Themes

MEETINGS

18-19 June 2015
BRAINSTORMING SESSION

2-3 July 2015
BRAINSTORMING SESSION

22 September 2015
DIALOGUE MEETING

15 October 2015
DIALOGUE MEETING

25-26 February 2016
BRAINSTORMING SESSION

26 April 2016
DIALOGUE MEETING

17-18 March 2016
BRAINSTORMING SESSION

29 April 2016
DIALOGUE MEETING

14-15 June 2016
BRAINSTORMING SESSION

15 September 2016
BRAINSTORMING SESSION

      AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT VIA DIGITAL MEANS

      About the Theme

      Accessible and Inclusive Culture – Promoting access to culture via digital means:
      policies and strategies for audience development


      In its Work Plan for Culture (2015-2018)(1), the Council of the EU proposes a key issue to be discussed by Member States during the coming months: ‘What is the impact of the digital shift on audience development policies and the practices of cultural institutions?’

      Possible answers depend, first of all, on definitions or priorities set by audience development (AD) strategies:
      • Informing and attracting audiences is a goal common to almost all types of cultural organisations or content providers, regardless of their size, status (public, not-for-profit, commercial) and programmes;
      • Enlarging audiences is particularly important for newcomers and small organisations, as well as for programmes and institutions that have limited public appeal, are in need of more revenue or have an ageing audience (i.e. less so in cases where institutions already operate at full capacity);
      • Diversifying or ‘democratising’ audiences of cultural organisations is a frequent political goal either at the level of cultural institutions or that of policy makers/funders;
      • Developing a meaningful and more interactive relationship with (diverse) audiences could be understood as ‘audience engagement’, taking place in real or virtual ‘shared spaces’(2) and respecting both the diversity of cultural expressions and artistic freedom;
      • Audience development through co-creation with the audience.
      For these and other AD strategies, digital tools and online platforms provide many new opportunities, ranging from more up-to-date information, to improved usability of, or distant access to, cultural services; better opportunities for interactive communication through blogs, social networks, etc.; discovery and learning about the arts, heritage and socio-culture; or community building, advocacy and the mobilisation of voluntary work.

      Clearly, not all of the new instruments have already been fully explored or are actively being used by arts and heritage institutions throughout Europe. For some of them, digital tools may still be unfamiliar; others struggle with financial and rights issues or see AD marketing strategies based on audience demands(3) and online ‘edutainment’ as a danger to the artistic quality of their programmes, while others sometimes fail to detect online and digital tools as opportunities for ‘quality content marketing’. In addition, conditions for cultural policy making, management, research and evaluation in this domain differ in the EU Member States, e.g. with regard to know-how and financial or human resources(4).

      A different line of discussion could address the audiences for digitised cultural content and genuine digital works. Supported by European, national, regional and local public funds, digitisation has progressed, particularly in the domain of heritage (e.g. digital libraries, museum collections, restoration of films). In the arts and literature, the creation, reproduction and distribution of new works by digital means and the re-mastering of older ones has also turned into a reality, although prompted more by private market forces. As pointed out by expert Divina Frau-Meigs (Sorbonne Nouvelle University, France)(5): ‘The online challenge for cultural diversity and pluralism is not only the protection and promotion of legacy arts and broadcast content but also the fostering of user-generated content and comments, which moves the public from consumption to participation’.

      This state of affairs could suggest a discussion on the themes of Promoting access to culture via digital means: policies and strategies for audience development, focusing on the following set of questions (list not exhaustive):
      • Q1. What are the opportunities to be seized?
      • Q2. What are the challenges to be addressed?
      • Q3. What are the lessons to be learned from existing practices?
      • Q4. Can digital means help cultural institutions reach out to different or less accessible audiences (men/women, young people, seniors, people with disabilities, migrant communities, etc.)?
      • Q5. What are the cultural sector's expectations from public administrations at national, regional and EU levels with regard to cultural audience development via digital means?
      • Q6. What local/regional/national best practices could be shared at a European level?
      _____________________________________________
      (1) 16094/14 adopted on 25 November 2014.
      (2) cf. the Report ‘Sharing Diversity’ on www.interculturaldialogue.eu.
      (3) cf. Arts Council England: Grants for the arts – audience development and marketing (2011 information sheet).
      (4) cf. chapter ‘New technologies and digitalisation in the arts and culture’, www.culturalpolicies.net country profiles.
      (5) at the 10th Conference of Ministers responsible for Culture (Council of Europe, Moscow 2013).

