Skip to main content

This essay for the 2014 Seoul Art Space, Seoul Foun­da­tion for Arts and Cul­ture Inter­na­tion­al Sym­po­sium briefly cov­ers UK arts poli­cies for sup­port to artists’ devel­op­ment, com­ments on their impact on artists’ social and eco­nom­ic sta­tus and sug­gests a rethink­ing of the artists’ intrin­sic role in soci­ety as a vital part of secur­ing and sus­tain­ing con­tem­po­rary visu­al arts in the future.

Artists and arts policy

In the UK, the arts enjoy an arm’s length’ infra­struc­ture [1] – one in which the arts coun­cils (of Eng­land, North­ern Ire­land, Scot­land and Wales) are inde­pen­dent of gov­ern­ment, devel­op­ing poli­cies and fund­ing for the arts as a pub­lic ben­e­fit. One argu­ment for set­ting up the Arts Coun­cil of Great Britain in the first place was the fear of what would hap­pen to the visu­al arts if left to the vagaries of the mar­ket place. Amongst his­tor­i­cal assump­tions [2] for estab­lish­ing state sup­port of the arts through the arts coun­cils were that fine art is impor­tant but very frag­ile, and because artists are as a mat­ter of course poor, they need to be guid­ed and patro­n­ised’ by the state. 

With­in this spir­it, in 1979 the Arts Coun­cil of Great Britain ini­ti­at­ed a pol­i­cy to pay artists when they exhib­it­ed work in pub­licly-fund­ed gal­leries. Pub­lic gal­leries and muse­ums choose to exhib­it the works of liv­ing artists for the enjoy­ment and edu­ca­tion of vis­i­tors. Both these func­tions are of wide ben­e­fit to the com­mu­ni­ty. Artists pro­vide a ser­vice, and, just as oth­er work­ers in the gallery are enti­tled to be paid for their labour, so artists too are enti­tled to be paid for the use that is made of their work. Artists are pro­fes­sion­al work­ers as well. Every oth­er pro­fes­sion­al sec­tor in the arts expects that this pub­lic ben­e­fit should be recog­nised, and rec­om­pensed, by the pay­ment of a fee…. The argu­ment for EPR (Exhi­bi­tion Pay­ment Right) is based on equi­ty – on fair­ness and jus­tice. All artists should ben­e­fit from the con­sump­tion of their work by the pub­lic.” [3]

It is worth not­ing how­ev­er that although the lat­er Arts Coun­cil ini­tia­tive Year of the Artist 2000 was also intend­ed to secure artists’ pro­fes­sion­al sta­tus through enhanced pay and con­di­tions[4], sub­se­quent research in 2003 into artists’ fees and pay­ments had indi­cat­ed that com­mis­sion­ers’ atti­tudes had not in the longer term been changed by such advo­ca­cy. [5]

By 2006, England’s arts and cul­ture were said to be the health­i­est they had ever been, enjoy­ing a 73% fund­ing increase under an arts-friend­ly Labour gov­ern­ment over a decade that was described as a gold­en age’ for the arts. [6] The Nation­al Lot­tery con­tri­bu­tion to the arts led to cre­ation of new-build flag­ship’ con­tem­po­rary visu­al arts gal­leries across the UK. Mil­lions of pounds of arts mon­ey were allo­cat­ed to these arts build­ings and their enhanced over­head costs. With the new wave of cura­to­r­i­al posi­tions, the con­tem­po­rary visu­al arts became tru­ly pro­fes­sion­alised’.

