The mission of Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts is to disseminate new thinking and perspectives on arts entrepreneurship theory, practice, and pedagogy.

The editors are committed to publishing research-based articles and case studies of interest to scholars, artists, and students in the areas of entrepreneurship theory as applied to the arts; arts entrepreneurship education; arts management; arts and creative industries; public policy and the arts; the arts in community and economic development; nonprofit leadership; social entrepreneurship in or using the arts; evaluation and assessment; public practice in the arts.

Artivate is published twice yearly, summer and winter, in an online format. The editors are particularly interested in articles that actively link theory with practice in ways that will be of interest and impact to the broad cross-section of the Journal’s readership. Self-reflective studies from arts entrepreneurs and empirical research from scholars are equally welcome. We are interested in supporting the growth of our nascent discipline and also welcome debut articles from emerging scholars.

Our editorial board is drawn from diverse disciplines at the nexus of entrepreneurship and the arts. These distinguished colleagues review and recommend articles submitted for consideration and we thank them in advance for their hard work and dedication.

Artivate was originally published by The Pave Program in Arts Entrepreneurship at Arizona State University, but is now published by the University of Arkansas Press

Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by

Clear all filters

130178-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

What does “participation” mean in the context of presentational art forms like live theatre, dance performance or classical music? Is, as has been suggested recently by the James Irvine Foundation and researchers from WolfBrown, “participatory art” only that art in which the audience engages by becoming an active artist? What

What does “participation” mean in the context of presentational art forms like live theatre, dance performance or classical music? Is, as has been suggested recently by the James Irvine Foundation and researchers from WolfBrown, “participatory art” only that art in which the audience engages by becoming an active artist? What are the implications of such a shift from one of the major arts funders in the United States, and are they warranted? Increasing research indicates that the simple act of watching a performance event—spectating—is, in fact, participatory. Research into brain activity during such events and studies of performance on subsequent reasoning, emotional maturity and empathy indicate that the act of watching an artistic work requires an extraordinary amount of participation and attention on the part of the spectator, and ultimately dictates that so strongly articulating a spectrum of participation in which traditional presentational art as relegated to a lesser position is premature. Rather, a holistic approach being led by a small but growing group of entrepreneurs who straddle the divide between artist and arts administrator has begun to take root, working to augment and increase the impact of presentational art without sacrificing its presentational aspects.

ContributorsLord, Clayton (Author)
Created2012-09
130149-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Over the 2000s, Toronto initiated and instituted a process of cultivating itself as a creative city. Entrepreneurial city visionaries found that in order to enter the global market, their planning had to be strategic. This paper explores how Toronto’s policy entrepreneurs used planning, partnerships, and an expanded definition of economic

Over the 2000s, Toronto initiated and instituted a process of cultivating itself as a creative city. Entrepreneurial city visionaries found that in order to enter the global market, their planning had to be strategic. This paper explores how Toronto’s policy entrepreneurs used planning, partnerships, and an expanded definition of economic development to create a “Cultural Camelot.” In addition to competing on the financial and revenue-generating fronts, a coalition of cross-sector leaders took on the challenge of fostering a livable city with a deep social ethos imbued within a variety of dimensions of urban life. This new focus gave Toronto the chance establish itself as a center for innovation, which strengthened urban cultural capital and helped promote the strategic agenda of becoming a competitor in the creative economy sector. Investment in research and creative city strategic planning, coupled with the allocation of financial and human capital resources across a variety of industries, served to encourage creativity, promote culture and competitiveness, and drive economic development.

ContributorsGoldberg-Miller, Shoshanah (Author)
Created2015-02-15