Keep us all in the picture

Participation in the arts benefits both the individual and society. But how inclusive is the Irish arts scene, asks Arminta Wallace

Who goes to arts events in affluent 21st-century Ireland? The answer, alas, is that nobody really knows. When the National Economic and Social Forum set out to prepare a draft document on the topic of cultural inclusion in Irish society, it was forced to draw on data collected in 1994 - and if we know one thing, it's that a great deal has changed in Ireland in the past 12 years. At least one major new survey is currently being conducted - by the Arts Council - and its results are due to be published shortly. But the very absence of figures is instructive. In a society which is still getting to grips with a working contemporary definition of "culture", the notion of "cultural exclusion" is still somewhat blurry around the edges.

"A commitment to the ideas of social inclusion and social justice requires that we embrace all facets of life including the economic, social and cultural domains," the NESF report - catchily titled "Arts, Culture and Social Cohesion: Issues, Policies and Recommendations" - begins. "While we are familiar with the ideas of economic marginalisation and social exclusion, we are less so with the idea of cultural exclusion. By cultural exclusion we mean exclusion from access to cultural goods and resources that are regularly accessed by the better-off in society. . ."

The complex relationships uncovered by the report hint at the scale and depth of the problem. Taking a very broad view of the term "culture" as "a set of attitudes, practices or beliefs that are fundamental to the function of different societies", it runs jauntily through some of the benefits - cognitive, behavioural, health and community-level social cohesion - which result from active participation in the arts. It also breaks "participation" down into four dimensions - production of art, participation in decision-making in the arts, passive consumption and active consumption.

Cultural exclusion is, according to this analysis, a kind of vicious circle; if people don't attend arts events or become involved in making art, they are unlikely to become involved in arts decision-making. And because there is at present no decision-making which properly addresses the needs of minority groups, the inevitable result is further alienation and exclusion. Thus the people in our society who would, arguably, benefit most from exposure to artistic activities - children, the less well-off, the elderly and now, presumably, immigrants - are the least likely to take any part in them.

The 200-page report incorporates more than 80 submissions from a range of interested parties, from local authorities through parent and toddler groups to third-level colleges, prison libraries, the Information Centre for Immigrants and such organisations as Age & Opportunity. It lists key actions which have been taken in this area by everyone from the Department of Education and Science to the national cultural institutions; and it focuses on three key areas for closer study - libraries, the visual arts and live drama, both professional and amateur.

This broad perspective makes for some practical unwieldiness, but is itself part of the point. As the report makes clear, many arts organisations and local authorities are working hard to increase participation in the arts, but nobody is co-ordinating these efforts at national and particularly at policy level. This, not surprisingly, is the key recommendation of the report - better co-ordination, not simply at local and national level, but among local arts groups, between national and local arts organisations and among local authority arts officers.

It also recommends better management and certainty of funding - which includes both multi-annual funding and ring-fenced funding for cultural inclusion - increased provision for the arts in education, targeted measures for specific groups and improved data on participation in the arts, as mentioned above.

As Anne-Marie McGauran of the NESF explains, however, the immediate target is the formation of a steering committee, to be chaired by the Department of Arts, Sports and Tourism, which will ensure that the recommendations become reality.

"In the 1990s there was a very good report done on poverty in the arts by the Arts Council and Combat Poverty," she says. "It made some very good recommendations - some of which were very similar to the ones we've made - but there was no steering committee or anything to drive it all forward."

It's not the only arts report to languish in a dusty corner, of course. The saddest reading of the entire NESF report comes on pages 145-152; a catalogue of previous reports on this and similar topics, including the comprehensive and hugely imaginative 1994 report, "The Public and the Arts", on which this new work leans, at times very heavily indeed.

The final meeting of the project team takes place this week. After that, the report will go as a memorandum to all Government departments as well as making it to the Cabinet table; a series of talks by NESF members to Dáil committees and city and county managers will probably follow.

"The NESF does have a good history of getting things implemented," McGauran says. "We're maybe in a better position than others to make things happen. Also, every three years the NESF has implementation reports where it goes back over previous reports and looks at what has happened to every recommendation. So there are a number of ways that we can keep looking at it. In some ways, of course, it goes out of our hands. We can act as a kind of watchdog - but what actually happens is not, unfortunately, up to us."

The report offers a fascinating insider glimpse into current Government thinking on the arts and on arts policy. It's also undeniably weird to read, in this context, paragraphs about how the immediate captivation and pleasure offered by artistic experiences are private benefits which spill over into the public realm "by developing citizens who are more empathetic and more discriminating in their perceptions about the world around them".

Government Ministers would be forgiven for being somewhat wary of the latter, but for arts practitioners in Ireland, this is a debate worth having - and one which deserves to play to a packed, and captivated, audience.

Breaking down barriers

The NESF report identifies a range of barriers to participation in the arts. These include geographical barriers - most venues are located in urban areas - cost, transport, family commitments (the cost of bringing children to arts events is a factor here), disabilities, literacy and racial and ethnic barriers.

No information has been collected in Ireland yet on the latter topic, but studies from the UK suggest that those from black and ethnic backgrounds don't attend arts venues, citing "lack of time, lack of information about what's available in the local area, and lack of interest" as the reasons.

Information technology, meanwhile, works both ways - it has the potential to make cultural activities more accessible, but can be tricky for those who live in an area without broadband access, or for those with disabilities.

Young people experience additional barriers including lack of finance, facilities and transport - as well as time. Some 71 per cent of 18-year-olds reported in 2004 that they didn't have enough time to take part in leisure activities.

Harder to quantify, in many ways, are the social and psychological barriers to the arts. "Some people who do not attend arts events see the arts as 'for other people', 'not for us'," the report says.

"Alternatively, the art that is shown may not relate to their experiences and so they find it irrelevant."