy is formed Kindgon’s policy window (Kingdon, 2003) is used. To identify the strategic form in place to fulfill the policies, objectives and strategies are analyzed according to what strategic school is followed as set forth by Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel in their book Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through The Wilds Of Strategic Management (1998).
2 1.3. CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGIES
„Cultural Diplomacy the Icelandic Way: The current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices.” is a case study of how Iceland currently conducts its cultural diplomacy practices, and adopts the qualitative research process. This method was chosen as it generates rich data in multiple contexts while leaving the participant’s perspectives intact. It also allows for the world to be experienced in a pragmatic way not made available through the quantitative research process. The participants of this study were selected due to their expertise in the cultural field in Iceland, and are key cultural personnel at the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Promote Iceland and Iceland Naturally, along with members of the Expert Committee on Arts and Culture headed by Promote Iceland.
To obtain the objective of this thesis, a questionnaire was sent to the Expert Committee on Arts and Culture participants via e-mail. The questionnaire was a combination of open and closed ended questions, intended to establish a view of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy landscape. Interviews were also conducted with key cultural personnel within the Icelandic government. As I (the author) am located in the U.S., the interviews were conducted via phone due to geographical distance apart from one interview, which was conducted, face-to-face. The interviews were semi structured, individual, and in-depth. All interviews were digitally recorded in order to preserve the verbal part in its entirety for analysis. Prior to sending out the questionnaires or conducting the interviews, all participants consented either via e-mail or verbally to participate in the research after receiving a brief introduction about the nature of the research. They were informed that their responses would be identifiable as the questionnaire, and interviews would be summarized and that the thesis would appear on www.skemma.is upon completion. The required degree of trust in supplying such information was enhanced prior to the questionnaire being disseminated due to the fact that I work for the Icelandic government within the cultural discipline. In this capacity, from the introduction onward, I work in some capacity with and am known by the participants. For the purpose of the thesis, I kept the frame narrow, and limited the number of interviewees to a manageable
3 amount, to get the necessary overview and gain insight and detailed understanding.
1.4. SCIENTIFIC VALUE
There is a paucity of literature on Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices, with less than a handful of books written about Iceland’s cultural policy. The first public cultural policy was developed by the government in 2013 (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, 2013). Given this situation, in order to effectively utilize Iceland’s cultural diplomacy, a comprehensive outline of its current state is required, with prescribed pathways and areas of improvement needed. The expectation is for this thesis to help map out Iceland’s Cultural Diplomacy landscape and identify its role within Iceland’s implemented foreign policy. It is not intended to solve any issues nor to provide suggestions - rather it is intended to inform and to initiate conversation on the topic and to add to the dearth of literature on this topic.
1.5. CONSTRUCTION OF THE THESIS
In order to successfully establish what cultural diplomacy is and how it works, chapter two of the thesis defines the concepts of culture, soft power, public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy. Chapter two also, as a means to produce a comprehensive picture of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices as they look today, identifies and defines the government entities responsible for sharing Icelandic culture, looks at the structure and practices of those entities, and identifies the departments responsible for implementing and fulfilling cultural diplomacy policy within their walls. Chapter three introduces the theories used in this thesis to analyze the current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy procedures, along with reviewing the limited existing literature on Iceland’s cultural diplomacy. Chapter four concerns the methodology of the thesis. It introduces the participants, explains how the research is designed, what methods are used and how the research is conducted and analyzed. Chapter four also addresses the limitations of the study, the role of the researcher and the ethical issues at hand. Chapters five and six summarize the answers given in the questionnaire and interviews. Chapter seven presents the results from the study,
4 and the final chapter, chapter eight, outlines the conclusion, and provides a discussion about feasible next steps.
1.6. TIMELINE
Timetable for MA thesis Action Date Research plan – to school 5 Sept 2016 Draft theoretical background 9 Sept 2016 Draft concepts & terminology 12 Sept 2016 Send to advisor – concepts & terminology and research material 19 Sept 2016 (interview questions, introductory letter, theories etc.) Meeting with advisor – preparation for data collection 21 Sept 2016 Draft paper sent to school 3 Oct 2016 Draft interview questions 5 Oct 2016 Data collection 14 Oct 2016 Data analysis 23 Oct 2016 Draft introduction, results & conclusion – send to advisor 25 Oct 2016 Review theoretical background 27 Oct 2016 Review concepts & terminology 23 Oct 2016 Review introduction, results & conclusion 31 Oct 2016 Draft discussion (link results and theoretical background) – send to 2 Nov 2016 advisor Draft abstract 3 Nov 2016 Originality report from Turnitin 6 Nov 2016 Final draft – to advisor 7 Nov 2016 Revision according to advisor’s recommendations 30 Nov 2016 Proof reading 3 Dec 2016 Print thesis 6 Dec 2016 Final hand in to school 12 Dec 2016 Thesis defense preparation 1 Feb 2017 Thesis defense 3 Feb 2017 Graduation 18 Feb 2017
5
2. DEFINITIONS
This chapter defines the concepts needed to establish a comprehensive picture of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy environment, and introduces the Government of Iceland and the main ministries and organizations responsible for carrying out the cultural diplomacy practices.
2.1. CULTURE
In the year 2014 the Merriam-Webster announced “culture” the word of the year (“2014 Word of the Year,” n.d.), that is “culture” had the biggest spike in look-ups on the web site. Peter Sokilowski, Merriam-Webster’s Editor at Large, explained the reasons for the word’s popularity: “Culture is a word that we seem to be relying on more and more. It allows us to identify and isolate an idea, issue or group with seriousness. And it’s efficient: we talk about the culture of a group rather than saying the typical habits, attitudes and behaviors of that group. So we think that it may be the increased use of this newer sense of the word culture that is catching people’s attention and driving the volume of lookups” (“Merriam- Webster’s 2014 Word of the Year,” n.d.).
Although the word culture is efficient according to Sokilowski, it’s a complicated concept that appears in many forms across time and platforms (Duelund, 2003). The concept of culture has evolved from including all esthetic talent in the Middle Ages to being somewhat of an equator for all the arts in the wake of The Enlightenment era, when emphasis was shifted from tradition to reason, science and individualism. This shift is not surprising, as art was supposed to educate, inform and develop the cultivated individual. In order to define the roles of culture in the Nordic countries, Duelund has offered a four-layered cultural pyramid (humanistic, enlightenment, sociological and anthropological) that includes the administrative actions corresponding to each layer. Picture one shows Duelund’s pyramid. The picture was made by the author and is an adaptation from Duelund’s book The Nordic Cultural Model.
7
Picture 1. Duelund's cultural pyramid
The concepts in the pyramid are value-oriented, meaning they represent different values. They are interchangeable - the lower concepts can share elements with the higher concepts.
The first layer (art), starting at the top, is the narrowest concept of culture, the humanistic concept. Its emphasis is the professional production of quality art and culture. A criticism on this level is that it can be considered elitist, as it is not available to all and the administrative support, in whichever form, goes directly to the professional artist producing the work.
The second layer (media) is the enlightenment concept where emphasis is still on the arts, but the addition is that culture is a diffusion of the experience of culture and information about culture. This level includes culture as media, information, entertainment and amusement. The administrative support at this level is directed to informing the public about art and culture via various media like TV, magazines, online, movies etc.
The third layer (culture) is the sociological concept. This layer includes both the art and media layers, but includes common values, attitudes and life forms in society or group. The administrative support of this layer is to promote participant democracy, as it focuses on cultural activities and participation.
8 Sports and recreation fall into this section of the pyramid. It should be noted that Duelund excludes religion from his pyramid - but if one were to include it, this is the layer where religion belongs.
The fourth layer (society), residing at the bottom of the pyramid, is the anthropological layer. This layer is the widest and includes all dimensions of life. At this level, the administration supports the maintenance and development of society including education, new technologies, trade and welfare to name a few.
2.2. POWER
According to Nye (Jr, 2004), power is like the weather. Everyone depends on it and talks about it, but few actually understand it. Like farmers and meteorologists try to forecast the weather, political leaders and analysts try to predict and describe changes in power relationships. Nye compares power to love in the sense that it is easier to experience than to define or to measure. What is it exactly, this force, that many fear and crave at the same time? According to the Mirriam-Webster dictionary, power is the ability to act or produce an effect (“Definition of power,” n.d.). The Cambridge Dictionary adds that power is the ability or right to control people and events, or to influence the way people act or think in important ways (“Definition of power,” n.d.). Power therefore is the ability to influence the behavior of others to get the outcome one wants (Jr, 2004). One can influence another’s behavior in different ways by coercion through threats, payments, or other rewards or punishments - or you can attract and co-opt the desired behavior by getting someone to want the same thing as you want (Jr, 2004).
2.3. SOFT POWER
Nye finalized his concept in his book Soft Power: The Means to Success in world Politics in 2004, having improved and expanded his definition and concept of power since he first introduced it in 1990. Nye claims that everyone is familiar with hard power, and also aware that military and economic might induce others to change their position. Yet, sometimes we are also able to get the outcome one wants without apparent threats or payoffs - for example through attraction,
9 influence and justness (2004). The power of attraction clearly is evident in personal relationships, where the power doesn’t necessarily belong to the stronger partner, but rather lies in the chemistry of attraction (Jr, 2004). It also may be possible to influence others to change their behavior with a convincing conversation or speech, for example. In addition, it is possible to change people’s behavior by being fair and just, a quality that many regard highly and share as a core value. These indirect ways of getting results, without using force to shape the preferences of others, is what Nye labels soft power (2004). Nye considers soft power to be an attractive means that neither uses money nor force as currency, but rather the attraction to shared values, and the justness and duty of contributing to the achievement of those shared values.
2.4. DIPLOMACY
“Diplomacy is a set of norms and rules regulating relations between states. As such it is embedded in organizational structures, procedures, routines and habits of foreign ministries.” (Bátora, 2005).
2.5. PUBLIC DIPLOMACY
If diplomacy is the interaction between states, public diplomacy in its most common form is the interaction between government and foreign public according to Bátora (Bátora, 2005). Bátora’s narrow definition is at one end of the pendulum while Cummings goes to the other extreme and says “public diplomacy consists of all a nation does to explain itself to the world” (Cummings, 2009). In addition, some view pubic diplomacy as having a much wider scope than just activities of governments. Public diplomacy, according to such advocates, can include organizations and even individuals whose activities who share the goal of “furthering understanding through communication.” (Payne, Sevin, & Bruya, 2011) It can be seen by these examples that public diplomacy is not a simple concept, and can span a wide range. For the purpose of this study, the more narrow definition of Bátora is used - as the intention of the writer is to focus on cultural diplomacy as a part of public diplomacy, as the government conducts it.
10 2.6. CULTURAL DIPLOMACY
The Institute for Cultural Diplomacy defines cultural diplomacy as “Course of actions, which are based on and utilize the exchange of ideas, values, traditions and other aspects of culture or identity, whether to strengthen relationships, enhance socio-cultural cooperation or promote national interests; Cultural diplomacy can be practiced by either the public sector, private sector or civil society.” (“Institute for Cultural Diplomacy,” n.d.).
Cultural diplomacy is a perfect example of soft power with its ability to persuade through culture, values and ideas (Cynthia P. Schneider, 2004) and when cultural diplomacy is put to practice, it can accomplish a number of important things. It can develop respect for others and their way of thinking (Advisory Committee on Cultural Diplomacy, 2005), help create a foundation of trust, counterbalance misunderstanding, hatred and terrorism, reduce hostility that derives from differences and counteract negative views (Holmes, 2012). It can also reach influential members of foreign societies who cannot be reached through traditional embassy functions (Advisory Committee on Cultural Diplomacy, 2005). In order for cultural diplomacy to be credible and persuasive, it needs to stand independently (Schneider, 2006). This was noted during the cold war when US cultural “ambassadors” (performers, writers and thinkers) were perceived by the Soviet public to be independent of the US government, and in turn the public didn’t feel as they were being manipulated (Schneider, 2006).
For the purpose of this thesis the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy’s definition of cultural diplomacy will be adopted: “Course of actions, which are based on and utilize the exchange of ideas, values, traditions and other aspects of culture or identity, whether to strengthen relationships, enhance socio-cultural cooperation or promote national interests; Cultural diplomacy can be practiced by either the public sector, private sector or civil society.”
2.7. NATIONAL CULTURAL POLICY OF ICELAND
On March 6, 2013 the Icelandic Government put forth the first official cultural policy. The policy is meant to guide the Government and the national Parliament
11 (Althing) in setting new strategies, making decisions and furthering discussions. In the same way it can be of value to politicians, diplomats, cultural institutions, scholars, grants committees, artists and their organizations, media and all that in any way participate in the cultural field (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, 2013). The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture was in charge of the policy making process, and its work spanned four years, from 2009 to 2013. Four main emphases are present in the cultural policy, creation and participation, good access to culture, co-operation between the Government and cultural entities and the participation of children and young adults in the cultural field (“National Cultural Policy of Iceland,” n.d.).
The specific part of the National Cultural Policy of Iceland relevant to this thesis is the following excerpt that addresses Icelandic culture abroad:
Iceland in an international context
Icelandic cultural life is nourished by international currents while at the same time contributing to those currents. This kind of interaction is indispensable for the advancement of artistic and cultural activity. Participation by Icelandic artists in international cooperation enlarges the market they have access to and heightens the standard by which they are measured, while at the same time contributing to the enrichment of the country’s artistic and cultural life.
Iceland’s cultural life influences many people’s experience of the country, and its reputation is enhanced by high-quality cultural projects presented in the international arena.
Preserving the cultural heritage, including the Icelandic language, is important in a global context, not to mention the importance of that heritage as a fundamental component of the national identity.
