91�鶹������Ʒ����

Digitalization has been a game-changer, but the impact of the pandemic shows that it needs to be more accessible, adapted and monitored. UNESCO World Heritage properties moved quickly to provide online content, virtual tours, lectures and performances. Amidst physical site closures, UNESCO continued damage assessments using satellite technology developed with UNITAR-UNOSAT, 3D documentation and drone technologies. With festive events and ceremonies cancelled, some living heritage practices adjusted to “stay-at-home” orders by moving online.

The past year also witnessed a massive migration of live events to online and hybrid forms. Some 44% of the largest , while an additional 25% took place partly online. The art market also shifted online, with an overall . As people have looked to culture for solidarity, belonging, diversion, solace and inspiration, the online consumption of cultural goods and services surged across most regions through virtual exhibitions, concerts, music and and streaming services. Many artists have offered free access to vast quantities of creative content. This has also raised important issues of remuneration and copyright; concerns that are gaining traction as cultural consumption patterns are rapidly changing in the digital era. Digital streaming services and gaming are the few areas whose activities have increased during the pandemic. and have opened up access points enabling up-and-coming or lesser-known acts to take the floor. The increased sharing of digital cultural content has amplified gaps in access and diversity, raising questions of inclusivity, as digital content does not always target different audiences and may not be accessible to all. The large disparity in digital access and infrastructure threatens to exclude many from benefiting from technological development. In sub-Saharan Africa, , while a larger share live in rural areas where cable or satellite connectivity is sparse and costly. The degree of access to technology can generate substantial development gains, as evidenced in a in Nigeria that provides fresh evidence on the positive impact of increased mobile broadband coverage on household and individual welfare, including employment, and poverty reduction. The extensive use of online platforms during pandemic has also revealed the digital gender divide. Women’s lower online access in comparison to men, compounded by women’s disproportionate access to skills development and networks, risks the . The crisis thus carries the risk of deepening inequalities in access to and participation in culture and, on a broader scale, limiting cultural diversity.

Across most fields of culture, employment was dealt a major blow, impacting the livelihoods of many workers both within the sector and in related industries. Prior to the pandemic artists and cultural professionals were already in a precarious situation, many of whom were working in situations of informality with no safety net. The impact of the pandemic on freelancers and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) has been particularly brutal. This has been evident even in countries where there are comprehensive social support frameworks in place, and more critical in those with a high prevalence of the informal sector. The ripple effects of the pandemic point to insufficient support measures that are ill-adapted to the specifics of the cultural sector. In countries where support measures have been made available, cultural institutions with salaried workers have generally been able to access some financial cushioning to protect staff. However, gig workers and freelancers, who are often “invisible” and at the margins of official relief mechanisms have in some cases been forced to pursue alternative employment outside their profession to support themselves. In theatre, whose creative workforce makes up the majority share (70%) of the sector, freelancers are crucial to the creation of work and the overall development and sustainability of the sector. In the UK alone, in the performing arts have reported to have ceased working altogether over the past year. For musicians, the closure of live music venues and festivals has impacted their rights payment and income, 75% of which derives from . Moreover, the loss of an artist’s revenue today can also have consequences several years later, as artists may be paid 2-3 years later for the rights to their work. By exposing the stark precariousness of the situation of cultural professionals, the pandemic has demonstrated both the vulnerability and magnitude of cultural employment. It has also underscored how it is connected to many other non-cultural sectors and flows across the whole economic ecosystem, thus exposing the economic impact of culture in terms of employment more broadly.

Although it is clear that the performing arts is an economic driver, it is not understood that this income-generating activity is dependent upon freelancers.

