The rhetoric of cultural policies and the issue of ‘getting things done’: Bologna cultural capital 10 years after

City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

City, Culture and Society journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ccs

The rhetoric of cultural policies and the issue of ‘getting things done’: Bologna cultural capital 10 years after Luca Zan ⇑, Sara Bonini Baraldi, Federica Onofri GIOCA, University of Bologna, Italy Department of Management, Via Capo di Lucca 34, 40126 Bologna, Italy

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 5 July 2011 Received in revised form date 14 October 2011 Accepted 30 November 2011 Available online 11 January 2012 Keywords: Management Cultural policy Bologna Capital of culture Unesco creative city

a b s t r a c t This paper focuses on the risk of disconnection between policies and practices in the field of culture. General (and abstract) approaches to cultural policies are likely to get the attention of politicians and officers in culture departments in local government agencies and the press in the name of city branding, cultural districts, creativity and the like. To what extent this rhetoric is translated into actual and consistent actions is open to debate. Work on institutional, organizational and resource aspects related to the implementation of elegant policy designs does not always enter the agenda. The short-termism of political cycles is likely to make things even worse. The same bias is usually found in cultural policy studies, with a few exceptions that pay attention to reconstructing actual cultural policies instead of the ritualism of making ‘‘grand strategies”. Drawing from management studies, the paper adopts a different approach to the evaluation of cultural policies, investigating the relationship between different phases of the process at the micro level: planning, resource allocation, actions and results. The analysis of 10 years of cultural policies in Bologna – one of the European Capitals of Culture for 2000 – will serve as a specific focus to test and develop the analytical approach. We note the lack of adequate accountability tools, and call for the identification of more empirically rooted ways of addressing attention to actual behaviour, implementation, and budget developed in management studies. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction: management as a problem One of the phenomena taking place in the arts sector in the recent decades is the ‘‘contamination” of pure professional and disciplinary discourses with the issue of economic conditions. To different extent in various contexts, the relationship of archaeology, curatorship, or musicology with (limited) resources and levels of service have emerged as a common trait (Benhamou, 2004; Throsby, 2000). This is not surprising, given the central role of public funding if not direct involvement in running arts entities by the public administration itself. Similar to the rest of ‘‘public” economy, arts entities have been part of the new tendency to look for efficiency-and-effectiveness, if not questioning the ‘‘value for money” of their activities (Bonini Baraldi, 2007; Zan, 1999; Zan et al., 2007). ⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Management, Via Capo di Lucca 34, 40126 Bologna, Italy. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Zan). URL: http://www.gioca.unibo.it (L. Zan). 1877-9166/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ccs.2011.11.008

Yet, within this process, serious differences exist even between those that are coming to the arts field from economic and organizational backgrounds. The broad area of ‘‘creative cities”, ‘‘art cities”, cultural districts, city renewal and promotion is perhaps one of the best examples of such a variety of approaches, echoing the historical difficulties by most social science – surely economics – to bridge the gap between macro and micro aspects (Florida, 2002; Landry, 2000; Santagata, 2009: for a discussion see Okano, 2010; Sasaki, 2010; Stolarick, Hracs, & Florida, 2010. For a more radical criticism see Pratt, 2008). For it is one thing to define a general design and development ideas that could add ‘‘value” – whatever that means – at a logical level; it is a completely different issue to ‘‘get things done”, particularly when multiple institutions and multiple actors are involved. A first gap between cultural economics (and economists) and management of cultural organizations can be identified here. While understanding the need for a broad strategic vision, the writers share a strong preference towards an analysis at the organizational level,

190

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

Planning

Analysis of internal consistency of Policy over ten years

Resources Allocation

Analysis of consistency between policies and resources allocation

Actions

Results

Analysis of consistency between policies and actions/results

Fig. 1. A framework for the evaluation of cultural policies based on management literature.

looking at conditions of feasibility of individual entities, within a micro focus. In addition to the level of investigation and focus, there is however a more subtle aspect in our view, which explains the success of the literature on creative cities and the like: its attitude towards ‘‘positive thinking”, sometimes with astonishing degrees of abstraction and naiveté, while totally ignoring questions of ‘‘implementation” or the need to articulate any policy design in terms of conditions, opportunities, or incentives for actors. From a meta-marketing point of view, one could argue that Richard Florida’s contribution is exactly the product that an average politician is looking for (as for instance many directors of culture departments at the city level across the world). It is less boring (and presents fewer technical barriers) than a discussion of the accounting, budgeting, or human resources issues within individual arts organizations; it is abstract enough to allow a relatively quick understanding of the sector without wasting too much time in deeper understanding of contextual aspects; it is appealing enough to give prestige and legitimacy to media-oriented political actions; and it is easy enough to ‘‘design” in elegant ways, even if its feasibility is weak or opaque. All of this is coupled with the short-term orientation that frequently characterizes the political arena (if the designed policies are turned into actual actions, no one knows where the responsibility will lay). From this point of view Bologna is a good example of the difficult path of cultural polices. It is a city with the oldest university in the Western world, and a university population of about one quarter of the total inhabitants; a city still famous for the urban planning ideas of recovering the historical centre in the sixties; the European capital of culture in 2000; and the UNESCO City of Music in 2006. Yet it is a city where cultural policies experienced several problems in recent years. To overcome the limits of major contributions to the field, this paper analyses the last 10 years of Bologna’s cultural policies by drawing from three different areas of management studies. First, it recognizes the basic disconnection between rhetoric and practice (Meyer and Rowan, 1977), trying to address questions and problems that are at stake beyond the rhetoric of political planning. Second, it adopts (and adapts) the analytical approach of managerial control (e.g. Antony & Young, 1999) focusing on the necessary link between aims, resources, actions and results (see Bonini

Baraldi, 2007; Zan, 2006).1 Third, it considers the unpredictability itself of actual strategies as embedded in the notions of ‘‘emerging strategy” (Mintzberg, 1973; Mintzberg, 1978; see also Normann, 1977; Pettigrew, 1985), acknowledging approaches which emerged in decision making debate, from bounded rationality to the ‘‘garbage can” model (Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1972). While the need to allocate and organize human and financial resources for the implementation of policies is strongly supported, greater attention is put to actual behaviour and results, claiming the lack of accountability tools. Based on such a broad set of literatures, our framework focuses on the consistency at three different levels (see Fig. 1): 1. Longitudinal consistency among policies: Cultural policies are rarely short-termed: they need new infrastructures and investments, adequate feasibility analysis, institutional frameworks and organizational set ups. In short, a serious cultural policy tends to require a long-term commitment. However the consistency of cultural policies over time is usually affected by several dynamics, last but not least political instability. 2. Consistency between policies and resources allocation: Once policy priorities are established, economic resources for enacting them must be coherently allocated. If policies are not adequately reflected in budget choices, they cannot be realized. 3. Consistency between policies and actions/results: The last step of the planning and control system requires the evaluation of results (in terms of output and outcome) in comparison with initial aims. For a stated policy, it is important to analyse what actions are actually carried out and how far policies’ aims have been achieved. While the framework is simple, the lack of data makes its application difficult. In the case of Bologna, for instance, only a partial analysis is possible. In section two of the paper, continuities and changes in 10 years of Bologna cultural policies will be looked for in their internal consistency (at least in rhetorical terms). Basically the 1 Surprisingly enough, while this kind of study has recently gained its role in the arts management field (see for instance Canergie & Wolnizer, 1996; Chatelain, 2001; Zan 2006), it is still overlooked in the field of cultural policy. The need to pay more attention to conditions for action and results however strongly emerges, with serious gaps both in theory and practice.

