OpenMusE Music, Society and Citizenship: Methods and Indicators

D3.1 – Music, Society, and Citizenship: Methods and Indicators OpenMusE An open, scalable data to-policy pipeline for European music ecosystems Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 2 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Project Factsheet Acronym: OpenMusE Title: An open, scalable data to-policy pipeline for European music ecosystems Coordinator: SINUS Marktund Sozialforschung GmbH Reference: 101095295 Type: Research and Innova�on Ac�on Program: Horizon Europe Start: 1st January 2023 Dura�on: 36 months Website: htps://www.openmuse.eu/ Consor�um: SINUS Marktund Sozialforschung GmbH, Germany (SINUS), Coordinator TURUN YLIOPISTO, Finland (UTU) UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (UVA) Scuola Superiore di Studi Universitari e di Perfezionament, Italy (SSSA) EKONOMICKA UNIVERZITA V BRATISLAVE, Slovakia (EUBA) REPREX B.V., Netherlands (REPREX) SYNYO GmbH, Austria (SYNYO) MUSIC INNOVATION HUB SPA IMPRESA SOCIALE, Italy (MIH) Slovenský ochranný zväz autorský pre práva k hudobným, Slovakia (SOZA) Aloaded AB, Sweden (ALOADED) Music Export Ukraine, Ukraine (MEU) Muzikos Eksporto Fondas, Lithuania (MXF) ARTISJUS MAGYAR SZERZOI JOGVEDO IRODA EGYESULET, Hungary (ARTISJUS) MUSICAUTOR SDRUZHENIE, Bulgaria (MUSICAUTOR) HEARDIS! GMBH, Germany (HEARDIS) D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 3 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Deliverable Factsheet Number: D3.1 Title: Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators Lead beneficiary: UTU Work package: WP3 Task: T3.1 Dissemina�on level: Public Submission date: 30.11.2023 Main author(s): James Edwards, SINUS Annika Herbertz, SINUS Helen Rademacher, SINUS Daniel Antal, REPREX Contributor(s): Mar�n Cloonan, UTU Sarah Parisio, MIH Dario Punzo, MIH Anna Zò, MIH Isabella Tautscher, SINUS Quality check: Daniel Antal, UVA Caterina Sganga, SSSA Marc Calmbach, SINUS Document history: Revision Date Main modifica�on Author 0.1 13/09/2023 Structural dra� complete James Edwards 0.2 17/10/2023 Sec�on 1 complete James Edwards 0.3 20/10/2023 Sec�on 1 quality check Mar�n Cloonan 0.4 25/11/2023 Sec�on 2 complete James Edwards, Annika Herbertz, Helen Rademacher D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 4 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 0.5 28/11/2023 Sec�on 3 and 4 complete James Edwards 0.6 29/11/2023 Sec�on 3 and 4 quality check Caterina Sganga, Daniel Antal, Marc Calmbach 1.0 30/11/2023 Submission James Edwards 1.1 09/01/2024 Revision and re-submission James Edwards D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 5 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Disclaimer of Warran�es This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe, research and innovation programme, under Grant Agreement No. 101095295. This document has been prepared by OpenMusE project partners as an account of work carried out within the framework of the EC-GA contract no 101095295. Any dissemina�on of results must indicate that it reflects only the author’s view and that the Commission Agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of the informa�on it contains. Neither Project Coordinator, nor any signatory party of OpenMusE Project Consor�um Agreement, nor any person ac�ng on behalf of any of them: (a) makes any warranty or representation whatsoever, express, or implied, (i). with respect to the use of any information, apparatus, method, process, or similar item disclosed in this document, including merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, or (ii). that such use does not infringe on or interfere with privately owned rights, including any party's intellectual property, or (iii). that this document is suitable to any particular user's circumstance; or (b) assumes responsibility for any damages or other liability whatsoever (including any consequential damages, even if Project Coordinator or any representative of a signatory party of the OpenMusE Project Consortium Agreement, has been advised of the possibility of such damages) resulting from your selection or use of this document or any information, apparatus, method, process, or similar item disclosed in this document. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 6 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Glossary Please see the glossaries provided in D1.1, D2.1, D6.2, and D6.3. A harmonised glossary will be hosted on the Open Music Europe project website and the Open Music Observatory (D5.1). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 7 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Execu�ve Summary This deliverable iden�fies cri�cal research ques�ons, data sources and gaps, and data collec�on methods regarding the broad topic of music, society, and ci�zenship in Europe. It builds upon the Feasibility Study for the Establishment of a European Music Observatory (Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture et al., 2020). This deliverable’s focus is on three topics emphasised in that study, and in subsequent policy work: 1. The ways audiences interact and engage with (and through) music; 2. The composition and evolution of music ecosystems; 3. The environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability of music ecosystems. Drawing upon best prac�ces in cultural sta�s�cs and current policy priori�es, this deliverable proposes a mapping of policy-relevant concepts to guide data collec�on on the three topics above. A review of scien�fic literature was conducted on the basis of this concept map. The concept map was then itera�vely revised and developed into a schema for the assessment of data availabili�es and gaps. This schema is based on the no�on that data can be collected on any topic in music and society along five dimensions (cf. ESSnet-Culture 2012). It will be applied to assess data availability on numerous topics in music, society, and ci�zenship on the EU27 level. Take, for instance, the topic of “music educa�on”. Data could be collected on: • Employment: number of faculty/staff • Expenditure: government spending on music education • Consumption: student spending on music education • Practices: number of students studying music • Governance: existence of regulations on music education This ini�al schema will be workshopped with music sector stakeholders in order to improve its relevance and ac�onability. During the forthcoming data collec�on phase, a revised schema will be used to assess data on music, society, and ci�zenship in Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and Slovakia. It will also provide input for surveys of music professionals and small businesses/organisa�ons on the one hand, and the general popula�on on the other. The end goal is to develop a framework for data collec�on on music, society, and ci�zenship, which could be incorporated into a future European Music Observatory. This deliverable concludes by proposing policy-relevant indicators on music, society, and ci�zenship. The second itera�on of these indicators will be reviewed by stakeholders and added to the Open Music Observatory (D5.1). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 8 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Table of Contents Glossary ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduc�on ........................................................................................................................................... 11 1 Research Aims and Ques�ons ....................................................................................................... 12 1.1 Audience Interac�on with Music ........................................................................................... 12 1.1.1 Touchpoint: Good prac�ces in cultural sta�s�cs ........................................................... 12 1.1.2 Touchpoint: Current cultural policy priori�es ................................................................ 12 1.1.3 Outcome: Research ques�ons on audience interac�on with music ............................. 13 1.2 The Composi�on and Evolu�on of Music Ecosystems .......................................................... 14 1.3 The ESG Sustainability of Music Ecosystems ......................................................................... 15 2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 17 2.1 The EU Cultural and Music Policy Agenda ............................................................................. 17 2.1.1 AB MUSIC Working Group Report (2016) ...................................................................... 17 2.1.2 Communica�on on A New European Agenda for Culture (2018) ................................. 18 2.1.3 Report from the Commission on the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 (2022) ........... 18 2.1.4 The Music Moves Europe ini�a�ve (2018-present) ...................................................... 21 2.1.5 Council Resolu�on on the EU Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026 (2022) ....................... 22 2.2 Na�onal Cultural and Music Policy Agendas ......................................................................... 25 2.2.1 Bulgaria .......................................................................................................................... 27 2.2.2 Germany ........................................................................................................................ 27 2.2.3 Hungary ......................................................................................................................... 28 2.2.4 Italy ................................................................................................................................ 29 2.2.5 Slovakia .......................................................................................................................... 30 2.3 Concept Mapping of Policy Priori�es and Scien�fic Literature Review ................................. 34 2.3.1 Informa�on: Music educa�on ....................................................................................... 34 2.3.2 Informa�on: Other music informa�on behaviour ......................................................... 38 2.3.3 Communica�on and community: Music and social life ................................................. 40 2.3.4 Communica�on and community: Music, society, and poli�cs ...................................... 41 2.3.5 Enjoyment and expression: Music and human rights ................................................... 44 2.3.6 Enjoyment and expression: Musical crea�on [non-commercial] .................................. 46 2.3.7 Transac�on: Musical crea�on [commercial].................................................................. 49 2.3.8 Transac�on: Par�cipa�on in musical life ....................................................................... 50 2.3.9 Music, health, and well-being ....................................................................................... 52 2.3.10 Music and sustainable development ............................................................................. 55 3 Data Availability and Gaps ............................................................................................................. 56 3.1 Data Availability and Gaps in EU-Level Cultural Sta�s�cs ..................................................... 56 D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 9 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 3.2 Other Data Availability and Gaps on the EU Level ................................................................. 58 3.3 Data Availability and Gaps on the Na�onal Level .................................................................. 60 3.3.1 Bulgaria .......................................................................................................................... 60 3.3.2 Germany ........................................................................................................................ 60 3.3.3 Hungary ......................................................................................................................... 60 3.3.4 Italy ................................................................................................................................ 60 3.3.5 Slovakia .......................................................................................................................... 60 3.4 Cross-Domain Concepts in Data Collec�on ........................................................................... 66 4 Data Sources and Collec�on Methods .......................................................................................... 67 4.1 Secondary Survey Data .......................................................................................................... 67 4.1.1 Available survey data ..................................................................................................... 67 4.1.2 Ex-post harmonisa�on of secondary survey data ......................................................... 