One of the roles of government in the domain of the arts and culture is to promote participation in international relations and cooperation. Objectives
1. To increase international cooperation, including through the promotion of Icelandic culture abroad by professional means with the active collaboration of everyone concerned. To bolster, for this
12 purpose, the activities of the information centres for the arts and induce them to seek closer cooperation with their sister organisations in the other Nordic countries and elsewhere in the world.
2. To ensure that participation in international cooperation in the domains of the arts and the promotion of Icelandic arts abroad takes place on the terms of art itself. The information centres for the arts, Promote Iceland, the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs have important roles in this.
3. To make it easier for Icelandic artists to participate in artistic activities in other countries and to strengthen the role of the information centres for the arts in this respect.
4. To take advantage of a variety of ways to disseminate the Icelandic cultural heritage, prioritizing participation, learning and own experience.
5. To promote active cooperation on cultural affairs between the government and international organizations. (“National Cultural Policy of Iceland,” n.d.)
It should be noted that, in the first article of the Parliamentary laws on Iceland’s Foreign Services, culture is designated as one of three areas of importance. The article continues, “The Foreign Service handles Foreign Service matters and protects Iceland’s interests in all ways towards other states. It shall in particular protect Iceland’s interests when it comes to: firstly politics and security matters, secondly foreign business matters and thirdly cultural matters (“39/1971,” n.d.). By giving culture its own place within the law back in 1971, Parliament made it clear that Icelandic culture is highly important to the nation and should be protected in the best possible way. It is therefore no surprise that even though the official cultural policy wasn’t implemented until 2013, Haukur F. Hannesson claims there was an unofficial cultural policy in place much earlier. That unofficial policy is defined in the laws, contracts, and strategy planning declarations from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, and executed through that said ministry’s decisions and works. Hannesson also claims that the policy is put forth clearly in publications by the ministry (2009).
13
The cultural policy set forth in 2013 hasn’t gone un-criticized. Njörður Sigurjónsson (2013) points out in his examination of the policy that it includes contradictions that, for the purpose of this paper, are pertinent. He points out that the policy stresses the importance of the Government not interfering in the operation of its cultural organizations receiving public funding while at the same time encouraging these same organizations to operate and organize the programming so that young people and children have an easy access to arts and culture, regardless of their financial status (Sigurjónsson, 2013).
2.8. GOVERNMENT OF ICELAND
Iceland’s oldest and highest institution is the Parliament (Althingi), established in 930 at the Thingvellir (Parliament Plains), but took on its modern form of the Republic of Iceland on June 17th, 1944 when the first President of Iceland was chosen. Iceland is a constitutional republic with a multi-party system. The head of state is the President, and the government exercises executive power. Every four years 63 representatives are elected by secret ballot to sit in parliament. Upon election, the President gives a leader of a political party, usually the leader of the party with the highest number of votes, the authority to form a cabinet of Ministers. The cabinet stays in power until the next general election or a new government is founded (“Althingi2013_enska.pdf,” n.d.). In the year 2016, there are 8 working ministries, Prime Minister’s office, Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Ministry for the Environment and Natural resources, Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Industries and Innovation, Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Welfare. For the purpose of this paper, special attention is given to the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Industries and Innovation, as they play an important role in supporting and promoting Icelandic culture.
2.9. MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND CULTURE
Iceland’s Ministry of Education, Science and Culture is responsible for policy planning and administration of the arts and heritage sectors and other cultural
14 affairs. The objective of the state’s support of the arts and culture is to afford everyone residing in Iceland the opportunity to enjoy arts and culture regardless of their social status, and to ensure a favorable working environment for artists.
Government involvement in the arts focuses primarily on the operation of state- run art institutions and support for professional artists (“The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture,” n.d.). The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture acts as one unit, but is divided into two departments, the Department of Cultural Affairs and the Department of Education and Science. The Department of Cultural Affairs prepares policy formulation in cultural affairs and supervises its implementation as well as being responsible for the general administration of cultural issues. The Department of Cultural Affairs handles amongst other items, issues concerning the arts and cultural heritage, the Icelandic language, the mass media, and sports and youth affairs. Its areas of responsibilities include relations with public cultural institutions and museums, communities, sporting organizations and other NGOs, enterprises and individuals. In addition the department supervises public support for arts and culture (“The structure of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture | Ministry,” n.d.). Although cultural matters fall under the Department of Cultural Affairs, this does not mean that culture related matters are not evident in the Department of Education and Science, as it is the Department of Education and Science, the Iceland Academy of the Arts, a self-governing institution that offers University level education in the arts, fall under the department’s jurisdiction.
Picture two depicts the organizational structure of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, and is taken from the Ministry’s website - but translated to English by the author.
15
Picture 2. Organizational chart for the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (“Skipurit mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytisins,” n.d.)
2.10. MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The Ministry for Foreign Affairs supports promotion of arts and culture and is in charge of and looks after Iceland’s cultural interest abroad. The Ministry for Foreign Affairs operates 25 Embassies and Consulates (Diplomatic Missions) around the globe with full time professional staff. In addition, 240 unpaid individuals serve as Honorary Consuls in over 80 states internationally (“Sendi- og ræðisskrifstofur,” n.d.). Iceland’s Diplomatic Missions around the world act as facilitators and supporters, connecting artists, institutions and art promoters from Iceland with other countries. They present Iceland as a cultural destination and prepare visits of artistic directors and cultural journalists to Iceland.
16 Cultural activities are financed with contributions from public and private funds, often in collaboration with promoting centers and institutions (“English | Arts and Culture,” n.d.). The cultural affairs office at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs falls under the Directorate for External Trade and Economic Affairs. The standard practice is that paid Foreign Service employees rotate in their positions every four years, either within the ministry or between international posts. There are exceptions to this standard practice where international local employees are hired, in which case, they don’t fall under the four year rotation schedule, but rather stay at the same post for the duration of their employment. Picture three shows the organizational chart for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and is from the Ministry’s webpage.
Picture 3. Organizational chart for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs (“Organization Ministry for Foreign Affairs,” n.d.)
17 2.11. PROMOTE ICELAND
Promote Iceland is a sub organization of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, depicted in the organization chart above. The Minister for Foreign Affairs appoints all seven board members for three years at a time. Four board members are nominated by the Confederation of Icelandic Employers, one by the Minister of Education, Science and Culture, one by the Minister of Industry and Innovation and one is appointed without nomination. Promote Iceland is a semi- public partnership which was established in June 2010, in order to “strengthen Iceland’s image and reputation, enhance the competitive position of Icelandic undertakings on foreign markets and to attract foreign investment and tourists to the country” (“The Promote Iceland Act,” n.d.-a). In the Promote Iceland Act, (Article 2, item e) it is noted that the role of Promote Iceland is to support the promotion of Icelandic culture abroad (“The Promote Iceland Act,” n.d.-b). Promote Iceland also forms advisory boards in various domains. One of those advisory boards, the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries, relates directly to this thesis and is introduced below. Within this context, it is clear that Promote Iceland is an important actor on Iceland’s cultural stage. Picture four shows the organizational chart for Promote Iceland and was obtained via email from Promote Iceland.
Picture 4. Organizational chart for Promote Iceland
18 2.12. THE EXPERT COMMITTEE ON ARTS AND CREATIVE INDUSTRIES
As previously outlined, Promote Iceland forms the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries. The Expert Committee on Arts and Creative industries consists of thirteen individuals, two of whom are appointed by the Minister of Education, Science and Culture, one appointed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and one appointed by the Minister of Industries and Innovation. Each of the seven national creative centers and Performing Arts Iceland are represented in the committee by their respective directors, in addition to the director of the Federation of Icelandic artists, who is appointed by the Director of Promote Iceland. The mission of the Expert Committee of Arts and Creative Industries is to “purposefully promote the Icelandic arts, culture and the creative industries, in order to increase their foreign currency income” (“Fagráð Íslandsstofu,” n.d.). To accomplish this, the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries has the following four guiding lights. Firstly, it sets the focus and quality objectives related to international cooperation. Secondly, it develops and aids an initiative about Iceland as a culture destination. Thirdly, it maximizes the synergistic public relations and marketing opportunities abroad, across cultural disciplines and industries, and lastly - it supports economic analysis and projects that aim to show a microeconomic gain related to the activity produced by the arts, culture and creative industry (“Fagráð Íslandsstofu,” n.d.). Below is a brief introduction on the creative arts centers that have a seat in the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries in alphabetical order. Organizational charts were called for from the creative centers but not all of them had charts available and therefore their structure will be explained solely in writing.
Federation of Icelandic Artists was established in 1928, intended to serve as a union of sorts, protecting artists rights and securing due payment for their work. Before the Federation of Icelandic Artists was founded there was no organization that served this purpose. Today the Federation of Icelandic Artists is a co- operative federation of fifteen unions and organizations spanning various fields of the arts. It provides platform for authors and performers to exchange ideas, views and design and implementing cultural policies in accordance with priorities and plans. The number one undertaking of the Federation of Icelandic
19 Artists is to motivate the authorities to increase their role in the cultural and artistic development of the society and to encourage authors and performers to contribute to the promotion of the cultural identity and development of the society (“Federation of Icelandic Artist, about,” n.d.).
The Federation of Icelandic Artists doesn’t have an organizational chart available but operates in a flat organization fashion, where there is no middle level management and the work conducted is in consensus. The federation doesn’t have an overhead and only employs one part time staff member who serves as the President of the federation and is elected by members of the Federation of Icelandic Artists during an annual meeting for a term of two years at a time with an option of being re-elected multiple times.
Iceland Design Centre was founded in spring 2008 as a product of a long cherished dream of Icelandic designers and architects, and has emerged as the home of flourishing Icelandic design. The foundation of the Iceland Design Centre is the Iceland Academy of the Arts which opened in 1998, with its Faculty of Architecture and Design being founded shortly afterwards. The result was that for the first time, Icelandic designers were educated in Iceland, and, therefore their influences were closer to Iceland than that of their counterparts, who had received their education abroad. Iceland Design Centre’s main purpose “is to achieve more appreciation of the importance of good design and architecture for society.” Its role is “to promote design of all kinds as a vital and profitable aspect of Icelandic economy” (“Iceland Design Centre,” n.d.). The Iceland Design Centre is owned by nine organizations which can be identified in the organizational chart below. Picture five depicts the organizational chart and was obtained from the Iceland Design Centre in Icelandic via email and translated by the author to English.
20
Picture 5. Organizational chart for Iceland Design Centre
Iceland Music Information Centre is the national agency for, both contemporary and older, Icelandic music and is a member of the International Association of Music Information Centres. The Iceland Music Information Centre was established in 1968 at the initiative of Icelandic composers. The undertaking of the Iceland Music Information Centre is “to champion the new music of Iceland by collecting and curating resources and connecting them with audiences, making composer’s works accessible to all”. Iceland Music Information Centre runs an impressive online sheet music store but sheet music can also be purchased and picked up at their offices during certain hours of the week (“Tónverkamiðstöð,” n.d.).
The Iceland Music Information Centre doesn’t have an organizational chart but the board consists of four members, two of whom are composers from the
21 Icelandic Composer’s Society, one composer that is not a member of any composer affiliation and one from the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service. The chair is one of the members of the Composer’s Society and the board hires a manager to overlook the operation.
Icelandic Art Center was formally founded in December 2003, and introduces and supports Icelandic visual arts abroad. Its efforts assist artists through funding, networking and cooperation with private and public partners. The Icelandic Art Center seeks to build and strengthen networks between the local and international visual arts scene. It also seeks to initiate an international art dialogue, and encourages Icelandic visual artist to participate in that dialogue. The Icelandic Art Center has a three person professional committee, in charge of selecting artist to participate in international festivals and or receive funding (“Ársskýrsla-KÍM-2015-.pdf,” n.d.). Picture 6 shows the organizational chart of the Icelandic Art Center and was obtained via email from the Icelandic Art Center.
Picture 6. Organizational chart for the Icelandic Art Center
22 Icelandic Film Centre was founded in 2003 when a new law had taken effect that stipulated the Government’s participation in domestic filmmaking. The Icelandic Film Centre’s role is to fund Icelandic films and promote them internationally. In addition the Icelandic Film Centre serves a crucial role in the development of new generations of Icelandic film makers by nurturing the film culture and supporting local film festivals, workshops and seminars where both local and international film professionals participate. The Icelandic Film Centre operates the Icelandic Film Fund which serves to further Icelandic filmmaking by providing financial support. For a project to receive funding there needs to be a connection with Icelandic culture. If such ties to Icelandic culture don’t exist, a special cultural ground needs to be established for the project to receive funding (“About The Icelandic Film Centre | Icelandic Film Centre,” n.d.).
The Icelandic Film Centre doesn´t have an organizational chart available but the overhaul is small with the Director overseeing the operation and staff members in the following positions; Head of Finance, Festival Manager, Head of Productions and International Relations, and Office Clerk.
Icelandic Game Industry is meant to be a strong forum for Icelandic gaming companies to join forces and make Iceland an interesting location for the international gaming industry. Icelandic Game Industry was founded in 2009, and services the gaming industry in various ways like assisting with public relations both locally and internationally, connecting the gaming industry to schools and businesses and assisting in the funding application process. There are 18 Icelandic gaming companies in Iceland today and five new games have been launched in 2016. (“Samtök leikja-framleiðenda, IGI,” n.d.). The author was unable to obtain an organizational chart from the Icelandic Game Industry.
Icelandic Literature Center was founded in 2013, and replaced is predecessor the Icelandic Literature Fund, which was established in 2007. The main goals of the Icelandic Literature Center are to raise awareness about Icelandic literature both locally and internationally and promote distribution and translation of Icelandic literature outside of Iceland. Icelandic Literature Center grants
23 translation subsidies to foreign publishers and supports Icelandic authors traveling abroad to promote their works with travel grants.
