Details on article
Id | 107 | |
Author | Evans, G., | |
Title | Measure for measure: evaluating the evidence of culture’s contribution to regeneration. | |
Reference | Evans, G. (2005). Measure for measure: evaluating the evidence of culture’s contribution to regeneration. Urban Studies, 42, 5/6: 959‑83. |
Keywords | Cities; Culture-led regeneration; Impacts; Evidence-based evaluation |
Link to article | https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00420980500107102 |
|
Abstract | "Culture-led regeneration, as it has come to be known, is now a feature of cities—old
and new—as they seek to revive former industrial and waterfront sites and city centres, and
establish themselves as competitive cities of culture. At the same time, the rationale for cultural
input to area and neighbourhood regeneration has been extended to include quality of life, as
well economic outcomes. The evidence of how far flagship and major cultural projects
contribute to a range of regeneration objectives is, however, limited. Measuring the social,
economic and environmental impacts attributed to the cultural element in area regeneration is
problematic and the ‘evidence’ is seldom robust. The paper reviews both evidence and the
indicators used to measure impacts and concludes with an assessment of how and why gaps in
evidence persist." |
|
Metodology | Review of relevant literature and case studies |
|
Findings | The evidence of regeneration using major cultural projects and the sustained impacts arising—including the longer-term measurement required to test these out—does appear to be limited. Where evidence is emerging, distributive effects and regeneration objectives as now defined, are generally underachieved— or they are not sustained. A conclusion seems to be that the flagship and major city-centre and waterfront cultural schemes are less about regeneration than the conventional wisdom portrays them. The nature of cultural projects which feature in regeneration schemes may need to be assessed more rigorously in terms of the impacts they actually produce. |
|
Open Access | YES | |
DOI | 10.1080/00420980500107102 | |
Search Database | WoS (Web of Science) |
|
Technique | Document analysis; Literature review; Case studies | |