      Brainstorming session
      18-19 June 2015, Amsterdam/The Netherlands

      The Brainstorming Session on Audience Development via Digital Means took place on 18-19 June in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. It was attended by representatives from a broad range of disciplines, all of whom have a stake in ‘audience development via digital media’, this included: academic researchers and practitioners, R&D specialists and transmedia designers, museums and cultural heritage administrators and managers, librarian and documentation specialists, and arts professionals from film, sound, music, opera, dance, and theatre. You can find the agenda Download Symbolhere and the list of participants Download Symbolhere.

      Brainstorming Report

      The Brainstorming Report summarised the discussion held during the Brainstorming Session in Amsterdam/The Netherlands. This document has been edited by three of the participants, coordinated via online digital means and in consultation with all participants by the 3 July 2015:
      • Charlotte Saldanha
      • Dominic Smith
      • Amanda Windle
      You can download it Download Symbolhere.

      Dialogue Meeting
      27 October 2015, Brussels/Belgium

      The Dialogue Meeting took place on 27 October 2015 in Brussels/Belgium. It was the occasion for the participants to meet the European Commission and discuss the results of the Brainstorming Session.


        PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE OF CULTURAL HERITAGE

        About the Theme

        Participatory governance models and community and local engagement are increasingly felt to be an integral part(1) of culture and heritage policies.

        'Cultural heritage is', as a recent Commission Communication suggested(2), 'a shared resource and a common good'; looking after it must therefore be 'a common responsibility'. The Communication acknowledges that conservation is increasingly 'people-centred. Old approaches sought to protect heritage by isolating it from daily life. New approaches focus on making it fully part of the local community. Sites are given a second life and meaning that speak to contemporary needs and concerns.'

        The digital shift and new forms of social networking and online accessibility enable unprecedented forms of engagement. Museums are increasingly community-oriented, led by people and stories, proposing heritage-based narratives that weave the personal stories of community members into the interpretation of larger historical events(3).

        The adoption of a participatory approach is now well rooted in several EU Programmes, such as the European Capitals of Culture(4). The broadening notion of cultural heritage, encompassing tangible, intangible and digital resources, enlarges the spectrum of ownership, making local engagement and shared responsibility a necessity for sustainable management. Historic cities, towns and villages engage citizens and communities in taking in proper consideration of heritage resources, including those valued by local communities or under-represented areas, in their plans for the future(5). This ensures that their vitality, sense of identity and cultural diversity are kept alive, while generating sustainable growth and employment.

        Effective participatory governance frameworks are increasingly key to facilitating cross-cutting policies, enabling heritage to contribute to different policy areas, including smart, sustainable and inclusive growth by:
        • stimulating active citizenship;
        • increasing trust between public authorities and people;
        • improving the transparency and accountability of public bodies;
        • activating civic participation of people with a migrant background; and
        • fostering social cohesion.
        Although this shift is increasingly accepted, its practical implementation is not always easy to apply. The Culture Ministers of the European Union, in their Council Conclusions of November 2014, therefore invited Member States to develop multi-level and multi-stakeholder governance frameworks and promote the involvement of relevant stakeholders by ensuring that their participation is possible at all stages of the decision-making process. As cultural heritage is one of four priorities in the new Work Plan for Culture (2015-2018), along with accessibility and cultural diversity, it is pertinent that one of the 'Open Method of Coordination' working groups deals with 'participatory governance of cultural heritage'. The aim is to identify innovative approaches to multi-level governance of cultural heritage that involve the public sector, private stakeholders and civil society.

        Building on earlier work of the Commission, UNESCO, ICOMOS, the Council of Europe and other national bodies and suggesting a series of principles for good governance, Shipley and Kovacs (for the Canadian Institute of Good Governance(6)) also underline the need for active 'citizen participation… at all levels of decision-making'; from grassroots initiatives to cultural policy. However, they also highlight the fact that effective participation is dependent on a 'supportive democratic context': one built on a respect for human rights and a rejection 'of discrimination based on gender, race, colour, ethnicity or religion'. The involvement of an active civil society, they suggest, is not only needed to build a sense of 'trust' between stakeholders but also to act as a balance to political power.

