Art policy in the emerging paradigm: Lessons from Alan Peacock

In 1979 the International Institute of Public Finance held its annual conference in Taormina, Italy. Alan Peacock introduced his presentation emphasizing many contradictions in the public finance framework between academic theory and government’s action adopting a few operas written by Vincenzo Bellini as metaphors of the dynamics of the public sector and its features. It was a clear homage to a composer born at short distance from Taormina, but also Peacock’s usual joke about the theatrical profile of real life.

Alan Peacock loved Italy, and due to its deep involvement in music and opera he knew our language, and was aware of the odd aspects of our policy. Active in years when public funding of the arts was the rule, he continuously tried to drive attention to a simpler framework where public action can be combined with individual freedom of choice. What would Peacock suggest to the Italian public decision-makers (as well as to art professionals) in order for the cultural system to face the present radical transformation from the mechanical manufacturing paradigm to the liquid sharing economy?

The crucial feature in Peacock’s view of cultural policy was the clear refusal of paternalistic action aimed at keeping the arts supply alive. This was strongly justified with both the philosophical framework based upon free choice, reluctant to believe in supply-induced reactions of demand, and the empirical awareness of the weak incentives implied by monetary support of producers. If any, subsidies should aim at facilitating choice and access: cultural addiction will do the rest.

The present Italian cultural policy appears to be entirely based upon mechanical and often uncritical support of supply, and ignores both the existing and the potential demand for the arts. Public action could widely benefit from the approach and the views advocated by Alan Peacock in diversified and fertile production including the performing arts, museums, built heritage, art policy, and creative industries.

Whatever the area, the public sector should encourage any free and responsible choice aimed at facing society’s reaction and market appreciation without relying upon ex ante monetary support. This would act as a powerful obstacle against the autonomous and sustainable dynamics of the arts market. In our time Peacock’s lessons are even more sensible and useful, since the emerging economic paradigm is based upon the value of knowledge, the fertility of culture as a driver of growth for the whole economy.