Dur­ing the UK’s eco­nom­ic down­turn and sub­se­quent reces­sion, arts fund­ing suf­fered sub­stan­tial gov­ern­ment cuts [7]. Although the ambi­tions set out by Arts Coun­cil Eng­land for the core (Nation­al Port­fo­lio Organ­i­sa­tion) fund­ing includ­ed: Encourage[ment] of artists’ prac­tice and career devel­op­ment through invest­ment in artists’ work­space and pro­duc­tion facil­i­ties, artist-led spaces, and pro­fes­sion­al sup­port organ­i­sa­tions and maintain[ence] of a resilient and diverse ecol­o­gy that reflects, on a nation­wide basis, the rich­ness of work cur­rent­ly being made, and encom­pass­es organ­i­sa­tions of vary­ing types and scales”, Arts Coun­cil Eng­land con­cen­trat­ed its sup­port to con­tem­po­rary visu­al arts by main­tain­ing these spe­cial­ist gal­leries putting 48% of the 2012 – 15 bud­get specif­i­cal­ly to the Top 20′ gal­leries and pro­duc­tion agen­cies [8]. Fund­ing deci­sions made for 2015 – 18 will increase spend on this top’ group to 68%. 

The 2012 – 15 fund­ing cuts of £1.36m to six­teen small-scale and artist-led organ­i­sa­tions have severe­ly dam­aged an impor­tant lay­er in the infra­struc­ture for artists’ prac­tices, impact­ing on the liveli­hood of artists and future vital­i­ty and sus­tain­abil­i­ty of the visu­al arts ecol­o­gy, putting at risk 19 full-time and 46 part-time jobs, con­tract­ed work for 287 free­lancers, 133 intern­ship oppor­tu­ni­ties and 43 artists’ men­tor­ing oppor­tu­ni­ties annu­al­ly. Over­all, the cut organ­i­sa­tions direct­ly or indi­rect­ly sup­port­ed almost 6,700 visu­al artists pur­su­ing pro­fes­sion­al careers at a time when artists’ liveli­hoods are under threat”. [9]

Artists and the art market 

In the mid-80s, £40 mil­lion was esti­mat­ed as the annu­al val­ue of UK art sales – the equiv­a­lent to £101m nowa­days. How­ev­er, the actu­al val­ue, as cal­cu­lat­ed in 2009 [10], was more like £3.08 bil­lion — that is thir­ty times larg­er than the 80s. Lon­don is now said to be the world’s most suc­cess­ful con­tem­po­rary art mar­ket. But does this ben­e­fit the UK’s con­tem­po­rary artists? Artist Gra­ham Crow­ley com­ments: Nobody I know about talks about the mar­ket as rep­re­sent­ed in the media. It’s seen pure­ly as a con­struct of the mar­ket and the media… The artist’s work is expen­sive in the mar­ket place, and that’s what is impor­tant.” [11]

In terms of increas­ing the artists’ com­mer­cial art sales, whilst the Taste buds report [12] indi­cat­ed the vital impor­tance of the crit­i­cal mass of artists to the over­all art market’s suc­cess and enor­mous poten­tial to enhance sales of con­tem­po­rary art to new pur­chasers and col­lec­tors’ – this would only occur if the art world’ was will­ing to forego the tra­di­tion­al frame­works that — because they fil­ter sup­ply” and con­trol the demand” — main­tain the high prices achieved by art stars’. 

Artists as social instrument

Over the recent arts fund­ing peri­od, art has been gen­er­al­ly per­ceived as a social instru­ment, as exem­pli­fied in state­ments such as: Art pro­duces social change that can be seen, eval­u­at­ed and broad­ly planned; con­tributes to social cohe­sion, ben­e­fits envi­ron­men­tal renew­al and health and injects cre­ativ­i­ty into organ­i­sa­tion­al plan­ning.” [13]

Arts Coun­cil England’s cur­rent pol­i­cy states: We are a cus­to­di­an of pub­lic invest­ment, and we are charged with get­ting the max­i­mum val­ue out of this: the enlight­en­ment and enter­tain­ment arts and cul­ture bring us; the enrich­ing of our lives and the inspir­ing of our edu­ca­tion; the vital con­tri­bu­tion to our health and well-being and the pow­er­ing of region­al regen­er­a­tion, tourism and our stand­ing abroad.” [14]