-Freelance Make Theatres Work 

Certain subsectors of culture have been particularly affected by closures, limits on mobility and physical distancing measures. The performing arts, live performance and venue-based segments of culture have been particularly hard hit. A recent on museums in COVID-19 revealed that government subsidies decreased for half of national establishments over the past year. During this time, the overall attendance at . Significant shortfalls have been borne by large museums. For example, in Brazil, where museums were closed for an average of 203 days last year, visitors to the Museu de Arte de São Paulo Assis Chateaubriand, the Museu de Arte Moderna de São Paulo and the Pinacoteca de São Paulo declined by 81%, 79% and 75%, respectively. Today, 43% of Member States responding to a have their museums closed. The closure of museums has also had a negative knock-on effect on local economies, including tours, hotels, museum shops, cafes and restaurants. Similarly, the closure of UNESCO World Heritage sites have been detrimental to local communities who live in and around sites and may depend on it for their livelihoods, or for religious reasons. Large public or partly public-funded structures have been better at weathering the storm. Live performance venues, which are predominantly private, non-profit, or public non-profit structures, have been heavily impacted, particularly small, grassroots venues, which are important sources of creative experimentation and diversity. In London alone, in the city currently face permanent closure. Confinement measures have interrupted living heritage practices, preventing bearers access to the spaces they need, from violinmakers in Italy who cannot access their studios, to craftspersons in Botswana who are unable to sell their earthenware pottery. The cancellation or postponement of fairs, festivals and biennales - integral to employment prospects and networking in the creative economy - have generated substantial losses for the events themselves and the many businesses and workers connected with these events. The cancellation of the annual Avignon Festival in France, for example, has not only impacted the festival workers, but also the broader urban ecosystem beyond the cultural event.

In the middle of March when Coronavirus was a big threat, we decided to close the site to visitors to prevent its spreading. This directly affects the site and the local communities that are selling their products outside the entrance.

-Mahmoud Suliman, Site Manager, Archaeological Sites of the Island of Meroe, Sudan

Sporlight on a year in film

The year 2020 was an unprecedented year for the global film industry, reporting an estimated US$32 billion loss. The downturn was driven by the surge in streaming services, widespread cinema closures, global box office downturn, lack of theatrical windows and film production shutdowns.

In Latin America, Argentina and Mexico saw their box office revenues drop by 80%. In Asia and the Pacific, box office revenues in the first half of 2020 had plunged by 92% compared to the same period in 2019. However, by August, Asia and the Pacific accounted for nearly 78% of the total box office worldwide. Recent data points to some indications of recovery. Film productions are increasingly up and running, with hygiene and physical distancing measures in place. Gower Street’s latest Global Box Office Tracker shows that 2021 global box office grew to US$4.2 billion last month, up from $3.3 billion the previous month. A reflection on the reduction of the industry's climate impact is also gaining momentum, with a multiplication of initiatives and increasing encouragement from public policies, signaling a growing trend towards adapting practices.

The wide-ranging impacts of the crisis have triggered greater recognition of the economic and social value of culture. Over the past year, the experience of the pandemic has signaled a shift in policy narrative, pointing to a stronger awareness of the cross-cutting benefits of culture in societies. In low- to middle-income countries whose GDP and national employment largely depends on cultural tourism, this impact has been felt even more starkly. Widespread closures and the cessation of cultural activities have been a wake-up call that has highlighted the extent that culture contributes to the economy – both as a sector in itself and for its connection to other industries. When Ministers of Culture of the G20 met last November, presided by Saudi Arabia, it marked the first time that culture has been included in the policy discussions of this international forum. There has also been increasing recognition by international and regional development banks of the economic impact of culture, notably in relation to the cultural and creative industries (CCIs) and cultural tourism linked to cultural heritage and museums. The pandemic has provoked much bigger questions about how cultural economies function and how they are valued. In the pandemic, we have turned to culture as a lifeline. It has provided a source of solidarity, inspiration and belonging. Open air UNESCO World Heritage sites such as Byblos, Lebanon have seen an increase in the number of local residents visiting the site to connect with their heritage during the pandemic. Stronger linkages between culture and health have been forged through culture’s contribution to individual and community wellbeing, which has been highlighted in various surveys over the past year, and underlined as a crucial component of recovery strategies. There is also growing recognition that biodiversity is a key for all aspects of human health, both mental and physical, which has compelled societies to reconsider unsustainable practices. For instance, the experience of the pandemic was a turning point for the city of Venice to recently ban cruise ships. New sustainable business models are imperative for the sector’s survival. It has signaled a need for structural change and reform in the sector that not only embraces new developments – such as changes in the status of artists over time, digital acceleration and mobility – but also helps to achieve other development objectives.

