Ars&Urbis International Workshop, 2007, cc by-sa.

Public Art as a Driver of Urban Transformation in Douala.in Re-Imagining the African City: The Arts and Urban Politics. Workshop Basel, 11/03/2016.Iolanda Pensa, Marilyn Douala Bell and Marta Pucciarelli, SUPSI and doual’art.

Images on Wikimedia CommonsSUD 2007 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:SUD_Salon_Urbain_de_Douala_2007SUD 2010 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/SUD_Salon_Urbain_de_Douala_2010SUD 2013 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/SUD_Salon_Urbain_de_Douala_2013doual’art https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Doual%27art

doual’art http://www.doualart.orgmobile A2K Culture and Safety in Africa http://www.mobilea2k.org

Joseph-Francis Sumégné, Douala, 1996, cc by-sa.

Lucas Grandin, Douala, 2010, cc by-sa.

Salifou Lindou, Douala, 2010, cc by-sa.

Tracey Rose, Douala, 2010, cc by-sa.

Hervé Yamguen, Douala, 2010, cc by-sa.

Alioum Moussa, Douala, 2005, cc by-sa.

Self-financed3.589 €

Ministry of Culture15.244 €

IRCOD9.950 €

FNAC/Ambassade de France501 €

Cultures France20.000 €

EED, Bonn38.058 €

Arts Collaboratory28.000 €

doual’art - Rapport d’audit des états financiers, 2008. Total income 115.343 euro.

0 €

22.500 €

45.000 €

67.500 €

90.000 €

NL DE FR CM

18.833 €

30.451 €

38.058 €

28.000 €

2008

0 €

25.000 €

50.000 €

75.000 €

100.000 €

Cult&DevCult-coop Cult Dev Coop Research Ed Crowd Sponsors Services

3.589501

48.008

15.24420.000

28.000 €

Self-financed3%

ACP-UE9.880 €

lettera2717.422 €

Cultures France20.000 €

Casa Africa14.941 €

Arts Initiatives17.252 €

Goethe Institut1.000 €

EED, Bonn43.760 €

Prince Claus Fund25.000 €

Arts Collaboratory57.500 €

doual’art - Rapport d’audit des états financiers, 2009. Total income 212.853 euro.

0 €

22.500 €

45.000 €

67.500 €

90.000 €

NL DE USA ES FR IT Europe CM

6.098 €9.880 €

17.422 €20.000 €

14.941 €17.252 €

44.760 €

82.500 €

2009

0 €

25.000 €

50.000 €

75.000 €

100.000 €

Cult&DevCult-coop Cult Dev Coop Research Ed Crowd Sponsors Services

6.098

17.422

43.76045.821

99.752 €

Self-financed65.184 €

Alucam762 €

SGBC3.049 €

SABC4.573 €

MTN4.573 €

ACP-UE35.097 €

Gasworks1.200 €

Bozar8.000 €

lettera277.500 €

FNAC/Ambassade de France2.836 €

AECID25.000 €

Arts Initiatives12.957 € Goethe Institut

1.121 €

BKVB6.896 €

Mondriaan Foundation25.000 €

Arts Collaboratory49.143 €

doual’art - Rapport d’audit des états financiers, 2010. Total income 252.892 euro.

0 €

22.500 €

45.000 €

67.500 €

90.000 €

NL DE USA ES FR IT BE UK Europe CM

78.143 €

35.097 €

1.200 €8.000 €7.500 €

2.836 €

25.000 €

12.957 €

1.121 €

81.039 €

2010

0 €

25.000 €

50.000 €

75.000 €

100.000 €

Cult&DevCult-coop Cult Dev Coop Research Ed Crowd Sponsors Services

65.184

12.9587.500

27.836

14.896

61.21863.300 €

Reserve328 €

Self-financed7.425 €

UNESCO203 €

ACP-UE14.497 €

Flemmish institute of culture4.500 €

Orange Foundation40.000 €

French institute of Cameroon3.045 €

Goethe Institut1.982 €

German Embassy2.182 €

GIZ1.410 €

Arts Collaboratory21.442 €

doual’art - Rapport d’audit des états financiers, 2012. Total income 97.013 euro.