Either through finan­cial neces­si­ty or the desire of the pub­lic fun­ders who are their patrons’, many UK artists are mak­ing art or deliv­er­ing art projects the effi­ca­cy of which are mea­sured in terms of their instru­men­tal pow­ers: how well they serve the needs of oth­ers by achiev­ing social improve­ment such as regen­er­a­tion, whether they uplift the lives of dis­ad­van­taged peo­ple or fill the arts gap’ in the school cur­ric­u­la. Artists are encour­aged in this respect by pol­i­cy mak­ers to widen their prac­tices and expec­ta­tions because: There is noth­ing rep­re­hen­si­ble in artists seek­ing to extend cul­tur­al democ­ra­cy by open­ing their prac­tice to oth­ers”. [15]

How­ev­er, as John Hold­en com­ment­ed: Insti­tu­tion­al and Mea­sure­ment Prop­er­ties of the admin­is­tra­tive sys­tem exert far too much influ­ence over the nature of cul­tur­al activ­i­ty itself…The dan­ger is that unin­ten­tion­al­ly, these pres­sures will insti­tu­tion­alise cul­tur­al medi­oc­rity by encour­ag­ing fun­ders and fund­ed to take safe bets… We should be not be sat­is­fied with cri­te­ria that act as prox­ies for cul­tur­al val­ue; rather, we should be seek­ing to design the insti­tu­tions around the cre­ation of cul­tur­al val­ue.” [16]

The eco­nom­ic sta­tus of artists

Notwith­stand­ing the pub­lic role for artists as providers of arts ser­vices that ben­e­fit soci­ety, artists’ liveli­hoods con­tin­ue to suffer. 

The artists’ liveli­hoods sur­vey by a‑n along with relat­ed research [17] shows that arts poli­cies and invest­ment deci­sions dra­mat­i­cal­ly affect artists’ income lev­els and their liveli­hoods and career sustainability. 

  • The val­ue of open­ly offered work for artists is in decline. In 2013 the over­all val­ue of work on offer to artists was £7.5m less (29%) than the pre-reces­sion year of 2007, and £2m less than was offered in 2012
  • Com­mis­sion bud­gets have declined con­sid­er­ably. In 2013, com­mis­sions pro­vid­ed 11% of the val­ue of all work, with an aver­age bud­get of £19,444. In com­par­i­son in 2007 (pre-reces­sion), the fig­ure was 62% and com­mis­sion bud­gets aver­aged £100K.

In tan­dem, arts fund­ing poli­cies have reduced lev­els of finan­cial sup­port direct to artists through open-access funds. A key find­ing from the A fair share report is that only 2.5% of artists in Eng­land are suc­cess­ful annu­al­ly in gain­ing a grant from such schemes [18]. When com­bined, these fac­tors rep­re­sent a dra­mat­ic loss in artists’ annu­al income lev­els. For 71% of artists in 2013, turnover from their prac­tice was less than £10,000 a year. 17% were earn­ing up to £20,000 and just 7% up to £30,000 [19]. In real terms, artists nowa­days are some £6,000 a year worse off than they had been in 1997

a‑n’s Pay­ing artists research revealed that it was with­in the pub­licly-fund­ed gal­leries that lev­els of finan­cial reward were par­tic­u­lar­ly poor. In the last three years, 71% of artists had received no fee at all for exhibit­ing in arts coun­cil-fund­ed gal­leries, and 63% had been forced to turn down exhi­bi­tions because they could not afford to car­ry the costs them­selves, from their low income base [20].

How­ev­er not all work­ing pro­fes­sion­al­ly in the con­tem­po­rary visu­al arts in the UK have fared as bad­ly as artists. An eco­nom­ic impact report [21] in 2013 showed that full-time earn­ings in the arts had risen by 6.8% in the last five years. 

