|Article: Electronic||Free Download|
It is considered that amateur artists perform or produce strictly for their own satisfaction and quite often that of other members of the local community, while making their living some other way (Elkington and Stebbins 2014). However, researchers have discovered that amateur art has significant social (Matarasso 1997), educational, cultural, and even economic impact (Bronner 2009). So who is responsible for financing amateur artists: state, region, municipality, or is it the third sector? Moreover, what are the most efficient public incentives to sustain social and economic effects in the long-term? The overall aim of this study has been to analyse public incentives for amateur arts and to assess their impact on the development of amateur art in the long-term. First, we look at social and economic impact of amateur arts, as well as arguments that can be used for justification of introducing public incentives to support amateur arts. Second, we briefly analyse fiscal measures, which can be applied to amateur arts in Europe. Third, we discuss in detail participation in amateur arts in Latvia and fiscal measures that are applied on a national and local level. Finally, we discuss the most efficient public incentives to sustain social and economic benefits in the long-term.
|Keywords:||Amateur Arts, Cultural Participation, Public Incentives for Culture, Fiscal Measures for Culture|
Assistant Professor, Latvian Academy of Culture, Riga, Latvia
Researcher, Research Centrer, Latvian Academy of Culture, Riga, Latvia
Lecturer, Latvian Academy of Culture, Riga, Latvia