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

questions we ask are: which of the original ideas for Bologna 2000 can be found in the planning documents for cultural policies in the following 10 years? How consistent were cultural policies in the last 10 years? Section three reconstructs the actual allocation of resources for cultural projects in Bologna, allowing an initial comparison with the policies in the last decade. A first obstacle to the researcher is encountered here, given the confidential nature of economic data, which need to be obtained through a personal fiduciary relationship with the personnel of the Municipality accounting office. Moreover, data actually provided refer to some but not all of the policies described in the planning documents, permitting only a partial analysis. Following the model, section four should analyse actions and the results of stated policies. Unfortunately, since reporting tools in this sense are not mandatory (and hardly provided on a voluntary bases), the only way for a researcher to address the issue is through in-depth (timeconsuming) field research. Given the impossibility to develop this analysis for each policy, the choice of the authors has been to focus on one project, namely the nomination of Bologna as UNESCO Creative City of Music in 2006. Cultural policies: continuity and discontinuity over time An analysis of cultural policies characterizing Bologna in the last 10 years must begin from the city’s political situation during the period. Over the last decade, Bologna had four different city councils. The period dates back to 1999 when Bologna’s citizens elected a centre-right mayor, Giorgio Guazzaloca, after a half-century of the government by the left (the previous mayor was Vitali). The next election in 2004 was won by the left-wing Sergio Cofferati, whose five-year term ended in June 2009, after which the office of mayor was taken over by the left-wing Flavio Delbono. However, the new council ended prematurely only a few months later, in February 2010 and the City Council was subsequently placed under central government administration.2 The commissioner Anna Maria Cancellieri, a former prefect, was then appointed to carry out the functions hitherto entrusted to the districts, executive council, mayor and City Council. Since May 2011 Bologna has been run by a new mayor, the left-wing Virginio Merola. One of the most significant moments in the history of the development of cultural policies in Bologna is the preparation of the application for European Capital of Culture for the year 2000. According to the philosophy underlying the application, the premises of this main project are summarized in these (rather abstract) key words: knowledge, tradition, mobility and communication. Nonetheless, the ideas underpinning the cultural planning for Bologna 2000 can be considered a turning point in the cultural policies ever adopted by the city and were supposed to be implemented in a multi-year plan of major projects, ideally included in the following provisional plans.3 Continuities 2 The new mayor Delbono had to resign following investigations for financial misconduct, fraud and public misconduct relating to his period in office as vicepresident of the Emilia-Romagna Region. 3 The provisional plan is a report that goes with the annual budget and covers a three-year period. It describes in a general way the features of the population, the territory, the economy and the services, indicating the resources available, the financial means and the funding opportunities.

191

and changes in the planning efforts and in the strategies included in these last year’s provisional plans can be analysed following three major macro-areas. 1. The first macro-area includes institutions or projects already existing before the application for Bologna 2000 and those were planned to be enhanced within this prestigious framework: a. Integrated communication strategy and centralization of museums The urgency of integrated promotion and communication strategies of 19 public and private museums was already given in 1996 when the project ‘‘Bologna dei Musei” (Bologna of Museums) was launched within the Bologna 2000 agenda. The project aimed to ‘‘improve museum activity by creating a system of shared communication to enhance the value of all city museums” (Bologna 2000 preparatory documents). Its key lines were: an integrated communication for all museums in the city (19 including municipal and private), the creation of a subscription and a joint ticket for the six public museums, the implementation of an integrated didactic scheme, the development of editorial production and merchandising, and a study of new projects and initiatives. After more than seven years coordination was still the top objective of the cultural policy agenda, when the first mention of the ‘‘centralization” of museums appeared in the 2003 Provisional Plan. In 2004 a strong emphasis was put on the establishment of the brand-new Museo della Musica (Museum of Music). Curiously enough, this was rhetorically supported as enlargement and enhancement of the museum system. The Bologna dei Musei project ended in 2005 when the City Council followed the cultural councillor’s decision to make entrance free at municipal museums starting from April 2006 (interview 8.02.2011). The 2006 Provisional Plan introduces a more dense budget-oriented need to centralize the coordination of public museums and to reduce the opening hours to save money (note that the decision of free entrance had this unanticipated consequence in terms of reduction of the level of services). In parallel – also accelerated from the empowerment that the Gallery of Modern Arts (GAM) benefited from in its new venue (Forno del Pane, then opened in 2007) – a preliminary inquiry for an institutional transformation of the municipal museums into a new entity with an autonomous governance structure was carried out. In 2008 the City Council decided to establish an ‘‘Institution” (a legal form according to Law 142 which provides more autonomy to the entity, though still within public law and general regulation). However, the Bologna Civic Museums Institution was set up with no specific plans attached. b. Conservation and enhancement of artistic heritage This is one of the main points resulting from the Bologna 2000 framework carried out by Mayor

