Key role of cultural and creative industries in the economy
Hendrik van der Pol
Director, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Canada
Abstract
As culture and creativity become an increasing driving force in the international
marketplace, it is essential to measure their impact not only on the economy but also on
society at large. UNESCO has always been at the forefront of addressing the dual
cultural and economic nature of cultural goods and services, working on both the theory
and the practice. The Organization’s Institute of Statistics (UIS) is currently seeking to
redefine international data collection standards for the culture and creative sector so that
they take into account the needs and specificities of the developing world.
Providing an overview of the main approaches to assessing the economic and social
importance of culture, this paper highlights the numerous limitations in current
statistical information. It also includes a series of proposals based on the pragmatic
approach currently being developed at UIS.
Introduction: Increasing role of cultural and creative industries
In this era of extraordinary change and globalization, many acknowledge that creativity
and innovation are now driving the new economy. Organizations and even economic
regions that embrace creativity generate significantly higher revenue and provide
greater stability into the future.
Based on ideas rather than physical capital, the creative economy straddles economic,
political, social, cultural and technological issues and is at the crossroads of the arts,
business and technology. It is unique in that it relies on an unlimited global resource:
human creativity. Growth strategies in the creative economy therefore focus on
harnessing the development potential of an unlimited resource and not on optimizing
limited resources (as in traditional manufacturing industries).
Many stakeholders are involved in this process: the public sector which includes
cultural institutions, e.g. museums, public service broadcasting organizations, etc.; the
private sector which covers a wide range of commercial operations in all fields of
cultural production and distribution; the non-profit sector including many theatre and
dance companies, festivals, orchestras, which may receive government subsidies; and
non-governmental organizations such as advocacy agencies, actors and musicians’
unions.
Culture and creative industries have been increasingly integrated into the policy agenda
of both developed and developing countries. In 2005, the United Kingdom’s
Commission for Africa reported that there was a ‘real danger that a lack of attention to
culture in policy making […] will overwhelm many of the collective mechanisms of
survival which are part of Africa’s cultures’ (Commission for Africa 2005;130). In
early May 2007, the European Commission announced its decision to adopt a strategy
on the contribution of culture to economic growth and intercultural dialogue (European
Commission, 2007).
Culture is increasingly finding a route to the market, which is leading to radical
transformations in the way people create, consume and enjoy cultural products.
Globalisation and the convergence of multimedia and telecommunications technologies
has transformed consumers from passive recipients of cultural messages into active cocreators
of creative content. Digital distribution in industries such as design and music
has transformed global markets and allowed new industries and consumers to emerge in
developing regions such as Africa and Asia (OECD-2, 2005). It is estimated that
licensed digital distribution of recorded music will rise from $653 million in 2005 to
$4.9 billion in 2010, which represented a 49.5% compound annual increase (PWC,
2007).
The digital distribution of music is but one aspect of much larger economic phenomena,
as will be discussed in this paper. Yet it is important to note that culture and creativity
also have a tremendous impact on social cohesion and development. In Europe, the role
of culture in development shows that ‘the arts enrich the social environment with
stimulating or pleasing public amenities.... [and] artistic activity, by stimulating
creativity… [and enhancing] innovation. Works of art and cultural products are a
collective “memory” for a community, and serve as a reservoir of creative and
intellectual ideas for future generations. Arts and cultural institutions improve the
quality of life’ (Council of Europe, 1997). Likewise, Australia has underscored the fact
that ‘the culture and leisure sector contributes to economic development through
facilitating creativity innovation and self reflection’ and, as such, recognises culture as
a key component of society’s well-being (ABS, 2001). Culture should not only be
considered as a means (or a barrier) to achieve economic growth but also as a factor of
social cohesion and human development.
Before exploring the social and economic importance of culture any further, certain
conceptual differences should be discussed. One choice of orientation, already
highlighted in the very title of this session, is to differentiate between ‘cultural’
industries and ‘creative’ industries1
. (Another approach, adopting the term ‘copyright’
industries, is considered briefly below while other categorisations, such as design
industries, lie beyond the scope of this paper). Cultural industries relate to the creation,
production and commercialisation of the products of human creativity, which are
copied and reproduced by industrial processes and worldwide mass distribution. They
are often protected by national and international copyright laws. They usually cover
printing, publishing and multimedia, audiovisual, phonographic and cinematographic
productions, crafts and design. Creative industries encompass a broader range of
activities than cultural industries including architecture, advertising, visual and
performing arts. The United Kingdom’s Department of Culture, Media and Sport
(DCMS) placed its definition of creative industries at the heart of its policy-marking
agenda in the late 1990s and defined creative industries as those requiring creativity,
skill and talent, with the potential for wealth and job creation through exploitation of
their intellectual property. The principal practical difference between these approaches
has been the definition of the sectors and occupations to be included in the statistics.
