This part of the model introduces key concepts of the model, namely societal engagement, impact and art-based methods.
It explores how art may facilitate societal actions, interactions, practices and discussions. Societal engagement
has become one of the central goals for HEIs. We think that an important prerequisite of societal impact for HEIs is
societal engagement. In this section we shall first discuss what we mean by societal engagement, then address societal
impact and finally look at art in this context. We need facilitators that are able to link different parts of society to each
other; art has a great capacity to make such connections. Art can connect different types of people, fields and values.
What is societal engagement?
Societal engagement has been emphasized in contemporary economic,
social, cultural, ecological and educational policies, and research
on societal engagement has provided support for the development of
various practices to plan, execute and evaluate societally important
actions. We assume that societal engagement—working with and for
society and working on society’s challenges—results in societal impact.
The concepts of social (engagement/impact) and societal (engagement/
impact) are often looked at as synonymous, and often the
term "social impact" is used instead of "societal" impact, but we consider
"societal engagement/impact" to be different from "social engagement/
impact" as it refers to a broader concept that comprises but also goes
beyond "social engagement/impact" (see e.g. Belfiore, 2008). We acknowledge
this fuzziness of understandings on the meaning of social/
societal impact and engagement (Johansson et al., 2019), and adopt the
more encompassing term “societal”.
The phenomenon of societal engagement can be approached from various
perspectives such as social, artistic, entrepreneurial, managerial
and economic activity, which offer multiple ways for higher education
institutions (HEIs) to engage with society and through engagement increase
their societal impact. The “societal” in the term “societal engagement”
refers to the various activities of humans in communities,
and societal impact aims at social, economic, cultural or other kinds
of engagement with people and society. The general aim of societally
engaged higher education institutions is to influence and do good, to
help people and society locally or in wider perspective, and to bring
change and development to society. Moreover, we cannot separate
HEIs and their activities from their political and national contexts. The
importance of societal responsibility is applicable to all actors in today’s
society, from businesses to HEIs. Societal engagement is multifaceted
and provides wide opportunities for HEIs to solve grand challenges
with and for the local community and globally.
...
Societal engagement of HEis may include several types of activities and outcomes. For example, deeper collaboration within the society and HEIs may affect managers’ attitudes towards diversity and social responsibility both in stakeholder organizations (e.g. art organizations, municipalities, or business) and in higher education institutions (HEIs). Art has the capacity, as mentioned above, to act as a connector between different worldviews, actors and opinions in society. Art may find a place, for example, in educational work, preventative work, crisis work, or rehabilitative work, all of which may have greater influence when connected to artistic practices. A more comprehensive description of societal engagement can be found in the MAPSI Study Book (Ánttonen et al 2016). (Consult also the Insights for Teachers section for examples of art-based methods in societal engagement activities.) In addition, entrepreneurship is often seen as a tool for integration, for example for immigrants, as statistics show that they seem to become entrepreneurs more often than local inhabitants, whether out of choice or necessity. There are several ways to analyze societal engagement (see examples in the right-hand column).
FINEEC—the Finnish Education Evaluation Centre—invited
HEis to present their societal engagement activities through
cases where educational institutions can self-decide how they
describe their societal engagement activity. This allows the
multifaceted nature of societal engagement to be presented,
but at the same time limits the comparability of the activities.
(For more information, see:https://karvi.fi/en/higher-education/)
In terms of the mental connections people make with ‘societal
engagement’, we can look at Google searches. The Google
timeline from 2004 to date (18.01.2018) shows a continuing
growth in interest in the topic of societal engagement. In these
statistics, the term „social engagement“ was used, as „societal
engagement“ does not have enough data to display a chart.
Nevertheless, it is a primary indication of the ongoing gain in
importance of the topic. Furthermore, it shows that society is
gaining awareness, as it basically shows interest in the topic
from a broader audience—not jusr professionals.
Despite the Wikipedia article entitled “Social Engagement”,
Google shows universities to be the stakeholders most involved
in the topic of “societal engagement in society“. This is
also promoted with several projects by the EU. Moreover there
are plenty of examples of international companies reporting
their societal engagement activities, often on their websites.
What is societal impact?
So, what constitutes societal impact? There is no unique answer to this question. There
is still a lot of ambiguity associated with the term "societal impact“.
As both components of the term—“societal” as well as
“impact”—provide opportunities for various interpretations,
multiple narrower and broader definitions of the term “societal
impact” exist. Let us review some of these in order to illustrate
the plurality of understandings and bring up the key differences
in interpretations of "societal impact“. The following
Table outlines some of the definitions of societal impact used by various institutions and authors.
It is important to note that a clear distinction
between impacts and outcomes is often
difficult. Therefore, it may be proposed that
the term “impact” can be used for both shortterm
and long-term consequences. A clear
distinction, however, should be made between
outputs and impacts (or outcomes).
As Mills-Scofield (2012) summarizes briefly,
but effectively: “Outcomes are the difference
made by the outputs.” In practice, however,
this important distinction is often forgotten
and many societal impact reports tend to focus
on outputs rather than on impacts.
...