192

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

Vitali at that time. Since 1999 no references have been found to conservation actions or plans in the provisional documents or in the strategic reports, except for the restoration actions for the Opera House. 2. The second macro-area includes all the projects that were designed around the Bologna 2000 application and are still central in the cultural policy agenda of the city: a. Manifattura delle Arti The project Manifattura delle Arti stemmed from the planning for Bologna 2000. The plan involved the transformation of a former trade fair into a cultural district through the aggregation of previously scattered cultural institutions belonging both to the Municipality and the University: GAM, Cineteca (Film Archive), Lumière Art Film Theater, Film Commission, Communication Studies Department and Film Studies Department of the University of Bologna. The requalification of the area required alongside the need to equip the city with new premises for the University, a new location for the GAM and a space to house the Cineteca. These last two became prominent institutions in entering the agenda of cultural policies. The refurbishment of the old building (Forno del Pane) as a new location for the GAM was envisaged during the Bologna 2000 application and then alternatively carried out and enhanced in the following provisional plans (2002, 2007, 2009). The Cineteca Film Archive is an independent institution set up by the City of Bologna. Subject to political ups-anddowns in interest, the Cineteca was on the top of the cultural policies agenda since 2004 (Provisional Plan 2004), when provisional plans started promising the creation of a movie production hub and the enhancement of the film archive collections. Over the decade, the City Council kept proposing some administrative changes. Since 2004 it intended to transform the older Institution into a Foundation, a project that continues to be put off and that is supposed to be finally accomplished in 2012. The main aim of the cultural district changed drastically over the years, depending on the council: it was first intended to be a major attractor for tourism (within the Bologna 2000 framework), and then to raise the quality of life for residents. Since 2003 cultural policies reported the intention to complete and enhance the new area (Provisional plans 2003), but during the following years the project seems to be left behind other programs because it was only partially fulfilled. b. Sala Borsa Sala Borsa is an international library and cultural centre located in the restored historical site of the ancient capital market with more than 1.300.000 visitors every year. Sala Borsa has seen massive changes both in goal-setting and intensity of political attention coinciding with shifts in Council boards. A core project within the Bologna 2000 framework, Sala Borsa was originally thought to become one of the most efficient and lively public libraries and cultural centres in Bologna and Italy, with a strong emphasis

3.

a.

b.

c.

on the ‘‘public good” side of culture (Strategic Plans for Bologna 2000). The ‘‘public good” view of the project was partially abandoned by Guazzaloca in 2002 when a partial privatization was attempted, outsourcing the bookshop and the cafeteria (Provisional Plan 2002). The project was completed by Cofferati with mixed interventions on the site. We do not find any reference to privatization outcomes in the following provisional plans. No trace of the Sala Borsa timeline is found in provisional plans: though heavily mentioned in the Bologna European Capital of Culture Application, the library disappears until 2009, when minor interventions over the public wi-fi are planned and then put off to 2011 (Provisional Plan 2009). Some interesting broader projects emerged over time, that were not mentioned in the Bologna 2000 project, but received attention in the following provisional plans: Centralization and enhancement of the library system More than 15 public libraries are owned by the Municipality. Since 2003 the need for coordination of services with a specific focus on the unified access and integration with the Biblioteca Universitaria (University Library) and the need for technological improvement and updates clearly emerged (Provisional Plan 2003). After some years of absence from policies, a precise plan was put forth in 2005 (Provisional Plan 2005): the creation of a technological library hub in Palazzo Paleotti to tackle interface updates. A unified institution was also envisioned to address the need for centralized management. Proposed in the 2007 Provisional Plan, in 2008 the City Council set up the Bologna City Libraries Institution, while applying the same solution to the Musei Civici (Provisional Plan 2008). Coordination of theaters and performing arts Only partially mentioned within the Bologna 2000 framework, the 2005 Provisional Plans begin to demonstrate the desire to create a body to coordinate theaters. This coordination body remains in provisional plans until 2008, when the Villa Pini project was envisioned. This previously private hospital was to be transformed into a theater service hub with participation of the bank foundations. The project became even larger in 2008 (Provisional Plans 2008) when the ETI (Ente Teatrale Italiano) dismissed the Teatro Duse (a historical Bolognese stage) and the Municipality included a proposal to constitute a Polo Teatrale Bolognese including the Arena del Sole – Teatro Stabile di Bologna in the provisional plan for the following year (Provisional Plan 2009). No clear goal was set for this complex project and no further mention is to be found in the following provisional plans. Major events committee An example of coordination policies is represented by the 2005 Major Events Committee project (Provisional Plan 2005): an advisory body should have been instructed to organize national and international exhibitions. No mention whatsoever of the Major Events Committee is to be found in provisional plans following 2005.

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

d. Bologna creative city of music steering committee Even though we are going to examine this example in depth in section 4, it is important to mention that since 2005, following the preliminary inquiry for the application of Bologna among the UNESCO Creative Cities as the City of Music, the possibility of creating a coordination body for music in Bologna was mentioned several times, expressing the will to strongly enhance and support music initiatives. No mention of its realization is found in the recent provisional plans or is it on the website. e. Bologna Opera House In our analysis of provisional plans, it seems that the City Council never designed a long-term strategy addressed to the Opera House Foundation (whose chairman – by law – is the city mayor: Sicca and Zan (2005)). Over the years, documents mainly focused on the restoration of the theatre itself (Provisional Plans 2003 and 2005) and on the enforcement of the development plan approved by the Teatro Comunale Foundation (Provisional Plan 2009 and 2010). The development plan basically aims to renew the agreement that defines the program schedule yearly grant, the available facilities for the activities of the Foundation, and funds granted by the Municipality. Focusing on the evolution of these policies in three different moments (before the Bologna 2000 application, during the application, and afterwards) and applying our framework to it, what emerges is that the initial boost has not always been followed coherently. Many policies have been left behind for years and then re-examined, others have been drastically modified, many have emerged afterwards, and only few have been achieved, which confirms a deep disconnection between rhetoric and concrete actions and an intrinsic inconsistency in the planning of cultural policies. It is also interesting to note that many of these policies rather than being part of a broader strategy are more likely to be found as emerging or intertwined with the main ones, as for the cases of the centralization of museums and libraries and for the Opera House. While focusing on the consistency of strategies and plans, the structure of provisional plans presents two main problems. First, some of the projects (e.g. institutional transformation for Cineca, Gam or municipal museums) are presented in several editions of the plan as a sign that nothing really happened. In a way these institutions do not run the risk of being ‘‘out of the plans” but of being ‘‘stuck in the plans”, because it is so difficult to get things done at a managerial level. This difficulty gets even worse due to the oscillating political mandates, passing the necessity of operationalization from one City Council to the other. Second, all the plans regarding key institutions were released in such a vague and discontinuous way that it would be hard to compare them to practical actions, even in order to ‘‘measure” the degree of achievement. Once partially approved (in their semantic ambiguity and opaque implications), projects keep being postponed, and/or transformed, changed or restarted with different premises. From an administrative standpoint, an outspoken political will to make potentially valuable entities more efficient