68 4.2 Administra�ve Data Sources ................................................................................................. 69 4.2.1 Good prac�ces: Norway ................................................................................................ 69 4.2.2 Data sources to be queried ........................................................................................... 70 4.3 Mul�-Country Primary Data Collec�on ................................................................................. 70 4.3.1 Surveys ........................................................................................................................... 71 4.3.2 Environmental, social, and governance sustainability data .......................................... 72 4.4 Na�onal-Level Primary Data Collec�on ................................................................................. 74 4.4.1 Concept matching .......................................................................................................... 75 4.4.2 Iden�ty matching and coordina�on of data subjects or observa�onal units ............... 76 4.4.3 Ex-post harmonisa�on of surveys ................................................................................. 77 4.4.4 Ex-ante harmonisa�on of surveys ................................................................................. 77 4.5 Coordina�ng Mul�ple Data Sources ...................................................................................... 77 4.5.1 Crea�ng music industry registers .................................................................................. 77 4.5.2 Merging secondary and primary data using input-output tables .................................. 78 5 Indicator Candidates ...................................................................................................................... 80 5.1 EU-Level Indicator Candidates ............................................................................................... 80 5.2 Na�onal-Level Indicator Candidates ...................................................................................... 81 5.2.1 Bulgaria .......................................................................................................................... 81 5.2.2 Germany ........................................................................................................................ 81 5.2.3 Hungary ......................................................................................................................... 81 5.2.4 Italy ................................................................................................................................ 81 5.2.5 Slovakia .......................................................................................................................... 81 6 Conclusion and Outlook ................................................................................................................ 82 References ............................................................................................................................................. 83 D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 16 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability goals. This will include both open-source so�ware tools and resources like good prac�ces and guidelines. This will culminate in a pilot study in which Open Music Europe partner Music Innova�on Hub (MIH) creates a semi-automated organisa�onal sustainability report by using so�ware tools developed by partners REPREX and UTU. This sustainability report will comply with the forthcoming EU Corporate Sustainability Repor�ng Direc�ve (CSRD) and European Sustainability Repor�ng Standards (ESRS). The following table outlines the ESRS domains and topics on which data should be collected (for preliminary thoughts on data collec�on, see Sec�on 4.3.2): ESRS domains, topics, and indicators Domain ESRS topic Potential indicators Environmental E1 Climate change Energy consumption; climate change mitigation Environmental E2 Pollution Pollutant emission Environmental E3 Water and marine resources Water consumption and discharge Environmental E4 Biodiversity and ecosystems Impacts and dependencies on ecosystems (e.g., use of sustainable resources; animal rights; etc.) Environmental E5 Circular economy Resource inflows and outflows; resource optimisation Social S1 Own workforce Work-related rights (e.g., working conditions; work-life balance; freedom of association; equal opportunities for different groups; etc.) Social S2 Workers in the value chain Work-related rights in the value chain Social S3 Affected communities Impact of company and value chain activities on civil, social, and economic rights; social inclusion of different groups; social cohesion; community wellbeing; etc. Social S4 Consumers and end-users Impact of company products and services on consumers (e.g., data protection; child protection; etc.) Governance G1 Business conduct Anti-corruption and anti-bribery measures; protection of whistleblowers; lobbying; relations with suppliers The ESRS framework also provides a structured means to evaluate the relevance of music sector projects to different aspects of sustainability. To this end, the framework has been used to assess a small selec�on of EU-funded projects on music (see Annex 2). Because the EU has made a priority of publishing project informa�on as linked open data, it should be feasible to automate this type of analysis in the near future (see Sec�on 4). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 17 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 2 Literature Review 2.1 The EU Cultural and Music Policy Agenda In order to ensure the policy relevance of the work package, the literature review phase began with an analysis of recent EU-level policy documents on music, and culture more broadly. Throughout, aten�on was paid to the degree to which policy documents addressed the WP3 focal points, i.e.: 1) Do policy objectives and actions address the ways audiences interact and engage with and through culture, and specifically with music? 2) Do policy objectives and actions address the composition and evolution of cultural ecosystems, and specifically musical ecosystems? 3) Do policy objectives and actions address the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability of cultural ecosystems, and specifically music ecosystems? In brief, all three focal points are strongly represented in EU policy documents on the level of culture in general, as well as the more limited corpus of policy documents on music in specific. 2.1.1 AB MUSIC Working Group Report (2016) In 2015, the Crea�ve Europe AB Music Working Group, comprising both policymakers and representa�ves of the music sector, convened to establish a founda�on for a more proac�ve and comprehensive policy approach to the sector (Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture, 2016) . This Working Group paved the way for enhanced sectoral considera�on in the New European Agenda for Culture (2018) and the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 (2021). Three main topics were considered: 1. Cross-border circulation and cultural diversity 2. Support, professionalisation and remuneration of music creators 3. Reinventing the music experience in the digital age The Working Group iden�fied a number of challenges facing the sector. These included the divergent impacts of the Digital Single Market strategy, such as its poten�al mul�plier effect on the “value gap” and power differen�al between “a handful of large dominant players on one hand, and a mul�tude of small or very small actors on the other” (p. 14); the need on the part of independent ar�sts and MSMEs for enhanced educa�on, training, and access to funding3; the need for ac�ve measures to help ensure the fair remunera�on of creators; various interpreta�ons of the concept of “cultural diversity”; the challenge of music circula�on within a fragmented interna�onal trade regime (and with regard to the Transatlan�c Trade and Investment Partnership in par�cular; p. 15); the importance of suppor�ng live venues as drivers of cultural diversity and stores of “symbolic societal value” (p. 16); the importance of fes�vals, music export offices, and radio as spaces for both dissemina�on and talent discovery; conflicts of interest between new and established entrants to the market; and the lack of “reliable, independent and trustworthy” sources of data on the live, publishing, and recorded music sectors and the start-up sector, and the need for beter incen�ves for data owners and curators to share data with policymakers (p. 17). With regard to data, the Working Group proposed: “i) ac�ons to increase the collec�on and transparency of metadata and user data, ii) ac�ons to increase the measuring of the footprint of the music sector in Europe, including the launch of an observatory that would produce independent studies regarding the sector and provide regular and accurate measures of the imprint of 3 The Founda�on for Assis�ng Canadian Talent on Recordings (FACTOR; htps://www.factor.ca/) was men�oned by a number of par�cipants as a good prac�ce in this regard. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 18 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 European music, its circula�on and vitality” (p. 17). This recommenda�on set the groundwork for EMO Feasibility Study and the Open Music Europe project. 2.1.2 Communica�on on A New European Agenda for Culture (2018) The Communica�on on a New European Agenda for Culture (European Commission, 2018) summarises the European Commission’s efforts to support the European cultural sector – including the music sector in par�cular – through a mul�tude of ini�a�ves (e.g., Crea�ve Europe). These ini�a�ves are structured around a social dimension, an economic dimension, and an external rela�ons dimension, with a par�cular focus on the first two dimensions. Regarding the social dimension, the Agenda aims to foster the cultural capability of Europeans, encourage the mobility of professionals in the cultural and crea�ve sectors, and protect and promote Europe’s cultural heritage as a shared resource. Concerning the economic dimension, the Agenda focuses on the promo�on of the arts, culture, and crea�ve thinking in all forms of educa�on and training, fostering favourable ecosystems for cultural and crea�ve industries, promo�ng the skills needed by these sectors, crea�ng CCSI jobs, improving CCSI employment condi�ons, improving cultural educa�on and training, and boos�ng Europe as a cultural tourism des�na�on. The Agenda emphasises the economic contribu�on of the CCSIs, as well as their importance to other industries such as tourism. At the same �me, the Agenda highlights challenges that prevail within the CCSIs, such as difficult employment condi�ons. Finally, the external rela�ons dimension aims to strengthen cultural coopera�on with actors outside Europe, support culture as an engine for sustainable social and economic development, promote intercultural dialogue for peaceful inter-community rela�ons, and reinforce coopera�on on cultural heritage. Within this dimension, the EC’s ini�a�ves are focused on the Western Balkans in par�cular, as well as other regions in Asia, Africa, and La�n America. Throughout all three dimensions, the importance of both preserving the European cultural heritage, and of encouraging innova�on within the cultural sector (Digital4Culture), are highlighted. The Communica�on sets forth several planned ac�ons in all three dimensions relevant to increasing the compe��veness, fairness, and sustainability of European music ecosystems. These include plans to support partners (e.g., the OECD) with similar objec�ves (2018); promote music and the arts in educa�on and training (e.g., via Erasmus+; 2019); support crea�vity-driven innova�on via crosssec�onal pilot projects (2018); beter leverage the European Ins�tute of Innova�on and Knowledge and Innova�on Communi�es (2019); strengthen dialogue with the European audiovisual industry (2018); support Member States in ensuring fair remunera�on for ar�sts and creators (2019); and organise regular dialogues with cultural and crea�ve sectors – including the music sector in par�cular via the Preparatory Ac�on "Music Moves Europe", set forth in the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022. 