0 €

22.500 €

45.000 €

67.500 €

90.000 €

NL DE FR BE Europe UNESCO CM

7.753 €203 €

14.497 €

4.500 €

43.045 €

5.574 €

21.442 €

2012

0 €

25.000 €

50.000 €

75.000 €

100.000 €

Cult&DevCult-coop Cult Dev Coop Research Ed Crowd Sponsors Services

7.753

40.000

3.592

24.22621.442 €

Reserve38.352 €

Self-financed23.787 €

CUD1.151 €

Kisskissbankbank3.601 €

Arterial Network (AFAI)14.696 €

SUPSI7.824 €

First Floor Gallery921 €

Tate Modern24.974 €

Philip Aguirré46.900 €

lettera272.000 €

Goethe Institut9.292 €

GIZ2.820 €

Arts Collaboratory70.000 €

doual’art - Rapport d’audit des états financiers, 2013. Total income 246.318 euro.

0 €

22.500 €

45.000 €

67.500 €

90.000 €

NL DE IT BE UK ZW CH Afr-int Crowd CM

24.938 €

3.601 €

14.696 €

7.824 €921 €

24.974 €

46.900 €

2.000 €

12.112 €

70.000 €

2013

0 €

25.000 €

50.000 €

75.000 €

100.000 €

Cult&DevCult-coop Cult Dev Coop Research Ed Crowd Sponsors Services

23.787

3.6012.0007.8242.8201.151

72.795

9.292

84.696 €

Cultural Institutions and Public Art in Douala. Iolanda Pensa and Stefano Baseggio, 2006, CC BY-SA.

Context

City

Administration

Country

Money

PartnersSuccess

International Recognition

Continent

Similarities

Differences

Other works in the same area

Bibliography

Urban branding

Maintenance

Urban branding

Porosity

Assumption: Art is a space of research and experimentations (freedom and limitations)Findings related to the role of the arts in Re-Imagining the African City and the potential scalability of the production of the arts integrated in urban politics.

A. Common traps1. Money. Art is pretty cheap. In the majority of the cases it requires very limited investments with

very limited risks.2. Justifications. There is the tendency to justify the production of art and culture with arguments

which do not take into consideration the plus value of art.3. Efficiency. If the objective is not to produce art (as research and experimentation), maybe it is

better to do something else; it might be much more efficient than art.

B. Dynamics1. Entrance point. Art can provide an entrance point in difficult contexts2. Infrastructure. Artworks can be infrastructures; they can provide services3. Producing. The production of public art requires largely unavailable skills 4. Land ownership. The space occupied by art (and the negotiations to occupy it) determines

processes, reactions and perceptions of the work (strong political implications).5. Evaluation. No evaluation process appears to be capable of taking into consideration both the

quality of the artwork and its social and political impact. It is not requested.

C. Art as a System error1. When something is one thing and it is also something else.2. When people react by saying “ça reveille”.3. Quality and exceptional. Not all artworks are exceptional and a critical selection is needed.

Any correspondence with other case studies?

The arts as a space of experimentation and research

Factor Freedom Limitations

Selection • The artist can work independently.• New institutions can be created and there is a potentially unlimited number of

curators and committee that can select artworks. • Institutions, curators and committee can defend and support the work of artists.

• The artist is selected by a curator, institution or committee. • The selection is inscribed into a cultural events, project or program, which frames and influence the selection

process and results (aims, location, budget, time-frame, expectations, target, stakeholders). • The competitive process of selection can lead to conflicts and tensions in particular among the local art system

(negative feedback of artists who have not been selected, curators and members of the committee who have not been included and institutions which are not represented among the stakeholders; conflicts related to the use of public resources).

Location • Artists can choose the location where they want to intervene.• The temporary nature of ephemeral interventions and performances benefit of

more freedom.

• The location can be determined and limited by the obtainment of the necessary authorization (government, private owner, community).

• The location is determined by regeneration plans and the artist is invited to intervene on a pre-determinated site.• Even when the artwork is produced without authorization, it might be in the interest of the artists to build a

consensus around the artwork from the community.• The location has an impact on how viewers read and perceive an artwork.

Production • The artist can directly manage all aspects of the production of the artwork (materials, equipment, technique, suppliers, authorization).

• The artist is not asked to produce the work but a concept; the work will be produced by others (institution, production company, assistant).