Creators are innovative, entrepreneurial, and resilient, but to build a long path out of this crisis, we have to turn to governments. This is not just for emergency funds; however welcome those have been. Policymakers also need to tackle the problems in front of them: the deep flaws that have skewed the playing field for creators for many years.

- Björn Ulvaeus, President, International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) 

At the outset of the pandemic, UNESCO took decisive steps to strengthen policy frameworks and support culture in crisis, highlighting its mission to support Member States. The pandemic has clearly underlined the importance of global policy dialogue on culture to address the impacts of the crisis and plan the recovery. It has called on the need to regenerate the foundations of multilateral discussions – a critical endeavor in an increasingly fragmented world – by putting the spotlight on culture as a shared, common good. One year ago, in April 2020, UNESCO convened more than 130 ministers of culture for an online meeting on the impact of and potential responses to the crisis, affirming the role of UNESCO for advancing policy dialogue with its Member States. This was followed by a consultation in July among Member States, with the aim of assessing and documenting the impact on the culture sector. The pandemic has also underlined the need for more flexible, reactive monitoring instruments to support policymaking in volatile, complex contexts by providing data on a rolling basis. The Tracker on Culture and Public Policy itself, which was initially published weekly to provide key information on the rapidly-evolving situation, was turned into a monthly monitoring tool following increased expectations upon UNESCO to provide much-needed guidance in light of its global and specialized mandate on culture. 91�鶹������Ʒ���� ensured that World Heritage site closures have been monitored, while surveys on the impact of COVID-19 have been carried out among World Heritage site managers and local authorities, as well as on living heritage.

The pandemic has invited UNESCO to expand and diversify communication channels with a wide range of actors, building on its various networks developed over time as part of its Conventions and Recommendations. Since its launch in April 2020, over 270 Resiliart debates have been held with artists in over 110 countries, highlighting the role of civil society in contributing to policymaking. The UNESCO publication “Culture in Crisis: Policy guide for a resilient creative sector” was also published as a practical tool for post-crisis recovery efforts. A Task Force on Culture and Resilient Tourism was established with the Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Convention to address key issues relating to tourism and heritage management during and beyond the COVID-19 crisis. Overall, institutional, professional or grassroot networks developed as part of the implementation of UNESCO Culture Conventions and Recommendations – such as World Heritage site managers, facilitators and community bearers of living heritage, experts and practitioners of the cultural and creative industries, and museum directors, among others – were also harnessed by UNESCO and its Member States to collect data, amplify advocacy or inform the policy response. Thereby, the pandemic further brought to light UNESCO’s convening role across the different policy domains, bringing together policymakers and professionals, the power of its normative and policy instruments, and its importance as a laboratory of ideas to stimulate global reflection on the future of the sector.

Many States provided initial emergency financial support to help cushion the impact of the pandemic for cultural organizations or individuals as part of mainstream financial support schemes targeting national economic recovery. In some cases, dedicated funds or financial mechanisms were set up for the cultural sector, reflecting a priority granted to culture in the national policy agenda, including in lower-income countries. This has served to expand eligibility criteria, and accelerate the delivery of existing financial mechanisms or earmarked budgets. In some cases, financial mechanisms targeted the cultural sector as a whole, but more often funding was channeled through professional or sectorial public authorities. In some countries, the momentum stirred by the ministerial dialogue on culture developed by UNESCO at the global level or by intergovernmental organizations at the regional level proved instrumental for line ministries to build the case for culture as part of national budgets. Local governments, the private sector and civil society have also been active in providing emergency measures for both cultural organizations and individual workers, many of which were introduced early in the pandemic.