The Icelandic Literature Center doesn’t have an organizational chart but it has a five person Board of Directors, one of whom is also the Managing Director and oversees the operation. In addition to the Managing Director there is one staff member who serves as a Project Manager and two Literature Advisers.
Icelandic Music Export was founded in 2006 and was the initiative of The Icelandic Music Association, which is an umbrella organization of right holder societies. Icelandic Music Export aims to bring the different strands of the eclectic Icelandic music scene under one roof and to increase the visibility of Icelandic music internationally. They accomplish these goals by making information about Icelandic musicians easily accessible via comprehensive databases, by collaborating with companies to promote Icelandic music abroad and by organizing festivals and events. Icelandic music is gaining popularity, as the number of musical events that Icelandic musicians have participated in grew from 700 in the year 2012 to 1200 only two years later, or in 2014 (“Iceland Music Export | About,” n.d.).
Icelandic Music Export doesn´t have an organizational chart available but has a four person Board of Directors and three full time employees in the positions of Managing Director, Project Manager and an Editor.
Performing Arts Iceland is the only art form that at present doesn’t have a physical information center to call a home. Performing Arts Iceland is an umbrella organization for all performing arts organizations, festivals, institutions, unions and free groups in Iceland. It was founded in 1972 and has various Icelandic and international projects on its table that all have it in common to seek to advance the visibility of Icelandic performing arts in the international market (“Performing Arts in Iceland | About,” n.d.).
There is no organizational chart available for Performing Arts Iceland but the Board of Directors consists of five people selected annually by three member
24 associations. In addition there is a representative committee of 13 people, nominated annually by member associations, that elects the President of Performing Arts Iceland, for a two year term, during confidential elections. In addition to the President there is one employee in the position of a Public Relations Manager.
2.13. ICELAND NATURALLY
Iceland Naturally is a joint communication and branding program supported by the Government of Iceland and private companies. Iceland Naturally is a paid member based program that utilizes the efforts of the Government and its eleven member companies; Icelandic USA; Icelandair; Blue Lagoon; ISAVIA; Reyka Vodka; Icelandic Glacial; Íslandsbanki; City of Reykjavík; Promote Iceland; National Power Company of Iceland; Ölgerðin Egill Skallagrímsson and Icelandic Provisions. The mission is to promote tourism, services and products from Iceland and the organization is designed to increase the Icelandic nation’s prosperity by adding value to its brands in the North American markets (“Iceland Naturally,” n.d.-a).
Iceland Naturally splits its promotional focus into a primary and secondary target markets. The primary market consists of the New York Metro area; New England Metro area; Seattle Metro area; Denver; Washington DC and the Mid- Atlantic region in the U.S. and Toronto and Edmonton in Canada. The secondary markets are the Pacific North West, Southern; Northern California and Alaska in the U.S. and Nova Scotia and Vancouver in Canada. The consumers in these markets have been identified, as showing high interest in Iceland and Icelandic culture, through consumer market research conducted biannually in both the U.S. and Canada (Iceland Naturally, n.d.-b). Through the same biannual consumer research, Iceland Naturally has also pinpointed market segment groups that show higher interest in Iceland and Icelandic culture than other consumers, and have made these groups their target groups (the Outdoor Type, the City Vacationer and the Frequent Traveler). The Outdoor Type is more likely to be male than female, more likely than other consumers to have a college degree, and their average income is higher than the average consumers. The Outdoor Type’s media of choice is the Internet, followed closely by TV, and members of this group are more likely to read newspapers and magazines
25 regularly. When making travel decisions, the Outdoor Type is greatly influenced by friend’s advice and the Internet. The City Vacationer,, like the Outdoor Type, is more likely to be male than female, more likely to live in urban areas, be single, not have children living at home, be highly educated with an average household income higher than the average consumer. The City Vacationer is guided mostly by the Internet and word-of-mouth when selecting a travel destination, and is more likely to be influenced by stories in the media than the average consumer. The Frequent Traveler, like the other two target groups, is more likely to be male, travel overseas at least two times a year, live in urban and suburban areas, be highly educated and have a professional job (physician, attorney, architect, engineer etc.) with the highest average household income. The Frequent Traveler’s media of choice is TV and Internet. When deciding on travel destinations, the Frequent Traveler looks to the Internet and friends, but also is affected by stories and ads in the media. The Frequent Traveler is guided by exotic culture and food destinations and affordable quality accommodation.
Iceland Naturally is located at the Consulate General of Iceland in New York, yet its management is split between the Consulate General in New York and Promote Iceland. For the purpose of this thesis, it is important to note that this is a public/private partnership and does not follow the same operational principle as a “pure” Government identity. Picture seven depicts the organizational chart for Iceland Naturally, and is from Iceland Naturally’s 2017 marketing plan.
26
Picture 7. Organizational chart for Iceland Naturally (Iceland Naturally 2017 Marketing Plan, n.d.)
2.14. MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIES AND INNOVATION
Even though the Ministry of Industries and Innovation does not operate a Department of Cultural Affairs, it is important to include an introduction of the ministry here as it does operate a Department of Business Affairs, Innovation and Tourism and does at times fund international cultural projects. The Ministry of Industry and Innovation also appoints one member of the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries. The Ministry of Industries and Innovation opened in September 2012 as a result of the integration of the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture, the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism and a portion of the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The reason for the amalgamation was to bring together the state supervision and involvement in industry and innovation under one roof to coordinate and advance a vigorous forward-looking business and economy. Picture eight depicts an organizational chart for the Ministry of Industries and Innovation, available on the Ministry’s website
27
Picture 8. Organizational chart for the Ministry of Industries and Innovation (“Organisational Chart Ministry of Industries and Innovation,” n.d.)
28 3. THEORIES AND LITERATURE REVIEW
There has been no research conducted on Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices. In 2009, as a first step in Iceland’s first official cultural policy, Haukur F. Hannesson wrote a paper for the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, in which he analyzed the state of Iceland’s informal cultural policy (Hannesson, 2009). In his paper, Hannesson concluded that an informal cultural policy was in place, demonstrated through Government strategies, laws and budgets. In addition to writing that paper, Hannesson was an advisor on Hilmar Magnússon’s MA thesis at the University of Iceland in 2011, on the role of culture in Iceland’s foreign policy from 1991 to 2011 (“Frá búkslætti til bókamessu,” n.d.). Magnússon’s paper thoroughly accounts what role culture held within Iceland’s foreign services during the different administration spanning the 20 year period his thesis examines. Apart from the aforementioned and the official National Cultural Policy, Njörður Sigurjónsson wrote an article on the National Cultural Policy in the Icelandic Reivew of Politics and Administration. In his article Sigurjónsson examines the concept of deliberate cultural policy-making and concludes that two main themes stand out in the National Cultural Policy. These include: 1. participation and access to culture, and 2. importance of rules and procedures. The writer notes as one might expect that there is not as much focus or emphasis on national identity and cultural heritage. (Sigurjónsson, 2013).
3.1. POLICY
“A definite course or method of action selected from among alternatives and in light of given conditions to guide and determine present and future decisions.” (“Definition of POLICY,” n.d.)
3.1.1. Cultural Policy
Harry Hillman-Chartrand has extensively researched the government’s role in publicly funding the arts. His two primary areas of interest include, who or what will be taxed (and by how much) and who or what will benefit (and by how
29 much) from public revenues (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989). Chartrand identifies three forces of economics that drive public funding of the arts, Business Economics, Political Economics and Welfare Economics. When Business Economics is dominant, he claims that if large amounts of national income or large number of jobs are involved, there is a greater chance that government will support the sector. When Political Economics are in control, the result is less predictable. The fine art’s audience tends to be a numerically small group, predominantly affluent females while the suppliers of the art tend to be “avant-garde,” which are historically ruthlessly critical of the powers in charge. The criticism heard regarding the Political Economic force is that this amounts to welfare for the rich.
When Welfare Economics is in the forefront, concern is with the balance between equity and efficiency. The fine arts are viewed as a “merit good”, a service that is encouraged on the basis of non-market value judgments. The antithesis would be a “demerit good”, something that is not good for the public, i.e., smoking or criminal activities. What constitutes ”merit good” changes over time, depends on social and historical circumstances, and is often a subject of controversy.
The government seeks to focus on one or all of following three objectives when evaluating a proposal to publicly fund the arts (Chartrand, 2002).
1) To promote the process of creativity and/or excellence (as defined by the arts community itself). 2) To foster production of works of a specific style, theme or purpose, e.g. socialist realism or commercial success. 3) To support specific producers, e.g., a budgetary “line item” appropriation for flagship arts institutions.
Chartrand derived four roles of the government in its effort to achieve these objectives: the facilitator, the patron, the architect and the engineer (Chartrand, 2002).
30 When the government acts as the facilitator, there is little direct influence from the government on the arts and culture. The government funds come through tax expenditures. There are not strict rules and regulations, and the focus is on diversity, rather than one specific type of art. The funding is randomly distributed as it depends on public funding that reflects the different tastes of various donors.
When the government acts as the patron it distributes funds according to the arm’s length principal to arts councils who, in turn, decide which artists or organizations receive support and to what extent. The government determines how much total support it allocates to the arts councils, but it does not have a say in the distribution to the final recipients.
When in the role of the architect, the government has more authority than in the earlier two roles. Government in the role of the architect funds the arts through a Ministry or Department of Culture, and bureaucrats, in effect, make the grants. The administration of a nation’s cultural policy is in the hands of the Ministry of Culture, and the scope of support the arts and culture receive is determined almost exclusively by direct government funding. The strength of the role of the architect is that the artists and art organizations do not depend on box office sales in order to survive, and in turn the market doesn’t have much pull in what product is supplied. The downside is the risk that secure long term funding will cause stagnation in creativity over time.
The final role the government can take on is that of the engineer. The engineer owns all artistic production and only supports art that meets the political standards of excellence. Funding depends on the politician’s intent on furthering political education or re-education. The funding decisions are frequently revised to match the ever-changing political emphasis.
3.1.2. Instrumental Cultural Policy
31 Instrumental cultural policy refers to a cultural policy that uses “cultural ventures or cultural investments as a means or instrument to attain goals in other than the cultural areas” (Vestheim, 1994). The notion of instrumental cultural policy surfaced in the early 1990s. It was an attempt to explain the shifts that had taken place in cultural policy rationales since the 1980’s, when the focus was more on the art for art’s sake principle. This contrasted to the emerging belief in the 1990s that “public subsidy for the arts represented a sensible way for the state to invest public resources, in view of the arts, potential for job creation, tourism promotion, invisible earnings and its contribution to urban – as well as social conclusion” (Belfiore, 2004a).
The 1990s brought on an “audit explosion” (“The Audit Explosion,” n.d.) connected to attempts to get the state more entrepreneurial. In cultural policy relations, the audit explosion was manifested in a trend towards evidence-based policy making seeking to satisfy the need to measure the impact of art in clear and quantifiable ways (“The Audit Explosion,” n.d.). As the value of culture is often immeasurable, attaching cultural policy to a “more influential” policy concerns (Gray, 2007) is often the only way to get politicians to justify public cultural funding. Belfiore claims that the arts have, for example, “successfully” attached themselves to economic development, urban regeneration and social inclusion (Belfiore, 2004a).
3.1.3. Arm’s length principle
“Arm’s length” is a public policy principle applied in law, politics and economics in most Western societies. The principle is implicit in the constitutional separation of powers between the judiciary, executive and legislative branches of government” (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989). The arm’s length principal is applied in different areas of public affairs. In order to avoid conflict of interest, ministers and senior government officials are usually required to put their financial assets into a “blind trust” where a trustee manages the assets and keeps the official abreast of the value of the account but keeps all other information confidential. A transaction is considered being at arm’s length if it’s conducted between organizations that have no corporate or any other direct connection
32 with each other and therefore act only in its own self-interest (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989).
3.1.4. Organized anarchy: A garbage can model
Michael D. Cohen, James G. March and Johan P. Olsen put forth the theory of the Garbage Can model as means to explain the messy decision making process within organizations operating in an organized anarchy way. They said that in order to understand the decision making process of organizations operating in an organized anarchy way one could think of it in terms of a garbage can where various kinds of problems and solutions are tossed into by participants and allowed to “marinate” in there until the garbage is collected (1972a).
Organized anarchy organizations have three main traits - problematic preferences, unclear technology and fluid participation.
The first trait of an organization operating in an organized anarchy way is problematic preferences. This is when the decision makers don’t reveal their preferences; furthermore, their preferences are inconsistent, poorly defined and can change at any given moment.
The second trait of an organization operating in an organized anarchy way is unclear technology. This exists when employees don’t have oversight over the whole function of the organization, but only possess knowledge about their own particular job within that organization, and their jobs are handled in a manner of trial and error.
The third and final trait of an organization operating in an organized anarchy way is fluid participation and refers to decision makers sometimes making decisions, while at other times not making those same decisions even if the situation in which the decision are made is constant. Participation in meetings is an example of this type of behavior. Who attends a meeting at any given time greatly influences how and why decisions are made.
33
In addition to the three traits that define operating organizations, characterized by organized anarchy, the decision-making process isn’t one where decisions are decisively made or taken, but rather they just happen. To explain how the decisions happen, Cohen, March and Olsen identified four main streams influencing decision - problems, solutions, participants and choice opportunities.
The problem stream refers to problems that occur both inside and outside organizations and demand attention. This might be in the form of lifestyle or family issues, frustration related to work, dispersal of status, money or jobs, ideology or group relations within the workplace to name a few.
The solution stream refers to when solutions exist or have been created before a problem comes along. The organization is sitting on the solutions and seeks problems that need solving in order to use these existing solutions.
