Local Cultural Ecosystem In Türkiye

Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts (İKSV) has published its 11th report titled Local Cultural Ecosystem in Türkiye which is the culmination of a year-long field research carried out within the scope of “Ortaklaşa: Culture, Dialogue and Support Programme” implemented by İKSV with the support of the European Union.

The report, written by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ulaş Bayraktar aims to draw a general picture of the cultural ecosystem in Türkiye, which includes many different actors and profiles. The report aims to create a strong ground for dialogue and cooperation between local governments and civil culture and arts organizations and to initiate a discussion that will make it possible to jointly design local cultural policies with a long-term perspective.

You may access the full report here, titled “Local Cultural Policies in Türkiye” in English.

Research Background

In Türkiye, we are faced with the need for cultural policies to be shaped by the local actors in line with the requirements of the cities and the regions. In terms of the distribution of resources and delegation of authority, the Public Administration Reform grants the potential of localisation and decentralisation to the municipalities which, however, still seem far from attaining the financial and structural means for the grounds of dialogue and collaboration we aspire to. Even though the CSOs active in the field of arts and culture have a considerably high interest in developing and promoting cultural policies, their participation and involvement in these processes are as considerably low. The foremost reason is the lack of dialogue among stakeholders who do not demonstrate the intention of collaboration.

This research aims to take a snapshot of the cultural ecosystem in Türkiye which contains a multitude of different actors and profiles. It seeks to answer the questions of “What sorts of actions, mechanisms, and initiatives are required to collaboratively establish a participatory, inclusive, egalitarian, and rights-based cultural ecosystem? Who are the actors that play role in the development of cultural polices? What are the restrictions, opportunities, and challenges in this process? What are the needs of the cultural professionals active in localities?”.

Research findings

Aiming to diagnose the relationships between municipalities and CSOs active in the field of arts and culture in various cities of Türkiye, the research was carried out between March-October 2023 with different constituents of the cultural sector by using quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. Within this framework, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 139 informants in 12 cities; focus group meetings with 157 participants from 30 different cities; and 406 online surveys and face-to-face questionnaires with 1,245 participants across the country.

In the research design and the analysis of findings, the cultural sphere was addressed as an ecosystem by utilising the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment framework. In line with the objective of the research, CSOs active in the field of arts and culture, municipalities and city residents were identified as the actors of this ecosystem. These three constituents were analysed in different dimensions such as mutual cognisance and being informed of one another, collaboration, and participation in activities and in decision-making processes. Different determining elements such as demographic and geographic attributes and resources on hand were taken into account in the analysis.

The prominent findings of the research can be summarised as follows:

According to the results of the public opinion surveys carried out with the participation of city residents across the country, 59% of the residents and 60% of the municipality representatives who responded to the survey say that their expectations of municipal services in the field of arts and culture are sufficiently or partially met. However, this rate drops to 18% among CSO representatives. It is possible to say that cities offer quite comprehensive and rich cultural lives. The differences nevertheless observed regarding the meeting of expectations is consistent with the differentiation in both the meaning attributed to culture and the description of cultural activities: In the public opinion survey, when asked for the meaning they ascribe to culture, a considerable number of city residents say “tradition” and “customs”.
The scope of culture is quite ambiguous; the perception of cultural services is fused with leisure, sports, and religious services. When cleared of this ambiguity, the amounts that municipalities allocate for culture hardly reach 1% of their budgets. In the central government’s annual budget of approximately 4.5 trillion liras approved for 2023, the amount allocated to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism was 16.5 billion liras, which corresponds to less than 0.004 of the total budget. According to the Local Administrations Consolidated Budget expenses data published by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance, local authorities allocated 1.7% of their budgets to cultural services for the year 2022.
The municipality representatives who responded to the online survey state that the biggest problem (61%) they encounter in organising arts and culture activities is finding funding. When we ask the same question to CSO representatives in the online survey conducted with the participation of CSOs active in the field of arts and culture, this rate further rises to 83%. The quantitative, physical, and technical inadequacies of the cultural venues stand out as yet another problem area, which elucidates the fundamental challenge posed by financial difficulties.
Despite the severity of their financial difficulties, the CSOs’ main motivation for seeking to collaborate with municipalities is not financial support. Only 20% of the CSOs participating in the online survey indicate funding as their biggest expectation from the municipalities, while 40% prioritise the need to have a say in cultural policies. This demand for having a say also underlines the importance of the demand for democratisation.
In the local authorities, the most influential actor in the planning of cultural activities is the mayors. Municipality representatives who participated in the online survey state that the mayors are the most influential actors both in cultural activity planning and cultural policy making at the rate of 89% and 91%, respectively.
73% of CSO representatives state that personal connections are determinant in the collaborations established with the municipalities. In the local cultural management pivoting around the mayor, the lack of objective criteria for the selection of activities to be supported by municipal resources creates an inevitable inequality between persons and institutions. Cultural activities devised through subjective preferences and decisions independent of certain principles, priorities and objectives hinder the development of a cultural policy. As the person in office and/or the political approach in power changes, the cultural life also undergoes a complete change.
In the activities they carry out in collaboration with CSOs, the municipalities become the determinants of the content as well. In these activities, the entire visibility is centred upon the municipality, ranging from the size of the municipality logo to the press bulletins. Regardless of whose idea or labour is used, the activity in question turns into an institutional event that will be reduced to a number and perhaps an image in the municipality’s annual report. This, in turn, creates an inescapable asymmetry for most of the organisations that collaborate with or are supported by the municipality. Occupying a much more subordinate and powerless position in comparison to the resources and means of the municipality, the CSOs are usually unable to leave this asymmetrical relationship.
According to the findings of the public opinion survey carried out across the country, 81% of the city residents participate in cultural activities less than they would like to. The previous year, 56% of the survey respondents visited historical sites at least once and 53% went to the cinema. Barring these two examples, more than half of the sample group participated in no other cultural activity. The biggest reason for these low rates of participation is lack of time and interest.
Only 9% of the city residents can participate in the cultural activities organised by the municipality as much as they would like to. The biggest reason for the low rates of participation seems to be lack of time and tardy announcement of the activities. In response to the question “Are you sufficiently informed of the cultural activities carried out by the municipalities in your vicinity?” asked of the city residents in the nationwide public opinion survey, 21% of the respondents said they are mostly informed, while 31% said they are never informed. Despite these low rates, 90% of the municipality representatives and 69% of the CSO representatives who participated in the surveys think that the activities are able to reach their target audiences.
The priority placed on quantitative performance can cause the processes of democratic participation and negotiation to be overlooked. Aspects such as the quality, consistency, and sustainability of the activities are not given sufficient importance. Therefore, there is no intent of collaboration with CSOs and cultural professionals which are the experts of the field; and it becomes difficult to develop effective, participatory, and sustainable cultural policies.
Ethnic identities, cultural values most notably language, religious sensitivities, and sexual orientations emerge as the redlines and political boundaries of the field of freedom accorded to artists in Türkiye. The rise of political tension and the sharpening of social polarisation also politicise the opportunities of collaboration that could flourish within the local cultural ecosystem. The freedoms of artists and cultural professionals are not safeguarded.