In addition to public funding, other forms of support, including the participation of investment banks, nonprofit and crowdfunding, have shifted the lines towards more robust public-private partnerships and civil society engagement. Among the numerous examples around the world, Tunisia’s “Fonds Relance Culture” (FRC)(Culture Revival Fund - FRC) Fund provides a public-private endowment that centralizes financial contributions from organizations and individuals that would like to assist young artists and freelancers. At national level, in Senegal, more than 25,000 cultural actors have benefitted from the COVID-19 Force Fund for amounts ranging from 100,000 (US$180) to 125,000 CFA francs (US$230). Civil society has been a large contributor to Musicares, a U.S.-based, independent charity, which has distributed more than US$22 million to more than 25,000 musicians and their families, while the U.K.-based Theatre Artists Fund has raised £7.2 million (US$10 million) to support freelancers.

Overall, the impact of the pandemic has brought to light the gaps in public support and insufficient investment of the private sector in the culture sector. Many support measures have left cultural workers and organizations by the wayside as they didn’t fit funding criteria. Also, as illustrated in the findings of a recent , of the 32% of artists and cultural organizations able to access funding, it did not always come from COVID-specific emergency funds. Some artists and organizations, such as in the U.S., thus received unemployment insurance from their state, or relied on an emergency withdrawal of retirement funds. Moreover, some emergency funding support has been provided as one-off lump sums, which has made it more difficult to secure additional funding as the pandemic has progressed. The crisis also exposed the need to adapt tax frameworks to meet the specificities of the cultural sector. Turkey also made the decision to defer social security premiums for six months for a range of sectors, including culture. France introduced a waiver of social charges for businesses in hard-hit sectors, including culture. The pandemic has triggered a broader reflection on re-evaluating public funding frameworks for culture. In some countries, this has involved advocating for more robust partnerships with the private sector. In other countries, this has meant pushing for more public funding involvement in the cultural sector. This is equally challenging at the local level as cities have seen state subsidies decline throughout the pandemic, forcing them to innovate new economic models.

It is time to position culture as a public policy priority and as a human right, just as it is stated in the international conventions we have signed.

- Eva Gomez, Museo para la Vivencia Nacional, Honduras, Resiliart debate 2020

The pandemic has also spurred mid- to long-term structural reform and measures. This also means gradually adapting to a volatile environment, where similar health, climate or conflict-related crises may recur in the future. The crisis has changed how the world functions and points to the limitations of existing systems. In this spirit, many Member States have introduced training to boost digital and entrepreneurial skills, as a means of responding to the challenges and opportunities of the digital transition. In Romania, the National Institute for Cultural Research and Training introduced a Register of the Independent Culture Sector as a mechanism to support mobility and regulation in future national cultural strategies. Similarly, numerous safety and hygiene measures were undertaken for venues, live performances and events. From introducing checkerboard formations in outdoor concert halls to conducting rock concerts with audiences in cars in Mexico, States have been exploring the possibilities to safely open cultural venues and live performance while ensuring sanitary measures and physical distancing. Many local, national and international guidelines and materials have been prepared in this regard. Among them, the International Council of Museums (ICOM) developed guidelines for the safety and preservation of museum collections during confinement, and the safety of audiences when museums reopen. Beyond ensuring a safe cultural experience, safety and hygiene measures have also prompted a reflection on ways to engage more inclusively with a wide range of audiences, such as opening specific visit segments for the elderly or further facilitating access for the disabled.