        A later, but important, addition to these principles is a recognition that 'the traditions of all those involved' need to be recognised – not just the buildings, historic sites (or prevailing narratives) of the dominant ethnic, religious or cultural groupings. This is a principle that may need to be constantly examined in terms of what we mean by real 'participation' and 'representation'(7) within cultural governance, especially when few countries have a bottom up process for involving local communities in the designation of heritage.(8)

        Arnstein's Ladder of Citizen Participation (1969) offers a model of participation that starts with the passive exchange of information, moves through a more two-way consultation and finally reaches an open exchange of ideas involving real partnership.(9) The challenge for realising genuine participatory governance of cultural heritage is whether the partnership between governments and civil society can move beyond what Arnstein calls 'tokenism' to shared problem solving.

        In this shared problem-solving exercise, civil society often plays the role of promoter or mediator in engaging communities, local population, cultural institutions and stakeholders in innovative approaches to valuing and managing cultural heritage. Their voice is needed in order to explore how a participatory approach may contribute to addressing public resources better, as well as building public trust in policy decisions on heritage management – thereby increasing and balancing social and economic benefits for the territories concerned – and whether more should be done to make full use of the opportunities it opens up.

        This state of affairs could suggest a discussion on the themes of Participatory Governance of Cultural Heritage, focusing on the following set of questions (list not exhaustive):
        • In the context of the described shift, what is the added value of a people-centred and community-oriented approach for quality heritage policies? What are the opportunities to be seized?
        • In the same context, what are the challenges and barriers to be addressed for an effective participation?
        • In order to address challenges, what are the lessons to be learned from existing practices throughout EU Member States?
        • In order to address challenges, what are the lessons that can be drawn from other EU programmes, including the European Capitals of Culture?
        _____________________________________________
        (1) The Third UNESCO World Forum on Culture and Cultural Industries: 'Culture, Creativity and Sustainable Development. Research, Innovation, Opportunities,' shares this aspiration. 'Inclusive economic and social development', it states, 'requires 'transparent, participatory and informed systems of governance for culture (involving) a diversity of voices… in policy-making processes that address the rights and interests of all members of society.'
        (2) Towards an integrated approach to cultural heritage for Europe.
        (3) Nina Simon, The Participatory Museum: http://www.participatorymuseum.org/read/.
        (4) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0010.
        (5) https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/knowing-your-place/.
        (6) http://env-web2.uwaterloo.ca/hrcresearch/attachments/519fb740a129b0.53659657.pdf.
        (7) http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/199.htm.
        (8) https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/local.
        (9) The Guide to Effective Participation by David Wilcox, 1994: http://www.partnerships.org.uk/guide/.

        Brainstorming session
        2-3 July 2015, Florence/Italy

        The Brainstorming Session on Participatory Governance of Cultural Heritage took place on 2-3 July 2015 in Florence/Italy. It was attended by representatives from a broad range of disciplines, all of whom have a stake in ‘participatory governance of cultural heritage’, this included: academic researchers and practitioners, R&D specialists, museums and cultural heritage administrators and managers, librarian and documentation specialists, and arts professionals from sound, music, opera, dance, and theatre. You can find the agenda Download Symbolhere and the list of participants Download Symbolhere.

        Brainstorming Report

        The Brainstorming Report summarised the discussion held during the Brainstorming Session in Florence/Italy. This document has been edited by an editorial team, coordinated via online digital means. You can download it Download Symbolhere.

        Dialogue Meeting
        22 September 2015, Brussels/Belgium

        The Dialogue Meeting took place on 22 September 2015 in Brussels/Belgium. The Brainstorming Report on Audience Development via Digital Means was presented to the European Commission. The presentation was followed by a discussion on the results.

          DEVELOPING THE ENTREPRENEURIAL AND INNOVATION POTENTIAL OF THE CULTURAL AND CREATIVE SECTORS

          About the Theme

          The EU's Cultural and Creative Sectors (CCS) have the potential to be a truly transformational sector:
          • For our societies – where our increasingly diverse talent base can, with the right enabling conditions, be mobilised as the next generation of inventors and innovators, artists and makers, technologists and designers. They can power a revitalised economy while enhancing our lives through the social value they generate.
          • For our economies – where our rich mix of creative entrepreneurs working across sectors such as design, software, music, film, crafts and the arts, are increasingly adept at creating new jobs and collaborating to drive innovation and creativity across the whole economy.
          • For our cities and regions – where networks and hubs of creative and cultural activity are helping to reanimate places through the energy, openness and distinctiveness they bring.
          Collectively the CCS provide over 4% of EU GDP, represent just under 4% of the total workforce and are growing at 3.5% per year. In some major cities – such as Berlin and London – the sector is in double figures for GDP and jobs, and its growth outstrips most areas of the economy. Plus in some relatively rural regions, from northern Portugal to central Denmark, the CCS are being supported for their direct economic value but also for the spillover effects they generate to sectors such as tourism, manufacturing and science.

