Working Paper Series, 20

!"# %&' ()%* +,-./% 0",,123%3'*4

An introduction to the literature on arts impact studies


Prepared by
Joshua Guetzkow
or the
5.6327 %&' 8'.*1)' "9 01:%1)' 0"29')'2/'





Princeton Uniersity
June -8, 2002

1he author thanks Paul DiMaggio and Stee 1epper or their guidance and suggestions, and
Jesse Mintz-Roth or his ine research assistance. Also, thanks are due to the Rockeeller loundation
or its generous support o this project. Please do not cite without permission. Direct any comments
or the author to joshgprinceton.edu.
+;5<=>?05+=;

As priate and public agencies seek innoatie ways to employ the arts to
improe and strengthen communities, they hae become increasingly interested in
assessing the impact o their inestments. In this context, arts adocates and
researchers hae made a ariety o ambitious claims about how the arts impact
communities. 1hese claims, howeer, are made problematic by the many
complications inoled in studying the arts. Just consider the possible deinitions o
the phrase, the arts impact communities.` \hen speaking o the arts,` do we reer
to indiidual participation ,as audience member or direct inolement,, to the
presence o arts organizations ,non-proit !"# or-proit, or to art,cultural districts,
estials or community arts \hen speaking o impact,` do we reer to economic,
cultural or social impact, do we reer exclusiely to direct community-leel eects or
do we also include indiidual- and organizational-leel ones By communities,` do
we mean regions, cities, neighborhoods, schools or ethnic groups
O course, there are no authoritatie answers to these questions, since
dierent research questions require dierent deinitions. And as one might expect,
arts impact studies employ these heterogeneous deinitions in a ariety o
combinations. Gien this array o deinitions, how would we go about measuring the
impact o the arts on communities One problem is that researchers and arts
adocates rarely seem to consider such complications when making claims about the
broader impact o the arts, and seldom discuss the implications o making particular
theoretical and methodological choices.
1

In this paper, I will lay out some o the issues that need to be addressed when
thinking about and studying how the arts impact communities, in addition to
proiding an introduction to the literature on arts impact studies. I begin discussing
the mechanisms through which the arts are said to hae an impact. lollowing this is a

1
To be Iair, many studies are not intended to examine the impact oI arts programs on the broader
community, but only at a relatively limited number oI participants. Nevertheless, the Iindings oI these
studies are oIten used by arts advocates to support more ambitious claims about the impact oI the arts on
communities.
1
discussion o key theoretical and methodological issues inoled in studying the
impact o the arts. I conclude by suggesting areas or urther research and relecting
on the limitations o past research.

8@0!(;+A8A
1he arts hae been heralded as a panacea or all kinds o problems Arts-
integrated school curricula supposedly improe academic perormance and student
discipline ,liske 1999, Remer 1990,. 1he arts reitalize neighborhoods and promote
economic prosperity ,Costello 1998, SCDCAC 2001, Stanziola 1999, \alesh 2001,.
Participation in the arts improes physical and psychological well-being ,Baklien
2000, Ball and Keating 2002, Bygren, Konlaan and Johansson 1996, 1urner and
Senior 2000,. 1he arts proide a catalyst or the creation o social capital and the
attainment o important community goals ,Goss 2000, Matarasso 199, \illiams
1995,.
Gien these claims, the question arises o how to elaborate the causal
mechanisms through which the arts hae an impact ,i.e., the interening actors that
connect a particular arts actiity with a speciic outcome,. Below is a grid that lays out
two dimensions that will help in thinking about this.
2
1he rows represent three
aspects o the arts typically highlighted in the literature: direct inolement in arts
organizations, especially that which entails personal engagement in some orm o
creatie actiity ,most oten associated with community arts programs and the use o
the arts in education,, participation in the arts as an audience member ,mostly
associated with cognitie ability, cultural capital and health improement arguments,
as well as economic impact studies o the arts - i.e., whether the arts hae an
economic impact by drawing audience dollars rom outside the community,, and the
presence o arts organizations in a community ,mostly associated with economic
impact studies and social capital arguments,.


2
This grid expands and builds upon a typology oI arts eIIects developed in a research proposal to the
Wallace-Readers Digest Funds by Kevin McCarthy (2002) oI the RAND Corporation.
2
5.B:' C4 8'/&.23*,* "9 ()%* +,-./%
`

Individual Community
Material/
Health
Cognitive /
Psych.
Interpersonal Economic Cultural Social
D
i
r
e
c
t

I
n
v
o
l
v
e
m
e
n
t



Builds inter-
personal ties and
promotes
volunteering,
which improves
health

Increases
opportunities Ior
selI-expression
and enjoyment

Reduces
delinquency in
high-risk youth

Increases sense oI
individual eIIicacy
and selI-esteem

Improves
individuals` sense
oI belonging or
attachment to a
community

Improves human
capital: skills and
creative abilities


Builds individual
social networks

Enhances ability
to work with
others and
communicate
ideas



Wages to paid
employees

Increases sense
oI collective
identity and
eIIicacy

Builds social
capital by getting
people involved,
by connecting
organizations to
each other and by
giving participants
experience in
organizing and
working with local
government and
nonproIits.


A
u
d
i
e
n
c
e

P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n


Increases
opportunities Ior
enjoyment

Relieves Stress








Increases cultural
capital

Enhances visuo-
spatial reasoning
(Mozart eIIect)

Improves school
perIormance
Increases tolerance
oI others
People (esp.
tourists/visitors)
spend money on
attending the arts
and on local
businesses. Further,
local spending by
these arts venues
and patronized
businesses has
indirect multiplier
eIIects
Builds
community
identity and pride
Leads to positive
commuunity
norms, such as
diversity,
tolerance and
Iree expression.
People come
together who
might not
otherwise come
into contact with
each other


P
r
e
s
e
n
c
e

o
f

A
r
t
i
s
t
s

a
n
d

A
r
t
s

O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

&

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

Increases
individual
opportunity and
propensity to be
involved in the
arts
Increases prop-
ensity oI comm.-
unity members to
participate in the
arts

Increases attract-
tiveness oI area to
tourists, businesses,
people (esp. high-
skill workers) and
investments

Fosters a 'creative
milieu that spurs
economic growth in
creative industries.

