WORLD CITIES CULTURE FINANCE REPORT

2017 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report

Contents

Report Headlines 5

Introduction 6

Why is this report needed? 6 What is the specific focus of the report? 7 Is there a ‘best’ way to fund culture? 8 How the research was undertaken: scope, challenges and key terms 9 The art of the possible: an exploratory study 11 Comparative analysis 13 Culture-dedicated direct expenditure 13 Other public funders 22 Indirect public funding and private giving 24 New funding models 28 Recent trends 29 Future research and policy agenda 30 City Profiles

Amsterdam 35 Brussels 43 Istanbul 51 London 59 Los Angeles 67 Moscow 75 New York 83 Paris 91 San Francisco 99 Seoul 108 Shanghai 116 Shenzhen 124 Stockholm 132 Sydney 140 Tokyo 148 Toronto 156

Acknowledgements and research partners 162

Special Thanks 163

Credits 164

2 3 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report

Report Headlines

Worldwide, the cultural sector is funded • In United States cities, culture by a complex mix of earned income, funding is dominated by private public funding, private sponsorship giving. Outside of the US, with the and charitable donations. Cultural exception of Tokyo, no other city has policymakers need to be resourceful and more than 19% of total funding from aware of the full ‘toolkit’ of options that private sources. can be used to help support culture in world cities. • Individuals dominate private giving to culture in the US and UK. This is the first global comparative study Corporations dominate private on how culture is financed in world giving in Asia. cities. It draws on detailed quantitative and qualitative data provided by sixteen • Indirect public funding, including members of the World Cities Culture tax breaks and fiscal incentives, is Forum. Its key findings include: growing in importance. Cities need to get better at capturing this and • Capital cities attract a large share of measuring its impact. national culture budgets because of the size and extent of their historic • New models of funding – such cultural infrastructure. as social finance and public match funding for crowdfunding • In three cities – Paris, Moscow and campaigns – are starting to appear. London – well over $1 billion of However it is too early, and they are public, culture-dedicated money is too small-scale, for their effects to spent per year. be measured.

• San Francisco, New York City and • Institutional complexity in public Shanghai fund culture primarily at funding has increased in most the world city level, with almost no world cities, but this means role for national government. data is harder to capture and analyse. Policymakers also need • Over one-third of all public direct to ensure that policy is joined up culture funding is provided by local across diverse institutions and government. stakeholders.

• Chinese cities are placing a greater priority on investing in newer and more commercial cultural forms, and in the creative industries in particular.

New4 York Brooklyn Bridge. Photo © Alexandra Neuber, NYC& Co. 5 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Introduction

Introduction

This report is the first global comparative full ‘toolkit’ of options that can be used What is the specific focus of and reports on initiatives aiming to 1/ For instance, the two study attempting to unravel and shed to help support culture in world cities. the report? encourage it. largest public funders of light on the complex question of how the UK’s performing arts culture is financed in world cities. It Funding for culture is a complicated We focus on two important gaps in the Once it is possible to identify and and music sector provided draws on detailed quantitative and subject. In most countries and cities, quantify both public funding and private £0.92bn in funding evidence: public funding and private in 2014 [Arts Council qualitative data provided by sixteen the cultural sector is a mixed economy: giving. Although public funding is giving, then ultimately it will be possible England (Grant in Aid and members of the World Cities Culture some organisations are wholly for generally not the biggest component of to derive a value for earned income Lottery) = £0.68bn (Arts Council England Annual Forum, covering: profit, some are publicly-owned and 1/ within the cultural sector. 2/ revenues to culture, it is almost always Report 2014/15) and the others are not-for-profit independents present, even when delivered indirectly. English local authorities • how cultural expenditure is financed and charities. These organisations rely Having data about the public funding of = £0.24bn (DCLG Local • the mechanisms through which on a combination of earned income, Authority Revenue Outturn culture is important because: Summary 2014-15)]. resources are distributed and public funding, private sponsorship and While the total turnover invested (including new financial charitable donations, with the precise • Public funding of culture is used of the sector is not widely models that are being launched and mix varying according to local context. to achieve a wide variety of public published (which would tested) be the proper comparison policy goals, usually goals that to use), the much smaller Public funding for culture is provided by would not be met in their entirety (or figure for the Gross Value It focuses primarily on two important different tiers of government, from the would be less equitably achieved) if Added of the sector gaps in the evidence: public funding and nation state down to local government, was still comfortably left to the market. It is the only form more than five times this private giving. each with their own defined scope and of funding in the cultural sector that value, at £5.4bn over powers with regards to culture. Further explicitly has to act in the public’s the same period (DCMS 2015 Creative Industries complicating the landscape, in many interest and for which the state is Why is this report needed? Economic Estimates). countries and cities public funding goes directly accountable. not just to publicly-owned organisations, Thirty-three world cities are members of but also to not-for-profits and sometimes • Knowing how much public money 2/ This is because total the World Cities Culture Forum. We aim also for-profit enterprises. is being spent, by whom and in to collect data that helps member cities revenues in culture = what ways, provides valuable A (Earned income) + reflect upon their policies and practice This complexity has so far largely management information as well as B (Public funding) + C – and, if necessary, to improve their stymied researchers, leading to an opportunities for knowledge sharing (Private giving). As the effectiveness and impact. value of all revenues are almost complete lack of published and learning. represented in the turnover research on how public authorities (in of the cultural sector (T A great deal of public and private money particular) fund culture in cities. This • State funding is often designed = A+B+C), which can be is spent on supporting culture in our report is a first contribution towards calculated in many cities to incentivise others to invest in from official government member cities, and others like them. Yet giving cities the knowledge they need culture. statistics, then earned no one really knows quite how much is to understand and assess the cultural income A = T-(B+C). spent, nor by whom – let alone where funding landscape. Private giving to culture is also an this money goes and the impact of this important focus for this research. In spending. These are serious gaps for some cities, particularly in the United policymakers. States, private giving – by individuals, trusts and foundations and companies Finding insights to fill these gaps is – is larger than state investment. In vital, particularly now. Public finances, other cities it is relatively insignificant, consumers’ disposable income, but some national governments are corporate sponsorship and the value of experimenting with tax incentives in the endowments and financial investments hope that these will encourage private are all volatile and or/under pressure in giving. This report seeks to quantify today’s world. Cultural policymakers individual and corporate philanthropy need to be resourceful and aware of the

6 7 World Cities Culture Finance Report Introduction World Cities Culture Finance Report Introduction

Is there a ‘best’ way to fund over significantly) in order to secure their 3/ Ernst & Young (2006) culture? backing. However, when philanthropy The way to cultural is driven by corporate giving, or when diversity in tax policies: There are strong differences of opinion individual giving is dominated by the The Ernst & Young very wealthy, many worry that the kind of international survey on – both within and between cities and tax policies in the cultural countries – on the ‘best’ approach to culture that is produced becomes overly sector. funding culture. influenced by the world view of a small number of powerful donors. 4/ Directorate General Each city and country has its own mix of Internal Policies of funding models, strongly influenced by: There is no easy resolution to these the Union: Culture debates. Nonetheless, the critiques and Education (2006) described suggest that no one form of Financing the Arts and Culture in the European • stage of development and relative culture funding on its own is likely to Union. wealth provide a better outcome than some • the political and administrative combination of multiple forms of funding. division of responsibilities between nation state, region/province, city Because of the lack of data, the debate and local government over funding for culture tends to rely • the wider political economy of on theoretical critiques associated the country (and in particular, by with political ideology, rather than on attitudes to the market). engagement with evidence.

At one extreme, government investment A very small body of comparative work is seen as the best guarantee that the on the public funding of culture exists at the national level, but this is limited interests of all of the public – as opposed focuses on revenue funding, excluding Image: Courtesy of 3/ How the research was undertaken to only the wealthy or well-educated, for to particular funding mechanisms or capital expenditure. Where relevant, we City of Toronto. instance – will be served. State funding is to particular regional blocs. 4/ No-one Our research tackles the complexity of the have provided information on capital seen as differing from the market in that has previously attempted to undertake subject head on. We have captured and expenditure within the narrative of the it views culture not only as a commodity systematic empirical research examining de-duplicated data on public expenditure city chapters, and within the narrative on but as a common inheritance, linked to different systems of public funding in on culture at all relevant government private giving in the comparative analysis. individual and collective identity, which a comparative context in world cities. levels. For the large majority of our cities needs to be nurtured and sustained. The interweaving of the various public this is three levels: national/federal, world As in previous WCCF reports, we have At the other extreme, public funding of funding streams that occurs at the world city (usually the metropolitan area/city started with the UNESCO definition of culture is seen as too prone to capture by city level significantly increases the region), and local (the combination of local culture. To simplify data gathering, we special interests (particularly producers of complexity of the research, but it is at this authorities or municipalities that make collapsed the six UNESCO domains into culture at the expense of audiences), too city level where the articulation between up the world city). By de-duplicating, three (Arts; Cultural heritage; Creative bureaucratic and inefficient in operation, cultural policy and sustainable urban we mean that we have avoided double industries), hoping that this would enable and too prone to state interference in development takes place. counting expenditure streams. For cities to report on the broad sectoral content and freedom of speech. instance, where money from national profile of public funding. In practice, this government is given to local authorities proved impossible as many/most budget Philanthropy is not immune from for them to spend as they wish on culture, lines and expenditure items (at different similar debates. When it is driven by this has been counted at the local level levels of government) combine funds individual giving, many see it as a and not at the national level. related to all domains. Similarly it was strongly democratic form of funding, also impossible to consistently identify which requires cultural organisations The quantitative data reported in the how particular expenditures related to the to understand and respond to their overview of each city chapter, and different stages of the culture cycle (e.g. audiences and supporters (who cross reviewed in the comparative analysis, production, exhibition, consumption).

8 9 World Cities Culture Finance Report Introduction World Cities Culture Finance Report Introduction

Private Public This research is primarily concerned The ‘most recent’ year for which data Sponsorships Private giving Indirect funding Direct funding culture-dedicated with expenditure. However, the city’s is available inevitably varies between case studies also show how public cities. To aid comparison, all financial money is raised for the cultural sector, data has been converted into US other than from general taxation. In dollars and one fixed conversion particular, they identify whether there rate has been chosen for each city

Non-culture are any specific ‘hypothecated’ taxes (depending on the date of the data). dedicated (taxes that produce revenues that are ring fenced for a particular purpose) which support culture. They also identify cities that are experimenting with new models, whether public or private, to raise funding for culture.

Table 1. City City name World city level Regional level Local level definitions used in Amsterdam Amsterdam N/A 7 city districts this report Metropolitan Area We have divided the data collection into Public indirect funding: Brussels Brussels-Capital N/A 19 municipalities three main categories, with a number of Region (including City of sub-divisions: ‘Tax expenditures,’ the value of tax Brussels) reliefs applied to the cultural sector. Istanbul Istanbul province N/A 39 district Public direct funding: They are called ‘expenditures’ because municipalities they represent a cost to the state of London Greater London N/A 32 boroughs and • Culture-dedicated funding: money which would otherwise have City of London Mainly expenditures by ministries been collected as tax revenue. The of culture and culture departments, more common term, fiscal incentives, Los Angeles Los Angeles County California State 88 municipalities ‘arms length bodies’ (ALBs) alludes to an important feature of tax Moscow City of Moscow N/A 11 prefectures responsible for grant making expenditures: they are designed to New York New York City New York State 5 boroughs such as arts councils, and cultural incentivise other actors (beyond the Paris Île-de-France N/A 1,281 municipalities programmes funded by other state) to invest in culture. For example, departments (e.g. cultural education individuals and businesses that want San Francisco City and County of California State N/A programmes funded by education to donate to culture, or production San Francisco departments). companies that are seeking a location in Seoul Seoul Special City N/A 25 Gu which to shoot and make films. Shanghai Shanghai Municipal N/A 15 local districts • Other public funding: District Cultural expenditures by Private giving and sponsorship: Shenzhen Shenzhen Municipal N/A 10 local districts organisations that are not culture- District dedicated and whose spending is All donations and sponsorship provided not targeted at the cultural sector by individuals, businesses, and trusts Stockholm Stockholm County N/A 26 municipalities alone, such as departments of trade and foundations. (including City of and inward investment promotion, Stockholm) international development, or health. Sydney Metropolitan Region New South Wales 43 councils of Sydney Tokyo Tokyo Metropolis N/A 62 local authorities (Tokyo prefecture) Toronto City of Toronto Ontario N/A

10 11 World Cities Culture Finance Report Introduction World Cities Culture Finance Report

Comparative analysis

The art of the possible: an know there is missing data, we have exploratory study indicated this with a question mark Capital city 50 (‘?’). Finally, we do not provide per Not capital city Undertaking this research was complex capita comparisons of the funding data and took well over 18 months to as this would overstate the degree of 40 conclude. It has required several rounds direct comparability in the data. The of correspondence and iterations of the comparative analysis uses broader data between the BOP research team categories of analysis instead. 30 and the participating cities in order to arrive at the final data set used in the By developing a shared framework and report. (Further details on how it was common approach we have produced 20 undertaken, and the data sources used, the most detailed comparative picture in are included at the back of each city existence of public funding and private case study.) giving to culture in world cities. This 10

picture is still incomplete and a work AngelesLos San Fransisco San Shanghai Shenzhen in progress. But we have been able to Stockholm London Amsterdam Paris Brussels Moscow Istanbul Tokyo Median Toronto New York Seoul Sydney This report has not overcome all of the 0% difficulties of this kind of research. Some identify the specific nature and extent Proportion of national culture budget spent on world cities, 2014-15 of the estimations and variables can be of data gaps and estimation challenges improved upon, there are also a number – the first step towards eventually of persistent data gaps, and it has not resolving them. Therefore this report been possible to collect all data equally should very much be seen as the first word on the subject of culture financing Culture-dedicated direct comfortably over $1bn of public money Figure 1. World cities across all the cities. proportion of national/ in world cities, not the last. per year in culture-dedicated funds – expenditure federal government $3.3bn, $2.4bn and $1.6bn respectively. How have we dealt with these gaps? culture budgets, First, in the comparative analysis, we The culture of cities is the product of a 2014-15 have occasionally omitted a city if unique geography and a unique history. What all three cities have in common is Source: Budget data from too many key data items are missing. The diversity of the 16 cities represented that they are all national capitals. And it is clear that capital status is important national governments, Second, we have sub-divided data in the research is great – from entirely new regional/province, beyond Paris, Moscow and London. Our categories wherever possible so that it global cities such as Shenzhen to cities world city and local is clearer what the data totals consist such as Istanbul that can trace their roots sample of cities is perfectly balanced governments / BOP of (and also what might still be missing). back for millennia, from sprawling mega between eight cities that are capitals and Consulting (2016) Third, for isolated instances where we cities such as Tokyo and Los Angeles eight that are not. The median level of to relatively compact ones, such as expenditure made by national / federal Stockholm and London. government culture budget across the cities in the study is 19.7%. As can be Yet even across this diversity, there are seen in Figure 1, all of the cities that lie noticeable patterns in the level of public below the median are all non-capital funding for culture. cities, with the (narrow) exception of Seoul. Similarly, Istanbul is the only non- Capital city status capital city that receives more than 20% of the national culture budget. (Istanbul In absolute terms, three cities are notable is a former capital and still the dominant for their scale of public culture-dedicated city in Turkey.) direct investment (as measured across all tiers of government): Paris, Moscow and London. These three large European and former imperial capitals each invest

12 13 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

NATIONAL CHAMPIONS

43% 29% New York City is unusual among the of government, polycentrism and U.S. cities: it benefits from a very large decentralisation also make a difference. 17% 1% 21% share of federal government culture 11% expenditure (19%) compared with France and the UK are ‘monocentric’ 14% 34% Los Angeles and San Francisco (both urban systems in which one city 70% 57% account for under 5%). In an indirect dominates (Paris and London 57% fashion, New York City also illustrates respectively). Within a polycentric 79% 42% the ‘capital city’ effect on national urban system such as China or the 45%

Amsterdam (337M USD)

culture budgets as it was the preeminent United States, it is harder for one city London 12% (1548M USD) 30% city in the United States from the mid- to become such a focus for national 66% Brussels (655M USD) Toronto* 28% nineteenth century through much of the government investment. Seoul

twentieth – a capital in all but name. (733MUSD) 22% Tokyo In addition to having polycentric Istanbul (864MUSD) (479M USD) Capital cities and ‘quasi’ capitals such urban systems, both China and the (655M USD) 44% Shanghai 56% as New York City and Istanbul have all United States have a high degree 29% 71% Shenzhen (707MUSD) benefitted from successive waves of of governmental decentralisation. (436M USD) Stockholm national government investment in their Regions and cities operate within a (714MUSD) Moscow cultural infrastructure – for example, the federal structure, with a high degree (2402M USD) (3291M USD) 47% 29% Paris 9% creation of national museums, theatres of autonomy in their tax raising and Los Angeles* (375M USD) Sydney* 44% or academies – in ways that newer spending powers. For these reasons, 5% New York* (473M USD) 71% (587M USD) world cities have not. These large sunk as Figure 2 shows, the bulk of public 43% San Francisco* investments have created a legacy of culture-dedicated expenditure in the 1% (189M USD)

AVERAGE revenue and capital investment, as Chinese and US cities is made at 1% 22% 13% well as generating positive localised the world city level (Shenzhen, San 92% externalities such as skilled labour pools Francisco) or shared between world city 44% and discerning audiences, which in turn level and local government (Los Angeles 38% 44% 49% create a need for further investment. In and Shanghai). This is particularly true of 98% these ways, national public funding of the Chinese cities in the research which, culture in world cities is influenced by as ‘Tier 1’ Chinese cities, are deemed 36% their historic prominence, helping to to be rich enough not to require transfer WORLD CITY LOCAL support their specialisation in culture. payments from the national government. 55% CHAMPIONS CHAMPIONS This historical process helps to explain why the share of national culture 25% budgets is highest in the major capitals of ‘old Europe,’ which typically receive more than a quarter of their national AVERAGE governments’ culture-dedicated direct expenditure.

Polycentric urban system, decentralised *Five cities have a regional National, world city and local funding of culture by city National political system Culture-dedicated public expenditure, 2014-15 tier of government as well. It has been omitted World City History and capital status are clearly here, as most cities do Figure 2. World cities’ Source: Budget data from Local important, but by no means the not receive government culture dedicated public national governments, investment from regions. only factor. When we take account expenditure broken down regional/province, world city Percentages may not of expenditure by different tiers by administrative level of and local governments / BOP add up to 100% due to government, 2014-15 Consulting (2016) rounding.

14 15 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

National champions • Although world city funding only • The two main municipal agencies accounts for 13% of overall culture- providing direct funding to artists New York’s division of responsibility between capital and We have previously identified cities which dedicated public funding in Paris, the and arts organizations in San revenue funding dominate their national culture budgets. absolute sums are very significant. Francisco are the San Francisco While many think that New York’s great cultural institutions exist For many of these cities, including The government of Paris Île-de- Arts Commission and Grants for the without any state funding, this is not true. Instead, the model that Brussels, London and Amsterdam, this France, and the eight departments Arts, a division of the Office of the has developed in New York for the Cultural Institutions Group is also means that a majority of their total that sit within it, contributed a total of City Administrator. Both agencies based on minimal revenue support but major support in terms of public expenditure on culture comes from $432m in 2013-15. The City of Paris are funded by various sources and premises and facilities, which the City continues to own to this day. New York City takes care of capital costs related to the upkeep and their national government. These could contributed $272 million. in 2015-16 their total appropriated maintenance of properties and estates, leaving the independent be called the ‘national champions’ of our budget was $32m, 0.4% of the total organisations that run the institutions to focus entirely on ‘content’ sixteen cities. World city champions city budget. In addition, the city issues. The City’s capital budget for the Department of Cultural funded the San Francisco library Affairs is 915 million USD between 2016-2019 (including City and However, in Moscow and Paris, lower- The cities with the highest share of system to the value of $117m in non-City funds). tier levels of government also make large culture-dedicated public funding at the 2015-2016. contributions to culture. This reduces world city level are San Francisco (98%), the national government’s overall share New York (92%), Shenzhen (71%) and • In New York City the Department culture, radio, film and television, of expenditure to less than 50%. For Moscow (71%). of Cultural Affairs (DCLA) is sports, news and publishing, instance: responsible for directing cultural and tourism. It directly funds 14 policy and funding local arts cultural organisations, including organizations. DCLA is the largest libraries, galleries, a symphony, Nuit Blanche 2014, local funder of art and culture in and the heritage management Brussels. Photo © Fabienne the U.S., with a budget comparable department. Together with the Cresens. Courtesy of to that of the National Endowment Publicity Department of the City of Brussels for the Arts. It provides funding Shenzhen Municipal Committee of and capital support for over 900 the Communist Party of China, the non-profit cultural organizations CSTA manages the ‘government each year, which totalled $159m in strategic funds.’ These cross 2014-15, along with a range of other government funds have been direct programming and technical established by the city to support assistance. In addition to its grant particular industries or themes. making, the Cultural Institutions In 2015-6, these funds for culture Group of 33 cultural organisations – totalled $191m, representing 62% including the Metropolitan Museum of the dedicated culture spending of of Art and the Lincoln Center – are the city. based on city-owned land and receive some operational funding • The Moscow Department of Culture from the city. Alongside the DCLA manages and funds 429 institutions investment, the city of New York at over 1,000 sites across the city, invests in the public library system, including libraries, museums, which received $352m in 2014-15. theatres, parks, recreation centres, exhibition halls, art schools, concert • Culture-dedicated spending by the halls, and cinemas. It also runs city government in Shenzhen in public events and festivals. The 2015-6 totalled $310m, or 0.4% of scale of this network of city-owned its budget, approximately the same and run institutions and activities as the national average in China. means that 4% of the city’s total The Culture, Sports and Tourism budget, $1.7bn, was spent on Administration (CSTA) includes culture in 2014-15.