          Indeed, being at the crossroads between arts, business and technology, the cultural and creative sectors find themselves in a strategic position to trigger innovation and spillovers in other sectors. Further developing the entrepreneurial and innovation potential is vital for them in order to further grow and to adapt to a constantly evolving technological and financial environment. The decreases in public funding, the challenges of globalisation, the opportunities of digitisation or the increasing empowerment of audiences have already pushed the cultural and creative sectors to test new approaches and to explore new business models. These innovative approaches can be powerful drivers for the strengthening of cultural diversity and for the development of entrepreneurship, as well as for growth, jobs or social inclusion.

          The European Commission recognises the role of the CCS and the potential they bring, which is reflected in the EU funding programmes. The Creative Europe programme supports activities such as networking, development of new business models and capacity-building. A dedicated loan guarantee facility will be launched in 2016. The COSME programme targets SMEs, with support for internationalisation, innovation and clustering. Plus the structural funds continue to support CCS activities – for infrastructure, skills, clustering, social and market development.

          This is also based on a recognition that we can and must do better – in backing our creative talent to innovate, invent and generate the ideas and business models that will give our economy a competitive edge. To do this requires a coherent and targeted approach – by building an innovation friendly ecosystem to ensure we meet the needs of a sector which, through digitalisation and the dramatic growth of the freelance economy, is going through a period of immense change and considerable uncertainty.

          While the sector shares many of the characteristics of other sectors in terms of access to talent, markets, skills and finance, other factors, which render the cultural and creative sector unique, call for sector-specific approaches. For instance, the small scale nature of business of the sector presents some real challenges (niche support requires careful design; mainstream financial instruments are not tailor-made to fit the profile and needs of the sector). On the other hand, the distinctive profile of the sector also presents strategic opportunities. The enabling conditions need to be adapted for CCS in order to benefit a wider set of knowledge-intensive and innovation dependent businesses.

          If we are to develop effective enabling conditions for the CCS to flourish, it is important to explore a number of questions targeting the innovation potential and entrepreneurial challenges of the sector. The following and more will shape our discussion going forward:

          Q1. ENTREPRENEURSHIP: How to best open up opportunities in the CCS and support creative talent to develop the entrepreneurship and management skills it needs to prosper? What works? What doesn't work?

          Q2. INNOVATION: How new and emerging business models are changing the ways CCS operate, stimulating cultural entrepreneurship and innovation potential of enterprises? What are the most innovative measures to promote entrepreneurship and new business models in the cultural and creative sectors?

          Q3. ROLE OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES: How support to innovation and entrepreneurship in the cultural and creative sectors by public authorities at local, regional, national and EU level can best respond to the changing needs of the sector? What works? What doesn't work?

          Brainstorming session
          25-26 February 2016, Berlin/Germany

          The Brainstorming Session on developing the entrepreneurial and innovation potential of the cultural and creative sector took place on 25-26 February 2016 in Berlin/Germany. It was attended by representatives from many various fields (architecture, audio-visual, cultural heritage, cultural participation in urban planning, cultural policy making, digital media, education, festivals, music, performing arts, visual arts, youth etc.), but also coming from different types of organisations (art associations, creative business associations, CCS enterprises, higher education institutes, museums, national public bodies, NGOs, research institutes, etc.). You can find the agenda here and the list of participants here.

          Brainstorming Report

          Following the presentation and debate with policy makers in Brussels the group decided to condense the full brain storming report to a short guide to address upcoming challenges, innovative topics and future governance in policies for CCS.

          The document includes proposals for new analysis and new actions.

          You can download it here.

          Dialogue Meeting
          26 April 2016, Brussels/Belgium

          The Dialogue Meeting took place on 26 April 2016 in Brussels/Belgium. It was the occasion for the participants to meet representatives of the European Commission and exchange with them about the topic of entrepreneurship and innovation in the CCS.

            PROMOTING INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE AND BRINGING COMMUNITIES TOGETHER THROUGH CULTURE IN SHARED PUBLIC SPACES

            About the Theme

            In its current Work Plan for Culture (2015-2018), the Council of the European Union continues to prioritise European work on intercultural dialogue. This is an ongoing political commitment in follow-up to the 2007 European Agenda for Culture, where intercultural dialogue was a key theme, the 2008 European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, and the 2014 Report on the Role of Public Arts and Cultural Institutions in the Promotion of Cultural Diversity and Intercultural Dialogue, produced by Member States’ experts under the Open Method of Coordination (OMC). The European Parliament is currently preparing its own report on intercultural dialogue, led by Julie Ward MEP, for adoption in early 2016.

