,.1 Spart Part1 pyppet 'lb1atr1

Transcription

1 ~.O Finding,.1 Spart Part1 pyppet 'lb1atr1 The results show the effectiveness of government funding as a means of generating employment. The following tables show shows the amount of government funding that translates into one full-time job. Table 1 shows the results of version one of the Government Arts Funding-Employment Ratio for Spare Parts Puppet Theatre. Accounting for the multiplier effect. for the period every of government funding to Spare Parts Puppet Theatre generated one full-time job. Table 1 Government Arts Funding-Employment Ratio <Version 1) Spare Parts Puppet Theatre Artist & Support 20, Admin & Marketing , Contract Artistic 5, , Total employment 16,465 19,777 16,512 18, ~

2 Table 2 shows the same relationship between government funding to Spare Parts Puppet Theatre and employment. Yor the period , every 30, 220 of government funding to Spare Parts Puppet Theatre generated one full-time job. The ratios, however, are just over one and half times greater than those in Table 1. This is because Table 2 ignores the multiplier effect. The ratios in Table 1 are lower because when the multiplier effect is considered. the same amount of government fundi ng effectively generates not 1 job. but jobs. Table 2 Government Arts Fundinq-Emplovroent Ratio <Version 2) Spare Parts Puppet Theatre Artist & Support 33,656 30,369 33, ' 132 Admin & Marketing 30,315 32,377 29, ,855 Contract Artistic ,549 60, Total employment , Tables 1 and 2 show the disaggregation of employment into individual categories. Ignoring the multiplier effect, over 93

3 the three year period. the least investment required to generate employment was fo~ Contracting Artists. while the greatest investment was for Artists and Support. The ratios are and respectively. With the exception of Contracting Artists. all ratios are believed to be accurate estimates. The reason for the unexpectedly large variations in the Contracting Artist ratios is believed to be the combination of both accounting and methodological error. This problem is discussed in section

4 S.2 Dick Cbair 'fb1atr1 Table 3 shows the results of version one of the Government Arts Funding-Dnployment Ratio for Deck Chair Theatre. Accounting for the multiplier effect, for the period , every of government funding to Deck Chair Theatre generated one full-time job. Table 3 Government Arts Fundinq-F.mployment Ratio (Version 1) Deck Chair Theatre Artist & Support ,854 17,925 17,778 Admin & Marketing 12,005 8,276 18, Contract Artistic 16,797 39,304 21,776 23,615 Total employment 13,764 16,420 16,575 15,

5 Table 4 shows t me same elationehip between government funding to Deck Ch~i r Theatre and employment. For the period , every 25, 821 of government funding to Deck Chair 'The&tre generated one f u l l-time j ob. The amounts, however, are jus ov~r one and half times grea t~r than those in Table 3. This is because Table 4 ignores the multipltier e f fect. The amounts in Table 3 are lower because, when the multiplier effect i s cons idered, the same amount of gov~rnment funding effectively generates not 1 job, but jobs. Table 4 Government Arts Fundinq-Emplovment Ratio (Version 2) Deck Chair Theatre Artist & Support 25,051 34,764 29, Admin & Marketing 20, , Contract Artistic ,367 Total employment ,545 25,821 96

6 Tables 3 and 4 show the disaggregation o f. employment i nto individual categories. Ignoring the multi plier effect, ove~ the three year period, the least invest ment requi red to generate employment was for Administ ration and Marketi ng, while the greatest investment was for Cont ract Artists. The ratios are 21,272 and 39,367 respectively. URlike Spare Parts Puppet Theatre, there is a large variation from year to year. in all the ratios for Deck Chair Thea~ re. This i s t he result of both accounting and methodological error. The se sectio n problems are discussed in 97