16 17 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

Sydney and London are both unusual at the top quartile (‘High’) or the middle two 5/ Local champions Harvey, A. (2016) the world city level. In Sydney, there is no quartiles (‘Medium’). Funding arts and culture in tier of government that operates at the a time of austerity, report What is missing from Figure 3 above world city level that has a culture budget. In this overall analysis, taking into for Arts Council England is the local dimension. For many cities London’s world city government, the and the New Local local provision of public direct culture- account all levels of government, the Government Network. Greater London Authority (GLA), is the effect of being a capital city is less clear. dedicated funding is very important: most unusual of the sixteen cities in that There is just one ‘national champion’ as on average, more than one third of it is a strategic authority that does not outlined above (London), although no expenditure is provided by local directly provide services itself. Its small capital city has ‘low’ national funding for government. It is particularly important cultural budget reflects this strategic culture. But otherwise the capital cities in the following cities. role, although the $19m that the GLA are relatively dispersed across the matrix. spent on culture in 2015-16 does account Seoul and Tokyo, and even Amsterdam, • Los Angeles County is very for 5% of the total GLA budget. Sub- have a rough balance between national decentralised and consists of 88 national public expenditure on culture and world city level, in addition to municipalities, each of which is in Greater London is instead driven by Moscow’s position as beneficiary of both free to adopt their own approach to the 33 London boroughs. Even after major national and world city funding. culture. Collectively they accounted making cuts of 19% in their overall arts for 55% of all direct culture- and culture budgets between 2010 and There is also no clear pattern by dedicated public funding in LA. As 2015, 5/ local authorities accounted for geographic regional bloc. Seoul and with other US cities, the large bulk 27% of all culture-dedicated direct public Tokyo are very different from the Chinese of public culture-dedicated funding expenditure in Greater London in 2014-15. cities and Toronto is different from the was devoted to the public library other North American US cities, which system: in LA’s case this represents As it is visually difficult to scale cities each have their differences in turn. The 90% of local expenditure. against three axes (National; World city; same applies with regard to European Local), Figure 3 below shows the share of cities. All of which suggests that political • Shanghai’s 15 districts are culture-dedicated public direct funding systems that exist at both the national responsible for funding cultural by National and World city government level and the world city level are far more activities and local ‘public culture’ and music conservatories. Some Tokyo Roppongi Art only. It displays whether the share of important in determining the levels of institutions, including libraries, municipalities group themselves Night 2012. Photo © expenditure for each source is in the culture centres and museums. into larger municipal associations Alexis Haulot, courtesy direct culture-dedicated public funding of Tokyo Metropolitan bottom quartile across the cities (‘Low’), than any wider geo-political groupings. Beyond this standard provision, they with combined budgets; these Paris Government may set up discretionary additional Île-de-France municipal associations funds for culture, such as Fengxian collectively spent $79m on cultural district’s ‘Xian culture’ grants. Their projects in 2014-15. combined culture budgets for 2016 WORLD CITY LEVEL Figure 3. Contribution totalled $402m, 57% of Shanghai’s • Tokyo’s 62 local authorities are High Medium Low of world cities’ culture- dedicated public public investment in culture. responsible for funding local arts and High direct expenditure cultural projects, and managing local Amsterdam, London made by national / cultural facilities and cultural heritage Toronto, Brussels • In Paris, municipalities play an federal government important role in financing culture, sites. Their total culture budget ranked against world was $274m in 2015-16. A liaison Medium city level government, despite their very small size: there are Moscow, Istanbul, Sydney, 2014-15 1,281 municipalities in the Paris Île- committee established by the Tokyo New York Seoul, Tokyo Stockholm, Paris de-France region alone. In 2015, the Metropolitan Government (TMG) Budget data from Source: total budget for municipalities in the includes Heads of Cultural Policy NATIONAL LEVEL NATIONAL national governments, Low regional/province, region was estimated to be $1.1 billion from all local authorities, and serves Shenzhen, Shanghai, to coordinate cultural policy between San Fransisco Los Angeles world city and local (excluding Ville de Paris budget). governments / BOP Funding areas primarily focus on the local authorities and the TMG. Consulting (2016) libraries, multi-media libraries Proportion of national vs city-level funding across world cities, 2014-15

18 19 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

Chinese New Year What are the governance and Grant-funded independent Launch, Dawns Points, Sydney. Photo management models of organisations in organisations. courtesy of City of receipt of direct public funds? Sdyney The most widespread model, common A variety of models co-exist in the across all cities, is funding a relatively cultural sector. The vertically integrated small number of key cultural institutions or ‘statist’ model of cultural policy, – often referred to as ‘portfolio’ funding. whereby governments own, manage This is often the preferred choice of and fund their own in-house cultural national culture departments, such as in institutions, is relatively rare at world city the UK, the Netherlands and France. level – it is only characteristic of Moscow and, to a lesser extent, Shanghai. It is Portfolio organisations benefit from the much more common at local authority fact that funding is often multi-year; this level across many cities. brings stability and allows organisations to more easily cover core costs. However, There are two alternative modes of there are potential downsides for funders. provision: Once established, portfolios are often static, and this lack of challenge or Outsourced management. competition can result in inertia and Which cultural domains are funded cultural sectors. A key focus is the stagnation. Therefore ‘open’ grant funding via direct culture-dedicated public creative industries: In Istanbul, ‘Culture Co’ is an enterprise is an alternative and/or accompaniment expenditure? arm established in 1989 for administering to portfolio forms of funding, providing • In Shenzhen in 2016 there were the cultural venues owned by Istanbul smaller amounts that are generally In general it has been impossible to two culture-related funds: the Metropolitan Municipality (IMM), awarded over shorter time periods. determine which cultural domains are Development of the Culture organising festivals and events, and the beneficiaries of public expenditure. Industries and Culture Promotion generating revenue through ticket • The City of Stockholm is an However, there are two areas where it is Fund, and the Culture and Creative and book sales. In 2014-15, the IMM example of a city that has changed more possible to generalise. Industries Fund. Together these budget for Culture Co was $82m, 26% its funding system to include funds totalled $191m, representing of all public direct funds to culture at funding for individual projects as In both London and the United States 62% of the dedicated culture the world city level. A similar, though well as organisations, with special cities (New York, San Francisco and spending of the city. not-for-profit version, exists in Tokyo. development funding available for Los Angeles), local spending is heavily The Tokyo Metropolitan Foundation innovative initiatives. This decision focused on the public library system, • In Shanghai, the Office of Shanghai for History and Culture receives $65m, was taken in 2011 in order to actively accounting for between 60-73% of Cultural and Creative Industry approximately 33% of the budget of promote structural change in the expenditure. Why might this be? Of the Promotion and Leading Group, is the Culture Promotion Division of the sector and prioritise reaching new culture sector as a whole, public libraries in charge of a fund which awarded Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s audiences which better reflect the are the least able to generate other $47m in grants in 2015. Bureau of Citizens and Cultural Affairs. multicultural nature of Stockholm. revenues, as their key public purpose is It is responsible for administering Tokyo to provide free or very low cost access to With less ‘legacy’ cultural infrastructure Metropolitan Government’s nine arts and • Shenzhen has also used grant funding, knowledge. In London (and the UK more in which to invest, it appears that culture facilities as well as funding Arts via the two strategic funds outlined widely), they are also the only elements of Chinese cities are placing a greater Council Tokyo. above, to open up funding beyond local authority cultural provision that are priority on investing in newer and more government affiliated organisations. In statutory by law. commercial cultural forms. 2014, almost 400 project grants were awarded to non-governmental cultural In China, both Shanghai and Shenzhen organisations from these funds as the have created ‘strategic’ cross- city moves towards a more ‘market- government funds to support their oriented’ culture sector.

20 21 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

Other public funders Housing Authority, and the New York City Muzeon Park of Arts. Photo © Savintsev Department of Transportation among Egor, courtesy of Many people may not realise that public others. This provides a great illustration Moscow Institute for funds from departments other than of how culture can work horizontally Social and Cultural culture ministries flow into the cultural across multiple policy agendas. Programs sector. For instance, many education budgets have long included expenditure But the range and diversity of on culture and arts education. Over departments that directly invest into the last two decades, there has been culture in New York is not common. More increasing interest across other city typically, departments with the following government departments in how culture responsibilities seem to be the most can help them to achieve their own engaged in funding cultural activities agendas, whether this is increasing the across the sixteen cities. appeal and vitality of city centres and neighbourhoods, attracting tourists • Education. Education departments and inward investment, adding new at all government levels frequently knowledge-based jobs or helping fund arts and cultural education to tackle complex social and health initiatives – in Tokyo, Shenzhen, problems. Seoul, London, San Francisco, Paris and Moscow. While funding The progressive integration of culture levels are not known for every city, with other areas of urban policy is the sums can be very significant. something that the World Cities Culture Mirroring Paris and Moscow’s high Forum champions. It is therefore levels of direct culture-dedicated gratifying that all of the cities report funds, spending on arts and cultural some level of additional funding education provided by Education flowing into their cultural sectors from departments comfortably runs into other public funders, even if these are the hundreds of $ millions per year. • Economic development and typically quite modest in comparison to business support. These Fashion provides the golden thread in culture-dedicated funds. However, it is • City promotion: tourism and departments in the Asian cities of Brussels extremely challenging to disaggregate inward investment. Culture is Shanghai, Shenzhen and Seoul all The soon to be opened Mode And Design non-culture budgets in order to identify funded as a distinctive asset that is provide economic development and promoted as part of city marketing Centre in Brussels (MAD Brussels) what element goes towards culture. It business support to the creative provides a textbook example of how a has not been possible to quantify this campaigns (Istanbul, Los Angeles), industries, with varying degrees of range of other public funders have come consistently and comprehensively within and as a key tourist ‘product’ focus – from fashion in Shenzhen to together to invest in a major new facility our research. Despite this, a narrative (New York, Sydney, Los Angeles, animation, games and digital media for the creative and cultural sector in the Belgium capital. While over 2m EUR of review of the information provided by Paris). Alongside these consumer in Seoul. Paris also has a number cities suggests a number of trends. promotion strategies, some city-wide public funding will have been invested in of economic development policies the facility when it opens in 2017, hardly any inward investment and marketing and business support services to (around 50,000 EUR) has come from the The range of departments and agencies, such as The Stockholm support creative industries (mainly culture budgets of the City of Brussels and organisations that additionally fund Business Region, also undertake audiovisual, literature, performing Wallonia-Brussels Federation. Funders instead include the Tourism Department culture across the cities can be very B2B marketing for the cultural sector arts) and cultural start-ups. wide. For example, in New York these (in this case to bring more film of the City of Brussels, the Ministry for production to the Stockholm region Employment and Economy, the Ministry for include the Department for the Aging, Mobility and the Ministry for Environment of Department of Corrections, Department and to facilitate the film industry’s Brussels Region, as well as the European of Probation, Department of Youth and contacts within the city). Regional Development Fund. Community Development, New York City www.mad.brussels

22 23 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

The case studies show that our cities Indirect public funding and In the cultural sector tax expenditures have already had some success in private giving often have a relationship to the amount embedding culture within wider city of private giving and sponsorship government priorities – making culture ‘Tax breaks’ or ‘fiscal incentives’ funding, because government policy has the ‘golden thread’ of urban policy. give certain categories of taxpayers set in place incentives and rewards for Some are increasing the proportion of (businesses or individuals, depending such activity. For this reason, Figure 4 money coming from other public funders. on the specific tax) a decrease in the below includes proportionate estimates But aside from cultural education, where tax they pay. This can range from of tax expenditures and private giving funding is often substantial, the sums total exemption, to reduced rates and sponsorship money, as well as provided by other public funders tend to for particular types of taxpayer or the other two main categories of tax be relatively small. on particular types of goods (e.g. expenditures in culture (AV media artists’ materials), through to tax ‘production incentives’ and ‘operational Hypothecated taxes credits that are redeemable against incentives’, which relate to exemptions tax provided that a particular qualified and reductions for cultural organisations Further funds flow into the culture sector action has taken place (e.g. donated from standard taxes such as VAT or in some cities from ‘hypothecated’ taxes. to a cultural organisation, invested in land taxes). These are taxes imposed on categories film production). As they result in a of goods and services whose proceeds decrease in tax proceeds collected by Quantifying tax expenditures is can only be spent on a designated governments, they are also collectively challenging. For private giving and and specific purpose – in this case, referred to as ‘tax expenditures.’ production incentives, it often requires culture. While the money raised through calculations to be made at a national hypothecated taxes is paid either by the Tax expenditures level and then an estimate to be derived public or some element of the business for the world city level. Even then, for community (depending on the specific Tax expenditures are the key method some tax expenditures – particularly tax), the setting and collection of the tax for the indirect public funding of culture. the operational incentives provided is undertaken by the state. They are more often set at national/ regarding ‘generic’ taxes such as VAT federal level, though some world city and property tax – it has not been Los Angeles and Toronto both have governments have also implemented possible to estimate a value for these hypothecated taxes that benefit the them where they have tax raising and (with the exception of Moscow). As a cultural sector. LA operates a 1% spending powers. In relation to culture, rule, where a ‘?’ exists in Figure 4, we transient occupancy tax (a tax on hotel there are two distinct kinds of tax know that a particular type of incentive rooms) which generates about $11 expenditures: exists, but it has not been possible million per year for the Department of to quantify it. There has been less Cultural Affairs. Toronto has established • Culture-specific tax expenditures, consistent reporting of audio-visual a tax on billboards in the city which goes such as tax incentives for film media production incentives, which to an arts and culture reserve fund. and other audio-visual media appears to be related to the fact that production, which are significant for they are not administered by world both London and Toronto. city culture departments and the data is therefore more difficult to obtain. • More general tax expenditures, As the figures for London and Toronto such as individual and corporate demonstrate, these expenditures can be significant. tax breaks for giving to charitable Quais de Seine, Paris. organisations (of which there are Photo © JARRY- many in the cultural sector). These are TRIPELON/CRT Paris- important in all the North American Ile de France cities, as well as in Paris and London.

24 25 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

Private vs. public funding by city, 2014-15 Private giving and sponsorship but this is relatively modest as a share 6/ of overall giving and public funding (4- Giving USA 2014. Figure 4 Percentage breakdown of public 15%). Notably, it is the North European, 7/ funding and private giving and sponsorship The big story revealed by Figure 4 is the Research is thin on the revenues by source, 2014-15 extent of private giving and sponsorship non-Francophone cities of London and Amsterdam that benefit from the highest ground, but research revenues generated in North American undertaken for 2005 cities, primarily in the United States. levels of private giving and sponsorship. showed that 93% of In these cities, philanthropy and individual giving to the sponsorship accounts for 50% or There are also differing profiles of private arts was given by those Stockholm (714M USD) 100 earning $200,000 and more of total public and private funding giving between the regional blocs. In the above (Tax Policy Center, North American cities and Anglophone 2012). Shanghai (707M USD) 100 (excluding earned revenue). The high water mark is New York, which receives London, philanthropy is dominated Shenzhen (443M USD) 100 more donations to cultural institutions by individual giving. For instance, in than in any other U.S. state, and where 2014, individual giving (not including Paris (3544M USD) 4 93 3 70% of all public and fundraised income bequests) accounted for 72% of all comes from philanthropic sources. giving to the arts in the United States. Brussels (712M USD) 3 92 5 6/ In comparison, in Tokyo – the only Amsterdam (371M USD) 8 91 1 The United States as a whole has prided Asian city that benefits from a major itself on creating what is regularly component of private giving – individual Sydney (412M USD) 9 91 reported to be the best conditions giving is estimated to account for a little over 4% of philanthropic funds. Further, Moscow (2942M USD) 1 91 8 to support individual giving in the world. The federal government in the while data is not available at the city Seoul (1063M USD) 15 81 4 U.S. incentivises private charitable level, existing evidence at the national contributions by forgoing 33-35 cents in level in the U.S. strongly suggests that City average 20 73 2 4 1 tax revenue for each dollar donated to individual giving to the arts in the country a non-profit organisation. This level of is indeed dominated by the wealthy and Toronto (1098M USD) 1 67 33 government support has been granted by large gifts and donations. 7/ London (2606M USD) 19 61 1 20 as the incentive is seen as a democratic form of funding that allows the actions of There are a number of examples of Tokyo (1276M USD) 45 54 individual citizens to guide government relatively recent tax measures brought spending (through foregone tax receipts). in by governments to incentivise private Los Angeles (910M USD) 45 52 3 giving, but they have had limited impact. San Francisco (624M USD) 61 35 4 Also noteworthy in Figure 4 is the degree In Seoul, donations made by individuals of similarity between cities in the other and corporations to arts and culture New York (2338M USD) 70 26 4 regional blocs. The Asian cities raise organisations via the national Arts comparatively very little culture funding Council Korea are 100% tax deductible through private giving and sponsorship. for individuals and 50% tax deductible The one big exception to this rule is for corporations. Despite this incentive, Tokyo. Corporations and foundations individual giving to the arts and culture are the main private funders of arts remains relatively low, representing only Source: Direct expenditure obtained 0.2% of total individual donations at Public direct Public indirect % - Private giving & and culture in Japan and in 2012-13 production incentive sponsorship from budget data from national they gave $525 million to the arts and the national level, but 5% of total governments, regional/province, Public indirect % - Public indirect % - Unquantifiable culture in Tokyo – more than double corporate donations. giving incentive operational incentive incentive world city and local governments; indirect expenditure estimates the direct culture budget of the Tokyo derived from Treasury/Finance/ Metropolitan Government. Similarly, the national Gift and Tax department reported data; Inheritance Tax Act (Geefwet) in the philanthropy data from industry European cities all benefit from some Netherlands, which came into effect surveys / BOP Consulting (2016) private giving and sponsorship funding, nation-wide in 2012 for a five-year

26 27 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

Gretchtenfestival, New funding models Amsterdam. Courtesy of City of Amsterdam Our research has highlighted some of the new methods that city governments and other bodies are currently exploring in order to channel funds into the cultural sector. There are three broad categories of model/intervention currently being pursued across the cities.

Financial instruments

• While many cities have • New York is using Participatory China Art Museum, Budgeting to allow city residents Shanghai. Photo © crowdfunding platforms that operate Zhenliang Ye, courtesy within their territories, three cities to participate in the allocation of of Shanghai Theatre (Seoul, Stockholm and Sydney) discretionary capital funds through Academy are experimenting with providing a year-long series of public meetings public sector match funding for the culminating in a public vote, sums raised by the public via their organized by City Council districts. crowdfunding campaigns. Sydney A number of cultural projects are incentivising crowdfunding have been funded through this further via making individuals’ mechanism, including BRIC, Reel crowdfunded investments on Works, and ArtBuilt. one platform tax deductible. The Paris government meanwhile has Finance related to property trial period, aims to encourage private initiated the Funds for Paris which donations to cultural institutions through Capital campaigns are a vital element offers up to 66% tax deductions • San Francisco is addressing of private giving in the cultural sector offering a 125% multiplier. Donations to for patronage to finance heritage high property prices through its so-called ‘public benefit’ organisations Given the fluctuations of capital restoration projects. Community Arts Stabilization Trust with cultural status provide additional investment on a year-to-year basis, we (CAST), a non-profit trust that brings income tax benefits. According to have not included capital expenditure • Shanghai has instituted a Special together public and private funds recent evaluations, the Geefwet has had in the current research. However, when Purpose Investment vehicle, the first to purchase property assets for a limited impact, primarily increasing considering private giving revenues, it cultural organisations. would be a distortion not to mention the to receive approval from the China donations in large cities and to large importance of capital campaigns that Securities Regulatory Commission, institutions. focus on private fundraising for new or which invests both in the traditional • Moscow is offering subsidised or refurbished cultural buildings. Examples cultural sector and in tourism, free tenancy in state-owned historic These findings suggest that there are are plentiful across the 16 cities in the design and the leisure industries. buildings, in exchange for capital likely to be ingrained cultural attitudes study. For instance, LVMH invested It also helps cultural and creative investment in restoration and upkeep. to individual giving that may take much 143 million USD to build its non-profit art museum, the newly opened Guanfu institutions to restructure and longer to address, and require different Museum in Shanghai, which is located on become publicly traded. Business models or complementary strategies and tactics the 37th floor of the world’s second tallest from those that focus solely on the building, Shanghai Centre. Of the 422 • In the UK, a number of funders • In Amsterdam, a musicians’ operation of the tax system. million USD construction cost for the New and investors are experimenting cooperative is supporting its York Whitney Museum of American Art performance space using a model new building at the Meatpacking District, with applying social investment 367 million USD was from private sources. models to cultural organisations. At that combines artist investment with the organisational level, London’s audience subscription. Globe Theatre has become the first organisation in the country to establish its own Social Impact Bond.

28 29 World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis World Cities Culture Finance Report Comparative Analysis

Recent trends A third trend is the ‘policy learning’ 8/ Future research and This research has shown how and transfer of policies and incentives In 2012, the UK’s national culture department policy agenda complicated assessing the funding of Several cities are presently seeking to encourage private giving. This has launched the ‘Catalyst’ culture in world cities remains when to re-balance their cultural funding mainly flowed from the United States to programme, a £100m This first WCCF Finance Report provides looking across multiple administrative other countries. three-year grant fund levels, and across public and some ecosystems. designed to help the a wealth of systematically assembled country’s cultural sector to and scrutinised data where previously private sources of funding. It is clear Most obviously the level of culture- All these trends address some of the get better at fundraising. there was very little. Yet there still that, from an institutional perspective, £68m was administered dedicated public funding is declining in wider critiques of the public funding of remain many gaps and areas that can culture is a more complicated field than culture – that it gets captured by special in the arts by Arts Council European cities such as Amsterdam and England with the rest in be improved upon. Some of the clearest many other areas of urban policy. In London, and also in Seoul and Sydney. interests, that it creates organisations heritage, managed by the opportunities are: governance and management terms, the Policymakers within government and that can be distant from their audiences, Heritage Lottery Fund. state is very rarely the sole or even main that government has too much control, The Arts Council scheme other key funding agencies (e.g. Arts provided a number • greater consistency in reporting provider for cultural goods and services. Councils) are therefore using a number that it is too bureaucratic. Yet the private of means of support, production incentives for film and There are good reasons as to why this is of measures to support and facilitate giving incentives, in particular, do not including match funding other audio-visual media production so, and they seem quite constant across seem to be bearing fruit at the moment – of donations raised up to different city and country contexts. organisations in the sector to raise a capped limit, as well as more traded and private giving income. at least not in cities such as Amsterdam grants for organisations • more consistent identification of But this institutional complexity has These measures include tax incentives, and Seoul. It could be simply too early to to use as they wished to private giving and sponsorship implications for both research and policy. improve their fundraising, public match-funding of crowdfunding tell at this stage, or it could be that these funding, and assessment of approaches cannot be transplanted whether this was spending (see ‘New financial models’ below), and on wealth screening for the feasibility of consistently It is clear that cities that involve a higher training/building capacity within cultural to these different contexts in the ways donors, training for staff, disaggregating this by type (e.g. number of institutions/stakeholders currently being trialled. hiring fundraising experts individual, trust and foundation, and use a wider range of mechanisms organisations to improve their fundraising or spending on cultivation ability. 8/ Achieving a shift in cultural and other fundraising corporate) in the distribution of public funds pose organisations’ finances away from direct events. a much greater challenge when it public funding will require organisations • further investigation and better comes to tracking and understanding to be more creative and innovative than quantification of expenditures by expenditure. From a policy perspective, they have been in the past. other non-culture public funders although culture’s role as the golden thread of urban policy is to be A second trend is that a number of cities • assessment of the feasibility welcomed, it poses a challenge in have moved to open up their public of estimating revenues from terms of ensuring that cultural policy funding to a wider range of cultural ‘operational’ tax incentives is ‘joined up’: that it is coherent and organisations and projects. In Shenzhen does not unnecessarily duplicate effort and Moscow, the emphasis is on • identification of overall turnover or resources. The city chapters of the bringing public funding to institutions in the cultural sector for each city, current research can be considered as which are not government owned or in order to derive an estimate for building blocks of a joined-up approach run. In Stockholm, the emphasis is on earned/traded income as they contain essential knowledge on reaching underserved audiences better the funding landscape. We hope this and bringing innovation into the sector • increasing the number and range of report will hopefully trigger a range of by offering project funding as well as cities in the research to enhance the conversations and debate, not least on organisational grant funding. assessment of factors that might how resources can be better aligned to be influencing the nature of funding deliver the shared goal of sustainable regimes for culture. urban development.

30 31 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report

City Profiles

IMAGE

32 Photo courtesy of Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture 33 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Amsterdam

Data based on 2013-16 funding schemes

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 337M USD (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect 6M USD National World City 43% Private giving & sponsorship 29M USD 57%

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

84% Ministry for Education, 77% Department for Culture and Science Arts and Culture

16% Ministry 16% Department for for Education, Arts and Culture Culture and Science 7% Amsterdam Fund for the Arts (AFK)

National 193M USD World City 144M USD Local

Basic Cultural Infrastructure Plan for the Arts – portfolio 7 local districts portfolio Budget not available Public libraries and local media Six Public Cultural Funds Project-based grants

De Rode Hoed Photo courtesy of City of Amsterdam 34 35 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Amsterdam World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Amsterdam

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Moderately centralised, At a national level, culture is managed Arts (AFK), which has a budget of 10 with a majority of funding from national level. by the Ministry for Education, Culture million USD. It offers both a Professional and Science, which funds a portfolio of Arts scheme and a Cultural Participation (Amsterdam receives a higher percentage of funding 83 cultural organisations via its Basic Scheme aimed at increasing participation from the national government than other cities in Cultural Infrastructure (BIS) scheme. in the arts beyond that taking place in the Netherlands.) Figures for local spending are not Of these institutions, 24 are based in schools. It supports a wide range of Amsterdam, and they account for 40% organisations, with a focus on audience available. of the total national grant, totalling 162 development, new finance models, million USD. The current BIS scheme and local cultural identity. In addition, Percentage of national culture budget: 33% runs from 2013 until 2016. cultural organisations will be able to apply for innovation funding, based on their The Ministry also funds six track record in developing international, Sector/institutional profile of direct public Public Cultural Funds – Fonds national and local partnerships, talent spend: Dominated by national and city support for Podiumkunsten, Mondriaan Fonds, development and cultural education. With portfolio organisations. Smaller amounts for Nederlands Filmfonds, Letterenfonds, the 2017-2020 Plan the AFK will take a Stimuleringfonds voor Creatieve bigger role in structural funding, with a libraries and projects at city level. Industrie, and Fonds Cultuurparticipatie budget of 40 million USD. – which focus on performing arts, visual Overall cultural spending profile: Little arts, design and cultural heritage, The City of Amsterdam also funds literature, creative industries, film and public libraries and local media (public information is available on philanthropy and amateur arts, cultural education and broadcasting). In 2015-16, it budgeted earned revenue. popular culture. Thirty-one cultural 20 million USD for public libraries and 3 organisations in Amsterdam received million USD for local media. a total of 31 million USD from these, Non-culture public funders: Occasional project representing 25% of the Public Cultural At the local level, the seven City funding provided by other city departments, Funds programme. Amsterdam Districts (Centrum, Nieuw-West, Noord, including Education, Diversity, Planning & receives 57% of its public culture Oost, West, Zuid and Zuidoost) play Development and Economic Affairs funding from the national government, a an important role in facilitating and proportion higher than other cities in the supporting public and informal arts in the Netherlands. city. They also provide match funding to projects supported by Amsterdam Fund Rijksmuseum At the world city level, one of the most for the Arts or private funders such as Photo © Nachtwachtzaal, important sources of funding is the the local branch of the Prins Bernhard courtesy of City of City’s Plan for the Arts. The 6th Plan Cultuurfonds. Funding from the City Amsterdam (2013-16) included structural funding of Districts is not identified in this report, 111 million USD per year for a portfolio as it is not always directly allocated as a of 146 organisations, including four ‘cultural budget.’ community cultural centres, which ‘make sure that every Amsterdammer has an opportunity to experience arts and culture throughout the city.’ The recently approved 2017-2020 Plan will allocate 120 million USD annually.