193

and independent emerges both from all provisional documents since 2000 and the planning for Bologna 2000 (see also Boari & Zan, 1999). Autonomy was intended to be granted both through the transformation of main cultural institutions into private foundations (as in the Cineteca case) and through the systematization of cultural offerings (as in the Major Event Committee and the Theater Promotional Network cases). Neither of these objectives has been accomplished yet. Lastly, there is a lack of consistency not only in the planning of feasible policies, but also a serious lack of commitment in assuming the responsibility for actually implementing these policies. Even if many of the projects found in provisional plans are interesting, there is almost no practical goal-setting: an unusual feature for a provisional document that is supposed to establish guidelines and projects for future developments. Beyond the rhetoric of cultural policies: budgetary allocation over the decade In this section we will investigate economic allocation over the last decade, reconstructing resource flows that have been used for cultural policies in the city. Thanks to the management accounting system used by the Municipality, we can reconstruct some of the most important elements in this picture. Though our preference will be on day-to-day implicit policies and hence on current expenditures and allocations, some important elements emerge from data about capital expenditures in the long term plans of the Municipality4 (Piani Pluriennali, as in Table 1): – First, a relatively consistent investment plan has been carried out (75 million Euro at 2010 values). – However, the plan is concentrated in the first years: 50 million Euro between 2000 and 2003; after 2004 the investment cycle seems to face a general slowdown (25 million over six years). – The most important projects are the Ex Manifattura Tabacchi; the conservation of historical monuments; museums and public libraries, and ex-Sala Borsa. Only in the first sub-cycle (2000-03) were the Bologna Opera House, Museo Morandi and the University project involved; they did not receive attention in the second sub-cycle. These data show some elements of implementation of declared policies, such as the development of the Manifattura area, the conservation of monuments, the effort on libraries, though the impact on individual entities (e.g. individual museum) is not broken down. In this period, the new location of the GAM was established, probably taking most of the investments left for museums themselves. Some comments about ‘‘political responsibility” of different governments involved in the decade and the implementation of declared strategies could be offered here. To what extent can goals and policies be found ‘‘in numbers”? 4 The long-term Plan (Piani Pluriennali), is a three-yearly planning document containing all the actions planned within a specific area and the related investments. This document is approved by the City Council and it is related to the Provisional Plan.

194

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

Table 1 Investments in the Cultural Sector. Thousands of euro (revalued 2010)

Arena del Sole Project Ex Sala Borsa Project Museo Morandi and Collezioni Comunali d’arte Project Opera house Project Other Municipal theatres Project Manifattura delle arti cultural area Project Conservation historical monuments Project Museums and Public Library Project Municipal libraries Project University Project Other interventions TOTAL

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Tot

81 348 101 712 80 7293 1328 805 607 0 0 11,355

0 1052 66 535 0 4464 972 1021 246 0 0 8357

0 83 62 206 0 1975 1665 5036 0 592 0 9619

0 623 252 544 0 10,818 4527 2689 0 1439 0 20,893

0 0 42 14 0 208 880 1894 135 0 0 3175

219 36 0 96 0 2364 3224 934 91 0 0 6964

0 131 0 32 6 2504 1391 872 0 0 242 5179

0 881 0 0 34 110 1654 2786 0 0 0 5465

0 127 0 0 0 102 304 1880 0 0 0 2413

0 0 0 0 78 934 224 392 0 0 5 1634

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

300 3281 524 2140 199 30,773 16,169 18,311 1079 2031 247 75,053

Arena del Sole Project

12,000

Ex Sala Borsa Project

10,000 Museo Morandi and Collezioni Comunali d'arte Project

8,000

Opera house Project Other Municipal theatres Project

6,000 Manifattura delle arti cultural area Project

4,000

Conservation historical monuments Project Museums and Public Library Project

2,000

Municipal libraries Project

0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

In other words, what is the relationship between policies as declared in the provisional plans and in actual financial figures? Unfortunately, this is a comparison which cannot be made at this level. Given the abstract (generic) ways in which policies are referred to in planning documents, with the total lack of specification of precise goals, resources, and timing, it is impossible to compare the potential discrepancies between declared and actual policies. This is not to say that nothing has been done. Simply, an issue of transparency emerges on this crucial aspect. However, whatever the consistency between declared policies and investments, there is an additional issue: the consistency between policies and annual allocations. One of the recurrent threats in the cultural sector, indeed, is the risk of misaddressing attention in favour of great investment decisions, while forgetting the relevance of day to day decisions and yearly allocations that allow current costs and current operations to be run (see Zan, 2000 on the British Museum). Due to changes in the accounting system, in this case we are forced to focus on data starting from 2003 (it could be shown that trends are however consistent in the first two years). From Tables 2 and 3 some considerations emerge: – In real terms (values 2010) the total expenditures of the cultural department increase slightly until 2005, then decrease back to the values in 2002. This more or less constant value hides two important phenomena, however.

University Project

– The share of cultural expenses in the overall budget of the Municipality is relatively limited, moving around values of 6% (increasing till 2005 while decreasing in the last year), compared to the same value in other municipalities that deliberately were using cultural policies as priorities. – The almost constant expenditures in the total for the cultural department hide different trends from different institutions: central services have been reduced, though still representing 23% of the total expenditures (in a sense a measure of ‘‘centralization” within the department). The libraries represent the biggest part of the budget (37.9%), despite a slight decrease in real terms over time. The Museum institution shows a final value in line with the beginning of the period, after a period of increase in 2003–05 (see below). Not surprisingly, Cineteca and GAM present an increase in real value (+30% and +70%, respectively). Basically, comparing 2009 and 2002 data, a reduction of central services can be pointed out, while the total for museums and libraries shows a constant amount of resources, with consistent increases for Cineteca and GAM. Moreover, interesting elements can emerge when breaking down the data of the Museum Institution: this was set up in 2008, but it is still possible to trace back resources for individual museums within it for the early years. What Table 3 clearly shows is a sort of asymmetric effect of cultural policies: this is, the new Museum of Music was actually

195

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200 Table 2 Expenditures in Culture, Municipality of Bologna (in 2000 values).

Total Central Services Civic Museums Institution Bologna City Libraries Institution Cineteca Institution GAM Institution Total Cultural Sector Total Municipality Cultural Sector Expenses % 16,000,000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

% in 2009

2009/ 02

9,440,250 6,304,421 13,509,806 2,400,347 2,398,132 34,052,955 569,958,270 6.0

11,475,754 6,838,081 13,591,094 2,995,180 2,517,905 37,418,014 567,783,302 6.6

10,922,775 7,466,261 13,870,858 3,420,906 2,682,865 38,363,665 583,287,798 6.6

10,319,407 7,572,307 13,940,705 3,692,935 2,670,652 38,196,006 593,458,432 6.4

8,590,364 6,933,348 13,389,243 2,844,530 1,764,898 33,522,383 566,405,681 5.9

8,986,145 6,781,783 13,199,415 2,950,988 2,321,145 34,239,478 568,802,779 6.0

8,801,770 6,567,422 13,304,718 3,532,782 2,967,697 35,174,389 560,893,981 6.3

7,943,137 6,320,438 13,081,470 4,166,278 3,003,871 34,515,194 592,049,376 5.8

23.0 18.3 37.9 12.1 8.7 100.0

0.8 1.0 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.0

14,000,000

Total Central Services

12,000,000 Civic Museums Institution

10,000,000 8,000,000

Bologna City Libraries Institution

6,000,000

Cineteca Institution

4,000,000

GAM Institution

2,000,000

09

08

20

07

20

06

20

05

20

04

03

20

20

20

20

02

0

Table 3 Expenditures in Culture, Municipality of Bologna: breakdown (in 2000 values).