1
The development of notions of ‘creative industries’ in the last ten years stems from the UK Dept of Culture Media
and Sport Creative Industries Mapping Document (London 1998), with a revised version in 2001.
Diverging conceptual terms is not, however, the only difficulty when trying to measure
the impact of culture and creativity. For an organization like UNESCO, which is
primarily concerned with developing countries, a lack of key data poses a major
problem. Since most data on culture are from the developed world, such as OECD and
the European Union (EU) countries, the most significant challenge facing UNESCO’s
Institute for Statistics (UIS) is to develop cultural indicators which are relevant to the
developing world, especially Africa. A different approach to measuring culture must
therefore be advocated but what form should it take? A certain number of proposals are
presented in the latter half of this paper but first it is important to understand fully the
economic and social role of culture.
Key statistics on the economic and social role of culture
The entertainment and media industry are forecast to grow from $1.3 trillion in 2005 to
reach 1.8 trillion by 2010 (PWC, 2007).2
Asia is expected to record the highest growth
rate of all regions in the entertainment and media industry, increasing from $274 billion
to $425 billion (with a 9.2% compound annual growth rate (CAGR)) and China will
have the fastest growing industry in the world, with a 26% CAGR. In 1990s, the
creative economy in OECD countries grew at an annual rate twice that of service
industries and four times that of manufacturing (Howkins, 2001).
The growth of the cultural and creative sector in the European Union from 1999 to 2003
was 12.3% higher than the growth of the overall economy (European Commission,
2006). Turnover of the culture and creative sector in the EU, which comprises
television, cinema, music, performing arts, and entertainment, generated €654 billion
and contributed to 2.6% of the European Union’s GDP in 2003. The culture sector
employed at least 5.8 million people in Europe in 2004, which is more than the total
working population of Greece and Ireland put together. Furthermore, it is often noted
that the quality of jobs generated in the creative industries may provide higher levels of
job satisfaction, given a strong sense of commitment to the sector and involvement in
cultural life.
While these statistics are vital to our understanding of the increasing economic
contribution of culture, it should be noted that there are several other ways to measure
the importance of cultural industries. One such alternative source of data can be found
in national satellite accounts, which are being adopted by several MERCOSUR
countries. Initial results are provided in Figure 1, where it is shown that the contribution
of culture (here understood as publishing, leisure, cultural services and sports) to the
GDP for the MERCOSUR countries was less than 3% in 2003. While this figure seems
to be lower than for European countries, varying definitions may explain these
differences; for example, the European study incorporates gambling and casinos and
internet transactions, which is not the case for MERCOSUR.
2
The media and entertainment industry includes filmed entertainment; TV; recorded music; radio and out-of-home
advertising; internet advertising and access spending; video games; business information; magazine publishing;
newspaper publishing; book publishing; theme parks and amusement parks; casino and other regulated gaming;
sports.
Figure 1: Contribution of the value added of selected cultural industries to the GDP
for MERCOSUR countries in 2003 in percentage
2.63
1.83
1.6 1.57
0.6
2.93
1.9
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Uruguay Argentina Chile Colombia Venezuela Brazil Peru
Source: Cuenta satélite de cultura, Secretaria de cultura, Argentina, 2006.
Another way of assessing the creative economy is by examining what is referred to as
the copyright industries. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO, 2003)
developed a framework that enables countries to estimate the size of their creative and
information sector. The guide separates out this sector into four categories of industries,
which are the Core Copyright Industries, the Interdependent Copyright Industries, the
Partial Copyright Industries, and the Non-Dedicated Support Industries. These
industries differ by their level of involvement in creation, production and
manufacturing in the literary, scientific and artistic domain. The core copyright
industries3
are usually those characterized as typical cultural industries.
Table 1 shows the contribution to GDP and employment of the Core Copyright
Industries and Copyright Industries as a whole (including the Interdependent and Partial
Copyright sectors). When all copyright industries are factored into the economic model,
the total value of the contribution to GDP or the workforce can vary considerably
depending on how they are defined.