Greater likelihood
oI revitalization
Improves
community
image and status
Promotes
neighborhood
cultural diversity

Reduces
neighborhood
crime and
delinquency
* This grid Iurther develops a typology proposed by Kevin McCarthy (2002).
3
1he columns represent types o impact and are diided into indiidual and
community leels. Indiidual-leel eects are releant or the purposes o community
impact studies to the extent that the impact o the arts on indiiduals aggregates to
the community. ,lor example, some indiidual-leel impacts, such as personal
enjoyment,` may not hae any consequences on community lie., 1he three types o
indiidual impacts are material ,mainly health,, cognitie,psychological and
interpersonal. 1ypes o community-leel eects, which are roughly homologous to
indiidual-leel ones, are economic, cultural and social. 1he cells o the table contain,
where releant, speciic impacts claimed in the literature.
1he grid helps to assess how dierent leels and types o artistic inputs are
related to dierent types o outputs. It can be taken as axiomatic that, other things
being equal, the more %&#'()*'!# and,or &"+'"(' the participation o community
members ,who are not inoled as proessionals,, the greater the impact the arts will
hae on cultural and social actors.
3
loweer, direct inolement is more intense
than audience participation, whereas audience participation is more widespread than
direct inolement. ,1o the extent that community arts programs are geared towards
producing some kind o public show` |art show, play, reading, estial, etc.|, they will
tend to optimize both dimensions o participation., Greater concentrations o artists
and arts-related organizations lead to higher degrees o arts participation among
residents, directly and as audience members ,Stern and Seiert 2000,. 1here is also
oten a trade-o between dierent types o arts actiities in terms o the kinds o
beneits they are most likely to produce. lor example, a well-respected theater
employing a proessional sta is more likely to draw isitors and tourists rom
outside the community than is a local community arts project exhibition, and hence it
will hae a greater economic impact. But, since the leel o participation among
community members lacks intensity in the case o the theater, it has less potential or

3
Note that this does not apply to economic impacts, since those rely primarily on bringing revenue Irom
outside the community. In this example, the type oI participation is widespread` and the degree is the
intensity.`
4
building social capital and a sense o collectie eicacy. Both the theater and the
community arts project may enhance community pride and sel-image.
It should be noted that, with the exception o economic impact studies,
almost all other research ocuses on the beneits that accrue to indiiduals and
organizations inoled in the arts, rather than the direct impact o the arts on a
community as such.
4
I will discuss this problem o aggregation later in the paper, but
or now I bracket it in aor o explicating mechanisms that connect well-deined arts
actiities to well-deined outcomes.
5
1he ollowing discussion is organized by claims
about the impact o the arts. I ocus on three types o claims: irst, claims that the arts
build social capital, second, claims that the arts improe the economy, and third,
claims that the arts are good or indiiduals. 1hese three broad claims capture
irtually all o the more speciic assertions about the impact o the arts.

0:.3,4 5&' .)%* 32/)'.*' *"/3.: /.-3%.:
6
.2D /",,123%E /"&'*3"2
Claims under this heading encompass the last two columns o the table -
community-leel cultural and social impacts - as well as interpersonal eects.
Virtually all studies that make this claim examine the eects o community arts
programs on the participants and organizations inoled ,Costello 1998, Dolan 1995,
Dreeszen 1992, lritschner and loman 1984, CDA 2000, Krieger 2001, Landry et
al. 1996, Matarasso 199, Matzke 2000, Murphy 1995, Ogilie 2000, Preston 1983,
Stern et al. 1994, Stern and Seiert 2002, 1rent 2000, \illiams 1995, \ollheim 2000,.
1he ollowing discussion draws on all o these studies.
Although quite aried, community arts programs are grassroots organizations
that attempt to use the arts as a tool or human or material deelopment ,Costello
1998,. Community arts programs almost uniersally inole community members in a

4
One notable exception is Stern (1999; 2001), who demonstrates that a greater concentration oI arts
organizations in a neighborhood leads to longer-lasting ethnic and economic diversity in that neighborhood.
5
By aggregation, I reIer to the process by which eIIects on individuals, taken together, can combine to have
an inIluence on the broader community.
6
Scholars oIten Iail to deIine precisely what they mean by social capital. According to Robert Putnam`s
inIluential deIinition, 'social capital reIers to connections among individuals social networks and the
norms oI reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise Irom them, which may Iacilitate coordination and
cooperation Ior mutual beneIit (2001: 19)
5
creatie actiity leading to a public perormance or exhibit. As deined by the Ontario
Arts Council ,2002,, Community Arts is an art process that inoles proessional
artists and community members in a collaboratie creatie process resulting in
collectie experience and public expression. It proides a way or communities to
express themseles, enables artists, through inancial or other supports, to engage in
creatie actiity with communities, and is collaboratie - the creatie process is
equally important as the artistic outcome.` ,Note that this is dierent rom such
things as local, neighborhood knitting groups., Community arts programs oten
inole people who are disadantaged in some way ,at-risk youth, ethnic minorities,
people in a poor neighborhood, and are designed in the context o some larger goal,
such as neighborhood improement ,typically aesthetic, or learning and teaching
about dierse cultures ,multiculturalism,. 1hese goals are usually the basis or claims
about the politically transormatie potential o community arts projects ,e.g., see
\illiams 199,. Regardless o the ultimate purpose,s, to which social capital is to be
put, community arts programs are said to build social capital by boosting indiiduals`
ability and motiation to be ciically engaged, as well as building organizational
capacity or eectie action. 1his is speciically accomplished by:
Creating a enue that draws people together who would otherwise not be
engaged in constructie social actiity.

lostering trust between participants and thereby increasing their
generalized trust o others

Proiding an experience o collectie eicacy and ciic engagement, which
spurs participants to urther collectie action

Arts eents may be a source o pride or residents ,participants and non-
participants alike, in their community, increasing their sense o connection
to that community.

Proiding an experience or participants to learn technical and
interpersonal skills important or collectie organizing

Increasing the scope o indiiduals` social networks

6
Proiding an experience or the organizations inoled to enhance their
capacities. Much o this comes when organizations` establish ties and learn
how to work, consult and coordinate with other organizations and
goernment bodies in order to accomplish their goals.

A case study rom \illiams` ,1995: 101-106,, research in Australia proides an
example o these mechanisms. 1he study was conducted on a sample o recipients o
community-based arts grants proided by the Australia Council. One o these grants
was gien to a small group o women residents o Longlea, a suburb o Brisbane.
1heir goal was to beautiy their blighted community center, which inoled local
residents in the creation o artworks around the community center. 1his drew
together townspeople who might otherwise hae stayed at home to engage in a
constructie social actiity. As people worked collaboratiely on the project and got
to know each other better, their mutual trust increased. 1heir success in negotiating
with the municipal bureaucracy in order to accomplish the task gae participants a
newound sense that they could accomplish other goals. 1he community group and
indiiduals coordinating the eorts learned organizing skills, learned how to naigate
the bureaucracy and built relationships with the municipal and regional goernment.
linally, the people inoled elt an increased sense o pride and appreciation o their
town.


0:.3,4 5&' .)%* &.F' . B'2'93/3.: 3,-./% "2 %&' '/"2",E

Lconomic impacts are perhaps the most widely touted beneits o the arts.
1he literature on economic impact studies o the arts tends to all into two categories:
on the one hand, adocacy studies based on quick appraisals that oten exaggerate the
impact o the arts ,Azmier 2002, Bryan 1998, Lckstein 1995, Perryman 2001,
SCDCAC 2001, Singer 2000, \alesh 2001,. On the other hand are more rigorous
studies -- which, oertime, show increasing methodological reinement ,Cohen 1994,
Costello 1998, CPC 2002, Cwi 1980a, Cwi 1980b, Cwi and Lyall 19, DiNoto and
Merk 1993, lrey 1998, Gazel 199, Kling, Reier and Sable 2001, Mitchell 1993,
7
O'lagan and Duy 198, Port Authority o New \ork and New Jersey 1983, Radich
198, Rolph 2001, Sable and Kling 2001, Seaman 199, Stern and Seiert 2000,
1hrosby 2001, 1raers, Stokes and Kleinmann 199,. In the ollowing discussion, I
hae tried to rely on these more rigorous studies.

