Survival of India’s Creative Economy

There is continued uncertainty in India’s creative sector due to the deepening impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, which poses a risk to its long-term survival if emergency action is not taken. Underlining this uncertainty, the British Council, FICCI and Art X Company jointly launched the second edition of the “Taking the Temperature” report on the deepening impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on India’s creative economy. The report tries to understand the economic state and sentiment of the creative sector workforce and artists. The accompanying discussion saw Sanjoy Roy, Co-chair, FICCI Art and Culture Committee; Rashmi Dhanwani, Founder Director, The Art X Company; Jonathan Kennedy, Director Arts India, British Council; and moderator, Pragya Tiwari, Regional Director South Asia, Flint, talking on the findings of the report

The “Taking the Temperature” survey, informed, Dilip Chinoy, Secretary General, FICCI, reports what is happening on the ground along with case studies of resilience in action across the whole creative sector. The survey reflects the depth of the crisis in the creative economy, and also looks at systemic action, which strengthens the economy. There are recommendations for the future creative economy development, and also live business models of creative businesses that are adapting to digital future going ahead. Some of the most striking impacts he said, is that of the workforce leaving the creative economy and changing careers; individual artisans facing short-term hand-to-mouth existence, and creative businesses contending with increasingly difficult choices to manage costs including cutting staff and overheads to ensure they survive and remain resilient.

"This is the first time in our collective living history memory that we have had a lockdown that brought everything to a standstill"

- Sanjoy Roy

Sanjoy Roy

Pragya Tiwari: What is it that we speak of when we mention the cultural sector? The diffusion and amorphous quality of it, at least in part, lends to the apathy towards the cultural sector on the whole.

Sanjoy Roy: The report brings to the fore the real crisis in the creative economy sector. It is an incredible crisis of loss of income, closure, artisans and artists not being able to put food on the table, and more. I’m not sure if it is about apathy it is about ignorance. People are unable to comprehend the creative sector not realising that the creative economy today, goes from everything to the Ragi in the gurudwara, to the kathak dancer, to the pandal maker, to the lighting designer, to the backstage person, to the artisan in Benares, to the person curing the skin, which will be put onto the mridangam. You are looking at an impact across the entire artistic design artisanal community. In India, what happens between the sowing season and harvest? Most of the agrarian economy is also driven by arts they weave, stitch, sing, do puppetry. In earlier times, during a natural disaster, people migrated from their district, which had an impacted to the next district, and you earned a living and sent money back home.

This is the first time in our collective living history memory that we have had a lockdown that brought everything to a standstill. What our planners and policymakers forget is, where the focus is on manufacturing and for every million dollars of investments in manufacturing, you create approximately nine jobs in the creative sector, for every million dollars of investment you create 99 jobs. This is a sector where you can make the impact at the grass root level. Hopefully, these reports will continue to focus on and build that knowledge base-that there is a science behind what is being put out. Is there light in the future? No, because there has been no policy change to be able to address the need of the moment.

Rashmi Dhanwani: We don’t have a formal culture policy. Culture is administered around nine different central departments, and here, I would like to talk about a document, which is a country culture policy profile put together by Ashish Rajadhyaksha, P Radhika and Raghavendra Tenkayala. They locate the notion of culture within policy in the nationalist context. This report says that, ‘so pervasive is the representation of culture as a national legacy-both sanskriti, being cultured and as parampara, tradition-that no corresponding practice or corresponding policy statement involving the arts could exist, without in some form incorporating, at least adequately accounting for prevailing definitions of sanskriti, which is being cultured. This imbalance has been incarnated into the very substance of all prevalent arts and culture policy ever since this period, well into the present’.

So, the understanding of culture is a part of us, a part of our identity, and everything that we do in culture needs to represent that. Hence, notions around economy, jobs, measurement and value, don’t come into that framework of conversation. Over the years, policy and administrative perspective have not kept pace with the evolution of the sector. None of this finds any location in any central arts policy. It is not one organisation or department that is charged with thinking about where and how is this entire ecosystem evolving. Moreover, the discussions about the structural issues don’t even find space in academic dialogues. Hence, there is neither an understanding of the sector, nor is there a critical dialogue around its needs and movements, and the value it brings to the country. More importantly, there is absolutely no data or comprehensive study done to understand who is part of the sector, what is the value they bring to us as society, culture, economy and even humanity. Nobody really has a stake in thinking about these concerns, and even when you do, you don’t have the power or the pathways to power to actually act upon it. Hence, the report becomes important because it provides evidence that can be used beyond subjectivities to think about what is the right direction for this sector.