3
The core copyright industries are industries that are wholly engaged in creation, production and manufacturing,
performance, broadcast, communication ad exhibition, or distribution and sales of works and other protected subject
matter,
Table 1 Contribution of copyright industries to the GDP and employment in % for
several countries in 2001
Contribution of
copyright industries
% to
Countries Industries GDP Workforce
Singapore Copyright industries 5.7 5.8
Core copyright industries 2.9 3.6
Canada Copyright industries 5.3 7.0
Core copyright industries 3.9
USA Copyright industries 12.0 8.4
Core copyright industries 7.8 4.0
Hungary Copyright industries 6.8 7.1
Core copyright industries 4.0 4.2
Latvia Core + interdependent 4.0 4.4
Source: WIPO, National Studies on Assessing the Economic Contribution of the Copyright-Based Industries, 2006.
A final key source of data on the creative economy is information related to the
consumption of cultural activities or products, which can be captured by statistics on
household spending on recreation and culture. The inclusion of recreation covers
domains beyond the common definition of creative industries, such as the purchase of
leisure equipment for camping. The percentage of GDP spent on household expenditure
on recreation and culture for most OECD countries shows a positive correlation with
per capita income (OECD, 2007). The richer a country is, the more chance there is that
the population will spend a higher percentage of their income on culture and leisure.
However, there are some anomalies: in Ireland, considered a rich country, the
population spends relatively little on recreation and culture, while the Czech Republic,
considered a poorer country, spends a rather high share. Figure 2 shows that in OECD
countries, the percentage of household expenditures on recreation and culture is
included in a range between 2% for Mexico and 8% of the GDP for the United
Kingdom. The trend has remained fairly stable at around 5% of GDP over the last
decade.
Figure 2 Household expenditure on recreation and culture as percentage of GDP
in 2005 or latest year available
4
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UnitedKingdom
Australia
Austria
Iceland
UnitedStates
Japan
CzechRepublic
Finland
Spain
Canada
Sweden
Slovenia
Greece
Germany
France
Denmark
SlovakRepublic
Switzerland
Netherlands
Belgium
Poland
Hungary
Italy
Korea
Luxembourg
Ireland
Mexico
PercentageofGDP
Source: OECD, OECD Factbook 2007 - Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics, 2007.
Measuring progress: the limits of current cultural statistics
Despite these different methodologies to measure the creative economy, there are a
number of limitations to such data collection. Not only do varying definitions and
categorizations often make information incomparable, as we have already seen, but data
is also frequently scarce or at best incomplete. Furthermore, there is a widespread lack
of resources and expertise to ensure high quality statistical work, especially in the
developing world, as data collection on the creative sector remains a low priority area
for many countries.
Many different initiatives to measure culture and map out cultural and copyright
industries have been developed in Latin America in the past ten years, not only at the
local and national level but also sub-regionally (e.g. Mercosur, Grupo Andino and
CONACULTA). Statistical data and indicators have reached an advanced level of detail
and sophistication in some cases (such as Colombia and Chile), but are non-existent in
4
Household expenditure on recreation and culture includes purchases of audio-visual, photographic and computer
equipment; CDs and DVDs; musical instruments; camper vans; caravans; sports equipment; toys; domestic pets and
related products; gardening tools and plants; newspapers; tickets to sporting matches, cinemas and theatres; and
spending on gambling (including lottery tickets) less any winnings. It excludes expenditures on restaurants, hotels,
and travel and holiday homes but includes package holidays.
other countries of the region, particularly those in Central America. The Organization
of American States and the Organization of Ibero-American States are currently striving
to establish cultural information systems (CIS) through knowledge-sharing activities
among countries in the region. However, these tend to be highly descriptive and a
common set of core indicators has yet to be identified.
As for Africa, the role of cultural industries in the continent’s development was
acknowledged in the 1992 Dakar Plan of Action (UNESCO, 1992). The document
serves as a reference point for current strategies in this area, as described in the New
Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) plan for culture and development
(UNESCO, 2003). Having said this, few culture statistics are currently collected on a
regular basis, despite increasing policy needs to assess the importance of revenue
generated from cultural industries which thrive on the continent, such as music and
crafts. This requires a better characterization within international classification systems
in order to provide clear guidance to National Statistics Offices.