1he arts attract isitors ,art as export` industry,:
1ourists isit a community primarily in order to attend an arts eent
,alternatiely, tourists may prolong a trip in order to attend an arts
eent,. 1hey will spend directly on the arts eent and may also shop,
eat at a local restaurant and,or stay at a hotel in the community. 1o the
extent that these tourist dollars are spent by the arts organization - as
well as the stores, restaurants and hotels - on local goods and serices,
the dollars brought in to the community or an arts eent will hae
indirect multiplier eects on the local economy.

1he arts attract residents and businesses:
1he density o arts organizations and prealence o arts eents may
play a role in attracting residents and businesses to ,re,locate to a
community by improing its image and making it more appealing. 1his
is especially true or attracting highly skilled, high-wage residents, who
will hae a larger economic impact than less-skilled people. Businesses,
especially those that employ highly trained mobile personnel, may
consider the presence o art enues when making ,re,location decisions
,Cwi 1980b: 18-19,. 1he presence o the arts ,i.e., improed image o
an area, may work to enhance the impact o tax incenties or business
location decisions ,Costello 1998: 14-9,.
ligh concentrations o artists and,or high-skilled workers may
produce agglomeration eects, where businesses ,especially those in
the ast-growing creatie industries` ,\alesh 2001,, are drawn to an
area because o the aailability o creatie talent and,or high-skilled
workers, and ice ersa.

1he arts attract inestments:
By improing a community`s image, people may eel more conident
about inesting in that community. So or example, people might be

7
An indirect multiplier is based on the idea that a portion oI each dollar spent on some good or service is
then used by the recipient to pay Ior more goods and services. To the extent that the money circulates
within a community (e.g., a city), it multiplies` within that community. So Ior example, iI you spend $20
on a ticket to a play, the playhouse turns around and spends $15 oI that Ior set design supplies Irom local
markets. The employees also spend locally some portion oI their income that is derived Irom that $15 to
pay Ior more goods and services; and the stores Irom which they bought supplies in turn use some oI that
money to pay their workers and buy more supplies, and so on. This multiplies` the value oI the initial $20.
8
more likely to buy property in an area that they eel is up-and-
coming` because o the presence o the arts. Or, banks may be more
likely to lend to businesses in areas perceied as more secure and
stable, and so on.


One problem with determining the impact o the arts is distinguishing
between reenue rom locals s. reenue rom tourists, and among the latter
determining the extent to which the arts drew them to isit the community.
Lxpenditures by locals should not be included in studies o the economic impact o
the arts, because the arts may simply represent an alternatie outlet or spending
,rather than an additional outlet,, thus representing no net dierences on the local
economy ,assuming equal multiplier eects among outlets,. In terms o priate and
public subsidies or the arts, it is diicult to determine the opportunity costs o
inesting the money in other things ,i.e., whether inesting the same amount o
money in something else would hae a stronger impact on the economy,. 1here is
scant eidence on whether money spent on the arts is more likely to circulate locally
than money spent in other areas ,though see Palmer 2002 or a comparison o arts
perormances ersus sports arenas,.
As an example o how the arts may hae an economic impact, let us examine a
summer theater estial that a small town puts on eery year,Mitchell 1993,. 1his
estial draws thousands o isitors who come - some rom ar away, but most rom
the surrounding area - in order to attend the perormance. 1hese isitors spend
money on tickets as well as restaurants, hotels, parking and retail shopping. ,In this
sense, the arts are said to be an export` industry to the extent that they bring in
money rom outside the local economy., 1his spending has a direct positie impact
on the town`s economy. Indirectly, this spending has what is called a multiplier
eect` to the extent that those dollars re-circulate in the local economy as a result o
spending on local goods and serices by the estial and the other business.



9
0:.3,4 5&' .)%* .)' 7""D 9") 32D3F3D1.:*

Claims that the arts are good or indiiduals take many orms. 1he arts hae
been said to improe health, mental well-being, cognitie unctioning, creatie ability
and academic perormance.

1he arts improe indiidual health.
Lither engaging in creatie actiity or simply attending some kind o
artistic eent appears to improe physical health ,Angus 1999, Baklien
2000, Ball and Keating 2002, Bygren, Konlaan and Johansson 1996,
lDA 2000, 1hoits and lewitt 2001,. 1his could be due in part to its
ability to reliee stress. Also, arts engagement widens and strengthens
social bonds, which also improes health ,Baklien 2000: 250-51, Ball
and Keating 2002,. On a more physiological leel, Bygren, Konlaan
and Johansson ,1996: 1580, explain: we know that the organism
responds with changes in the humoral nerous system--or example,
erbal expression o traumatic experiences through writing or talking
improes physical health, enhances immune unction, and is associated
with ewer medical isits.`

1he arts improe psychological well-being.
lere we hae to distinguish between passie and actie participation.
Attending arts eents may be stimulating and reliee stress, hence
leading to improed happiness, lie satisaction. Actie participation in
the arts leads, in addition, to improed sel-concept and sense o
control oer one`s lie. 1here are dierent reasons why this might be
so. Lots o the anecdotal eidence comes rom community arts
programs, some o which are geared towards poor, marginal or at-risk`
populations ,Lynch and Chosa 1996, Seham 199, \eitz 1996,
\illiams 1995,. 1his is backed up by the little - and poor quality -
surey data that do exist. 1o the extent that the creation and
completion o some arts project proides an opportunity to such
participants to succeed and gain some positie public recognition, it
will improe their sense o control oer their lie and sel-concept
,liske 1999, Jackson 199, Randall, Magie and Miller 199, Seham
199, \eitz 1996,. 1o date, there has been no systematic comparison
between community arts programs operating in dierent socio-
economic climates to see whether such eects appear to be uniorm.

1he arts improe skills, cultural capital and creatiity.
lere again we hae to distinguish between passie and actie
participation. Audience members may gain some new knowledge or
10
cultural capital
8
by attending arts eents. 1here is also the so-called
Mozart eect showing that children who listen to Mozart ,and other
similar stimuli, show improed perormance on isuo-spatial reasoning
tests - although the eect may not last ,Chabris et al. 1999, letland
2000,. Indiiduals directly inoled in creating or organizing artistic
actiity may learn skills that they did not preiously hae and may
demonstrate greater creatiity ,liske 1999, Randall, Magie and Miller
199, Rolph 2001, Seham 199, Sharp 2001, \eitz 1996,. On the
whole, education studies show that kids engaged in an arts class will do
better in other subjects and that an arts-integrated curriculum improes
school perormance ,Albert 1995, liske 1999, Jackson 199, Remer
1990, \eitz 1996, \inner and letland 2000,. 1he basic reason or
this may be that children ind learning through artistic,creatie actiity
much more enjoyable, and so they will hae an easier time engaging
with the material. It is important to point out, howeer, that most
studies do not control suiciently or sel-selection into arts actiities
and the eects are not as dramatic as boosters would claim.