The 2013-2016 Plan also funds the project-based Amsterdam Fund for the

36 37 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Amsterdam World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Amsterdam

Other public funders In its rebuilding and refurbishment of cultural infrastructure – including Project funding for the arts and culture is the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam also provided indirectly or occasionally and the Rijksmuseum – the city has by other city departments, including emphasised economic and social return Education, Diversity, Planning & on investment. Many of these projects Development and Economic Affairs. It were funded through public-private is not, however, possible to reflect the partnerships, and some completely corresponding budgets in this report. privately. Public indirect and private New funding models funding Voordekunst is the Netherlands’ largest donation-based crowdfunding platform. The Gift and Inheritance Tax Act The platform was initiated in 2010 by (Geefwet), which came into effect the Amsterdam Fund for the Arts (AFK) nation-wide in 2012 for a five-year with a vision to support individual trial period, aims to encourage private artists and small arts organisations donations to cultural institutions through as well as raising public awareness to offering a 125% multiplier. Donations to support the arts. 10,000 donors have so-called public benefit organisations donated 13 million USD since its launch, with cultural status provide additional supporting over 1700 arts projects. The income tax benefits. According to platform received funding the Ministry of recent evaluations, the Geefwet has had Education, Culture and Science. a limited impact, primarily increasing donations in large cities and to large Amsterdam artists are also institutions. Estimated public indirect experimenting with other new financial spending to support private donations models for culture. For example, under the Geefwet initiative was 5 Splendor, set up in 2010 and run by a million USD. group of 50 professional musicians, uses a ‘cooperative model’ of a performing Estimated donations from individuals, space. The Splendor musicians each trusts, foundations and corporations to invest €1,000 (1,300 USD) and perform Amsterdam Light arts and culture in Amsterdam were 29 several concerts per year for members; Festival 2013. million USD in 2013. in exchange they are able to use the Photo © Janus van den building whenever they like for their Eijnden. Courtesy of City of Amsterdam Financial sustainability became a priority musical activities. Members pay €100 in the City of Amsterdam’s 2013-16 (USD 130) per year and have access Plan for the Arts, which focused on to 50 concerts in that time, as well as making sure that artists and cultural being able to participate alongside the organisations could excel and innovate musicians in planning for the future. despite a budget cut. It obliged them to reach new audiences and become less dependent on public funding, requiring every cultural institution to generate at least 25% of its own revenue from earned income by 2016.

38 39 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Amsterdam World Cities Culture Finance Report

Currency conversion: 1 € $ 1.329 Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

36 Percentage of national culture budget: City of Amsterdam / 2015-16 Sum of total public culture-dedicated 33% funding at national level as a percentage of total culture budget of the Ministry for Education, Culture and Science (BIS €345.7M, Culture Funds €123M)

37 Ministry of Education Basic Cultural Ministry for Education, Culture and Infrastructure funding: 162 million USD Science/ 2015-16

37 Ministry of Education Public Cultural Ministry for Education, Culture and Funds: 31 million USD Science / 2015-16

37 City of Amsterdam 6th Plan for the Arts: City of Amsterdam / 2015-16 111 million USD

37 City of Amsterdam 7th Plan for the Arts: City of Amsterdam / 2015-16 120 million USD

37 Amsterdam Fund for the Arts: City of Amsterdam / 2015-16 10 million USD

37 2017-2020 AFK funding: 40 million USD City of Amsterdam /2016

37 City of Amsterdam Public libraries City of Amsterdam /2015-16 funding: 20 million USD

37 City of Amsterdam Local media funding: City of Amsterdam /2015-16 3 million USD

38 Geefwet initiative - public indirect Centrum voor Filantropische Studies / Total individual giving and corporate funding: 5 million USD BOP / 2013 donations to culture in 2015 – €57 million and €80 million respectively (Centrum voor Filantropische Studies, Giving in the Netherlands 2015). Private giving to Amsterdam estimated by share of national GDP (7.8%, Statistics Netherlands) Public indirect funding estimated based on Geefwet theoretical model (Culturele instellingen in Nederland. Veranderingen in geefgedrag, giften, fondsenwerving en inkomsten tussen 2011 en 2014)

38 Private giving and sponsorship: Centrum voor Filantropische Studies / Estimated as total private giving and 29 million USD BOP / 2013 sponsorship to culture in Netherland (€281 million, Centrum voor Filantropische Studies, Giving in the Netherlands 2015) proportionated by Amsterdam share of national GDP (7.8%)

38 Voordekunst: 13 million USD Voordekunst / 2016

Museumplein Courtesy of City of Amsterdam 40 41 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Brussels

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 655 USD + ? National Local 75% 11% 71M USD (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) 492M USD

Public indirect 35M USD World City 14% Private giving and sponsorship 22M USD + ? 92M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

52% Ministry for Culture of 54% City of the French Community Brussels

46% 18 other municipalities

19% Secretary of State for 31% Brussels Scientific Policy Commission 15% Ministry for of the Flemish Federal Cultural 14% Flemish Ministry Community Institutions of Culture, Youth, Sports and Media 19% Brussels Commission of theFrench Community

50% Brussels-Capital Region

National 492M USD World City 92M USD Local 71M USD

Culture budget Culture budget Culture budget

Culture budget Culture budget Culture budget

Funding for cultural institutions Culture budget

Culture budget

Carte de Visite, ARTopenKUNST, Brussels Photo © Eric Danhier. Courtesy of City of Brussels 42 43 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Brussels World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Brussels

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Very fragmented, with At the national level, Belgium has conservation, education and 1/ management) totaled 50 million USD. These are the Royal limited central government responsibility for culture. no overall Ministry of Culture. This is Museums of Fine Arts, because it is a federal state which puts Other cultural spending was estimated Royal Museums of Art and Responsibility for culture – and funding – sits with most powers in the hands of its three to be 82 million, including budget to History, Royal Library of the French and Flemish linguistic Communities, support higher arts education. Belgium, State Archives Regions (based on territory) and three of Belgium, Royal Institute both as national ‘regions’ and at world city level. Communities (based on language). The for Cultural Heritage, and CEGESOMA (Centre for Small role for local government. three Communities – Flemish, French and The Flemish Ministry of Culture, Youth, German-speaking – hold responsibility Sports and Media culture budget is divided Historical Research and Documentation on War and for both culture and education. Both the between two agencies: the Agency for Contemporary Society). Percentage of national culture budget: 30% French and Flemish Communities have Arts and Heritage, and the Agency for powers in Brussels. Social Work. The Agency for Arts and Heritage implements the Arts Decree Sector/institutional profile of direct public Federal funding for culture is restricted (Kunstendecreet). In 2016 an estimated spend: National funding almost exclusively for large to support for large cultural institutions 32 million USD from the Arts Decree was institutions which are not under the control of any which are not under the control of any awarded to artists and arts organisations one Community. The Ministry for Federal in Brussels. The Agency also directly one Community. Cultural Institutions funds the La Monnaie/ supports a number of cultural institutions, De Munt National Opera, BOZAR Fine Arts such as the Brussels Philharmonic and Overall cultural funding profile: Dominated by Centre and the Belgian National Orchestra Flemish Radio Orchestra (11 million USD) in Brussels. Total funding for these and the concert hall Ancienne Belgique public direct funding, with a significant role for tax institutions was 73 million USD in 2015. (3 million USD). Other grants programmes incentives for cultural production and employment. include the Flemish Brussels Fund and Very little private giving. The Secretary of State for Scientific the Brusselse podia. Brussels received Policy funds six institutions in Brussels, 9 million USD from these other grants 1/ which received a total of 94 million and subsidies programme in 2016. The Important non-culture public funders: Many USD in 2015. In addition to the above, heritage budget in Brussels was estimated ministries involved but no data is available. they also support Cinematek (Royal to be 2 million USD. Belgian Filmarchive), a public foundation which also receives funding from the The Agency for Social Work is responsible City of Brussels and the National Lottery. for supporting local culture - public libraries, Data on the funding for the Cinematek cultural centres and local cultural activities Nuit Blanche 2014, and other cultural subsidies are not such as the David Fund. In 2016 the Agency Brussels available. for Social Work spent an estimate of 12 Photo © Photo Alexis million USD in Brussels. Haulot. Courtesy of City The Ministry for Culture of the French of Brussels Community is the largest single public At the world city level, the Brussels-Capital financer of culture in Brussels, Region is Belgium’s third federated contributing a total of 256 million USD region, having been created in 1989. In 2015 in 2015. Its approach is based on it spent 46 million USD to support culture: the principle of subsidiarity: support the budget for the Monuments and Sites for initiatives by cultural operators Directorate was 29 million USD and Screen. or associations. In 2015, a large Brussels received a budget of 5 million USD share of these subsidies went to and 7 million USD (estimate) respectively. support artistic creation (62 million), Estimated budget for other cultural projects and cultural education and cultural was 5 million USD (e.g. MAD Brussels, centres (62 million). Other direct Bright Festivals, various cultural projects to subsidies (production, dissemination, promote social cohesions).

44 45 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Brussels World Cities Culture Finance Report

The linguistic Communities within Public indirect and private the Brussels-Capital Region also funding support cultural activities: the Brussels Commission of the Flemish Community The Belgian Tax Shelter is a national has a culture budget of 29 million USD government-approved tax incentive and the Brussels Commission of the designed to encourage the production of French Community has a cultural budget audiovisual works in Belgium. In 2015 it of 17 million USD. contributed an estimate of 35 million USD to Brussel’s audiovisual sector. In 2016 it At the local level, nineteen municipalities will be expanded to cover the performing make up the Brussels-Capital Region, arts, including theatre, dance, opera spending a total of 71 million USD on and music. culture. Of these, the City of Brussels is by far the largest and most significant, The Brussels-Capital Region subsidises with a cultural budget of 38 million USD in (sometimes heavily) the employment 2016. Its per capita spending, as well as of certain categories of workers. For its absolute spending, on culture is higher example, employers get a tax break for than the other municipalities. the employment of artists, to a maximum of 682 USD per employee per month. For Other public funders some institutions this indirect subsidy can total 132,000 to 264,000 USD. A number of other government ministries and departments, at all levels of The National Lottery is a public law limited government, are involved in cultural company under the direct supervision of policy and funding. For example, at the the national Minister of the Budget and national level, the Minister of the Budget Minister of Finances. Subsidies Photo courtesy of is in charge of the National Lottery, for culture are distributed both via Tokyo Metropolitan which spends a small percentage of its Ministerial budgets, and directly via Government revenue on culture. At the regional level, sponsorship. Figures for these subsidies Minister for Equal Rights of the French are not available. Community supports events, projects and organisations which support accessibility, There is very limited private support as well as consciousness-raising activities for culture in Belgium, in part because relating to disability and LGBTQ rights. giving is not incentivised through a Other ministries and departments involved tax deduction scheme or other legal include Tourism, Promotion of Brussels, framework. In 2012, estimated corporate and Public Education. However data from sponsorship of culture in Brussels totalled these funders is not available. 22 million USD.

Inauguration of Brussel’s new pederestian zone, summer 2015 Photo © Vincent Peal. Courtesy of City of Brussels 46 47 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Brussels World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Brussels

Brussels piétonnier Photo © Vincent PEAL. Courtesy of City of Brussels

Currency conversion: 1 € $ 1.32 Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

44 Percentage of national Official budgets / BOP / 2015 Percentage of national culture budget allocated to culture budget: 30% Brussels.

Total national culture budget calculated by the combined budgets from: • Politique scientifique (Ministre Sleurs): €71 million (2015) . Assume all culture budget went to Brussels • Institutions culturelles fédérales (Ministre Reynders): €55 million (2015) Assume all culture budget went to Brussels • Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles: €579 million (2015) Media budget excluded • Vlaamse Gemeenschap: €546 million (2015). Culture and cultural heritage budget. Media budget excluded • Deutschsprachige Gemeinschaft: €6.6 million

45 Ministry for Federal Cultural City of Brussels / 2015 Funding for La Monnaie, BOZAR and Orchestre Institutions: 73 million national de Belgique 45 Flemish Ministry of Culture, City of Brussels / 2014 Flemish Brussels Fund (€3.3 million), Brusselse podia Youth, Sports and Media grant (€2.5 million) and other subsidies (€2.2 million) 45 Secretary of State for City of Brussels / 2015 Direct funding for Royal Museums of Fine Arts (EUR funding for culture: 9 million Scientific Policy: 93 million 3.87million) , Royal Museums of Art and History (EUR 4.96 million) , Royal Library of Belgium (EUR 6.27 45 Flemish Ministry of Culture, City of Brussels / 2016 Estimated based on share of population residing million) , State Archives of Belgium (EUR 4.81 million), Youth, Sports and Media; within Brussels-Capital Region (5%), assume per Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage (EUR 1.34 million) , heritage: 2 million capita cultural spend on heritage is the same across and CEGESOMA (EUR 1.5 million). the Flemish Community.

Payroll estimated based on number of employees in 45 Flemish Ministry of Culture, City of Brussels / 2016 Estimated based on share of population residing each institution (total 1400 employees), assume an Youth, Sports and Media; within Brussels-Capital Region (5%), assume per average cost of EUR 34,000 per employee. Agency for Social Work: 12 capita cultural spend on is the same across the million Flemish Community. 45 Ministry for Culture of the Ministry for Culture of the French Community: 256 million French Community / BOP/ 2015 45 Brussels-Capital Region City of Brussels / 2016 cultural budget: 46 million 45 Ministry for Culture of the Ministry for Culture of the French Community artistic French Community / 2015 45 Brussels-Capital Region City of Brussels / 2016 creation funding: 62 million Monuments and Sites Directorate: 29 million 45 Ministry for Culture of the Ministry for Culture of the French Community cultural French Community / 2015 45 Brussels-Capital Region; City of Brussels / 2016 education and cultural Screen.Brussels: 5 million centre funding: 62 million 45 Brussels-Capital Region; City of Brussels / BOP/ 2016 Estimate 45 Ministry for Culture of the Ministry for Culture of the Support for production: EUR 1.17 million Visit.Brussels: 7 million French Community other French Community / 2015 Support for dissemination: EUR 19.74 million direct subsidies: 50 million Support for conservation: EUR 3.64 million 45 Brussels-Capital Region; City of Brussels / BOP/ 2016 Estimate Support for education: EUR 46.66 million other cultural projects Management: EUR 12.63 million funding: 5 million

45 Ministry for Culture of the Ministry for Culture of the Estimated based on share of population residing in 46 Brussels Commission of the City of Brussels / 2015 French Community other French Community / City of Brussels-Capital Region within the French Community Flemish Community culture cultural spending: 82 million Brussels/ BOP/ 2015 (25%). Assume per capita cultural spending is the budget: 29 million same across the French Community. 46 Brussels Commission of the City of Brussels / 2015 45 Flemish Ministry of Culture, City of Brussels / 2016 Estimate French Community: 17 million Youth, Sports and Media, 46 Nineteen local City of Brussels / BOP/ 2015 Estimate Agency of Arts and Heritage, municipalities culture Arts Decree: 32 million budget: 33 million

45 Flemish Ministry of Culture, City of Brussels / 2014 46 City of Brussels culture City of Brussels / 2016 Youth, Sports and Media budget: 38 million funding for Brussels Philharmonic and Flemish 46 Belgian Tax Shelter: 35 City of Brussels / BOP / 2015 Estimated based on the Belgian Tax Shelter value Radio Orchestra: 11 million million nationally (€140 million), proportionated by the size of economy of Brussels (20%) 45 Flemish Ministry of Culture, City of Brussels / 2014 Youth, Sports and Media 46 Corporate sponsorship Compendium Cultural Policies Estimated based on national private sponsorship to funding for concert hall of culture in Brussels: 22 and Trends in Europe / BOP / arts and culture (€89 million), proportionated by the Ancienne Belgique: 3 million million 2011 size of economy of Brussels (20%)

48 49 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Istanbul

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 479M USD + 7M USD National 22% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) World City 66% Public indirect ? Local 12% Private giving and sponsorship ?

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

48% Ministry 46% Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality of Culture and Tourism

28% Istanbul Governorship 100% Presidency 26% Istanbul Metropolitan 39 district 24% Ministry Municipality municipalities of Culture and Tourism

28% General Directorate of Foundations

National 103M USD World City 316M USD Local 60M USD

State-owned cultural organisations Cultural services Local cultural centres and cultural activities Cultural heritage preservation Heritage and museums

Grants and cultural activities Culture Co

13th Istanbul Biennial Photo © Servet Dilber. Courtesy of Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Tourism: 50 51 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Istanbul World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Istanbul

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Relatively decentralised, At the national level, responsibility arts education courses and cultural dominated by world city funding, with a significant for culture lies with the Ministry of events. Culture and Tourism. It has 11 general amount of national funding for regions which is directorates responsible for specific In 1989 the IMM established Culture controlled at regional level. (In this case the region cultural domains, or for functions such Co (Istanbul Cultural and Artistic and the world city cover the same area.) as Research and Training, or Copyright. Products Corporation), an enterprise arm There are also a number of cultural responsible for administering the cultural venues and performing arts groups venues owned by IMM. Culture Co also Percentage of national culture budget: 21% directly affiliated with the national organises festivals and events, and Ministry. Of the Ministry’s total culture carries out and disseminates research Sector/institutional profile of direct public budget, 21% (74 million USD) went on culture in Istanbul. In 2014-15 the IMM to Istanbul in 2014-15. Together, the budget for Culture Co was 82 million spend: Primarily institutions owned by government General Directorates of Cultural Assets USD. Culture Co also earns revenue – cultural centres, museums, libraries and and Museums, State Theatres, Fine Arts, through ticket and book sales. theatres. There is also significant spending on the and Cinema delivered 64 million USD of this. In addition to the Istanbul Metropolitan preservation and restoration of heritage. Municipality, there is also a Provincial About one third of spending by the Administration in Istanbul, administered Overall cultural spending profile: Some corporate Ministry of Culture and Tourism is grants by a Governor appointed by central and project-based funding. For example, government. The Istanbul Governorship sponsorship and indirect public funding. However the General Directorate of Cinema offers Presidency of Investment Monitoring overall statistics on private giving are not available. funds for film productions and research and Coordination funds the restoration projects, and the General Directorate of of museums and historic sites across the Fine Arts funds the International Istanbul city. This funding amounted to 88 million Important non-culture public funders: Both the Opera Festival and International Istanbul USD in 2014-15. Republic of Turkey Promotion Fund and the Chamber Ballet Competition. of Commerce fund culture-related projects. At the local level, each of Istanbul’s 39 The General Directorate of Foundations district municipalities has a department – a national governmental body that of culture. They own and fund local Photo courtesy of oversees and maintain cultural heritage cultural centres which run free activities Istanbul Directorate of – has two regional offices in Istanbul, one such as guided cultural tours, art Culture and Tourism on the Asian and one on the European courses, reading days, children’s plays, side of the city. Their responsibilities and community celebrations. In 2014- include the preservation and restoration 15, the district municipalities spent an of historic buildings and estates estimated 60 million USD on cultural belonging to Ottoman-era foundations. centres and activities. The regional offices spent 29 million USD on culture in 2014-15.

At the world city level, the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) owns a large number of cultural centres, museums, libraries and theatres across Istanbul. It also provides financial and in-kind support to the cultural sector. In 2014-15 it spent 146 million USD on cultural services such as providing free

52 53 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Istanbul World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Istanbul

Other public funders Public indirect and private funding In 2014-15, funding from public bodies other than those listed above was 7.5 Tax exemptions are in place to support million USD, about 1.5% of Istanbul’s cultural organisations and incentivise public direct cultural budget. corporate sponsorship. According to national law, eligible cultural organisations The Republic of Turkey Promotion Fund receive support from the treasury for funded 28 cultural events in Istanbul payment of utility bills and employer in 2014-15. The Istanbul Chamber of contributions to social insurance. Commerce also regularly funds cultural In addition, corporations providing events and festivals in the city. Together sponsorship to eligible organisations can the cultural spending by these two deduct this from their corporation tax. agencies amounted to 6 million USD. The value of these tax exemptions has not been publicly released. The Istanbul Development Agency (ISTKA), a local agency of the Ministry Banks and large corporations (and their of Development, provides funding and foundations) are the main private funders technical assistance to public and private of arts and culture in Istanbul. Festivals sector and NGOs. Since 2010 it has and events often receive corporate funded several projects focusing on the sponsorship: for example, the Koc Group creative economy, including research on has sponsored the Istanbul Biennale for the cultural heritage and cultural economy the past 10 years. of Istanbul, research on Turkish cinema and Creative Istanbul workshops. The Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts, one of the most high-profile cultural Hagia Sophia Interior The Provincial Directorate of Youth and foundations in Istanbul, produces festivals New funding models Photo courtesy of Sports also funds cultural events. including the International Istanbul Film Istanbul Directorate of Festival, the International Theatre Festival, Fongogo is a new Turkish crowdfunding Culture and Tourism and Istanbul Biennale. Its private funding platform with a team based in Istanbul. In amounted to 17.5 million USD in 2014. 2014, eight cultural projects were funded through this platform, receiving a total of 78,350 USD. Many of these projects had a strong social focus: for example, one set up outdoor cinemas in rural villages in order to provide arts programmes for young people. Projects are rarely funded entirely through crowdfunding, but this platform offers a new funding stream.

54 55 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Istanbul World Cities Culture Finance Report

Currency conversion: 1 TL $ 0.46 Data Sources 2014 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

52 Percentage of national culture budget: Ministry of Culture and Tourism / BOP / Percentage of Ministry of Culture and 21% 2014 - 15 Tourism’s culture budget allocated to Istanbul (162 million Turkish Lira). This includes funding to the 11 general directorates.

53 Ministry of Culture’s budget to Istanbul: Istanbul Directorate of Culture and This figure includes funding via the Ministry’s 74 million Tourism / 2014 - 15 11 directorates.

53 General Directorates of Cultural Assets Istanbul Directorate of Culture and and Museums, State Theatres, Fine Arts, Tourism / 2014 - 15 and Cinema: 64 million

53 The General Directorate of Foundations Istanbul Directorate of Culture and regional offices: 29 million Tourism / 2014 - 15

53 Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Istanbul Directorate of Culture and culture budget: 146 million Tourism / 2014 - 15

53 Culture Co: 82 million Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Tourism / 2014 - 15

53 Istanbul Governorship Presidency of Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Official correspondence carried out by Investment Monitoring and Coordination: Tourism / 2014 - 15 Provincial Directorate of Istanbul 88 million

53 District municipalities: 60 million Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Estimated based on average cultural Tourism / BOP / 2014 - 15 spending of 21 municipalities.