The few examples of definitions of societal impact presented in the Table certainly do not exhaust all of the possible variations in the interpretation of societal impact. However, these examples should be sufficient to reveal the multitude of understandings of the term “societal impact”, as well as the key differences in perception of the term, and the main shortcomings of the definitions used for societal impact. Analysis of the existing definitions of “societal impact” also suggests that a comprehensive, theoretically founded and precise but at the same time concise and generally acceptable definition of “societal impact” seems to be missing from the literature focused on the subject. Namely, the existing definitions are often either too narrow (restrictive) with regard to the type of impact (intended vs. unintended; short-term vs. long-term; positive vs. negative, etc.), disregard causality, or are defined in way that leads to partly overlapping definitions (e.g. when a distinction is made between social impact and economic impact). Aside from these issues, perhaps the most significant shortcoming of existing definitions of societal impact is the absence of a supportive theoretical (formal) framework by the authors for their proposed definitions.
Art enabling societal engagement as a connector in
society
Nowadays there is an ongoing discussion about the meanings
and values of the arts (Klamer 2017). Art makes its imprint on
each of us in different ways and forms. Art can generate financial inome and contribute to economic developmentand at the same time promote
happiness and longevity. The societal aspect of art does
not insist that there should be a focused goal connected with welfare
or wellbeing. Art and creativity are often seen as sources of innovation,
new thinking and productive outcomes. (Arts Council
England 2014, Anttonen et al. 2016) The understanding of
what constitutes the arts has wide variation, and it can be proposed
that the definition of art is not fixed, but rather organic.
Art offers multiple means for HEIs to engage with society and
address societal challenges. Art offers the potential for critical
thinking and doing. It is also has the potential to bring people
together and tune them in to the “same channel”, even when
they have very different perspectives or professional backgrounds,
represent very different social classes, and represent
very different political movements. For example, in the era
of climate change and environmental threats, passivity and
slowness are critical values that offer room for art to foster and
expand thinking and non-active being in society. Art contributes
value to society and HEIs in various ways.
...
Holden (2006) names three different values of art: institutional, intrinsic and instrumental. Institutional value emphasizes the techniques and processes when making art. The intrinsic value relates to the subjective experience of art intellectually, emotionally and spiritually. All arts forms offer an epistemic base which allows holistic and sensory knowledge to open up subjectivity to shared common discussion. Art is able to make challenges or problems visible in society through sensory knowledge. Art is a special forum to make diversity visible and to give room for different aspects and experiences. According to Pääjoki (2004), art is a platform for encountering. Fostering encountering, empathy, and solidarity seems extremely important in our time. The third value of art that Holden (2006) refers to is the instrumental value and this is related to the ancillary effects of art, using it to achieve social but also economic results.
In addition, sociologist Pascal Gielen notes that culture and creativity are nowadays seen more as problem solvers, to the detriment of their intrinsic qualities, which are about creating sense-making and immaterial values. If the role of culture is, among other things, to create a sense of identity and community, a complexity of symbols and values that help us to define ourselves (measure), art—and especially contemporary art—should also produce disruptions (dismeasure), to help people and society question the established aspects of mainstream culture, and thus help culture and society renew themselves constantly. (Gielen, 2015) According to the same author, cultural heritage, a rich cultural offer and cultural participation contribute to wellbeing and the attractiveness of places. At the same time, it is exactly this power of the arts to break patterns, question, re-frame, and create catharsis that make it so valuable for mental and emotional health. In terms of social cohesion, Gielen identifies two types of connection, both of which are essential for healthy community relations: bonding and bridging. While cultural participation in general will mainly help people establish bonds with people they have things in common with, people confronted with art that brings some kind of dismeasure into their lives are likely to experience improved bridging and social cohesion, thus becoming open to otherness.
Prescriptions for art-based methods vary according to context.
Art-based methods can be incorporated in the fields of research,
pedagogy and arts management, as for example when creating
dialogues among groups. These all have a place in learning and in
higher education. Learning is understood through the socio-constructivist
prism (Kanselaar 2002), which means that knowledge
and understanding is nurtured by social communication, togetherness
and negotiation. Diversity of experiences and background
are the starting point for learning and development processes.
According to Känkänen & Bardy (2014) art-based methods can
create a free space without right or wrong, which provides the
opportunity to discuss and explore different phenomena without
preconceptions and prejudices. There is room to wonder and
question without limitations, offering new ways for self-expression
using different art-based techniques. See example of a new model in the box
on the right.
Alain de Botton and John Armstron in their book Art as Therapy (2013) note: “We are vulnerable,
desperate creatures in need of support. And art has
the potential to help with problems of the soul.” The author
identifies concrete areas connected to inner wellbeing where
arts can be of great importance and benefit for individuals. Art
can support people in dealing with their mental problems by
addressing them in a creative way, and creating a safe space
for expressing and discussing these issues. Art gives us hope
by providing the opportunity for creativity and it reminds us
that we are not alone in suffering. Art can rebalance us—a
beautiful painting or calming music may help us regain peace
of mind after a busy day. It opens our eyes to the neglected
value of everyday life, which we may have become blind to or
forgetten about. In addition, it can guide us through our different
anxieties. It helps us cope with loss and the imminence
of aging and death, the fear of losing status or being rejected,
and it accompanies us through mourning. Art can help us gain
perspective and get an idea of how the future may look. Art
also helps people feel connected and belonging to communities,
groups or territories.
Art can be seen as a cultural human right
that provides health and wellbeing for individuals
in different life situations and stages.
Art is an essential part of human life
and it can protect against social isolation
and strengthen the sense of belonging to a
community. (see e.g., All-Party Parliamentary
Group on Arts, Health and Wellbeing,
2017; Lehikoinen & Vanhanen, 2017) Art has
the quality of acting as a boundary object,
which helps to link different fields and disciplines.
This capacity of art is a great potential
and can be considered as an intrinsic
value of the arts.
See: New model Visual
Arts organisations and
Societal Engagement!
click here