1he ,-.&"/ 0) 1!22'* report ,\eitz 1996, proides concrete examples o some
o these mechanisms. 1he report identiies arts-training programs targeted at at-risk
youth and seeks to understand why these programs work. At least two o the
programs inoled working with sentenced juenile oenders. One program taught
musical theater, the other painting. Both programs appeared to enhance the sel-
esteem o their participants, because they learned new skills, ound that they had
undiscoered talents, and receied positie recognition rom peers and others when
they perorm or exhibit their work. Learning new skills may also improe their
position on the job market. lor example, in addition to learning singing, dancing and
acting, participants in the music theater program also learn about the technical side o
producing a play, such as lighting, set-design and sound. Also, perorming a play or
doing other kinds o artistic actiity can proide a means o learning that children
ind much more un and engaging. As a result they will learn and absorb the material
better.

8
I use the most restricted deIinition oI cultural capital as simply knowledge oI the Iine arts. For example, in
taking an arts class, one learns something about aesthetics and art appreciation and perhaps about art
history. Such knowledge has been linked to better school perIormance and improvement oI other liIe
outcomes (DiMaggio 1982; DiMaggio and Mohr 1985).
11


5!@=<@5+0(G H 8@5!=>=G=I+0(G +AA?@A
>'9323%3"2*
As I pointed out at the start, the phrase arts impact communities` admits o
many possible deinitions. Speciying these deinitions is an important task that
researchers oten ignore. lere, I briely sketch some dimensions along which these
terms can be deined.
3'4&"&"/ 5+6' !*+(7 - Dierent research projects rarely deine the arts` in the
same way, and oten the same study will include dierse actiities and organizations,
including proessional opera companies, neighborhood cultural centers, community
arts programs and in some cases een major league sports. 1here are seeral
dimensions along which deinitions o the arts might be speciied: genre or art-orm
,whether the actiity is painting, singing, acting, etc.,, sector ,whether the
organization inoled is non-proit, commercial or goernmental,, time ,duration o
the arts actiity or inolement,, place ,where does the actiity,perormance take
place,, group participation ,whether the actiity is done alone, in small groups or in
large groups,, medium ,whether the arts is lie, recorded or \eb-based,, and mode o
participation ,whether inolement is actie art-making, organizational olunteering
or audience participation,.
1his last dimension proides a distinction useul or classiying prior studies.
Some studies look at the eect o participation in the arts on those who are directly
inoled, especially when they are engaged in art-making. Such studies oten examine
the impact o community arts programs ,CDA 2000, Landry et al. 1996, Matarasso
199, Matzke 2000, Murphy 1995, 1rent 2000, \illiams 1995, \ollheim 2000, or
arts-centered teaching programs ,Albert 1995, liske 1999, Jackson 199, Remer 1990,
Seham 199, Sharp 2001, \eitz 1996, \inner and letland 2000,, usually on the
participants themseles but sometimes on the local community. Other studies look at
arts attendance, occasionally examining the impact o the arts on their audience
,Bygren, Konlaan and Johansson 1996, Chabris et al. 1999, letland 2000, Landry et
12
al. 1996, Matarasso 1999, \illiams 1995,, but most oten ocusing on the audience`s
impact on the local economy ,Bendixen 199, DiMaggio, Useem and Brown 198,
lrey 1998, Gazel 199, Laing and \ork 2000, Mitchell 1993, O'lagan and Duy
198, SA1C 1998,.
9
A third major ocus o arts research is on the presence and
density o arts organizations, looking sometimes at how these actors aect
inolement in the arts and other local organizations ,Stern 1999, Stern and Seiert
2000,, but typically emphasizing the impact o arts organizations on the local
economy ,Cohen 1994, Costello 1998, Cwi 1980a, DiNoto and Merk 1993, Port
Authority o New \ork and New Jersey 1983, Stern 2001, Stern and Seiert 2000,
1raers, Stokes and Kleinmann 199,. lere I hae simply proided a quick surey o
the deinitional terrain o arts studies. 1he broader point to be made is simply that it
is crucial to deine precisely what are the arts` that one is studying, because dierent
arts actiities are likely to lead to a dierent set o outcomes. lurthermore, the use o
ague and dierse deinitions o the arts` makes comparability and accumulation
across studies ery diicult.

3'4&"&"/ 5&.)!8+7 -- As this discussion illustrates, deining the scope o what is
meant by the arts` goes some length towards delimiting their potential impact. ,lor
example, a school arts program is not likely to hae an appreciable impact on the
economy o a city., Like the arts, there are also a number o dimensions along which
the scope o the impact,s, ought to be clariied: whether the impact is on indiiduals,
institutions,organizations, communities or the economy, whether it is direct or
indirect ,e.g., does it indirectly aect communities by aecting indiiduals,, whether
the impact is short-term or long-term, whether impacts are greater or some groups
and indiiduals than or others, and whether the impact is social, cultural,
psychological, economic, and so on. 1hese dimensions are oten under-speciied, and
as a result indings can be easily inlated or oer generalized ,e.g., a small, short-term
impact on a subgroup o people might be iewed as an enduring impact on a broader

9
Dollars spent in a community by cultural tourists are only one way in which the arts are said to have an
economic impact.
13
class o residents,. lurthermore, as Cwi ,198, notes, the policy releance o most
arts program ealuations studies is limited, because o their ailure to adequately
speciy the impact that the program is intended to hae.
3'4&"&"/ 58-..9"&+:7 - Community can be deined in a ariety o ways: as a
geographic region, municipality, neighborhood ,itsel open to a ariety o deinitions,,
or ethnic group. In general, researchers use one o two criteria in deining
community: propinquity and group membership. \ith the irst criterion, researchers
deine community in terms o people`s proximity to one another and study things like
neighborhoods, schools, cities or SMSAs. lor example, the Social Impact o the Arts
Project ,SIAP, usually uses census block groups` as part o its deinition o
neighborhood, and also historically institutionalized, widely recognized
neighborhoods, such as Germantown in Philadelphia or the south side` o Chicago
,Stern 2001,. Another common way to deine community is as a legally distinct area,
such as a town, city or state ,Cwi 1980a, Cwi 1982, Cwi and Lyall 19, DiNoto and
Merk 1993, Gazel 199, Mitchell 1993, NALAA 1994, Perryman 2001,. Studies using
this criterion usually ocus on the economic impact o the arts, so examining a well-
deined tax base makes sense. Alternatiely, researchers may study community
deined by group membership, categorizing people on the basis o race,ethnicity,
national origin, gender, sexual orientation, occupation and so orth.
Researchers may use one o two methods or classiying people into
communities: one method deines community on the basis o criteria imposed by the
researcher, the other deines community in accord with indiiduals` sel-identiication
,see Stern et al. 1994 or an example o this,. Note that the basis o people`s sel-
identiication can come rom many sources. It may be coterminous with proximity-
or legally-based deinitions ,e.g., I`m rom Germantown,` I`m rom Robert 1aylor
lomes` or I`m rom Atlanta,.` People may also sel-identiy on the basis o group
membership. Some community-based arts programs are organized around such
communities. lor example, one program studied by \illiams ,1995, was designed to
hae aboriginal children in a rural Australian town express their culture. It is
14
important to distinguish between researcher-imposed s. sel-identiied deinitions o
community. It is possible, or example, that in order to understand i and how the
arts contribute to such subjectie outcomes as increased trust o others, greater pride
in one`s community and motiation to work towards collectie ends, then one needs
to take an inductie approach to this question o community ,e.g., using deinitions
that members themseles put orward,. And i there is a disjuncture between the
researcher`s deinition o a community and the sel-identiications o its members,
then the researcher may ail to ind eidence o, or example, social solidarity
,because s,he would be looking in the wrong places or eidence,.
10