7 ~.o Conc\~ i~n As was the ince ~ tiou vf t l is study, the results h i ghlight the differ~nc~s in em,,nj y:qent generation that arise when the mult i p l ier e (f~ct is considered. The ratios from version t of the G vernment Arts Funding-Eraployment R4tio (Tables 1 and 3 are just over half the value of the ratios in Tables 2 and 4. This is because the adjusted employment multiplier used in version 1 o f the computation has a value of It has been shown that if we consider the multiplier effect. the effective investment by government, for employment g neration through arts funding, is effectively just over half, than is th~ case when the multiplier effect is ignored. The choice between which r a tios to adopt is dependent on whethet ~he user consi ders the multiplier effect valid. It as the pur pose of t his study to highlight the problems that may be encountered when using multipliers. Becaus e of the i nherent methodological problems and assumpt ions made when using multipl i ers. version 1 ratios ( Tables 1 and 3) should be used with appropriate cauti on. Version 2 ratios (Tables 2 and 4), however, are not subject to the same methodological ~roblems. 98

8 This study has shown some mejor problems in identifying employment in the a~ts. 1'he need for further research to address some of the probi ems faced, is evident. Some particular ise ~es might be addressed: 1) The amount of part-time employment migh cal C\: lated in the amount of time, in days aind hours. not t he ni:,lmber of po3itions het.d. This woll:i.4 a~c~te ~y re re~ e n b a proportion of full-time emp l oyment. be 2) Adher ence to A stral ia Council employmemt definitions, an~ the disaggregation of pay sheet data according to these definitions. Payment rates might be noted on all pay sheets. 3) The amount of employment generated for Contract Artistic Services may be more accurately identified by a survey o f contracting professional artists. and relevant rates of income. Particular attention might be given to the way in which contracting artist expenditur e is accounted for. These issues would make it possibl e for contracting artist's fees to be accurately tra na latad i~~ o the amount of employment. This study nas uncovered some major problems ir. attempting 99

9 to quantify theatre employment. It is anticipated that this study has provided some groundwork for future work. so t hese problems can be solved. 100

10 7.0 Table ot Appendice No.1 Union award rates of pay : act ors, production and venue personnel. page 103 No.2 Spare Parts Puppet Theatre: Employment in total hours and equivalent full-time jobs. 104 No. 3 D~ ~k Chair Theatre : Employment in total hours and equivalent full-time jobs. 105 No.4 Substitute rates of income for contracting artists : Production designers and composers. 106 No. 5 Comparison with official data: Number of equivalent full-time jobs and the percentage devi ation from the official figures. 107 No.a Compariscn with official data : Funding contr ibution per job: Artist & Support. 108 No.7 Spare ~arts expendi ture statement. Puppet Theatre : Income and 109 No.8 Deck Chair Theatre: Income and expenditure statement

11 No.9 Substitute rates of income for contracting artists: Writers. 111 No.10 Spare Parts Puppet Theatre: Versions 1 & 2 of the Government Arts Funding-Employment Ratio 112. o. 11 Deck Chair Theatre : Versions 1 & 2 of the Government Arts Funding-Employm ent Ratio. 113 No.12 Type 2B employment multipl ier: Method of adjustment. 114 No.13 Contracting Artists: Terms of Employment and Fees. 115 No.14 Production Designers and Composers: Aggregation of occupational groups. 116 No.15 Artist Contracts: Comparison between income and expenditure statements and contract fees paid. 117 No.16 Percentage Mix of Government Funding (Federal, State, and Local) and Mix of Government Funding versus S If-Funding. 118 No.17 Statutory Authority Grants as a Percentage of Total Government Grants

12 APPENDIX 1 Award Rates of Pay Per Hour : Acton"a Production & Venue * * 11.19* Method: Mean Substitute Rate of Income Per Hour for Production and Venue Personnel Day Rate per hour Night rate3 : per hour Mean* - ( )/ per hour 1: a: Source: Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance Note. From Actors <Theatrical J Award Actors Equity of Australia. Persons involved in technical production, backstage, box office and support areas. Note. From 1beatric4l &Jolovees <General 1?JeatricalJ Award No. A7 of fliest Australian Theatrical and Amusement Dnployees Association (Union of Dnployees). 103