"While we have the complexity of the formal and informal creative economy in India, the creative economy in the UK is a part of the formal economy"

- Jonathan Kennedy

Jonathan Kennedy

Jonathan Kennedy: Speaking of the UK approach to the creative economy, there is one government department in the UK which covers all creative sectors the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. There are 11 categories, which segment the creative economy in the UK. It is understood not just as to the artistic value which is predominant but also the value to the GDP of the country, and how the UK acts as a magnet for visitors, tourists, and internal cultural tourism, which are destinations in their own right. It understands the ecosystem because it has been mapping the sector for 20+years now. It is also embedded in a tax system. While we have the complexity of the formal and informal creative economy in India, the creative economy in the UK is a part of the formal economy. Income tax, corporation tax, are all coded as part of the creative economy. So, the treasury knows what is generated for the treasury for every pound spent by investment into the various arts councils, and what they generate back in terms of the exchequer.

Last summer, in the early months of Covid-19, the government invested 1.57 billion pounds into the sector because it understood that it also generates back into the economy, almost 11 billion pounds a year. Let alone the economic value of the asset of the creative economy and the different sectors to the wider wealth of the country, the pandemic saw us all turn to television, to Netflix, to reading, to going online to experience the arts we needed the arts for solace and solidarity. The ‘soft stuff’ of the arts is also critically important to our well-being. We need the arts to understand ourselves and the world around us, and how that also feeds into GDP in the country. It is all part of that wider global benefit that we get from the creative economy of the arts and culture.

Q: One key aspect of 2020 has been the push towards digital are we overstating that promise or are we exploring the tip of the iceberg? What are some of the ongoing innovations, potential and limitations?

Sanjoy Roy: When you look at the possibility of a digital India, it is an India deeply divided those who have bandwidth sometimes, and those who don’t have access to a smartphone, Zoom, an understanding of technology. While it has the potential of democratising the space and allowing artists, artisans etc. to access this ‘new wonder’, it is far from an equitable space at this point of time. Musicians, perhaps, can collaborate across countries but what about everybody else the person who used to design the set, or a costume designer, or the helper at the backend in a Kamani or a Prithvi theatre? Digital doesn’t in any way help that cause. Is the digital medium the solution to everything? No, it is not. Has it made a difference and leapfrogged us because of the pandemic? Absolutely.

When it comes to the performing arts and films, television, web series, the difference is the exchange of energy. That said, technology will improve. The immediate future is and will continue to be impacted until and unless there is intervention at the policy level, at the taxation level, the government’s attitude to being able to roll-out adequate support measures and safety net measures for the community of artists and artisans and the creative economy. If they don’t do that, kick-starting this aspect will be that much tougher.

Rashmi Dhanwani

Q: What are the recommendations of the “Taking the Temperature” Report-2?

Rashmi: It is about survival. We are talking about a sector that is currently living a hand to mouth existence and they are leaving the sector. There is no way to map that kind of deeper level, nuanced impact as yet. One of our first recommendations is that we need emergency action for investment between government and corporates. It does not speak to creating new policies, or frameworks to begin with it is just about addressing the core problem: people need money to get food and shelter. How can we look at getting micro-grants to reach the right people? The second area we had made a recommendation in is strengthening of the creative economy for India’s international competitive advantage.

We need to include the creative sector in the social and economic recovery plan, secure and strengthen the creative economy for the long term. In adversity lies opportunity! Let artists’ organisations figure out where the opportunities lie. The main thing is also looking at existing policies. And finally, how do we establish the creative economy network of artists, artisans and cultural organisations? How do we create one central space, a creative economy network of associations that is able to speak to powers-that-be for collective advocacy, where we can pool resources for mutual support so that everybody is not reinventing the wheel at the same time, and we are able to ensure shared learning across the diversity of India’s languages, industries, and art forms?

Jonathan: India’s art and culture is part of its global brand, its DNA, its ‘sanskriti’. But it is also part of its livelihood, its income generation, its wider sense of the world. The need of the hour is the support of the sector, within the sector, and from without the sector. We need that support to be live and now.

The Report 2 gives insight into:

• The scale of impact on creative sectors, arts companies, artists, managers, and stakeholders.
• Comparisons, development, change over a sustained period from March to November 2020.
• Systemic actions being taken to strengthen the creative economy.
• Recommendations for the future development of the creative economy.

Key findings (Report 1):

• Creative sectors are in the formal and informal economy.
• 41% of the sector stopped functioning during lockdown in March-June.
• 88% of the creative sectors are Micro Small and Midsize Enterprises (MSMEs).
• 61% of the sector established 4-10 years stopped functioning in lockdown.
• 88% of the sector fear the impact of social distancing over the long-term.

Key findings (Report 2):

• The creative economy is contracting.
• Organisations are closing permanently to avoid bankruptcy.
• Creative businesses are contending with increasingly difficult choices to remain resilient.
• Individual professionals and artisans are facing short-term hand-to-mouth existence.
• Sectors are adapting to digital and live business models.
• Some of the workforce is leaving the creative economy and changing careers.