The creative sector in New Zealand : mapping and economic role : report to New Zealand Trade and Enterprise

The New Zealand creative sector was responsible for almost 121,000 jobs at the time of the 2006 Census (6.3% of total employment). These are divided between • 35,751 creative specialists – persons employed doing creative work in creative industries • 42,300 support workers - persons providing management and support services in creative industries • 42,792 embedded creative workers – persons engaged in creative work in other types of enterprise The most striking feature of this breakdown is the fact that the largest group of creative workers are employed outside the creative industries, i.e. in other types of businesses. Even within the creative industries, there are fewer people directly engaged in creative work than in providing management and support. Creative sector employees earned incomes of approximately $52,000 per annum at the time of the 2006 Census. This is relatively uniform across all three types of creative worker, and is significantly above the average for all employed persons (of approximately $40,700). Creative employment and incomes were growing strongly over both five year periods between the 1996, 2001 and 2006 Censuses. However, when we compare creative and general trends, we see two distinct phases in the development of the creative sector: • rapid structural growth over the five years to 2001 (especially led by developments in ICT), with creative employment and incomes increasing rapidly at a time when they were growing modestly across the whole economy; • subsequent consolidation, with growth driven by more by national economic expansion than structural change, and creative employment and incomes moving in parallel with strong economy-wide growth. Other important trends revealed by the data are that • the strongest growth during the decade was in embedded creative workers, especially over the first five years. The weakest growth was in creative specialists, with support workers in creative industries in the middle rank, • by far the strongest growth in creative industries’ employment was in Software & digital content, which trebled in size over the decade Comparing New Zealand with the United Kingdom and Australia, the two southern hemisphere nations have significantly lower proportions of total employment in the creative sector (both in creative industries and embedded employment). New Zealand’s and Australia’s creative shares in 2001 were similar (5.4% each), but in the following five years, our share has expanded (to 5.7%) whereas Australia’s fell slightly (to 5.2%) – in both cases, through changes in creative industries’ employment. The creative industries generated $10.5 billion in total gross output in the March 2006 year. Resulting from this was value added totalling $5.1b, representing 3.3% of New Zealand’s total GDP. Overall, value added in the creative industries represents 49% of industry gross output, which is higher than the average across the whole economy, 45%. This is a reflection of the relatively high labour intensity and high earnings of the creative industries. Industries which have an above-average ratio of value added to gross output are usually labour-intensive, especially when wages and salaries are above average. This is true for Software & Digital Content and Architecture, Design & Visual Arts, with ratios of 60.4% and 55.2% respectively. However there is significant variation in this ratio between different parts of the creative industries, with some parts (e.g. Software & Digital Content and Architecture, Design & Visual Arts) generating even higher value added relative to output, and others (e.g. TV & Radio, Publishing and Music & Performing Arts) less, because of high capital intensity and import content. When we take into account the impact of the creative industries’ demand for goods and services from its suppliers and consumption spending from incomes earned, we estimate that there is an addition to economic activity of: • $30.9 billion in gross output, $41.4b in total • $15.1b in value added, $20.3b in total • 158,100 people employed, 234,600 in total The total economic impact of the creative industries is approximately four times their direct output and value added, and three times their direct employment. Their effect on output and value added is roughly in line with the average over all industries, although the effect on employment is significantly lower. This is because of the relatively high labour intensity (and high earnings) of the creative industries, which generate below-average demand from suppliers, but normal levels of demand though expenditure from incomes. Drawing on these numbers and conclusions, we suggest some (slightly speculative) directions for future research. The goal is to better understand the contribution the creative sector makes to productivity growth; in particular, the distinctive contributions from creative firms and embedded creative workers. The ideas for future research can be organised into the several categories: • Understanding the categories of the creative sector– who is doing the business? In other words, examine via more fine grained research (at a firm level perhaps) just what is the creative contribution from the different aspects of the creative sector industries. It may be possible to categorise these in terms of more or less striking innovations. • Investigate the relationship between the characteristics and the performance of the various creative industries/ sectors; • Look more closely at innovation at an industry level e.g. using an index of relative growth of exports, and see if this can be related to intensity of use of creative inputs; • Undertake case studies of the creative sector; • Undertake case studies of the embedded contribution to growth in the firms and industries that employ them, by examining taking several high performing noncreative industries (in the same way as proposed for the creative sector). • Look at the aggregates – drawing on the broad picture of the extent of the numbers of creative workers embedded within the different industries, consider the extent to which these might explain aspects of the industries’ varied performance in terms of exports, growth and so on. • This might be able to extended to examine issues like the type of creative workers that are most effective when embedded, or test the hypothesis that each industry has its own particular requirements for embedded creative workers that overwhelms any generic contributions from say design, or IT.

