Cultural policy models and cultural facilities models: from national to local models. Analysis of Barcelona’s case

The development of cultural policy analysis by social science has been produced a theorization about cultural policy models from sociology and political science. This analysis shows the influence of the national model of cultural policy on the forms of governance and management of cultural facilities. However, in this paper we will defend that currently the local model of cultural policy decisively influences the model of cultural institutions. This is explained by the growing importance of culture in local development strategies. In order to demonstrate this we will analyze the case of the Barcelona Model of local development and cultural policy, that is characterized for the level of local government leadership, multilevel governance, the use of culture in urban planning processes and a tendency to use public-private partnership in public management. This Model influences the genesis and development of the cultural facilities and it produces a singular and relatively successful model.

Unraveling EU Policies: the ““Common Basic Principles”” and the ““European Integration Fund”” as a technology of government

this paper is about EU “soft policies” on immigrant integration. It analyzes the “Common Basic Principles” (CBPs) and the “European Integration Fund” (EIF), two devices that have been recently established within this framework. It adopts the theoretical perspective of the “anthropology of policy” and “governmentality studies”. It shows the context of birth of the aforementioned devices, as well as their functioning and the assessment done by the actors implied in the elaboration/implementation/evaluation of the related policies. It is based both on documentary research as well as direct observation and interviews done to the actors implied. It concludes that the PBC and the EIF should be considered as a “technology of government”, that strives to align the conduct of the actors with the governmental aims, as well as it produces specific practices and knowledge. It also underlines an intrinsic feature of many policies: their “congenital failure”, since they are (often) disputed and resignified by situated actors, who are embedded in asymmetrical power relations.