\hether researcher-imposed or not, clearly speciying the scope o the
community is crucial when trying to think about how the arts impact a community
directly, as well as the related problem o aggregation.

5&' J)"B:', "9 (77)'7.%3"2
One o the more exing issues conronting anyone wishing to understand the
impact o the arts on communities is the question o how to link micro-leel eects
on indiiduals to the more macro leel o the community. Lxcept or economic
impact studies, irtually eery arts impact study examines how the arts aect
indiiduals ,though see Stern 1999, 2001,, whether by improing their health ,Bygren,
Konlaan and Johansson 1996, Costello 1998,, their sel-esteem ,\eitz 1996,, their
skills, talents and knowledge ,liske 1999, \inner and letland 2000,, or their
tolerance o other cultures ,Matarasso 199, \illiams 1995,. In some cases,
researchers hae also argued that the creation o arts programs ,usually made possible
by goernment or priate grants, increases the capacities o arts organizations, or
example by enhancing their ability to work with local goernment agencies ,Stern and
Seiert 2002, \illiams 199,. In this case, the problem becomes one o aggregating
organizations rather than indiiduals.

10
I am grateIul to Paul DiMaggio Ior suggesting these last two points.
15
Note that deining the scope o the community in question is critical to the
problem o aggregation. lor example, other things equal, a small community arts
program is more likely to hae an impact on people in the neighborhood in which it
operates than on people liing on the other side o town. But without haing to
deine community, at least ie general ways in which indiidual,organizational-leel
eects might aggregate can be distinguished:
1. Most obiously, one could simply talk in terms o the percentage o
indiiduals,organizations in a population that are aected. Social capital is
typically conceied o in such a manner, where a community with a higher
percentage o indiiduals participating in ciic groups and,or a greater density
o such groups is considered to hae greater social capital. lence, i arts
programs get more indiiduals inoled in community groups, then they
increase the community`s social capital.
2. Closely related to this is the idea that there may be threshold leels or tipping
points` ,Gladwell 2000, at which indiidual,organizational-leel eects begin
to hae community-leel consequences. In this case, as in number 1 aboe, an
unresoled issue is determining the leel at which these eects can properly be
said to hae an impact on the community.`
3. 1he presence o the arts and,or participation by community members may
hae an impact on community norms or the opinion climate.` lor example,
the presences and perormances o a multicultural theater may reinorce
norms about multiculturalism and diersity or ree expression..
4. 1o the extent that arts organizations sere as a catalyst in the creation o ties
between dispersed indiiduals and organizations ,who would not otherwise
establish ties,, these networks, may then be used to accomplish other
community goals.
5. Communities may be aected when a ew key indiiduals and,or
organizations are aected. lor example, a successul community arts program
may inluence the perceptions o key goernment oicials and make them
16
more likely to support such programs in the uture. Or successul arts-based
neighborhood reitalization programs targeted at particular crime-ridden
neighborhoods or juenile oenders may lower the oerall crime rate.
6. linally, indiiduals and groups inoled in the arts can be said to aect the
community by creating public goods.
11
1he alue o arts as a public good ,its
contingent aluation, is usually measured by willingness-to-pay sureys
12
,CPC
2002, Kling, Reier and Sable 2001, Sable and Kling 2001, Seaman 199,
1hrosby 2001,.

A':'/%3"2 J)"B:',*
As with much social research, arts impact studies typically suer rom
selection bias problems, which make it diicult to identiy clearly the causal role o
the arts.
13
1his problem is usually expressed by the truism that correlation is not
causation.` lor example, research indicates that people who participate in the arts are
healthier and happier ,Bygren, Konlaan and Johansson 1996, Costello 1998, 1hoits
and lewitt 2001,. But, does this mean that arts inolement makes people healthier
and happier, or that such people are more likely to get inoled in the arts Do arts
programs build social capital, or are communities with higher social capital more
likely to initiate arts programs Usually, the answer to such questions is both.` On
aerage, healthier people are more likely to olunteer in arts programs, but that
actiity likely improes their health as well ,1hoits and lewitt 2001,. Communities
with greater social capital are more likely to initiate arts programs, but those programs
may urther promote the building o social capital. Most likely, health or social capital

11
Outdoor sculpture is a good example oI public goods, since many people can enjoy it. But, people don`t
necessarily need to use/enjoy art Ior it to be a public good.
12
Willingness-to-pay surveys ask respondents how much they would be willing to pay (usually in taxes) to
support some artistic activity (e.g., 'How much would you be willing to pay in taxes to support the
NEA?). People who don`t patronize the arts still report that they are willing to pay to Iund them, and this
is interpreted to mean that the arts are valuable to them.
13
Generically, selection bias means that the sample (i.e., the people and/or organizations that one is
studying) is not representative oI the entire population, leading to conclusions that are not valid. In arts
research, the most pernicious oI these is selI-selection bias: since people who choose participate in the arts
may be diIIerent Irom others, that diIIerence may explain the observed outcome rather than the arts
activity.
17
would not hae improed in the same way and to the same degree had the arts
programs been absent. \hen seen rom this perspectie, selection issues - when
recognized and handled appropriately - arguably do not present an intractable
problem to arts impact studies.