54 Other public bodies funding: 7.5 million Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Includes funding from Republic of Turkey Tourism / BOP / 2014 - 15 Promotion Fund; Provincial Directorate of Youth and Sports; Chamber of Commerce; Istanbul Development Agency

54 Republic of Turkey Promotion Fund, Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Istanbul Chamber of Commerce: 6 million Tourism / BOP / 2014 - 15

54 Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts private funding: 17.5 million / 2014

55 Fongogo: 78,350 USD Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Tourism / 2014

Courtesy of Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Tourism 56 57 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report London

Funding for culture Public direct funding Sources

Public direct 1547M USD + 30M USD National Local 70% 28% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect 546M USD World City Private giving and sponsorship 482M USD 2%

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

47% Department for Culture, 60% 33 local authorities Media and Sport

40% Arts Council England

10% 33 local authorities 2% English Heritage

63% 30% 33 local 11% Heritage Greater authorities Lottery Fund London Authority

37% Greater London Authority

National 1082M USD World City 19M USD Local 447M USD

National museums and galleries Museum of London Local library services and British Library Project funding (e.g. London Museums, galleries, theatres National Portfolio Organisations Fashion Week, Fourth Plinth) and public entertainment and grants to other culture organisations Arts development services, archives and heritage Grants for heritage and arts projects

Heritage funding

Busk in London Festival 2015 Photo © Rafael Bastos Courtesy of Greater London Authority 58 59 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile London World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile London

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Mix of central and local 1/ At the national level, responsibility for The GLA was established in 2000, after 2/ Percentage of national culture lies with the Department for the abolition of the Greater London Arms-length organisations funding. In relative terms, very little investment from culture budget which are public institutions goes to London-based Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). It Council in 1986, and is a strategic operating with varying world city level. organisations. funds 42 arms-length 2/ organisations regional authority whose responsibilities degrees of independence and public bodies which deliver public and budget are limited compared to from government.

most other world city governments. Percentage of national culture budget: 41% 1/ services. These include Arts Council 3/ England, an arms-length body which It leads policy on culture, transport, The devolved nations of is the major grant-making organisation planning and the environment. the UK are Scotland, Wales Sector/institutional profile of direct public spend: for the arts in England, as well as similar and Northern Ireland.

organisations in the devolved nations of The GLA’s culture budget in 2015-16 National spending primarily goes to national museums 4/ the UK. 3/ The majority of Arts Council was 19 million USD, 5% of its total and national portfolio organisations, with additional National Portfolio England funding in London goes to budget. Of this, 12 million USD went Organisations receive project grant programmes. City funding goes to the National Portfolio Organisations, 4/ to the Museum of London, with the regular funding from the Arts Council England, Museum of London plus specific programmes, while a total of 338 million USD in 2014-15. rest of the budget invested in projects currently over a funding local authority spending is mainly on libraries. An additional 99 million USD of Arts including London Fashion Week, the period of three years. Council England funding went to Fourth Plinth, and Film London. programmes such as Grants for the Overall cultural funding profile: Private philanthropy Arts, which offers project funds. At the local level, London has 33 local is important in London, with individual donations authorities: 32 boroughs plus the City of English Heritage, another arms-length London. Their responsibilities include accounting for the majority of fundraised income. organisation, spent 19 million USD in schools, libraries, recreation and local Indirect public funding is dominated by tax credits for London in 2014-15, out of a total spend cultural institutions. In 2014-15 London’s the film industry and TV. of 155 million USD. local authorities spent 447 million USD on culture, 2.2% of their total budget. The DCMS also funds 16 national Of this 268 million USD was spent Important non-culture public funders: Around 40% museums and galleries, of which 14 on libraries (60%); 132 million USD of city funding for culture in London comes from other are based in London. Grants to the on museums, galleries, theatres and London-based organisations totalled entertainment; and 47 million USD on departments, including the Education, Regeneration 509 million USD. arts development, archives and heritage. and Economic Development teams. At a national level the city’s culture department also received funding The National Lottery, established in Local authorities are financed both by from the Department of Education in 2014-15. 1994, also provides funds for culture. Of the national government (64% in 2014- the 2,746 million USD raised through the 15) and by local taxes. Over the past few Really Good, 2016, lottery in 2014/15, 20% is allocated to the years, national government funding to by David Shrigley. arts and 20% to heritage. Lottery funds local authorities has been cut by around Commission for the are managed by twelve organisations 40%. This has put significant pressure Mayor of London’s nominated by Parliament, including the on their cultural spending. Fourth Plinth Heritage Lottery Fund and Arts Council Programme. Photo © Gautier Deblonde. England. In 2015-16, the Heritage Lottery Fund gave out 115 million USD in grant funding to London-based projects (not including capital projects).

At the world city level, responsibility for culture lies with the culture department at the Greater London Authority (GLA).

60 61 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile London World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile London

Other public funders 5/ The UK’s creative London’s creative industries benefit industries are concentrated New funding models At the national level, the Department for significantly from national tax incentives. in London. For example, 5/ approximately 75% of the Education spent 18 million USD on a Nationally, these credits include 517 New models for financing the arts are million USD to the film industry; 147 million UK film industry is based in network of 29 Music Education Hubs and around London emerging. For example, ‘social investment in London, which brings together USD for ‘high-end’ television; and 20 funds,’ where investors seek social as well local authorities, schools and local million USD for animation (2015-16). Of as financial returns. A recent initiative is the organisations to create a provision for this, the estimated value of these credits Arts Impact Fund which provides soft loans music education. to London was 513 million USD. Tax to cultural organisations. It is supported incentives for children’s television, video by Arts Council England, the innovation At the world city level, the GLA games, theatre production, orchestra and charity Nesta, and private foundations culture department works with other exhibitions in museums and galleries have and corporate donors. The London-based departments within the GLA on culture- recently been introduced. Studio Wayne McGregor has received related projects. Around 40% of city finance through this programme, amongst funding for culture in London – an In London, local authorities offer others. estimated 12 million USD – comes from discretionary relief on local business taxes non-culture teams. For example, the GLA to cultural organisations, as well as other The Globe Theatre in London has launched Regeneration Unit is currently delivering forms of indirect support such as free or its own social impact bond, seeking to two programmes, the Mayor’s High Street subsidised rent for rehearsal, exhibitions raise 7.5 million USD to fund a new library, Fund (HSF) and the London Regeneration and office space. archive and research centre. It is expected Fund (LRF), both of which contain a to draw investment that generates both significant cultural element. Private giving to arts and culture is high in social impact and a financial return. the UK. A recent survey by Arts Council England revealed that in 2014-15, individual The Mayor of London is exploring plans Public indirect and private giving to the London culture sector for a Creative Land Trust to support funding was 284 million USD, with trusts and affordable creative workspace across the foundations contributing 116 million, and capital. It will enable access to finance the Many cultural organisations are charities corporations 82 million USD, totalling 482 ownership of buildings for use as creative and benefit from a national tax exemption. million USD in private giving. workspace in perpetuity. The trust will In addition, the Gift Aid programme allows combine public funds, philanthropy and charities to increase the value of donations social impact investment. It was inspired from UK taxpayers by 25% through by similar models in other cities, such reclaiming the tax paid on these donations. as the San Francisco Community Arts There are also tax incentives for corporate Stabilization Trust. Muaré by Voalá. giving and for payroll giving. The estimated Greenwich Docklands value of indirect public funding for culture International Festival. to London organisations via the Gift Aid Photo © Steve Eggleton. Courtesy scheme was 33 million USD in 2014-15. of Greater London Authority A Cultural Gifts Scheme allows individuals and corporations to reduce their tax liability by 30% of the value of cultural objects donated to the nation (for example paintings or sculpture). The Acceptance in Lieu scheme allows inheritance taxes to be reduced based on donations of cultural objects.

62 63 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile London World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile London

Spectra by Ryoji Ikeda Photo © Jonathan Perugia. Currency conversion: Courtesy of Greater 1 €£ $ 1.53 Data Sources 2015 average London Authority

Page Data Source / Year Note

60 Percentage of national culture budget: DCMS / BOP / 2014-15 National culture budget comprised of: 41% 1) DCMS culture budget (excluding broadcasting budget); 2) Scotland’s culture budget (including Historic Scotland budget); 3) Wales culture budget and 4) Northern Ireland’s culture budget.

61 Arts Council England spending to Arts Council England “Arts Council National Portfolio Organisations located England Grant Commitments 2014-15” / in London: 338 million 2014-15

61 Arts Council England Grants for the Arts Arts Council England “Arts Council funding to London culture sector: 99 England Grant Commitments 2014-15” / million 2014-15

61 DCMS grants to 14 national museums DCMS / BOP / 2014-15 British library, British Museum, Geffrey and galleries located in London: 509 Museum, Horniman, Imperial War Museum, million National Gallery, National Maritime Museum, National Portrait Gallery, National History Museum, Sir John Soane's Museum, V&A, Wallace Collection, SMG (partial), Tate (partial)

61 English Heritage spending in London: 19 English Heritage / 2014-15 million

61 Heritage Lottery Fund grant funding to Heritage Lottery Fund / 2015-16 Figure does not include grant funding for London-based projects: 115 million capital projects.

61 Greater London Authority Culture Team Greater London Authority / 2015-16 budget: 19 million

61 Greater London Authority funding to Greater London Authority / 2015-16 Museum of London: 12 million

61 London’s local authorities total spending UK Department for Communities and on culture: 447 million Local Government "Local Authority Revenue Expenditure and Financing England 2014-15 Final Outturn" / 2014-15

61 London’s local authorities spending on UK Department for Communities and libraries: 268 million Local Government "Local Authority Revenue Expenditure and Financing England 2014-15 Final Outturn" / 2014-15

61 London’s local authorities spending UK Department for Communities and on museums, galleries, theatres and Local Government "Local Authority entertainment: 132 million Revenue Expenditure and Financing England 2014-15 Final Outturn" / 2014-15

61 London’s local authorities spending on UK Department for Communities and arts development and support, archives Local Government "Local Authority 62 Tax credits to ‘high end’ television: 147 HM Revenue & Customs / 2015-16 Official Statistics on Film, High-End and heritage: 47 million Revenue Expenditure and Financing million Television, Animation, and Video Games Tax England 2014-15 Final Outturn" / 2014-15 Relief, July 2016. National figure

62 Department of Education funding to Arts Council England “Allocations Figure represents funding for 29 hubs 62 Tax credits to animation: 20 million HM Revenue & Customs / 2015-16 Official Statistics on Film, High-End Music Education Hubs: 18 million for Music Education Hubs 2015-16” / located in London. Television, Animation, and Video Games Tax 2015-16 Relief, July 2016. National figure

62 Greater London Authority funding for Greater London Authority / 2015-16 Estimate 62 Tax credits to London creative industries: HM Revenue & Customs / BOP / 2015-16 Proportionated from national figure based on culture from non-culture teams: 12 million 513 million the size of London film sector

62 Indirect public funding for culture to Arts Council England “Private Investment Estimated based on total individual 62 Individual giving to London culture Arts Council England “Private Investment London organisations via the Gift Aid in Culture Survey” / UK Giving 2015 / donations to London culture sector. Assume sector: 284 million in Culture Survey” / 2014-15 scheme: 33 million BOP / 2014-15 25pc of public indirect funding for every £1 62 Private trusts and foundations giving to Arts Council England “Private Investment donations under Gift Aid scheme. London culture sector: 116 million in Culture Survey” / 2014-15 Assume that 47% of these donations use Gift Aid (UK Giving Report 2015). 62 Private corporations giving to London Arts Council England “Private Investment culture sector: 82 million in Culture Survey” / 2014-15 62 Tax credits to film industry: 517 million HM Revenue & Customs / 2015-16 Official Statistics on Film, High-End Television, Animation, and Video Games Tax 62 Total private giving to London culture Arts Council England “Private Investment Relief, July 2016. National figure sector: 482 million in Culture Survey” / 2014-15

64 65 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Los Angeles

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 473M USD + ? World City Local 44% 54% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect 25M USD + ? Regional 1% National Private giving and sponsorship 412M USD 1%

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

39% County Funding 90% 35 municipalities

6% 7 municipalities and their local agencies 6% LA Arts Commission

69% State of California 4% City of LA 31% California Arts Council 9% Federal government

91% National Endowment for the Arts

55% County Funding

National 3M USD World City 209M USD

Grants Public libraries

Public libraries Support for cultural institutions

Grants Regional 4M USD Local 257M USD Public libraries Public libraries Grants Culture budget

Santa Monica Pier shot Transient occupancy tax Photo Courtesy of the City of Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairsnd Cultural Programs 66 67 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Los Angeles World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Los Angeles

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Extremely decentralised. At the national level the main source was 12 million USD. In 2015, the LA Strong role for world city region as well as of culture funding is the National County Arts Commission launched the Endowment for the Arts (NEA), an Community Impact Arts Grant program, municipalities, though national level important for independent agency that provides grants which provides arts grants to non- indirect tax expenditure. and contracts to individuals, institutions at profit organizations doing such work as every administrative level, and non-profit homeless services and environmental Percentage of national culture budget: 2% organisations. In 2014, the NEA gave 3 protection. While it is difficult to make the million USD in grants to organisations and case for public investment in arts, there individuals in Los Angeles, representing is increasing interest in LA in using the Sector/institutional profile of direct public 2% of the total NEA budget. arts to achieve other goals, which is now spend: Concentrated very heavily on library generating new money for the arts. Other federal bodies funding the arts systems at local and world city level, with a small include the National Endowment for the County government also supports portfolio of major cultural organisations also Humanities, US Department of Education, major cultural institutions including the supported at world city level. Smithsonian Institutions, Corporation for Descanso Gardens, Ford Theatres, Public Broadcasting, Institute of Museum Grand Park, LA Plaza de Cultura y Artes, and Library Services, and the Kennedy Los Angeles County Arboretum and Overall cultural funding profile: Major Center for the Performing Arts. The US Botanic Garden, Los Angeles County Art philanthropic contribution – equivalent to 88% Department of Education also supports Museum, Music Center, and the National arts education programmes, though the History Museum of Los Angeles County. of direct public funding – leveraged by tax main responsibility for education rests at In 2015-16, County funding for these expenditures (c. $25m) of direct spend. state level. The LA County library system institutions totalled 82 million USD. received 300,000 USD from the federal local level Important non-culture public funders: Other city government. At the , Los Angeles is unusual in its level of decentralisation, even by the departments provide cultural services. Public art At the regional (state) level, LA receives standards of the United States. LA County supported by “1% for art” programme. money from the California Arts Council, a consists of 88 municipalities (including the state agency giving open grants to local Cities of Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, Santa government, city and county agencies Monica and West Hollywood), each of Ford Theatres dance like the LA County Arts Commission, which is free to adopt their own approach Photo © The Future non-profit organizations and individuals. to culture. Seven municipalities provide Collective for the A 94% funding cut in 2003 meant that in grants to arts organisations and artists. 1/ LA County Arts 2013-14, California was ranked 49th out They also provide direct funding for public Commission. Courtesy of LACAC/City of Los of 50 states for arts funding per capita. art, arts institutions and arts activities, as Angeles However, state funding for the Council do many of the other municipalities. These was increased in 2014 for the first time in seven cities had a combined total arts ten years. In that year it granted 1 million budget of nearly 15 million USD in 2014-15. USD to arts and culture in LA. However, by far the largest sums of The state also contributes 3 million USD public money are invested in the LA to the LA library system. County library system, which receives 115 million USD from the county and 231 At the world city level, the LA County million USD from 35 municipalities, each Arts Commission, funded by donations funding their own libraries. The City of as well as by the government, is the LA library system represents 46% of this largest grant maker to arts non-profits. combined funding. In 2014-15 the Arts Commission budget

68 69 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Los Angeles World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Los Angeles

Other public funders A 2.5 percent fee on the gross receipts of cable operators in the unincorporated In the city of Los Angeles, other areas of the county also funds the departments provide arts and culture Cable Television Franchise Fund, which services. For example, the Departments supports the filming and distribution of of Public Health and Mental Health fund performing arts programmes. arts programs designed to have health outcomes. Along with the Department Public indirect and private of Cultural Affairs, the Department of funding Transportation (DoT) co-funds a Creative Catalyst Artist in Residence In the United States, most funding for arts who will work with the DoT to help reduce and culture comes from private sources, traffic fatalities. primarily donations from individuals and ticket sales. In 2014, funding for culture in Los Angeles County operates a ‘one Los Angeles County totalled 245 million percent for art’ programme, whereby 1% USD from individual donations, 134 of the design and construction costs of million from private foundations and 33 any capital project by County government million from non-foundation corporate is set aside for public art. This usually funding. Earned revenue, however, is even becomes part of the budget of the LA more significant, representing 626 million County Arts Commission, which manages USD for Los Angeles organisations in the the process. The cost of maintenance is same year. (The figures in this paragraph covered by the department(s) housed in include only those organisations that the building. Many municipalities within submit Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts, Los Angeles County have similar percent so in actuality more is spent on arts and for art programmes that apply to private culture than these figures indicate.) developers, and some have both public and private percent for art policies. Philanthropy coupled with tax incentives is a popular model in the United States New funding models The Getty Center Interior The LA Tourism and Convention Board due to the freedom that it gives individuals has supported culture as part of its efforts Photo © Travis Conklin. to direct their contributions to their Artist Collectives are a novel approach to Courtesy of the to create a cohesive marketing strategy for preferred cultural institutions. The federal arts funding in LA, particularly important City of Los Angeles the region. For example, its 2012 ‘Discover government incentivises private to small theatres. Neither non-profit Department of Cultural the Arts’ campaign offered half-price charitable contributions by forgoing organisations nor businesses, they AffairsAngeles admissions to fifty cultural institutions. 33-35 cents in tax revenue for each dollar are not typically captured by standard donated to a non-profit. The estimated measures for arts funding or financial Hypothecated tax – a tax whose value of this incentive to in LA was 25 impact. They are important for their proceeds are ringfenced and can only be million USD in 2014. ability to provide support that amplifies spent on specific activities or areas – is the work of member artists and arts also used to fund culture in Los Angeles. organisations. LA City has a 1% transient occupancy tax (a tax on hotel rooms) which generates about 11 million per year for the Department of Cultural Affairs. Other cities in LA County have a similar tax but the revenues generated are much lower.

70 71 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Los Angeles World Cities Culture Finance Report Watts Towers Photo Courtesy of Los Angeles County Arts Commission

Data Sources

Page Data Source / Year Note

68 Percentage of national National Endowments for the Percentage of total grants from NEA awarded to culture budget: 2% Arts / 2014-15 organisations and individuals in LA

69 NEA grants to LA: 3 million National Endowments for the Arts / 2014-15

69 Federal library funding: Institute of Museum and Funding for the 36 library systems in LA county 300,000 Library Services / 2013

69 California Arts Council: 1 million

69 State funding for LA Institute of Museum and Funding for the 36 library systems in LA county libraries: 3 million Library Services / 2013

69 LA County Arts County of Los Angeles Budget Budget includes small proportion of funding from Commission budget: 12 / 2014 - 15 other governments and income sources. million

69 County funding for core County of Los Angeles / 2014 institutions: 82 million - 15

69 7 cities’ arts budget: 15 LA County Arts Commission / Los Angeles, Santa Monica, Santa Clarita, Pasadena, million 2014-15 Long Beach, West Hollywood and Culvert City

69 County funding to LA Institute of Museum and Funding for the 36 library systems in LA county libraries: 115 million Library Services / 2013

69 Municipalities funding to LA Institute of Museum and Funding for the 36 library systems in LA county libraries: 231 million Library Services / 2013

70 LA City transient occupancy LA County Arts Commission tax: 11 million / 2016

70 Individual donations: 245 DataArts / 2014 Figure includes only those organisations that submit million Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts.

70 Private foundations DataArts / 2014 Figure includes only those organisations that submit donations: 134 million Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts.

70 Non-foundation corporate DataArts / 2014 Figure includes only those organisations that submit funding: 33 million Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts.

70 Earned revenue: 626 million DataArts / 2014 Figure includes only those organisations that submit Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts.

70 Federal government tax DataArts / LA County Arts Estimated based on 34 cents tax revenue forgone for incentives for private Commission / BOP / 2014 each dollar of itemised individual donations, assuming charitable contributions: 25 that 30% of the total private donations ($244,668,123) million were itemised for tax benefits. Figure does not include tax breaks from individual donations to libraries.

72 73 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Moscow

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 2,402M USD + 272M USD National 26% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect 244M USD World City 74% Private giving and sponsorship 24M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

84% Ministry of Culture 65.5% Department of Culture

<1% Ministry of Culture 9% Government of the Russian Federation

7% Ministry of Culture

3% Department of Cultural Heritage 18% Other non-culture 13.5% 11 Prefectures departments of Administrative Areas

National 700M USD World City 1702M

91 state-owned Moscow-based Funding from “The Culture of Funding from “The Culture of cultural organisations and the Moscow 2012-18” and “The Moscow 2012 – 18” Federal Archive Agency Development of the Recreation and Tourism Industries 2012 – 18” Funding from “The Culture of Maintenance of cultural heritage state programmes Moscow 2012 – 18” and “The and state-owned cultural Development of the Recreation and organisations Funding from “The Culture of Tourism Industries 2012 – 18” state Moscow 2012-18” and “The programmes Project-based funding Development of the Recreation and Tourism Industries 2012 – 18” state Local Grants of the President programmes (funding through World City)

Krymskaya embankment Photo courtesy of the Moscow Institute for Social and Cultural Programs 74 75 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Moscow World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Moscow

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Dominated by city- At the national level, the Ministry of institutions at over 1,000 sites across the city, including libraries, museums, controlled funding via two main cultural programmes, Culture of the Russian Federation manages and funds 91 Moscow theaters, parks, recreation centers, which also fund local cultural activities. National cultural institutions including the exhibition halls, art schools, concert Ministry of Culture funding is also significant. Tretyakov Gallery, the Pushkin Museum halls, and cinemas. It also runs public of Fine Arts, the Historical Museum, events and festivals. The scale of this and the Grand Theatre. These are network of city-owned institutions means Percentage of national culture budget: 25% some of the largest and best known that 4% of the city’s total budget, 1.7 cultural institutions in the city. State- billion USD, is spent on culture. Sector/institutional profile of direct public owned institutions play a key role in Russian cultural life, with 92% of the In 2014-15, the Department of Culture spend: Almost all public spending goes to an Ministry’s funding for Moscow going received 860 million USD from ‘The extremely large network of state-owned and to organisations owned and run by the Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ and 255 managed institutions. Grant programmes are under Ministry of Culture (586 million USD in million USD from ‘The Development of 2014-15). Of the remainder, the Ministry Recreation and Tourism Industries 2012- development but not currently active. spent 47 million USD on the maintenance 2018’. It primarily provides core funding of cultural heritage and 4 million USD to city-owned organisations, although Overall cultural funding profile: Dominated by on project-based activities. Of the total it also offers targeted subsidies for special cultural events and programmes, public funding with some earned revenue. Relatively Ministry of Culture budget, 25% is spent in Moscow. for which private businesses and non- insignificant private giving revenues, mainly from profits are also eligible. Public grants foundations and businesses. The Government of the Russian are generally not available to institutions Federation also offers ‘Grants of the which are not state-owned, but a President’ to cultural institutions. These programme to widen access to public Important non-culture public funders: Other city grants to Moscow totalled 63 million grants has been under development by departments spend from city culture programmes, USD, representing 9% of national direct the Department of Culture since 2013. while the Department of Culture in turn receives funding for Moscow. The Department of Cultural Heritage funding from other programmes, such as ‘Capital At the world city level, there are two is responsible for the restoration and City Education.’ main programmes for culture. ‘The maintenance of historical buildings and Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ has a monuments. It received about 3% of total budget of 6.5 billion USD over this ‘Culture of Moscow’ funding in 2014 -15, Moscow City seven-year period. Its priorities are to a total of 46 million USD. Day 2015. develop participation in cultural life by Photo Courtesy of the Moscow Institute for Moscow residents and to modernise A significant proportion of the budget Social and Cultural and increase the impact of cultural of the two state-funded programmes Programs institutions. ‘The Development of is spent by agencies other than Recreation and Tourism Industries 2012- the Department of Culture and the 2018’ has a total budget of 4.2 billion Department of Cultural Heritage: 85 USD over this seven-year period, and million USD of ‘Culture of Moscow’ and aims at developing the city environment, 225 million USD of ‘Development of particularly green areas and public Recreation and Tourism in 2014-15. spaces. Moscow is pursuing an ambitious The Moscow Department of Culture programme for the development and is the main coordinator of these modernisation of cultural infrastructure, programmes. It manages and funds 429 including Gorky Park and the Muzeon