Santo Stefano allocation Archaeological Museum Patrimonio Industriale Museum Risorgimento and Certosa Museum and Library International Museum and Library of Music Civic Museums Davia Bargellini Museum Municipal Art Collection (Collezioni Comunali d’Arte) Medieval Museum Total managed museum Civiltà Contadina Museum Jewish Museum Beata Vergine di San Luca Museum Affiliated Museum Museum of the Resistance of Bologna Museums system and other exhibition activities Total not managed museum Museums Institution

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

0 1,896,302 884,025 309,074 516,287 620,329 152,510 407,853 711,134 5,497,514 48,113 159,531 0 5 582 598,675 806,907 6,304,421

0 1,997,263 870,835 469,910 575,909 733,455 188,287 400,735 687,293 5,923,687 47,169 160,524 8718 2045 94,810 601,129 914,394 6,838,082

11,144 1,892,367 757,045 595,509 1,376,812 713,240 163,912 453,832 596,778 6,560,638 46,043 150,542 67,392 41,069 94,060 506,517 905,624 7,466,262

10,958 1,860,514 796,592 538,761 1,163,763 724,479 172,570 388,414 896,907 6,552,958 60,269 156,000 112,081 45,131 64,755 581,113 1,019,349 7,572,307

10,743 1,740,388 833,443 394,749 1,127,287 733,287 156,435 375,278 545,889 5,917,499 37,601 129,228 102,293 44,630 72,132 629,967 1,015,849 6,933,348

10,562 1,732,241 736,201 431,151 1,116,931 815,004 114,950 335,470 450,060 5,742,570 36,967 123,814 119,276 44,220 114,390 600,547 1,039,213 6,781,783

10,231 1,562,337 910,570 386,536 1,104,103 731,879 117,435 352,748 493,214 5,669,053 46,040 120,773 117,942 36,020 40,617 536,976 898,368 6,567,422

10,155 1,752,356 657,039 417,585 1,158,470 719,590 111,775 375,041 499,502 5,701,513 35,543 98,237 109,612 39,762 56,418 279,356 618,926 6,320,438

0 0 0 0 0 0

Santo Stefano allocation

2,500,000 Archaeological Museum

2,000,000

Patrimonio Industriale Museum Risorgimento and Certosa Museum and Library International Museum and Library of Music Civic Museums

1,500,000 1,000,000

Davia Bargellini Museum

500,000

Municipal Art Collection (Collezioni Comunali d'Arte) Medieval Museum

0 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

created, and was also funded with incremental resources for a short period. But in the end, being the aggregate allocation in 2009 as in 2002, this means that it was funded

Total not managed museum

with the erosion of funding to other museums within this group of entities. More precisely, at the end of the period the entities that have been penalized are: the Archaeologi-

196

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

cal and Collezioni Comunali ( 10%); the Patrimonio Industriale, Davia Bargelini, Museo Medievale ( 30%). What policies did not show is that – in terms of constant expenditures of the cultural department in 2009 compared to 2002 – the development of new institutions and the politically ‘‘preferred” entities (Cineteca, Gam, Museo della musica) is – de facto – funded by cuts to other museums. A couple of comments are possible here:

There is also an issue of effectiveness to assess. Overall, there were 459,000 visitors to Municipal museums in 2009, almost double the figure in 2000 (Table 4). This is largely due to the introduction of free entrance in 2006. This is a great result in itself, indeed: the number of visitors is larger than the number of people living in the city! However, when putting together visitors and data on resources (Table 5), an interesting phenomenon emerges, this is to say the underinvestment by the city on its museums over time, with major differences between situations that have been seriously penalized and others that have been favoured, at least relatively speaking:

– First, an explicit strategy/policy has never been set up. It seems rather an emerging than a deliberate strategy/ policy. It would be hard for any politician to make such a ‘‘goal” explicit, given the value of older institutions in their own, though neglected by the attention of policies in the last decade (Archaeological, Patrimonio Industriale, Medievale). – Second, at least for the GAM, it is interesting to note that the increases in current cost are partly associated with the decision to move it in the new location, although a detailed budget of the increase of expenditure associated with this decision was never proposed (Relazione Saggi, 2006). This is another example of decision without planning, which explains to some extent the emergence of policies that were not made explicit/clear. – Finally, and as a whole, what the numbers describe is the situation of a city which is not increasing its investment or its annual budget on culture, despite the rhetoric of cultural policies.

– Underinvestment: While the relationship between resources and visitors (how much is spent per visitor) presents values between 24 and 60 euro in 2002, in 2009 the values are mostly between 10 and 30 euro per visitors. – Asymmetry: Some museums in particular have been penalized, with values around 10-18 euro per visitor in 2009 (Archeologico, Collezioni Comunali, Davia Barellini, Medievale, Resistenza), while others are still presenting a better situation (with values around 24–30, that was not so bad in 2002). The Museum of Beata Vergine di San Luca gets still high amounts (79 in 2008 and still 47 in 2009): one could argue why scarce resources are spent on museums that have minor performances in terms of visitors (also considering that in terms of

Table 4 Visitors to Museums (2000-2009).

Patrimonio Industriale Museum Archaeological Museum Municipal Art Collection Davia Bargellini Museum Medieval Museum International Museum and Library of Music Risorgimento Museum Casa Carducci Museum GAM (Gallery of Modern Arts) MAMbo - Museum Modern Art Villa delle Rose and other GAM locations Morandi Museum Casa Morandi Museum Memoria di Ustica Museum Beata Vergine di San Luca Museum Jewish Museum Museum of the Resistance of Bologna

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

5983 73,946 23,170 8128 28,484

17,030 63,883 24,631 6805 31,060

14,270 63,303 16,909 6332 25,883

20,550 58,020 14,156 5218 23,525

9964

9518

9979 40,740

24,259 143,764 23,282 3704 73,625 26,073 7664 4020 21,110

25,809

3062 24,782

2917 24,420

3750 23,216

6226 29,760

31,810 96,239 29,517 3723 24,568 33,818 6616 5570 3353 50,661 2412 30,210

29,600 107,143 35,532 7547 29,338 37,750 5480 6070

31,393

22,762 77,424 13,755 4462 32,041 21,787 7121 4385 18,437

30,324 99,996 31,526 7133 27,066 39,436 6245 6294

44,126

8137 3588 26,853

21,438 59,963 13,699 4691 25,317 19,271 8570 4373 92,078

93,942 2467 27,871

2031 19,084 250,255

2259 16,225 1057 383,028

3850 2063 17,377 2658 344,445

4881 1487 21,310 3338 403,316

123,282 4653 37,299 1366 6451 2354 18,765 6490 459,120

52,896

56,201

7145

17,345

12,232

14,046

2069 18,163

253,842

257,866

215,457

201,937

296,969

Patrimonio Industriale Museum

160,000

Archaeological Museum

140,000

Municipal Art Collection (Collezioni Comunali d'Arte) Davia Bargellini Museum

120,000

Medieval Museum

100,000

International Museum and Library of Music

80,000 Risorgimento Museum

60,000

Casa Carducci Museum

40,000

GAM (Gallery of Modern Arts)

20,000

MAMbo - Museum Modern Art Villa delle Rose and other GAM locations

0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Morandi Museum Memoria di Ustica Museum

2010

0

197

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200 Table 5 Ratio resources/visitors (2000-2009).