The choice opportunity stream refers to when situations are presented where it is expected that decisions are made, like in a meeting, when contracts need to be signed, financial plans need to be published or during the hiring and firing of employees.
The participants stream refers to when the decision making personnel doesn’t have the time or the will to devote themselves to a topic at hand, and their time within the organization can be cut short as people quit, etc.
There isn’t a way to predict how the streams will flow and mix with one another while in the garbage can and therefore the final decision that comes out of the garbage can - upon marinating there for some time - is coincidental.
In order to influence the decision making process within organization operating in an organized anarchy way the leaders can be sensitive to the shifting interests and the involvement that includes the participants. They can recognize the status and power implication of the choice situations and attempt to time the creations of issues.
34
35 3.1.5. Kingdon’s Policy Window Model
John W. Kingdon, a political scientist, claims policy making to be a highly political process where everyone involved wants and tries to be influential. According to Kingdon, those involved can either be hidden or seen - with the visual group consisting of politicians - and the hidden group consisting of experts, scholars, career public administrators, diplomats etc. Both groups are important to the policy making process but their roles vary greatly.
Those in the visual group decide political agenda, and the invisible ones formulate the decision agenda in which possible solutions are formed. In order to explain how public policies come to light, Kingdon derived the Policy Window Model. The model suggests that three streams need to be aligned in order for policy to be enacted. He refers to these streams as the problem stream, the policy stream and the political stream. Floating in the problem stream are problems or subjects. It is crucial for either a problem or a subject to be present, because if it “ain’t broke” there’s no need to fix it. The policy stream carries with it solutions, ideas and research. The major forces driving this stream are personal and intellectual, and the participants tend to be hidden. The political stream is where the visual participants formulate the governmental agenda, or the list of issues that need to be solved. In this stream, political trends and electoral results push the tide. Picture nine explains Kindon’s Policy Window Model and is taken from an article that was published on the website of Global Health Action.
Picture 9. Kingdon’s Window of policy (Aluttis, Kraft, & Brand, 2014)
36 3.2. STRATEGY
“A careful plan or method for achieving a particular goal usually over a long period of time” (“Definition of STRATEGY,” n.d.)
3.2.1. Strategy as a plan or a pattern
Henry Mintzberg, Bruce Ahlstrand and Joseph Lampel derived a ten part strategy-formation in the book Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through The Wilds Of Strategic Management (1998). Each part is equivalent to one school of thought: Design School, Planning School, Positioning School, Entrepreneurial School, Cognitive School, Learning School, Power School, Cultural School, Environmental School and Configuration School Each of the ten schools of strategy-formation is defined by their behavior in five ways according to Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel (1998). The five Ps stand for Plan, Pattern, Position, Perspective and Ploy. The first two Ps examine if a strategy-formation is intended or realized. Strategy, as a plan, looks ahead and is intended, deliberate - a guide, direction or course of action into the future, a way to get from the beginning to the end. Strategy as a pattern is realized, emergent. It’s consistent in behavior over time and perpetually takes the same action. It examines past behavior to ascertain the strategy that was utilized. The following two Ps look at the content of the strategy: is the strategy is a position and the deciding factor in the change of a behavior; or if it is a perspective, the fundamental way of doing things? (Mintzberg et al., 1998).
The first three schools (Design, Planning and Positioning Schools) are prescriptive in nature, as they are more concerned with how strategies should be formulated than with how they form. They look at strategy as a plan, something that is deliberately intended. The next six parts (Entrepreneurial, Cognitive, Learning, Power, Cultural and Environmental Schools) are descriptive in nature, as they are concerned with how strategies actually evolve. These parts focus on strategy as a pattern, something that has emerged. The last school, the Configuration School stands alone - as it combines the other perspectives by
37 trying to be integrative and clustering the various elements of the strategy formation process s (Mintzberg et al., 1998).
This thesis attempts to identify the current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices by looking to the theories introduced above in this chapter. It examines if there is a cultural diplomacy policy in place and if so what role the Government assumes in publicly funding culture according to Chartrand’s four characters (2002). If a cultural diplomacy policy is in place the thesis look at whether or not it follows the principles of an instrumental policy as put forth by Belfiore (2004a). It analyzes if the policy making process fits within Kingdon’s window of policy (2003). It investigates whether Chartrand and McCaughey’s arm’s length principle is followed (1989). It looks at the decision making process and determines if it is conducted in an organized anarchy way as proposed by Cohen, March and Olsen (1972a). And it looks to see if the strategy is put forth as a plan or if it emerges as a pattern according Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel and which one of their strategy schools best fits description (1998).
38 4. METHODOLOGY
This chapter explains how the research was executed, how participants were selected, what methods were used, which procedures were involved, how the analysis was conducted, the limitations of this research, ethical concerns and the researchers position and connection to the participants and the topic at large.
4.1. PARTICIPANTS
The method used to select the participants was a purposive method of expert sampling. This type of sampling involves assembling a sample of persons with known or demonstrable experience and expertise in some area (“Nonprobability Sampling,” n.d.). This method is viable when there are limited number of primary data sources available who can contribute to the study (“Purposive sampling,” n.d.). Participants in this study were selected for their extended knowledge about Icelandic culture and their current position in the Icelandic cultural field, either within the Government of Iceland or one of Iceland’s creative centers. They comprise the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries headed by Promote Iceland and the Government employees heading the cultural departments of their respective ministries.
Seven members of the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries who received a questionnaire responded and agreed to participate and completed the questionnaire. They are listed below in alphabetical order of the cultural institution they represent. Two additional members of the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries were not included in the group that received the questionnaire as they belong to the group that was interviewed, due to the fact that they are in charge of the cultural departments at the ministries.
The participants from the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries are listed below in alphabetical order of the organizations they represent.
39 Federation of Icelandic Artists – Kolbrún Halldórsdóttir Iceland Design Center – Halla Helgadóttir Icelandic Art Center – Björg Stefánsdóttir Icelandic Film Centre – Laufey Gudjónssdóttir Icelandic Literature Center – Hrefna Haraldsdóttir Icelandic Music Export – Sigtryggur Baldursson Performing Arts Iceland – Marta Nordal
Out of five Government personnel identified as having specialized knowledge in the Icelandic cultural field four responded positively and were interviewed. They are listed below in alphabetical order of the Governmental identity they represent.
Iceland Naturally – Hlynur Guðjónsson Ministry of Education, Science and Culture – Karítas Gunnarsdóttir Ministry for Foreign Affairs – Skafti Jónsson Promote Iceland – Kristjana Rós Guðjohnsen
4.2. DESIGN
The thesis idea was a product of my research for literature on the subject of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices. Such research was a part of preparing for a panel discussion “Northern Lights” (“Origin Theatre,” n.d.), hosted by the Origin Theater Company at Scandinavia House in New York City in early spring 2016. The specific topic was “How do the Nordic Countries implement their cultural diplomacy policies and how they can inspire and enhance the value of the arts in society and international relations?” During the research it became apparent there is little, if any, material on the topic from Iceland’s angle, and furthermore, that no formal/public cultural diplomacy policy exists. This thesis seeks to begin filling that void in literature by looking at the current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy procedures.
This thesis is a case study of the current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices. It’s built on a questionnaire and semi structured in-depth interviews
40 with selected professionals within the cultural field in Iceland. This is augmented by a content analysis of reviewed documentation that interviewees referred to, and documents that establish the role of the organizations involved within the cultural realm.
This thesis examines the cultural diplomacy phenomenon and seeks to answer as applied research the direct question “what is the current state of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy practices?”. The design is concise and purposeful in nature, as the sample of individuals was selected due to their extensive and specialized knowledge on how Iceland carries out its international cultural relations.
4.3. METHOD
The research conducted is qualitative. It aims to look at, describe and understand how cultural diplomacy procedures are conducted in Iceland. This thesis follows the qualitative research process where the idea stimulated interest and dialogue, followed by the formulation of the research question and literature review. Once the research question was formulated and a comprehensive understanding of the scope of existing and non-existing material related to the research topic had followed, a plan was developed on how to conduct the actual research and what methods to use.
The qualitative method was chosen as it generates rich data in multiple contexts, leaving the participant’s perspectives intact (Labaree, n.d.). The qualitative method also provides the ability to obtain a more pragmatic and descriptive outlook on the topic that often is not possible with numerical, quantitative data. Furthermore, this approach provides for more flexible options to collect and analyze data, enabling the researcher to adapt the research agenda, if needed (Labaree, n.d.). This flexibility was evident during the span of this research as the participants added documentation and online sources to their answers, thereby supplying additional information. The mode of research was twofold: questionnaires and interviews.
41 A questionnaire for the Expert Committee on Culture and Creative Industries (7 respondents) was chosen as interviews for this group, in addition to those belonging to the other group, would have been too time consuming, for a thesis this size. The questionnaire was constructed based on a post-positivistic paradigm where the sample was small and produced qualitative data with high validity that can be generalizable from one setting to another (Wisker, 2008). The nine questions were manageable in size to encourage a high response rate. The questions were both closed and open ended, written in an oral question and answer form, as the intent was to gain full, varied responses and gather rich information (Wisker, 2008).
Interviews are one of the most important sources of case study information as they give information based on insider experience and add to supplement information provided in a questionnaire (Wisker, 2008). The qualitative method of semi structured in-depth interviews was chosen to add insight and perspective to the answers acquired through the questionnaire from the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries Qualitative (Bauer & Gaskell, 2009). A series of 14 set questions were used as a starting point for each interview, and the results were distinct and varied perspectives, reflecting the fact that the interviewees hold positions in different Government bodies.
Additionally documents were reviewed which were supplied by participants in support or addition to their answers or to gain a deeper understanding of the organization form or their respective ministries or creative centers.
4.4. PROCEDURES
Selecting the sample proved to be a fairly easy and a straightforward process as Iceland’s population is relatively small - 330.000 people and “everyone knows each other”. The smallness of Iceland was an asset, as it required only one phone call to Promote Iceland to identify key cultural influencers, and a follow up e-mail containing contact information for all identified individuals in the possible sample. Once the participants had been identified, they were split into two groups, one group, the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries, to
42 receive a questionnaire and the other group, leading employees within the Government cultural sectors, composed those to be interviewed. It should be noted that during the research process two individuals in the Expert Committee on Art and Creative Industries were identified as key cultural staff members for the Government and therefore were moved into the group of individuals to be interviewed.
In preparation for data collection, an introductory e-mail was sent to all but two prospective participants to be interviewed. The two participants who did not receive an introductory email received a verbal introduction, due to a close co- working relationship, and both agreed to be interviewed. The initial email sent out to the prospective participants included a brief introduction about the nature of the research and explanation they had been selected to participate in this project due to their expertise in the cultural field. The participants were given a deadline and made aware that a summary of their answers would be identifiable and made public as they will appear on an academic database where one can find BA and MA thesis (www.skemma.is).
The response rate to this first email was not as expected and a subsequent email was sent a couple of weeks later, including a friendly reminder. Eight people agreed to have the questionnaire sent to them via email, which they then acknowledged receiving either by sending it back completed, explaining why they did not think the questions in the questionnaire applied to their respective institutions or with a promise to fill it out and return it at a later date. All but one of the eight participants met the deadline.
The questionnaire was distributed in the participant’s native language, Icelandic and answers recorded in the same fashion. The questions and answers where then translated to English for the use in this thesis. Once the answers from the questionnaire had been gathered and reviewed, emerging themes, for further exploration were identified, developed and utilized in preparation for the interview phase of the project.
43 Questions to guide the interviews were assembled and a timeframe to conduct the interviews with the remaining participants was established via email. All participants agreed to have the interviews recorded. At this point it was apparent that a considerable time was being spent on translating the answers. In order to manage the time better, the remaining participants were asked if they would be willing to conduct the interviews in English. This was accepted, as all participants are fluent in English. Interviews were conducted at the agreed time via phone and recorded, except one interview which was conducted in person and also recorded. To record the interviews the iPhone application Voice Memos was used. Recordings were then transferred to the Tempo Slow application, a function that proved useful when transcribing the interviews. The researcher is the only person in possession of the raw answers to the questionnaire and interviews and will dispose of them a year from completion of this thesis.
While the theoretical part of the thesis preceded this collection and analysis of data, the raw findings suggested the relevancy of some theories over others.
4.5. ANALYSIS
A content analysis was performed in the form of color coded thematic analyses where the answers to the questionnaire and interviews were summarized and simplified, and emerging themes highlighted with corresponding colors (“Ryan and Bernard Themes. FM 15(1).pdf,” n.d.). As the researcher is a novice, a scrutiny technique of looking for repetitions, similarities and differences, was used to identify emerging themes (“Ryan and Bernard Themes. FM 15(1).pdf,” n.d.). Picture 10 below from Ryan and Bernhard depicts the deciding factors that lead to that approach. As the questions were specifically designed for the purpose of this research, there was much control over the textual content (Wisker, 2008)
44
Picture 10. Theme-Identification Techniques (“Ryan and Bernard Themes. FM 15(1).pdf,” n.d.)
4.6. LIMITATIONS
The participants of this study are the heads of the cultural departments at the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, in addition to the Expert Committee on Arts and Creative Industries. Their expertise on how Iceland conducts its cultural practices is not questioned nor a focus of this thesis. The objective in this thesis is to document general characteristics and trends on how Iceland conducts it cultural practices. Although the sample was selected to represent highly knowledgeable individuals about Iceland’s cultural practices, this study only partially represents the scope of Iceland’s cultural territory. There are other independent organizations, like
45 Performing Arts Reykjavík and Reykjavík Dance Festival for example, which are active in the international market but were not studied in this thesis. This type of non-coverage should be considered when addressing the bias of sampling (Bauer & Gaskell, 2009). Another form of sampling bias to consider is the non- response. Not everyone in the initially selected sample was reachable or filled out the questionnaire once they had received it (Bauer & Gaskell, 2009).