G./6 "9 (--)"-)3.%' 0",-.)3*"2*
lrom a policy perspectie, howeer, the issue is no longer whether the
existence o the arts has a beneicial impact, but whether money spent on arts
programs will hae .-*' o an impact than other programs. Indeed, one law with the
literature on arts impact is the lack o studies that compare the arts with other
programs or industries. 1he key question or policy-makers ,or grant-giers, is this:
gien some pre-deined goal ,improing the economy, attracting tourism, improing
education, reorming at-risk adolescents, etc.,, how can that goal be most eectiely
reached 1hus, the issue changes rom did this program work at all` to did this
program work better than another` Instead o what are the beneits o the arts,` the
question becomes what are the opportunity costs
14
o using this money to und the
arts` lor example, are arts programs or at-risk youth more eectie than the Boy
Scouts or midnight basketball Do arts programs draw people away rom other high-
impact actiities in which they would otherwise be inoled, such as enironmental
actiism or charity, would public money be better spent on things like transportation
inrastructure or police Determining whether a program is more eectie` than
another is o course no simple matter and demands precise deinition o the goal o
the program, but none o the studies I reiewed adequately addressed this issue. 1he
diiculty o the comparison is compounded by the act that many o the beneits we
associate with the arts, like increased creatiity or eelings o well-being, are
intangible` and thereore diicult to measure. loweer, to the extent that the arts do
potentially proide something unique, the lack o comparatie studies make it that
much more diicult to concretely demonstrate the unique contribution o the arts.

14
Opportunity costs basically mean that when you spend your money or time in one activity/investment,
there is a cost oI not being able to use that time or money in some other activity/investment.
18

;'7.%3F' @K%')2.:3%3'*

In addition to ignoring opportunity costs, arts impact studies typically ignore
the potentially negatie impacts o the arts. lor example, gien the broad deinition
o the arts` ound in many studies, the negatie impact o such eents as raes or
rock concerts - or example noise pollution and delinquency - largely goes ignored
,though see Gazel |199| or an economic impact study o a Grateul Dead concert in
Las Vegas that took into account the city`s extra expenditures on security or the
eent,. Or, i an arts` program builds social solidarity among some ethnic group,
could this lead to greater balkanization o the community Zukin`s ,1989, study o
New \ork City shows that the presence o arts actiities and artists in a poor
neighborhood may be a harbinger o gentriication ,though see Stern |1999| or
eidence rom other cities that the presence o arts organizations leads to lasting
diersity,. 1o the extent that studies do examine ailed programs, they tend to ocus
on the causes o ailure rather than its consequences ,Matarasso 199, \illiams 199,.
In short, those who inestigate the impact o the arts need to be more aware o
potential negatie as well as positie impacts.

G./6 "9 (D'L1.%' >.%.
Most arts impact studies are based on cross-sectional data, making inerences
about selection and the causal role o the arts exceedingly diicult. 1he lack o oer-
time data also makes it impossible to see how long the eects o an arts program
persist.
15
lurthermore, the sample sizes o many studies are too small or making
proper statistical inerences.
16
In many instances, researchers employ multiple or
comparatie case study approaches, or example by studying seeral dierent
community arts programs. Despite the strengths o this type o analysis or describing

15
Williams` (1997) study in Australia did Iollow some oI the communities she studied Ior several years
aIter the initial program; this enabled her to draw inIerences about what Iactors lead to sustained impact.
16
Statistical inIerences (Ior example, determining with what degree oI conIidence we can say that children
in arts programs do better in school) are based on the premise that the sample is representative oI the entire
population. The representativeness oI small sample sizes cannot be guaranteed with a high level oI
conIidence.
19
in detail the supposed consequences o particular arts programs on particular
indiiduals, these studies are limited in a number o ways:
lirst, they tend to rely exclusiely on the subjectie accounts o people
inoled in the art programs or audience members in order to support their claims -
in short, they tend to be anecdote-rich and eidence-poor ,though perhaps there`s an
argument to be made that a mountain o anecdotes seres as some kind o eidence,.
1he undamental question here is whether impact can be .'!(9*'# solely or largely on
the basis o these accounts, especially considering that participants almost always sel-
select into participation. \hat would happen i people were randomly assigned into
an arts treatment` group 1his is closely related to another problem with these, as
with other arts impact studies, which is that they tend to sample only treated groups.
lor example, questionnaires go only to people who are centrally or closely inoled
in a particular arts program, rarely asking community members what consequences
the program had on them ,though see Matarasso 199,. Also, ealuation studies only
look at organizations or communities that won the supporting grant ,whose impact
the study is intended to measure,, neer comparing it with a similar community that
didn`t win a grant, let alone one that neer een applied. No doubt it is especially
diicult to create a quasi-experimental design in applied social science, but arts
impact research seldom makes an eort to achiee this goal. ,One problem, o
course, has been lack o adequate unding to undertake such an eort., More
generically, the problem with in-depth case studies is that they are rarely
representatie o the oerall population.

A-'/393/.%3"2 "9 0"2%'K% @99'/%* .2D +2%')F'2327 M./%")*
Researchers studying the impact o the arts are rarely sensitie to contextual or
interening actors that inluence the outcomes they ind. 1his is important or
generalizing rom the indings o a speciic study. 1o take a simple example, many
studies claim that the arts hae a beneicial economic impact. loweer, it is likely
that this impact aries depending on the size o the community under discussion and
20
the size and density o arts organizations,eents. 1hus, in order or the arts to make
an appreciable ,and perhaps measurable, impact on the economy o a large city, it will
likely require the deelopment o an arts district ,such as the 1emple Bar in Dublin,
see Costello 1998,. An annual drama estial is likely to hae little economic impact
on a large city ,though it may hae an appreciable impact on the neighborhood in
which it is located,, but may be a decisie actor in the economy o a small town
,Mitchell 1993,. And local community arts projects are likely to hae little economic
impact. 1he National Association o Local Arts Agencies study is one o the best to
date in selecting arts actiities o arious sizes across a wide range o municipalities
,Cohen 1994,. 1he point is simply that arts impact researchers need to begin to think
more seriously about the conditions under which their results do - or do not -
generalize.


0=;0G?A+=;

Research on the how the arts impact communities is a burgeoning and wide-
ranging ield o research. Despite the ariety o research subjects and methodologies
alie and well in the ield, there are a number o aenues this literature has yet to
explore. lor example, researchers study ormal groups and organizations to the
exclusion o more inormal groups, such as local neighborhood knitting groups and
the like. Case studies tend to ocus on arts programs deeloped or marginal
populations ,like at-risk children,, it would be interesting to see what could be learned
rom comparing these programs to ones where most o the participants are middle-
or upper-middle class. Also, researchers oten study community arts programs that
hae some kind o political or social goal: what might be learned by comparing these
organizations to those that hae no such goal And in terms o determining their
relatie economic impact, we need to know whether arts organizations tend to spend
more money in the local economy and on locally-produced goods than do other
organizations,businesses. 1hese examples point to a larger problem with the research
in this ield, especially those that use multiple, in-depth case studies: the cases are
21
generally not chosen in such a way as to gain much empirical leerage` rom the
comparison. Cases appear to be selected on the basis o capturing the widest diersity
o programs possible - sometimes with an implication that this will ensure
representatieness. 1he most that comes rom this sort o comparison is a list o
some actors that appear to aect the relatie success o the programs. Researchers
need to think more about the logic driing their case selection, so that they can get
more rom their comparisons.
1he criticisms that I hae enumerated in this paper could apply to most bodies o
social research. But, the ield o cultural policy studies is young and resources are
scarce. 1hereore, it is perhaps more important than in other ields that small
inestments in research yield strong results that can be leeraged to adance public
policy and priate philanthropy. As a result, it is especially incumbent upon arts
researchers to careully speciy their deinitions and think critically about the
theoretical and empirical issues conronting them when attempting to take the
measure o culture.

