THE CONTEXT FOR THE REPORT 23
The research was supported by a Knowledge Transfer
Partnership (KTP)¹ between Manchester Metropolitan
University and the charity and online artists’ directory Axisweb.
Called Models of Validation, the research programme was
funded by AHRC/ESRC/Axisweb via Innovate UK and ran
between May 2017 and November 2018 full time, and from
January 2019 to January 2020 part time.
The project built on a pilot study by the same authors,
commissioned by Axisweb in 2015 ² when an audit of members’
online profiles identified that approximately 60% of artists
were working in social contexts some or all of the time. The
charity commissioned ManMet to research the validation of
social practice, to support members’ social practice and help
make it more visible.
The pilot study interviewed 24 successful artists and
commissioners about their roles and methods for selecting
artists with whom to work, the artists’ routes to validation, measures
of success, training received, and the comparative impact
of gallery and non-gallery commissions on artists’ careers.
The findings suggested that although the collaborative
potential and societal benefits of social practice make it an
increasingly valuable commodity in the public funding landscape,
the existing model of validation fails to meet the needs
1 The Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP)
scheme helps businesses in the UK to innovate
and grow. It links them with an academic or
research organisation and a graduate. KTPs bring
in new skills and the latest academic thinking
to deliver a specific, strategic innovation
project through a knowledge-based partnership.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/knowledge-transferpartnerships-what-they-are-and-how-to-apply#whatis-a-knowledge-transfer-partnership
2 ‘Any new provision should be artist-led and/or
developed in close consultation with artists
who have achieved a range of different kinds of
validation already. Without this, artists could
be disenfranchised through external values being
imposed upon them in “top down” regulatory ways.’
Ravetz and Wright, 2015
and values of many social practice artists. For artists, a desire to
make art that might help to ‘improve the conditions in a particular
community or in the world at large’ (Helicon Collaborative,
2017; 4) is one of the key motivators for working in social practice;
but the growth of the field is also directly connected to the
fact that the dominant art world provides little or no income
for most artists and at least some income can be derived from
doing projects with people/in social settings.
a-n’s research (Big Artists Survey, 2011) concluded that
while 52% of artists used residency/engaged practice regularly
or occasionally, only 18% exclusively did that. The same survey
reported 62% of artists using community arts in the same
manner. One reason for this is economic. A skills gap analysis
report commissioned by Creative Scotland from Consilium
Research and Consultancy (2012: 15), found that 84% of practitioners
take on participatory arts within a portfolio of work
for financial reasons. Artists work in 2016 (Jones, 2017) also
demonstrates that public art and residency budgets are superior
to arts organisations budgets.
But whilst social practice offers some artists some form of
livelihood, those working in the field are not being sufficiently
validated — i.e. critically acknowledged and supported — by
relevant professional organisations and ecosystems. While the
gallery model of validation is based on an artist’s positioning in
a network of dealers, collectors and curators and on the value
and prestige of commissions, exhibitions and sales (Thornton,
2008; 2009), social practice artists’ requirements and desires
for validation diverge significantly. Social practice artists have
less influence within these networks; the commissioning
practices, funding streams, artistic and ethical values, outputs
and outcomes of social practice are not fully compatible with
those of the contemporary art world and art markets.³ This
lack of validation limits artists’ and commissioners’ abilities to
produce good work and to contribute to excellence in the field.
3 Ravetz and Wright, 2015.