The questionnaire asked about the major events that had taken place abroad since 2013, the date when the official National Cultural Policy was put into effect. The number of events the participants put down varied in number. As the questions were open ended and requested detailed descriptions, it can be expected that some participants left out events, that if included would have provided different perspective. It also is noteworthy to mentions that major events like DesignMarch, which is Iceland Design Centre’s biggest international marketing effort or the renowned music festival Iceland Airwaves take, place in Iceland and therefore do not fall into the scope of this thesis.
All participants were made aware of the nature of this study before participating. They were aware that the aim was to investigate the processes related to Icelandic cultural events taking place abroad. It is possible some participants filled out the questionnaire or entered the interviews with answers that would make their organization look favorable. The fact that the interviews were conducted in English should be noted. Even though each one of the interviewees is fluent in English, both written and spoken, it is not the native language of most of those who participated. This could affect the choice of words used and the flow of the conversation.
Reliability is an agreement between interpreters that depends on the amount of training of the coders (Bauer & Gaskell, 2009). This research had one novice person interpreting the interviews. In order to increase the reliability, the transcripts were reviewed often and with time intervals, which past research suggests improves intrapersonal reliability, consistency and stability (Bauer & Gaskell, 2009).
46 4.7. RESEARCHER’S POSITION AND ETHICAL CONCERNS
As the researcher works in the cultural sector within the Government at the Consulate General of Iceland in New York, it needs to be acknowledged that there is substantial connection to the topic and interest in finding out the streams of strategy and policy of the cultural practices of the government.
Although the researcher’s position is one of curiosity and interest and not derived from vested interest, it must be noted that the researcher works for the Government of Iceland and could have a biased attitude. Yet, this factor was considered and all efforts possible for objectivity were adopted. The fact that the researcher was familiar with almost all participants, in one way or another, through her position at the Consulate General, made it easier to approach all participants This existing connection possibly also aided in the analytical process, as the researcher was able to add personal qualitative insights to the interviews through familiarity with the participants, and the subject.
47 5. QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARIES
The questionnaire was sent to the participants of the Expert Committee on Art and Culture. The objective was to identify where the public funds originate and in to identify the responsible parties at the Governmental entities that fund Icelandic cultural activities abroad.
All participants received the same questionnaire and the questions are listed below in the order they appeared.
1. What cultural events have taken place abroad since the implementation of the Cultural Policy of Iceland in 2013? 2. What goal was the event intended to achieve? 3. What route was taken in order to achieve the set goal? 4. Was the goal achieved? 5. How was the achievement measured? 6. Did you organization fund the project and if so what %? 7. Did the Government fund the project and if so what %? 8. Was the Government’s financial contribution earmarked for a particular part of the project and if so what part? 9. What documentation did the Government request upon project completion?
5.1. FEDERATION OF ICELANDIC ARTISTS
Kolbrún Halldórsdóttir, President of the Federation of Icelandic Artist responded positively to receiving the questionnaire but upon reviewing the questions it was her evaluation that the questions didn’t apply to the Federation of Icelandic Artists as it hasn’t been actively participating in International cultural events.
48 5.2. ICELAND DESIGN CENTRE
Halla Helgadóttir, Managing Director of Iceland Design Centre since its establishment in 2008 answered the questionnaire.
Helgadóttir is connected to five events; Iceland Contemporary Design 2009- 1012; AL13; Scandinavian Fashion Festival; Nordic Design Lunch and We Live Here. Even though the Iceland Contemporary Design 2009-2012 took place before the implementation of the Icelandic Cultural Policy in 2013, which is the time frame in question for this thesis, Helgadottir successfully advocated to include this project as it defined all of Iceland Design Centre’s cultural and trade projects. It also should be noted that participation in Scandinavian Fashion Festival took place in Stockholm and Helsinki multiple times (2009-2016 in Stockholm and 2012-2016 in Helsinki) but that in Helgadóttir’s responses are all included together.
Iceland Contemporary Design 2009-2012 was an exhibit that featured Icelandic contemporary furniture, product design and architecture. The exhibit was introduced in 2009, and from 2009 to 2012, it was exhibited in Reykjavík, Copenhagen, Shanghai, Beijing, Stockholm, Tallin and Helsinki. The exhibit was intended to pinpoint Iceland, as a Nordic design nation and to promote Icelandic design for influential Nordics. In the beginning there were trade related goals that weren’t realistic, even though many of the exhibitors formed valuable contacts through this event. The exhibit sparked the awakening of Nordic colleagues about the growing design field in Iceland, and worked well in conjunction with Iceland Design Centre’s biggest promotional event, DesignMarch.
Iceland Design Centre also gained valuable experience through this project. The initial goal of traveling with this kind of exhibit from place to place to establish immediate business connections was overly ambitious, as it is clear that the first step should be to analyze a market and then, in the next step, penetrate that said market having a long term plan.
49 The impact was unfortunately not measured in a quantifiable ways, as the financial resources didn’t exist. Yet, increased media publications about Icelandic design, increased participation of Icelandic designers and companies in international projects and exhibits, the major increase in number of foreigners that seek out, and know about, the Icelandic Design Centre and the increasing invites to the Iceland Design Centre to participate in various Nordic collaborations, conferences and panels provide a clear indication of positive results.
Iceland Design Centre has little to no financial resources for projects, and therefore most of the finances for this project originates from other sources in the form of grants and collaborations. Iceland Design Centre absorbed most of the cost of labor, project management, marketing, PR etc. The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Industry and Innovation, Promote Iceland and the Nordic Culture Fund funded this project along with a few smaller partners. A price tag on the contribution of the Iceland Design Centre is difficult to assess, as the project was mainly in the form of labor, project management, marketing and PR, enhanced by extensive volunteer work and the resourcefulness needed to launch and develop project without too much cost. On this subject, Iceland Design Centre provided detailed yearly reports and financial statements to all the Government bodies involved, which outlined how this project was handled, what was done and what goals were met.
AI13 was a joint Icelandic/Swedish collaboration in 2013 about the transference of knowledge on using Aluminum in design. The goal of this event was to examine possibilities to further utilize Aluminum in Iceland for design purposes and to explore if Aluminum can be considered an Icelandic raw material. Five Icelandic designers were invited on a knowledge excursion to South Sweden. Outcome of that excursion were design projects related to Aluminum. The final projects were introduced at Stockholm Design Week and DesignMarch in Reykjavík, which resulted in even wider dialogue. AI13 produced new opportunities and also highlighted that in Iceland the knowledge is mostly about raw production of Aluminum and not about the processing process. Although the results of AI13 were not measured, opening a dialog between parties that
50 had not cooperated before was the project’s main success. Iceland Design Centre handed in their yearly report and financial statement to the Government entities involved where the project was detailed both in terms of execution and finances.
The Scandinavian Fashion Festival, held during the annual Stockholm Design Week (2009-1016), is where Iceland Design Centre has secured visibility of Icelandic design by participating in collaboration with local partners. The main goal is to promote Icelandic design and DesignMarch Reykjavík, by working with strong local partners and participating in existing events and strengthen connections. Iceland Design Centre attempts to connect projects from Icelandic designers residing in each place in order to maximize the overall influence. These events are various, most of them small, but in order to be successful in marketing and PR stamina and determination is needed to actively participate in such activities. Results for such activity were measured in increased participation and awareness about DesignMarch. Iceland Design Centre mostly funds these events with additional foreign grants. In all instances, the cooperation was with Promote Iceland and/or the local Icelandic Embassies, who have supported the projects up to around 20-30% of the total cost. Grants from Promote Iceland go towards promotion and the Embassies contributions are applied for receptions, catering etc. With these events, detailed documentation is handed in in advance but little documentation is produced afterwards given that representatives from the Embassies took part. Iceland Design Centre always documents projects in their annual reports.
Nordic Design Lunch is a networking event and collaboration between Design Forum Finland and Iceland Design Centre. In this event influencers, media, designers and business executives were invited to a dialogue about closer Nordic collaboration on design and architecture both within the Nordic countries and internationally. The goals with Nordic Design Lunch, which was hosted three times in 2014, during Stockholm Design Week, Helsinki Design Week and DesignMarch Reykjavík, were to encourage more Nordic collaborative projects that build on actual connection between individuals, companies and organizations and work towards strengthening the Nordic Design brand internationally.
51 Helgadóttir notes that we are only 25 million people in the Nordic countries, and that Iceland’s goal is to be an actual influencer in the design world and to use the advantage of being small - yet belonging to wide networks across the design disciples. In order to achieve the set goals, Iceland Design Centre hosted a lunch to connect the influencers face to face, to encourage dialogue between them and to initiate a brainstorming session. Each Nordic Design Lunch was a small, inexpensive and easy in execution. Iceland Design Centre considers Nordic Design Lunch to be a uniquely successful project that can be used as an entrance point for entering new areas of collaboration with Nordic colleagues.
The success of Nordic Design Lunch was measured in participation and interest of those taking time out of their intense design week schedule’s to be a part of this project; 50-60 people have attended these events. Success also was measured in participation and cooperation of Icelanders in projects resulting from these lunches. Iceland Design Centre absorbs or fundraises, in collaboration with foreign cooperators, about 60% of the cost, the Government has put forth around 20-30% and foreign collaborators have shared the cost to cover the rest. The Governmental funding was earmarked for promotion of the projects as is case when it originates from Promote Iceland. Follow up documentation to the Government was in the form of annual report and financial statement. Nordic Design Lunch was the foundation for the We Live Here project below.
We Live Here was an exhibit displaying Iceland and Finnish design at Stockholm Design Week in 2015 and a collaboration between Design Forum Finland and Iceland Design Centre. The exhibit space was a rented apartment in central Stockholm, where inside a contemporary Icelandic/Finnish home was created where the “nations” consisting of Icelandic and Finnish designers “moved in” together for the week with the help of their Swedish friends. Their new home was decorated with Icelandic, Finnish and Swedish design.
The major objective of this project was to put more emphasis on the human side and history rather than solely emphasizing the furniture or other products. The project gained a lot of attention and was by many deemed to be the most
52 interesting exhibit that year at Stockholm Design Week. It is clear that the project is well known within the Nordic design circles and that it has been an inspiration for other similar projects. It is difficult to measure the outcome of this type of a project but it is obvious that the project has increased interest in Icelandic design and the design boom that followed in Iceland.
Iceland Design Centre absorbed the labor, technology, marketing, promotional and PR, about 20% of the total cost, and Promote Iceland put forth funds to be used towards promotion, shipping of the exhibition pieces and travel cost for the participating designers. Iceland Design Center reports back to Promote Iceland in as it does to other Governmental entities, in the form of annual reports and financial statements. We Live Here portrayed Icelandic, Finnish and Swedish design in a unique and memorable way. It also served as a pilot project as it has grown to include all the Nordic countries working jointly on a future international We Live Here project.
Helgadóttir notes that the follow up process is a challenge for the Iceland Design Centre in general, as the financial resources simply don’t exist for such projects.
5.3. ICELANDIC ART CENTER
Björg Stefánsdóttir, Director of the Icelandic Art Center answered the questionnaire.
Stefánsdóttir listed four events that took place since 2013, Katín Sigurðardóttir’s exhibit at the Venice Biennale 2013, Christoph Buchel’s exibit at the Venice Biennale 2015, Way Over in New York 2015 and Way Over in Berlin 2016.
Katrín Sigurðardóttir’s exhibit at the Venice Biennale 2013 took place in the Icelandic Pavilion and its main emphasis was the promotion of the artist Katrín Sigurðardóttir and her work. Icelandic Art Center hosted a special press meeting on opening day and an opening reception and a gala dinner which included big names in the international visual art scene, collectors, curators and other important individuals. The success from the Icelandic Pavilion in Venice was
53 measured in the attention that it received both home in Iceland but mostly internationally. It is also was measured in the offers that the artist received after the Venice Biennale to exhibit at museums and galleries, but it also is judged on how the exhibit does each time. In the case of Katrín Sigurðardóttir’s exhibit, it received great, wide attention and as a result Sigurðardóttir held her first private exhibit in London in 2015, and also has exhibited more in the U.S. than in Europe. There was a special financial contribution from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture to cover the cost of the Icelandic Pavilion. Furthermore, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs contributed to make the opening of the exhibit possible. Fritz and Co, the PR Company that Icelandic Arts Center worked with on this event. The Icelandic Art Center compiled a report to the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture regarding the process of the Icelandic Pavilion at the Venice Biennale, in addition to signing a contract with the Ministry about the execution of the exhibit.
Christoph Büchel’s exhibit at the Venice Biennale 2015 goal was to promote the artist, Christoph Büchel, and his works. The opening of the Icelandic Pavilion lasted a day and was extremely well attended. The Pavilion’s curator, Andrea Schwan played the main part, and was connected with the media both before and after the opening. Christoph Buchel’s exhibit received the greatest attention of all participating Pavilions that year, and more attention than any other Icelandic Pavilion. Like in 2013 the Icelandic Art Center received a special contribution from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture to cover the cost of the Pavilion, provided a special report on the execution and finances.
The author notes that the Icelandic Pavilion was controversial from the time the Swiss-born, Iceland-based artist, Christoph Büchel presented his idea of “The Mosque”, to the execution at the Biennale in Venice (Baumgardner, 2015). The Icelandic Pavilion was in fact permanently shut down by the Venice Police after being declared a security hazard in addition to lacking proper permits (Kennedy, 2015).