2.1.3 Report from the Commission on the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 (2022) The European Work Plans for Culture (2005-2006; 2007-2010; 2011-2014; 2015-2018; 2019-2022; 2023-2026) establish core objec�ves for EU-level cultural policy, as determined by consensus among Member State representa�ves in the European Council. The Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 cons�tuted an important step forward for EU music policy insofar as it established the Music Moves Europe programme. In prepara�on for the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 (2021), a survey was conducted seeking Member State views on cultural policy, resul�ng in the following six priori�es: a) Sustainability in cultural heritage D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 19 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 b) Cohesion and well-being c) An ecosystem supporting artists, cultural and creative professionals and European content d) Gender equality e) International cultural relations f) Culture as a driver for sustainable development Sec�on 3 of the report breaks down ac�ons and planned outputs corresponding to each of these priori�es. Most of these ac�ons and outputs are relevant to the music sector and the Open Music Europe project in a cross-cu�ng capacity; the Music Moves Europe programme is directly relevant, and indeed, laid the groundwork for the project. Priority A - Sustainability in cultural heritage • Participatory governance of cultural heritage: The Commission designed and funded a peerlearning project entitled "Cultural Heritage in Action", beginning in 2019, in which over 100 local & regional policymakers exchange knowledge on cultural heritage, focusing on participatory governance, adaptive reuse and quality principles for interventions in cultural heritage. • Adaption of cultural heritage to climate change: The Commission set up an Open Method Coordination (OMC) group on “Strengthening Cultural Heritage Resilience for Climate Change”, followed by a report and set of recommendations on good practices and innovative measures for the protection of cultural heritage in relation to climate change. • Quality principles for EU-funded interventions with potential impact on cultural heritage: A document with the European quality principles on interventions impacting cultural heritage has been published and revised in 2019 and 2020 integrating also good practices identified in the peer learning project “Cultural Heritage in Action”. • Complementary funding for cultural heritage: The Commission organised an online workshop in 2021 on complementary funding for cultural heritage with representatives of 22 member states, covering methods like public-private partnerships, crowdfunding, fundraising, lotteries, donations and more, followed by a report and policy debate. Priority B - Cohesion and well-being • Social cohesion: The commission organised and online workshop in 2020 with participants from 22 member states exchanged views on the promotion of social cohesion through culture at local and regional levels, sustainable models on cooperation between public authorities and cultural sector practitioners, alongside related topics. • High-quality architecture and built environment: The commission implemented an OMC group on this topic, which published a report and related toolkit based on a collection of case studies gathered from multiple governance levels across Europe, including best practice examples and policy recommendations on how to operationalise quality criteria for architecture and built environment. • Understanding digital audiences: In 2021, the Commission launched of Voices of culture platform with the aim to explore the possibility of voluntary guidelines for collecting and managing data on digital audiences, with a special focus on the performing arts. • Young creative generations: In 2019 council conclusion were adopted following the Presidency Conference “Young creative generations” in Romania. • Citizenships, values and democracy: After a presidency conference in Finland on “Citizenship, values and democracy” in 2019 a 2021 study was conducted on the importance of citizens’ participation in culture for civic engagement and democracy. Priority C - An ecosystem suppor�ng ar�sts, cultural and crea�ve professionals and European content D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 20 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 • Status and working condition of artists: A study was published in 2020 on working conditions of artists and cultural and creative professionals, followed by the establishment of an OMC group which shared good practices on this topic, also taking into account the wider ecosystem that supports artists, cultural and creative professionals and European content. • Artistic freedom: In 2021, the commission organised an online workshop with participants from 20 member states, thematizing the current state of affairs on freedom of artistic expression, best practices for realising, promoting and protecting this freedom, alongside a possible legal framework for that. • Audiovisual co-production: The commission established an OMC group, which determined that formally framed co-productions not only reach broader audiences than national works but also enhance artists' international careers, presenting an opportunity to reconsider collaborative approaches in addressing urgent challenges such as the shift towards environmentally sustainable practices in the audiovisual industry. • Music: Romania organised the Presidency Conference “Music Moves Europe” alongside an online conference on diversity and competitiveness of the European music sector, in which topics like the impact of COVID-19, the role of music for social cohesion and well-being, music streaming and cultural diversity, and the Music Moves Europe initiative have been addressed between experts from EU Member states and representatives of the music sector. • Multilingualism and translation: An OMC group was established, which work focused on the main challenges faced by translators alongside recommendations for the future attractiveness, training opportunities and pay and working conditions of the field. • Financing and innovation in the cultural and creative sectors: The event 'Cultural and Creative Sectors Ecosystems: Flipping the Odds' was held to foster collaboration and discussions among nearly 250 stakeholders to assess the implementation of previous OMC groups' recommendations on finance, innovation, and public policies in the cultural and creative sectors. Priority D - Gender equality: The commission launched an independent study on gender gaps in cultural and crea�ve sectors and established an OMC group focusing on key challenges such as gender stereotypes, sexual harassment, access to the labour market and the gender pay gap, access to social benefits, access to resources, access to leadership posi�ons and female entrepreneurship, data collec�on, gender equality in the workplace, gender budge�ng and gender mainstreaming methodologies, as well as gender-sensi�ve language Priority E - Interna�onal cultural rela�ons: The Council conclusions on an EU strategic approach to interna�onal cultural rela�ons aim to integrate cultural rela�ons into foreign policy instruments, emphasizing the need for cross-cu�ng cultural coopera�on and policy coordina�on, with the Slovenian Presidency event 'Future Unlocked!' discussing cultural and crea�ve sectors as agents of change on a global scale. Priority F - Culture as a driver for sustainable development: The commission set up an OMC group focusing on improving the integra�on of culture into na�onal sustainable development strategies, UNESCO repor�ng tools and botom-up projects on sustainability featuring cultural key players. It was preceded by a Voices of Culture dialogue on the topic of culture and Sustainable Development goals and following report. Furthermore, the report emphasises the crucial role of regular, reliable data in informing evidencebased policymaking, highligh�ng cultural sta�s�cs as a cross-cu�ng priority in the work plan. Eurostat is ac�vely engaged in gathering alterna�ve data sources at the na�onal level, launching ques�onnaires and involving the Culture Sta�s�cs Working Group to enhance the quality of cultural sta�s�cs. Addi�onally, the Commission's call for proposals on 'Measuring the Cultural and Crea�ve Sectors in the EU' aims to create a framework to address data gaps at Eurostat level, with a project expected to D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 21 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 conclude in December 2022, complemen�ng efforts related to the establishment of a European music observatory and other sta�s�cal ini�a�ves under Horizon Europe. The cultural and crea�ve sectors' increasing digital transforma�on, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, provides significant opportuni�es for growth, experimenta�on, and improved engagement with diverse audiences. However, challenges such as the cost of access to technology, skill shortages, unfair sharing of revenues for digital uses, dependency on external pla�orms, dominance of mainstream providers, promo�on and preserva�on of cultural diversity, infrastructure gaps, and the digital divide need to be addressed to ensure a fair digital transi�on benefi�ng European cultural players and ci�zens. 2.1.4 The Music Moves Europe ini�a�ve (2018-present) Regarding the music sector and the Open Music Europe project, the most significant ac�on taken in the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 was the establishment of the Music Moves Europe ini�a�ve. The topline objec�ve of the ini�a�ve is “to build on and strengthen the sector's strong assets: crea�vity, diversity and compe��veness,” and to lay the groundwork for an integrated EU policy approach to music (Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture et al., 2023). Its four specific objec�ves are to: • Promote creativity and innovation • Safeguard and expand the diversity of European music • Help the sector adapt to and benefit from digitisation • Support the sector’s sustainable recovery from the COVID-19 crisis and its resilience Between 2018-2020, the ini�a�ve supported 60 small-scale projects under a dedicated Preparatory Ac�on, including the EMO Feasibility Study and four other EU studies: • Study on a European music export strategy (2020) • Analysis of market trends and gaps in funding needs for the music sector (2020) • Study on the health and wellbeing of music creators (2023) • Implementing steps to develop and promote European Music Export (2023) In 2021, the Music Moves Europe ini�a�ve received further support via the Crea�ve Europe programme 2021-2027, which includes a sector-specific approach to music (Brüt, 2020; p. 7). This support included a EUR 500,000 tender on “Strengthening the Dialogue on Music” by organizing a series of Music Moves Europe dialogue mee�ngs and a biennial conference on music involving stakeholders, which was won by the founding members of the Federa�on of Music Conferences (ARTmania Events SRL, S�ch�ng Eurosonic Noorderslag, Music Innova�on Hub SpA, MaMa Event, Inferno Events GmbH & Co. KG, and Shi�works OU). Notably, the tender also included “a request for conceptual work to provide an updated defini�on on Europe’s music ecosystem” (htps://etendering.ted.europa.eu/c�/c�-display.html?c�Id=10166). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 22 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 2.1.5 Council Resolu�on on the EU Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026 (2022) The Council Resolu�on on the EU Work Plan for Culture 2023–2026 (2022/C 466/01, 2022) entails a range of cross-sectoral ac�ons, in addi�on to specific ac�ons target the video game sector and libraries. It acknowledges the achievements of the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022 and establishes seven guiding principles and four priori�es for EU-level cultural policy and ac�on. The guiding principles emphasise the intrinsic value of culture in general, cultural heritage, and cultural and linguis�c diversity; the importance of freedom of ar�s�c expression and crea�vity; the role of cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue in promo�ng human rights; the poten�al of culture to contribute to sustainable development, economic prosperity, social inclusion, equality, mutual respect, and the fight against violence and discrimina�on. The Council Resolu�on also stresses the importance of the use of high-quality data and sta�s�cs in the implementa�on of cultural ac�ons. Regarding the men�oned principles, the Resolu�on establishes the following priori�es: a) Artists and cultural professionals: empowering the cultural and creative sectors b) Culture for the people: enhancing cultural participation and the role of culture in society c) Culture for the planet: unleashing the power of culture d) Culture for co-creative partnerships: strengthening the cultural dimension of EU external relations The Resolu�on furthermore invites the Commission and other decision-makers to report on results and findings by 2026, and to consider proposing an EU strategic framework for culture. Within each priority area, the Resolu�on prescribes a number of ac�ons. Those ac�ons relevant to the music sector are summarised below, along with brief notes on their relevance (in italic text). Note that the ac�on “c1. Cultural sta�s�cs – to build resilience in and through culture” is in fact a cross-cu�ng ac�on relevant to data collec�on in all areas, in par�cular on cultural