According to this understanding, it is possible to roughly divide into the following areas:
1. Culture and the creative industry as a sector of the future: This area, which in the Anglo-Saxon language area is referred to as “creative industries”, above all considers the effects that result from the establishment of the cultural and creative industries as a new industry. Especially communal culture was once considered to be a kind of provision of income to be financed by the city or region in order to ensure the “cultural supply” of the population and the attractiveness of the region. In the course of the increasing private financing of culture, the direct economic potential in the form of jobs and tax revenues resulting from the cultural and creative industries is becoming more prominent. Helbricht (2005) speaks of “economization of culture”.
In this context, the conceptual basis has also been expanded: If one spoke earlier of cultural economy, which includes above all the economic sectors that deal with the artistic production, their mediation or dissemination, has today – based on the term Creative Industries – the term Creative industries established. Although the terms are usually used interchangeably and the boundaries are fluid, the creative industries may include areas such as advertising, architecture, publishing, software and hardware development, and photography. So, when we talk about cultural economy, we mean the economic effects associated with “classical culture.” We understand creative industries as a generic term, which includes creative industries as well as cultural industries.
The creative industry is primarily promoted because it is regarded as a growth market (Bayliss 2007). Thus, despite the difficulty of delimiting and recording the cultural and creative industries with the help of various studies since the 1980s – even if there have been some slumps – an increase in growth can be detected. (Ertel 2006).
The increasing need to gain a differentiated understanding of the new industry is also apparent in the call for tenders issued by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology under the title: “Culture and Creative Industries: Identification of the Common Characteristic Definition Elements of the Heterogeneous Branches of the” Cultural Economy “to Determine their Perspectives from an Economic Perspective “(Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology of 19 October 2007).
2. Innovation cultures as an environment factor: On the other hand, under terms such as “Innovative Milieus” (Camagni 1991) and “Creative Class” (Florida 2004), it is discussed to what extent certain cultures or a creative class influence the innovative capacity of companies and regions and how to use politically. Essentially, these concepts, which we subsume under the term innovation cultures (Grote Westrick / Rehfeld 2006), are about recognizing that regions have cultural peculiarities that influence their ability to innovate. These cultural peculiarities arise from a tension between familiar cultural artefacts and new external influences. A regional culture is based primarily on values, norms, common symbols such as collective views, which in turn create a common basis of trust. However, regional cultures are also subject to constant change. New views and external influence meet the tried and tested and the familiar. This creates a basis for innovative behavior in a region. However, the connections are complex, do not take place immediately and are therefore difficult to analyze.
Currently, the international discussion particularly refers to Richard Florida. Innovative successful regions have a common denominator, according to him, to which he summarizes the three keywords “technology, talent, tolerance”. The more open and tolerant a region is, the more attractive it becomes, which in turn attracts “creative minds”. The so-called “creative class” includes not only those employed or self-employed in the creative industries, but all those whose employment involves a creative process and who create something new or establish innovations (Florida 2004).
3 Complex effects of culture and creativity
Culture and creativity have several dimensions in terms of their impact on regional development, which can be delineated, but which do not seem singular. A rough effect structure is shown in the figure above.
Let us start with the creative industries, which first of all create jobs and create added value as direct regional effects. But the regional effects go far beyond that. The creative industries also include areas such as advertising and design, which, as business-related services, in turn supply other industries at the location and thus make them more competitive. It is also often stated that the creative industries, through their experimental and unconventional approaches, take on a pioneering role for innovative ways of working.
Furthermore, the creative industries – especially the cultural industry – contribute to the attractiveness of the region and, as a so-called soft location factor, are important for regional development. As has been shown in many European cities, the creative industries are establishing themselves primarily in structurally weak neighborhoods, on the one hand because of the availability of inner-city land and buildings on favorable terms and on the other because the creative industries are the focus of many European urban renewal programs.
These urban areas, which have been renewed in this way, have a specific potential and contribute to the attractiveness of the city as a whole through unique selling points. This is shown by examples such as the incumbent European Capital of Culture Liverpool, where the partially fallow downtown or the nearby “Albert Docks” were revitalized and now accommodate diverse uses of the creative industries, but also districts such as St.Pauli / Karolinenviertel in Hamburg, where in vacant buildings partly with the financial help of urban renewal programs established by the creative industries.
Cultural offerings and unique selling points (galleries, theaters, cultural events) create a positive image which, according to the hopes of the municipal planners, appeals to both investment and the creative class (Bayliss 2007: 889). In turn, this creative class influences the innovation culture of a region that influences regional success through values, mentalities and moods. The culture of innovation is not only determined by the so-called creative class, but is also determined by the companies and their employees. As companies and regions interact with each other, regions are influenced both by corporate cultures and, conversely, by companies taking part of regional culture. This exchange usually takes place through employees (Minning / Dörhöfer / Pekruhl 2007).
The fact that cultures not only play a role singularly at the level of regions and companies, but influence each other is obvious, but has not yet been systematically investigated. Exactly this question is the focus of an EU project entitled “Corporate Culture and Regional Embeddedness” CURE, which is briefly outlined below.