Way Over in New York 2015 was a promotion of Icelandic contemporary visual art within the international visual art markets. The goal was to establish
54 connection between Icelandic artists and foreign curators, museum directors, media, art collectors and gallery owners. The event was executed in cooperation with an Icelandic artist, who has lived and worked in New York for the last 20 years. The timing of the event was important, as it took place at the same time as the Armory Show 2015, and additionally, the Museum of Modern Art opened the Björk exhibit that same weekend. For these reasons there were many influential people from the visual arts field already in New York at the time that optimized the opportunity to invite people to party.
The success of these types of events is mainly measured in who attends the party but also by the connections that form between important individuals within the art world and the opportunities that are offered as a result of the event. This can take a long time to materialize as exhibitions and decisions are tedious in preparation and implementation. Way Over in New York received contributions from a few organizations to fully fund the project - with 21% coming from Promote Iceland, 13% from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, 13% from Iceland Naturally and the Icelandic Art Center covering 53%. The Way over project is reported in the Icelandic Art Center’s annual report.
Way Over in Berlin 2016 was, like Way Over in New York, a promotion of Icelandic contemporary visual art and the goals were identical to establish connection between Icelandic visual artists and foreign curators, museum directors, media, art collectors and gallery owners. The event was highlighted by an Icelandic artist who is well known in the Berlin art world, having lived and worked there for 18 years. The artist has extensive connections that materialized in inviting high profile people within the art world to attend the party. Like the one in New York, the Berlin event was very well attended. The Icelandic Art Center worked with a Berlin located PR firm named Bueau N and handled the invites and follow-ups both during the party and afterwards. Promote Iceland contributed 43% to the project, The Icelandic Embassy in Berlin 6% and the Icelandic Art Center covered 50% of the total cost. Reporting of the event was in the annual report.
55 5.4. ICELANDIC FILM CENTRE
Laufey Guðjónsdóttir, Director of the Icelandic Film Centre answered the questionnaire.
Guðjónsdóttir provided a list of Icelandic movies at International film festivals (“Icelandic films at festivals in 2015 | Icelandic Film Centre,” n.d.). Guðjónsdóttir mentions the movie Rams (Hrútar) especially as it received substantial funding due to its selection for the 2015 Cannes Film Festival.
Icelandic Movies at International film festivals promotes Icelandic films to film festivals’ sales and distribution industries such as Film Festivals in Berlin, Cannes, Toronto and Busan in Korea, and in strengthening networks between the Icelandic film industry and foreign counterparts with focus on coproduction and distribution. These projects have had great success recently, and Icelandic Films are well known internationally. Sales and distribution also have been greatly increased, and this is a major factor in evaluating success: the number of events/film festivals Icelandic movies selected, the number of sales and distribution contracts that materialize, and the number of international recognition and awards, which surpassed 100 in 2015.
The participation of the Icelandic Film Centre varies and includes events – which includes payments for marketing booths at the facilities in the Berlin, Toronto, Cannes and Busan markets, and traveling expenses for the staff that attends these festivals. In addition the Icelandic Film Centre covers, labor, production cost of marketing material, shipping costs. Furthermore, with its express services, it secures necessary licenses, and coordinates distribution to the festivals. Most of the costs related to these events are covered by the Icelandic Film Centre, but Promote Iceland has sponsored promotions in the U.S. and assisted in covering costs related to media and film festival executive visits to Iceland. The movie Rams received 6 million Icelandic krona earmarked for the promotion of the Film at the Cannes Film Festival. The Icelandic Film Centre provides an overview for all events along with financial statements to the Government bodies involved.
56 5.5. ICELANDIC LITERATURE CENTER
Hrefna Haraldsdóttir, Managing Director and Chairman of the Board of the Icelandic Literature Center chose not to answer the questionnaire in detail but responded that the Icelandic Literature Center works according to the laws and regulations of the Government at any given time. Icelandic Literature Center takes part in two to three book fairs annually and works with the Nordic Institute for Literature to jointly promote Nordic literature in various ways. At the book fairs, promotion is in the form of introducing Icelandic literature to international publishers and others, supplying information about what grants are available for publishers and translators, and preparing promotional material.
Icelandic Literature Center has cooperated with Promote Iceland on the Gothenburg Book Fair in the last few years and that support, in addition to a funding from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture enables the presence of the Icelandic Literature Center at the book fair. The participation in the London Book Fair is in collaboration with the Nordic Institutes for Literature and the cost is shared with them. All of the Icelandic Literature Center’s efforts are aimed at strengthening Icelandic literature and expanding its exposure. Results are evaluated by the number of Icelandic titles published abroad, and the frequency of trips made by Icelandic authors to promote their works at international book fairs and festivals. The projects have been fruitful which is evident in the constant increase in applications to translate Icelandic literature to foreign languages, given a record number of translation grants given in the year 2015 (“Miðstöð íslenskra bókmennta,” n.d.)
5.6. ICELAND MUSIC EXPORT
Sigtryggur Baldursson, Director of Iceland Music Export was unable to answer the questionnaire, but Anna Ásthildur Thorsteinsson, Project Manager at Icelandic Music Export answered on his behalf. Baldursson was consulted on nature of the answers through numerous emails by Thorsteinsson.
Thorsteinsson includes Eurosonic in her answers to the questionnaire but Baldursson notes that Iceland Music Export also organizes other events and had
57 three artists at CMJ Music Festival where they produced an Iceland Airwaves showcase and other showcases internationally in which Iceland Music Export assisted.
Eurosonic is an annual music Festival held in Netherlands in January each year. The goals for the event are numerous and include goals for the musicians, goals for the image of Icelandic music, and goals for the Icelandic music industry. Two goals set for the musician who participated were firstly to book more music festivals for the rest of the year, and secondly to obtain more contracts to collaborate on bookings and production. The goal for the image of Icelandic music and “Iceland the music country” was to portray Iceland as an infinite source of talented and creative people. The goal for the Icelandic music industry was to strengthen the internal structure of the music industry by using the whole procedure to increase knowledge. The project was big, and took over a year to execute, with all procedures designed to reach the set goals. Thorsteinsson reported all goals were met in many ways but did not elaborate. The achievements were measured with a survey and a final report was handed in to the Government upon project completion. The project was funded with grants from various organizations and Government bodies including the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, the Ministry of Industry and Innovation, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Innovation Center Iceland, City of Reykjavík, Performing Rights Society, Icelandair, and an extra contribution from the Government.
5.7. PERFORMING ARTS ICELAND
Marta Nordal is the elected president of Performing Arts Iceland since 2013 and in that capacity answered the questionnaire.
In her answers, Nordal only mentions projects that Performing Arts Iceland took part in directly - Nordic Performing Arts Days and Ice Hot.
58 Nordic Performing Arts Days held in Copenhagen in 2014 and the Faroe Islands in 2016 were a joint Nordic collaboration of the Nordic International Theater Institutes. These are biannual events where one of the Nordic countries hosts a performing arts festival and works from all the Nordic countries are exhibited, plays are read and panel discussions take place. The goal of these events is to enhance the connections between the Nordic International Theater Institutes and promote Nordic performance arts. In order to achieve these goals, criteria was set forth, by the organizers of the festival, which the participating projects needed to meet in order to qualify for participation. The projects that participated were either advertised or selected directly.
These events didn’t produce much visibility outside of the Nordic countries and there was no measurement in place to establish if the initial goals were met. Performing Arts Iceland covered part of the cost related to the Icelandic participants but apart from that the Government didn’t fund the projects.
Ice Hot is a biannual Nordic contemporary dance festival where contemporary dance pieces from each of the Nordic countries are performed. The goal of these events is to promote Nordic dance and dance authors. As with Nordic Arts Days, criteria are established, by the organizers of the festival, and all projects must meet such criteria to qualify for participation. Those projects selected were either through public advertisement or selected directly without being publicly advertised
This event was greatly visible, as many international promoters attended and the project produced opportunities for all participating artist to exhibit their works in other places. To measure if the goals were reached, a questionnaire was sent out to the artists that participated in order to obtain answers on such opportunities. Performing Arts Iceland contributed in part to the costs related to the Icelandic curator, and the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture made an un-earmarked contribution. Performing Arts Iceland handed in a follow up report to the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture on the project, and how the funds were distributed.
59 Nordal notes that in addition to the projects mentioned above, there are subsidiary events that Performing Arts Iceland supplies material and participants.
Nordal emphasizes in her responses that there is no center for the performing arts in Iceland, and that it is the only art branch that doesn’t have a center to call its own. Attempts are currently underway to set up a center in 2016. As a result of not having a performing arts center, international projects are not centralized but are considered by various organizations. Upon establishment of a performing arts center, it can be expected that Icelandic performance artists will be more visible at international festivals and that there will be a clearer focus.
60 6. INTERVIEW SUMMARIES
To gain insight into how the Government bodies responsible for promoting Icelandic culture conduct their practices the following questions where used to guide the interviews.
1. Does the organization have a mission statement and if so where can it be found? 2. What is the process when selecting a project to receive financial support (does the organization approach participants or do participants approach the organization)? 3. Who within your organization decides what project gets financial support and how and why are they (decision makers) selected and how long have they been in their position? 4. When deciding what project to financially support, what if any are the guidelines followed, where do they originate from and are they applied to all projects? 5. Do they justify their selection based on criteria and if so where is the justification sent to (is it public)? 6. How does the financial transaction take place (directly to a project leader or to a 3rd party)? 7. What if any documentation is involved in the application process on behalf of the project applicants (do they have to meet key objectives and is there a standard and objective criteria? 8. What need is the selected project fulfilling and how does it advance the overall mission? 9. How is the need evaluated? 10. What is the selected project expected to achieve, does it advance specific goals or objectives that are laid out? 11. Is there a follow up once a project has been completed and if so in what form (what documentation do project leaders need to hand in and is it self-analysis of success and challenges)? 12. Who evaluates the follow up? 13. What are the criteria for evaluation? 14. Is there an overarching principle that ties all of the efforts together and if so what is it?
61 6.1. MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND CULTURE
Karítas Gunnarsdóttir, Director, Deputy Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture responded to the inquiry and was interviewed. Gunnarsdóttir has worked at the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture since 1995, as a Director since 2000, and as Deputy Permanent Secretary since 2011. The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture follows the legislation and financial budget of the Government, and uses the Cultural Policy of Iceland to guide all their cultural efforts.
The cultural involvement of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture consists of three parts. First and foremost is support to the national cultural institution that receive their operational funding from the Government – such as the National Theater and the Iceland Symphony Orchestra: secondly the governmental cultural institutions and creative centers receive their support based on legislation and rules set forth in the financial budget of the Government; thirdly, there is support for the grassroots, the cultural entities that don’t exist within the institutions. The rules are strict when it comes to funding and there is not much opportunity to fund individual projects that aren’t supported by the respective creative centers or Government institutions.
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture generally does not make decisions on what individual projects get support. The process is that creative centers get annually funded according to the Government’s yearly financial plan. The creative centers themselves are in charge of how these funds are distributed, providing such funding is within each centers framework and strategies. Major international projects like the Icelandic Pavilion at the Venice Biennale receive extra funding from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. Yet, the Ministry plays no part in deciding what artists are funded at any given time. That decision rests fully with the Icelandic Art Center. When there is international bilateral cooperation, the process is that a mutual agreement is established to fund a festival, but the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture does not play any part in the selection of the artist who participates.
62 It is rare that a project gets direct funding from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, but there is a small amount set a side annually to assist with distinguished international projects that are not included on the annual funding plan. Examples of this funding include the Prague Quadrennial of Performance Design and Space; Nordic Cool which took place in Washington, DC in 2013 and the yearlong Nordic Cultural Festival, to be hosted by the Southbank Centre in London in 2017. These events are all prominent, and in order for Iceland to be on equal terms with other participating countries, there should be additional funding, enabling the artists to be a part of projects of such high importance.
One of the conditions of receiving direct funding from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture is to complete a report once the project is finished. In order to ensure that reports are completed, 20% of the funding is held back until a final report is produced. Should it happen that a final report is not provided, the possibility of receiving financial support at a future time is reduced. The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture does not evaluate if the project in question was successful or not, but examines the final report to make sure that all conditions, agreed upon at the time of funding, were met.
The focus of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture is to fulfill the need for culture to exist in a civil society, and that all their efforts are made to secure public support for flourishing cultural life in Iceland.
6.2. MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The interviewee was Skafti Jónsson who heads the Office of Cultural Affairs at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs assumed this position in February 2016.
According to Jónsson, there is no mission statement about culture set forth by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
The Icelandic Embassies decide what cultural projects to financially support and then apply to a central fund with the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. The Office of Culture at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, in turn, consults with the Ministry of
63 Education, Science and Culture on what projects should obtain funding and subsequently divides the funds between the Embassies. Usually the Embassies receive substantially less funding than they requested. Once a decision is made to fund a cultural project the norm is not to make it public, yet people are always welcome to ask about specific projects and the information can be made available
The application process to receive funds from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs varies. Jónsson notes that most of the projects are small, and going through a complicated process in order to complete them would be overly tedious. Hence the process for most of the projects, due to their small size, is fairly simple consisting of a succinct project description. The larger projects adhere to other rules, and extensive documentation is needed regarding the execution and financial plan.
At the end of each year, each of the Embassies is required to hand in an annual report that documents how the funds for the projects were actually spent. For the big projects, more extensive reporting is required - including self-analysis of the successes and challenges. The reports are evaluated by the Office of Cultural Affairs in consultation with the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. The evaluation process does not include specific criteria.
There is no overall objective for selected cultural projects that get financial support financially by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Some do not have commercial value but are adopted for art’s value.
6.3. PROMOTE ICELAND
Kristjana Rós Gudjohnsen was interviewed on behalf of Promote Iceland where she has been working for the past five years and currently holds the position of Manager, Visit Iceland & Creative Industries.