22
<@M@<@;0@A

Albert, Maria. 1995. "Impact oI an arts-integrated social studies curriculum on eighth graders'
thinking capacities." Pp. xi, 344 leaves ; p., 29 cm. Lexington, Ky.: University oI
Kentucky.
Angus, John. 1999. An Enquirv concerning Possible Methods for evaluation Arts for Health
Profects. Bath, UK: Community Health.
Azmier, Jason J. 2002. "Culture and Economic Competitveness: An Emerging Role Ior the Arts
in Canada." Canada West Foundation.
Baklien, Bergljot. 2000. "Culture is Healthy." International Journal of Cultural Policv 7.
Ball, Susan, and Clare Keating. 2002. "Researching Ior Arts and Health's Sake." in 2nd
Conference on Cultural Policv Research. Wellington, NZ.
Bendixen, Petere. 1997. "Cultural Tourism - Economic Success at the Expense oI Culture?"
International Journal of Cultural Policv 4.
Bryan, Jane. 1998. The economic impact of the arts and cultural industries in Wales. CardiII:
|CardiII Business School?|.
Bygren, Lars O., Boinkum B. Konlaan, and Sven-Erik Johansson. 1996. "Attendance at cultural
events, reading books or periodicals, and making music or singing in a choir as
determinants Ior survival: Swedish interview survey oI living conditions." British
Medical Journal 313:1577-1580.
Chabris, Christopher F, Kenneth M Steele, Simone Dalla Bella, Isbelle Peretz, Tracy Dunlop,
Lloyd A Dawe, G Keith Humphrey, Roberta A Shannon, Johnny L Jr Kirby, CG
Olmstead, and Frances H Rauscher. 1999. "Prelude or requiem Ior the "Mozart EIIect"."
Nature 400:826-828.
Cohen, Randy. 1994. Arts in the local economv. final report. Washington: National Assembly oI
Local Arts Agencies.
Costello, Donal Joseph. 1998. "The Economic and Social Impact oI the Arts on Urban and
Community Development." Pp. 1333-A in Dissertation Abstracts International, A. The
Humanities and Social Sciences. Pittsburgh: University oI Pittsburgh.
CPC. 2002. "Contingent Valuation oI Culture ConIerence." Cultural Policy Center at the
University oI Chicago. http://culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu/cvmconI.html.
Cwi, David. 1980a. The economic impact of ten cultural institutions on the economv of the
Springfield, Illinois SMSA. SpringIield, Ill.: Center Ior the Study oI Middle-size Cities
Sangamon State University.
. 1980b. The role of the arts in urban economic development. Washington, D.C.: Economic
Research Division Economic Development Administration.
. 1982. The arts in New Jersev . status, impacts, needs. Trenton, N.J.: The Council.
Cwi, David, and Katharine Lyall. 1977. A model to assess the local economic impact of arts
institutions . the Baltimore case studv. Baltimore: Center Ior Metropolitan Planning and
Research the Johns Hopkins Univ.
DiMaggio, Paul. 1982. "Cultural Capital and School Success: The Impact oI Status Culture
Participation on the Grades oI U.S. High School Students." American Journal of
Sociologv 47:189-201.
DiMaggio, Paul, and John Mohr. 1985. "Cultural Capital, Educational Attainment, and Marital
Selection." American Journal of Sociologv 90:1231-1261.
DiMaggio, Paul, Michael Useem, and Paula Brown. 1978. "Audience Studies oI the PerIorming
Arts and Museums: A Critical Review." Research Division, The National Endowment Ior
the Arts.
DiNoto, Michael J, and Lawrence H Merk. 1993. "Small Economy Estimates oI the Impact oI the
Arts." Journal of Cultural Economics 17:41-54.
23
Dolan, Teresa. 1995. Communitv Arts. Helping to Build Communities? Taken from a Southern
Ireland perspective. London: City University.
Dreeszen, Craig. 1992. "Intersections: Community Arts and Education Collaborations." Journal
of Arts, Management, Law and Societv 22:211-240.
Eckstein, Jeremy. 1995. The Contribution of the Cultural Sector to the UK economv. London:
Policy Studies Institute.
Fiske, Edward B. 1999. Champions of change . the impact of the arts on learning. Washington,
DC: Arts Education Partnership President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.
Frey, Bruno S. 1998. "Superstar Museums: An Economic Analysis." Journal of Cultural
Economics 22:113-25.
Fritschner, Linda Marie, and Miles K. HoIIman. 1984. "The Community and the Local Art
Center." in American Sociological Association.
Gazel, Ricardo. 1997. "Beyond Rock and Roll: The Economic Impact oI the GrateIul Dead on a
Local Economy." Journal of Cultural Economics 21:41-55.
Gladwell, Malcolm. 2000. The Tipping Point. How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference.
New York: Little, Brown and Company.
Goss, Kristin. 2000. Bettertogether . the report of the Saguaro Seminar on Civic Engagement in
America. Cambridge, MA: Saguaro Seminar Civic Engagement in America John F.
Kennedy School oI Government Harvard University.
http://www.bettertogether.org/bt5Freport.pdI.
HDA. 2000. Art for health. a review of good practice in communitv-based arts profects and
initiatives which impact on health and wellbeing. London: Health Development Agency.
http://www.hda-online.org.uk/downloads/pdIs/arts5Fmono.pdI.
Hetland, Lois. 2000. "Listening to Music Enhances Spatial-Temporal Reasoning: Evidence oI the
'Mozart EIIect'." Journal of Aesthetic Education 34:105-148.
Jackson, Ernest. 1979. "The impact oI arts enrichment instruction on selI-concept, attendance,
motivation, and academic perIormance." Pp. v, 135 leaves : p., Iorms. New York:
Fordham University.
Kling, Robert W., Charles F. Revier, and Karin A. Sable. 2001. "Estimating the Public Good
Value oI Preserving a Local Historic Landmark: The role oI non-substitutability and
inIormation in contingent valuation." Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University.
Krieger, Alex. 2001. "Community builders." Architecture 90.
Laing, Dave, and Norton York. 2000. "The Value oI Music in London." Cultural Trends 10.
Landry, Charles, Lesley Greene, Franois Matarasso, and Franco Bianchini. 1996. The Art of
Regeneration. Urban Renewal through Cultural Activitv. Stroud: Comedia.
Lynch, Ruth Torkelson, and Deanne Chosa. 1996. "Group-oriented community-based expressive
arts programming Ior individuals with disabilities: Participant satisIaction and
perceptions oI psychosocial impact."
Matarasso, Franois. 1997. Use or ornament? . the social impact of participation in the Arts.
Stroud, Glos.: Comedia.
. 1999. Magic, Mvths and Monev . The Impact of the English National Ballet on Tour. Stroud:
Comedia.
Matzke, Christine. 2000. "'Healthy community arts, healthy communities': Community Arts
ConIerence, Exhibition Fair, and Festival." Research in Drama Education 5:131 - 139.
McCarthy, Kevin. 2002. "Building an Understanding oI the BeneIits oI Participation in the Arts."
