Can the arts recover from coronavirus? (part 2)

The first part of this blog series looked at the impact the coronavirus has had on the arts sector so far, and at the help being offered to alleviate it.

In social isolation, many people turn to art for entertainment and comfort and as a means for connecting with others, and the importance of the arts for wellbeing becomes increasingly apparent. Despite the huge strain the sector is under, its organisations and professionals are finding innovative ways of overcoming the challenges they face, to continue creating and engaging with the public.

How is the sector responding?

With venues closed and in-person events cancelled, the arts have moved online, and the sector is essentially undergoing an imposed digital shift.

Galleries and museums across the world have digitised and moved online, allowing the public to explore their collections virtually, and often for free. Several galleries have been experimenting with virtual reality platforms, allowing them to arrange and display their collections as they would onsite. The Getty Museum in California has even made its collections available via “Animal Crossing”, allowing gamers to view and display artworks from the Getty on their own virtual islands.

Theatres and performing arts companies have responded to the crisis by making performances available for free via streaming platforms. London’s Royal Opera House have been streaming free opera and ballet performances, Shakespeare’s Globe theatre has made a large collection of its recorded stage productions available for free, the English National Ballet have been offering remote ballet lessons, and the National Theatre have made a collection of its productions available through YouTube.

Artists, like many people, are working from home. Well-known artists including Anthony Gormley, Grayson Perry, David Hockney and Tracey Emin have been sharing their work during lockdown using social media.

Musicians have also been using social media and streaming platforms to share performances and collaborate with one another. New music has been created in response to the pandemic, and many artists have participated in live stream events to raise money for music venues which are at risk because of the crisis. Major global broadcast events such as ‘Together at Home’ have included performances from well-known artists like Lady Gaga and Elton John, to raise funds for frontline workers and the World Health Organisation.

By going digital, the arts sector is successfully keeping the public engaged, but concerns have been raised about the sustainability of this new model where most content is being offered for free, and there is uncertainty about how the public will choose to consume arts and culture in a post-coronavirus world.

What is needed going forward?

Despite the funding efforts and the hard work of the arts sector, as social distancing continues, concerns are growing about how the sector will withstand the financial pressures as the crisis moves into its next phase. As the emergency funds offered by Arts Council England (ACE) are quickly running out, their CEO Darren Henley has emphasised that ACE simply do not have “the resources needed to secure the income of individuals or the future of shuttered organisations through an extended lockdown, nor the ability to support the costs of reopening”. He argues that finding a solution going forward will require close engagement between government and arts organisations.

A recent letter, written by the Creative Industries Federation (CEF) and signed by 400 of the UK’s leading artists, has warned that the UK is in serious danger of becoming a “cultural wasteland” despite the funding that has been offered so far, and called for urgent funding from the government to support creative industries.

The Culture 2030 Goal Campaign have argued that the arts and culture sectors are “too often compromised in budget allocations”, and have called on governments to take immediate action to protect the sector which will play a fundamental role in helping communities to recover from the crisis. This argument has been echoed by United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), who have also emphasised the vital role of arts and culture in making sense of the world post-crisis.

Hans Ulrich Obrist, the artistic director of London’s Serpentine gallery, has argued that a multimillion-pound public arts fund is needed, similar to the programmes offered by Franklin D Roosevelt to support the arts during the Great Depression.

Final thoughts

The arts are finding ways to adapt, create, and innovate during the coronavirus crisis, despite serious financial strain. Arts professionals recognise that the sector has recovered from crises before and will find a way of doing so again. It has also been argued that the crisis has given the sector a chance to slow down, reset, and develop a more sustainable way of working together in the future. ACE have pointed out that, while the hardest part may be yet to come, they now have “an emerging sense of what the months ahead may look like and a chance to prepare”. Like most other sectors and areas of society, the arts will move into its own “new normal”, but just what that will look like remains to be seen.

Part one of this blog post was published on Monday 11 May.