            The 2014 OMC report included many informative examples of good practice, and the following recommendations to cultural institutions:

            • declare commitment [to diversity and dialogue, preferably through an explicit strategy]
            • programme quality art for all [rather than “add-on” activities for target groups]
            • take into consideration non-users [through contacts with communities and NGOs]
            • act locally (including with community “ambassadors”)
            • focus efforts to reach new audiences on the young [including through new technologies]
            • think outside the box, act outside the walls [to reach people who do not enter cultural institutions]
            Two years on, as part of our renewed structured dialogue on culture with civil society, we would now like to hear more about intercultural dialogue from interested civil society organizations - in arts and culture and beyond, including NGOs representing minority groups.

            The specific theme we would like to discuss now is how to use culture in shared public spaces to promote intercultural dialogue and bring communities together. The last recommendation above, from the 2014 Report, is particularly relevant to this theme.

            Once applications from civil society have been received, and participants selected, we propose to send out a questionnaire with three initial questions, to gather information. These will be a. What are the best forms of cultural activities to promote dialogue and bring people together, and why (with evidence where available, for this and subsequent questions)?
            eg theatre, dance, music, poetry, visual art, heritage, film, literature, other genres / combinations?
            b. What kinds of shared public spaces are being or might be used (beyond “cultural” spaces like museums, libraries, theatres, heritage sites which were already considered in the OMC report)? What are their particular advantages / disadvantages?
            eg streets, parks, cafés, public transport, schools, hospitals, places of worship, the internet …?
            c. How to identify, engage and motivate different types of people who would not normally participate in the same cultural activities, or even speak to one another?
            eg communication methods - word of mouth, media, community leaders, peer-to-peer; programming choices; co-creation opportunities?

            During the two meetings which will be held as part of the process (the brainstorming and dialogue meetings) it is proposed to structure discussions around three further questions, set out below. It will be open to participants to propose additional or different issues to focus on during the meetings and in the final report of the process:

            1. What would success look like? And what are the best ways to organize cultural activities in shared public spaces to make them successful in promoting intercultural dialogue? eg what kind of organizations / individuals / communities… should lead/ be involved?

            2. Is public funding being used effectively to promote this kind of activity? If so, where / how (specific examples)? If not, why not? Should culture in shared public spaces be a higher priority for limited public funding in relation to intercultural dialogue, or are activities actually more likely to be successful if they are low-budget / no-budget / community-led?

            3. What evidence is there on the effectiveness of the arts and culture in shared public spaces to promote intercultural dialogue, or just to get different people talking to each other?

            Input from civil society on these issues will be very timely, including in relation to the high number of refugees currently arriving in Europe.

            Brainstorming session
            17-18 March 2016, Barcelona/Spain

            What is it about?
            The Brainstorming Session on Promoting intercultural dialogue and bringing communities together through culture in shared public spaces represents the opportunity for a group of 35 European civil society stakeholders in the cultural sector to exchange ideas on this topic and to present these to the European Commission. The group will brainstorm in March 2016, and then have the opportunity, in April 2016, to discuss their main ideas (to be summarised in a Brainstorming Report) with the European Commission at a Dialogue Meeting at Flagey in Brussels.

            Calendar:

            1. Applicants will be informed whether they have been selected or not by January 2016.
            2. The selected participants are requested to come mandated by their organisation/network to the Brainstorming Session on 17-18 March 2016. Part of the preparation expected from participants in the Brainstorming Session will be to send some key messages from their organisation on the topic of “Promoting intercultural dialogue and bringing communities together through culture in shared public spaces”, which will be a starting point for discussion on 17 March 2016.
            3. The Brainstorming Session is a short gathering of a day and a half, which serves as an opportunity for the cultural sector to brainstorm together and structure the ideas they would like to convey to the European Commission at the Dialogue Meeting at a later stage.
            4. The summary of the discussion will be compiled in a Brainstorming Report, drafted by an editorial team appointed by the group of participants itself during the meeting. The Brainstorming Report will be finalised remotely in collaboration with the whole group between the Brainstorming Session and the Dialogue Meeting.

            Brainstorming Report

            The session on “promoting intercultural dialogue and bringing communities together through culture in shared public spaces”, held on 17-18 March 2016 in Barcelona, has provided a space for exchange and discussion between around 35 participants representing the cultural sectors from the EU Member States.