par�cipa�on and the societal impacts of culture in general (e.g., “culture for the people”). Note that the ac�ons are not numbered in the original document. Priority A – Ar�sts and cultural professionals: empowering the cultural and crea�ve sector • A1 Status and working conditions of artists and cultural and creative professionals (working methods: follow-up to the ongoing OMC group; thematic workshops; possible conference). An online platform is proposed to disseminate information about working conditions in the CCSIs, as well as data on topics such as diversity, mobility, and gender relations within the sector. The AB MUSIC Working Group and other structured dialogues with the music sector confirm that this topic is of the highest sectoral relevance. The OMC report on The status and working conditions of artists and cultural and creative professionals (Directorate-General for Education, 2023) has since been released, and platform has been launched at https://creativesunite.eu/work-condition/. • A2 Artistic freedom (working methods: conference, followed by related Council conclusions). Ideas and good practices will be exchanged regarding the importance of artistic freedom, links between culture and democracy, and challenges faced by artists. As an expressive form with particular political resonance, music is particularly vulnerable to censorship (Kirkegaard & Otterbeck, 2017). • A3 Stimulate the digital transformation of the cultural and creative sectors (working methods: conference, possibly followed by related Council conclusions). Experiences will be exchanged in order to identify transferable best practices to promote a coherent and sustainable digital transformation across the CCSIs. The AB MUSIC Working Group Report and numerous projects funded under Creative Europe and the Music Moves Europe programme D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 23 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 confirm that music is often a ‘canary in the coal mine’ with regard to the impact of digitalisation on creative professionals and the need for a proactive rather than reactive approach. • A4 Stimulate the green transition of the cultural and creative sectors, with a specific focus on the energy crisis (working methods: workshops or OMC groups; a stocktaking exercise on the energy crisis for sharing best practices). Experiences will be exchanged to identify transferable best practices on CO2 calculators and supporting the CSS efforts to adapt to the green transitions. This action intersects directly with Open Music Europe task 3.3, the development of an ESG reporting tool tailored for CCSI MSMEs and small CSOs. • A5 Enhancing the cultural and creative dimension in the European video games sector – this is a sectoral action only marginally relevant to music. Priority B – Culture for the people: enhancing cultural par�cipa�on and the role of culture in society • B1 Culture and promoting democracy: towards cultural citizenship in Europe (working methods: peer learning; possible conference bringing together policy makers and relevant stakeholders in the cultural and educational sectors). Experiences on utilizing culture to enhance democracy will be exchanged and examples of best practices will be selected. Here it is important to note the longstanding relationship between music and pro-democratic movements in Europe, from post-WWII Germany (Anderton, 2016) to contemporary postEastern Bloc states such as Bulgaria (Buchanan, 2006). This topic is further addressed in Section 2.3.4 below. • B2 Culture and health (working methods: possible conference; possible informal meetings of officials from ministries of culture and health; short-term OMC group on including culture in health policies – exchanging good practices with a special focus on mental health). The aim is to raise awareness of the positive effects of culture, create more cross-sectoral cooperation among decision-makers, develop recommendations for implementing participatory cultural practices with a focus on mental health, and continue mapping good practices. Among the arts, the role of music in health care is comparatively well-studied; this topic is addressed in Section 2.3.9 below. • B3 Building bridges: strengthen the multiple roles of libraries as gateways to and transmitters of cultural works, skills and European values (working methods: OMC group; workshops; conference). Aims of the actions are to create a comprehensive debate on how to best promote and strengthen libraries, identify different dimensions and areas with potential, explore funding lines under EU programmes, bring together policy makers and library professionals and explore possibilities for training and further activities for professionals. Ensuring that the music sector is represented in this action would be beneficial, as music libraries and music information centres are important players within the music data space. • B4 Protection of children and young people from harmful content on digital platforms (working methods: workshop(s)/round table discussion(s)). Best practices will be identified and supports to ensure protection and empowerment of children and young people online, both in the Member States and on EU level. Viewed from a music sector perspective, this is a delicate topic, given the history of “moral panics” on music and the complex discourse on content labelling (e.g. Deflem, 2020; Hjelm et al., 2011); this is all the more reason for proactive sectoral participation. • B5 Discoverability of diverse European cultural content in the digital environment (working methods: technical study and/or workshop). Innovative projects, specific tools and accessibility to content (e.g. for people with lower income or disabilities) will be reviewed, with a focus on less-explored and less-regulated sectors such as music or books. As streaming services have become the dominant channels for music consumption, this topic is particularly critical to the sector; it is also a focus of Open Music Europe task 2.3, the Listen Local project. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 24 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Priority C – Culture for the planet: unleashing the power of culture • C1 Cultural statistics – to build resilience in and through culture (working methods: series of workshops and/or peer-learning activities; discussions with Eurostat and EU Member States’ statistical offices). Best practices among the Member States will be exchanged and a set of harmonised and comparable statistics identified and developed across the EU, covering gender equality aspects, the labour dimension, economic support, and cultural participation. As mentioned above, this is in fact a cross-cutting priority that builds upon the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022. It is particularly important for the Open Music Europe project to follow up on the work done in this action, or better, participate in it directly. • C2 Cultural governance (working methods: think-tank meeting, possibly followed by related Council conclusions). A new model of cultural governance will be developed proposing futureoriented approaches to holistically address current challenges. Here it should be noted that governance is an important topic on an organisational as well as a sectoral level, especially as it constitutes a domain within the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). The ESG reporting tool developed in Open Music Europe task 3.3 addresses governance alongside environmental and social sustainability. • C3 Climate action through culture, including the arts and cultural heritage (working methods: follow-up to the 2022 OMC reports; workshops, possibly followed by related Council conclusions). Knowledge will be exchanged regarding innovative artistic and cultural approaches, including measures under the RRF, to address the climate crisis, help transform behaviour to do so, and advance EU-funded research on this topic. A number of initiatives have focused on improving the climate impact of different sub-sectors within music, especially festivals. The ESG reporting tool developed in Open Music Europe task 3.3 should improve MSMEs’ capacity to assess their climate impact and set informed goals for improvement. • C4 High quality living environment for everyone (working methods: European Directors for Architectural Policies (EDAP) meetings; promotion of the NEB initiative via post-OMC expert network exchanges; possible organisation of a European conference on architectural policies). Good practices will be exchanged among the EDAP; existing legislative frameworks and relevant initiatives in the field will be reviewed; potentially, new processes to foster the inclusion of high-quality standards in new policies and programmes will be set up. While this action focuses explicitly on architecture, it intersects with the topic of noise pollution and the sonic environment more generally, which is mentioned in the EMO Feasibility Study as relevant to the sector (p. 116). • C5 Safeguarding heritage against natural and human-made disasters (working methods: peer-learning activities (workshops, visits) and/or conference). A comprehensive inventory of relevant manuals, guidelines and methodology to facilitate the design and implementation of risk and emergency preparedness measures will be produced, alongside capacity and skill building of stakeholders. As with the above action, the focus here is likely on tangible rather than intangible heritage; however, scientific research has been done on the adverse impact of climate change on musical traditions (e.g., Ryan, 2015), and music sector participation in the action would be positive. • C6 Exchanging information between cultural heritage professionals and competent authorities for cultural goods on the fight against trafficking cultural goods (working methods: series of workshops complementary to the upcoming EU Action Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods for 2023-2027; peer learning). The actions aim to assess and improve the cooperation between the actors involved, allowing them to gain insight into each other’s working methods, identifying risks and problems, and working on possible recommendations for improvement. While it is possible that musical instruments or other musical heritage objects are among the cultural goods that are trafficked illegally, this action is comparatively low priority for the sector. However, a parallel area of illegal trade that does remain relevant is audiovisual piracy. The EMO Feasibility Study identifies piracy among the D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 25 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 data availabilities/gaps in the pillar on music, society, and citizenship, and recommends a “Study on online piracy in the EU, and piracy of European content outside the EU” as a potential “quick win” for a future EMO (2020, p. 67). Piracy has accordingly been added to the concept mapping in this deliverable (Section 2.3 below). Priority D – Culture for co-crea�ve partnerships: strengthening the cultural dimension of EU external rela�ons • D1 Governance of the EU strategic approach to international cultural relations and framework (working methods: short-term OMC, senior officials’ meetings). The aim is to establish a cross-cutting and inclusive methodology, proposing future working structures and methods to reinforce, harmonise, and sustain cultural cooperation in international relations, engaging all pertinent stakeholders. Music has long been an important element in cultural diplomacy and international cultural relations (Ramel & Prévost-Thomas, 2018), and • D2 Preserving cultural heritage and empowering local CCS in Ukraine (working methods: Commission-led expert group or think-tank meetings and peer-learning/training activities; meetings with Permanent Representations). Possible joint measures, synergies and best practices for the support of Ukrainian cultural and creative actors, and the preservation, protection and reconstruction of Ukrainian cultural heritage and cultural institutions will be assessed. Open Music Europe is committed to empowering Ukrainian CCSIs. Partners REPREX and Music Exchange Ukraine (MEU) will explore the transfer of the Listen Local project, piloted in Open Music Europe WP2, to Ukraine. • D3 The role of culture and cultural professionals in the promotion and defence of democracy and human rights in fragile contexts (working methods: possible joint meetings with relevant Council Working Parties; joint stocktaking conference/seminar with the European Parliament, the Council of Europe, UNESCO and civil society. A comprehensive overview of situations, needs, etc. of cultural human rights defenders will be created. As an art form historically bound to political culture, music is especially vulnerable to censorship; for details, see Section 2.3.5 below. The inclusion of music sector stakeholders in this action is crucial. 