On a more global scale, one of the major failings of current statistical data is that it does
not accurately capture copyright flows and other intangible assets. World trade in ‘core’
cultural goods – taken as recorded media (music, CDs, etc) and printed media (books,
newspapers, periodicals, etc.) – amounted to almost $60 million in 2002 (UIS, 2005).
However, these figures do not capture the value of copyright cultural products traded
worldwide. Trade statistics are captured through customs data and therefore relate only
to the physical characteristics of products. What they fail to take into account is the
value of ideas, creativity and innovation which, in most cases, are transformed into
productive capacity requiring intellectual property protection. As mentioned in the
introduction, the cultural sector exploits an infinite raw material – creativity – which
proves difficult to trace in physical form.
Data on imports and exports of films can be used to indicate diversity in production and
exchange by indicating diversity in the origin of films entering a country, but it presents
the severe limitations of customs and balance of payments data (UIS, 2005). Typically,
films are exported to the destination market, then copied and distributed locally. As a
result, the level of exports may bear little relation to the volume distributed in the
recipient country. While an exported film has an almost negligible value at customs, the
bulk of international exchanges relating to its export are compiled in data from balance
of payments, in the form of receipts for royalties and licences through copies, exhibition
rights and reproduction licence fees.
Another major challenge to data collection is the question of how to measure cultural
employment. In order to understand cultural employment within a country, occupations
within cultural industries need to be supplemented with cultural occupations in noncultural
industries. These could include, for example, design activities in manufacturing
and other sectors. Furthermore, cultural occupations in developing countries are often a
secondary occupation for agricultural labourers or other workers and, as such, are often
not declared or captured in censuses and labour force surveys.
The International Standard Classification by Occupations (ISCO) currently does not
provide the level of detail required to identify cultural occupations in a truly
comprehensive manner. In some cases, it is necessary to link employment data with
industry data to calculate total cultural employment. These hidden or ‘embedded’
cultural occupations may not include a large enough number of practitioners to be
accurately measured in sample surveys. Moreover, self-employed or informal work, and
even small companies of less than ten people are not captured in surveys. In this
respect, even European statistics may well underestimate cultural employment.
UIS’s role in defining standards
In 2006, the UIS began to revise the 1986 UNESCO Statistical Framework for Culture.
Preliminary proposals have been well received by countries and present a further
opportunity to rally countries around a common standard. It is recognized that, in the
past, such initiatives have often failed as few countries have sufficient resources for
dedicated surveys of culture, and that earlier standards have seen to be centred on
OECD or EU perspectives rather than those of developing countries. Instead, UIS will
concentrate on a pragmatic approach building on a regular collection of statistical
instruments, such as labour force surveys and population censuses. Proposals will focus
on standard-setting, which involves marginal adaptations to these existing data
collection instruments, thus minimizing costs and maximizing the potential for regular
collection of cultural data once the project has been completed. They will present a
comprehensive approach to measuring culture in both social and economic spheres
while allowing countries the flexibility to identify different national priorities.5
UIS has produced two reports on the international trade in cultural goods, but the
Institute must now also consider the question of the consumption of cultural goods.
‘Consumption’ is seen by some as an economic approach whereas culture demands a
wider view in which ‘enjoyment’ has more than an economic value. Nevertheless,
specialists in the culture field are quick to point out that ‘participation’ in cultural
activities has strong social benefits, such as confirming identity with a social group,
increasing social cohesion, or, through an encounter with a different culture, allowing
people to question assumptions about how they act or think about their own emotional
and moral values.
UIS is therefore interested in developing instruments for national and international
studies, which will evaluate participation in a wide range of cultural activities. The
Institute’s approach is a fundamentally pragmatic one since it realises that estimating
the full ‘value’ of cultural goods would be too costly. Developing countries in particular
do not have the financial resources to carry out extensive surveys to assess cultural
value, and expertise on the special methodologies involved is scarce. Instead, UIS
recommends that countries take a broad-based approach, while understanding the
inevitable imperfections of the results produced. A measurement strategy, which draws
on common existing statistical instruments and standards, is required. As such, UIS
advocates the use of the International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC) and
Classification of Occupations (ISCO).
UIS is currently working with the International Labour Organization to ensure that they
represent the full range of cultural employment. At the same time, UIS will advise
national statistical offices that, while adhering to international standards, they should
aim to identify the informal sector in any cultural industries that are a national priority.
For example, all national statistical offices conduct a labour force survey and, if such
surveys asked about a second occupation, it is likely that many craftsmen would be
identified.