Inter­views with cura­tors and art direc­tors revealed the view that, rather than pay­ment, artists should be con­tent to gain expo­sure and career devel­op­ment from pub­lic exhi­bi­tions. There was a dis­tinct lack of con­cern for the eco­nom­ic sit­u­a­tion of artists: The pay and con­di­tions which artists receive and improv­ing fees for exhi­bi­tions were not par­tic­u­lar­ly con­sid­ered a pri­or­i­ty by par­tic­i­pat­ing venues; nor were the pay and con­di­tions of artists more gen­er­al­ly con­sid­ered a par­tic­u­lar talk­ing point in the sec­tor at the moment. [22] It seems amongst artis­tic staff at the very insti­tu­tions who now enjoy the lion’s share of arts fund­ing that there is lit­tle con­cern for, or aware­ness of, artists’ intrin­sic val­ue into the their cura­to­r­i­al and audi­ence devel­op­ment processes. 

The sta­tus of artists

Frey and Pom­merehne [23] defined some­one as an artist by: 

  • The amount of time spent on artis­tic work
  • The amount of income derived from artis­tic activity
  • Rep­u­ta­tion amongst gen­er­al public 
  • Recog­ni­tion amongst oth­er artists
  • Qual­i­ty of artis­tic work – as defined somehow
  • Mem­ber­ship of a pro­fes­sion­al body
  • Pro­fes­sion­al qualification
  • Sub­jec­tive self-eval­u­a­tion of being an artist

The busi­ness of being an artist [24] pro­vid­ed an alter­na­tive set of definitions: 

  • Mak­er of unique works of val­ue for sale
  • Ani­ma­teur — encour­ag­ing oth­er people’s cre­ative expression
  • Pub­lic ser­vant – mak­ing work to com­mis­sion for pub­lic places, regen­er­a­tion, etc
  • Eco­nom­ic unit – a small busi­ness’ / a cre­ative indus­try employ­ing others
  • Social work­er – empow­er­ing oth­ers to be ful­filled and improve their lives
  • Edu­ca­tor – deliv­er­ing into schools and the edu­ca­tion­al curriculum
  • Ini­tia­tor of new arts ven­tures – cre­ators of arts fes­ti­vals, open stu­dios, etc
  • Vision­ary – a social conscience’

Rethink­ing artists

Tomorrow’s peo­ple” are: Inno­v­a­tive and con­ser­v­a­tive; have mul­ti­ple truths held light­ly; they live, think and act local­ly and glob­al­ly; they embrace spir­i­tu­al­i­ty; they think holis­ti­cal­ly and sys­tem­i­cal­ly; they tol­er­ate ambi­gu­i­ty and dif­fer­ence; they are reflex­ive learn­ers; they con­tex­tu­alise — putting them­selves into the process; they val­ue ethics – eschew­ing right action over fixed prin­ci­ples; they assume per­son­al respon­si­bil­i­ty and account­abil­i­ty; they are both par­tic­u­lar­ist and gen­er­al­ist; they rea­son abstract­ly and nar­ra­tive­ly and they trust phys­i­cal intel­li­gence”. [25] Artists demon­strate many of these char­ac­ter­is­tics that are required in 21st Cen­tu­ry cul­tur­al people. 

My own in-depth research that specif­i­cal­ly exam­ined the scope and val­ue of artist-led ini­tia­tives con­clud­ed that: Although as pool of cre­ators, artists might be visu­alised by the arts fund­ing sys­tem as the mate­r­i­al in which the arts sys­tem tree’ is plant­ed, the seem­ing­ly nat­u­ral­ly-occur­ring resource which nour­ish­es the roots so that the tree pro­duces healthy leaves and fruits. An alter­na­tive visu­al­i­sa­tion might be to place the artist-con­stituen­cy around the rim of a wheel which also con­tains the oth­er enablers and pro­mot­ers of the visu­al arts and which is dri­ven by the inter­ac­tion between, and the com­bined strengths of, each of its parts. Such a dia­gram recog­nis­es that all ele­ments hold an equal role with­in the arts infra­struc­ture, and sug­gests a greater pos­si­bil­i­ty of inter­ac­tion and exchange between artists and the range of peo­ple whose beliefs and ener­gies shape the cul­tur­al iden­ti­ty of the coun­try and define the part the arts plays with­in it.” [26]

At Arts Fund­ing — Artis­tic Free­dom’, the Pres­i­dent of Croa­t­ia, com­pos­er Pro­fes­sor Ivo Josipovic, said: When reg­u­lat­ing the posi­tion of artists in the soci­ety, one should­n’t have Mozart, Rem­brandt, Beethoven, Balzac or some oth­er genius in mind, but a human that choos­es art as his pro­fes­sion because he has his inter­nal motives to be a genius. The sys­tem should give oppor­tu­ni­ty to an artist to be inde­pen­dent, to express his tal­ent in the way he finds the best, and in the same time secure a decent life for him and his fam­i­ly.” [27]

Artist David Cot­ter­rell has com­ment­ed: I don’t believe that all artists can help us to find some form of truth, but more that their cacoph­o­ny of diverse, con­tra­dic­to­ry, tan­gen­tial and sub­jec­tive views may serve to chal­lenge the fic­tion of estab­lished nar­ra­tives and remind us of the inher­ent com­plex­i­ty of human per­cep­tion and expe­ri­ence. I was recent­ly told an ide­al­is­tic metaphor to describe and jus­ti­fy the role of artists. — If you imag­ine a crowd, per­haps a tour or com­muter group hur­ry­ing for­ward to its des­ti­na­tion, artists could be seen as mem­bers of a crowd who run ahead to look around a cor­ner and report back to the group on what they have found. The slight­ly hero­ic role of the artist as advance recon for soci­ety was quite flat­ter­ing to any of us who describe our­selves as artists. I found myself slight­ly dis­agree­ing with the sim­plic­i­ty of the image. I pro­posed an alter­nate view that artists are also the mem­bers of the crowd who drop back to tie their shoe-laces and find them­selves dis­tract­ed by the view down an alley or the detail of an anom­aly, which might not have been ini­tial­ly regard­ed as sig­nif­i­cant by the crowd. Enthralled by the beau­ty and sig­nif­i­cance of their obser­va­tion they might attempt to rejoin the group to describe what they saw.” [28]

In a more recent report, the authors argue that: Artists and cre­ative prac­ti­tion­ers are key work­ers’ and entre­pre­neurs in the devel­op­ment of healthy and sus­tain­able com­mu­ni­ties, mod­el­ling ways of liv­ing that exem­pli­fy adapt­abil­i­ty, resilience and inno­va­tion and con­tribut­ing to local economies in ways that enhance rather than dimin­ish well­be­ing. We do not express or advo­cate for the art of sur­viv­ing in a bro­ken sys­tem but rather… a way to make the lives of emerg­ing artists more vis­i­ble and viable as well as the pol­i­cy mak­ing log­ic of the towns and cities of which they are a part.” [29]

The Pay­ing Artists Cam­paign man­i­festo’ also makes the case for a new under­stand­ing of the val­ue of artists, say­ing that: Artists are the inno­va­tors from which great art emerges and on which our society’s well-being depends. It is through artists’ ideas, exper­i­ments and inge­nu­ity that cre­ative ideas and prod­ucts are made man­i­fest. Art by its nature presents a wide range of lev­els of engage­ment and par­tic­i­pa­tion for peo­ple and audi­ences. Artists thrive on such engage­ment as an essen­tial ingre­di­ent to feed what is their con­tin­u­ous, life-time’s ded­i­ca­tion to a cre­ative prac­tice. The world is always look­ing for new ways of see­ing. Art prac­tice – the col­lec­tive per­for­mance of art mak­ing between mate­ri­als, artists, art­works, gal­leries and peo­ple — is an inter-dis­ci­pli­nary reflex­ive process that enables peo­ple to rethink and re-imag­ine their real­i­ties, and which cre­ates cul­tur­al val­ue.” [30]

©Susan Jones 2014 

First pub­lished Work­ing Artists: Aspects of Arts and Labour, 6th Seoul Art Space Inter­na­tion­al Sym­po­sium, Seoul Foun­da­tion for Arts and Cul­ture, 2014 

[1] It is a prin­ci­ple which was first artic­u­lat­ed by Keynes in 1946 and which has served us all, politi­cians and artists, very well since. It keeps the arts free of polit­i­cal inter­fer­ence in the con­tent and nature of cre­ative expres­sion. It pro­tects politi­cians from being held account­able for the occa­sion­al­ly out­ra­geous, offen­sive or oth­er­wise trou­ble­some work of artists.” CMS Select Com­mit­tee report on Fund­ing of the Arts and Her­itage, 2011 www​.pub​li​ca​tions​.par​lia​ment​.uk/​p​a​/​c​m​201011​/​c​m​s​e​l​e​c​t​/​c​m​c​u​m​e​d​s​/​464​/​46405.htm

[2] As dis­cussed in The State and the Visu­al Arts, Nicholas Pear­son, OUP1981 

[3] A brief his­to­ry of Exhi­bi­tion Pay­ment Right, a‑n, 2014 www.a‑

[4] Amongst sev­en objec­tives for Year of the Artist was: to deliv­er last­ing oppor­tu­ni­ties for artists cre­ative­ly, struc­tural­ly and finan­cial­ly” Year of the Artist eval­u­a­tion, Lucy Hut­ton and Clare Fenn, Arts Coun­cil Research report. www​.artscoun​cil​.org​.uk/​m​e​d​i​a​/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​d​o​c​u​m​e​n​t​s​/​p​u​b​l​i​c​a​t​i​o​n​s​/​454.doc

[5] Because Arts Coun­cil guid­ance had not been con­tin­ued nor fig­ures updat­ed to take into account eco­nom­ic fac­tors since, the 2000 day rate for artists was still being wide­ly used to by com­mis­sion­ers and pur­chasers and was often treat­ed as a stan­dard (rather than a min­i­mum)”, although not­ing that: Artists who are assertive enough may nego­ti­ate extra payment.”Fees and pay­ments to artists, Susan Baines and Jane Whee­lock, a‑n, 2003 www.a‑

[6] Arts Coun­cil Eng­land Annu­al Report 200607 www​.artscoun​cil​.org​.uk/​m​e​d​i​a​/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​d​o​w​n​l​o​a​d​s​/​p​a​r​t​1.doc

[7] The Arts Coun­cil was cut by almost 30% in the 2010 Gov­ern­ment spend­ing review alone, with fur­ther cuts in sub­se­quent years. Funds to the arts for the peri­od 2015 – 18 are only guar­an­teed for 201516.

[8]ACE Wednes­day, a‑n, 2011www.a‑

[9] Lad­ders for devel­op­ment, Dany Louise, a‑n Research paper 2011 https://www.a‑ (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[10] The British Art Mar­ket, Arts Eco­nom­ics, 2009 www​.lapa​da​.org/​p​u​b​l​i​c​/​T​h​e​_​B​r​i​t​i​s​h​_​a​r​t​_​M​a​r​k​e​t.pdf

[11] Inter­view, a‑n, 2010www.a‑ (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[12] Taste Buds: how to cul­ti­vate the art mar­ket, Mor­ris Har­g­reaves McIn­tyre, Arts Coun­cil Eng­land, 2004 www​.artscoun​cil​.org​.uk/​p​u​b​l​i​c​a​t​i​o​n​_​a​r​c​h​i​v​e​/​t​a​s​t​e​-​b​u​d​s​-​h​o​w​-​t​o​-​c​u​l​t​i​v​a​t​e​-​t​h​e​-​a​r​t​-​m​a​rket/

