Posted on April 18, 2011
How does one analyse the contribution, impact and needs of a sector when there is little agreement on what constitutes heritage, or how it is defined? Although international organisations such as UNESCO have agreed on a set of definitions, these are not always in accord with local usage of the term. As a result the parameters and the scope of 'heritage'-related projects are continually shifting. Some think of heritage as something that has to do with all that we as humans have inherited from the past. Others assume that heritage resources can only be found in museums. Although there have been major shifts in engaging with the term 'heritage' and all its associated meanings and nuances, key public institutions have not yet engaged with these debates, or with the perceived overlap between heritage and culture. The grey areas that persist are most damaging in terms of money matters. This is evident in the way in which the sector is funded and the way in which it manages available resources.
DAC's heritage mandate falls squarely within the complex constitutional relationships between the national, provincial and local spheres of government and their respective legislative and executive powers and functions for heritage. The minister and the (national) Department of Arts and Culture (DAC), as the custodians of the nation's heritage, are mandated to: formulate national policy; monitor and evaluate the implementation of national policy; establish appropriate legal and fiscal frameworks; oversee the management of national heritage resources in accordance with national policies; coordinate national institutions, agencies and structure ; fund national structures and allocating resources; liaise with international and regional governments regarding issues of national significance; and liaise with provincial governments to ensure equitable, efficient and effective delivery of heritage services to the nation.
In February 2011 DAC officials, under the leadership of Minister Paul Mashatile, presented their plan for 2011. This plan places strong emphasis on job creation and skills development for sectors that fall under the department. The arts and culture sector, inclusive of the heritage sub-sector have been identified as one of the major potential contributors to the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and thus recommended as areas where job creation could be accelerated.In his presentation, Minister Mashatile cited Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) figures that indicate that the craft sub-sector alone contributes an estimated amount of R2 billion to the GDP, creates 38,000 jobs through about 7000 small enterprises. Given this, it is surprising that crafters are still considered to form part of the so-called 'Second Economy'. Although there have been developments in the craft sub-sector with regards to skills and product development, many crafters are still illiterate and live in poverty. Small enterprises are inadequately funded and as a result, sustainability of such establishments is compromised. A strategy developed by the DAC and presented at a subsequent consultative conference identified a number of ways in which the DAC could take action to increase the sector's contribution to the national economy.
It is unfortunate that the resources available to the sector through agencies such as the National Heritage Council (NHC), National Arts Council (NAC) and the National Lottery Distribution Trust Fund (NLDTF) are not co-ordinated. There is some duplication of funding activity, as well as areas that are marginalised by all the agencies. In addition to this, the administrative requirements for applicants are found to be disabling by many of the sector's small establishments. For example, the sector is required to demonstrate job creation, however, funding from the NHC does not allow for the payment of salaries. Although many entities operating in the sector are registered as Close Corporations, current legislation does not allow the disbursement of grants to CCs. Another problem is that many non-profit organisations, especially those with limited resources or based in far-flung rural areas, lack the capacity to meet the stringent demands of the funding agencies.
Since the 1990s, the heritage sector has sought to align itself closely with the tourism industry. This is not always an easy, comfortable or mutually rewarding fit. Tourism activities can do harm to fragile and vulnerable heritage resources and, if not carefully managed, compromise irreplaceable resources. But many in the heritage sector are seduced by the prospect of gaining a share in the lucrative tourism industry. According to a report by the Gauteng Provincial Department of Sport, Arts, Culture and Recreation, in Johannesburg alone the value of the cultural tourism sector is estimated between R500 million and R1 billion. The sector has also been able to attract investment from the private sector, through activities of the banking industry, but access to these initiatives is limited and the agenda for projects tends to be informed by the interests of the various corporate strategies, rather than by the need to conserve, promote and present the nation's heritage.
It is a paradox that a sector that adds so much to the fiscus is marginalised in terms of the return on investment. There is an imbalance between the monetary contribution of the sector and flow back into the sector through its establishments. Heritage practitioners have long argued that a percentage of the tourism levy should be allocated to heritage conservation, especially where it can be shown that tourists visit an area because of its heritage resources, however one defines those.
Xolelwa Kashe Katiya is the Deputy Director of the Archival Platform