13 APPENDIX 2 Soare Parts Puppet Theatre; f)nployment in Total Hours and Equivalent Full-time Jobs ARTISTS ADM IN CONTRACT TOTAL & SUPPORT & MI<TING ARTISTIC EMPLOY WKS DAYS HOURS SUB TOT fort~) WKS DAYS HOURS SUB TOT (HRS> WKS DAYS HOURS SUB TOT CHRS) TOT HRS EFJ EFJ 1989 EFJ 1990 EFJ : Equivalent full-time jobs (EFJJ. Total employment category hours divided by hours. 104

14 APPENDIX 3 Deck Chair Iheatre: Employment in Total Hours and Equivalent Full-time Jobs ARTISTS ADM IN CONTRACT TOTAL & SUPPORT & MKTING ARTISTIC EMPLOY WKS DAYS HOURS SUB TOT (HRS) WKS D~YS HOURS SUB TOT (HRS) WKS DAYS HOURS SUB TOT (HRS) TOT HRS EFJ EFJ 1989 EFJ 1990 EFJ : Equivalent full-time jobs (EFJJ. Total employment category hours divided by hours. 105

15 APPENDIX 4 Sµbstitute Rates of Income for Contracting Artists Aver~ge Total Weekly Earnings : Production Designers and Composers Profession per week 1 Production Designersa Music Composers : Average total weekly earnings for adult persons. Note. From Distribution and Composition of Dnoloyees Earnings and Hours (Catalogue No ) Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. 3 : Occupational group: Designers and Illustrators. Note. From Australian Stand4rd Classification of Occupations.LASCOJ (Group No.2805). Canberra : Australian Government Publishing Services. 3 : Occupational group: Musicians, Composers and Related Professionals. ~. From Australi4n St4nd4rd Cla# ification of Occupations!ASCOi (Group No. 2815). Canberra: Australian Government Publishi~g Services. 106

16 APPENDIX S Official Data and Research Results: Number of EFJ 1 Ignoring the Multiplier Effect STUDY 3 AC STUDY AC STUDY AC STUDY A&S 4 : A&MD: Official Data and Research Results: Number of EFJ 1 Percentage Deviation from Official Data Ignoring the Multiplier Effect as a ARTIST & SUPP4: % % % % ADMIN & MKT % +9.68% % % 1: Equivalent full-tilll6 jobs (EFJJ. a : Official data from Australia Council <ACJ schedules.!f!2il. From Aoolication For Government Assistance by ctn Arts Organisation Sydney: Australia Council 3 : Results from this resectrch. : Artist and Support employment category. e: Administration and llarketing employment category. 107

17 APPENDIX C5 Official Doto ond Research Results: Government Funding Contri bution oer EfJ 1 : Artist ond Support Ignoring the Multiplier Effect ,026 23, ,319 19,062 Study 3 29,007 32,099 31,865 31,029 1 : Equivalent full-tilllfj Job (EFJJ. a: Official data from Australia Council (AC) schedules.!!jj11. From Aoolication For Government Assistance b y an Act«Qrqaniaation Sydney: Australia Council 3 : Reaults from this research. 108

18 APPENDIX 7 Spore Ports Puppet Theatre: Income and Expenditure Statement GOVT FUNDS CWLTif 153, , , ,000 STATE , ,500 LOCAL 5, ,000 TOT GOVT1 419, , , NON-GOVT REVa 165, , , ,000 REVENUE 584, , , TOTAL EXP 547, ,500 1,685,000 EMPLOY EXP 3 348, , , CONTRACT ART 4 28,000 21,000 21,000 70,000 ART & SUPP" , ,000 ADMIN & MKTe 98,000 84, , , 000 Note. From Application For Government Assistance by an Arts Organisation Sydney: Australia Council. 1 : Total government revenue. Excludes _~unding from statutory authorities. 3 : Box office and all non-government revenue. 3 : Total employment expendi ture: Artist & Support. Administration & /llarketing, Contract Artistic Services. 4 : Contract Artistic Services expenditure. 9 : Artist and Support employment expenditure. : Administration and /llarketing employment expenditure. 109

