Advertisement

Journal of Cultural Economics

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 35–57 | Cite as

State Subsidies and Repertoire Conventionality in the Non-Profit English Theatre Sector: An Econometric Analysis

  • John O’Hagan
  • Adriana Neligan
Article

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of financial and socio-economic factors on repertoire decisions of the grant-aided, non-profit theatre sector in England using cross-sectional regression analysis for the seasons 1996/97 to 1998/99. The dependent variable, a conventionality index, a variant of the DiMaggio/Stenberg conformity index, is calculated first. This shows a very considerable variation in repertoire conventionality, so measured, in the non-profit English theatre sector. A model is then constructed to assess the impact of the above-mentioned factors in determining variations in this index using a dataset hitherto not analysed in this way. The empirical results show that public subsidy, the size and the location of a theatre as well as the local average income have an impact on conventionality, which confirms existing empirical findings.

Key words

conventionality cultural economics performing arts organisations repertoire subsidies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Austen-Smith, D. (1980) “On the Impact of Revenue Subsidies on Repertory Theatre Policy.” Journal of Cultural Economics 4: 9–17.Google Scholar
  2. Boyden Associates (2000) A Report for the ACE on the Roles and Functions of the English Producing Theatres. Stage One. Summary. Arts Council of England, Bristol.Google Scholar
  3. Castañer, X. and Campos, L. (2002) “The Determinants of Artistic Innovation: Bringing in the Role of Cultural Organisations.” Journal of Cultural Economics 26: 29–52.Google Scholar
  4. Caves, R. (2000) Creative Industries. Harvard University Press, Boston.Google Scholar
  5. Davidson, R. and McKinnon, J. G. (1993) Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. DiMaggio, P. and Stenberg, K. (1985a) “Conformity and Diversity in American Resident Theatres”, in Judith Balfe and Margaret Wyszomirski (eds.), Arts, Ideology and Politics. Praeger, New York, pp. 116–143.Google Scholar
  7. DiMaggio, P. and Stenberg, K. (1985b) “Why do Some Theatres Innovate More than Others? An Empirical Analysis.” Poetics 14: 107–122.Google Scholar
  8. Heilbrun, J. (2001) “Empirical Evidence of a Decline in Repertory Diversity among American Opera Companies 1991/92 to 1997/98.” Journal of Cultural Economics 25: 63–72.Google Scholar
  9. Jenkins, S. and Austen-Smith, D. (1987) “Interdependent Decision-Making in Non-Profit Industries. A Simultaneous Equation Analysis of English Provincial Theatre.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 5:149–174.Google Scholar
  10. Krebs, S. (1996) Öffentliche Theater in Deutschland. VWF, Berlin.Google Scholar
  11. Krebs, S. and Pommerehne, W.W. (1995) “Politico-economic Interactions of German Public Performing Arts.” Journal of Cultural Economics 19: 17–32.Google Scholar
  12. Long, J.S. and Ervin, L. H. (2000) “Using Heteroscedasticity Consistent Standard Errors in the Linear Regression Model.” The American Statistician 54: 217–224.Google Scholar
  13. Martorella, R. (1977) “The Relationship Between Box Office and Repertoire: A Case Study of Opera.” The Sociological Quarterly 18: 354–366.Google Scholar
  14. Montias, J.M. (1983) “Public Support for the Performing Arts in Europe and the United States,” in Gustav R. and Robert L. West (eds.), Comparative Development Perspectives. Westview Press, Boulder Colorado, and reprinted in Paul DiMaggio (1986) Nonprofit Enterprise in the Arts. Studies in Mission and Constraint. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 287–319.Google Scholar
  15. O’Hagan, J.W. (1998) The State and the Arts: An Analysis of Key Economic Policy Issues in Europe and in the United States. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.Google Scholar
  16. O’Hagan, J.W. and Neligan, A. (2001) “Innovation and Diversity in Repertoire in Grant-aided and Commercial Theatre”, in Sara Selwood (ed.), The UK Cultural Sector: Profile and Policy Issues. Policy Studies Institute, London, pp. 217–234.Google Scholar
  17. Pierce, J.L. (2000) “Programmatic Risk-Taking by American Opera Companies.” Journal of Cultural Economics 24: 45–63.Google Scholar
  18. Schulze, G. and Rose, A. (1998) “Public Orchestra Funding in Germany – An Empirical Investigation.” Journal of Cultural Economics 22: 227–247.Google Scholar
  19. Throsby, D.C. (1994) “The Production and Consumption of the Arts: A View of Cultural Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature 32: 1–29.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsTrinity College DublinDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations