Article 1: Creative Impact – Redefining Culture and CCE as a Catalyst for Systemic Change

In an era marked by climate crises, social inequality, and rapid technological change, societies often turn to science, policy, or economics for solutions. Yet, one powerful driver of systemic transformation is often overlooked: culture. Defined by UNESCO (2001) as the spiritual, material, intellectual, and emotional features of a society—including arts, lifestyles, and beliefs—culture shapes our values, identities, and actions. It is the creative professionals—artists, designers, innovators, and the broader cultural and creative economies (CCE)—who drive culture forward. But can culture, and the CCE, play a pivotal role in addressing complex societal challenges?

This question lies at the core of creative impact.

Creative impact can be defined as the positive societal change resulting from the intentional use of creative practices, cultural expressions, collaborative strategies around culture to address societal challenges. It involves creative professionals acting as systems entrepreneurs who actively engage communities, challenge existing power structures and mental models, and implement strategies that lead to deep, lasting change. By raising awareness, innovating, and co-creating, creatives work across disciplines and sectors to promote social innovation, build social capital, and empower communities, ultimately fostering systemic transformation.

Creative Impact in the Context of Change

Creative impact aligns with a broader discourse that has, for years, revolved around key concepts like social entrepreneurship, social innovation, social and collective impact, social change, and systems change. Each of these concepts tackles societal challenges through innovative, participatory approaches, forming a chain of interconnected processes:

Social Entrepreneurship serves as one approach where entrepreneurial thinking intersects with social missions to develop innovative solutions. These solutions, known as social innovations, emerge from entrepreneurial initiatives or other contexts, offering tangible, actionable responses to specific societal challenges. Their success is typically assessed by their social impact—the measurable changes and improvements they bring to society. While individual efforts can drive change, collective impact significantly amplifies these effects. By aligning diverse stakeholders around a shared strategy, collective impact fosters coordinated action. However, impactful change can also result from uncoordinated efforts or unexpected events, demonstrating the unpredictable nature of social transformation. Together, these efforts contribute to social change—a profound shift in societal norms, behaviours, and structures. Such change can be driven by deliberate actions or triggered by external shocks. The ultimate goal, however, is systems change, which goes beyond isolated interventions. Systems change seeks to reimagine and transform the underlying structures, processes, and power dynamics that sustain complex social challenges.

This broad framework for impact and change is a useful lens through which to view societal transformation, raising an important question: does it already capture the essence of creative impact, or is there something unique to it?

Culture, CCE and Their Role in Addressing Societal Challenges

The CCE are uniquely positioned to address complex challenges due to their structural, operational, and philosophical characteristics. There are five characteristics that distinguish and make them stand out to other domains.

1. Innovation Under Uncertainty: CCE employ predominantly in small enterprises or as solo self-employed individuals(BMWK, 2022).  This lean structure fosters agility and resourcefulness, characteristics that enable CCE to innovate even with limited financial resources. Moreover, cultural markets are marked by uncertainty since cultural products are ‘experience goods’ whose true value becomes clear only after they have been consumed. This unpredictability compels CCE practitioners to take significant risks and continually innovate (Caves, 2000; Hesmondhalgh, 2019). At the same time, flexibility may come at the cost of precarious labour conditions and unstable income. When supported by effective policy measures and fair labour practices, the CCE can yield innovative approaches to tackling complex societal challenges.
2. Embedding Solutions in Culture: CCE are well-positioned to integrate solutions into cultural narratives and practices, thus making them more meaningful, resonant, and context-specific (Bianchini & Landry, 1995; Matarasso, 2019). By aligning initiatives with shared values, traditions, and stories, these enterprises can strengthen the uptake and durability of new ideas—be it in environmental sustainability, health advocacy, or social cohesion. Nonetheless, cultural embedding is not guaranteed and can risk imposing external narratives without genuine community engagement. When CCE engage authentically with local contexts and collaborate with diverse stakeholders, cultural embedding can inspire grounded, lasting forms of positive change.
3. Bridging Divides and Fostering Inclusion: Cultural and creative initiatives have the potential to foster participation, bridge social divides, and promote a more inclusive public sphere (Hall, 1997; Matarasso, 1997). By broadening cultural access, reframing dominant narratives, and nurturing the ‘capacity to aspire’ within marginalised communities (Appadurai, 2004), CCE can drive meaningful social change. However, these outcomes are not automatic (Banks, 2017). Achieving them requires addressing power imbalances, fostering sustained community collaboration, and establishing supportive policy frameworks. When implemented with intention and care, cultural initiatives can catalyse social engagement, support cultural democracy, and expand human capabilities (Throsby, 2001).
4. Collaborative Innovation and Collective Impact: Cultural and creative enterprises (CCE) often operate within dynamic networks of collaboration, where ideas and resources flow through project-based work and creative clusters (Söndermann et al. (2009). This collaborative approach enables the formation of collective impact, allowing diverse stakeholders to achieve outcomes that go beyond the capacity of any single actor (Kania & Kramer, 2011). For such impact to materialise, sustained commitment, strategic coordination, and mechanisms for measuring and learning from outcomes are essential. When these conditions are met, CCE-led collaborations can unite broad coalitions, foster shared learning, and drive systemic change across cultural, social, and economic spheres.
5. Leading as Early Adopters and Pioneers: CCE frequently engage with emerging technologies, artistic methods, and new modes of production, becoming early adopters that can drive social and technological innovation (Florida, 2014; Potts et al., 2008). This forward-looking orientation may position them as pioneers in addressing societal challenges, from climate adaptation to digital inclusion. Yet, the reach of these pioneering efforts can be uneven, reflecting unequal resource distribution and access to skill-building opportunities. When combined with supportive infrastructure and an inclusive approach, CCE’s early adoption of new tools and practices can spur broader transformative potential and long-term resilience in the face of change.

Understanding Creative Impact from a System Change Perspective

Having unique properties alone does not clarify how the impact generated by the CCE and culture as a medium contributes specifically to addressing societal challenges. To fully grasp the transformative potential of creative impact, it needs to be framed it within the six conditions of systems change, as outlined by Kania, Kramer, and Senge (2018). According to them, systems change means ‘shifting the conditions that are holding a problem in place.’ In order to effectively and sustainably address societal problems it is not enough to address mere symptoms but the underlying conditions that hold societal issues in place.

Figure 1 illustrates six interdependent conditions that often sustain social or environmental problems. These conditions vary in their visibility, influenced by how explicit or tangible they appear to those involved in the system. While each condition can be individually defined, measured, and targeted, they are deeply interconnected, with interactions that can either reinforce or counteract systemic change efforts.

Notably, the less visible conditions—such as mental models (e.g., biases related to race, gender, or other ingrained societal norms)—are often the most difficult to identify and address but hold the greatest potential for transformative change.

Creative impact operates across five of these conditions, providing unique contributions that are both tangible and transformative:

• Resource Flows: CCE influence how resources—financial, intellectual, and social—are produced, distributed, and valued. By participating in global and regional creative networks, communities can gain access to wider audiences, funding opportunities, and collaborative platforms that transcend traditional market boundaries (European Commission, 2021). Creative placemaking and cultural district initiatives (Grodach, 2020) demonstrate how cultural interventions can support local arts ecosystems, enable knowledge exchange, and channel investment into underserved areas, potentially fostering more equitable patterns of cultural and economic development. However, it is also important to acknowledge that CCE often reflect existing power imbalances and can be exclusive, favouring certain groups or geographies over others (O’Brien & Oakley, 2015).
• Practices: Cultural practices serve as repositories of memory, norms, and ethical values, providing communities with guidance for problem-solving and collaboration. By combining traditional knowledge with creative methodologies, CCE can produce solutions that reflect local identities, encourage inclusive participation, and inspire ethically grounded innovations (Brown, 2008; UNESCO, 2022). For example, co-creative initiatives—such as participatory design in urban regeneration—integrate arts-based engagement to address contemporary issues like social cohesion, economic development, and environmental resilience (Grodach, 2020; European Commission, 2021). Incorporating cultural values and traditional know-how into broader frameworks, including sustainability-focused efforts, makes these solutions more contextually relevant and enduring (Dessein et al., 2015). Ultimately, culture informs a diverse range of adaptive, inclusive, and future-oriented practices.
• Relationships and Connections: Cultural activities and creative collaborations strengthen social bonds, generate trust, and enhance social capital. Joint cultural initiatives—from community festivals to cross-border cultural exchanges—create new relational networks that bridge divides and encourage cooperation. Such initiatives have been shown to promote inclusive coalitions capable of addressing complex challenges (Matarasso, 1997). By linking diverse stakeholders—artists, policymakers, educational institutions, and civil society organisations—culture-based projects cultivate environments in which communication, empathy, and cooperation emerge as foundational values (Crossick & Kaszynska, 2016), thereby reinforcing the relational fabric necessary for sustained systemic change.
• Power Dynamics:  Cultural representation and creative expression have the potential to address power dynamics by providing platforms for voices historically excluded from policy-making and public discourse. Initiatives such as documentary film, community radio, or arts-based forums can legitimise and amplify marginalised narratives, challenging dominant paradigms and, in some cases, redistributing influence (Carpentier, 2011). However, the capacity of CCE to transform power relations is not guaranteed. Without careful attention to structural inequalities, resource distribution, and gatekeeping practices, within the CCE, cultural initiatives can inadvertently reinforce existing hierarchies (Banks, 2017; Hesmondhalgh, 2019).
• Mental Models: Transforming mental models—the underlying beliefs, assumptions, and biases that guide human behaviour— is one of the most challenging aspects of systems change (Kania, Kramer, & Senge, 2018). Creative narratives, storytelling, and the arts can help communities rethink ingrained stereotypes, reframe pressing issues, and envision alternative futures (Snow & Benford, 2000; Minkiewicz, Evans, & Bridson, 2014). For instance, reimagining climate adaptation efforts not merely as technological fixes but as shared cultural stories can inspire more meaningful engagement. By reshaping collective identities and aspirations, creative impact encourages communities to adopt new patterns of thought and action that underpin systemic transformations.

It is important to emphasise that creative impact often addresses multiple conditions simultaneously, fostering dynamic interactions by influencing resource flows, practices, relationships, power dynamics, and mental models in tandem (see Article 2).

By leveraging culture and creativity, creative impact can address systemic challenges in ways that are innovative, inclusive, and enduring. Creative impact thus becomes not only a driver of systemic transformation but also a blueprint for a more equitable and resilient future.

The Unique Contribution of Creative Impact

While the broader frameworks of social entrepreneurship, social innovation, and systems change provide a robust foundation for understanding societal transformation, creative impact brings a distinct set of strengths to the table. First, it humanises complex issues, by translating abstract societal challenges—like climate change or inequality—into tangible, emotionally resonant experiences, through creative methods and cultural formats. Second, creative impact innovates through risk and experimentation. Unlike traditional sectors, the CCE operate with high tolerance for risk and uncertainty, continually pushing boundaries to develop unexpected solutions. This willingness to experiment ensures that creative impact remains a driver of innovation. Third, creative impact generates societal value beyond markets. While the CCE contribute significantly to economic growth, their true value lies in their ability to generate societal benefits—education, community engagement, and social cohesion—through cultural production (Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010). Fourth, creative impact drives systemic change. Rather than addressing isolated issues, it seeks to transform the underlying structures that sustain societal challenges. By cultivating new mindsets, practices, and collaborative approaches, and by reimagining entrenched systems, creative impact drives lasting structural change that delivers meaningful societal benefits.

Creative impact is not merely a subset of broader frameworks like social entrepreneurship or innovation. It represents a distinct approach that harnesses the power of culture and creativity to address societal challenges in ways that are innovative, inclusive, and transformative. While cultural expression need not always serve a direct social or economic purpose, its intrinsic value as a source of aesthetic exploration and identity formation should not be overlooked.

As the world grapples with increasingly complex challenges, the imperative to support and amplify culture and creative impact has never been more pressing. Policymakers, organisations, and stakeholders should recognise the unique role of culture and the CCE by investing in their ability to enrich individuals‘ lives and drive systemic change. By integrating cultural insights, fostering collaboration, and prioritizing inclusion, creative professionals can shape a future that is more equitable, sustainable, and resilient. Creative impact, therefore, reminds us that culture is not merely a mirror reflecting society—it is a force capable of transforming it.

References

Appadurai, A. (2004). The Capacity to Aspire: Culture and the Terms of Recognition. In V. Rao & M. Walton (Eds.), Culture and Public Action. Stanford University Press.

Bakhshi, H., & Throsby, D. (2010). Culture of Innovation: An Economic Analysis of Innovation in Arts and Cultural Organisations.

Banks, M. (2017). Creative Justice: Cultural Industries, Work and Inequality. Rowman & Littlefield.

BMWK (2022). 2022 Cultural and Creative Industries Monitoring Report.

Brown, T. (2008). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Creates New Alternatives for Business and Society.

Carpentier, N. (2011). Media and Participation: A Site of Ideological-Democratic Struggle.

Caves, R. E. (2000). Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce.

Crossick, G., & Kaszynska, P. (2016). Understanding the Value of Arts & Culture: The AHRC Cultural Value Project. Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC).

Dessein, J., Soini, K., Fairclough, G., & Horlings, L. (Eds.) (2015). Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development: Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability. University of Jyväskylä.

European Commission (2021). Cultural and creative sectors in post-COVID-19 Europe. European Commission.

Florida, R. (2014). The Rise of the Creative Class – Revisited. Basic Books.

Grodach, C. (2017). Urban cultural policy and creative city making. Cities, 68(1), 82–91.

Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices.

Hesmondhalgh, D. (2019). The Cultural Industries (4th ed.). SAGE.

Kania, J., Kramer, M., & Senge, P. (2018). The Water of Systems Change.

Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 2011.

Landry, C., & Bianchini, F. (1995). The Creative City. Demos.

Matarasso, F. (1997). Use or Ornament? The Social Impact of Participation in the Arts. Comedia.

Minkiewicz, J., Evans, J., & Bridson, K. (2014). How do consumers co-create their experiences? An exploration in the heritage sector. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(1–2), 30–59.

O’Brien, D., & Oakley, K. (2015). Cultural Value and Inequality: A Critical Literature Review. Swindon: Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC).

Potts, J., Cunningham, S., Hartley, J., & Ormerod, P. (2008). Social network markets: A new definition of the creative industries. Journal of Cultural Economics, 32(3), 167–185.

Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (2000). Clarifying the relationship between framing and ideology. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 5(1), 55–70.

Söndermann, M., Backes, C., Arndt, O., & Brümmer, F. (2009). Gesamtwirtschaftliche Perspektive der Kultur- und Kreativwirtschaft in Deutschland.

UNESCO (2001). Definition of Culture. Retrieved from UNESCO Policy Toolbox.

UNESCO (2022). Re|Shaping Policies for Creativity: Addressing Culture as a Global Public Good. UNESCO Publishing.