19 APPENDIX 8 Peck Choir Tbeotre: Income ond ExDenditure Statement GOVT FUNDS CWT.. ra 56, ,079 98, ,129 STATE 225, , , ,325 LOCAL TOT GOVT 1 282, , , ,454 NON-GOVT REva 145, , , REVENUE 427, , ,845 1, TOTAL EXP , ,889 1,359,075 EMPLOY EXP 3 280, , , ,722 CONTRACT ART , ,600 ART &. SUPP" 194, , ADMIN &. MKT 86,700 57, ,735 Note. From Application For Government Assistance by on Arts Qrqonisotion Sydney: Austrolio Council. 1 : Total government revenue. Excludes funding from statutory authorities. 3 : Box office and all non-government revenue. 3 : Total employment expenditure: Artist & Support, Administration & llarketing, Contract Artistic Services. 4 : Contract Artistic Services expenditure. 8 : Artist and Support employment expenditure. : Administration and llarketing employment expenditure. 110

20 APPENDIX 9 Substitute Rates of Income for Contracting Artists: Writers Writers in Residence per week 1 Experienced Inexperienced : Ratea per week 1 Suggested rates of income for writers in resi dence. Note. From Alan Payne (personal coamunication, October, 1992). firiter's Guild of Australia. 3 : All contract writers were experienced. 111

21 lppjlldix 1Q Including the _Mul ti~l i.jj' -BUect 1989 i~~.o ~ ~ e~~-~ Artist & Support Admin & Marketing Contract Artisti c Total employment 20,190 18,218 19,899 19,276 18,186 19,422 17,936 18, 5ct9 5,893 14, ,367 1~ ,512 18,128 SQttt-&ltta_fupbet!hA ~r : Emoloimefit i«tio cye~sion 2> Government Arts _fuqdi~q 1.E cl1udinq j;be Multipl ier..,ltf.eet ~ ~--~ ~ Artist & Support.33.ff6 '30,369 33, , 132 Admi A & J4arke«. i ng 3tl, :u!> 32.3?7 29,900 3().1855 Contract lrt,is'tic: 9,824 24,549 60, Total empl~nt 27,447 30,36 33, s 112

22 APPlilDIX 11 Fundina Incl_µdiM tha_jl&.!1tip1 ier Efft ct '0 19) ~---- ~rt\i st & Support , ,925 Adm'i n & Marketing 12.00~ &.233 Contract Ar-:tistic 16 ~?97 39, , 77\6 Total employment 13, ,6,575 17,778 12, 760\ 23, ,490 D.eck Chai r Iheatr<e : Govec1nment Arts Funding f)dp f:oymen~ Ratio. < Ver s i oll 2 > Including the Mul 1 tipl!ie rr l f ffect 198,' ~ ~ Artist & Support Admin & Market.i1ng 1 Contract Artistic Total empl oy,ment ooa , , , 5l '3 29, ,394 36,301 22, ,637 2r U.3

23 APPENDIX 12 Type 28 f)pployment Multiplier: Method of Adjustment Comconents of the Type 2 Multiplier A Initial effects 8 First round effects C Industrial support effects D Production induced effects E Consumption induced effects F Simple Multiplier G Total Multiplier H Type 2A multiplier I Type 2B multiplier CB + C) CA + D> CA + D + E) CG/A) (G - A/A) Type 28 Multiplier Unadjusted: I G - A/A Adjusted: I* CG - A) - B/A Example Where. A H (0.040/0.015) B c D I - ([ )/0.015) I* {([ ) ))/0.015) E F G Note. From I. Bobbin (personal c011dunication. October 1992) Australian Bureau of Statistics. Input-output Section. 114

24 APPJ!Nl)IX 13 Contracting Artists: Terms of fimployment and Fees Deck Chair Theatre WRITERS Spare Parts Theatre PROD DESIGN 10 WEEKS 5 WEEKS.M WEEKS 9 WEEKS 11 WEEKS WEEKS CHOREOGRAPHY 7 WEEKS COMPOSERS 5.5 WEEKS WEEKS WRITERS 24 WEEKS 24 WEEKS WEEKS 9 WEEKS : Contracts sjghted jn the fjnancjaj records of both theatres. 115