Expanding access to culture throughout the crisis and accelerating digital literacy have been common denominators of most policy interventions across all regions. The majority of countries have sought to expand online cultural platforms, with the explicit intention to support cultural participation and education during confinement. Among countless examples, the Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic, in association with the Arts and Theatre Institute (ATI), launched a project that harnesses new technologies to focus on the connection between live art and the audience. By “stepping into” the digital realm at an unprecedented scale and expanding publicly-owned platforms, countries have also started to move towards more deliberate State intervention in the regulation of the digital realm.

Longer term investment in domestic production was another core target for public policies to reignite and strengthen the cultural sector and take decisive steps towards comprehensive post-crisis recovery. Policy support for culture has taken numerous forms, including commissioning artwork; financing cultural infrastructure; promoting domestic production and cultural tourism; facilitating national distribution, export and international investment; boosting cultural consumption and demand; introducing tax incentives; and creating capacity-building initiatives. The wide range of measures undertaken by countries illustrate the necessity for a comprehensive approach to public policy support across different domains, as well as throughout the value chain. It also puts forward the importance of international solidarity and dialogue in view of the inequalities between and within countries, as well as their interdependence. Among the examples around the world, the Australian Government announced last July a AUD $400M (US$310.6 million) location incentive as a way of attracting international film production over the next seven years.

Regarding cultural tourism, in mid-2020 UNESCO collaborated with the EU on a social media campaign "Europe's culture - close to you" aimed at encouraging people to rediscover their cultural heritage in different regions. Viet Nam’s domestic tourism increased as national lockdowns were eased in May, while Thailand invested US$700 million to reignite its domestic tourism. Reflecting wider support for the crafts sector, a local handicrafts continuity and revival programme was launched in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, a UNESCO Creative City of Handicrafts and Folk Arts, to provide vocational training and support to women artisans in the city.

Looking forward, this wide spectrum of policy measures is likely to steer the sector towards more resilient, sustainable and inclusive models, echoing the vision of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A number of Member States have taken the opportunity to push for more sustainable practices in line with the 2030 Agenda. Reducing the environmental impact of the cultural sector or harnessing culture’s role in social inclusion are among overarching policy objectives. For example, as part of the UNESCO Sustainable Travel Pledge in partnership with Expedia Group, nearly 600 hotels in Thailand early this year pledged to introduce firm measures to eliminate single-use plastics and promote local culture for a more sustainable tourism recovery post COVID-19. The “new normal” shall not be “back to business as usual”.

Artists need to come together to create or agitate for policies.

- Lennon Prosper, Artist and Chairperson of Balance Inc., Saint Lucia | Resiliart debate 2020

2021 will be a defining year. Among the first to be impacted in 2020, the cultural sector may also be among the last to recover. Vaccine roll-outs will determine travel, mobility and openings of cultural venues, and strongly influence the future of the sector. Yet this is a fragile dawn. Within a highly volatile global landscape, where protracted crises may durably undermine public finances, support measures for culture risk being jeopardized or overshadowed by competing priorities. However, the overwhelming recognition of the social and economic impact of culture – which has been highlighted by the pandemic – is univocal.

In this context, deliberately anchoring culture within mainstream recovery plans is critical for the future of the sector. Culture should be central to recovery efforts, not only as a priority policy area but also, more fundamentally, to inspire a shift in policymaking towards more people-centred approaches. At country level, the inclusion of culture in national COVID-19 recovery plans, which has been notably supported by UNESCO Field Offices as part of UN Country Teams, will help this shift. At the multilateral level, the upward trajectory on global policy dialogue for culture – from the UNESCO Forum of Ministers of Culture in 2019 to the inclusion of culture in major global fora such as the G20 and the upcoming Mondiacult Conference in 2022 – will also be a driving force. Likewise, the growing commitment of international financial partners, including development banks, towards the culture sector – notably the economic weight of the creative economy and cultural tourism – will be critical. To underpin this process, building the case for culture through strong data, indicators and narrative will be critical.