2.2 National Cultural and Music Policy Agendas The target countries for primary data collec�on in Open Music Europe WP3 are Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and Slovakia. A fundamental review of cultural policy in these countries was conducted based on Compendium of Cultural Policies and Trends reports (Agos�no et al., 2022; Blumenreich, 2022; Inkei, 2021; Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic et al., 2018; Tomova & Andreeva, 2020). Note that with the excep�on of Slovakia, this review is only current up to the dates of these reports. Over the course of the project, aten�on will be paid to bringing this review up to date with regard to music policy in par�cular, through both desk research and dialogue with governmental and scien�fic stakeholders. The review was guided by the same ques�ons iden�fied in Sec�on 2.1 above (based on the WP3 focal points). Aten�on was furthermore paid to the convergence or divergence of na�onal cultural policy agendas with the priori�es and ac�ons of the EU Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026. The following table summarises the relevance of each ac�on to na�onal-level policy agendas; for number references, see Annex 3 (as noted above, the ac�on c1. Cultural statistics – to build resilience in and through culture is in fact a cross-cu�ng ac�on relevant to data collec�on in all areas, in par�cular on cultural par�cipa�on and the societal impacts of culture in general, e.g., “culture for the people”): D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 32 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 The following priori�es are stated under Objec�ve 2: a. Priority 2.1 - Stimulate the share of private resources in the cultural and creative industries as a means of increasing resources. b. Priority 2.2 - Promote culture and the creative industries through legislative and financial instruments. c. Priority 2.3 - Strengthen instruments to promote investment in the form of sustainable construction, reconstruction, modernisation, rehabilitation of technical equipment and debarring. d. Priority 2.4 - Systematise support from public subsidy funds for culture and creative industries. e. Priority 2.5 - Stabilise funding for public service media. f. Priority 2.6 - Coordinate the discussion on the various forms of funding for churches and religious societies. Objec�ve 3 – A dignified culture. Objec�ve 3 aims to “improve condi�ons for the work and crea�on of people working in the cultural and crea�ve industries.” The Ministry is advised to support people ac�ve in culture and the crea�ve industries, both by providing them with the necessary educa�on to pursue a career, and by ensuring decent working condi�ons, including fair remunera�on for their work independent of their employment status. The following priori�es are stated under Objec�ve 3: a. Priority 3.1 - Remove barriers to individuals and institutions in the cultural and creative industries. b. Priority 3.2 - Prevent precarisation of work in the cultural and creative industries. c. Priority 3.3 - Support self-governing professional organisations of people working in the cultural and creative industries. Objec�ve 4 – Quality culture. In Objec�ve 4, it is recommended to “increase exper�se, innova�on and quality in the culture and crea�ve industries”. In order to achieve this objec�ve, the main focus is put on educa�on, se�ng educa�on standards, and encouraging life-long learning for professionals in culture and the crea�ve industries. At the same �me, the Ministry is advised to improve cultural educa�on within the general popula�on and build cultural curiosity early on in school educa�on, and thereby develop a more educated and cri�cal audience. The following priori�es are stated under Objec�ve 4: a. Priority 4.1 - Develop and then maintain an effective formal education system for professionals working in the field of culture and creative industries. b. Priority 4.2 - Develop lifelong learning opportunities for cultural professionals and creative industries. c. Priority 4.3 - Promote and develop theory, criticism, reflection, research and management in the arts, culture, history, creative industries, and disciplines related to arts and crafts. d. Priority 4.4 - Support the creation, production, and dissemination of innovative cultural content. Objec�ve 5 – Inclusive culture. Objec�ve 5 aims to “Ensure that culture is accessible and that its specifici�es are developed for all”, thus taking an inclusive approach, making culture accessible and affordable for all popula�on groups, including minori�es, and to offer spaces to create, present, and par�cipate in culture. Culture needs to be comprehensive and allow for communica�on and D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 33 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 collabora�on between different popula�on groups. In addi�on, buildings and equipment should be made barrier-free. The following priori�es are stated under Objec�ve 5: a. Priority 5.1 - Support the cultural and artistic activities of national minorities and ethnic groups and their presentation to the general public. b. Priority 5.2 - Support the artistic activities of marginalised, disadvantaged, and vulnerable groups and their presentation to the general public. c. Priority 5.3 - Develop tools to support access to culture and creative industries for marginalised, disadvantaged, and vulnerable groups. d. Priority 5.4 - Develop intercultural cooperation and dialogue. e. Priority 5.5 - Promote inter-faith dialogue. Objec�ve 6 – Respected culture. In Objec�ve 6, it is recommended to “increase the pres�ge of culture and crea�ve industries and improve their recogni�on as an important value for society at the na�onal level, streamline foreign presenta�on and interna�onal coopera�on.”. In comparison to other European countries, Slovakia lags behind in passive cultural par�cipa�on, which needs to be changed by increasing the value given to culture within the popula�on, by improving cultural educa�on, and by making culture more accessible. The following priori�es are stated under Objec�ve 6: a. Priority 6.1 - Systematically promote people's cultural participation in all areas of arts and culture. b. Priority 6.2 - Increase the accessibility and security of tangible and intangible cultural heritage. c. Priority 6.3 - Promote positive attitudes and attitudes towards art and culture in all periods of their lives. d. Priority 6.4 - Develop a systematic presentation of culture and creative industries abroad through the promotion of international cooperation and mobility. e. Priority 6.5 - Promote collaboration between actors across different groups and areas of the cultural and creative industries. Objec�ve 7 – Responsible culture. Objec�ve 7 aims to “par�cipate in iden�fying and addressing current environmental and other societal challenges, thereby increasing societal cohesion and resilience.” The idea is to leverage the public impact of culture and the crea�ve industries to create awareness for and tackle societal problems, such as the environmental crisis, shape opinions, improve cri�cal thinking and increase resilience to misinforma�on. What is more, culture and the crea�ve industries should be encouraged to reduce their nega�ve impact on the environment and instead opt for sustainable solu�ons. The following priori�es are stated under Objec�ve 7: a. Priority 7.1 - Promote the social and environmental responsibility of organisations active in the cultural and creative industries. b. Priority 7.2 - Support the creation, production, dissemination and visibility of sustainable products and projects in the cultural and creative industries. c. Priority 7.3 - Develop trans-ministerial and international cooperation, particularly on topics addressing current environmental and other societal challenges. d. Priority 7.4 - Increase the resilience of culture and creative industries in crisis situations. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 34 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 e. Priority 7.5 - Support activities to develop media education, critical thinking and the fight against the spread of misinformation. f. Priority 7.6 - Strengthen media pluralism and independence. g. Priority 7.7 - Ensure increased protection and safety of journalists and women journalists. Each of these objec�ves is mapped to specific quan�ta�ve KPIs, which are included in Sec�on 5.2.5. 2.3 Concept Mapping of Policy Priorities and Scientific Literature Review The ESSnet-Culture Final Report establishes harmonisa�on as a priority in the improvement of cultural sta�s�cs in Europe (Bína et al., 2014; p. 17). It builds upon the 1986 UNESCO Framework for cultural sta�s�cs, the Council Resolu�on of 20 November 1995 on the promo�on of sta�s�cs on culture and economic growth, and the work of the Leadership Group Culture or LEG-Culture (1997-2000) and Eurostat Working Group on cultural sta�s�cs (2001-2004), and the Work Plan for Culture 2008-2010, which iden�fied the improvement and comparability of cultural sta�s�cs as a priority. A prerequisite for this is the standardisa�on and consistent transla�on of concepts and constructs (p. 252). The policy priori�es and ac�ons established on the EU level are interpretable within the ESSnet-Culture framework, insofar as they mostly target the iden�fied func�ons of culture in one or more domain. However, numerous concepts and areas of ac�on have emerged as policy leitmo�fs since the report’s publica�on, such as culture and democracy and culture and sustainability. This calls for an updated mapping. One way to achieve this in a manner consistent with the logic of the ESSnet-Culture framework is to draw on mul�lingual controlled vocabularies, such as EuroVoc, a thesaurus covering the ac�vi�es of the EU managed by the Publica�ons Office of the European Union. In prepara�on for a review of data and scien�fic literature, the policy priori�es and corresponding ac�ons outlined in the Council Resolu�on on the EU Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026 were mapped to EuroVoc concepts. In the instance that a fi�ng EuroVoc concept could not be found, other EU-managed controlled vocabularies were used (e.g., ECLAS, which is based on the Macrothesaurus of OECD complemented by the ILO thesaurus, and par�ally convergent with EuroVoc). Subsidiary “ac�on concepts” on music were then proposed. The full mapping is provided in Annex 4. As noted in Sec�on 1, this concept mapping guided the defini�on of research ques�ons and a review of scien�fic literature. In order to synergise with ESSnet-Culture, each concept was furthermore assigned to a pillar in the ICET model, as well as a proposed sub-heading. This breakdown guided a review of the scien�fic literature. Each sec�on begins with an overview of data available on the European level, e.g., via Eurostat or periodic surveying programmes. It then progresses to a review of key topics in the scien�fic literature and grey literature. A�er the literature review, the mapping was slightly revised to beter reflect the scien�fic state of the art. 2.3.1 Informa�on: Music educa�on This section summarises a selection of literature on music education and music vocational education. A guiding question is: what are the roles and comparative importance of formal, non-formal, and informal education and vocational education in musical engagement in Europe? Educa�on is one of the six cultural func�ons iden�fied by the ESSnet-Culture Final Report (along with crea�on, produc�on/publishing, dissemina�on/trade, preserva�on, and management/regula�on; p. 44). Adap�ng defini�ons from the Interna�onal Standard Classifica�on of Educa�on (ISCED) and the Classifica�on of Learning Ac�vi�es (CLA), is possible to dis�nguish between: D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 35 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 • Formal music education, which is “institutionalised, intentional and planned through public organisations and recognised private bodies […] recognised as such by the relevant national education or equivalent authorities” (cf. ISCED, 2011). This includes compulsory and optional music education in primary and secondary schools, music-focused vocational education (if relevant), and music-focused tertiary education. • Non-formal music education, which is “institutionalised, intentional and planned by an education provider [… as] an addition, alternative and/or complement to formal education within the process of lifelong learning of individuals” (cf. ISCED, 2011). This includes vocational and continuing education in the form of non-degree programmes, workshops, etc., as well as non-vocational offerings such as workshops on music appreciation, music history, etc. • Informal music education, which is “intentional, but it is less organised and less structured ... and may include for example learning events (activities) that occur in the family, in the workplace, and in the daily life of every person, on a self-directed, family-directed or sociallydirected basis” (cf., CLA 2016). This