            The present report is the result of the discussion presented to the European Commission at a Dialogue Meeting on 29 April 2016 in Brussels.

            Dialogue Meeting

            The Dialogue Meeting took place on 29 April 2016 in Brussels/Belgium.

              THE ROLE OF CULTURE IN PROMOTING THE INCLUSION OF REFUGEES AND MIGRANTS

              About the Theme

              In October 2015 EU Heads of State agreed that tackling the migration and refugee crisis is a common obligation which requires a comprehensive strategy and a determined effort over time in a spirit of solidarity and responsibility. In November 2015 Member States’ Culture Ministers debated the issue, and agreed that after providing for migrants' and refugees' immediate needs, the focus needs to turn to their social and economic integration. They agreed that culture and the arts have a role to play in the process of integrating refugees who will be granted asylum status, to help them to better understand their new environment and its interaction with their own socio-cultural background, thus contributing to building a more cohesive and open society.

              EU Culture Ministers also agreed to create a new working group of Member State experts in the context of the migration and refugee crisis, to explore how culture and the arts can bring individuals and peoples together and increase participation in cultural and societal life. This work will build on the 2014 Expert Group’s Report on the Role of Public Arts and Cultural Institutions in the Promotion of Cultural Diversity and Intercultural Dialogue.

              The European Parliament is currently preparing its own report on intercultural dialogue, led by Julie Ward MEP, for adoption in early 2016.

              To deliver on European and national political commitments, activities at local level are vitally important, particularly those led by arts and cultural organizations working at grass-roots level.

              The Commission would now like to hear the views of organizations working in communities - in the field of culture and beyond, including NGOs combatting racism and xenophobia. The Commission is therefore very happy that cultural organizations also identified the issue of the inclusion of migrant as top theme to be discussed in the consultation on the open theme under the structured dialogue in the field of culture. A total of 322 organizations across Europe voted in the online consultation to define this fifth (and final) theme of the 2015-2016 structured dialogue "Voices of culture"

              Two meetings will be held in 2016 to discuss the issue (brainstorming and dialogue meetings), in which it is proposed to structure discussions around three questions, set out below:

              1. Which 5 recent initiatives in Europe (or elsewhere) best demonstrate the successful role of culture in promoting the inclusion of refugees and migrants? What have been the key success factors in these initiatives?
              2. What are the best ways to organize cultural activities to promote the inclusion of refugees and migrants – immediately on arrival (first six months), and in the longer term (after six months – the normal time limit for asylum procedures in the EU)?
              3. What are the 5 strongest arguments which can be made by civil society, on why and how to use culture to promote the integration of migrants and refugees? How should these arguments be framed, to justify investment in culture?

              It will be open to participants to propose additional or different issues to focus on during the meetings and in the final report of the process (though we suggest the group should not prioritise the issue of culture in shared public spaces, on which separate discussions are being held).



              Brainstorming session
              14-15 June 2016 – Brussels/Belgium

              What is it about?
              The Brainstorming Session on the role of culture in promoting the inclusion of refugees and migrants represents the opportunity for a group of 35 European civil society stakeholders in the cultural sector to exchange ideas on this topic and to present these to the European Commission. The group will brainstorm on 14-15 June 2016, and then have the opportunity, in September 2016, to discuss their main ideas (to be summarised in a Brainstorming Report) with the European Commission at a Dialogue Meeting in Brussels.

              Calendar:

              1. Applicants will be informed whether they have been selected, based on the criteria below, or not, by March 2016.
              2. The selected participants are requested to come mandated by their organisation/network to the Brainstorming Session on 14-15 June 2016. Part of the preparation expected from participants in the Brainstorming Session will be to answer the questions under the theme description in cooperation with their network and peers. The answers will then be summarised into a paper, which will be a starting point for discussion on 14 June 2016.
              3. The Brainstorming Session is a short gathering of a day and a half, which serves as an opportunity for the cultural sector to brainstorm together and structure the ideas they would like to convey to the European Commission at the Dialogue Meeting at a later stage.
              4. The summary of the discussion will be compiled in a Brainstorming Report, drafted by volunteers from the group of participants itself during the meeting. The Brainstorming Report will be finalised remotely in collaboration with the whole group between the Brainstorming Session and the Dialogue Meeting.

              Next steps

              The group is currently drafting the Brainstorming Report. It will be available in September after the Dialogue Meeting with the European Commission on 15 September 2016.