Patrimonio Industriale Museum Archaeological Museum Municipal Art Collection Davia Bargellini Museum Medieval Museum International Museum and Library of Music GAM (Gallery of Modern Arts) and MAMbo Beata Vergine di San Luca Museum Museum of the Resistance of Bologna

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

61.9 30.0 24.1 24.1 27.5

42.4 34.4 28.3 36.1 29.2

58.9

93.8

35.3 31.6 33.1 34.9 23.6 71.4 29.1 32.6

35.0 24.0 28.2 38.7 28.0 53.4 144.9 55.2

34.4 12.1 16.1 42.2 7.4 43.2 83.6 45.3 68.2

23.1 18.0 11.4 30.9 18.3 33.0 43.0 57.8 43.0

30.0 15.6 11.2 16.5 18.2 28.0 31.6 79.3 12.2

22.2 16.4 10.6 14.8 17.0 30.7 24.4 46.6 8.7

Patrimonio Industriale Museum

160 140

Archaeological Museum

120 Municipal Art Collection (Collezioni Comunali d'Arte)

100 80

Davia Bargellini Museum

60 Medieval Museum

40 International Museum and Library of Music

20 0 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

collections other museums have more important stuff as well). – Dynamics: Interestingly, there is a trend which sums up the policies of the Municipality on museums over time: reducing the level of effort. The increase in visitors’ number due to the free entrance since 2006, and the decrease in real resources explain the trend in this indicator. In reality, the negative trend can be identified even before 2006 for most of the institutions, a sign of decrease in priority of goals in actual cultural policies. Bologna UNESCO Creative City of Music: how does it matter? This section seeks to partially fulfil the proposed framework evaluating the consistency between policies and results in one specific case: the nomination of Bologna as UNESCO Creative City of Music. The aim of such analysis is to assess, behind the rhetoric of political claims, what has actually been realized and achieved. The episode is interesting in itself because, despite the initial echo of the prestigious recognition, few concrete actions have been actually perceived by the citizens, which calls for a deeper understanding. Given the lack of any reporting tools, the case has been developed through field research, mainly interviews with major actors and website analysis. Moreover, since Bologna UNESCO Creative City of Music is a zero-budget project, no connection with the previous section has been possible. After a brief reconstruction of the initial ambitions on the nomination, a description of the concrete actions following the policies is provided here, ending with organizational explanations of the limited success of the policy. Bologna is still the only Italian city to be appointed as the UNESCO Creative City in 2006. The process began in 2005 when Benedetto Zacchiroli, head of the department

GAM (Gallery of Modern Arts) and MAMbo

of international relations of the Municipality at the time, took initiative to nominate Bologna to the UNESCO musical network, with the support of the Mayor Sergio Cofferati. The nomination officially recognized Bologna as an important music hub thanks to its huge heritage, the massive presence of artists and technicians, and the articulated network of associations actively working in the music field. In the mind of its promoter, the UNESCO nomination should have acted as a double leverage for the city: as an opportunity to increase the visibility of Bologna at the international level, and as a tool to avoid the actual fragmentation of the Bologna musical milieu supporting a cooperative and networking approach (interview 01.06.2011). Despite this vision, however, the activities implemented have been few and fragmented. In five years only very small projects have been organized at the international level in cooperation with other cities of the network (namely a small joint festival with Ghent, a student exchange with the Japanese city of Kanazawa, and few others). As stated by the promoter of the project ‘‘an overall strategy in this sense has always been lacking” (interview 08.06.2011). On the other side, the main event (still the only important one) realized at the local level has been a big concert organized in October 2007 in the main square of the city. No specific music events or initiatives have been organized in the following years, apart from the signature of ‘‘Creative Cities’ Memorandum of Understanding” (in occasion of the visit in Bologna of the Mayors of Glasgow, Santa Fe and Popayan in 2008. UNESCO, 2008). In 2008, instead of organizing a specific concert the City ‘‘exploited” an event proposed by the Opera House publicizing it as one of the Creative City initiatives (interview 08.06.2011). The years 2009 and 2010 have not seen any specific musical events. For New Year 2011, the cultural department of the Municipality contacted the local music organizations with the idea to plan a joint event under the umbrella of Bologna

198

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

Creative City of Music. However, no positive response has arrived from them (interview 06.06.2011), confirming the little involvement of the musical milieu of the city in the project. Lack of communication about the nomination can be acknowledged, both at the local and international levels: while no specific initiatives (roundtables, workshops, etc) have been organized to coordinate activities among the numerous musical entities, the web has also been definitely underexploited (suffice it to note that the official website of the project has not been updated since 2007, while only few music institutions in the City have posted the logo of the UNESCO recognition in their homepage). As a result, the level of awareness that the city has managed to achieve both locally and internationally is low. At present, the only ‘‘action” carried on by the Municipality (apart from the small international programs cited above) is the concession of the logo to those events that actually require and – in the eye of the Municipality – ‘‘deserve” it. Though, few organizations seem to be aware or interested in its potential use, with only about 20 requests and 15 concessions per year actually given (interview 06.06.2011). The initial ambitions related to the participation of Bologna in the network seem therefore to be disregarded: few events, weak communication, and inability to increase awareness are the main results. As explicitly recognized by one of the municipal officers working on it, ‘‘being UNESCO Creative City of Music does not imply any project or program to manage, rather it is a brand achieved.” The musical contents are and were already provided by the organizations working in the field: the nomination is a mere recognition of their vitality” (interview 06.06.2011). While the importance of historical heritage and spontaneous music activities of the city can be easily understood, the nomination could have been better exploited, at least in terms of the City’s prestige. Several elements related to institutional and organizational issues, however, made it very difficult to happen. First, the political instability of the City in the last decade has had a role in the overall lack of a strategy on the project. After the first years, during which it still benefited of the presence of its initiator, the program was actually left without a political referent: while the Delbono term was too short to define responsibilities on single projects (June 2009–February 2010), the commissioner in charge of the administration in the following two years had to concentrate on ordinary and less strategic (political) issues, disregarding the Unesco nomination (interview 08.06.2011). Given the overall lack of political leadership, responsibilities inside the administration have also been ambiguous and discontinuous. Nowadays the management of the project is ‘‘split” in two: the institutional aspects are managed by the international department, while the promotion on the territory is under the responsibility of the territorial marketing department (even if, in practice, it is the cultural department that runs it). In short, today there is not a specific office or an ad hoc team accountable for the initiative, and the work is not well coordinated amongst the different departments (interview 08.06.2011). Maybe the creation of an external entity would have been more effective – as in the case of Glasgow where a