[13] Use or orna­ment: The social impact of par­tic­i­pa­tion in the arts, Fran­cois Mataras­so, Come­dia, 1997 http://​ben​e​fit​shub​.ca/​e​n​t​r​y​/​u​s​e​-​o​r​-​o​r​n​a​m​e​n​t​-​t​h​e​-​s​o​c​i​a​l​-​i​m​p​a​c​t​-​o​f​-​p​a​r​t​i​c​i​p​a​t​i​o​n​-​i​n​-​t​h​e​-​arts/

[14] From intro­duc­tion to Achiev­ing Great Art for Every­one, Arts Coun­cil Eng­land, 2013 www​.artscoun​cil​.org​.uk/​m​e​d​i​a​/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​G​r​e​a​t​_​a​r​t​_​a​n​d​_​c​u​l​t​u​r​e​_​f​o​r​_​e​v​e​r​y​o​n​e.pdf

[15] Use or orna­ment, Fran­cois Mataras­so, Come­dia, 1997 

[16] John Hold­en, Demos www​.demos​.co​.uk

[17]a‑n Research paper: Artists work in 2013, 2014 www.a‑ (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[18] A fair share – direct fund­ing for indi­vid­ual artists from UK arts coun­cils, 2011 www.a‑‑fair-share-direct-funding-for-individual-artists-from-uk-arts-councils‑2 (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[19] Pay­ing artists research: Phase 1 find­ings https://www.a‑ (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[20] ibid 

[21] CEBR Eco­nom­ic Report, 2013 www​.artscoun​cil​.org​.uk/​m​e​d​i​a​/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​p​d​f​/​C​E​B​R​_​e​c​o​n​o​m​i​c​_​r​e​p​o​r​t​_​w​e​b​_​v​e​r​s​i​o​n​_​0513.pdf

[22] Pay­ing artists research: Phase 2 find­ings, 2013 www.a‑ (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[23] Mus­es and mar­kets explo­rations in the eco­nom­ics of the arts, Frey and Pom­merehne, Black­well, 1989 

[24] The busi­ness of being an artist, Janet Sum­mer­ton, Eric Moody, City Uni­ver­si­ty, 1996 

[25] Inside the edge, Roanne Dods, research report for Mis­sions Mod­els Mon­ey, 2010 ww​.mis​sion​mod​elsmoney​.org​.uk/​s​i​t​e​s​/​d​e​f​a​u​l​t​/​f​i​l​e​s​/​23974648​-​I​n​s​i​d​e​-​t​h​e​-​E​d​g​e​-​b​y​-​R​o​a​n​n​e​-​D​o​d​s​-​2008​_​0.pdf

[26] Mea­sur­ing the expe­ri­ence: the scope and val­ue of artist-led organ­i­sa­tions, Susan Jones, 1997www.a‑

[27] Euro­pean Coun­cil of Artists Con­fer­ence, Zagreb, 2010 www​.eca​.dk/​a​c​t​i​v​i​t​i​e​s​/​z​a​g​r​e​b​p​r​e​s​s.htm

[28] Bridg­ing the gap, Mak­ing the case sym­po­sium, Tate Mod­ern, 2009 www.a‑ (pay to view/​free to a‑n members) 

[29] The Art of Liv­ing Dan­ger­ous­ly, Exchange, Mis­sion Mod­els Mon­ey (MMM) and New Eco­nom­ics Foun­da­tion, 2014 http://​www​.theemp​ty​space​.org​.uk/​d​o​c​u​m​e​n​t​s​/​_​v​i​e​w​/​545​f​6​a​667​b​b​b​88​a​a​348​b4577

[30] Secur­ing the future for the visu­al arts in the UK, a‑n, 2014 www​.payin​gartists​.org​.uk/​w​p​-​c​o​n​t​e​n​t​/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​2014​/​05​/​P​a​y​i​n​g​-​A​r​t​i​s​t​s​_​S​e​c​u​r​i​n​g​-​a​-​f​u​t​u​r​e​-​f​o​r​-​v​i​s​u​a​l​-​a​r​t​s​-​i​n​-​t​h​e​-​U​K​_​f.pdf