includes individual music lessons, participation in amateur music organisations, musical practice among friends and family, etc. While cultural educa�on is not covered in the 2018 Guide to Eurostat cultural statistics (Eurostat, 2018b), a chapter on “Culture-related educa�on” is included in the most recent report Eurostat Cultural statistics report. This chapter does not provide informa�on specific to music educa�on, but does offer: • Breakdowns of tertiary (ISCED levels 5 to 8) students in culture-related fields, including the arts (ISCED-F 2013 field 021), but not disaggregated by individual artistic fields such as music and performing arts (ISCED-F 2013 field 0215; pp. 47-48); • Statistics on number of tertiary students from abroad and the mobility of students and trainees under the Erasmus programme, but not disaggregated by field (pp. 54-59). A priority during the data collec�on phase of Open Music Europe WP3 will be to determine the granularity with which sta�s�cs on students in culture-related fields can be disaggregated with regard to field; the R package eurostat maintained by project partner UTU will be used (see Sec�on 4 below). An addi�onal source of cross-na�onal data on educa�on is the OECD Programme for Interna�onal Student Assessment (PISA). A cursory review shows that: • The 2018 student questionnaire codebook includes items on hours per week attending instruction on music (EC001Q06NA), time spent using digital devices during classroom lessons in a typical school week to access music (IC150Q06HA), and digital music device used for learning or teaching during lessons within the last month (IC152Q06HA). Notably, it also includes items on musical instruments kept in the home (ST012Q09NA), portable music players available in the home (IC001Q08TA), and time spent using digital devices outside of classroom lessons in a typical school week to access music (IC151Q06HA), as well as music-related occupation codes for the mother, father, and self (2354: Other music teachers; 2652: Musicians, singers and composers; 7312: Musical instrument makers and tuners). • The 2018 school questionnaire codebook includes the item <This academic year>, activities offered to <national modal grade for 15-year-olds>: School play or school musical (SC053Q02TA), but no items on music alone. • The 2018 teacher questionnaire codebook includes the item Teach it in the <national modal grade for 15-year-olds> in the current school year: Arts (TC018Q08NB), but not music specifically. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 36 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 PISA microdata is available from the OECD; a more thorough explora�on of the relevance of PISA data to formal music educa�on will be conducted during the data collec�on phase of WP3. One challenge to the collec�on of data on par�cipa�on in formal music educa�on is the variability of school structures in the EU in general, and in arts and music educa�on programmes in par�cular. The Music Educa�on Network (meNet) project collected data on poli�cal/policy frameworks, school systems and structures, music educa�on in schools, music curricula, and pathways for future development in 20 EU countries, finding significant differences in: • The age ranges covered by various levels of compulsory education; • The indicative compulsory time dedicated to music education at the early childhood, primary, and secondary levels; • The availability of optional music education at these levels; • The framing and contents of music curricula (Music Education Network, 2023). The meNet project determined that there is “no consistent way in which curriculum documents construct and present aims, content or learning outcomes for music” – though most do break down the “basic ac�vi�es of music making: composing, performing, listening and understanding” (ibid.). With regard to genre and style, a focus on art music and/or na�onal tradi�ons is common, with only a few references to jazz and popular music; all curriculum documents emphasise “the importance of becoming familiar with the music of one’s country and cultural heritage”, whereas around half also make reference to the value of “developing wider cultural understanding through engagement with music from around the globe” (ibid.). The project furthermore found varying degrees of autonomy on a sub-na�onal level regarding how music educa�on is implemented within very general na�onal-level prescrip�ons and constraints (ibid.). During the data collec�on phase of Open Music Europe WP3, outreach will be made to the Ins�tut für Musikpädagogik Wien, which coordinated the Music Educa�on Network project, with a request for methodological details (see Sec�on 4 below). As with music educa�on in compulsory educa�on, data collec�on on higher music educa�on in Europe is not consistent across member states. As noted in the Analysis of market trends and gaps in funding needs for the music sector, the European Associa�on of Conservatories, Music Academies and Musikhochschulen (AEC) collects data from member ins�tu�ons which allows a par�al assessment of the number of higher music educa�on ins�tu�ons in 17 member states and the number of music students in 18 member states (cited in Le Gall et al., 2020, p. 10-11). The AEC has also recently introduced an innova�ve data portal on 79 completed and 67 ongoing “digital prac�ces” carried out by staff of 46 ins�tu�ons in 36 ci�es across Europe (Guaus & SMS Digi�sa�on Working Group, 2023; Strengthening Music in Society, 2023). During the data collec�on phase of Open Music Europe WP3, outreach will be made to the AEC with a request for methodological details (see Sec�on 4 below). With regard to non-formal and informal arts and music educa�on, data have not been made available on the EU level. Some data may exist via open ques�ons on non-formal educa�on (NFE) and informal educa�on (INF) in the EU-wide Adult Educa�on Survey (Strengthening Music in Society, 2023) (see Sec�on 4.1 below). During the data collec�on phase of this work package, a request will be made for AES microdata with the intent of analysing these ques�ons. Two important recent resources on non-formal and informal arts and music educa�on with a focus on music professionals are the Finance, Learning, Innova�on and Intellectual Property Rights for the Cultural and Crea�ve Sectors and Industries (Crea�ve FLIP) project report on Learning: Skills needs and gaps in the CCSI (VVA, 2021) and the EC OMC report on The status and working conditions of artists and cultural and creative professionals (Directorate-General for Educa�on, 2023), produced within the scope of Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026. The Crea�ve FLIP report summarises educa�onal pathways, D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 37 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 skills needs, and skills mismatches for selected crea�ve occupa�ons, two of which are “singer” and “violin maker” (note that these selec�ons are intended as illustra�ve rather than representa�ve). It concludes that in many MS, these (and by extension other) music occupa�ons “benefit from high quality educa�on levels and educa�onal ins�tu�ons”, but also that “a recurring issue was that curricula do not reflect the needs of the job market”, e.g., in terms of required managerial and/or technical skills (pp. 56-57). It concludes that while formal professional educa�on must remain the bedrock of a successful music career, informal and non-formal offerings play an indispensable role in readying professionals for the market and preparing them to adapt to its con�nual transforma�on. The EC OMC report further emphasises the importance of informal and non-formal skill acquisi�on and lifelong learning, and offers examples of EU-funded good prac�ces such as (pp. 69-71): • The EU Pact4Skills Large-Scale Partnership for the Cultural and Creative Industries Ecosystem and Creative Pact for Skills Manifesto (https://ecbnintra.notion.site/Creative-Pact-for-Skills-CP4S-Manifesto-7ab34b220bf54dfc98fb7bac8ad93627) a partnership with broad aims that includes “European umbrella associations, networks, sectoral associations, vocational education and training providers, and trade unions” (p. 69); • Various Erasmus+ Skills Blueprint projects for the CCSIs, including Cyanotypes (https://cyanotypes.website/), which conducts a scenario-based appraisal of future skills needs, and the European Cultural Heritage Skills Alliance (https://charter-alliance.eu/), which aims to develop a sectoral strategy for bridging educational offerings and occupational needs; • The newly established EIT Culture & Creativity KIC (https://eit.europa.eu/eit-community/eitculture-creativity), which will focus on technological upskilling of creatives; • The Creative FLIP project (https://creativeflip.creativehubs.net/), which supports CCSI actors in improving access to finance, updating skills classifications, piloting innovative learning and upskilling projects, and building capacity in topics related to IPR; • The Innovation and Creative Solutions for Cultural Heritage (INCREAS) project (https://www.increas.eu/), which focuses on digital adaptation in the heritage sector; • The Creative Skills Europe platform (https://www.creativeskillseurope.eu/), which facilitates networking across stakeholder groups and provides resources such as podcasts and webinars. Notably, these reports do not quan�fy or analyse the distribu�on of EU funding for (informal) music educa�on through projects such as these. However, the EU ins�tu�ons have been standardising the means by which EU-funded project data is disseminated and improving their machine-readability: see, e.g., the Crea�ve Europe portal (htps://culture.ec.europa.eu/crea�ve-europe/projects/search/), Erasmus+ portal (htps://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/projects/search/), and CORDIS Horizon Europe, Horizon 2020, and FP7 results portal (htps://cordis.europa.eu/projects). The CORDIS portal in par�cular now enables full project dataset downloads as machine-readable open linked data. As such standardisa�on measures progress, they should enable such analysis. While outside the scope of the Open Music Europe descrip�on of ac�on, this possibility will be explored during the project. The scien�fic literature on formal, non-formal, and informal music educa�on is also robust. Formal music educa�on in Europe, such as in schools, conservatories, and music academies, provides a structured environment for learning music theory, history, and prac�cal skills, as well as access to trained teachers, instruments, and performance opportuni�es that may be limited in informal se�ngs. It also ensures a standardisa�on of musical training and provides a common basis for students from different backgrounds. Formal music educa�on focuses mainly on classical music and na�onal tradi�ons, as well as some�mes jazz. In the last 20 years, however, popular music has also increasingly found its way into the field of formal academic educa�on. Two examples from Germany are the D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 38 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Popakademie Mannheim (courses such as “Pop Music Design”, “World Music”, and “Popular Music”) and the University of Paderborn (“Popular Music and Media”). Informal music educa�on allows for a wider range of musical styles to be explored, pop music o�en being viewed as the prime example of informal learning in music (Green, 2017). Informal music educa�on is not only used to refer to music educa�on taking place outside of ins�tu�onal se�ng but also in the means of a specific style of learning, regardless of where it takes place (Folkestad, 2006). Informal music educa�on accommodates various learning styles and encourages crea�vity, allowing individuals to explore music on their terms (Jenkins, 2011; Cayari, 2014; Baryga, 2022). In line with this, informal music educa�on o�en contributes to the forma�on of an individual musical iden�ty (Jenkins, 2011). Addi�onally, informal se�ngs, such as community events, fes�vals, and local performances, can contribute to the social aspect of musical engagement, fostering a sense of community and shared iden�ty through music (van der Merwe & Morelli, 2022). An important achievement of cultural studies is the iden�fica�on of music-centred youth cultures and scenes as places of resistance, (self-)socialisa�on, and the acquisi�on of skills. In doing so, they have shi�ed the focus away from the culturally pessimis�c assump�on that scenes are primarily forms of communi�sa�on where youth "learns" deviant behaviours that make no posi�ve contribu�on to society. The sociological concept of self-socialisa�on through media and music (Müller, 1994; Rhein et al., 2008) also emphasises that membership in youth cultures fundamentally requires an acquisi�on of skills and knowledge. The successful acquisi�on of such not only enables integra�on into socio-cultural contexts, but can also be significant beyond scene life. This also includes skills that can be put to prac�cal use in the workplace. Learning-by-doing and the word-of-mouth exchange of experiences within the scene play an important role in impar�ng skills relevant to the scene (Hitzler & Pfadenhauer, 2004), but scene-specific media (e.g. fanzines) are also “educators” (Calmbach, 2007; Calmbach & Rhein, 2007). The importance of formal and informal educa�on can vary for individuals. Formal educa�on is o�en seen as necessary for those pursuing professional careers in classical music or academia, while informal educa�on may be more relevant for those engaged in folk, popular, or contemporary music scenes. Informal educa�on holds great significance in preserving and promo�ng tradi�onal music within communi�es, especially in areas with limited resources or fewer formal educa�onal ins�tu�ons. Also Berbel & Gómez (2014) highlight the importance of coordina�on between formal and informal music educa�on to op�mise the use of resources available and enhance the quality of the educa�on. For example, integra�ng informal music learning prac�ces in schools' classrooms can bridge the gap between formal music educa�on and students' private musical worlds, allowing students to be ac�ve agents in their own learning process (Papazachariou-Christoforou, 2023). In conclusion, the roles and importance of formal and informal educa�on in musical engagement in Europe are mul�faceted, influenced by individual preferences, cultural contexts, and the specific goals of the learners. The interplay between these two forms of educa�on contributes to the diverse and dynamic musical landscape in the region. 