Reviewing the business models of the cultural sector and fostering economic diversification came forward as a critical priority in a context where the pandemic has revealed massive flaws in the system, regardless of countries' socio-economic contexts. Drawing on lessons learnt from the crisis, policy support schemes should be adapted to the specific needs of the cultural sector, including the high prevalence of SMEs, self-employed workers and informality. The economic and social protection of artists and cultural professionals, in particular, should be strengthened, building on the outcomes of the Resiliart movement and a review of the Recommendation on the Status for the Artist. Overall, more comprehensive policy measures should be developed across the value chain. This entails the support of a broad alliance, including civil society and the private and non-profit sectors, to strengthen cultural ecosystems and renew business models of cultural institutions, notably to ensure more agile, public-private partnerships. Countries should deliberately work to diversify culture-related economies, including through public investment, reducing tourism dependency, spurring national cultural consumption and demand, and integrate culture-based strategies across national economies, including in non cultural sub-sectors. Finally, more agile data collection mechanisms and communication channels between policymakers and cultural stakeholders should be sustained to inform the adaptation of cultural policies in a fast-evolving environment.

The future of the cultural sector also relies on a more robust integration of culture across the policy spectrum. The pandemic has exposed and, to some extent, amplified global development challenges, in particular social inequalities, the climate crisis and digital transformation. These overarching trends have been reshaping the policy landscape over the last decade and directly call upon the transformative role of culture in our societies, even more so in the COVID-19 recovery context, which has reshuffled policy priorities. As the current crisis has exacerbated pre-existing inequalities between countries and within societies, leveraging culture to foster social inclusion and wellbeing will be a major endeavour. Steps undertaken in that direction point to a growing recognition of the role of culture in social progress.

As the cultural sector is invited to profoundly reshape its business models for economic recovery, promoting culture's contribution to climate action has clearly gained traction with a view to build back better and greener. This growing momentum arising from the sector itself should be deliberately supported by public policies, including through financial incentives and legal frameworks. Adapting to the digital transformation, which was massively accelerated since the outbreak of the pandemic, will be a major component of culture and public policies in the years to come, and a factor in supporting the sector's diversification. Enabling more equitable access to online culture through investments in infrastructure and capacity-building, as well as further regulating the digital realm to ensure fair remuneration of cultural professionals and to better protect cultural and linguistic diversity, will be critical endeavours. Public investments linked with COVID-19 recovery offer the opportunity to accelerate this much-needed shift.

The pandemic is also likely to accelerate the evolution of the cultural policy landscape towards multi-level governance models, a trend which has been unfolding over the past two decades. The rise of local governments, in particular, was further accelerated by the crisis, as cities and regions were on the frontlines in addressing the needs of the cultural sector, while also having to innovate economic models to face severe cuts in State transfers. Likewise, the role of civil society in policymaking was clearly reflected in the active engagement of professional organizations in conducting impact assessments, channeling needs of the sector to decision-makers, outlining prospects for policy action or innovating financial mechanisms to rescue cultural professionals and individuals affected by the pandemic. This is a role that is likely to be amplified in the future. Finally, the increasing engagement of regional and sub-regional organizations towards the culture sector was further illustrated by the numerous ministerial debates, impact assessments, data collection and financial assistance mechanisms conducted by regional and sub-regional organizations around the world.

Looking forward, recovery perspectives should shed new light on the role of culture as a common good. This is an essential rationale in the current public policy discourse across different policy areas, where culture has a critical role to play. As societies were profoundly shaken by the suspension of cultural interactions and made acutely aware of the profound importance of culture by this brutal interruption, the pandemic acts as a reset button. At this particular juncture, public policies should deliberately invest in valuing cultural diversity as a positive resource and engine for renewal and societal transformation. Beyond the cultural sector itself, culture has the power to advance other human development objectives such as education, health and well-being, while also stimulating the much-needed skills and values of adaptation, solidarity and empathy, all of which will be vital to build back better societies.