Great art for everyone? Engagement and participation policy in the arts

New Labour began its administration with a commitment to bring democracy to culture. However, a decade later the Arts Council England (ACE)'s mission statement of "Great art for everyone" suggested a continued emphasis on access to mainstream culture rather than on cultural democracy. The argument in this paper is that Labour's vision has resulted in little change to the basis upon which arts institutions receive regular funding, or the social composition of those who participate in the arts in Britain today - who remain predominantly white and middle class. Public consultation through The arts debate provides evidence that the arts are still perceived as elitist, and policy too insular and self-reflective. The report clearly identified the public's desire for not only greater transparency in decisionmaking processes but also involvement in the decisions themselves, in order to democratise the arts. This paper draws on research investigating the extent to which participatory decisionmaking schemes affect cultural democracy and the subsequent impact on artistic policy and practice. In addition to documentary analysis, this study involved interviews with policymakers, practitioners and the public, focusing on two projects using participatory decision-making in England. © 2011 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC

The participation myth

Policy rhetoric around strategies to and the value of increasing participation in the arts has been well documented internationally over more than a decade. But in the UK, which is the focus for this article, targets to increase participation have been consistently missed and there remains a direct correlation between those taking part in cultural activity and their socio-economic status. The starting point for this article is to examine the barriers to increasing participation in the arts and question the way that such policy has been implemented within the English context, which may have relevance for policy making in other countries. What is demonstrated is that policy implementation is influenced by vested interest of those in receipt of funding and that a narrow range of voices, from a powerful cultural elite, are involved in the decision making in the arts. The article makes a case for widening the range of voices heard in decision making in order to support both artistic practice and public engagement