The mission statement of Promote Iceland is as follows; “Promote Iceland aims to enhance Iceland’s good image and reputation, to support the competitive
64 standing of Icelandic industries in foreign markets, to attract foreign tourists and investments to the country, and assist in the promotion of Icelandic culture abroad” (“About,” n.d.)
Promote Iceland does not directly select cultural projects that receive funding. All projects that receive financial support from Promote Iceland come through the creative centers, which make up the foundation of the Expert Committee of Promote Iceland. The specific creative center a project is allocated depends the creative field of the project. After consideration and selection by the creative center, Promote Iceland is then the next step for funding. The selection process on behalf of Promote Iceland is never Ad hoc. It is done on yearly basis, built into Promote Iceland’s financial budget. The creative centers clarify what projects they are seeking financial support four to five months before the year end to ensure the project can be included in the budget. Guðjohnsen makes decisions on what projects get financial funding and shares decisions by the Director, Visit Iceland & Creative Instustries, Inga Hlín Pálsdóttir. The funding decisions are justified internally and publicized in an annual report, and Guðjohnsen is very clear of the strict standards in the selection process for Promote Iceland projects.
The creative centers are the professional organizations that Promote Iceland relies on to make sure the projects meet each centers’ specific goals or objectives during the application process. The criteria include what is the main goal of the project, what costs are involved and what plan needs to be in place about the execution. All funds originating from Promote Iceland are earmarked for the promotional parts of the projects, and therefore it’s imperative that a promotional strategy is in place. A requirement is that the project includes a professional PR agency that specializes in the target market.
Upon completion of a project, Promote Iceland requires a report to be handed in where actual steps of the project are noted and explanation of where finances were distributed. In addition Promote Iceland requires copies of all receipts related to the promotional side of the project to ensure that the amount of funds coming from Promote Iceland went towards such promotional activities.
65 The overall objective of a project is set by the creative center. Promote Iceland does not necessarily mandate a project to promote Iceland per se, or to entice tourists to visit Iceland in order to fund a project. The major objective is that the project needs to be a professional promotion of the creative industries. It can be connected to the promotion of Icelandic artists, music arts etc. abroad.
6.4. ICELAND NATURALLY
Hlynur Guðjónsson, Consul General & Trade Commissioner was interviewed. Guðjónsson has been working at the Consulate General of Iceland in New York for the past 10 year, and during those years has acted as one of two managers for Iceland Naturally.
Iceland Naturally is a cooperative marketing organization comprised of top Iceland brands that promote tourism, services, products and culture of Iceland to the North American audience. When selecting projects that Iceland Naturally financially supports, the process consists of two pathways. Either Iceland Naturally approaches participants of interest, or interested participants approach Iceland Naturally. The decision about what projects get supported lies with the two managers who jointly reach a conclusion, and the support either goes directly to the project participants or to the collaborating organization. If a justification is needed about the funding process, the managers provide the rationale.
In order to obtain financial support, the project must fall within Iceland Naturally’s strategic plan, support Iceland Naturally’s overall strategy, and the members of Iceland Naturally need to benefit from the project and/or be able to participate in the project. Documentation is requested on behalf of Iceland Naturally about the nature of the project, which the stakeholders are, what the execution plan is and the financial plan.
The projects that Iceland Naturally financially supports are very diverse, and the reports needed upon project depletion depend on the nature of the project it and the criteria mandated for evaluation. If it is something like a concert, the follow
66 up should include how many people attended the concert and what media coverage did the project received. For more complicated projects, Iceland Naturally requires qualitative and quantitative reporting, along with evaluating the project through its own resources, i.e., via Iceland Naturally’s e-mail database, digital analytics, member critics and consumer surveys in the U.S and Canada.
The overarching principle that ties all of Iceland Naturally’s efforts together is Iceland and all things Icelandic.
67 7. RESULTS FROM ANALYSIS
This chapter presents the analysis on how the Government of Iceland currently conducts its cultural diplomacy practice on the grounds of the theories presented in chapter three.
7.1. ARM’S LENGTHS PRINCIPLE
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture; the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Promote Iceland all follow the arm’s length principal in their operations. None of these entities solely choose the recipients no distribute directly to the recipients, as it is done by a third party (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989). The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture and Promote Iceland both, on an annual basis, supply funding, according to the Government’s annual budget plan, to the creative centers who select the recipients and handle the financial transaction. In the case of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, it is the Icelandic Embassies that decide what projects they support and then approach the Ministry for Foreign Affairs on individual case bases for funding. The cultural funds available are limited and many of the projects that the Embassies seek support are denied due to the lack of funds.
Iceland Naturally operates differently, since it is a public/private promotional program. The arm’s length principle does not apply as it does above, as Iceland Naturally is involved in the selection process. Such is the case with the format of a concert series called Reykjavík Calling, hosted as a part of a three to five day Taste of Iceland Festival, in collaboration with a local radio station in each city the festival takes place. The local radio stations select the Icelandic musicians it judges that are best for its market. Iceland Naturally also handles financial transactions earmarked to the participants or to a third party, depending on the nature of the agreement in place.
The creative centers are the link enabling the Government to be one step removed from the funding decision process and, therefore, act according to the arm’s length principal
68 7.2. CULTURAL DIPLOMACY POLICY
When examining which of Chartrand’s roles (Chartrand, 2002) the government adopts when deciding whether or not to fund cultural projects abroad, the evidence of this study suggests that there is a mixture of roles. The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture; the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Promote Iceland, by operating at arm’s length - by distributing funds to the creative centers without affecting the selection of participants - take on the role of the patron. Yet, there are there aspects involved. The focus is on cultural diversity (funding all the creative centers and not just selective few) so there is flair of the facilitator present. The funding rules and regulations are strict, and that’s where the organizations deviate from the role of the facilitator, which tends to work within a loose funding framework. The third role that emerges is the architect. The Government funds culture largely through the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (“703/145 lög í heild,” n.d.). The cultural sector is highly dependent on Governmental funding and the administration of Iceland’s Cultural Policy is the responsibility of that same ministry. An area of non-conformation is that bureaucrats do not decide what projects receive grants; those decisions rest firmly with the creative centers.
Even though Chartrand’s roles relate to the Government’s role in publicly funding the arts and Iceland Naturally is only partially a Governmental identity, Iceland Naturally fits in with Chartand’s role of the facilitator as it focuses on funding variety of culture.
7.3. INSTRUMENTAL CULTURAL DIPLOMACY POLICY
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture; the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Promote Iceland all have tendencies to adhere to the instrumental cultural diplomacy policy model, put forth by Belfiori (Belfiore, 2004b) as the alternative motive is to either promote tourism and tourism related practices, supplement education, establish connections or increase consumption etc.
Iceland Naturally best fits the instrumental cultural diplomacy model, as the main purpose of Iceland Naturally, as a promotional program, is to promote
69 Iceland and Icelandic products in North America. To best fulfill that mission, Iceland Naturally uses and supports cultural events in as many ways possible to bring attention to Iceland and all things Icelandic.
In the case of the creative centers, each is specifically designed to support and advance its corresponding art form, and for that reason the creative centers do not adhere to the principles of instrumental cultural diplomacy policy
7.4. ORGANIZED ANARCHY
Given that the decision making process of selecting what cultural projects get financial support is decided by the creative centers and not by Governmental bodies, the creative centers were examined regarding whether or not the decision making entities operate in an organized anarchy mode when making their decisions (Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1972b). Evidence in this study reveals the creative centers do not operate in an organized anarchy fashion. Their preferences are publicly revealed, consistent and well defined as each center focuses solely on its respective designated art branch, and therefore chooses projects from that art branch to receive financial support. Each creative center is small in operation with few employees, which suggests that such employees have good oversight over the entire function of the organization and are not solely focused on their own job function.
When Iceland Naturally is evaluated from the organized anarchy perspective it follows the same procedure as the creative centers. It is a small operation, with well-informed employees, who have an admirable record of being consistent in their decisions.
7.5. KINGDON’S POLICY WINDOW MODEL
Now that it has been established that an unformal cultural diplomacy policy characterizes the organizations studied in this this, what insights on origins can be highlighted by Kingdon’s policy window (Kingdon, 2003). One problem has been identified. The individual art sectors are neither clearly visible nor organized. They needed a structure where each could shine better and function
70 in a more organized way both locally and internationally. This viewpoint was, over time, presented by the forerunners of the art sectors to the Government of Iceland. The political stream was aligned, as the Government was in agreement, and also viewed this as a problem in need of a vix; hence the “policy window” opened. With this agenda, one by one the creative industries each had a home, where their respective interests were protected and their respected art and artist promoted.
7.6. STRATEGY AS A PLAN OR A PATTERN
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture; the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Promote Iceland do not have individual strategic plans in place when it comes to cultural affairs. It can be seen though that steps are taken to fulfill the guidelines put forth in the National Cultural Policy of Iceland (“National Cultural Policy of Iceland,” n.d.) and in Iceland 2020, a Governmental Policy Statement for the Economy and Community, put forth in 2011, which emphasize the strengthening of the Icelandic culture (“Iceland 2020,” n.d.).
In the National Cultural Policy of Iceland it states:
“The government is not directly involved in the programming and daily activities of any of the public cultural institutions or of other recipients of public financial support. However, it carries out performance assessments for these activities and enforces the accountability of directors, board members and others responsible for the management of public funds.” and “The government manages its support for cultural activities in accordance with the arm’s length principle as applicable to the allocation of public funds for cultural purposes, for example in relation to the work of institutions and foundations, as well as of the allocation committees of artists’ stipend funds” (“National Cultural Policy of Iceland,” n.d.).
71 In Iceland 2020, a Governmental Policy Statement for the Economy and Community it states
“Creative industries have played a greater role in sustainable value creation in recent years than many people care to recognize. This includes companies that have been growing rapidly during the economic downturn. Moreover, it has been estimated that the creative industries will be able to employ an additional 3,000 people over the next three years. In order to ensure this growth, there is a need to identify the obstacles on its path and to work on formulating recommendations for any necessary reforms. Support will be given to facilitate the marketing of Icelandic art, culture, design and ingenuity abroad. There is a particular need to consider the role of the educational system to ensure that young people and the unemployed are provided with educational opportunities in areas where there is potential for growth and a shortage of labor. Responsibility: Ministry of Education, Science and Culture/Ministry of Industry.” (“Iceland 2020,” n.d.).
The strategic steps taken to meet the conditions above are that the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture; Ministry of Industries and Innovation and Promote Iceland fund the creative centers on annual basis and not on project basis – thereby securing no direct involvement in the programming and keeping the financial transactions at arm’s length. It is difficult to analyze what specific strategy is in place with such a paucity of information, but according to Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel this would fall under a loosely planned strategy school with a deliberate plan, as it has been executed in the intended fashion (1998).
Iceland Naturally has a strategic plan in place, which is articulated in annual tactical plan and marketing plans. Iceland Naturally’s policy falls under instrumental policy with the goal to promote Iceland and Icelandic products in North America. The strategic plan describes the steps to be taken in order to ensure that the instrumental policy goals are met. Iceland Naturally revises its
72 strategic plan annually in the light of new emerging markets and through evaluation of what proved successful and not successful in the past. With this in mind Iceland Naturally’s strategy would fall under the configuration school, as it formulates and executes a deliberate prescriptive plan, but then revises the plan according to changing markets; therefore it is emergent and descriptive (Mintzberg et al., 1998).
73 8. CONCLUSION
This chapter summarizes the results from the analysis and lays out how Iceland, at this time, conducts its cultural diplomacy practices. Furthermore, it provides discussion on whether there is an informal cultural diplomacy policy in place, and, if so, what policy theory such practices follow.
8.1. SUMMARY
From this study of Iceland’s cultural diplomacy procedures, evidence suggests there is a form of an informal cultural diplomacy policy in place for the Government of Iceland. The importance of Iceland participating in international cultural exchange is clearly stated in a Governmental policy statement about the vision for the Icelandic economy and community in 2020 which declares “support will be given to facilitate the marketing of Icelandic art, culture, design and ingenuity abroad” (“Iceland 2020,” n.d.).
Following the 2020 policy report, the National Cultural Policy of Iceland was enacted in 2013, which outlines the groundwork to how Government should conduct its practices. The report reads “The government is not directly involved in the programming and daily activities of any of the public cultural institutions or of other recipients of public financial support.” (“National Cultural Policy of Iceland,” n.d.). At current, and in accordance with the National Cultural Policy of Iceland, the Government follows the arm’s length policy principles (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989) by keeping distance from the decision making process, leaving it up to the creative centers in Iceland and the Icelandic Embassies to decide what projects get funded to present Icelandic culture abroad. It also follows the arm’s length policy principles regarding financial transactions by not transferring funds directly to the chosen participants, but to the creative centers and Icelandic Embassies, who in turn handle the transference of money to the recipients of the public support.
The Government’s role in the decision making process is depicted by interconnected parts according to the four Governmental roles Chartrand and McCaughey have established (Chartrand & McCaughey, 1989) to describe the
74 function of the Government on publicly funded cultural projects. The Government roles are an interaction between the patron, who conducts its decision making process according to the arm’s length principle; the facilitator, as the Government focuses on supporting all of the cultural branches without singling out a specific branch to enhance; and the architect sector, which is highly dependent on Government funding. The responsibility of the National Cultural Policy of Iceland rests with the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.
The nature of the cultural diplomacy policy is bipartite. It both serves to support culture for culture’s sake, but also acts to advance other motives like expanding the tourism sector and tourism related operations; supplementing education; and establishing connections etc. When activated to advance ulterior motives, it takes the shape of an instrumental cultural diplomacy policy according to Belfiori (Belfiore, 2004a). In the case of Iceland Naturally, the intention is clear to promote Iceland and all things Icelandic in the North American market and, therefore an instrumental cultural diplomacy policy is in place.
