A comparative study of the United States and Canada

The United States has taken a largely hands-off approach to federal cultural support throughout history. Compared to other countries, the U.S. has played an indirect role in its support systems, favoring methods like tax incentives over direct financial support. When it comes to the history of federal cultural policies, the U.S. has experienced heightened periods of support and attacks on what the level of federal intervention should be. There are trends of heightened periods of support occurring during economic or social crisis moments and used as an additive tool to another issue. Culture support in the U.S. has largely been a reactionary response to other issues. However, in the wake of a global pandemic and renewed racial justice movements, some are looking to see how our nation can think progressively about its engagement with the people. The U.S. plays a rather indirect role in federal involvement with the arts and cultural sector. However, as the last two years have highlighted, many inequitable and structural practices leave many in the sector unable to pursue creative careers without more federal intervention. Similarly, while there is still current bi-partisan support for arts and culture support in Congress, there is still a level of unease about the support and longevity of the support. Currently, federal support is minimal and primarily tied to relatively small-budget quasi-government granting agencies that practice federalism. Similarly, there is a level of mistrust of continued long-lasting support because of an increasingly partisan political environment coupled with governments lacking acknowledgment of the impact and validity the sector and its practitioner have in the country. By examining the historical and current rationales behind federal cultural policy involvement between Canada and the United States, this study aimed to understand and explore the feasibility of policy adaptability from Canada to the U.S. Through interviews with Canadian and American cultural policy scholars and advocates, this study explored current federal intervention rationale, calls for change, political attitudes, and equity in policy in each nation. By the end of the study, federal intervention at the federal level in Canada was outlined as a strong desire for Canadian choices for Canadians. Historically rationale was and still is largely centered around cultivating and protecting Canadian identity separate from its English roots and American neighbors. On the contrary, the American rationale for intervention appeared to be less concrete than Canada. For example, several rationale points were made that culture was good for a community and served economic benefits. However, policies did not reflect those ideas as clearly as Canadian policies reflected their rationales. American calls for change were more expansive and numerous, calling for increased communication and awareness of the sector's impact on the nation and how other policies impact the field. When it came to looking at the adaptability of policies from Canada to the U.S., adaptability seemed dismal because of Canada's general political acceptance and reasoning towards government intervention compared to the U.S. However, policy convergence may still be possible. Referenced by both Canadians and Americans, Canada's work with its indigenous populations was presented as an avenue for further study. The American participants were much more focused on change that made sense for American issues rather than focus on cultural policies or federal structures that could be transferred from Canada to the U.S. As a result, the U.S. is primed to be in a period of progressive change to look holistically at the how the sector can be interwoven throughout the federal government and how it has a place as an economic tool to benefit communities across the nation.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.