Mapping the Field: Arts-Based Community Development

This article begins by inviting the reader into an imaginary scenario in which he or she has US$1 million to distribute among 10 arts-based community development (ABCD) programmes. This exercise, according to the author William Cleveland, is meant to illustrate "the extraordinary range and depth of the work" taking place in the ABCD field, which he says is in its infancy. In this context, the piece provides examples of current work, describes and defines its scope and meaning, and characterises the state of the field (its successes and challenges).

Cleveland has noted in additional correspondence (bill@artandcommunity.com) that, although the article focuses on the history of the field in the United States, there is an active and growing presence of ABCD worldwide, particularly in developing countries.

To begin, based on his work at the Center for the Study of Art and Community, Cleveland includes a dictionary of terms intended to help communicate with colleagues in and out of the arts. This "Defining the Field" section is meant as a culmination (and invitation to continue) the effort of working to build a common vocabulary among practitioners in this new ABCD field. For example, ABCD is defined as "Arts-centered activity that contributes to the sustained advancement of human dignity, health and/or productivity within a community." He says that "The increasingly cross-sector nature of ABCD has demanded an increased clarity of focus and intent." To this end, the article provides a visual map of four "neighborhoods" that clarify and contextualise the components of ABCD: "Nurture and Heal", "Educate and Inform", "Inspire and Mobilize", and "Build and Improve". The projects introduced in the first exercise are mapped out within these categories.

Next, Cleveland articulates "the state of the field". In this section, he points out that ABCD is new, is expanding, and is working to define itself and its measures of success. He also reflects on the financial support offered to the field in its initial stages, noting that "...despite good intentions, the presence of powerful outside financial contributors can have a negative impact on local efforts to create healthy and sustainable communities." Reflecting on the effectiveness of past ABCD efforts, he explains that "...quite a few of the programs we have studied are described by participants and community leaders as unsuccessful...More often than not, the difficulties encountered were due to poor partnership development and artists and arts administrators who lacked basic community-engagement skills...In some cases, the constituencies being "served" were left with less than they started with because of the disruptions caused by the project."

Despite these challenges, Cleveland makes the point that ABCD programmes work, and that training opportunities are increasing and improving. He says that the two most critical factors in their success have been a clear artistic focus and the high quality of the artists involved. Asking artists to do therapeutic or remedial programmes that use art as a vehicle tends to have a weaker impact (and less success) than simply inviting artists to make art with communities to tell theirstories. Cleveland suggests that "some of the most interesting and creative ideas in the field are being developed away from the centers of economic and political power. Innovations are coming from small towns... [and] from urban neighborhoods...Many of the field's best "think tanks" are small, community-based and locally accountable. These efforts often emerge when artists and arts organizations forge partnerships with local nonarts organizations, and constituencies based on compelling mutual self-interest." Acknowledging barriers to institutionally-based programmes that work to link artists up with those in prisons, mental hospitals, senior-citizen centres, or the like, Cleveland notes that "Successful programs have gained cooperation and access by acknowledging their intruder status, and by learning the ropes before insinuating themselves into an institution's established routine."

The "lessons learned" section offers the following reflections:

• Power imbalances have been destabilising
• Local ownership has been key
• "Outreach" efforts often fail
• Partnerships have been central
• Articulating clear intentions has produced better outcomes
• Effective training promotes cross-sector learning and leadership
• Community artmaking is necessarily cumbersome, messy and slow.

Click here for the full article online.