76 77 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Moscow World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Moscow

Park of Arts. As it is funded from the Public indirect and private New funding models culture budget, it requires cooperation funding between cultural agencies and the city Moscow is a leader in the use of agencies responsible for carrying out Article 149 of the Russian Tax Codes public-private partnerships to restore the work – including the Department means that many cultural institutions and preserve cultural heritage. Under of Construction, the Department of are exempt from Value Added Tax. The concession agreements, private City Property, the Department of estimated value from this exemption organisations are allowed to use Housing, Utilities and Amenities, and the was 97 million USD in 2014-15. Moscow historical buildings at a reduced price or Department for Major Housing Repairs. cultural organisations run by the Moscow even free of charge (usually for a 49 year Other agencies receiving culture funding Department of Culture are, according term) in exchange for investing in their include the Department of Education to city law, exempt from city land and upkeep and restoration. For example, and the Committee on Tourism and property taxes. The value of these in 2013 the Podari Zhizn foundation Hotel Industry (funding for the latter is exemptions is estimated to be 147 million created a recreation and health centre not included in statistics as it is capital USD. for children in Izmalkovo mansion in the investment). Novo-Peredelkino district. In 2015, the Philanthropy plays a relatively small but still city attracted about 500 million USD of local level At the , the 11 prefectures are important role in the financing of culture investment for the restoration of historic responsible for local cultural activities as in Russia, and Moscow in particular. This buildings. well as parks and gardens not managed is mainly delivered by private charitable by the Department of Culture. Their foundations or the charitable programmes Since 2012, the Department of City cultural spending is funded by both major of businesses, rather than through Property has run a “One ruble per square city-wide programmes – 207 million USD individual donations. Corporate donations metre” programme which allows private from the ‘Development of Recreation and and sponsorships and support from trusts organisations to lease historical buildings Tourism’ and 24 million USD from the and foundations for Moscow cultural at a reduced price. Fourteen buildings ‘Culture of Moscow.’ organisations was 24 million USD in 2014- were leased in 2013-15. 15, equal to about 1% of public dedicated Other public funders culture funding. Other types of public-private partnership were put in place for the development The Department of Culture also Earned income by Moscow cultural of the Garage Center for Contemporary receives funding from other non-culture organisations owned and run by the Culture, the construction of Zaryadye programmes. For example, ‘The Capital Ministry of Culture and Department of Park, and the development of the City Education’ fund is drawn on to support Culture was 537 million USD in 2014-15, Moskva river area. art schools, music schools and relevant equivalent to approximately 20% of public higher education institutions, while ‘Social dedicated culture funding. We do not support of Moscow residents’ funding is include earned income as part of private used to organise recreational activities for funding in this report. children. In 2014-15, the funding for the Department of Culture from these non- culture programmes was 272 million USD. Patriarch’s Pond. Photo Courtesy of the Moscow Institute for Social and Cultural Programs

78 79 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Moscow World Cities Culture Finance Report

Currency conversion: 1 RUB $ 0.026 Data Sources 2014 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

76 Percentage of national culture budget: The Ministry of Culture of the Russian Percentage of Ministry of Culture budget 25% Federation / 2014-15 (95.59 bln Rubles) allocated to Moscow (24.38 bln Rubles)

77 Ministry of Culture funding to state- The Ministry of Culture of the Russian Figure concerns funding to federal cultural owned organisations: 586 million Federation / 2014-15 institutions and the Federal Archival Agency

77 Ministry of Culture cultural heritage The Ministry of Culture of the Russian maintenance: 47 million Federation / 2014-15

77 Ministry of Culture project-based The Ministry of Culture of the Russian activities: 4 million Federation / 2014-15

77 Grants of the President: 63 million The Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation / 2014-15

77 ‘The Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ total Moscow City Government Department of Budget over seven-year period budget: 6.5 billion Culture / 2015

77 ‘The Development of Recreation and Moscow City Government Department of Budget over seven-year period Tourism Industries 2012-2018’ total Culture / 2015 budget: 4.2 billion

77 % of city’s budget on culture: 4%; 1.7 Moscow City Government Department of Percentage of Moscow city’s budget (1,601 billion Culture / 2015 billion RUB) spent on culture

77 ‘The Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ Moscow City Government Department of Department of Culture budget: 860 Culture / 2015 million

77 ‘The Development of Recreation Moscow City Government Department of and Tourism Industries 2012-2018’ Culture / 2015 Department of Culture budget: 255 million

77 ‘The Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ Moscow City Government Department of Department of Cultural Heritage budget: Culture / 2015 46 million

77 ‘The Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ other Moscow City Government Department of departments budget: 85 million Culture / 2015

77 ‘The Development of Recreation and Moscow City Government Department of Tourism Industries 2012-2018’ other Culture / 2015 departments budget: 225 million

78 ‘The Development of Recreation and Moscow City Government Department of Tourism Industries 2012-2018’ 11 Culture / 2015 prefectures culture budget: 207 million

78 ‘The Culture of Moscow 2012-2018’ 11 Moscow City Government Department of prefectures culture budget: 24 million Culture / 2015

78 Non-culture programme funding for Moscow City Government Department of Department of Culture: 272 miillion USD Culture / 2015

78 Article 149 VAT exemption value: 97 Moscow City Government Department of Earned income from Moscow cultural million USD Culture / BOP / 2015 institutions was 20.54 bln RUB in 2014-15. Figure estimated as the tax revenue forgone from this revenue based on standard VAT rate (18%)

78 Land and property tax exemption value: Moscow City Government Department of 147 million USD Culture / 2015

78 Private giving and sponsorships: 24 Moscow City Government Department of million Culture / 2015

78 Cultural organisations earned income: Moscow City Government Department of 537 million Culture / 2015

Tsaritsyno Park Courtesy of Moscow Institute for Social and Cultural Programs 80 81 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report New York City

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 587M USD + 16.5M USD World City 92% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) National Regional Public indirect 95M USD 5% 3%

PublicPrivate Indirect giving and ? sponsorship 1639M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

65% Public libraries

30% Department of Cultural Affairs

100% New York State Council on the Arts

5% Cultural 100% National Development Endowment for Fund the Arts

National 28M USD World City 538M USD

Grants Budget

Regional 21M USD Budget

Grants Grants

The High Line, New York City Photo © Julienne Schaer. Courtesy of New York City Department of Cultural Affairs 82 83 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile New York City World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile New York City

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Highly decentralised. At the national level, the main source cultural organisations. In 2012-13 it was National funding is dwarfed by city-level of culture funding is the National allocated 27 million USD. Endowment for the Arts (NEA), an expenditure. National level more important in independent government agency DCLA also has a large capital budget incentivising individual giving. that provides grants and contracts – over 200 million USD per year during to individuals, institutions at every the period 2013-2017 – but we have administrative level, and non-profit not included capital spending in the Percentage of national culture budget: 19% organisations. In 2014-15, 19% of the statistics for this report. NEA budget (28 million USD) went to Sector/institutional profile of direct public New York City institutions and artists. In 2014-15 the New York City public spend: Strong focus on libraries and support for library system (covering Manhattan, At the regional level, the New York Brooklyn and Queens) received 352 a cohort of 33 organisations on city land but also State Council on the Arts is a state million USD from the city of New York. major programme of investment in not-for-profits. agency giving grants to non-profit arts organisations. In 2014 it gave 21 million USD in grants to New York City Overall cultural spending profile: Major institutions. philanthropic contributions – nearly three times direct public spend –leveraged by significant tax At the world city level, in New York City the Department of Cultural Affairs expenditures (16% of direct public spend). (DCLA) is responsible for directing cultural policy and funding local arts Important non-culture public funders: organizations. Its budget was 159 Regular, relatively small contributions for culture million USD in 2014-15. It provides funding and capital support for over programming from a range of departments. Strong 900 non-profit cultural organizations focus on cultural tourism with separate funding from each year, along with a range of other NYC + partners including reduced price admissions. direct programming and technical assistance.

DCLA calls itself ‘the largest local Duffy Square - Stair Ariel Photo © David funder of art and culture’ in the U.S., LeShay. Courtesy with an expense budget comparable of New York City to that of the National Endowment for Department of Cultural the Arts. Its Cultural Institutions Group Affairs is made up of 33 cultural organisations – including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Lincoln Center, the American Museum of Natural History, and Brooklyn Botanic Garden – which are based on city-owned land and receive some operational funding from the city. It also administers the Cultural Development Fund (CDF), through which the City grants programming support to arts and

84 85 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile New York City World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile New York City

Other public funders Public indirect and private Shenzhen Music Hall Photo courtesy of funding Shenzhen Municipal In New York City a number of other Government City agencies provide funding for Indirect funding is a popular model in the arts and culture programming. These United States due to the freedom it gives include the Department for the Aging, to individuals to direct their contributions Department of Corrections, Department to organizations important to them, of Probation, Department of Youth and including cultural organizations. The Community Development, Mayor’s Office federal government incentivises private of Media and Entertainment, New York charitable contributions by forgoing City Council, New York City Housing 33-35 cents in tax revenue for each dollar Authority, New York State Council on donated to a non-profit. Estimated public the Humanities, NYC Department of indirect funding was 95 million USD in Education and NYC Department of 2014. Transportation. More donations are made to cultural DCLA partners with these other city institutions in New York State than any agencies to promote access to culture other American state. In 2014, New York for all New Yorkers. For example, it works City cultural institutions received 1.64 with the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant billion private funding - 971 million USD Affairs to offer cultural benefits to those from individual donations, 441 million holding IDNYC cards (the new municipal USD from foundations and 228 million New funding models neighborhoods in Queens, East Brooklyn, Richard Alston Dance identification card). It recently launched a from non-foundation corporates. Earned the South Bronx, and Upper Manhattan. Company, Roughcut. Public Artists in Residence programme, revenue was low relative to private Photo © Chris Nash. In 2015 the City of New York announced In each community, BCC establishes with participation from the Administration funding: in 2014 it totalled 284 million Courtesy of New York plans to build 1,500 units of affordable a steering committee guided by local for Children’s Services, Mayor’s Office USD. (This data includes only those City Department of housing over the next ten years for organizations, providing a framework for Cultural Affairs of Immigrant Affairs, Mayor’s Office organisations that submit their data to the members of the creative community. organizations to collaborate, organize, of Veterans Affairs and New York City DataArts). Housing Authority. This programme Alongside these will be 500 units of share resources, and give art and culture workspace. The project intends to ensure a voice in community planning projects is funded both by the city and by Major foundations in the city include that artists are able to continue to live and that are underway. Grants available to philanthropic support. Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Andrew work in the city. each committee will provide opportunities Mellon Foundation and the Ford for public cultural programming that Promotion of cultural tourism is an Foundation. important goal for the city. NYC & Participatory Budgeting NYC allows city increases access for residents and helps Company is a private corporation residents to participate in the allocation of forge new connections between cultural which functions as the city’s tourism discretionary capital funds through a year- groups and the areas they serve. and marketing organisation. Part- long series of public meetings culminating funded by the city and by 2000 member in a public vote, organized by City Council organisations, it had a total budget in districts. A number of cultural projects have 2015 of 36 million USD, of which 16.5 been funded through this mechanism, million USD was contributed by the city. including BRIC, Reel Works, and ArtBuilt. It supported culture through promotions such as NYC Broadway and Off- New York City has also made it a Broadway Weeks. priority to increase cultural support for historically underserved communities. The Building Community Capacity (BCC) program, for one, has expanded to four

86 87 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile New York City World Cities Culture Finance Report

Data Sources

Page Data Source / Year Note

84 Percentage of national National Endowment for the Percentage of NEA grants awarded to individuals and culture budget: 19% Arts / 2014-15 organisations in New York City.

85 NEA grants to New York: 28 National Endowment for the million Arts / 2014-15

85 New York State Council on New York State Council on the the Arts grants to New York Arts / 2014 City institutions: 21 million

85 City of New York New York City Department of Department of Cultural Cultural Affairs / 2014-15 Affairs culture budget: 159 million

85 Cultural Development Fund: New York City Department of 27 million Cultural Affairs / 2012-13

85 City of New York New York City Department of Department of Cultural Cultural Affairs / 2013-2017 Affairs capital budget per year: 200 million

85 City of New York funding to The Council of the City of New New York City public library York / 2014-15 system: 352 million

86 NYC & Company total NYC & Company / 2015 budget: 36 million

86 New York City funding NYC & Company / 2015 for NYC & Company: 16.5 million

86 Federal government tax DataArts / BOP / 2014 Estimated based on 34 cents tax revenue forgone for incentives for private each dollar of itemised individual donations, assuming charitable contributions: 95 30% of the total private donations (971 million) were million itemized for tax benefits.

86 Individual giving to DataArts / 2014 Figures include only 1,231 organisations that submit New York City cultural Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts. institutions: 971 million

86 Foundations giving to DataArts / 2014 Figures include only 1,231 organisations that submit New York City cultural Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts. institutions: 441 million

86 Corporate giving to DataArts / 2014 Figures include only 1,231 organisations that submit New York City cultural Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts. institutions: 228 million

86 Earned revenue by cultural DataArts/ 2014 institutions: 284 million

New York Public Library Photo © Will Steacy , NYC & Co 88 89 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Paris

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 3291M USD + ? National Local 43% 44% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect 95M World City Private giving and sponsorship 158M USD 13%

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

90% Ministry of Culture and Communication 76% Other local municipalities

10% Regional Direction for 72% 8 ‘departments’ Cultural Affairs of (administrative regions) Île-de-France 5% Municipalities Associations 28% Region Île-de-France

19% City of Paris

National 1418M USD Local 1442M USD

Portfolio of national cultural Culture budget organisations, ‘cultural opérateurs.’ Culture budget

Funding for Paris region Culture budget

World City 432M USD

Culture budget

Grants

Photo © Alfred. Courtesy of CRT Paris Île-de-France 90 91 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Paris World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Paris

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Moderately centralised, At the national level, the Ministry of Culture It plays a consultative role with local 1/ Please note that these with a major component provided by national and Communication regularly funds a governments. It had a budget of 132 figures are included in the portfolio of national institutions, known million USD in 2015. total 1.285 billion USD for government and a small amount of this spent at as ‘cultural opérateurs,’ of which 75% are Ministry of Culture funding a regional/world city level. This is coupled with located in the Paris Île-de-France region. Recently, the government has explored new of Paris institutions. an extremely decentralised local government In 2012-13, 1.3 billion USD went to these funding mechanisms, creating foundations 2/ system, with some grouping themselves into larger Parisian institutions. The dominance of and endowment funds inspired by American These are Paris, Essonne, Paris in the national government’s cultural approaches to the financing of culture. Hauts-de-Seine, Seine- associations, providing an amount of funding spending, and the consequent importance Saint-Denis, Seine-et- world city level Marne, Val-de-Marne, comparable to the national government. World city of national public funding to Parisian At the , the Île-de-France Val-d’Oise and Yvelines. spending is significant in absolute terms but small cultural life, are consistent features of the region had a culture budget of 120 million French system of cultural finance, although USD in 2015, financed by the national in comparison. devolution has increased the role played government. (In France culture is not by regional and local governments. primarily financed or managed at a regional Percentage of national culture budget: 33% level.) In 2014-15 more than half of its budget Three of the cultural opérateurs are went to grants for the arts (particularly funded through hypothecated tax. The film) and regularly funded festivals. It also Sector/institutional profile of direct public National Centre for Cinema and the provides regular funding to ‘associated spend: National spending dominated by a portfolio Moving Image is funded by taxes on organisms,’ cultural organisations which are television services, cinema tickets, and otherwise autonomous. of national institutions. Municipality of Paris video-on-demand services (831 million primarily supports portfolio organisations and city- USD in 2015). Similar tax mechanisms Within the Île-de-France region (one of 18 run museums. are used to finance the National Book regions in France) there are 8 departments. Center (48 million USD in 2013) and the 2/ In 2015 the cultural budget for these National Center for Popular Music and departments combined was 312 million Overall cultural funding profile: Dominated by Jazz (32 million USD in 2013). 1/ USD. (This is the budget for departments as public funding, with some corporate philanthropy. departments, separate from the spending In practice, many cultural projects are of the City of Paris, discussed below.) financed by multiple levels of government Important non-culture public funders: Large simultaneously. For example, the At the local level, municipalities play an contribution from the national Ministry of Education Philarmonie de Paris project was financed important role in financing culture. They and other education spending. Tax deductions for 45% by the national government, 45% by are responsible for 73% of total local the City of Paris, and 10% by the Île-de- government spending on culture and focus culture granted by the Ministry of Economy, Finance France region. This type of partnership is on heritage, libraries, museums, cultural and Industry. facilitated by the CPER (Contrat de plan events and arts education. Most are very État-région) tool, under which the national small, with 1,281 municipalities in the Paris government contracts with regions to Île-de-France region alone. In 2015, the create multi-year plans for investment. estimated budget for all municipalities in the region, excluding the City of Paris budget, DRAC-IDF (Regional Direction for was 1.1 billion USD. Some municipalities Cultural Affairs of Île-de-France) is group themselves into larger municipal a devolved authority of the Ministry associations with combined budgets: for of Culture operating within the Paris example Grand Paris Seine Ouest pools its Île-de-France region. DRAC-IDF’s spending on cultural infrastructure. These responsibilities centre around the Paris Île-de-France municipal associations development of cultural infrastructure, spent 79 million on cultural projects in the creative industries and heritage. 2014-15.

92 93 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Paris World Cities Culture Finance Report

The City of Paris is unusually large, being Public indirect and private coterminous with the department of Paris, funding with 2.2 million residents (as opposed to 12 million for the Île-de-France). It has a Tax deductions, known as niches large culture budget: in 2014-15 it spent 129 fiscales, are available mainly for public million USD on ‘actions culturelles,’ mostly broadcasters, the press and the grants to portfolio institutions. It spent performing arts. These totalled 1.8 billion another 76 million USD funding city-run USD nationally in 2013-14 and were museums. The rest of its culture funding granted by the Ministry of Economy, totalled 43 million USD and financed Finance and Industry. We are not able to cultural centres (Centquatre, Maison des break down this figure further within this métallos, Gaîté lyrique) and events such report. as Nuit Blanche. The City of Paris is also responsible for leading on important Private foundations in Paris which support policies, such as the principle of free culture include Admical, a membership access to city run museums’ permanent network for corporate philanthropy, and collections. Fondation Cartier (which had a budget of 7.9 million USD in 2014-15). In 2015, an Other public funders estimated 208 million USD in corporate sponsorship went to the arts and culture On both a national and regional level, in in Paris Île-de-France region. there is considerable spending on culture by ministries other than the Ministry In 2003 a national law, Le Mécénat, was of Culture and Communication. For passed which created a legal framework example, in 2013-14 the national Ministry for corporate philanthropy. Companies of Education was responsible for 2 billion engaging in cultural philanthropy are USD of culture spending across France entitled to make a deduction from their as a whole. Similarly, on a regional level, corporation tax equivalent to 60% of the budgets for education also fund cultural value of the donation. Estimated public programmes and activities. indirect funding to Paris was 95 million USD in 2015. The “1% for Arts” programme – in place since 1951 for the Ministry of Education, New funding models and since 1980 for most other Ministries – funds the creation of artwork for public In 2012, the Centre for National buildings through the allocation of Monuments piloted the use of a French 1% of the cost of their construction or crowdfunding platform, My Major renovation. It is now applicable to local Company, to raise money for the governments as well. conservation of heritage sites including the Panthéon and Mont St.-Michel. The The intermittents du spectacle gives Louvre has also used crowdfunding to workers in the arts who are employed on raise money for art acquisitions, such fixed-term contracts special access to as a sculpture commissioned by the unemployment insurance. Marquise de Pompadour.

Barocco, TPO Theatre Company Photo courtesy of TPO 94 95 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Paris World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Paris

Currency conversion: 1 € $ 1.32 Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

92 Percentage of national culture budget: IAU Île-de-France / BOP / 2015 Percentage of Ministry of Culture and 33% Communications funding (culture, book and publishing, and cultural industries budget only: €3193.5) allocated to Paris Île-de- France region.

93 Funding for Paris cultural opérateurs: 1.3 Ministry of Culture and Communication / billion IAU Île-de-France / 2015

93 National Centre for Cinema and the Ministère de L’Économie et des Finances « Effort financier de l’État dans le domaine de Moving Image: 831 million / 2015 la culture et de la communication », 2015

93 National Book Center: 48 million Ministère de L’Économie et des Finances « Effort financier de l’État dans le domaine de / 2013 la culture et de la communication », 2015

93 National Center for Popular Music and Ministère de L’Économie et des Finances « Effort financier de l’État dans le domaine de Jazz: 32 million / 2013 la culture et de la communication », 2015

93 DRAC-IDF: 132 million Ministry of Culture and Communication / IAU Île-de-France / 2015

93 Île-de-France culture budget: 120 million Région Ile-de-France / 2015

93 Île-de-France 8 departments cultural Ministry of Culture and Communication / Estimated IAU based on information from budget: 312 million IAU Île-de-France / 2015 Ministry of Culture and Communication and « rapport des finances des collectivités locales en 2015 », DCGL 2015 staffing criteria. Assume the share of local authorities in the cultural budget of France is identical to their share in the overall budget of France.

93 Municipalities total culture budget: 1.1 Ministry of Culture and Communication / Estimated IAU based on information from billion IAU Île-de-France / 2015 Ministry of Culture and Communication and « rapport des finances des collectivités locales en 2015 », DCGL 2015 staffing criteria (8 December, 2016). Exclude Ville de Paris budget. Only municipalities with more than 10 000 inhabitants. Assume the share of local authorities in the cultural budget of France is identical to their share in the overall budget of France.