Further posts on our blog concerning the arts and culture include:

Can the arts recover from coronavirus? (part 1)

antenna-jqh0GEvuNBY-unsplash

No part of society or the economy has been untouched by the coronavirus outbreak, but as the situation develops globally, it has emerged that the arts, culture, and heritage sectors may be among the hardest hit. Organisations and individuals are working hard to adapt and deliver art in more creative ways than ever, but there is real concern about the lasting effects the pandemic could have on the cultural and creative industries, and the extent to which they will manage to recover.

The impact of coronavirus on the arts, culture and heritage sectors

Back in March, the UK government’s implementation of lockdown and strict social distancing measures led to the sudden and indefinite closure of cultural spaces such as theatres, museums, galleries and cinemas, and the cancellation or postponement of pretty much all events, performances, and festivals across the country. This suspended the usual operations of most cultural institutions, leading to uncertainty and potentially devastating financial losses for those working in the sector, particularly freelancers.

Many involved in the creative industries have expressed concern about financial sustainability, and about how a crisis like this may deepen the sector’s existing inequalities. In the UK, the creative industries employ around two million people, and approximately a third of these are freelancers – the group likely to be the hardest hit by the cancellation of events and projects.

The cancellation of summer festivals and gigs has particularly affected freelance musicians, comedians and performers who often rely on the festival circuit for a substantial proportion of their income.

On top of the immediate financial concerns, artists have expressed worries about the effect of the coronavirus on their visibility, as long-planned projects grind to a halt.

A recent report published by the Arts Council of Northern Ireland estimated that the average loss of earnings for individuals in Northern Ireland’s arts sector was £3,756 between March and May 2020, and the total income loss for organisations was approximately £3.97 million during the same period. Arts Council England have been conducting similar research to gauge the impact of the crisis on the arts sector in England, and are expected to publish their findings soon.

A series of recent webinars delivered by OECD addressed the impact of the coronavirus crisis on museums, and the wider cultural and creative sectors. Museums are at immediate risk due to the dramatic reduction in revenue and charitable donations, and the livelihoods of their staff and freelance professionals are in jeopardy as a result. The loss of income across the wider arts sector has the potential to wipe out a significant proportion of its creative framework. In the longer term, museum ecosystems may be seriously damaged by the loss of smaller creative companies and professionals, on whom museums rely for creative outputs. OECD also warned that the sudden withdrawal of museums from local development projects could have a lasting negative impact on their local communities.

Similar concerns are raised in the Arts Council of Northern Ireland report, which emphasises that the suspension of public classes, workshops, community outreach initiatives and work within schools, usually provided by arts organisations, is likely to have a profound impact on Northern Ireland’s local communities and place vulnerable people at risk.

What is being done to help?

Across the UK, emergency funding programmes have been launched to support organisations and individuals at risk.

Arts Council England has offered £160 million of emergency funding (almost all of its reserves), to protect England’s arts, museums and libraries. The funding package aims to support individual creative practitioners, as well as organisations at risk. As part of this programme, they are continuing to fund their existing National Portfolio Organisations, even where agreed projects cannot go ahead.

Arts Council Wales has allocated an initial £7 million to an urgent response fund, with the hope that  funding will increase through collaboration with other trusts, foundations, and charities who are able to contribute. Arts Council for Northern Ireland has combined £500,000 of their own funds with £1 million from the Department of Communities to create an emergency fund for artists and creative organisations.

Creative Scotland have launched three new emergency funding programmes, as well as guaranteeing that all previously committed funding awards will be honoured regardless of event cancellation. They have also encouraged recipients of their funding to honour their pre-existing agreements with artists and freelance professionals.

Businesses and employees in the sector are receiving support from the government’s furlough scheme, and freelancers can apply for government grants as part of the Self-Employed Income Support Scheme.

A variety of independent funding schemes have also been set up by charities and non-profit organisations across the UK to support organisations and individuals.

What next?

The arts sector is in serious danger as a result of the coronavirus crisis. The assistance on offer has the potential to help individuals and organisations to stay afloat for the time being, but as lockdown persists and social distancing measures seem set to continue for the foreseeable future, there are already concerns that the funding on offer at this stage is not going to be enough. The second part of this blog series will consider how the arts sector is responding to the crisis, and what is needed to help its recovery going forward.