specific Foundation was created. However, the whole initiative had to be realized with no additional budget: while UNESCO does not provide any funds to the Creative Cities, Bologna Municipality did not invest in a specific amount for the development of the project. In addition, the creation of an external structure with the participation of civil society would hardly be realized in Bologna, due to the lack of a strong project both in terms of political and strategic visions and in terms of ability to translate it in concrete plans and actions. Moreover, also the cultural milieu of the city did not react that much: since the initiative does not provide any financial advantage in the short term, no one has actually invested any effort on it, unable to understand its potential (also in terms of sponsor attractiveness) and prestige in the long term (interview 08.06.2011). In short, Bologna seems to have lost the opportunity to exploit the UNESCO recognition, worldwide considered as a strong seal of quality, not last for tourism purposes. Once again, political ambitions have collided with the conditions for action, not adequately taking into account contextual aspects and organizational issues (including budgeting and human resources) of policy implementation. In this case, also the political support seems to be missing, confirming once again how much operating activities are affected by political instability. Nonetheless, also the role of UNESCO in the story should be acknowledged. Without the ambition to deepen this wide issue (our analysis has expressly focused at the city level to analyse the implementation process of the recognition), it seems somehow that the ability of UNESCO to ‘‘manage” the network could also be improved. First, the recognition itself does not foresee incentives or specific aims to follow: for what we understood, Creative Cities should be able at least to organize one specific event per year (which not always occurs, as for Bologna), and attend the annual international conference (interview 08.06.2011). Second, the overall coordination of the network is undoubtedly ‘‘light”: about one newsletter e-mail per month, plus the co-organization of one annual international meeting. Finally, accountability tools are also quite poor: cities have to produce a report every two years, but even if the report is not fulfilled (as it happens in Bologna for the last report), nothing seems to occur. Maybe also international organizations, besides focusing on the design of programs and policies, could invest some additional efforts in ‘‘getting things done” or at least pay more attention in the evaluation of the impacts and results obtained. Concluding remarks Bologna represents an intriguing case: it would be difficult to say that nothing has been done; but it would be difficult as well to speak of a consistent policy design and implementation. Several weaknesses have been identified in the analysis: the lack of a systematic planning attitude and no use at all of any project management logic, not to say tools; the lack of any explicit assessment of what was (or was not) achieved in the past, i.e. the degree of achievement prior to any further decision in terms of policy; the lack of systematic economic assessment (budget or business plan) before and as a component of decision making;

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

and the lack of attention to organizational issues (i.e. the administrative context and boundaries), both in the planning and in the implementation phases. As a result, in a situation of decreasing resources, new initiatives simply subtract resources from already existing projects and institutions that are not particularly appealing for political debate, outside any explicit assessment. Was it worth to fund the new museum of music, the Certosa, the enlargement of GAM, the development of Cineteca at the cost of reducing resources in the other museums? We are not here suggesting any answer in substantive terms. Rather, we are addressing the lack of any aware ex-ante evaluation in the decision making process from a procedural point of view. Also in the case of absence of resources (as for Bologna UNESCO Creative City of Music), the inability to adequately cope with organizational aspects and the lack of a strong strategic vision leads to disappointing results. Moreover, from a managerial point of view, quite ironically, allocative decisions seem to have a negative correlation with audience performance: basically, the entities that were better performing (Archeologico, Medieveale) got fewer resources over time than those underperforming at that time (Patrimonio industriale, GAM). Far from any rhetoric of management incentives, performances simply seem not to matter in this context. From a procedural point of view, it is interesting to note that an analysis like ours was not available per se: data are there, but there was no need – at any point in time – to present a document for future policy issues that would comment (in critical or supportive ways) what has been done in the past with regards to policy settings, resource allocation and actual achievements. Indeed, the less optimistic view of the Bologna case compared to the prevailing literature on art cities literature could be linked to specific contextual elements. Surely the lack of continuity in the coalition running the municipality was part of the problem. Perhaps one could address an issue of quality of the ruling class in Bologna (or more in general, the deterioration of the political debate in Italy in the last 15 years, with the paradoxically post-ideological radical juxtaposition between the right and left wings). Certainly, having been the European Capital of Culture does not make any difference in this regard. Surely it would be difficult to speak of ‘‘best practices” in this case. But perhaps it is time to stop the rhetoric of best practices in itself, and learning from ‘‘worse” practices as well: or, simply, looking at practices beyond policies. In more general terms, compared to our framework the analysis of the Bologna case is certainly partial. More than reducing the usefulness of the proposed theoretical approach however, the case confirms once again the prevailing rhetorical nature of cultural policy (in general and in Bologna), underlining the need for greater transparency and accountability tools on both resource allocation and actual results. Assessing policies in this context is still hard work. The rhetorical nature of cultural policy that appears in this case is hardly an idiosyncratic element: indeed the ambiguity in language and the lack of commitment seems to be a way to distract attention from the inner conflicts between humanists and different cultural professionals (e.g.

199

archaeologists versus contemporary artists), which has also the effect of making policies (and politics and politicians) unaccountable. References Antony, R. N., & Young, D. W. (1999). Management control in nonprofit organization (6th ed.). Homewood: The McGraw-Hill Companies. Benhamou, F. (2004). L’économie de la culture. Paris: Découverte. Boari, C., Zan, L. (1999). La Galleria d’arte moderna di Bologna tra dinamica imprenditoriale e l’innovazione Istituzione. In Zan, L. (a cura di), Conservazione e innovazione nei musei italiani. Management e processi di cambiamento. Milano: Egea. Bonini Baraldi, S. (2007). Management, beni culturali e pubblica amministrazione. Milano: Franco Angeli. Canergie, G. D., & Wolnizer, P. W. (1996). Art and accountability: The language of design and managerial control. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9(5), 84–99. Chatelain, S. (2001). Management control and museums. International Journal of Arts Management, 4(1). Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, Johan P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25. Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. London: Basic Civitas Books. Landry, C. (2000). The creative city. A tool for urban innovators. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934–948. Normann, R. (1977). Management for growth. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Okano, H. (2010). Cultural urban branding and creative cities. A theoretical framework for promoting creativity in the public space. Cities, S10–S15. Pettigrew, A. (1985). The awakening giant. Continuity and change in ICI. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Pratt, A. C. (2008). Creative cities: The cultural industries and the creative class, LSE. Research on line http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/20704/. Santagata, W. (2009). Libro bianco sulla creatività. Per un modello italiano di sviluppo. Milano: Università Bocconi ed. Sasaki, M. (2010). Urban regeneration through cultural creativity and social inclusion. Rethinking creative city theory through a Japanese case study. Cities, 27, S3–S9. Sicca, L. M., & Zan, L. (2005). Much ado about management. International Journal of Art Management, 7(3), 46–64. Stolarick, K., Hracs, B. J., & Florida, R. (2010). Occam’s curse, dialectics, and the creative city, introduction to the special issue on advancing the creative economy approach for urban studies. City Culture and Society, 1, 175–177. Throsby, D. (2000). Economics and culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zan, L. (2000). Managerialisation processes and performance in arts organisations. The archaeological museum of Bologna. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 16(4), 431–454. Zan, L. (2006). Managerial rhetoric and arts organizations. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Zan, L. (Ed.). (1999). Conservazione e innovazione nei musei italiani. Milano: Etas. Zan, L., Bonini Baraldi, S., & Gordon, C. (2007). Cultural heritage between centralisation and decentralisation: Insights from the Italian context. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 13(1), 49–70.