93 Paris Île-de-France municipal Ministry of Culture and Communication / Estimated IAU based on information from associations: 79 million IAU Île-de-France / 2015 Ministry of Culture and Communication and « rapport des finances des collectivités locales en 2015 », DCGL 2015 staffing criteria. Assume the share of local authorities in the cultural budget of France is identical to their share in the overall budget of France. Rock En Seine 94 Municipality of Paris ‘actions culturelles’ Ville de Paris Festival. - 129 million; city-run museums – 76 Photo © William Alix million; other culture funding – 43 million / PhotoSynthese. 94 Ministry of Education national culture IAU Île-de-France / 2016 National figure Courtesy of Paris spending: 2 billion USD Île-de-France

94 Ministry of Economy, Finance and IAU Île-de-France / 2016 National figure Industry tax deductions: 1.8 billion

94 Corporate sponsorships: 208 million Baromètre Admical / BOP / 2014 According to Baromètre Admical/CSA - Le mécénat d’entreprise en France – 2016, national corporate sponsorships for culture was €525million in 2015. Paris figure proportionated by the size of economy (GDP) of Paris (30% of France)

94 Le Mécénat tax deductions: 95 million Baromètre Admical / BOP / 2014 Estimated by 60% of corporate sponsorships (208 million) forgone as tax revenue (Mécénat Law)

96 97 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report San Francisco

Funding for culture Public direct funding Sources

Public direct 189M USD + 27M USD World City 98% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) National Regional Public indirect 25M USD 1% 1%

Private giving and sponsorship 383M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

63% Local Funding for Public Library System

20% Other municipal funding sources 97% National Endowment 17% San Francisco Arts for the Arts Commission and Grants for the Arts 3% Federal Grants 97% California Arts Council

3% State of California

World City 185M USD National 2.5M USD Regional 1.7M USD

Local funding for public library Grants to non-governmental Open grants system in the form of revenue organisations budget Public libraries Public libraries Cultural assets funding

Grants

Ethereal Bodies by Cliff Garten, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital. Photo courtesy of the San Francisco Arts Commission. 98 99 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile San Francisco World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile San Francisco

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Extremely decentralised, At the national level, the largest At the world city level, the two main with the vast majority of spending at the world city single funder for culture is the municipal agencies providing direct National Endowment for the Arts funding to artists and arts organisations level. San Francisco is the only consolidated city (NEA), an independent federal agency are the San Francisco Arts Commission and county in the state of California, exercising providing grants and contracts to and Grants for the Arts, a division of governmental powers of both a city and a county individuals, state, local and non-profit the Office of the City Administrator. The organisations. In 2015-16, the NEA Arts Commission provides oversight of under California law. There is no cultural expenditure awarded 2.4 million USD (1% of total four city-owned cultural centres and a by local government. NEA grants) in San Francisco. municipal gallery, administers the “2% for Public Art Ordinance”, manages the Percentage of national culture budget: 1% Other national bodies funding the arts City’s Civic Art Collection and licenses include the National Endowment for the street artists and craftspeople. Humanities, Smithsonian Institutions, Sector/institutional profile of direct public Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Both agencies receive an absolute spend: Dominated by support for the public and Kennedy Center for the Performing majority of their funding from the City Arts. National grants funding for San and County of San Francisco’s General library system. Also funding for three city-owned Francisco public libraries was 80,000 Fund, with ‘pass-through’ grants from museums, public art and grant programs to support USD in 2014. the NEA and California Arts Council, arts organizations and individual artists. as well as some support from private At the regional level, the California partnerships. In 2015-16, their total Arts Council gives grants to local budget was 32 million USD, 0.4% of the Overall cultural spending profile: As with other government, non-profit organisations total city budget. Together they provide cities in the United States, dominated by private and individuals. A state agency, it is also about 18 million USD in direct grants. funded by donations and the NEA. In giving (mainly individual) and earned revenue. 2003 its budget was cut by 94%; in 2014 The City also provides direct funding to state funding was increased for the first three museums and as-needed funding Important non-culture public funders: These time in ten years. Funding was increased to a number of cultural assets, such include the Office of Economic and Workforce again in 2016. Current priorities for as the San Francisco War Memorial the Council include arts education, and Performing Arts Center, and Yerba Development; Recreation and Park Department; and revitalizing underserved communities, Buena Center for the Arts. In 2015-16, Department of Children, Youth, and their Families. and supporting community development this funding totalled 36 million USD. through local arts agencies such as the San Francisco Arts Commission. The San Francisco library system is It granted just under 1.7 million USD to actually the largest beneficiary of public culture in San Francisco in 2015-6. funding, having received 117 million USD from the City and County of San The state of California also contributed Francisco budget in 2015-2016. 53,000 USD to the San Francisco public library system in 2014.

Other state institutions support cultural activities but this spending is not counted in the report due to difficulty in identifying culture- and/or city-related spending.

100 101 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile San Francisco World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile San Francisco

Other public funders Public indirect and private 1/ The figures in this funding paragraph include only Other agencies making contributions to those organisations that culture include the Office of Economic submit Cultural Data Philanthropy coupled with tax incentives Profiles to DataArts, so in and Workforce Development and the is a popular model in the United States actuality more is spent on Recreation and Park Department, which due to the freedom that it gives to arts and culture than these figures indicate. funds cultural activities and programmes individuals to direct their contributions on their premises throughout the city. to institutions of their choice. The federal The Department of Children, Youth, and government incentivises private charitable their Families provides grants for arts contributions by forgoing 33-35 cents in education and activities benefiting youth tax revenue for each dollar donated to and children. Culture funding from these a non-profit. The estimated value of this agencies, plus the War Memorial Fund, incentive to San Francisco was 25 million totalled 27 million USD. USD in 2014.

The San Francisco Bay Area has one of the most robust private philanthropy sectors in the United States. A 2005 Foundation Center study found that 7% of the U.S. foundation arts grants over $10,000 were made to arts non-profits in the San Francisco Bay Area.

In 2014, total giving to culture in San Francisco was 383 million USD, of which 65% was from individual donations, 28% from private foundations and trusts, and New funding models Community Benefits provided through Every Day Every Developer’s Agreements, a case-by-case Way: Youth Arts 7% from non-corporate philanthropic Programming 2016 agreement between the city and a private endeavours. The majority of funding for San Francisco has experimented with Photo courtesy of culture in San Francisco – 509 million USD many new alternative funding models. real estate developer on a package of San Francisco Arts in 2014 – comes from earned revenue by It has attempted to cope with artist funds to benefit social work and/or the Commission city cultural institutions, including sales of displacement – resulting from a highly arts sector. tickets and merchandise. 1/ competitive real estate market – through initiatives such as the Community Arts Stabilization Trust (CAST), a non-profit organisation that brings together public and private funds to purchase assets for arts and cultural organisations and facilitates the navigation of complex real estate issues.

Other initiatives include the Arts Loan Fund, a short-term loan provided by a coalition of private and public arts funders in the city to arts organizations, and

102 103 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile San Francisco World Cities Culture Finance Report

Data Sources

Page Data Source / Year Note

100 Percentage of national culture budget: National Endowments for the Arts / Percentage of NEA grants awarded to 1% 2015-16 organisations and individuals in San Francisco

101 NEA grants to San Francisco: 2.4 million National Endowment for the Arts / 2015-16

101 Federal grants funding for San Francisco Institute of Museum and Library Services public libraries: 80,000 / 2013 -14

101 California Arts Council arts funding to National Endowments for the Arts / Includes funding for the local government, San Francisco: 1.7 million 2015-16 non-profit organizations, and artists in the city from the California Arts Council

101 State of California funding to the San Institute of Museum and Library Services No updated data Francisco public library system: 53,000 / 2013 -14

101 San Francisco Arts Commission and City and County of San Francisco Budget Figure includes full budget of the two local Grants for the Arts total budget: 32 and Appropriation Ordinance / 2015-16 arts agencies. million

101 San Francisco Arts Commission and City and County of San Francisco Budget Grants for the Arts direct grants: 18 and Appropriation Ordinance / 2015-16 million

101 City of San Francisco direct funding to City and County of San Francisco Budget Figure includes funding for 3 city funded three museums and as-needed funding and Appropriation Ordinance / 2015-16 museums and some other cultural assets in to a number of cultural assets, such as the City of San Francisco the War Memorial and Performing Arts Centres, and Yerba Buena Centre for the Arts: 36 million

101 City and County of San Francisco Institute of Museum and Library Services funding to San Francisco library system: / 2015 -16 117 million

102 Culture funding from non-cultural local City and County of San Francisco 2014 Includes, San Francisco Airport's funding for San Francisco public institutions: 27 Policy Analysis Report issued by Board SFO Museum, funding for arts and culture million of Supervisors and Official Budget of San from the Department of Children, Youth and Francisco Airport / 2013-14 Their Families, the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, the Recreation and Parks Departments, the War Memorial Fund, and other departments. Incomplete data - includes only identifiable funding for the arts by other city/county government agencies.

102 Federal government tax incentives for DataArts / BOP/ 2014 Estimated based on 34 cents tax revenue private charitable contributions: 25 forgone for each dollar of itemised individual million donations, assuming 30% of the total individual donations (201 million) were itemised for tax benefits.

102 Private giving to San Francisco cultural DataArts / BOP/ 2014 Figures include only those organisations that institutions: 383 million submit Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts.

102 Earned revenue by city cultural DataArts / BOP/ 2014 Figures include only those organisations that institutions: 509 million submit Cultural Data Profiles to DataArts.

Cloud Construction by Stephanie Robison Photo courtesy of San Francisco Arts Commission 104 105 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Seoul

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 864M USD + ? National World City Local 45% 34% 21% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect 46M USD

Private giving and sponsorship 153M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

88% Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism 42% 10 local foundations for arts and culture 31% Seoul Metropolitan Government, Culture, Design & Tourism Headquarter

58% 25 Gu 12% Cultural Heritage Administration governments 69% Seoul Metropolitan Government, Culture, Design & Tourism Headquarter

National 391M USD Local 179M USD

Affiliated organisations Direct cultural budget

Affiliated organisations Operation and management of cultural facilities

World City 294M USD

Project and grants funding

7 affiliated cultural organisations

Sindang Creativity Arcade Photo ©Jipil Jung. Courtesy of Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture 106 107 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Seoul World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Seoul

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Moderately decentralised, At the national level, the Ministry organisations. 1/ About one third of the 1/ city’s cultural budget, 92 million USD, These are the Seoul with slightly less than half of spending at national of Culture, Sports and Tourism Museum of History, Seoul (MCST) funds Seoul-based ‘affiliated goes to these seven organisations. The Museum of Art, Sejong level. Significant role for local authorities and local organisations,’ including national remainder of SMG’s budget is spent on Center for Performing arms-length foundations. National government various cultural initiatives which are either Arts, Seoul Philharmonic museums, national theatres, and national Orchestra, Seoul Design provides tax deductions but take-up has not been arts companies such as the Korea carried out by SMG itself, contracted to Foundation, Seoul Symphony Orchestra and the Korean its affiliated organisations, or subsidised Metropolitan Library and significant. National Ballet. Of the 47 organisations to other cultural organisations to deliver. the Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture. in Korea which receive funding from Percentage of national culture budget: 18% MCST, 39 are located in Seoul, but At the local level, each of the 25 17 are national organisations. In this autonomous ‘Gu governments’ in Seoul report we have considered only the 22 has a cultural division, with a total cultural Sector/institutional profile of direct public organisations whose focus is primarily budget of 105 million USD in 2014-15. Ten spend: National spend heavily dominated by on Seoul. In 2014-15 MCST spent 345 Gu governments have also set up local national museums, theatres and performing arts million USD on these organisations, arms-length foundations for arts and representing nearly half of all public culture to operate and manage cultural companies. One third of city funding goes to seven funding devoted to culture in Seoul. facilities on their behalf. The foundations’ organisations, the remainder to grant-funded Funding for these organisations combined budgets was 75 million USD, projects. Local governments manage cultural represented 20% of the total culture accounting for around 40% of the total budget of MCST. cultural budget at the local level. Though facilities, often via arms-length foundations. they are also expected to earn money, The Cultural Heritage Administration also most of their funding comes from the Gu Overall cultural funding profile: Private funds four affiliated cultural or heritage governments. The number of foundations has increased dramatically since 2000 philanthropy significant, dominated by corporations organisations in Seoul, including the National Palace Museum of Korea and and they are now the preferred model for rather than individuals. Earned revenue statistics are the Royal Tombs of the Joseon Dynasty. the management of cultural facilities by not available. This spending represents 12% of the Gu governments. national cultural funding devoted to Seoul, 46 million USD. Important non-culture public funders: Some national, city and local spending from education At the world city level, the Seoul budgets. Small investment by Economic Planning Metropolitan Government (SMG) also invests significant sums in Seoul’s Headquarters in creative industries. cultural sector. In 2015 its culture budget (excluding tourism, sport and the Seoul Dance Project, creative industries) was 293 million USD, Seoul Dance Festival representing about 1.3% of the city’s total Photo © Jordan Matter Photography. Courtesy budget. Responsibility for culture on a of Seoul Foundation for city level lies with the Culture, Design and Arts and Culture Tourism Headquarters of SMG, which funds seven affiliated or arms-length

108 109 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Seoul World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Seoul

Other public funders Tax deductions are available to corporations on their cultural Various public bodies at the national level entertainment expenses in addition to also fund culture-related projects. For their overall entertainment expenses. example, the Korea Foundation exists Corporations also benefit from tax to promote international understanding deductions when they purchase artworks. between Korea and other countries, and supports a number of cultural activities According to the “2014 Support to achieve this mission. The Korean Status Survey” by the Korea Mecenat Ministry of Education, the Seoul Culture Association, 168 million USD was raised Headquarter and the local ministries from the top 500 Korean companies and of education co-fund the “Teaching their cultural foundations. Over 90% of Artists dispatch program” to provide arts these companies are headquartered education to school-age citizens. in Seoul, and over 60% of cultural organisations in Korea are based in the At the world city level, the Economic capital, demonstrating the importance Planning Headquarters funds the of the tax breaks derived from these Seoul Business Agency to implement donations to the cultural sector in Seoul. programmes for key organisations within Giving from corporates and their the city’s creative industries: the Seoul cultural foundations is estimated to be Animation Center, Digital Media City and 151 million USD. Seoul Game Contents Center. However, this expenditure is relatively small, less Donations made by individuals and than 0.1% of the Seoul Metropolitan corporations to arts and culture Government’s main culture budget. organisations via the national Arts This spending is not counted in the report Council Korea receive a higher rate of tax deduction than general charitable due to difficulty identifying culture- and/or New funding models initiative with the Mecenat Association to Dongdaemun Design donations (100% tax deductible to city-related spend. We estimate that these incentivise corporate funding of culture. Plaza Photo Courtesy individuals and 50% tax deductible to of Seoul Foundation for public funding streams are relatively small In this initiative arts organisations are corporations). Despite the existence Organisations in Seoul have Arts and Culture compared to the public direct funding partnered with companies and donations of this mechanism which was created experimented with new match-funding identified above. made by companies are match funded to incentivise cultural philanthropy, and crowdfunding projects. For by SFAC. individual giving to the arts and culture example, Arts Council Korea collaborate Public indirect and private remains relatively low, representing with Tumblbug, an arts and culture funding only 0.2% of total individual donations. crowdfunding site. The Seoul Foundation Business funding of culture is more for Arts & Culture (SFAC) also launched National tax exemptions are available significant than individual philanthropy, an arts donation platform in 2014 called to museums and galleries, local cultural representing 5% of total corporate “Art Seoul G!ve Together.” Through the centres and approved arts and cultural donations at the national level. It is “Small G!ve” project it commits to match groups. Cultural organisations that estimated that private giving to arts and fund crowdfunding campaigns that meet are social enterprises can also benefit culture to Seoul by individuals totalled 2 their targets. from the Social Enterprise Promotion million USD in 2014. Act, which grants tax reductions or Faced with overall cuts to public sector exemptions to social enterprises for the Estimated public indirect funding culture budgets, Seoul has actively first five years of their operation. It has from individual, corporate and their engaged with the private sector to not been possible to quantify these tax cultural foundations’ donations was promote public-private partnerships. expenditures within the report. 46 million USD. For instance, SFAC has launched an

110 111 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Seoul World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Seoul

Currency conversion: 1 WON $ 0.00095 USD Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

108 Percentage of national culture budget: Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism Percentage of MCST Department of Culture, 18% / 2014 Arts and Content budget (1845 billion WON) allocated to Seoul (363 billion WON)

109 MCST funding for affiliated organisations: Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism Figures only concerns 22 organisations 345 million / 2014 based in Seoul whose focus is primarily on Seoul

109 Cultural Heritage Administration funding: Cultural Heritage Administration / 2014 Figures only concerns 4 organisations based 46 million in Seoul whose focus is primarily on Seoul

109 Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) Seoul Metropolitan Government / 2015 This figure excludes budget for tourism, culture budget: 293 million sport and the creative industries

109 Seoul Metropolitan Government culture Seoul Metropolitan Government / 2015 SMG’s culture budget as a percentage of its budget: 1.3% of the city’s total budget total budget (24,413 billion WON)

109 SMG funding for 7 affiliated Seoul Metropolitan Government / 2015 organisations: 92 million

109 Gu governments culture budget: 105 Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture / million 2015

109 Local foundations for arts and culture Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture / budget: 75 million 2015

110 Seoul Business Agency: 0.1% of city’s Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture / budget 2015

110 Corporate and their cultural foundations’ Korea Mecenat Association / BOP / 2014 Estimated based on “2014 Support Status giving to arts and culture: 151 million Survey”, proportioned by the size of economy of Seoul (90% of national GDP)

111 Individual giving to arts and culture: 2 National Tax Statistics / Beautiful Estimated by percentage of national million Foundation / BOP / 2014 charitable giving (1,211 billion WON, National Tax Statistics) to arts and culture in 2014 (0.2%, Beautiful Foundation), proportionated by the size of economy of Seoul (90% of national GDP)

111 Public indirect funding: 46 million National Tax Statistics / Beautiful Estimated by the amount of tax revenue Foundation / BOP / 2014 forgone due to tax deductions from private giving and corporate sponsorships to arts and culture in Seoul. Estimate based on Seoul’s tax rate on median income (17%, PwC worldwide tax summaries) Estimate based on highest band of corporate income tax rate (22%, PwC worldwide tax summaries), given most of corporate funding Hongeun Art came from large companies. Creativity Center. Photo courtesy of Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture

112 113 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Shanghai

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 707M USD + ?

(culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) World City Local 56% 44% Public indirect Private giving and sponsorship

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

51% MinistryGovernment-owned for Culture of and thearms-length French Community organisations

21% Ministry for Federal Cultural Institutions

4% Nine 100% 18% Flemish culture and 16 local districts 29% Culture creative funds DevelopmentMinistry of PromotionCulture, Fund Youth, Sports and Media 16% Cultural 10% and Creative SecretaryIndustry of State forPromotion ScientificFund Policy

World City 402M USD Local 305M USD

Operational and Local cultural facilities, cultural project funding activities and strategic funds

Grants

Grants

Grants

Shanghai Theatre Academy Library Building Photo courtesy of Shanghai Theatre Academy 114 115 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shanghai World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shanghai

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Exceptionally Shanghai’s wealth means that it does the national goal of creating a more decentralised – as a wealthy city Shanghai receives not attract national funding for ‘public ‘market-oriented’ cultural sector. They culture,’ meaning the standard free-to- allow targeted support for particular no transfer payments or ‘public culture’ funding use cultural facilities that all Chinese sectors and a more flexible approach to from national government. Spending balanced cities are required to maintain. In this funding, including grants to non-state between world city and local government. Shanghai is typical of first-tier Chinese institutions. In 2016 there were nine cities, due to China’s particularly culture funds with a total value of 12 decentralised funding regime. million USD. Some focus on the creative Percentage of national culture budget: industries or specifically support private Not identified – but very small However, Shanghai does receive funding institutions. via national strategic funds created to achieve specific policy objectives. The Publicity Department of the Sector/institutional profile of direct public In 2015, for example, 25 companies Shanghai Municipal Committee of the spend: Primarily core and project funding for and projects were subsidised by the Communist Party of China plays an state-managed institutions, though there is also Strategic Funds for Cultural Industry, important role in culture funding. It has managed by the Ministry of Finance. 25 affiliated public institutions, of which a focus on the creative industries. Strategic funds Statistics for this strategic funding are 22 are cultural organisations. The budget offer some grants to private cultural institutions. not available. for these 22 cultural organisations was Local government required to fund ‘public culture’ 24 million USD in 2016. It also manages At the world city level, Shanghai is a the Culture Development Promotion institutions, including libraries, culture centres and directly-controlled municipality, meaning fund, a strategic fund set up by the museums. that there are no regional intermediaries municipality of Shanghai. In 2015 the between it and the national government. fund gave 90 million USD to cultural Culture-dedicated spending by the city projects in the city. This is 33% of the Overall cultural spending profile: Private funding is government was 0.3% of its budget in city’s total culture budget. not common in China; the concept of ‘public culture’ 2016, slightly lower than the national implies institutions that are fully state-supported. average of 0.38%. Culture spending is The Municipal Committee of the CPC However businesses are starting to invest in culture. mainly managed by two government has a significant focus on the creative departments and one party committee industries. The Office of Shanghai department, discussed below. Cultural and Creative Industry Promotion Important non-culture public funders: and Leading Group, under the direction Government departments provide loan guarantee The Shanghai Municipal Administration of the Municipal Committee, is of Culture, Radio, Film and TV had a responsible for planning, policymaking provisions, investment funds, and tax exemptions. budget of 116 million USD in 2015- and coordination. It is also in charge of 16. It funds and manages 24 cultural a strategic fund, the Shanghai Cultural Shanghai Citizen Art institutions, including the Shanghai and Creative Industry Promotion Fund. Festival 2014. Photo © Museum and Shanghai Symphony In 2015 this fund gave 47 million USD Zhenliang Ye. Courtesy Orchestra, and also provides project- in grants. The Municipal Committee of Shanghai Theatre based funding for these organisations. It manages an arms-length organisation, Academy. supports the Shanghai International Arts the Shanghai Federation of Literary Festival and Shanghai Citizen Festival. and Art Circles, which runs educational Total funding for these organisations programs and culture exchanges, equals 90% of the Administration’s develops talent, and commissions culture budget. academic research. It also funds 12 associated alliances and 5 affiliated The Municipal Administration also organisations. In 2016 its budget was 19 manages strategic funds which reflect million USD.

116 117 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shanghai World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shanghai

The Shanghai Municipal Press and Indirect funding and Publication Bureau, a governmental private funding department which regulates and makes policy for the press and publishing Some government departments and industry, has a total budget of 9 million agencies provide indirect cultural funding, USD. including loan guarantee provisions, setting up investment funds, tax local level At the , Shanghai’s 15 exemptions and lower utility charges. districts are responsible for funding However we were unable to obtain cultural activities and local ‘public statistics for this indirect funding. culture’ institutions, including libraries, culture centres and museums. Beyond Individual donations to arts and culture this standard provision, they may set organisations are minimal in China. The up additional funds for culture, such concept of fundraising is still relatively as Fengxian’s ‘Xian culture’ grants. new to Chinese cultural organisations. Their combined culture budgets for Public organisations are not allowed 2016 totalled 402 million USD, 57% of to charge any fees to the public, which Shanghai’s public investment in culture. means their income comes almost

Other public funders entirely from public funding. Currently Shanghai has nearly 60 non- In Shanghai there is further significant state-owned museums and galleries. funding for the creative industries Shanghai businesses are increasingly administered by the Municipal Economic using culture as part of their offer, and Information Commission, Municipal to increase their profile, footfall and Development and Reform Commission, attractiveness. Property developers and the Science and Technology and hotel groups are developing private New funding models Shanghai Commission. These funds often benefit museums and galleries within commercial International Arts culture: for example, the Service buildings: for example Yuz Musuem, with The Shanghai government is encouraging Festival - Rising Sector Development Directional Fund, Arts Works. Photo © a total area of 9000 square metres, owned the development of new public-private Zhenliang Ye.Courtesy administered by the Development and by an Indonesian collector of Chinese partnerships. The Shanghai Culture of Shanghai Theatre Reform Commission, granted 7 million contemporary art. A large art space in Industrial Investment Fund, established Academy. USD to cultural projects. However, due to K11, a luxury shopping centre, has held by Haiting Securities and several leading difficulties separating out cultural spend, extremely popular exhibitions of Monet media groups, was the first to receive we have not included these funds in our and Picasso. approval from the China Securities statistics. Regulatory Commission. It invests both in the traditional cultural sector and in tourism, design and the leisure industries. It also helps cultural and creative institutions to restructure and become publicly traded.

118 119 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shanghai World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shanghai

Currency conversion: 1 CNY $ 0.159 USD Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

117 Shanghai Municipal Administration of Shanghai Municipal Administration of 2016 Official Budget. Figure refers to basic Culture, Radio, Film and TV budget 116 Culture, Radio, Film and TV / 2016 expenditure and project-based expenditure million USD

117 Nine culture funds: 12 million USD Shanghai Municipal Administration of These funds are: Animation and Game Culture, Radio, Film and TV / 2016 Funding; Development Funding for Shanghai Performing-Art Private Enterprises; Shanghai Non-Profit Performances Funding; Fine Arts In Schools Funding; Funding for State-owned Performing Arts Institutes Performing in Suburbs, Towns and Villages; Funding for Non-governmental Organisations Opening Museums in Shanghai; Shanghai Network Audio-visual Industry Funding; Shanghai Municipal Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection Funding; and Shanghai Public Cultural Projects Funding

117 Publicity Department of the Shanghai Publicity Department of the Shanghai 2016 Official Budget Municipal Committee of the Community Municipal Committee of the Community Party of China: 24 million Party of China / 2016

117 Culture Development Promotion Fund: 90 Publicity Department of the Shanghai 2016 Official Budget million USD Municipal Committee of the Community Party of China / 2016

117 Shanghai Cultural and Creative Industry Shanghai Municipal Administration of Promotion Fund: 47 million USD Culture, Radio, Film and TV / 2016

117 Shanghai Federation of Literary and Art Shanghai Federation of Literary and Art Circles: 19 million USD Circles / 2016

118 Shanghai Municipal Press and Shanghai Municipal Press and Publication Bureau: 9 million USD Publication Bureau / 2016

118 15 local districts: 402 million USD Districts budgets / BOP / 2016 Capital funding excluded Breakdown of culture, sports and media budgets were not available for five districts (Jiading district, Fengxian district, Baoshan district, Yangpu district and Songjiang district). Since their per capita spending on culture, sports and media were lower than the average culture spend per capita of the rest of the ten districts, aggregate budgets of these five districts were used instead.