Part two of this blog post will appear on Wednesday 13 May.

Further posts on our blog concerning the arts and culture include:

A bleak future for UK arts funding?

5349310766_ea97e0ee88_bBy Stacey Dingwall

At the moment, it seems like hardly a week goes by without the announcement of cuts to funding for arts organisations across the country. In July 2014, it was announced that, due to changes in the way it distributes its funding, Arts Council England would be reducing the amount of annual funding it provides to the English National Opera by 29%. On top of this, 33 organisations were informed that their funding would be stopped altogether, and 670 that the amount they receive would be frozen for the time being.

Cuts across the regions

The picture is similar across the country. In October, it was revealed that Arts Council Wales’ 2015/16 budget would be reduced by £300,000 on the previous year. The Arts Council of Northern Ireland is facing an 11.2% reduction in its own budget for the year ahead. And in Scotland, more than half of the organisations, including the Scottish Youth Theatre, who applied to Creative Scotland for long-term funding at the end of 2014 had their bids turned down.

Reactions to these announcements have been widely negative, from the public, leading arts figures and the organisations themselves. Accepting a theatre award last week, the actor David Tennant argued that providing funding to the UK creative industries is an “investment” rather than an “expense”, and that “the arts bring in so much more money to this economy than they take out”.

This was backed up a couple of days later in a report published by the Warwick Commission, Enriching Britain: Culture, Creativity and Growth, after a year-long examination of the UK creative arts sector. According to the Commission, the sector represents 5% of the total UK economy, valued at £76.9 billion.

Despite this, the sector presently receives just 0.3% of public spend annually, a figure which many involved in the sector expect will only decrease; new analysis carried out for the London School of Economics has predicted that English local council spending on the arts could fall by as much as 33% over the next five years. In real terms, this would represents a fall in funding of £750 million between 2014 and 2019, making arts the fourth hardest hit service during that period, behind planning, transport and housing.

Unfair distribution?

Aside from the actual amount of funding provided to the arts, another key issue is its distribution across the regions. In October 2014, the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee published the report of its enquiry into the work of Arts Council England, which criticised the “clear funding imbalance” in favour of London in the Council’s distribution of grants and aid.

Many have argued that this has been an issue for some time; a 2013 report, Rebalancing Our Cultural Capital, argued that of the £320 million allocated by Arts Council England in 2012/13, £20 per capita went to London, with only £3.60 per head given to the rest of England.

Separate analysis of Arts Council England’s national investment plans for 2015-2018 by GPS Culture, Hard Facts to Swallow, placed the overall balance of investment from the Council’s grant-in-aid and lottery income streams over this period at 4.1:1 in London’s favour. According to this analysis, £689 million (43.4%) will be invested in the London arts scene, providing a per capita return of £81.87 per head of population (php); £900 million will be provided for arts in the rest of England, generating a per capita return of £19.80 php.

Things can only get….worse?

Should there be a change in government at the upcoming general election, it doesn’t look like this will improve the funding situation for the arts. In January this year, the Labour Party was criticised for ‘bragging’ that it wouldn’t reverse the arts funding cuts announced by the coalition government, should it gain office in May. Although she has criticised cuts to arts funding imposed by the current government in the past, the deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman indicated that as “this government has failed on living standards and failed on the deficit”, a future Labour Government would be unable to reverse all of their decisions made regarding cuts going forward, including on arts.

In the meantime, many UK arts organisations are turning to an alternative means of financing their projects: crowdfunding. The last few years have seen many filmmakers and musicians across the world turn to platforms such as Kickstarter to get their projects off the ground, and last year The Art Fund launched its own platform, Art Happens, to help UK museums and galleries raise money for creative projects. Through this, it is intended that British museums will be able to continue to present the innovative projects which they, and the entire UK arts sector, are globally renowned for.


This article was originally published on 3 March on the Idox Grantfinder expert blog.

We are Europe’s leading provider of grants and policy information and have been providing support to UK organisations since 1985.