Demystifying the US Ecosystem: Myth 3

Myth 3: The United States does not have national cultural policies.

The United States does not have national cultural policies as traditionally understood to support the identity of a nation-state and before 1996 the phrase “cultural policy” was not utilized in U.S. public policy discourse. However, since the founding of the United States there have been policies created on the federal, state, and local level, often interdisciplinary in nature, that intersect with culture and thus can be considered cultural policies. (Please visit the Timeline of U.S. Federal Cultural Policy Milestones for a look at some of the most important historical American cultural policies.) For example, federal tax exemptions (discussed more fully in Myth 4) are extremely important (although indirect) federal policies that have significant implications for cultural support. Although it is often perceived that the most effective initiatives occur on the state and local levels, it is national legislation that provides the framework, values, and regulations that create the environment in which all other culturally related initiatives and programs must operate. A useful framework to conceptualise what types of policies impact the cultural ecosystem and thus could be classified as cultural policies was developed by the Center for Arts & Culture. Below are the seven issue areas along with hyperlinked examples of national cultural policy relevant issues and initiatives under each category.

(In comparison to other countries, the creative/copyright/entertainment industries are not regarded as a specific cultural policy file. However, they are most often categorized under Access & Equity, Law, or the Creative Workforce.)

The Federal Framework: Fostering Partnerships & Diversity

Federal laws and initiatives, although not designed to establish a national cultural policy or cultural identity, do lay the framework for a system intended to foster collaborations and diversity through horizontal and vertical federal, multilateral, and public-private partnerships. Direct federal funding for arts and culture is disbursed through the NEA, the NEH, the Institute for Museum and Library Sciences (IMLS) and the National Park Service within the Department of the Interior and is often used to leverage additional funding through matching or 1:1 grants which serve to legitimize and raise awareness of specific projects.

Two key initiatives that illustrate how federal goals are implemented on the local level are the Save America’s Treasures (SAT) and the Preserve America partnerships. Save America’s Treasures, created in 1999 as a White House Millennium Council Initiative, was designed to leverage resources for local preservation projects through a partnership between the National Trust for Historic Preservation (a non-profit non-governmental organization) and federal cultural agencies. Between fiscal year (FY) 1999 through FY 2005, the initiative has contributed over $233 million to over 800 projects. In 2005 alone, five federal agencies (the President's Committee on the Arts and Humanities , the NEA, NEH, and IMLS led by the National Park Service) distributed $14.89 million in grants requiring a 1:1 match to 61 SAT projects in 29 states. Preserve America, was created in 2001 as a White House initiative and mirrors the SAT model of public and private partnerships. It is implemented in cooperation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) in partnership with (7) U.S. Departments: Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, and Transportation, as well as the NEH, the PCAH, and the President's Council on Environmental Quality. The initiative reinforces the federal role as a leader in preserving and enhancing governmental-owned historic properties for economic development, cultural tourism, and the public’s benefit through state, local, tribal and private sector-partnerships. In 2006, Preserve America disbursed almost $5 million USD in matching grants to 68 projects in 33 states.

Cultural Policy at the State and Local Levels

In 2006, federal, state and local funding contributed $1.23 billion (about $4.11 per capita) to the arts sector alone. However, federal support only provides about 2% of this funding with the majority of government financial support given by the state and local levels. Since 2002, when state arts agency appropriations began to plummet from a high of $450.1 million in 2001 to a low of $281.1 million in 2004, state investments have risen to $327.5 million USD in 2006 (about $1.09 per capita representing .49% of total state expenditures.)

On the local level, communities are embracing culture as a component of a more holistic approach to governance and meeting community needs. Cities and regions are creating development plans that build on the benefits of culture to community health derived from the creative sector and cultural tourism in such places as Austin, Nashville, Philadelphia, the states of Louisiana and Maine, and the region of New England. Hence, Richard Florida’s concept of the creative class and its economic and social advantages to communities has resonated on the local level and cities like Santa Fe are embracing the identity of a creative city. Advocacy groups like Americans for the Arts have measured creative industry contributions derived through Dun and Bradstreet data (which under represents nonprofit arts) to identify the economic impact of the arts by congressional district and the National Association of State Arts Agencies (NASAA) has a Creative Economy Resource Center that spotlights local creative economy initiatives. These have proved to be invaluable advocacy tools and are extremely seductive as they provide measurable indicators linking the arts and culture to tourism and economic value. For example, collected statistics show that in 2002 the nonprofit arts sector contributed a total of $134 billion USD and the “copyright” industries contributed $626.2 billion USD to the economy.

Previous Section
Next Section
All Resources