Anticipating Change for Cultural Learning
What is the future for Cultural Learning, now that we’ve taken a second step into a more uncertain time, with the global Covid-19 crisis following after the Brexit Referendum, and with further impacts of the Climate & Ecological Emergency still to come? How might we think about these future scenarios to ensure the continuity of provision of creative learning and public engagement through and about arts, museums, heritage and science?
It’s an incredibly confusing time, when facts, opinions and emotions are swirling around. These lead to commentators offering so many possible outcomes for creativity and culture, and for education and employment, for example on the following issues:
Cultural activity will increase, or diminish. Although there may be a rush of postponed events taking place when lockdown ends, galleries and museums are likely to programme less activity in future because they may come out of this with fewer staff and smaller revenues, and will not take big risks. There may not be a post-Covid but a long protracted era of zoonotic pandemics and climate impacts, so it’s likely that the nature of cultural interaction has changed permanently. Before Covid-19, many had considered reducing touring, flying, rapid turnover of shows and so on as a response to the Climate & Ecological Emergency, but were still on the same high production tram-rails…until the virus hit.
Interest in Culture online will grow, or wane. Culture has been edging online for 20 years, and some aspects such as music sales have been transformed, but other drivers of change have increased tourism, museum visits, boutique festivals and a desire for novel experiences. Now, these drivers have been abruptly ended, perhaps or in part temporarily. Most cultural organisations are putting more content and events online, making more free, or promoting what they have already. Home-based creativity is proving to be valuable for wellbeing and social connection, and people are watching a lot of streamed drama, playing games, reading and listening to podcasts. However, audiences for online events are somewhat overwhelmed on top of online learning and meetings, and online engagement can be very slight and fleeting. It can be difficult to appreciate culture that is intended to be experienced in real places, in virtual ways. For example, the interest in virtual museum tours went up but only for four days.
Arts courses in Higher Education will suffer. These courses rely on the income from overseas students who want the experience of studying in the UK, not online. Tuition fees of c.£9250 per annum for UK & EU students are among the highest in the world, but will they want to pay this when they are even more uncertain of future earnings and when they can’t be sure their fees will pay for in-person situated experiences? And what about when EU students will have to pay higher overseas rates after the Brexit transition? Courses may have to be cut for lack of take-up and more young people may choose alternative routes, or find themselves unemployed.
Access gap in education. With schools and universities closed, learning is happening remotely, although too many learners are unable to benefit from this without all the support schools and colleges provide, such as free school meals, without access to technology and without the hands-on social context for which much learning is designed. The longer this continues, or has to be used as a strategy repeatedly, big gaps in access and opportunity will grow.
There are so many other dimensions to explore and these above are just examples. It’s very hard to know how any of these might play out, as we don’t yet know enough about the virus and the fallout from it. So, how might cultural and educational organisations, or partnerships or policy planners think about the future so as to plan for the best outcomes? We don’t have all the answers, but share some learning from our experience.
Last year we produced this analysis of drivers for change for the UK, using our Three Lenses method. It goes into detail about how drivers for change will affect Culture and Learning.
Flow’s Three Lenses are Context (blue), Capacities (pink) and Character (yellow). We use these in the Discovery phase of a project, systematically analysing a situation or problem, such as how to widen access to culture in a particular place, or how to increase involvement in an art form. Each lens is used to identify key drivers for change for this situation, and to consider the threats and opportunities for the future. The three lenses are:
1. BLUE / EXTERNAL LENS Looking at the wider context — both the threats and opportunities for system change
2. PINK / RELATIONAL LENS Considering the institutions and their communities within this wider context — both the threats to their development and opportunities to create change in their lives through relationships and access to learning
3. YELLOW / INTERNAL LENS Focusing further on people and their values, emotional attitudes or habitual actions — both how these create barriers for people and how they can promote positive change.
We prefer to carry out a Three Lenses analysis through a discussion or workshop rather than just by desk research. However, desk research is important to ensure discussions are well evidenced. We produced this comprehensive analysis of the Blue lens as a reference guide to speed up the process, so that in workshops with partners and clients we can go more quickly to the Pink and Yellow lenses and the specifics of their situation. The right hand column suggests opportunities in tackling or adapting to these drivers for change, and proactively increasing the wellbeing of people, places and planet. These ideas are informed by the Pink and Yellow lenses, thinking about Capacities and Values, and by being ‘Anticipatory’ — imagining preferable future scenarios in order to move towards them.
If you look at our future projections for Health and Wellbeing in this document, we identified zoonotic diseases as a potential threat, affecting access to Culture and Education. At the time of writing, we did not realise how significant or imminent that threat would be, perhaps because the conversations in the circles we work in tend not to delve into medical, technical or environmental issues. We had always believed that it is important to diversify conversations, and consult many different voices, but we are newly aware quite how vital it is to listen to expertise — whether this is acquired or professional expertise.
So, based on our learning through doing this work, here are some suggestions or principles for how to think about future scenarios in this time of uncertainty:
Take an expanded view — don’t treat the Environment as a niche issue but as fundamental and all-encompassing. Think systemically.
Be Salutogenic — be motivated first by outcomes for the wellbeing of persons and communities rather than by growing the wealth of individuals.
Be Anticipatory as often as possible — call for imagination of the future, knowing that anticipating positive futures can help to bring them about. Make lots of time to think about Drivers for Change, and to imagine them playing out in future.
Be Precautionary — take seriously all possible threats and pay attention to expertise and data about them. Make decisions based on the principle that if any action might cause or increase harm then you should not do it.
Increase the diversity of voices — without a range of expertise and experience, from circles outside your own, you are less likely to anticipate positive futures or be precautionary about threats.
Focus on creating conditions for positive change — when you can’t foresee the future, make big decisions or plan big projects, there are always things you can do to nurture wellbeing and to increase access to learning, culture and justice. These things include, for example, modelling kindness, being transparent and curious, improving your immediate environment and adhering to human rights.
