Advertisement

Renegotiating Cultural Welfare: The Adoption of Neoliberal Trends in Finnish Cultural Policy and How It Fits the Nordic Model of a Welfare State

  • Simo Häyrynen
Chapter
Part of the Sociology of the Arts book series (SOA)

Abstract

The Nordic model refers to an economic regime that combines market economy with “an active state” to guarantee equal possibilities for all parts of society. The same principles have been implemented in the Nordic cultural policies. This chapter examines the reactions of the Nordic cultural policy to the ideological turn in its societal environment around 1990. It is stated here that the system, constructed originally for protecting free artistic expression and equal cultural possibilities, has been in the front line of political market orientation. The orientation is modeled rhetorically after the ideas of cultural pluralism and economic efficiency; in practice, the fight has taken place between different ideological notions of governmental responsibilities.

References

  1. Ahearne, J. 2009. Cultural Policy Implicit and Explicit: A Distinction and Some Uses. International Journal of Cultural Policy 15 (2): 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bjurström, E. 2008. Cultural Policy and the Meaning of Modern and Postmodern Taste, with Concluding Remark on the Case of Sweden. International Journal of Cultural Policy 14 (1): 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boltanski, L., and È. Chiapello. 2007. The New Spirit of Capitalism. London: Verso. (Orig. 1999).Google Scholar
  4. Bruun, O., T. Eskelinen, I. Kauppinen, and H. Kuusela. 2009. Immateriaalitalous. Kapitalismin uusin muoto. [Immaterial Economy – New Modes of Capitalism]. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.Google Scholar
  5. CP. 1965. State Committee for the Arts 1965: A 8. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 1974. Committee for the Cultural Activities 1974:2. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 1992. Kupoli – Commission on the Outlines of Cultural Policy 1992:36. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 1993a. Report Submitted by the Finnish Council of State to the Parliament on Cultural Policy. Helsinki: Council of State.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 1993b. Kupolin kaikuja [Echoes of Kupoli]. A Summary of the Statements Given in the Circulation of a Proposal for Comment Concerning the Commission on the Outlines of Cultural Policy. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2009a. Näin suomalaista kulttuuria viedään [That’s How the Finnish Culture Is Exported]. In The Report on Cultural Export 2008, ed. I. Villacis. Publications of the Ministry of Education 2009:38. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 2009b. Creative Economy and Culture at the Core of Innovation Policy, Publications of the Ministry of Education 2009. Vol. 30. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 2010. Kulttuuri – tulevaisuuden voima. [Culture – the Power of Future]. Committee’s Proposal for the Report Submitted by the Finnish Council of State to the Parliament on Cultural Policy. Publications of the Ministry of Education 2010:10. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2011. Effectiveness Indicators to Strengthen the Knowledge Base for Cultural Policy, Publications of the Ministry of Education and Culture 2011. Vol. 16. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  14. Cultural Statistics. 2014. Culture and the Media 2013. Helsinki: Statistics Finland.Google Scholar
  15. Danielsen, A. 2008. The Persistence of Cultural Divides – Reflection on the Audience for Culture and the Arts in Norway. International Journal of Cultural Policy 14 (1): 95–112.Google Scholar
  16. DiMaggio, P., and W. Powell. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organisational Fields. American Sociological Review 48: 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duelund, P., ed. 2003. The Nordic Cultural Model. Copenhagen: Nordic Cultural Institute.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 2008. Nordic Cultural Policies: A Critical View. International Journal of Cultural Policy 14 (1): 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Einhorn, E., and J. Logue. 2003. Social Foundations of Post-industrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Esping-Andersen, Gösta. 1999. Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. The Social-Democratic, Liberal and Conservative regimes. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  21. Frenander, A. 2005. Kulturen som kulturpolitikens stora problem. Diskussionen om svensk kulturpolitik under 1900-talet. Hedemora: Gidlunds.Google Scholar
  22. Girard, A. 1972. Cultural Development: Experiences and Policies. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  23. Harrison, L., and S. Huntington, eds. 2000. Culture Matters. How Values Shape Human Progress? New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  24. Harvey, D. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Häyrynen, S. 2013. A Centralised Market Orientation: The Implicit Determinants of Finnish Cultural Policy in 1990–2010. International Journal of Cultural Policy 19 (5): 623–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jessop, B. 1990. State Theory: Putting Capitalist States in Their Place. London: Polity.Google Scholar
  27. Kananen, J. 2011. Modern Societal Impulses and Their Nordic Manifestations. On emancipation and Constraint in Societal Development. Helsinki: Nordprint.Google Scholar
  28. Kautto, M. 2001. Diversity Among Welfare States. Comparative Studies on Welfare State Adjustment in Nordic Countries, Stakes Research Report. Vol. 118. Saarijärvi: Gummerus.Google Scholar
  29. Kosonen, P. 1998. Pohjoismaiset mallit murroksessa [Nordic Models in the Crisis]. Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
  30. McGuigan, J. 2004. Rethinking Cultural Policy. Glasgow: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. ———. 2014. The Art and Soul of Neoliberalism. A Presentation Held in the Congress “Cultural Politics in Contemporary Society” in Joensuu Campus, University of Eastern Finland.Google Scholar
  32. Oesch, P. 2010. Company Support for the Arts and Culture in Finland in 2008 and Changes in the Support 1999–2008. Helsinki: Central Arts Council.Google Scholar
  33. Roivas, S. 2009. Tietoyhteiskunnan lupaus. Tieto- ja kommunikaatioteknologioiden sosiaalisesta soveltamisesta. [The Promise of Knowledge-Based Society]. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1402. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Røyseng, S. 2008. Arts Management and the Autonomy of Art. International Journal of Cultural Policy 14 (1): 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schmidt, Vivien Ann, and Mark Thatcher. 2013. Theorizing Ideational Continuity: The Resilience of Neo-Liberal Ideas in Europe. In In Resilient Liberalism in Europe’s Political Economy, ed. Vivien Ann Schmidt and Mark Thatcher, 1–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schnyder, G., and G. Jackson. 2013. Germany and Sweden in the Crisis: Re-coordination or Resilient Liberalism. In Resilient Liberalism in Europe’s Political Economy, ed. Vivien Ann Schmidt and Mark Thatcher, 313–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stenström, E. 2008. What Turn Will Cultural Policy Take? The Renewal of the Swedish Model. International Journal of Cultural Policy 14 (1): 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simo Häyrynen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Geographical and Historical StudiesJoensuuFinland

Personalised recommendations