Creative Industries

We are experiencing a period of profound social and economic transformation. This is a shift from an industrial economy to a knowledge economy (or a “creative economy”; or an “economy of the imagination”.) This new, emerging economic system is fundamentally organised around people (not machines or buildings); and around place. We heard Richard Florida argue that creative, talented people won’t go to where the job is, but vice versa, the job will come to them. So according to Florida, where we live is becoming the primary factor in global economic development. (Incidentally, it is worth contrasting this idea with the alternative proposition - put by speakers at this Forum - of “new nomadism”, that is, that creativity is nomadic and not bound by place.)

Regional performance : mapping "The North"

Paul Makeham’s work in AusStage Phase 3 has centred on regional mapping of live performance activity. A pilot mapping project was developed to identify regional clusters of performance as well as key regional organisations. In designing this pilot project, reference was made to two other ARC-funded projects. The first of these was Talking Theatre, an audience development research initiative for Queensland and the Northern Territory supported by an ARC Projects-Linkage grant. Talking Theatre was funded between 2004 and 2006 as a Linkage between the ARC, NARPACA (the Northern Australian Regional Performing Arts Centres Association), Arts Queensland, Arts Northern Territory, and QUT. The second project was the Creative Digital Industries National Mapping Project, operating through QUT’s Centre for Excellence in the Creative Industries (CCi). The NMP is designed to develop and publish a range of accurate and timely measures of the Creative Digital Industries in Australia.

Co-creative labour

This article introduces a special issue on the topic of co-creative labour. The term co-creation is used to describe the phenomenon of consumers increasingly participating in the process of making and circulating media content and experiences. Practices of user-created content and user-led innovation are now significant sources of both economic and cultural value. But how should we understand and analyse these value-generating activities? What are the identities and forms of agency that constitute these emerging co-creative relations? Should we define these activities as a form of labour and what are the implications and impacts of co-creative practices on the employment conditions and professional identities of people working in the creative industries? In answering these questions we argue that careful attention must be paid to how the participants themselves (both professional and non-professional, commercial and non-commercial) negotiate and navigate the meanings and possibilities of these emerging co-creative relationships for mutual benefit. Co-Creative media production is perhaps a disruptive agent of change that sits uncomfortably with our current understandings and theories of work and labour. The articles in this special issue follow and unpack the often diverse and contradictory ways in which the participants themselves use and remake the social categories of work and labour as they seek to co-ordinate and contest co-creative media practices.

Creative Industries : A New Direction?

This paper looks at the work of the ARC Centre for Creative Industries and Innovation at Queensland University of Technology. They have attempted to deal with some of the definitional and policy ambiguities surrounding the DCMS’s re-branding of ‘cultural industries’ as ‘creative industries’. The paper focuses on three central claims. First, that Art falls outside the creative industries; second, that the creative industries moves beyond a cultural policy paradigm towards that of innovation systems; third, that the notion of ‘social network markets’ represents the central defining characteristic of the creative industries. The paper suggests that the attempt to separate out art and culture from the creative industries is misplaced and represents a significant shift away from a longer trajectory of ‘cultural industries’ policies with some damaging consequences for cultural policy and creative businesses.

The Creative Workforce : How to Launch Young People into High-Flying Futures

Creativity has become the economic engine of the 21st century. No longer the preserve of creative industries, 'creative capital' – in the form of novel thinking, navigation, interactivity and border-crossing – has become crucial to success and productivity. But are young people being equipped for a work future in which creativity is the defining feature of economic life? In this important book, Erica McWilliam argues that young people’s creative capacities are not being properly developed and that education, particularly in Australia, demands a massive pedagogical shift. Using both Australian and overseas examples, McWilliam describes what creative capacities are, why they've become important to our work futures, and what can be done to optimise the creative capacities of young people.

Creative Commons : the next generation : Creative Commons licence use five years on

Since its launch in 2001, the Creative Commons open content licensing initiative has received both praise and censure. While some have touted it as a major step towards removing the burdens copyright law imposes on creativity and innovation in the digital age, others have argued that it robs artists of their rightful income. This paper aims to provide a brief overview and analysis of the practical application of the Creative Commons licences five years after their launch. It looks at how the Creative Commons licences are being used and who is using them, and attempts to identify likely motivations for doing so. By identifying trends in how this licence use has changed over time, it also attempts to rebut arguments that Creative Commons is a movement of academics and hobbyists, and has no value for traditional organisations or working artists.

Creative exports

The article draws on research and policy experience surrounding the development of a cultural industries agenda for St. Petersburg. It tries to explain the reason for some of the resistance to the “internationalization” of the cultural industries agenda. It suggests, first, that this agenda is implicated in tensions around “modernization”; second, that the United Kingdom's “independents-led” ' approach might have real limitations in other contexts; and third, that the idea that cities are able to compete within an ever more global cultural market might ignore some very real problems faced by the “losers” or “outsiders” in this process.

Placing the creative sector in innovation : the full gamut

This paper examines the place of the creative sector -- the arts, design, media and communications -- within the framework of contemporary innovation. The historical focus on science-and-technology by innovation policy makers has spurred many within the creative sector to argue how and why it also contributes to innovation. Drawing on a wide range of English-speaking research and policy documents, the full gamut of places for the creative sector in innovation is surveyed. The paper ends by scoping out the conceptual and empirical research that is required if ideas about innovation in the creative sector are to take up a mature position within innovation studies and related policy.

60Sox and the 2bobmob : mentoring in an online learning community for creative industries graduates

Knowledge intensive services are the fastest growing segment of the international economy and the digital creative industries are a key segment therein. Australia is well positioned to exploit this opportunity but has a skills shortage in the digital content industries in terms of commercial ready graduates. We report on a solution to this problem, in the form of an online creative community of practice – www.60Sox.org - where new graduates are mentored by Australian industry leaders - the 2bobmob. We describe this community of practice as a virtual creative ecology and discuss networks, peer feedback and mentoring as key elements of post-tertiary learning, in the context of portfolio career progression.

Introduction : creative industries and innovation policy

This special issue of Innovation : Management, Policy & Practice (also released as a book: ISBN 978-1-921348-31-0) will explore some empirical and analytic connections between creative industries and innovation policy. Seven papers are presented. The first four are empirical, providing analysis of large and/or detailed data sets on creative industries businesses and occupations to discern their contribution to innovation. The next three papers focus on comparative and historical policy analysis, connecting creative industries policy (broadly considered, including media, arts and cultural policy) and innovation policy. To introduce this special issue I want to review the arguments connecting the statistical, conceptual and policy neologism of ‘creative industries’ to: (1) the elements of a national innovation system; and (2) to innovation policy. In approaching this connection, two overarching issues arise.

Lifting the lifegiving dollar : case samples of creative practice in health and medical research philanthropy

This study aims to stimulate thought, debate and action for change on this question of more vigorous philanthropic funding of Australian health and medical research (HMR). It sharpens the argument with some facts and ideas about HMR funding from overseas sources. It also reports informed opinions from those working, giving and innovating in this area. It pinpoints the range of attitudes to HMR giving, both positive and negative. The study includes some aspects of Government funding as part of the equation, viewing Government as major HMR givers, with particular ability to partner, leverage and create incentives. Stimulating new philanthropy takes active outreach. The opportunity to build more dialogue between the HMR industry and the wider community is timely given the ‘licence to practice’ issues and questioned trust that applies currently somewhat both to science and to the charitable sector. This interest in improving HMR philanthropy also coincides with the launch last year by the Federal Government of Nonprofit Australia Limited (NAL), a group currently assessing infrastructure improvements to the charitable sector. History suggests no one will create this change if Research Australia does not. However, interest in change exists in various quarters. For Research Australia to successfully change the culture of Australian HMR giving, the process will drive the outcomes. Obviously stakeholder buy-in and partners will be needed and the ultimate blueprint for greater philanthropic HMR funding here will not be this document. Instead it will be the one that wears the handprint and ‘mindprint’ of the many architects and implementers interested in promoting HMR philanthropy, from philanthropists to nonprofit peaks to government policy arms. As the African proverb says, ‘If you want to go fast, go alone; but if you want to go far, go with others’.