25 APPENDIX 14 Pr9duction Designers and Comoosers: Aqqreqated Occupational G~oups Qesiqners and Illustrators 1 Includes: Fashion Designers Graphic Designers Industrial Designers Interior Designers Illustrators Musicians, Composers. and Related Professionals 3 Includes: Music Directors Concert and Opera Singers Popular Singers Instrumental Musicians Composers 1 :Note. From Australian Standard Cl4ssific4tion of Qccypations EASCO/ (Group No. 2805). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Services. 3 :~. From Aystr4lian Stanc:lard Classification of Occupations IACOJ (Group No.2815). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Services. 116

26 APPENDIX US Ar:ti1t Contr:1 t!i!= C2mp1r:is2n ~et]!!en IDCQID! ~nd ~~P!D!U ti.u:e St1t11111rnts ond C2ntr1ct Fees Poid. Soort P1rts Puppet Theatr:e l+e 1 : 28, ,000 70,000 Feesa: 10,000 19,158 9, ,332 Weeks 3 : Deck Chair Theatre I +E 1 : 0 12, Feesa: 5,600 6,800 29, : Contract artist expenditure in the income and expenditure (I+EJ statements for both theatres. Note. From Application For Government Assistance bv an Arts Qrqonisation Sydney: Australia Council. a : Artist contract fees: sighted from individual contract fees. a: Estimated amount of employment : sighted from individual contract periods. 117

27 APPENDIX 16 Percent1qe Mix of Government Funding <Federal. State. an<i Local> and Mix of Government Funding versus Self-Funding Spare Parts Puppet Theatre GOVT FUNDS CWLTII STATE LOCAL 1989 % % % % GOVT FUNDS NON-GOVT REVa 28.3 GOVT FUNDS TOT REVENUE Deck Chair Theatre 1989 % 1990 % 1991 % % GOVT FUNDS CWLTII STATE LOCAL GOVT FUNDs NON-GOVT REV GOVT FUNDS TOT REVENUE Note. From Applicatiol't For Government Assistance by an Arts Organisation Sydney: Australia Council. 1 : Total government revenue. Excludes funding from statutory authorities. 3 : Box office and all non-government revenue. (includes funding from statutory authorities) 118

28 APPENDIX 1? Statutory Authority Grants as a Percentage of Total Government Grants Spare Parts Puppet Theatre TOTAL GOVT GRANTS : 1 419, , , STATIITORY AUTHORITY GRANTS: 7,000 10, ,000 % OF GOVT GRANTS: Deck Chair Theatre TOTAL GOVT GRANTS: 1 282, , , ,454 STATlJI'ORY AUTHORITY GRANTS: % OF GOVT GRANTS: Note. From Application For Government Assistance by an Arts Organisation Sydney: Australia Council. 1 : Federal, State, and Local Government Grants. 119

29 8.0 Bibliography Alt, J.E., & Chrystal, K.A. (1983). Political Economics. Brighton: Harvester Press. Austen-Smith, D. (1980). On Justifying Subsidies to the Performing Arts. In W.S. Henderson, J. L. Shanahan, & A.J. McDonald (Eds. ), Economic Policy for the Arts (pp ). Cambridge : Abt Books. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (1990). Australian National Accounts Concepts, Sources and Methods (Catalogue No ). Canberra: Corrmonwealth Government Printer. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (1991) Australian National Accounts Input-Output Multipliers (Catalogue No ). Canberra: Corrmonwealth Government Printer. Bagozzi, R.P. (1975). Marketing as Exchange. Journal of Marketing, 39, (October), Baumol, W.J., & Bowen, W.G. (1976). Arguments for Public Assistance to the Performing Arts. In M. Blaug (Ed.), The Economics of the Arts. London: Martin Robertson. (Reprinted from Performing Arts: The Economic Dilenma. Twentieth Century Fund, 1966, ). 120