• Necessity of a team behind the production of large-scale artworks.• The production requires the involvement of a producer (or production company) who can manage the technical

implementation of the project (materials, equipment, technique, suppliers, authorization),• The production is limited by the availability of specific materials (not necessarily available in all countries) and by

the presence of specialized suppliers (not necessarily available in all countries).• The necessary skills to produce complex artworks are an asset of a limited number of people. This can generate a

perceived monopoly of key producers; in reality the monopoly is due to the extremely limited number of competitors.

Concept • The artist is free to define the concept of its work.• The temporary nature of ephemeral interventions and performances and the

limited cost and investment of small-scale artworks benefit of less limitations.

• The concept is limited by its feasibility, location, budget.• The concept is limited by a specific theme or general project frame.• The concept is reviewed and selected by a curato, institution or committee.r• The concept is limited by censure and auto-censure.• The concept change during production according to available materials and available suppliers.

Clients • Addressing a wide public can trigger new ideas and it can encourage artists to make relevant statements.

• Addressing a new public can trigger research and experimentation, and it can challenge the artist.

• Viewers are not the only client of an artwork: the artist is asked to respond to the requests of curators, institutions, committees, grant-makers and other stakeholders (among which government and media).

• The pressure of addressing a wide or a new public can lead to auto-censure. • In the production of artworks – in particular in the so-called developing countries and in informal settlements – the

process can be limited by the implicit or explicitly request of producing development (expectation or project aim).

Maintence • Artists do not necessarily want their artworks to be permanent. In the concept of the artwork the life-cycle of the artwork can include its disappearance.

• The necessity of maintenance can be a space of freedom.• Artworks can be maintained by public administrations, private owners, cultural

organizations and communities.• Recurrent cultural events (i.e. biennials, triennials, festivals) can facilitate a cyclical

maintenance (artworks are reinstalled and repaired for every edition).

• The necessity of maintenance makes all artworks ephemeral or partly ephemeral.• Maintenance can be determinant also in assuring an artwork does not become dangerous and unsafe for its public

and users.• Ownerships of the artwork determines who will manage maintenance. • The artwork can be vandalized or can be damaged intentionally or intentionally. To protect artworks, fences, gates

and the presence of guards are sometimes used.

Quality • A wide range of works and practices can be considered art.• The impact of cultural events and public art is not a determinant element for artistic

quality.

• Quality of an artwork can only be assessed by the art system (reviews and essays by art critics, art historians and journalists, publications, presentation of the artwork within an exhibition).

• An artwork can be framed within its selection process, which can involve an institution, curator or committee. The selection process doesn’t assure the quality of the artwork but it contributes to its artistic legitimacy.

• Dynamics of power and of inclusion and exclusion still determine art history and the acknowledgement of art practices around the world.

• According to its location, art can be expected to produce an impact on development and it can be expected to represent “local” or “national” practices.

• The biography of the artist (birth place, origins, working place) can have a determinant impact in his/her artistic evaluation and in the way his/her work is framed.

Mobile Access to Knowledge: Culture and Safety in Africa. Documenting and assessing the impact of cultural events and public art on urban safety, Final report, 2011-2014. http://www.mobilea2k.orgPucciarelli, Marta. Douala Final Report, 2013. http://www.mobilea2k.orgPensa, Iolanda. 2013. ‘I’ll have a project. How international grants and cultural cooperation

have shaped contemporary African art into a project made of objectives, activities and expected results’. Seismopolite Journal of Art and Politics 5. http://www.seismopolite.com/i-will-have-a-project-contemporary-african-art

Pensa, Iolanda. 2016 in print. System Error. Art as a space to produce what we would never have thought we needed in Art and Development. http://iopensa.it

Urban Safety and Security, ed. Emanuela Bonini Lessing, FrancoAngeli Edizioni, 2015.

Case studiesdoual’art, non profit association, Douala, Cameroon, 1991-Luanda Triennale, Luanda, Angola, 1991.2013.Johannesburg, South Africa, 1991-2013.Dak’Art, Dakar, Senegal, 1990-

Iolanda Pensa, SUSPI Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera Italiana, Laboratorio cultura visiva, iolanda.pensa@supsi.ch, 03/2016.