2.3.2 Informa�on: Other music informa�on behaviour This section summarises a selection of literature on how people seek information about music outside the context of education (including via libraries): Guiding questions are: what are the roles and comparative importance of different channels and sources in music information repertoires in Europe? Informa�on-seeking about music outside the context of educa�on falls under the “informa�on” pillar of the ICET model advocated by the ESSnet-Culture Final Report, however, such informa�on-seeking is not included among report’s six domains of cultural ac�vity and is not well-represented in subsequent D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 39 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Eurostat publica�ons on cultural sta�s�cs. An excep�on is the inclusion of data on cultural uses of the internet collected within the Community survey on informa�on and communica�on technologies (ICT) usage in households and by individuals. The current model ques�onnaire module on internet use includes an item on listening to music (I_IUMUSS; see Sec�on 3 below); this could arguably be interpreted as indirect data on informa�on-seeking as well, as much online music listening takes place on streaming services in which music discovery, informa�on-seeking, and listening are integrated. However, more focused and granular data collec�on is clearly needed on this topic. Various methods have been employed to understand how individuals interact with and discover music. These include both tradi�onal qualita�ve and quan�ta�ve social research methods and the analysis of online behavioural data – in par�cular user data from streaming services, which have emerged as dominant channels for music discovery as well as listening. With regard to tradi�onal methods, for instance, Baltzis & Gardikio�s (2008) used a quan�ta�ve survey to explore the rela�onship between social values and music preferences and distribu�on channel choices, emphasizing the social dimensions that frame music consump�on. Cunningham et al. (2007) adopted a qualita�ve approach, tasking par�cipants drawn from a university course with maintaining a diary that noted each incident of unfamiliar music encounter. This approach allowed for a longitudinal record of behaviours as they occurred, vital for understanding paterns in music discovery. With regard to the analysis of online behaviour, Crosno et al. (2007) analysed music transac�ons made via retail establishments, websites, and downloading services, revealing how trust in channels influenced purchasing behaviour. More recently, Kaneshiro et al. (2017) used Shazam data to analyse how listeners interact with songs at specific musical events, offering a quan�ta�ve perspec�ve on contextual music discovery behaviours. Specifically, Kaneshiro et al. analysed millions of queries and discovered that the �ming of these queries was influenced by musical events within the songs, such as the onset of vocals and choruses. The study also noted that as a song's popularity increases, users tend to query it earlier, implying that repeated exposure to a song may affect discovery behaviours. This exemplifies how in the dynamic field of music informa�on retrieval and discovery, the context in which users engage with music cri�cally shapes their judgments of informa�on relevance. Similarly, an analysis of YouTube music video viewing paterns by Oh & Choeh (2022) suggested that visually rich content can significantly impact audience interac�on. Both studies suggest a direct rela�onship between certain elements of an audiovisual work and the audience impulse to discover more about it and/or interact with it. Music discovery has undergone significant transforma�on in the streaming age. Streaming services, beyond being pla�orms for listening, have emerged as primary vectors for discovering new music. While human-curated playlists on streaming services may provide more consistent recommenda�ons, algorithmic cura�on stands out as the most commonly used means of discovery (Lindsay, 2016). However, algorithmic cura�on is not a one-way street: the interplay between so�ware func�ons and user innova�on characterises the music informa�on retrieval space. Users not only use so�ware as intended but also in crea�ve, unintended ways. Here, the incorpora�on of tradi�onal qualita�ve methods can shed light on dimensions that are difficult to capture through big data analysis alone: the diary-based method used by Cunningham et al. (2007), for instance, uncovered differences in the way users encounter music via various online and offline channels in mul�ple se�ngs, sugges�ng that design improvements could incorporate user behaviour paterns, like those observed with mobile devices. However, despite the rise of digital pla�orms, tradi�onal methods like radio and word of mouth retain their importance in how users find new music (Cunningham et al., 2007). A poli�cally relevant topic in music informa�on behaviour is bias. Biases in music recommender systems refer to the presence of systema�c and unfair preferences or prejudices in the recommenda�ons provided by these systems. These biases can manifest in various forms and impact D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 40 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 different aspects of the recommenda�on process. The most inves�gated types of bias in music recommender systems are gender bias, popularity bias, cultural or country bias, and intersec�onal biases, combining one or more of these biases. Gender bias is evident in both "organic" streaming and streams programmed by music recommenda�on systems (MRSs). In organic streaming, 21.75% of tracks are from either women or mul�-gender forma�ons, while MRSs increase this number to 23.55%. This gender gap aligns with datasets extracted from the streaming pla�orm Last.fm, where only 23% of solo ar�sts are women, reflec�ng the gender gap in the music industry (Epps-Darling et al., 2020). Furthermore, the study reveals that in lower popularity levels, more mul�-gender groups and female creators exist, but at the top level, solo female ar�sts dominate, influenced by selected superstars and genres (Epps-Darling et al., 2020). Ferraro et al. (2020) also found, that male ar�sts receive almost twice the reach of female ar�sts, indica�ng a substan�al imbalance, especially when considering the number of hits, where male ar�sts receive significantly more recommenda�ons. Popularity bias is partly introduced through collabora�ve filtering, where popular music items receive more ra�ngs, leading recommenda�on systems to favour frequently rated, popular items over less popular ones (Bauer, 2021). The intersec�on of gender and popularity bias is a crucial aspect, as most recommenders intensify the popularity bias of female users, contribu�ng to unequal exposure and opportuni�es (Lesota et al., 2021). Regarding country bias, recommenda�on algorithms significantly expose more US and UK ar�sts, penalizing ar�sts from other countries in terms of reach (Ferraro et al., 2020). These biases collec�vely underscore the challenges and dispari�es present in music recommenda�on systems, necessita�ng a closer examina�on and adjustments to promote fairness and inclusivity. Research on algorithmic bias is widespread and interdisciplinary – it has yet to be determined the extent to which this will be taken up as a primary focus in the Open Music Europe empirical research. 2.3.3 Communica�on and community: Music and social life This section summarises a selection of literature on music, social life, and social aspects of working life. Guiding questions are: how do offline and online social network dynamics shape musical life in Europe and vice versa, for the general population on the one hand and music professionals on the other? What role do music and musical activities play in socialisation? The role of social networks in culture and socialisa�on via cultural ac�vi�es fall under the “communica�on and community” pillar of the ICET model advocated by the ESSnet-Culture Final Report (Bína et al., 2014), however, these topics are not represented in subsequent Eurostat publica�ons on cultural sta�s�cs. Sta�s�cs on cultural employment and cultural par�cipa�on alike focus on the individual, and do not shed light on interac�on between individuals; data on expenditure on cultural goods focus are collected on the household level, but do not shed light on interac�ons within the household. Fortunately, as with music educa�on, the scien�fic literature on music and social life is robust. Researchers have used a range of methods to study this topic: for instance, social network analysis (SNA) allows researchers to chart the movement of musical influence and the interplay of social elements within music worlds, offering a structural perspec�ve on the cultural ecosystem of music (Crossley et al., 2014; McAndrew & Everet, 2015). Complemen�ng the macro-level insights provided by SNA, qualita�ve research methods offer a micro-level view through interviews and par�cipant observa�ons, which capture the nuanced, personal interac�ons individuals have with music in social contexts. For instance, by evalua�ng adolescents' reflec�ons on their live music experiences, researchers can glean an understanding of how these events play into overall social life (Kinnunen et al., 2020). Much research on this topic is case-study-based, offering a focused examina�on of par�cular instances of community music engagement. By evalua�ng and contras�ng various music projects, D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 41 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 researchers can determine their contribu�ons to broader societal objec�ves like na�on-building and social healing. This method is valuable in contextualizing music's role in addressing contemporary social issues and fostering a sense of unity and shared iden�ty within communi�es (van der Merwe & Morelli, 2022). However, researchers have also striven to uncover general principles of musical socialisa�on, for instance, by using tools like neuroimaging to explore how musical ac�vi�es synchronise with and enhance social bonding on the level of basic cogni�ve processes (Greenberg et al., 2021). Within this broad field of ques�ons, the Open Music Europe consor�um may concentrate aten�on on ques�ons such as the role of music in social networks among the general popula�on and/or professionals (Crossley et al., 2014; McAndrew & Everet, 2015), its presence in social media (Waldron, 2017), its contribu�on to the forma�on of social iden�ty (Kinnunen et al., 2020; van der Merwe & Morelli, 2022), and its capacity to drive social change (Rabinowitch, 2020). 