In addition to making small adjustments to existing surveys, it is always possible for
countries to undertake dedicated surveys for priority issues. In the realm of culture,
5
It is suggested that the Framework will allow countries to choose the sectors which are most appropriate for their
national policy, but that the sector definitions will be based on international standards. As such, while countries may
choose different sectors, they will be able to compare themselves with other countries that choose the same sector or
sectors.
dedicated surveys could be used to ‘drill down in depth’ in a particular sector, to
consider the implications of a particular event, or to measure the overall participation of
a certain population in cultural activities. In the case of a sector study, considerable care
should be taken with sample design to ensure that informal, artisan, and amateur craft
production is captured.
Another common form of survey covers a particular event or place, usually registering
the number of visitors to a site, event or festival. While in OECD countries it is easy to
separate tourists and audiences from locals and performers respectively, this is more
difficult in other countries in the world. Many sites, whether natural or architectural
heritage, play a central role in the lives of local communities. This means that local
participation and use of these sites should be surveyed alongside those of visitors from
further a field. Similarly, in many festivals in non-OECD countries audience and
performers cannot be separated as people move between roles at different times. This is
clearest in music, dance and drama, and artistic production where local shows are often
an opportunity for artists to exchange ideas and inspirations as much as they are about
displaying works to the general public.
Recognizing the many limitations of current cultural statistics, UIS proposes three main
aspects in which data collection on a particular cultural industry may require data of
other forms: education, traditional knowledge, and archiving and preserving. Education
teaches people how to value culture and is the principal means of transmitting culture
from one generation to the next. Enrolment rates in cultural education programmes are
therefore useful indicators on how different aspects of culture are covered in school and
higher education. Traditional knowledge represents cultural production that is not
included in the conventional market because it is subject to informal exchange, nonmonetary
exchange (e.g. exchange of gifts) or amateur/informal production. Examples
might include the practice of traditional medicine, rural textile production, production
of traditional musical instruments or dress. While these articles may not enter the
market, their production can be a very significant share of cultural production in a
particular sector and many countries will want more accurate data on the scale of this
production. Archiving and preserving is not merely the way in which significant works
of art are conserved and safeguarded for posterity. Important works of art or traditions
can be powerful forces for acculturation and inspiration for future artists. Works of art,
heritage sites and intangible heritage are therefore assets, which, if invested in, can
provide returns in terms of new cultural products, and visitor revenues. Figure 3 shows
an initial view of some sectors showing how the three suggested transverse dimensions
might be measured.
Fig. 3 Examples of some indicators for cultural industries across four sectors and the three
transverse dimensions
ISICs nuanced by occupation and product classifications
Arts
Visual, fine,
performing arts
Heritage
Natural Cultural
Tangible and Intangible
Audio-visual
Film, video, new media
Books & Press
Production &
Consumption
Employment
Value
Performances
Employment
Value
Employment
Value
No of titles
Employment
Value
No of titles
Education Enrolment
Performances in/by
schools
Enrolment
Attendance (visitors &
locals)
ICTs in education School
textbooks
Traditional
knowledge
Craft artisan
Story tellers
Festivals ($,
attendance)
Intangible heritage (no
of themes)
Biodiversity , language,
medicines
Traditional knowledge on
the Internet
Audio-visual
documentaries
Languages in
print
Archiving &
Preserving
Document centres Conservation (jobs,
spending)
Film archives (volumes) Libraries
(volumes,
transactions)
UNESCO’s approach to measuring creativity and culture
UNESCO has always been at the forefront of addressing the dual cultural and economic
nature of cultural goods and services. The Organization has worked extensively on this
interface, exploring both the theory and the practice.6
In May 2008, it is set to publish
its next World Report on the theme of cultural diversity. Building on the considerable
amount of critical reflection that lies behind the Universal Declaration on Cultural
Diversity (2001) and its Action Plan, the report will aim to identify key policies and
policy-making instruments to ensure that cultural diversity, sometimes perceived as a
threat or a source of insecurity, is truly fruitful and can flourish for the benefit of all.
This report is to include a statistical annex provided by UIS.