30 Brokensha. P. & Tonks. A. (1986). Culture Ind Coapunity Exoectations and Economics of the Arts in South Australio. Wen~worth Falls: Social Science Press. Canada Council. (1982). A "Short-Hand" Technique for Estimating the Economic Impact of the Performing Arts: Research Note (2nd ed. ). Ottawa: Author. A Centre for South Australian Economic Studies. (1990). The 1990 Adelaide Festival The Economic Impact Methodology and Results Details (Report No. TSA 90/2). Adelaide: Author. Cornwell. T. L. (1990). Democracy and the Arts The Role of Participation. New York : Praeger. Coughlin. C. & Mandelbaum. T. (1991. January). A Consumer ' s Guide to Regional Economic Multipliers. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review Creedy, J. (Ed.). (1970). The Social Context of Art. London: Tavistock. 121

31 Cuaaings, M.C., Jr., & Katz, R. (1989). Relations Between Government and the Arts in Western Europe and North America. In M. C. Cuaaings Jr., & J.M.D. Schuster (Eds.). Who's to pay for the Arts? The International Search for Models of Support (pp. 5-14). New York: American Council for the Arts. Cwi. D. (1980). Models of the Role of the Arts in Economic Development. In W.S. Henderson, J.L. Shanahan, & J.A. MacDonald CEds.). Economic Policy for the Arts (pp ). Cambridge : Abt Books. Cwi, D. (1981). Economic Impact of Arts and Cultural Institutions. Case Studies in: Columbus. Minneapolis St.Paul, St.Louis. Salt Lake City. San Antonio. Springfield (Research Report No. 15). New York: National Endowment for the Arts. Cwi. D. (1982). The Focus and Impact of Arts Impact Studies. In C. Violette & R. Taqqu (Eds.). Issues ~i=n----=s~u~p-p~o=r_t~i=n~a. ~t~h~e, A~r~t~s (pp.22-25). Ithica: Cornell University. 122

32 Cwi. D.. & Lyall. K. (1977). Economic Impacts of Arts an<i Cultural Institutions. A Model for Assessment and a Case Study in Baltimor e (Research Report No. 6). New York: National Endowment for the Arts. Galbraith. J.K. (1983). Economics and the Arts. The W.E Williams Memorial Lecture. London : Arts Council of Great Britain. Gold, S. (1983). Consumer Sovereignty and the Performing Arts. In W. S. Hendon & J.L. Shanahan (Eds. ), Economics of Cultural Decisions (pp ). Cambr idge: Abt Books. Hamer, Siler, George Associates. (1977). Economic Impact of Selected Arts Organisations in the Dallas Economy. Washington D.C. : Author. Hi llman-chartrand. H.. & Mccaughey, C. (1989). The Arm ' s Length Principle and the Arts: An International Perspective Past, Present and Future. In M. C. Cwrmings Jr., & J.M. D. Schuster (Eds. ). Who's to Pay for the Arts? The International Search for Models of Support (pp ). New York: American Council for the Arts. Horne. D. (1988). ~A=r~t~s~=F~u=n=d=i~n=q..._~a~n~d"--~P~u=b~l~1~ c,. C~u=-=-lt~u=r~e~ (Occasional Paper No. 1). Nathan: Griffith University, Institute for Cultural Policy Studies. 123

33 Jensen. R.C. & West. G.R. (1986). Australian Regional [)evelopments Input-Output for Practitioners: Theory and Acplications. Canberra: Conmonwealth Government Publishing Service. Johnson. D. (Ed. ). (1984). Public Expenditure. London: MacMillan. Kotler. P., & Andreasen. A. (1991). Strategic Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Laffont, J.J. (1989). Externalities. In J. Eatwell, M. Millgate. & P. Newman (Eds.). Allocation, Information and Markets (2nd ed. ). Cpp ). London : MacMillan. Lee-Owen. V. (1980). Conment. [Response to David Cwi). In W.S. Henderson. J.L. Shanahan, & J.A. MacDonald (Eds. ), Economic Policy for the Arts (pp ). Cambridge: Abt Books. Luxton, J. (n.d.). [Government Support of the Arts in Australia). Unpublished Manuscript, Edith Cowan University, Perth. Metropolitan Arts Council. (1977). Tbe Economic Impact of the Arts on Indian1polis. Indianapolis: Author. 124