The creative centers are individually responsible for selecting projects to receive public funding and there was not support that such actions are conducted in an organized anarchy fashion (Cohen et al., 1972b).. The decision making process with the creative centers is consistent and well defined and executed by the same employees that possess good oversight over the whole function of their organization. The same is also the case with Iceland Naturally.
The cultural diplomacy policy fits in with Kingdon’s policy window model (Kingdon, 2003) in the sense that it was identified that the art sectors are not well represented,. The Government concurred with that view and identified the problem as one needing a solution. The result was the establishment of the individual creative centers. Now all art sectors except for the Performing Arts Iceland have their own organization that represents their interest and advancement. A plan is in place for Performing Arts Iceland to have a home of their own in 2016, is in place.
75 The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture; the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Promote Iceland all have informal strategic plan in place, although diluted, that falls under the strategy school according to Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel (1998). Their strategy was intended and realized. Iceland Naturally’s strategic plan falls under the configuration school as it is planned but also emergent and descriptive in nature. Iceland Naturally set out with a deliberate prescriptive plan but revises its strategy annually which accounts for it also being emerging and descriptive.
8.2. DISCUSSION
Iceland is a proud cultural country and rightfully so. It´s cultural history is rich and there is a constant stream of highly talented artist emerging. The contemporary music scene bears clear witness to the deep fountain of talent, as the international events that Icelandic musicians take part in yearly increased of about 700 events between the years 2012 to 2014 (“Iceland Music Export | About,” n.d.). Iceland has been very visible in the last few years in the international media for various reasons. Some of the attention is focused on the flourishing music scene that Iceland continues to nourish. Granted, some attention is undoubtedly due to the financial crash in 2008, and Iceland´s recovery. Some of the attention is due to the scenic, tourist friendly volcanic eruption in 2010, and its harsher counterpart residue that spewed ashes over Europe and was the cause of many international flight travel interruptions in 2011. Some of the attention is also due to the unexpected success of the Icelandic men´s national team and their fan’s Viking like character at the European Soccer Championship in 2016.
There are without a doubt many more reasons for the heightened attention Iceland has received in the recent years. Even more impressive is what a journalist relayed to me: “I found it fascinating to learn that Iceland only has 330.000 inhabitants. I never realized that Iceland is a small Island state. Somehow everything I have ever heard about it and read about it, never gave it away that it was in fact such a micro society”. I find it important here to mention that this person is highly educated, well-traveled, British born, international
76 affairs commentator who specializes in the Middle East, and has in the past reported for outlets like the London Sunday Telegraph, The Wall Street Journal, New York Daily News and more of the like. This I include because it is important to note that the view of Iceland, held by someone so well versed in the matters of the world, is not diminutive. In fact this journalist has a very strong image of Iceland as do many who know the country. Icelanders are viewed by many as strong but peaceful people - capable of achieving great things.
Despite it being the case that Iceland is viewed as bigger than it possibly is, it is the author’s opinion that the full potential of Icelandic cultural diplomacy continues to flourish. That being viewed as “big” is not the end stop for Iceland. In order for cultural diplomacy´s full potential to be met, a comprehensive plan must be developed and put into place on how cultural diplomacy can help the Government achieve its goals in relation with other countries.
There should be a unified vision on how Iceland would like to be viewed by the international community. If Iceland likes to be viewed as strong and “big” regardless of its “small” size, then the road that cultural diplomacy is now taking seems to be a suitable road. If Iceland wants to be known for its progressive stand on equality, human rights and environmental issues - all matters that are relevant and important in today’s world - cultural diplomacy can be a useful tool in bringing that view to light in a more powerful way than it is viewed today.
An example of engagement, in a global cultural dialog on sustainability and environmental issues that surround it, is an Icelandic traveling exhibit that visited the United Nations headquarters in fall of 2016 and then went on to the Scandinavia House in New York. The exhibition “Borrowed Time: Icelandic Artists look forward” features artwork that reflects on sustainability from various perspectives, and aims to challenge the understanding of humans in the world by examining the issues of waste and consumption (“Borrowed Time | SH Events,” n.d.).
Regardless of how Iceland desires to be received in the international community, the message needs to be unified and well coordinated. Today Iceland´s cultural
77 diplomacy practices lack a clear common voice. To answer this challenge, possibly a governmental run working group could explore the following responsibilities: a) come up with a unified vision of how Iceland would like to be perceived internationally, b) identify where a government action or intervention could be helpful in advancing that unified vision, c) create international strategies and tactics, describing detailed steps that to be taken to meet the unified vision. Such a strategic plan should be detailed, as a major theme of this thesis is to open a dialogue on next steps in this important national activity in telling Iceland’s story.
78 BIBLIOGRAPHY
39/1971: Lög um utanríkisþjónustu Íslands. (n.d.). Retrieved November 22, 2016, from http://www.althingi.is/lagas/145b/1971039.html
703/145 lög í heild: fjárlög 2016. (n.d.). Retrieved November 26, 2016, from http://www.althingi.is/altext/145/s/0703.html
2014 Word of the Year: Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved June 26, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/2014-word-of-the-year
About. (n.d.). Retrieved November 1, 2016, from http://www.islandsstofa.is/en/about
About The Icelandic Film Centre | Icelandic Film Centre. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2016, from http://www.icelandicfilmcentre.is/About-The- Icelandic-Film-Centre/
Advisory Committee on Cultural Diplomacy, C. (2005). Cultural Diplomacy The Linchpin of Public Diplomacy (p. 28). Retrieved from http://www.freemediaonline.org/culturaldiplomacysept2005.pdf
Althingi2013_enska.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.althingi.is/pdf/Althingi2013_enska.pdf
Aluttis, C., Kraft, T., & Brand, H. (2014). Global health in the European Union - a review from an agenda-setting perspective. Global Health Action, 7(0). https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v7.23610
Ársskýrsla-KÍM-2015-.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://icelandicartcenter.is/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/A%CC%81rssky%CC%81rsla-KI%CC%81M- 2015-.pdf
79 Bátora, J. (2005). Public Diplomacy in Small and Mediu-Sized States: Norway and Canada. Netherlands Institute of International Relations “Clingendael,” 1–26.
Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2009). Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound. Sage Publication Ltd.
Baumgardner, J. (2015, June 2). What’s Been Missed in the Heated Debate around Christoph Büchel’s Venice Biennale Mosque. Retrieved November 26, 2016, from https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-venice- biennale-iceland-pavilion-debate
Belfiore, E. (2004a). Auditing culture. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 10(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286630042000255808
Belfiore, E. (2004b). Auditing Culture: the subsidized cultural sector in the New Public Management. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 10(2), 183–202.
Borrowed Time | SH Events. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.scandinaviahouse.org/events/borrowed-time/
Chartrand, H. H. (2002). Funding the Fine Arts: An International Political Economic Assessment. Association of Nordic Theatre Scholars, 14, 1–26.
Chartrand, H. H., & McCaughey, C. (1989). The arm’s length principle and the arts: an international perspective–past, present and future. Who’s to Pay for the Arts. Retrieved from http://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/ArmsLengthArts_ paper.pdf
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972a). A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice., 17(1), 1–25.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972b). A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.
80 Cultural Diplomacy and the National Interest. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.vanderbilt.edu/curbcenter/cms-wp/wp- content/uploads/interarts673.pdf
Cummings, M. C. (2009). Cultural Diplomacy and The United States Government: A Survey, 1–15.
Cynthia P. Schneider. (2004). Culture Communicates: US Diplomacy that Works. The Hague, Clingendael Institute, 1–22.
Definition of POLICY. (n.d.). Retrieved July 17, 2016, from http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/policy
Definition of power. (n.d.). [Dictionary]. Retrieved June 19, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/power
Definition of STRATEGY. (n.d.). Retrieved September 18, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/strategy
Duelund, P. (2003). The Nordic Cultural Model. Nordic Cultural Institute.
English | Arts and Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved September 19, 2016, from https://www.mfa.is/tasks/arts-culture/
Fagráð Íslandsstofu. (n.d.). Retrieved July 9, 2016, from http://www.islandsstofa.is/um-islandsstofu/stjorn-og-stefna/fagrad- islandsstofu
Federation of Icelandic Artist, about. (n.d.). Retrieved November 24, 2016, from http://bil.is/english
Frá búkslætti til bókamessu. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://skemman.is/stream/get/1946/7957/20733/1/hilmar-lokaritgerd- 2011-04-20.pdf
81 Gray, C. (2007). Commodification and Instrumentality in Cultural Policy. International Journal of Cultural Policy. Retrieved from https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/theatre_s/cp/staff/gray/research/c ommodinstrumentijcp.pdf
Hannesson, H. F. (2009). Er til menningarstefna á Íslandi (Is there a Cultural Policy in place in Iceland?) (p. 23). Ministry of Education and Culture. Retrieved from https://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/media/MRN- pdf/er_til_menningarstefna.pdf
Holmes, S. J. (2012, March). Cultural Diplomacy: does it work? - The Ditchley Foundation. Retrieved May 1, 2016, from http://www.ditchley.co.uk/conferences/past-programme/2010- 2019/2012/cultural-diplomacy
Iceland 2020. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://eng.forsaetisraduneyti.is/media/2020/iceland2020.pdf
Iceland Design Centre. (n.d.). Retrieved November 24, 2016, from http://www.icelanddesign.is/ICELANDDESIGNCENTRE/
Iceland Music Export | About. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2016, from http://icelandmusic.is/about/
Iceland Naturally. (n.d.-a). Retrieved November 7, 2016, from http://www.iceland.is/iceland-abroad/us/nyc/iceland-naturally
Iceland Naturally. (n.d.-b). Iceland Naturally Consumer Reports. New York.
Iceland Naturally 2017 Marketing Plan. (n.d.).
Icelandic films at festivals in 2015 | Icelandic Film Centre. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2016, from http://www.icelandicfilmcentre.is/Icelandicfilmsatfestivals/2015/
82 Institute for Cultural Diplomacy. (n.d.). Retrieved June 26, 2016, from http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en_culturaldiplomacy
Jr, J. S. N. (2004). Soft Power: The Means To Success In World Politics (1 edition). New York: PublicAffairs.
Kennedy, R. (2015, May 22). Police Shut Down Mosque Installation at Venice Biennale. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/23/arts/design/police-shut-down- mosque-installation-at-venice-biennale.html
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (2nd ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc.
Labaree, R. V. (n.d.). Research Guides: Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Qualitative Methods. Retrieved November 4, 2016, from http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/qualitative
Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið. (2013). Menningarstefna. Retrieved from https://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/utgafuskra/
Merriam-Webster’s 2014 Word of the Year. (n.d.). Retrieved June 26, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/press-release/2014-word-of-the-year
Miðstöð íslenskra bókmennta. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2016, from http://www.islit.is/en/news/nr/3840
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (1998). Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through The Wilds Of Strategic Management. New York: Free Press.
National Cultural Policy of Iceland. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://eng.menntamalaraduneyti.is/media/MRN- pdf/Menningarstefna_ENSKA_LOKAutgafa.pdf
83 Nonprobability Sampling. (n.d.). Retrieved July 9, 2016, from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampnon.php
Organisational Chart Ministry of Industries and Innovation. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2016, from http://eng.atvinnuvegaraduneyti.is/ministry/organisational-chart/
Organization Ministry for Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Retrieved November 22, 2016, from https://www.mfa.is/ministry/organization/
Origin Theatre. (n.d.). Retrieved May 22, 2016, from http://www.origintheatre.org/event_detail.php?id=72
Payne, G., Sevin, E., & Bruya, S. (2011). Grassroots 2.0: Public Diplomacy in the Digital Age. Comunicação Pública, (vol.6 n10), 45–70. https://doi.org/10.4000/cp.422
Performing Arts in Iceland | About. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2016, from http://stage.is/english/about/
Purposive sampling. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://research- methodology.net/sampling-in-primary-data-collection/purposive- sampling/
Ryan and Bernard Themes. FM 15(1).pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://nersp.osg.ufl.edu/~ufruss/documents/ryan%20and%20bernard%2 0themes.%20FM%2015(1).pdf
Samtök leikja-framleiðenda, IGI. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2016, from http://www.si.is/hugverk-og-thjonusta/igi/
Schneider, C. P. (2006). Cultural diplomacy: Hard to define, but you’d know it if you saw it. Brown J. World Aff., 13, 191.
84 Sendi- og ræðisskrifstofur. (n.d.). Retrieved November 22, 2016, from https://www.utanrikisraduneyti.is/raduneytid/sendi-og-raedisskrifstofur/
Sigurjónsson, N. (2013). Icelandic Cultural Policy. Veftímaritið Stjórnmál Og Stjórnsýsla, 9(2), 455. https://doi.org/10.13177/irpa.a.2013.9.2.10
Skipurit mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytisins. (n.d.). Retrieved November 22, 2016, from https://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/raduneyti/skipulag/skipurit/
The Audit Explosion. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.demos.co.uk/files/theauditexplosion.pdf
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved September 19, 2016, from https://eng.menntamalaraduneyti.is/
The Promote Iceland Act. (n.d.-a). Retrieved November 22, 2016, from http://www.islandsstofa.is/en/about/the-promote-iceland-act
The Promote Iceland Act. (n.d.-b). Retrieved September 19, 2016, from http://www.islandsstofa.is/en/about/the-promote-iceland-act
The structure of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture | Ministry. (n.d.). Retrieved July 6, 2016, from https://eng.menntamalaraduneyti.is/ministry/
Tónverkamiðstöð. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2016, from https://mic.is/
Vestheim, G. (1994). Instrumental Cultural Policy in Scandinavian Countries: A Critical Historical Perspective. The European Journal of Cultural Policy, 1(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286639409357969
Wisker, G. (2008). The Postgratuate Research Handbook. Palgrave McMillan.
85