New Year’s Eve celebration. Photo © Guolin Fu. Courtesy of Shanghai Theatre Academy

120 121 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Shenzhen

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 436M USD + 8M USD World City Local 71% 29% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect ? Private giving and sponsorship ?

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

51% Ministry for Culture of the63% French Development Community of the Culture 33% Culture, Industries and Culture Promotion Fund; Sports and Tourism Culture and Creative Industries Fund Administration 21% Ministry for Federal Cultural Institutions

100% 10 local 2% Publicity18% Flemish Ministry townships Departmentof of Culture, Youth, Shenzhen MunicipalSports and Media Committee

2% Shenzhen Federation of Literary10% Secretary and Arts Circles of State for Scientific Policy

World City 310M USD Local 126M USD

Open grants Culture budget

State-owned and affiliated cultural organisations

State-owned organisations

Culture budget

Shenzhen International Industrial Design Fair Photo courtesy of Shenzhen Municipal Government 122 123 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shenzhen World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shenzhen

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Exceptionally At the national level, Shenzhen’s wealth Department of the Shenzhen Municipal decentralised – as a wealthy city Shenzhen receives means that it does not attract transfer Committee of the Communist Party payments from the national government, of China play an important secondary no transfer payments or ‘public culture’ funding which are intended to support less role in culture funding as they manage from national government. The majority of spending prosperous localities. Nor does it receive the ‘government funds,’ strategic funds is at world city level. any funding from a national level for established by the city to support ‘public culture,’ meaning the standard particular industries or themes. In 2016 free-to-use cultural facilities that all there were two culture-related funds: the Percentage of national culture budget: Chinese cities are required to maintain. Development of the Culture Industries Around 0% In this, Shenzhen is typical of first-tier and Culture Promotion Fund, and the Chinese cities, due to China’s particularly Culture and Creative Industries Fund. decentralised funding regime. Together these funds totalled 191 million Sector/institutional profile of direct public USD, representing 63% of the dedicated spend: ‘Culture funds’ provide grants to At the world city level, culture-dedicated culture spending of the city. They represent both affiliated and non-governmental cultural spending by the city government totalled the government’s move towards a more 310 million USD, 0.4% of its budget in ‘market-oriented’ culture sector, as grants organisations, including the creative industries. 2016, slightly higher than the national are open to both affiliated and non- While core and grant funding is given to 14 average of 0.38%. Culture spending governmental cultural organisations. In government cultural organisations, large sums are in the city is managed by two different 2014, 381 project grants were awarded to government agencies. non-governmental cultural organisations also spent via ‘culture funds’ offering contestable from these funds. grants that are open to both affiliated and non- The remit of the Culture, Sports and governmental organisations. Local districts fund Tourism Administration includes culture, The Shenzhen Federation of Literary radio, film and television, sports, news and and Arts Circles is a non-governmental local ‘public culture’ institutions, such as libraries, publishing, and tourism. It directly funds 14 association of artists and writers. Its culture centres and museums. cultural organisations, including libraries, budget was 7 million USD. In addition to galleries, a symphony, and the heritage this budget, it administers a small Culture Overall cultural spending profile: Private funding management department. Core funding Promotion Fund – around 4 million USD in to these organisations was 52 million USD 2014, supporting 69 cultural activities. is not common in China; the concept of ‘public in 2016. On top of this, it provides project- culture’ implies institutions that are fully state- based funding to these organisations for At a local level, the 10 local districts of supported. Small private culture funds have been activities such as ‘Reading Month.’ This Shenzhen are responsible for funding accounts for another 49 million USD. cultural activities and local ‘public culture’ established and corporations sometimes put on institutions, such as libraries, culture cultural activities for their employees. The Publicity Department of the Shenzhen centres and museums. Beyond this Municipal Committee of the Communist standard provision, some have set up Party of China organises activities to additional funds for culture. For example, Important non-culture public funders: Some promote culture, supports local crafts and Futian and Nanshan have initiated a ‘non- support is offered to the creative industries by the publishes cultural research. It funds and profit culture activities tender’ system city’s Economy, Trade and Information Commission, manages the Shenzhen News, Film and TV through which they can ‘procure’ non-profit organisations to organise culture activities, and by the Science and Technology Innovation Centre as well as publishing the Shenzhen Cultural Industries Yearbook. Its total while Luohu and Baoan give grants to Committee. The Municipal Bureau of Education budget (including support for the Centre) private cultural organisations and activities. funds arts education programmes. was 7 million USD in 2015-16. Altogether, Shenzhen’s local districts spent 126 million USD in 2016, a little under 30% The Culture, Sports and Tourism of Shenzhen’s total culture budget. Administration and the Publicity

124 125 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shenzhen World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shenzhen

Other public funders Public indirect and private funding Shenzhen city government also offers significant support to the creative The ‘government funds’ for culture industries. For example, in 2014 the mentioned above also involve indirect Economy, Trade and Information methods of support, such as tax Commission of Shenzhen Municipality exemptions and a loan guarantee offered subsidies of 8 million USD to local provision. Data on the size of this support fashion brands. Similarly, the Shenzhen is not available. Cultural organisations Science and Technology Innovation also receive tax exemptions from the Committee awarded grants to seven Shenzhen government. creative industries organisations as part of their ‘Innovation Fund.’ Private funding for culture is not common in China; the concept of ‘public culture’ The Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of implies institutions that are fully state- Education also funds arts education supported. Yet Shenzhen is making programmes and cultural activities for efforts to increase private support for school-age children and young culture. Many corporations are based in people. Figures for its cultural spending the city, which has many young workers are not available, as these are not with a strong interest in culture. The city recorded separately. government encourages corporations to offer more cultural events, and local districts often offer small subsidies to these events as a gesture of goodwill.

A few private culture funds have been Shenzhen Music established in Shenzhen, which has New funding models Hall Photo courtesy of a reputation for being a pioneer in its Shenzhen Municipal approach to cultural funding. The Artron Shenzhen has embraced a concept Government Fund (set up by the Artron Arts Group) known as ‘Culture +.’ Thinking about and the Indigenous Culture Development the combinations ‘culture + technology,’ Fund (set up by the Shenzhen Charity ‘culture + entrepreneurship,’ and ‘culture Association) both have a national reach. In + finance’ has helped to open up new 2013, the Arton Fund offered 60,000 USD possibilities for public culture provision in project funding nationally. in Shenzhen, giving organisations the flexibility to access venture funding, crowdfunding, and funding from non- culture governmental agencies.

126 127 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Shenzhen World Cities Culture Finance Report

Currency conversion: 1 CNY $ 0.159 USD Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

125 Culture-dedicated spending by city People’s Government of Shenzhen City government budget: 51,229 million RMB government: 310 million, 0.4% Municipality / BOP / 2016

125 Culture, Sports and Tourism Culture, Sports and Tourism Administration core funding to 14 cultural Administration / 2016 organisations: 52 million

125 Culture, Sports and Tourism Culture, Sports and Tourism Administration project funding to 14 Administration / 2016 cultural organisations: 49 million

125 Publicity Department of the Shenzhen Publicity Department of the Shenzhen Municipal Committee of the Communist Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China culture budget: 7 million Party of China / 2016

125 Development of the Culture Industries The Culture, Sports and Tourism and Culture Promotion Fund, and the Administration / Publicity Department of Culture and Creative Industries Fund: 191 the Shenzhen Municipal Committee of million the Communist Party of China / 2016

125 Shenzhen Federation of Literary and Arts Shenzhen Federation of Literary and Arts Circles: 4 million Circles / 2014

125 Local districts cultural budget: 126 BOP / 2016 Data compiled based on 10 local districts’ million official budgets.

126 Economy, Trade and Information Economy, Trade and Information Commission of Shenzhen Municipality: Commission of Shenzhen Municipality / 8 million BOP / 2014

Citizens reading in Shenzhen library on a Sunday. Photo © Mo Han. Courtesy of Shenzhen University 128 129 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Stockholm

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 714M USD + ? National 47% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) Local 44%

Public Indirect ? World City Private giving and sponsorship ? 9%

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

21% Stockholm 39.5% National funding 40% 26 municipalities County Culture Administration

3% National funding 34% Stockholm County Culture 35% National Administration 9% National funding 30% 9% 26 funding 26 municipalities municipalities 45% Stockholm County Culture Administration 21% 26 municipalities 13.5% National funding

National 335M USD World City 63M USD Local 316M USD

Performing arts Funding for theatre, dance and Public libraries music Museums and exhibitions General cultural activities Culture related education Cultural heritage and archive (Folkbildning, folkhögskolor) Music/Culture School

Other cultural activities Museums, exhibitions, archives, Cultural education cultural heritage, design, film and Grants to artist media, libraries and other general expenditure

The Globe at Night Photo © Soren Andersson. Courtesy of City of Stockholm 130 131 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Stockholm World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Stockholm

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Moderately 1/ At the national level, funding for 3% of its total budget. It operates and Figure refers to National funds libraries, culture schools, festivals decentralised, with slightly less than half of funding derived to culture comes from a number of public Stockholm region institutions including the Swedish Arts and art galleries. spending at a national level. Council, Swedish Performing Arts Agency, Swedish National Heritage National and municipal cultural policy Percentage of national culture budget: 45% 1/ Board, Swedish Film Institute, and the is highly integrated, with common National Archives. 47% of public direct themes based on democratic access funding for the Stockholm region comes to culture. As the national capital Sector/institutional profile of direct public from the national government, with the and a regional driver of arts and spend: World city (county) spending focuses on main funder being the Swedish Arts culture, Stockholm works closely theatre, dance, music and cultural education. Council. The national government funds with central government, Stockholm and administers national institutions County Council, and neighbouring The largest proportion of local spending goes based in the capital, including the Royal municipalities on culture-related to libraries. Opera, Royal Dramatic Theatre, the infrastructure projects and events. A National Museum and National Maritime large number of independent cultural Museums. State expenditures derived to players receive support from both the Overall cultural spending profile: Private funding the Stockholm region in 2013 were 335 city and from the national government and sponsorship of culture is uncommon in million USD. via the Swedish Arts Council. Sweden, although several privately funded cultural At the world city level, responsibility for Since 2011, the City of Stockholm has institutions have recently been established culture lies with the Stockholm County made changes in its funding system in Stockholm. Culture Administration. In 2012-13 it aimed at actively promoting structural spent 63 million USD, of which 45% change in the arts and culture sector, prioritising reaching new audiences Important non-culture public funders: Include went to theatre, dance and music, and 34% went towards cultural education and reflecting the multicultural nature city planning and development offices (which plan via grants to youth organisations and of Stockholm. Although it is possible and implement cultural projects) and the Stockholm institutions for popular adult education to apply for three-year funding, the Business Region, which promotes both tourism (Folkhögskolar). emphasis is on funding for individual projects, with special development and the film industry. At the local level, Stockholm County funding available for innovative initiatives. includes 26 independent municipalities that coordinate their planning to form an On an even more local level, Stockholm integrated regional and urban entity. In Municipality is divided into fourteen 2012-13 the municipalities spent a total District Administrations. These receive of 316 million USD on culture. The largest city funding which is dedicated to proportion of this, 40%, went to libraries, ‘Children, culture and leisure’ and decide which are considered a policy priority as what proportion of this to allocate to suppliers of learning and recreation. culture. As it is not possible to separate out culture spend, this funding has not Stockholm Municipality (also known been included in our statistics. as the City of Stockholm) is the largest of these municipalities. In 2012-13, it spent 149 million USD on culture, which represents 47% of the total spending on culture by municipalities across the Stockholm region. The Stockholm municipality’s culture budget is about

132 133 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Stockholm World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Stockholm

Other public funders Indirect funding and private funding Other boards and divisions of the City of Stockholm are also involved in culture. Private funding and sponsorship of The city planning and development culture is uncommon in Sweden, offices are responsible for planning representing around 1% of total culture and implementing construction work, funding in Sweden. There are no including cultural projects. The Stockholm tax exemptions available for cultural Business Region (SBR) is responsible donations or sponsorship. for marketing Stockholm as a business and tourist destination, and supports Corporate sponsorship is generally only efforts to bring more film production to the achieved by the major state-run cultural Stockholm region and to facilitate the film institutions and does not represent a industry’s contacts within the city. large part of their budget. The Swedish savings bank foundations (partly owned by Swedbank, Sweden’s largest bank) sponsor both sports and culture, though their culture funding is limited.

The Postcode Lottery Culture Foundation is a private actor in the culture funding space. In 2013 it contributed 16.5 million USD to culture, but this was less than 1% of its total charitable spending.

In recent years, several privately funded Mural painting at cultural institutions have been established New funding models Odenplan. Photo © in Stockholm, including ABBA The Lisa Olsson. Courtesy Museum; Fotografiska, a photography Many young arts producers in Stockholm of City of Stockholm museum; Playhouse Theatre; and the are exploring alternative funding art museums Artipelag, Magasin III, approaches, with crowdfunding growing Sven-Harrys Konstmuseum and in popularity. One significant platform is Bonniers Konsthall. Crowdculture, which combines private donations with a public funding pool from the cultural budget, whose distribution is controlled by public support.

134 135 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Stockholm World Cities Culture Finance Report

Currency conversion: 1 SEK $ 0.15 USD Data Sources 2013 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

132 Percentage of national culture budget: National culture expenditures in regional Percentage of national funding derived to all 45% perspective 2013, Swedish Arts Council/ regions in Sweden (4.7 billion SEK) that were 2013 - 14 derived to Stockholm (2.1 billion SEK)

133 National level funding: 335 million National culture expenditures in regional perspective 2013, Swedish Arts Council/ 2013

133 Stockholm County Culture Swedish Agency for Cultural Policy Administration: 63 million Analysis / Samhällets utgifter för kultur 2012-2013 / Kulturfakta 2014:2

133 Municipalities culture expenditures: Swedish Agency for Cultural Policy 316 million Analysis / Samhällets utgifter för kultur 2012-2013 / Kulturfakta 2014:2

133 Stockholm municipality culture spending: Swedish Agency for Cultural Policy Stockholm Municipality’s budget was 47% 149 million Analysis / Samhällets utgifter för kultur of the total budget of all Stockholm region 2012-2013 / Kulturfakta 2014:2 municipalities

134 Postcode Lottery Culture Foundation: Postkodslotteriets / 2013 16.5 million

Royal Palace Sprint Photo © Henrik Trygg. Courtesy of City of Stockholm 136 137 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Sydney

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 375M USD + ? National Regional Local 22% 29% 49% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public Indirect ?

Private giving and sponsorship 37M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

86% Department of 90% NSW State Communications and Government the Arts

100% 43 local councils

14% Council for the Arts

5% 5% Screen ArtsNSW NSW

National 84M USD Regional 107M USD Local 184M USD

Portfolio organisations State Cultural Institutions Culture budget

Grants Grants

Grants

Vivid Sydney, Sydney Opera House Photo © Soren Andersson. Paul Patterson. Courtesy of City of Sydney 138 139 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Sydney World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Sydney

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Decentralised, with At the national level, culture is the ArtsNSW, part of the NSW Department significant regional and local funding. There is no responsibility of the Ministry of Arts, part of Justice, is the arts and culture of the Department of Communications policy and development body for the coordinating institution at world city level (Greater and the Arts. A large part of national government of New South Wales. Sydney), and therefore no corresponding spend. culture funding is allocated to a portfolio It supports artists and key arts and of state-supported institutions. Of the cultural organisations through both twelve national cultural institutions infrastructure and targeted grants, and Percentage of national culture budget: 14% in the Ministry of Arts portfolio, three works collaboratively with NSW cultural are located or co-located in Sydney, institutions, the arts and cultural sector Sector/institutional profile of direct public including Screen Australia and the and partners within government. In 2015- spend: Primarily to state cultural institutions and National Maritime Museum. Total 16, its Arts and Cultural Development funding to these three organisations was Programme provided 5 million USD arms-length bodies at both national and regional 72 million USD in 2015-16. The Ministry funding to Sydney based organizations level. Local government supports public libraries of Arts also funds specific short-term and individuals. and cultural activities. programs and grants to both institutions and individuals. Screen NSW, an arms-length organization supporting the film and Overall cultural spending profile: Dominated Australia Council for the Arts, also television industry in New South by public direct funding, with some indirect located in Sydney, is the Australian Wales, received 5 million USD in Government’s arts funding and advisory funding in 2016. contribution from a variety of tax incentives. Giving body, operating at ‘arms length.’ It by individuals and foundations nearly three times receives funding from the Ministry At the world city level, the ‘Greater the size of corporate sponsorships. of Arts. Its grants to Sydney based Sydney’ metropolitan area is made up organisations and individuals were 7 of 43 separate councils. No cultural million USD in 2015-16. In late 2015 funding data is gathered at the Greater Important non-culture public funders: A number its four-year budget was cut by 55 Sydney level, nor is cultural policy or of funders at both national and regional levels, million USD. An additional 36 million implementation strategy determined at drawing on tourism, heritage and environmental USD over that period was redirected to this level. fund a new Catalyst programme, to be preservation budgets. administered directly by the Ministry, At the local level, Sydney’s 43 councils which aims to support the creation of fund cultural activities and public partnerships, new infrastructure, and libraries. Their estimated total spending Hyde Park, Sydney innovative approaches to participation. on culture was 184 million USD. Photo © Joy Lai. In 2015-16, an estimated 4 million USD Courtesy of CIty of grant funding was spent in Sydney via Sydney the Catalyst programme.

At the regional level, there are six ‘State Cultural Institutions’ funded by the state in New South Wales (NSW), including the Sydney Opera House, the State Library of NSW, Powerhouse Museum and Sydney Living Museum. All are based in Sydney. Total grant funding for these organizations was 96 million USD in 2014-15. (Capital grants are excluded.)

140 141 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Sydney World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Sydney

Other public funders Public indirect and private funding Other national sources of culture funding for Sydney include Tourism Australia, Given public cuts in culture spending, Department of Environment Heritage a key priority for the culture sector in Grants and Funding, and the National Australia has been to encourage private Heritage Trust of Australia. giving.

The Sydney Harbour Federation Trust is a The national Ministry of the Arts self-funding government agency, part of administers a Cultural Gifts Program the national Department of Environment which incentivises donations of art and and governed by a board of trustees. It artefacts to public cultural institutions. manages key sites on the harbour such as Donors are able to claim the value of the Cockatoo Island. Most of its investment donated item as a deduction on their is in infrastructure; the cultural events it income tax. In 2014–15 there were nearly hosts are either state or federally funded 600 donations made. The estimated value through other agencies, such as ArtsNSW to Sydney was 10 million USD. or the Australia Council. In 2015, major cultural organisations Other state spending on culture derives in Sydney received 17 million USD in from tourism, heritage and environmental private donations and 10 million USD in preservation budgets. Heritage and sponsorships. environmental preservation are major concerns of the New South Wales The Australian Cultural Fund, government, with aboriginal arts, history administered by Creative Partnerships Photo © Sharon Hickey. and tradition an important strand within Australia, is a ‘collective funding platform New funding models this. State bodies and statutory authorities Courtesy of City of for Australian artists.’ Donations made via Sydney responsible for heritage include the the platform are tax deductible. The Australian Council for the Arts Department of Environment; Department estimates that crowdfunding raised 4 of Planning, Heritage Branch; Historic Private and Public Ancillary Funds are million USD for arts and culture nationally Houses Trust of NSW; and Aboriginal foundations or charitable trusts run, in 2013-14. Creative Partnerships Australia Affairs NSW. respectively, by individuals and families runs a match funding programme called or by non-profits and trustees. Donations MATCH which will support 43 campaigns Destination NSW, mainly funded by the are tax deductible and funds are exempt in 2016, of which 20 are hosted on the state treasury, spent 95.8 million USD from income tax. In 2012-13, these funds Australian Cultural Fund platform. in 2013-14 to promote tourism. This distributed 41 million USD to culture included funding for cultural events, nationally. such as commercial theatre, that attract tourists to the area.

142 143 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Sydney World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Sydney

Customs House Origami Tiger. Photo © Paul Patterson. Currency conversion: Courtesy of City of 1 AUD $ 0.752 USD Data Sources 2015 average Sydney

Page Data Source / Year Note

140 Percentage of national culture budget: Portfolio Budget Statements, Share of federal culture budget allocated to 14% Communication and the Arts Portfolio/ Greater Sydney. 2015-16 National budget concerns budget to the Department of Communications and the Arts (outcome 2, AUD 271M), Screen Australia (AUD 84M), Old Parliament House (AUD 18M), National Portrait Gallery of Australia (AUD 26M), National Museum of Australia (AUD 43M), National Library of Australia (AUD 53M), National Gallery of Australia (AUD 29M), National Film and Sound Archive of Australia (AUD 26M), Australian National Maritime Museum (AUD 24M), Australian Film, Television and Radio School (AUD 24), and the Australia council (AUD 185M).

141 Budget for Screen Australia, National Portfolio Budget Statements, Screen Australia budget: AUD 84 Maritime Museum, Australian film, Communication and the Arts Portfolio/ million. Proportionated based on 60% of Television and Radio School: 72 million BOP/2015-16 employment in the screen sector were from NWS. Assume these 60% of workers live in Greater Sydney Area. Australian film, Television and Radio School: AUD 24 million National Maritime Museum: 22 million USD

141 Australia Council for the Arts: 7 million Australia Council for the Arts

141 Catalyst programme: 4 million Australia Council for the Arts/BOP/ Grants to NSW : AUD 9.6 million 2015-16 Proportionated based on the proportion of the NSW population living in Greater Sydney (60%)

141 State Cultural Institutions: 96 million Annual reports/2014-16 Sydney Living Museum: AUD 17 million Art Gallery of New South Wales: AUD 24 million Australian Museum: AUD 23 million State Library NSW: AUD 15 million Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences: AUD 35 million Sydney opera house: AUD 113 million

141 ArtsNSW: 5 million USD ArtsNSW / 2016 Based on Arts Culture and Develop Multi- year Programme 2016 to 2018. For multi-year grants, annual average was used to estimate funding for 2016

141 Screen NSW: 5 million Screen Australia Stakeholder Report Figure concerns total amount of grants in /2014-15 2014-15. 142 Sponsorships: 10 million USD Australian Major Performing Arts Group Data taken from Tracking Changes in Assume all grants went to Greater Sydney / 2014 Corporate Sponsorship and Private area. Donations 2014. 141 43 councils: 184 million Australian Bureau of Statistics / BOP / Estimated based on the ABS estimate of 2012-13 per person culture spend (recurrent) in NSW NSW major performing arts organisations (AUD 50.64) multiplied by Greater Sydney figure. All NSW organisations that provided population (4,840,600) data were based in Sydney

142 Cultural Gifts Program: 10 million USD City of Sydney / Australian Bureau of Cultural Gifts Program national value: 142 Indirect public funding from Private and Data Australia / 2013-14 'Taxation Statistics 2012-13 Charities and Statistics / BOP / 2013-14 AUD 55 million. Assume value of gifts Public Ancillary Funds: 41 million Deductible Gifts'. proportionate to cities’ GDP. Proportionated by Greater Sydney GDP share (23% of National figure national GDP) 143 Australian Council for the Arts Australia Council for the Arts / 2014 National figure; taken from 'Arts Nation' 2015 142 Private donations: 17 million Australian Major Performing Arts Group Data taken from Tracking Changes in crowdfunding: 4 million edition / 2014 Corporate Sponsorship and Private Donations 2014.

NSW major performing arts organisations figure. All NSW organisations that provided data were based in Sydney

144 145 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Tokyo

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 655M USD + 35M USD National World City Local 28% 30% 42% (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated)

Public indirect ?