Unpublished proposal submitted by the RAND Corporation to the Wallace-Reader's
Digest Funds.
Mitchell, Clare J. A. 1993. "Economic Impact oI the Arts: Theatre Festivals in Small Ontario
Communities." Journal of Cultural Economics 17:55-67.
24
Murphy, Eileen M. 1995. "The impact oI cultural organizations on urban revitalization projects as
exempliIied in the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation." Pp. iv, 85 leaves ;
p., 29 cm. Washington D.C.: American University.
NALAA. 1994. Arts in the local economv. final report. Washington: National Assembly oI Local
Arts Agencies.
OAC. 2002. "Community Arts Organizations Program Guidelines." Ontario Arts Council.
Ogilvie, Robert S. 2000. Communitv building . increasing participation and taking action .
prepared for the 7th Street/McClvmonds Neighborhood Initiative. Berkeley, CaliI.:
University oI CaliIornia Berkeley Institute oI Urban and Regional Development.
O'Hagan, John W., and Christopher T. DuIIy. 1987. The performing arts and the public purse. An
economic analvsis. Dublin: The Arts Council/An Chomhairle Ealaion.
Palmer, John P. 2002. "Bread and Circuses: The Local BeneIits oI Sports and Cultural
Businesses." C.D. Howe Institute Commentarv 161.
Perryman, M Ray. 2001. "The Arts, culture, and the Texas economy: The catalyst Ior creativity
and the incubator Ior progress." Bavlor Business Review 19:8-9.
Port Authority oI New York and New Jersey, Cultural Assistance Center. 1983. "The Arts as an
Industry: Their Economic Importance to the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan
Region." New York, NY: Port Authority oI New York and New Jersey.
Preston, James C. 1983. "Patterns in Nongovernmental Community Action in Small
Communities." Journal of the Communitv Development Societv 14:83-94.
Radich, Anthony J. (Ed.). 1987. Economic impact of the arts. a sourcebook. Denver, CO:
National ConIerence oI State Legislatures.
Randall, Paula, Dian Magie, and Christine E. Miller. 1997. Art works' . prevention programs for
vouth & communities. Rockville, MD: National Endowment Ior the Arts and the Center
Ior Substance Abuse Prevention.
Remer, Jane. 1990. Changing schools through the arts . how to build on the power of an idea.
New York: ACA Books.
Rolph, Stephen. 2001. "Impact oI the Arts: A study oI the social and economic impacts oI the arts
in Essex in 1999/2000." Pp. 42. ChelmsIord: Essex County Council.
Sable, Karin A., and Robert W. Kling. 2001. "The Double Public Good: A Conceptual
Framework Ior "Shared Experience" Values Associated with Heritage Conservation."
Journal of Cultural Economics 25:77-89.
SATC. 1998. 1997 opera in the outback . economic and social impact studv. Adelaide, S. Aust.:
South Australian Tourism Commission Arts SA.
SCDCAC. 2001. "The arts and culture in San Diego : economic impact report, 2000." San Diego,
CaliI.: City oI San Diego Commission Ior Arts and Culture.
Seaman, Bruce A. 1997. "Arts Impact Studies: A Fashionable Excess." Pp. pages 723-55 in
Cultural economics. The arts, the heritage and the media industries. Jolume 2. Elgar
Reference Collection. International Librarv of Critical Writings in Economics, vol. 80.
Cheltenham, U.K, edited by Ruth ed Towse. and Lyme, N.H.: Elgar; distributed by
American International Distribution Corporation Williston.
Seham, Jenny C. 1997. "The eIIects on at-risk children oI an in-school dance program." Pp. iv,
101 leaves ; p., 29 cm.: Adelphi University.
Sharp, Caroline. 2001. "Developing Young Children's Creativity through the Arts: What Does
Research have to OIIer?" Pp. 36. Slough: National Federation Ior Educational Research.
Singer, Molly. 2000. "Culture Works: Cultural Resources as economic development tools."
Public Management 82:11-16.
Stanziola, Javier. 1999. Arts, government and communitv revitali:ation. Ashgate: Aldershot,
U.K.; BrookIield, Vt. and Sydney.
25
26
Stern, Mark J. 1999. "Is All the Worl Philadelphia? A multi-city study oI arts and cultural
organizations, diversity, and urban revitalization." Philadelphia: University oI
Pennsylvania School oI Social Work.
. 2001. "Social Impact oI the Arts Project: Summary oI Findings." Philadelphia: University oI
Pennsylvania School oI Social Work.
Stern, Mark J, Laura AmroIel, Gina Dyer, and Alison Wok. 1994. "The Embeddedness oI
Community Cultural Institutions." Philadelphia: University oI Pennsylvania School oI
Social Work.
Stern, Mark J, and Susan C SeiIert. 2000. "Cultural Participation and Communities: The Role oI
Individual and Neighborhood EIIects." Philadeliphia: University oI Pennsylvania School
oI Social Work.
. 2002. "Culture Builds Community Evaluation Summary Report." Pp. 62. Philadelphia:
University oI Pennsylvania School oI Social Work.
Strom, Elizabeth. 1999. "Let's put on a show! PerIorming arts and urban revitalization in Newark,
New Jersey." Pp. 423-35 in Journal of Urban Affairs.
Thoits, Peggy A., and Lyndi N. Hewitt. 2001. "Volunteer Work and Well-Being." Journal of
Health and Social Behavior 42:115-131.
Throsby, David. 2001. Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Travers, Tony, Eleanor Stokes, and Mark Kleinmann. 1997. "The Arts & Cultural Industries in
the London Economy." London: London Arts Board.
Trent, Allen W. 2000. Communitv . a collaborative action research profect in an arts impact
elementarv school. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University.
Turner, Francesca, and Peter Senior. 2000. A Powerful Force for Good. Culture, health and the
arts- an anthologv. Manchester: Manchester Metropolitan University.
Walesh, Kim and Doug Henton. 2001. "The Creative Community--Leveraging Creativity and
Cultural Participation Ior Silicon Valley's Economic and Civic Future." San Jose, CA:
Collaborative Economics.
Weitz, Judith. 1996. Coming up taller. arts and humanities programs for children and vouth at
risk. Washington, DC: President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.
Williams, Deidre. 1995. Creating social capital . a studv of the long-term benefits from
communitv based arts funding. Adelaide, S. Aust.: Community Arts Network oI South
Australia.
. 1997. How the arts measure up . Australian research into social impact. Stroud: Comedia.
Winner, Ellen, and Lois Hetland. 2000. "The Arts and Academic Improvement: What the
Evidence Shows." Special Issue of the Journal of Aesthetic Education 34.
Wollheim, Bruno. 2000. "Culture makes communities." York, England: Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Zukin, Sharon. 1989. Loft Living. Culture and Capital in Urban Change. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.