By Paolo Mercado
Illustration by Aaron Asis
“Creative economy? Diba pareho lang yan sa arts and culture promotion? [Isn’t that the same as arts and culture promotion?]” Whenever I speak about the creative economy of the Philippines, I inevitably encounter comments such as this. Some even go on to say:
“Matagal ng sinusuporta ng gobyerno ang Pinoy Creativity. Panahon pa ni Imelda, kilala na tayo. [The government has long supported Filipino creativity since the time of first lady Imelda Marcos.]”
Many people confuse the creative economy with arts and culture policy. This is a common misconception as creativity is often equated with the arts or artistic endeavors. Likewise, creative industries are often equated with the cultural industries that represent these arts (the theater industry, art industry, film industry, etc.).
I have found this simple chart from the British Council Creative Economy Website to be useful in explaining the difference between the concepts of art, culture, creative industries and the creative economy:
So let’s start with art. Art encompass several forms such as literature, music, theatre, film, dance, painting, photography, etc. The artist is one who spends years learning the skills of their chosen craft, and then applies their skills to express their unique view of the world. Art is often a very personal, individualistic discipline where the artists imparts a highly personal viewpoint that he/she shares with an audience in their chosen medium of expression. The artist’s conformity with societal norms and cultural conventions is not a requirement to the pursuit of art. Indeed many artists make their mark by precisely being non-conformist. Likewise, whether the artist chooses to share or sell his art is almost inconsequential to the pursuit of art. Many choose to sell their work to make a living (or even make millions), others are not able to sell, yet still persevere, and others choose to give their work for free.
Culture, on the other hand, are norms, rituals, objects, and places that define a society. They include artistic products and forms which derive from heritage, traditional knowledge, and customs that define the identity of a group of people. Culture goes beyond artistic products and expressions and includes rites & rituals, religious beliefs, social norms, as well as gastronomic and geographic heritage. Many cultural industries, such as folk dancing, music, traditional crafts, festivals, gastronomy, historical museums and cultural heritage sites are considered by some as part of the creative economy, while others do not include them.
Many people use cultural industries interchangeably with creative industries. However a clear distinction between them is that for cultural industries, the preservation and promotion of cultural identity is of primary importance, and profitable commercial gain is secondary. As such, it is often the case that cultural industries are further distinguished by their need for public sector subsidies or private sector grants or endowments in order to survive. Creative industries on the other hand are by definition designed for profit.
This emphasis on cultural identity is what makes cultural policy unavoidably political. This is especially true for the Philippines. Ever since the cultural policies and programs of Imelda Marcos all the way to the current administration, defining Filipino culture leads to heated debates about weeding out “foreign” influences, protecting the arts, and fighting over endowments from the government. Recently, some have espoused the need for a Filipino “Cultural Revolution” to purify Filipino culture from foreign elements. Others have proposed bills that threaten jail time for lackluster singing of the National Anthem. And a few wish for a return of the “Golden Age of the Arts” under Imelda, pointing at the glory of the Cultural Center of the Philippines, while conveniently ignoring the horror of the Manila Film Center.
Apart from preserving cultural identity, cultural policies often include the reinforcement of nationalistic values. Thus, they become important tools for setting normative desirable behavior in society. We can see this emphasis on Filipino Culture and Values to this very day in the recently published Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 that was released by National Economic and Development Authority earlier this year.
Chapter 7 of the PDP is devoted to Philippine culture and values. As can be seen in the Strategic Framework, majority of the programs are about the preservation of culture and the promotion of values. What is notable in the document, however, is that it recognizes in its second pillar “The Value of Creative Excellence.” Most notably, it states that the government policy should…
“Boost the development of Filipino Creativity as a tool for social cohesion and impetus for culture based industry and creative economy.”
To my knowledge, this is the first time the Creative Economy is mentioned in an official government policy document. This is a small step, but significant nonetheless.
That being said. while Arts and Culture Policy is inevitably political, the creative economy is fundamentally economic. It is essentially a value generating endeavor where value is created in the exchange of creative goods, services and intellectual property licenses. It is measured in terms of revenue and job creation, and inclusive growth. In a Creative Economy, content need not express specific cultural identity, especially if such cultural content doesn’t generate commercial gain. This leads to a certain fluidity in creative industries for outsourcing creation to off-shore production suppliers to cut costs. Animation, for example, has been outsourced to the Philippines by American and Japanese companies since the 1970s.
This distinction is important because inevitably our government must define who is responsible for growing our creative economy. In my view, the answer is quite clear. Art and culture policy is the domain of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA), and, if my sources are correct, the NCCA will eventually give way to a new Department of Culture and the Arts. Such a Department will continue the policies and politics of cultural identification, preservation and promotion.
In my view, the creative economy, with its agenda of value generation and job creation, must be put under the wing of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). As such, it would be an similar to what they have been doing with Manila FAME for furniture, fashion and accessories, but expanding to other creative industries such as advertising, animation, digital, innovation and design. These could then be linked to small and medium-sized enterprises incubation programs that DTI has been running for years. Perhaps under the leadership of the DTI, the Creative Industries will one day grow to be as big as the outsourcing industry, contributing positively to employment and dollar revenue.
About the Author
Paolo Mercado is a marketing professional, raised in a family of advertisers and writers, with a passion for teaching and an obsession for the performing arts. He is currently the Senior Vice President of Marketing, Communication and Innovation of Nestle Philippines.
This article was published in adobo magazine Culture 2017 issue.
