 |
 |
Hi Martin, I seem to remember having written a very similar email to you previously. One of the problems with the more recent UK data is they have not broken out the subsections of the creative industries. Making things even more opaque they calculate the value of the creative economy as being much more than the creative industries, i.e. 'The Creative Economy constitutes all occupations in the Creative Industries, PLUS all Creative Occupations OUTSIDE the Creative Industries.' [my emphasis] In addition, the original definition of creative industries includes many employment categories that would not normally be considered part of Art and Design viz. Marketing and sales directors Town planning officers Architectural and town planning technicians Other skilled trades not otherwise classified(!) Broadcasting equipment operators Motion picture, video and television programme distribution Information technology and telecommunications directors IT business analysts, architects and systems designers Other software publishing Programmers and software development professionals Computer programming activities Web design and development professionals Book publishing Publishing of directories and mailing lists Publishing of journals and periodicals Translation and interpretation activities Operation of arts facilities (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4 99683/CIEE_Methodology.pdf ) In terms of the imbalance and the misrepresentation promoted by Art and Design, if you look at Table 1 of the GVA of 'Creative Industries' (2008-2014) (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/creative-industries-economic-est imates-january-2016/creative-industries-economic-estimates-january-2016-key- findings ) you see that of the 9 sectors of 'Creative Industries' the technical fields of 'IT, software and computer services' was almost 50% of the total - with Design: Product, Graphic and Fashion Design together making up only 3% of the total. In the Creative Economies picture, the Art & Design and Architecture fields are a much smaller proportion as it also includes engineering fields, lawyers etc so rthe elative balance of contribution is even more extreme. Regards, Terry == Dr Terence Love PMACM, MISI, MAISA, FDRS, AMIMechE Director Design Out Crime & CPTED Centre Perth, Western Australia [log in to unmask] www.designoutcrime.org +61 (0)4 3497 5848 == ORCID 0000-0002-2436-7566 -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Salisbury, Martin Sent: Monday, 10 April 2017 2:27 PM To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[log in to unmask]> Subject: RE: Invitation: International survey on responsible conduct in research-creation Hi Terry, Could you clarify the basis of your second point- "2. Large-scale surveys of the creative industries that show creative industries as offering a significant contribution to society do so primarily on the basis of their inclusion of engineering and other technical disciplines - and these latter typically form the main economic and employment contribution (examples include the national surveys in the UK and Australia)." I am not suggesting that it is not true but can't find anything to substantiate it. Richard Florida's views are interesting but I'm not sure how typical they are. At http://www.thecreativeindustries.co.uk the 'industries' listed are advertising, architecture, arts & culture, craft, design, fashion, games, music, publishing, tech, TV & film. A more detailed table of these (and sub-sectors) the UK government's breakdown of creative industries can be found via the link below , under '2.2: Standard Industrial Classification used in Creative Industries sub-sector estimates' - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/57 8932/DCMS_Sectors_Economic_Estimates_-_Methodology.pdf These are the definitions used in 2016 to calculate the £87 billion value of the UK creative industries (5.3% of UK GVA). They do seem to comprise of 'areas taught in Art and Design and Architecture'. So perhaps, in the UK at least, this is not entirely a 'misleading public media promotion'? Of course I am not suggesting that 'creativity' is not key to many areas of the sciences such as maths and engineering, just trying to clarify commonly accepted definitions of 'creative industries'. Best wishes, Martin Professor Martin Salisbury Course Leader, MA Children's Book Illustration Director, The Centre for Children's Book Studies Cambridge School of Art 0845 196 2351 [log in to unmask] http://www.cambridgemashow.com http://www.anglia.ac.uk/ruskin/en/home/microsites/ccbs.html ________________________________________ From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Terence Love [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 1:57 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Invitation: International survey on responsible conduct in research-creation Dear Phillipe, In support of Fil, and agreeing broadly with your and Ken's comments, there are three other factors relating to the inclusion of Engineering and other technical fields into 'research-creation'. 1. Richard Florida's research and publications on creative industries/creative cities/creative culture, which are often seen as a key reference, place Engineering, Law and other non-Art creative disciplines as central and the main drivers of creative industry, creative economies and the creative culture. 2. Large-scale surveys of the creative industries that show creative industries as offering a significant contribution to society do so primarily on the basis of their inclusion of engineering and other technical disciplines - and these latter typically form the main economic and employment contribution (examples include the national surveys in the UK and Australia). 3. The idea that the creative industries primarily comprises the areas taught in Art and Design and Architecture appears to be a misleading public media promotion of the latter sub-fields, particularly Art. It can be seen most clearly if commentaries from those fields about the literature in the previous two points are compared with the actual literature. Regards, Terry == Dr Terence Love PMACM, MISI, MAISA, FDRS, AMIMechE Director Design Out Crime & CPTED Centre Perth, Western Australia [log in to unmask] www.designoutcrime.org +61 (0)4 3497 5848 == ORCID 0000-0002-2436-7566 -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman Sent: Sunday, 9 April 2017 10:42 PM To: PhD-Design <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: Invitation: International survey on responsible conduct in research-creation The label “research-creation” seems in some way to focus on the forms of research identified as 1) practice based research, 2) practice led research, 3) artistic research, and 4) the outlier “practice as research” position. As Philippe notes, the venture cuts across all fields that are “project-based, or action-based, or practise-based.” It doesn’t necessarily seem to claim that these are the only these fields involving creativity. Nevertheless, I can see the problem that Fil raises. At a meeting of Australian deans on the subject of research, I heard one dean argue for the validity of “creative research outputs” on the basis that “art and design carry our culture.” It seems to me that all fields of human activity “carry our culture.” At least that is what the social and behavioral sciences tell us. A great deal of the contemporary debate involving design research suggests that design is somehow different to other research fields — this may be true to the degree that mathematics differs to physics, physics differs to musicology, and musicology differs to economics. But the actual practice of any field at the highest level involves creation and creativity. ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design ----------------------------------------------------------------- -- Please click here to view our e-mail disclaimer http://www.anglia.ac.uk/email-disclaimer ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------