34 Mitchell, c.. & Wall, G. (1989). The Arts and Qbployment: A Case Study of the Stratford Festival. Growth and Ch4nqe, 1Q Mulcahy, K.V. (1982). The Rationale for Public Culture. In K.V. Mulcahy & R. Swaim (Eds. ), Public Policy and the Arts (pp ). Boulder: Westview Press. Musgrave, R.A. (1959). The Theory of Public Finance. New York : McGraw-Hill. Musgrave, R. A., & Musgrave, P. B. (1984). Public Finance in Theory and Practice (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Myerscough, J. (1988). The Economic Importance of the Arts in Britain. London: Policy Studies Institute. North, J. (1982). Economic Impact Studies of the Arts and their Implications for the Arts in Australia: A Digest and Literature Review. Sydney: Australia Council. Parsons. P. (Ed.). (1987). Shooting the Pianist The Role of Government in the Arts. Kensington: University of New South Wales, The Australian Theatre Studies Centre. 125

35 Patronage. Power and the Muse. Inquiry into Coamonwealth Assistance to the Arts. (1986). Recort from the House of Representatives Standing Conmittee on Expenditure. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Peacock. A.T. (1976). Welfare Economics and Public Subsidies to the Arts. In M. Blaug (Ed.), The Economics of the Arts. London: Martin Robertson. (Reprinted from Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies, (December), ). Peacock, In M. A.T., & Godfrey. C. (1976). Cultural Accounting. Blaug (Ed. ), The Economics of the Arts. London: Martin Robertson. (Reprinted from Social Trends. 1973, (November), 61-65). Pen J. (1983). A very Cultural Economist's Idea About the Locus of Decision Making. In W.S. Hendon & J.L. Shanahan (Eds. ), Economics of Cultural Decisions (pp ). Cambridge: Abt Books. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and Cultural Assistance Centre. (1983). The Arts as an Industry: Their Economic Importance to the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan Region. New York: Author. 126

36 Rowse. T. (1981). Culture and Democracy: The Economists and the Performing Arts. In J. Allen (Ed.). Media Interventions (pp ). Sydney : Interventions Publications. Rowse. T. (1965). Arquinq the Arts The Fundi ng of Arts in Australia. Ringwood : Penguin Books. Schnieder, F. & Pomnerehne, W.W. (1983). Private Demand for Public Subsidies to the Arts: A Study in Voting and Expenditure Theory. In W.S. Hendon & J. L. Shanahan (Eds.), Economics of Cultural Decisions (pp ). Cambridge: Abt Books. Scitovsky. T. (1983). Subsidies for the Arts: The Economic Argument. In W.S. Hendon & J.L. Shanahan (Eds.), Economics of Cultural Decisions (pp. 6-15). Cambridge : Abt Books. Shaw, W.. & Barry, V. (1989). Moral Issues in Business (4th ed. ). Belmont : Wadsworth. Sugden, R. (1981). The Political Economy of Public Choice. Southampton: Martin Robertson. Sullivan, J., & Wassail. G. (1977). The Impact of the Arts on Connecticut's Economy. on the Arts. Hartford: Connecticut Comnission 127

37 'lllrosby. c.. & Wi thers. G. (1979). 'llle Economics of the Performing Arts. Edward Arnold: Melbourne. 'lllrosby, C. D.. & Withers. G.A. (1983). Measuring Demand for the Arts as a Public Good: 'llleory and Empirical Results. In W.S. Hendon & J. L. Shanahan (Eds.), Economics of Cultural Decisions (pp ). Cambridge: Abt Books. 'lllrosby, C.. & Withers. G. (1984). What Pri ce Culture? North Sydney : Australia Council. Tisdell, D.A. (1972). Microeconomics The Theory of Economic Allocation. South Melbourne: John Wiley. Wall, G., & Purdon, M. (1987). The Economic Impact of the Arts in Ontario. Toronto : Ontario Arts Council. 128