Private giving and sponsorship 586M USD

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

10% National 63% Bureau of Citizens and Institutes Cultural Affairs, Culture for Cultural Promotion Division Heritage

8% Agency for Cultural Affairs 4% Tokyo 100% 7% National Metropolitan 62 local Diet Library Government authorities

44% Japan 7% Arts Arts Council Council Tokyo

31% National 28% Metropolitan Museums of Arts Foundation for History and Culture

National 185M USD World City 196M USD Local 274M USD

National theatres and open grants Culture budget Projects, management of cultural institutions, maintenance National museums Maintenance of cultural facilities of heritage.

State-owned cultural organisations Project funding

Project funding Tokyo Metropolitan Symphony

National Diet Library

* National level data was gathered based on Tokyo metropolitan Government’s capacity Roppongi Art Night 2014 Photo © Sunny Photo. Courtesy of Tokyo Metropolitan Government 146 147 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Tokyo World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Tokyo

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Relatively decentralised, At the national level, the Agency for The National Diet Library is the national with only 28% of funding provided by the national Cultural Affairs, which is part of the library founded in Tokyo. Together with Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, its International Library of Children’s government. Local government is responsible for Science and Technology, oversees Literature, it received 13 million USD in the largest proportion of public funding. national cultural institutions and supports national funding in 2015-16. arts and cultural projects. The budget of the Agency for Cultural Affairs is based At the world city level, Tokyo Percentage of national culture budget: 20% on the Mid-Term Vision for regional and Metropolitan Government has created a national revitalisation, aiming at the budget to fund projects to make Tokyo Sector/institutional profile of direct public creation of a cultural and artistic nation. Its one of the most globally recognised spend: At national and metropolitan level, total budget for the fiscal year 2015 was cities, and to accelerate the preparation 858 million USD, of which arts and cultural towards 2020 Tokyo Games based on expenditure goes primarily to arms-length projects and cultural heritage spending on the Long Term Vision for Tokyo. The institutions which manage national cultural Tokyo was estimated to be 15 million USD. Culture Promotion Division of the Tokyo institutions and facilities. Significant grants Metropolitan Government’s Bureau of Moving towards the 2020 Olympic Citizens and Cultural Affairs is responsible programmes. Local government funds projects and Games in Tokyo, it is making active for cultural policy and the promotion manages local facilities and heritage sites. efforts to foster young talent, to restore of arts and culture. Its budget is 196 and utilise cultural properties, to promote million USD, 0.4% of the total budget of international cultural exchange, and to the Tokyo Metropolitan Government. It Overall cultural funding profile: Corporations and improve and enhance infrastructure for has a focus on arts and cultural creation foundations are the main private funders, contributing the dissemination of culture. and dissemination to support the 2020 more than double the direct culture budget of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. There are three Independent Tokyo Metropolitan Government. No statistics Administrative Institutions (IAI) affiliated Tokyo Metropolitan Foundation for available for earned revenue. to the Agency for Cultural Affairs – History and Culture receives 33% the Japan Arts Council, the National (65million USD) of the Culture Promotion Important non-culture public funders: Many Museums of Arts, and the National Division’s budget. It is responsible Institutes for Cultural Heritage. for administering Tokyo Metropolitan government departments have functional Together, funding for the three IAIs is Government’s 9 arts and cultural facilities, responsibilities and budgets for culture. These 157 million USD, 85% of national direct as well as Arts Council Tokyo. include the Bureau of Industrial and Labor Affairs funding for culture. Arts Council Tokyo was the first Arts Tourism Division, Tokyo Metropolitan Board of The National Museums of Arts and the Council in Japan, established in 2012. Education and the Office of Education. National Institutes for Cultural Heritage It is funded by the Tokyo Metropolitan are responsible for managing the national Foundation for History and Culture and museums. Japan Arts Council funds represents 20 % (13 million USD) of Photo © Shoko Ogushi. Courtesy of six national theatres for the traditional the foundation’s total budget. It plays a Tokyo Metropolitan performing arts and manages the Japan central role in Tokyo’s arts and cultural Government Arts Fund which supports cultural and policy and makes public grants to arts artistic activities and artists who work in organisations. traditional and contemporary performing arts. Japan Arts Council is the most In 2015, Tokyo Metropolitan Government significant national funder of Tokyo created the Tokyo Vision for Arts and culture, representing 44% (81million USD) Culture and established the Tokyo Arts of total national direct funding. Fund to embody the Long Term Vision.

148 149 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Tokyo World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Tokyo

With a budget of 83 million USD (10 billion Public indirect funding and 1/ The Bureau of Construction JPY) for 5 years, the fund makes grants private funding also has a budget for to support cultural programmes for the maintaining cultural heritage in parks. 2020 Tokyo Games and programmes by According to the 2013-14 KMK Mécénat Arts Council Tokyo. Arts Council Tokyo is However its budget has Survey of 420 corporations and 189 been omitted from these responsible for arts and cultural projects corporate foundations, corporations and statistics due to difficulty that will take place around and beyond in separating its culture foundations gave 525 million USD to the spend. the Games. arts and culture in Tokyo. This is more than double the direct culture budget local level At the , Tokyo’s 62 local of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, authorities are responsible for funding demonstrating the high level of interest local arts and cultural projects, and of corporations in supporting arts and managing local cultural facilities and culture. cultural heritage sites. Their total culture budget was 274 million USD in 2015-16 The mission of the Association for (except capital work). Redevelopment Corporate Support of the Arts is to bring by Toshima ward to form an international together corporations and organisations cultural hub, as well as the newly opened interested in promoting the arts and Sumida Hokusai Museum funded by culture, and establishing a society full Sumida ward and individual supporters, of creativity, vitality and appreciation are good examples of the important role of diversity. It advocates for a project that local authorities play in Tokyo arts called “Creative Archipelago” which and culture. encourages social investment and promotes corporate participation in Other public funders culture all over the country, in particular by taking advantage of the opportunity of the Other government departments at the Tokyo Games. A survey reveals that over world city level also have functional 20% of corporations are examining the responsibilities and budgets for Photo courtesy of possibility of participating in the cultural Tokyo Metropolitan culture. This includes the budget to programmes around the Tokyo Games. Government implement projects set forth in the Long Term Vision for Tokyo, which Individual charitable giving to specific includes cultural programmes. In 2015- types of non-profit organisations is tax 16 these departments included the deductible. Research by the Economic Bureau of Industrial and Labour Affairs, and Social Research Institute of the Tourism Division (8 million USD), Tokyo Cabinet Office suggested that 5% of Metropolitan Board of Education (11 individual giving goes to art and culture million USD, public library budget) and the nationally. Office of Education (10 million USD).

Apart from these three, other government departments secured 6 million USD for arts and cultural projects in 2015-16 1/. These had dedicated culture budgets devoted to maintaining Tokyo’s cultural heritage.

150 151 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Tokyo World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Tokyo

Currency conversion: 1 ¥ $ 0.0083 USD Data Sources 2015 average

Page Data Source / Year Note

148 Percentage of national culture budget: Agency for Cultural Affairs / Tokyo Percentage of culture budget by Agency for 20% Metropolitan Government / 2015 - 16 Cultural Affairs budget (including National Museums of Arts, National Institutes for Cultural Heritage and Japan Arts Council) (¥100.5bln) allocated to Tokyo (¥20.8bln)

149 Funding for three IAIs: 157 million National Museums of Arts / National Institutes for Cultural Heritage / Japan Arts Council / 2015

149 Agency for Cultural Affairs other Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2013 spending: 15 million

149 Japan Arts Council funding to Tokyo: Japan Arts Council / Tokyo Metropolitan Total funding to Tokyo from Japan Arts 44% of total national direct funding Government / 2015 Council: ¥9.8 billion.

149 National Diet Library, National Diet National Diet Library / 2015 Library funding: 13 million

149 Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s budget: Bureau of Citizens and Cultural Affairs ¥6,235bln (2015) Culture Promotion Division budget: 196 million; 0.4% of the city’s total budget

149 Tokyo Metropolitan Foundation for Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 History and Culture: 65 million

149 Tokyo Arts Fund: 83 million USD Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 5-year budget, excluded from analysis.

150 Local authorities total culture budget: 274 Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 This figure excludes capital budget million

150 Bureau of Industrial and Labor Affairs Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 Tourism Division: 8 million

150 Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education: Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 11 million

150 Office of Education: 10 million Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015

150 Other government departments: 6 million Tokyo Metropolitan Government / 2015 Bureau of Urban Development, the Bureau of Construction, Bureau of Waterworks and Bureau of Sewerage. The Bureau of Construction’s budget figure has been omitted from our statistics due to the difficulty in separating its culture spend.

150 Corporate and corporate foundations’ KMK Mecenat Survey / Tokyo giving: 525 million Metropolitan Government / 2013 Fukushima Festival 2014. Courtesy of Tokyo Metropolitan Government

152 153 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report Toronto

Funding for culture Public direct funding - sources

Public direct 733M USD + 0.9M USD National World city 418M USD 179M USD (culture-dedicated + non-culture-dedicated) 57% 27%

Regional Public Indirect 349M USD 118M USD 16% Private giving and sponsorship 15M USD + ?

Culture-dedicated public direct funding

19% Ontario 12% 91% Department of Canadian 4% Public Media Economic Heritage libraries Development Development Corporation and Culture Division

56% Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture 74% Public libraries and Sport

2% Canada Council for the Arts

19% Ontario 14% 7% Canada Arts Council Economic Council for Development the Arts 2% Ontario and Culture Trillium Division Foundation

National 418M USD Regional 118M USD World City 197M USD

91% Grants 56% Grants 74% Public libraries

7% Grants 19% Grants 14% Cultural service budget

2% Grants 19% Grants 12% Cultural grants

4% Public libraries

2% Grants

Toronto Luminato Festival 2015 Photo courtesy of City of Toronto 154 155 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Toronto World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Toronto

Overview Culture-dedicated public direct funding

Public funding system: Somewhat centralised, At the national level, the Department USD funding for Toronto in 2015-16. This with a small majority of funding provided at the of Canadian Heritage is the main included grants to a portfolio of regularly government department responsible for funded organisations, independent national level. Regional (provincial) and world city culture. In 2014-15 it spent 365 million organisations and individuals. level also play a significant if smaller role. There is USD directly in Toronto, mostly going no local spend. to grants programmes administered The Ontario Media Development in Toronto. Its portfolio organisations Corporation is a government agency that include four departmental agencies supports media development, including Percentage of national culture budget: 19% (including Canadian Radio-television and film and television, publishing, music and Telecommunications Commissions and digital media. It runs funding programmes, Sector/institutional profile of direct public the Library and Archives Canada), ten administers tax credits and carries out crown corporations (including Canada research. In 2015-16, 473 grants were given spend: National spend primarily supports grants Council for the Arts, National Gallery of to Toronto-based organisations, totalling programmes administered in Toronto. World city Canada) and one administrative tribunal. 22 million USD. spend is dominated by public libraries (74% of It also runs strategic initiatives such as the Canada Cultural Investment Fund, which The Ontario Trillium Foundation, also world city level funding for culture). helps arts organisations develop new overseen by the Ministry, is Canada’s revenue streams and business strategies. largest grant making foundation, working Overall cultural spending profile: Indirect public in a broad range of areas including the The Canada Council for the Arts, environmental, the elderly, and social funding, in the form of tax credits, is significant. one of the ten crown corporations, inclusion. In 2015-16 it gave 3 million USD Toronto also has a high level of individual, charitable is supported by endowments and to Toronto in arts and culture grants. and corporate donations. bequests as well as government funds. In 2014-15 it provided 26 million USD The Ontario government provided 5 million in grants to institutions and individuals USD to public libraries in Toronto in 2015-16. Important non-culture public funders: A number based in Toronto. Telefilm Canada, of national and regional departments fund culture, another crown corporation that supports At the world city level, the City of although budget figures were not available. At city the screen-based sector, invested Toronto’s Economic Development and approximately 27 million USD in Culture Division (EDC) is responsible level, funding comes from Toronto Parks, Forestry production funding in Toronto. for culture. In 2016 its cultural services and Recreation, Toronto Regional Conservation budget was 50 million USD. Of this, 47% regional level Authority and Tourism Toronto, as well as from a At the , the Ontario Ministry (23 million USD) was devoted to Cultural of Tourism, Culture and Sport provides Grants: 16 million USD administered via billboard tax. provincial cultural policies, programs Arts Council Toronto, and the remaining and services. It has a portfolio of cultural 7 million USD granted directly by Photo © Courtesy of organisations and service agencies, EDC to a portfolio of 11 Major Cultural City of Toronto of which three – Art Gallery of Ontario, Organisations (including the Art Gallery Ontario Science Centre, and the Royal of Ontario, National Ballet of Canada and Ontario Museum – are based in Toronto. Pride Toronto) and 6 Local Arts Service They received 56.5 million USD in 2015- Organisations. In 2013, Toronto set a 16. The Ministry also offers grants via target to increase per capita spend on a number of programmes, totalling 9 culture from $18 to $25 CAD by 2016 million USD for Toronto in 2015-16. (excluding public libraries funding). By 2015 it had achieved 92% of this target. The Ministry of Culture oversees the Ontario Arts Council, an arms-length In 2016 Toronto Public Library received grant-making agency which gave over 147 million USD from the City of Toronto, 1800 grants, representing 23 million representing 74% of city level funding.

156 157 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Toronto World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Toronto

Other public funders Public indirect and private funding On a city level, Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation maintains public and Indirect funding is an important source green space in the city and organises of funding for culture in Toronto, and community festivals. Its budget is not includes incentives at national, provincial included in this report due to difficulty and city level. separating culture-specific spend. Toronto Regional Conservation Authority National tax credits for film and is responsible for the Black Creek Pioneer television total 365 million USD Village, an open-air heritage museum of nationally. Toronto, as Canada’s leading the 1800s village. In 2015-16 its funding for production centre, second only to Los the Black Creek Pioneer Village was 0.3 Angeles and New York City in North million USD. America, receives an estimated 108 million USD from these credits. Tourism Toronto also supports cultural events, such as sponsoring the Nuit Most provincial indirect funding is focused Blanche arts festival. It spent 0.6 million on the creative industries. Ontario Media USD on culture in 2014-15. Development Corporation administers a number of tax credits for the creative In 2009, Toronto introduced a Billboard industries (including audiovisual, computer Tax, which was upheld by the Supreme animation, digital media and book Court in 2012 after a challenge from publishing) which totalled 238 million the sign industry. Revenue was used to USD for Toronto in 2015-16. Provincial fund a 22 million USD arts and culture legislation partially exempts some of reserve which is now being used to meet Toronto’s charities (which include cultural The City of Toronto Toronto’s commitment of $25 CAD per organisations) from property taxes. Some Individual donations to the arts and New funding models celebrates the capita arts funding. large cultural institutions, such as the culture are high in Canada. For example, opening ceremonies Art Gallery of Ontario, are exempt from in 2014, the Toronto not-for-profit Since 2000, Tides Canada has operated for the Pan Am Ontario’s Ministry of Health, Ministry property taxes by special legislation. performing arts sector is estimated as a national shared platform to raise Games at Nathan Phillips Square of Education, Ministry of Economic to have received 9 million USD from funds for social change and deliver shared Development, Employment and Photo © Dan Galbraith/ Toronto City Council offer Below individuals, 3 million from trusts governance and administration expertise. Details Group. Infrastructure, Ministry of Community and Market Rent leases on a case-by- and foundations, and 2 million from It is not specifically focused on culture but Courtesy of City of Social Services and Office of Francophone case basis to cultural and community corporations. Estimated indirect public includes some art-based projects, such Toronto. Affairs all fund culture-related projects. organisations. Meanwhile, the funding as a result of these donations as ArtReach Toronto. Budget figures were not available. Imagination, Manufacturing, Innovation, was 2 million USD. Technology (IMIT) Program encourages On a federal level, FedDev Ontario, construction and renovation in certain Industry Canada, Employment and Social sectors – including the creative industries Development Canada, Parks Canada, and and tourist attractions – by granting Environment Canada have all invested in businesses “60% of the increase in the culture-related projects in Toronto. municipal taxes attributable to the eligible development over a 10-year period.”

158 159 World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Toronto World Cities Culture Finance Report City profile Toronto

Evergreen Brick Currency conversion: Works Courtesy of City 1 $ CAD 1.279 USD Data Sources 2015 average of Toronto.

Page Data Source / Year Note

156 Percentage of national culture budget: Canadian Actors' Equity Association/ Percentage of national culture budget (2.15 19% BOP / 2014 - 15 billion CAD) allocated to Toronto. National culture budget includes budgets for Department of Canadian Heritage and Selected Cultural Agencies and Crown Corporations, excluding Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

157 Canadian Heritage spending in Toronto: Department of Canadian Heritage / Total amount of Grants & Contributions with 365 million USD 2014 - 15 postal codes that start with “M” (Toronto region) for 2014-15. This includes all Canadian Heritage grant and contribution programs. This figure does not include any language or sport agreements, nor funding through the portfolio agencies (Canada Council, Telefilm, NFB, etc.).

157 Canada Council for the Arts: 26 million Canada Council for the Arts / 2014 - 15 USD

157 Telefilm Canada: 27 million USD Telefilm Canada / Canadian Media Estimated based on Telefilm’s national Producers Association / BOP / 2013-14 production funding (65 million CAD), proportionated with Ontario’s volume of film and television production (38% of that in Canada; Economic Report on the Screen- based Media Production Industry in Canada, 2015) Given that Toronto is the third largest film production location in North America, it is assumed that the vast majority of the production in Ontario happened in Toronto.

157 Art Gallery of Ontario, Ontario Science Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Centre, Royal Ontario Museum: 56.5 Sport / 2015-16 million USD 158 Tourism Toronto: 0.6 million USD Tourism Toronto / 2014 - 15 157 Ontario Ministry of Tourism, other grants: Figures include grants from Culture 9 million USD Development Fund, Community Museum 158 National tax credits for film and Canadian Audio-Visual Certification Projected value of Canadian Film or Video Operating Grants, Heritage Organizational television: 365 million USD Office / 2013 Production Tax Credit (CPTC) and Film Development Grants, Provincial Heritage or Video Production Services Tax Credit Organizations, Ontario Cultural Attractions (PSTC). Fund, and Celebrate Ontario 158 Tax credits for film and television to Canadian Audio-Visual Certification Estimated based on national tax credits for film 157 Ontario Arts Council: 23 million USD Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Toronto: 108 million USD Office / BOP / 2013 and television (365 million USD), proportionated Sport / 2015-16 with Ontario’s volume of film and television production (38% of that in Canada; Economic 157 Ontario Media Development Corporation: Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Report on the Screen-based Media Production 22 million USD Sport / 2015-16 Industry in Canada, 2015) 157 Ontario Trillium Foundation: 3 million Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Given Toronto is the third largest film USD Sport / 2015-16 production location in North America, it is assumed that the majority of production 157 Ontario public libraries: 5 million USD Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and activities in Ontario happen in Toronto. Sport / 2015-16 158 Ontario Media Development Corporation Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and 157 Economic Development and Culture City of Toronto / 2015 - 16 tax credits: 238 million USD Sport / 2015-16 Division, cultural service budget: 50 million USD 159 Performing arts sector: 9 million USD Statistics Canada / Invest Toronto/ BOP Figures only concern not-for-profit performing individual giving, 3 million USD trust / 2014 arts organisations. 157 Economic Development and Culture City of Toronto / 2015 - 16 and foundation giving, 2 million USD Estimated based on Ontario private funding data Division; cultural grants: 23 million USD corporate funding (Statistics Canada, CANSIM table 361-0080), proportionated with size of Toronto’s economy 157 Arts Council Toronto: 16 million USD City of Toronto / 2015 - 16 (25% of the Ontario’s GDP, Invest Toronto) 157 Major Cultural Organisations: 7 million City of Toronto / 2015 - 16 • Corporate donations and sponsorships: USD 11.5 million CAD • Individual donations and donations 157 Toronto Public Library: 147 million USD City of Toronto / 2015 - 16 from fundraising events: 48.3 million CAD 158 Black Creek Pioneer Village: 0.3 million City of Toronto / 2015 – 16 • Foundations and other private sector USD grants: 17.8 million CAD

160 161 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report

Acknowledgements and Special Thanks research partners

Amsterdam London New York City Shanghai Tokyo

Araf Ahmadali, Policy Jackie McNerney, Acting Ryan Max, Director Prof Changyong Huang, Yoshie Irie, Researcher advisor for Arts and Head of Culture, Mayor of of External Affairs, President of Shanghai for the Arts and Culture Culture, City of Amsterdam London’s Office Department of Cultural Theatre Academy; Director Cultural Policy, Planning Affairs, New York City of the World Cities Co- and Coordination Section, ordinated Centre for Culture Culture Promotion Division, and Innovation Bureau of Citizens and Cultural Affairs, Tokyo Brussels Los Angeles Paris Metropolitan Government

Shenzhen Toronto

Denis Laurent, Head of the Bronwyn Mauldin, Carine Camors, Culture Department, City Director of Research and Urban Economist, IAU Brussels Evaluation, Los Angeles Ile-de-France County Arts Commission Odile Soulard, Urban Laura Zucker, Executive Economist, IAU Yurong Huang, Director of Lori Martin, Senior Cultural Director, Los Angeles Ile-de-France Department of Academic Affairs Officer, Arts and County Arts Commission Research, Institute for Culture, City of Toronto Cultural Industries, Shenzhen University Kim Nguyen, Research Analyst, Economic Development and Culture Mayor of London World Cities Culture Istanbul Moscow San Fransisco Stockholm Summit 2015 Finance Eugenia Silina, Research Report Roundtable Analyst, Economic For continued leadership of the World session. Photo Development and Culture, City of Toronto Cities Culture Forum and especially Courtesy of Greater Justine Simons, Deputy Mayor for London Authority. Sally Hon, Manager, Culture, and Jackie McNerney, World Cultural Partnerships, City of Toronto Cities Culture Forum Project Manager Viveca Waak, Advisor, from Mayor of London’s Culture Team. Maria Privalova, General Anh Thang Dao-Shah, Department of Culture Director of the Moscow Policy and Evaluation Strategy, City of Central Library named after Manager, San Francisco Stockholm Sciences-Po Capstone team N.A. Nekrasov Arts Commission Esma Firuze Küyük, Expert Adrien Simorre; Benedicte Busquet; of Culture & Tourism, Alina Bogatkova, First Sydney Istanbul Office of the Deputy Director of the Seoul Remi Caliskan-Heniau; Ministry of Culture and Moscow Central Library Tiffany Tang Tourism named after N.A. Nekrasov, Deputy Director of Moscow Nehan Bekar, Department Institute for Social and Special thanks to Carine Camors and Manager, Strategy & Cultural Programs (MISCP) Project Development Odile Soulard for overseeing the original Branch, Istanbul Provincial Yulia Kim, Research Sciences Po Capstone project. Assistant, Moscow Institute Directorate of Culture and Ianto Ware, Strategy of social and cultural Tourism Hae-Bo Kim, Head, Advisor – Culture, City of programs Research&Development Sydney DataArts US Team, Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture

162 163 World Cities Culture Finance Report World Cities Culture Finance Report

Credits

World Cities Culture Finance Report BOP Consulting Editorial Team

Editorial and content direction Richard Naylor Paul Owens

Project management, data collection, research, analysis Yvonne Lo Matthieu Prin Andrea Cetrulo Jonathan Todd Yilei Feng

Writing and editing Sophia Woodley

Design and infographics Ollie McGhie

WCCF Advisory Group – Research Alina Bogatkova, First Deputy Director of the Moscow Central Library named after N.A. Nekrasov, Deputy Director of Moscow Institute for Social and Cultural Programs (MISCP)

Carine Camors, Urban Economist, IAU Ile-de-France

Prof Changyong Huang, President of Shanghai Theatre Academy; Director of the World Cities Co-ordinated Centre for Culture and Innovation

Hae-Bo Kim, Head, Research&Development Team, Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture

Bronwyn Mauldin, Director of Research and Evaluation, Los Angeles County Arts Commission

Maria Privalova, General Director of the Moscow Central Library named after N.A. Nekrasov

Odile Soulard, Urban Economist, IAU Ile-de-France

Inauguration du nouveau piétonnier de Bruxelles, summer 2015. Photo © Vincent Peal, courtesy of City of Brussels 164 165 World Cities Culture Finance Report

www.bop.co.uk 166