An example of UNESCO’s practical involvement in the field, the Global Alliance for
Culture Diversity is a pilot project that forges public-private partnerships to strengthen
cultural industries and enterprises in developing countries. In terms of normative action,
UNESCO adopted the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of
Cultural Expressions in 2005. Following an unprecedented ratification rate, the
Convention entered into force on 18 March 2007. This binding legal instrument
promotes cultural industries as key to sustainable development and poverty reduction
and seeks to strengthen international cooperation in the field of cultural industries. One
of the aims of the Convention is to gain a greater understanding of how to measure the
6
UNESCO has published a number of works on the subject matter: Our Creative Diversity, report by World
Commission on Culture and Development, 1995; Culture, Creativity and Markets, World Culture Report, 1998;
Cultural Diversity, Conflict and Pluralism, World Culture Report, 2000 and International Flows of Selected Cultural
Goods and Services, 1994-2003, UIS, 2005.
diversity of cultural expressions. To that end, UNESCO’s international standards in the
field of culture will be reviewed in close collaboration with UIS, in particular those
related to creative industries and their impact on economic development.
Conclusion
A broader assessment of the economic impact of cultural sectors and products is key to
providing a fuller picture of the real impact of culture. As a final example, we should
consider the impact of the Great Wall of China. It attracts huge tourist income,
investment by national authorities and local people. Yet a quick search finds the Great
Wall also used as a symbol to sell a wide range of products, including a brand of car, a
packaging machine, the Olympics, Chinese language courses, software, music, hotels,
cigarettes, medicine, fireworks, food, hydraulic fluid and so on. The Wall contributes to
the sale of all these products, extending its economic impact far beyond the heritage
sector. In theory, an assessment of the economic impact of the Great Wall should take
into account its value as a brand for all these products, its value to the people of China
as a symbol of national identity as well as its value to the people of the world as an
outstanding achievement of humanity. It is of course this latter aspect which has led to
its inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage lists.
The example of the Great Wall illustrates how far we have to go to measure the full
impact of culture in the economy, as well as the extensive contribution that culture
makes to both economy and society as a whole. Having said this, a sense of optimism
should prevail since the studies cited at the beginning of this article indicate that an
initial assessment of cultural industries using existing data can bring great benefits. All
countries that have carried out such an assessment have been surprised by the extent to
which such industries contribute to national economic performance. Such an initial
study can help identify which industries are the most important and where the evidence
requires further work to present a full picture.
Often the impact of an initial study into such cultural industries creates momentum for
statistical agencies to examine the issue in greater depth. The more that the impact of
cultural industries is studied using the approaches suggested in this article, the more
officials and members of the public will be able to appreciate the breadth and richness
of what culture has to offer a country. In addition, the more that the economic value of
culture is appreciated, the more people are willing to invest in culture, whether they be
public agencies or private companies who recognize the real returns that culture
provides.
All these issues can only be addressed through close international co-operation. This
must include partnerships between different international agencies (such as the OECD,
EUROSTAT and UNESCO), professional associations (such as the International
Federation of Library Associations) and national authorities for whom the resulting
statistics should be relevant, timely and of high quality. Only then will we be able to
measure the full impact on culture and creative on our economies and our societies.
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Measuring well being, 2001.
Council of Europe, From The Margins: A contribution to the debate on Culture and
Development in Europe, European Task Force on Culture and Development, 1997.
Department for Culture Media and Sport, United Kingdom (DCMS), Mapping Document,
1998.
Department for Culture Media and Sport, United Kingdom (DCMS), Creative Industries
Economic Estimates Statistical Bulletin, 2006.
European Commission, Communication for a European agenda for culture in a globalizing
world, 2007.
John Howkins, The Creative Economy: How People Make Money from Ideas, 2001.
OECD-1, Culture and Local Development, 2005.
OECD-2, Digital broadband content: mobile content, new content for new platforms,
Working party on the information economy, 2005.
OECD, OECD Factbook 2007 - Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics, 2007.
Price WaterHouse Coopers (PWC), Global Entertainment and Media Outlook: 2006-2010,
2007.
Presidencia de la nación, Secretaria de cultura, Argentina, Cuenta satélite de cultura, 2006.
UIS, UNESCO, International Flows of Selected Cultural Goods and Services, 1994-2002,
2005.
UNESCO, Culture industries for development in Africa: Dakar plan of action,
Organization of African Unity, 1992.
UNESCO, Atelier sur la culture et le développement dans le progamme d’action du
NEPAD, 2003.
World Commission on culture and development, Our creative diversity, 1995.
World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), Guide on surveying the economic
contribution of the copyright-based industries, 2003.
WIPO, National studies on Assessing the Economic Contribution of the Copyright-Based
Industries, 2006.