Interviews 01.06.2011: Interview to Benedetto Zacchiroli, former responsible of the international relation department of the Municipality of Bologna. 06.06.2011: Interview to Valentina Lanza, Municipal officer of the Cultural Sector. 08.06.2011: Interview to Francesca Martinese, coordinator of the International relation Department of the Municipality of Bologna. 8.02.2011: Interview to Melissa Lamaida, Istituzione Musei Civici, Municipality of Bologna.

Internal documents and laws Assessorato alla Cultura (2006). Relazione dell’esperto aziendale, Comune di Bologna. Competition 2006 for the design of the logo for Bologna UNESCO Creative City of Music. http://www.comune.bologna.it/comunichiamo/newsletter/webarchive. php?dataID=59 Accessed 4.06.11. Comune di Bologna, Assessorato alla Cultura, Bilancio al Dicembre 2000–2009. Comune di Bologna, Assessorato alla Cultura, Serie storica 2000–2009. Comune di Bologna, Assessorato alla Cultura, Piani Poliennali 2000–2009. Comune di Bologna, Assessorato alla Cultura, Report musei 2004–2009. Comune di Bologna, Assessorato alla Cultura, La costituzione di una rete museale nel contesto italiano, 2000.

200

L. Zan et al. / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 189–200

Decreto legislativo 18 agosto 2000, n. 267 ‘‘Testo unico delle leggi sull’ordinamento degli enti locali”. Decreto legislativo 6 luglio 2002, n. 137 ‘‘Codice dei beni culturali e del paesaggio”. Decreto legislativo 28 settembre 2000 n. 267 ‘‘Testo unico delle leggi sull’ordinamento degli enti locali”. Intervento tenuto dall’Assessore alla Cultura Roberto Grandi nella seduta del consiglio comunale del 21 luglio 1997. Regolamento dell’Istituzione Cineteca del Comune di Bologna, 23 Febbraio 1995. Regolamento dell’Istituzione Musei Civici di Bologna, 2 Luglio 2008. Regolamento dell’Istituzione Galleria Comunale d’arte Moderna di Bologna, 23 Febbraio 1995. Relazione Previsionale e Programmatica 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 (Allegati 1, 2, 3, 4). UNESCO, Creative Cities Network, Newsletter, Issue 02. March 2011, provided by Francesca Martinese, coordinator of the International relation Department of the Municipality of Bologna, pdf file, sent June 8th, 2011.

Internet documents Bologna City of Music, official webpage. http://www.comune.bologna.it/ cittadellamusica/index.php Accessed 6.06.11. Bologna City of Music, UNESCO website. http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ ev.php-URL_ID=36964&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Accessed 6.06.11. Bologna International relations office. http://www.comune.bologna.it/relazioniinternazionali/altreurpiNotizie.php?channelID=7 Accessed 6.06.11. http://www.bolognaonline.info/news/Bologna_musica-comunicato%20%20stampa. php Accessed 10.06.11. http://www.myspace.com/claudio.comandini/blog/445963909 Accessed 10.06.011. http://radiocittafujiko.it/home/node/5274 Accessed 10.06.11. http://radiocittafujiko.it/home/node/5176 Accessed 10.06.11. http://www.iperbole.bologna.it/museoarcheologico Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.sophia2000.it Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.museomusicabologna.it, Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.iperbole.bologna.it/cittadellamusica/ Accessed 20.06.11.

http://www.iperbole.bologna.it/museorisorgimento/ Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.iperbole.bologna.it/iperbole/MuseiCivici/ Accessed 20.06.011. http://www.comune.bologna.it/patrimonioindustriale/ Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.archivi.beniculturali.it/SABO/memorie_nascoste/daviabargellini.html Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.archiginnasio.it/ Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.riconoscimentomusei.emr.it Accessed 20.06.11. http://artfirst.percorsi-emotivi.com/ Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.mambo-bologna.org/museoustica/storia/ Accessed 20.06.11. http://www.mambo-bologna.org/museomorandi/casamorandi/storia/ Accessed 20.06.11. http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2008/01/09/istituzionemusei-civici-ha-senso-se-varra.html Accessed 20.06.11. http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2011/02/15/le-sale-deimusei-in-affitto-si.html Accessed 20.06.11. PromoBologna (2008). ‘‘Il settore Musica a Bologna”. http://www.promobologna.it/ binary/promo_bologna/studi_ricerche/il_settore_musica_a_Bologna_short. 1254839676.pdf. PromoBologna. http://www.promobologna.it/ufficio_stampa/comunicati/pagina43. html Accessed 6.06.11. UNESCO, ‘‘10 Things to know about UNESCO City of Music”, CLT/CEI/CID/2009/PI/ 116, July 2009. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001838/183825e.pdf. UNESCO, ‘‘Application to the Creative Cities Network”. http://portal.unesco.org/ culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=36800&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201. html. UNESCO, ‘‘Bologna UNESCO City of Music”, CLT/CEI/CID/2008/PI/78, 02/08/2007 (2007). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001592/159270e.pdf. UNESCO Creative Cities Networks. http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ ID=36746&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Accessed 10.06.11. UNESCO, ‘‘Memorandum of Understanding of the UNESCO Creative City Network”, signed in Bologna, November 20th, 2008. http://www.comune.bologna.it/ cittadellamusica/network/docs/CreativeCities_Chart.pdf. UNESCO, ‘‘Networks of creative cities within the global alliance for cultural diversity”, UNESCO Decision 170, 170 EX/18, PARIS, 27 August 2004, http:// unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001362/136203e.pdf.