2.3.4 Communica�on and community: Music, society, and poli�cs This section summarises a selection of literature on the relationship between music and a broad set of topics in society and politics:. It also addresses the topics of musical heritage and the scope of the nonprofit sector in music (e.g., music organisations and civil society organisations involved in music). Some guiding questions are: how does music mediate social engagement in Europe, especially in policyrelevant areas such as social cohesion and inclusion, civic participation, and environmental engagement? Can initiatives and policy interventions that target music produce positive outcomes in these policy-relevant areas? Music, and culture more broadly, are vectors not only for socialisa�on but also for individual and ins�tu�onal engagement on societal issues. This is a high-priority subject area in EU-level policy (as noted in Sec�on 2 above), as well as in recent work by high-level ins�tu�ons: the OECD report The Culture Fix: Creative People, Places and Industries, for instance, dives into the impact of culture on social inclusion and integra�on, social cohesion, cultural and crea�ve entrepreneurship, civic par�cipa�on, and the capacity to address societal challenges (OECD, 2022). Despite falling under the “communica�on and community” pillar of the ICET model, these topics are not covered in Eurostat publica�ons on cultural sta�s�cs. This might be in part due to the difficulty of opera�onalising complex cross-domain constructs such as the rela�onship between culture and civic engagement. A though�ul indica�on of how EU-level sta�s�cal data could be u�lised to explore such constructs is the Indicator Framework on Culture and Democracy project, commissioned by the Council of Europe and implemented by a research team at the Her�e School of Governance led by the eminent sociologist Helmut Anheier. The Framework iden�fies shared components within the domains of “culture” and “democracy”, such as par�cipa�on, as well as components unique to each domain but poten�ally interrelated, such as cultural funding and government capability (Council of Europe, 2016). Domain Dimension Component Culture Civic Cultural participation Culture Policy Cultural funding Culture Policy Cultural openness Culture Policy Cultural education Culture Economic Cultural industries Culture Economic Cultural infrastructure Culture Freedom and equality Cultural access and representation Democracy Civic Political participation D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 48 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 community and belonging among par�cipants. However, it also brings aten�on to the organisa�onal challenges inherent in managing amateur choirs, highligh�ng the need for effec�ve leadership and suppor�ve structures. Qualita�ve and cultural studies approaches can shed light on the experien�al dimension of amateur musical prac�ce. From a cultural studies perspec�ve, the dis�nc�on between professionals and amateurs regarding their crea�ve output is actually considered outdated and irrelevant, especially in the field of popular music. In independent music scenes, the audience usually doesn’t know or care if a musician has had formal musical training or not, or if music pays the bills. Consump�on choices are rarely based on knowledge about an ar�st’s musical educa�on. On the contrary, in many scenes, the audience and the ar�sts alike take pride in a DIY-approach to music. Here, amateurship is a marker of dis�nc�on and (collec�ve) iden�ty (Аrshava & Kutepova-Bredun, 2018). Amateur musicians o�en aim to challenge hierarchical cultural industry structures and established musical knowledge and expecta�ons (Calmbach, 2007; Court, 2017). They may reject the idea that “you need to be really good at music” in order to be “allowed to perform publicly”. Instead they rely on alterna�ve ways of knowing and subjugated epistemes (Calmbach & Rhein, 2007; Lunde Ha�ield, 2017). Typically, amateur musicians “are not in it for the money and fame” and o�en show contempt for the music industry. A very obvious examples of this are DIY hardcore punk ar�sts (Budde, 1997; Calmbach, 2007). There is research on amateur musicianship that indicates further mo�va�on to engage in music such as the desire to express emo�onal states, experience the unique mental state of "flow," and find pleasure in music (Regelski, 2007). Amateur musicians also value social interac�on and the opportunity for personal growth and skill development (Kruse, 2012). But the drive and passion for music and the desire to engage in meaningful and fulfilling musical experiences are universal for musicians and can’t be atributed to amateurs alone (McPherson & Renwick, 2009; Powell et al., 2023). A ques�on relevant to the EU policy priority of digital adapta�on is the ‘democra�sing’ impact of digital tools on music scenes. Such tools have clearly had an enormous impact on the accessibility of musical means of produc�on (Carboni, 2014). They have boosted the possibility for “everybody” to record and produce music at home, to expand crea�ve possibili�es, and to make music more accessible. This significantly contributed to the erosion of the dichotomy of amateurs vs. professionals: Music can sound great even if it’s not commercially or professionally recorded and produced, and (poten�ally) “everybody” can get their music out to the world through digital music pla�orms. Digital technologies have also transformed the ways how amateur musicians collaborate and reach a wider audience, allowing for crea�ve autonomy and control (Hoare et al., 2014). In recent years, a vivid discussion has started on whether the effect of reduc�ons in price and required skills-sets of new digital recording technologies and the accessibility of digital music pla�orms has led to a democra�sa�on of music (O’Grady, 2021). The ini�al enthusiasm about the digital possibili�es of making and distribu�ng music is fading. It becomes more and more apparent that claims of musical democra�sa�on through digital pla�orms may be flawed (Hodgson, 2021). Research shows that musicians are aware that digital music pla�orms can be crea�vely constric�ve rather than empowering, as they are o�en influenced by corporate interests and scalability. The discrepancy between the corporate rhetoric of these pla�orms and the actual experiences of musicians become apparent. One of the – at first sight – most obvious promises of music distribu�on in the digital age is that (new) audiences can be reached like never before. Of course, “roman�c success stories” of youngsters producing hits from their bedrooms do exist. But why are the charts s�ll dominated by music professionals releasing on major labels? One answer to that is the recogni�on of importance of metadata in the digital music age. Metadata allows for more efficient methods of searching for and crea�ng music collec�ons, which is especially important in a world where online informa�on is rapidly growing (Bergelid, 2018). Music metadata refers to structured atributes that provide descrip�ve D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 49 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 annota�ons for songs in digital libraries. These atributes include informa�on such as singer, author, genre, and release date. The internet has facilitated the produc�on and distribu�on of music metadata, with a shi� from expert-driven annota�ons to contribu�ons from the crowd. This explains the lack of consistent, complete, and authorita�ve informa�on about the crea�on of a musical work (Hardjono et al., 2019). The manual re-entry of informa�on or scraping data from other sites by mul�ple en��es in the music supply chain leads to synchronisa�on and correc�on efforts that are laborious and errorprone (Allison-Cassin, 2016). Therefore, the need for knowledge management techniques and tools in the context of digital music has been long unques�oned (Pachet & Csl, 2005) but not yet systema�cally fulfilled. This holds especially true for amateur musicians. It is therefore all the more surprising that the literature on how musicians deal with metadata is a blind spot. It can be assumed that ar�sts find metadata a rather “unsexy” topic to deal with that only distracts from the crea�ve process. For this reason, a survey of musicians and music MSMEs is planned as part of OpenMusE that will look (among other things) at ar�sts' awareness of metadata. Some ques�ons that may be addressed are: What do musicians know about metadata? Have they benefited from digital literacy educa�on? What digital tools do they use to manage data and metadata? Are musicians aware of legal and economic implica�ons of metadata? In other words: Do they recognise its importance to their livelihood? 2.3.7 Transac�on: Musical crea�on [commercial] This section summarises a selection of literature on commercial musical creation; as this topic is covered more comprehensively in Open Music Europe WP1, the focus here is on semi-professional and informal economic activity. Guiding questions are: what is the extent of participation in the informal musical economy in Europe among the population as a whole? How do musicians move along the spectrum of activity between “amateur” and “professional” musicianship? As men�oned above, crea�on is one of the six cultural func�ons iden�fied by the ESSnet-Culture Final Report, as is dissemina�on/trade (along with produc�on/publishing, preserva�on, educa�on, and management/regula�on; 2012, p. 44). Whereas non-commercial crea�ve ac�vity is dealt with under the heading of cultural par�cipa�on, commercial crea�ve ac�vity and dissemina�on/trade are dealt with under the headings of cultural employment, cultural enterprises, and interna�onal trade in cultural goods. Details are provided in Open Music Europe D1.1, which focuses more sharply on the European music economy. Two important recent supplements to these topline sta�s�cs on employment and trade were produced by the Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026 priority ac�on a1 on ar�st professionals: an OMC report on The status and working conditions of artists and cultural and creative professionals (DirectorateGeneral for Educa�on, 2023) and the pla�orm This is How We Work (Crea�vesunite, 2023). The report iden�fies a basic common aim of European Member State CCSI policy as “to ensure that ar�sts have access to an adequate status and social protec�on scheme, despite the o�en atypical forms of their work paterns, which might prevent access to social safeguards that typically exist for those in standard employment” (p. 21), but acknowledges that informality and precarity within the CCSIs are challenges – a fact that COVID-19 made par�cularly visible. The pla�orm, implemented by Crea�ves Unite (Crea�ve FLIP) under ac�on a1 of the Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026, provides overviews of EU Member State policies toward CCSI professionals on status and social security, labour rela�ons, learning and skills, ar�s�c freedom, and available resources. Both the OMC report and the This is How We Work pla�orm draw aten�on to the heterogeneity of legal arrangements covering work in the CCSIs across EU Member States. In addi�on to complica�ng life for many ar�sts themselves, this poses challenges for EU-level data collec�on and the subsequent assessment of crea�ve economies. As noted in Open Music Europe D1.1, neither the system of na�onal accounts nor surveys such as the Labour Force Survey (LFS) adequately cover the informal economy, D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 50 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 defined as “all economic ac�vi�es, excluding illicit ac�vi�es, by workers and economic units that are, in law or in prac�ce, not covered or insufficiently covered by formal arrangements” (ILO 2015). According to the ILO, 13.9% of the European workforce in the arts, entertainment, and recrea�on sectors and industries work in informal arrangements (2023, 11, pp. 60-61). While informality in the music industry is defined differently in different EU countries, a high degree of informality is the norm, and assessing commercial crea�ve ac�vity based on current officials alone would be inaccurate. Open Music Europe WP1 will seek to fill this gap through a mixed survey of enterprises (MSMEs) and individuals (independent ar�sts and freelance music professionals), which will be designed in coordina�on with the WP2 and WP3 teams in order to fill data gaps in all three work packages. The ques�on of informal employment will also be taken into considera�on in the cultural access and par�cipa�on survey implemented in WP3, e.g., through the inclusion of ques�ons on commercial music ac�vity among the general popula�on (see Sec�on 4.3 below). A range of methods have been used to study par�cipa�on in the informal musical economy. Comprehensive registers, for instance, can track public music performances, revealing the economic impact of music in, for instance, public spaces (Antal et al., 2023). Surveys can quan�fy the working and income condi�ons of music professionals (see OpenMusE D1.1). Ethnographic field research can complement such methods with qualita�ve insights, highligh�ng the socio-economic contribu�ons of musicians within marginalised communi�es: an example is a five-year project exploring grime music in London, which challenges conven�onal no�ons of underachievement associated with NEET categories and reveals a more complex picture of youth entrepreneurship (White, 2014). Such case studies shed light on the role of the informal music economy as a bas�on of opportunity for those who might be excluded from conven�onal employment due to educa�onal or socioeconomic barriers (Spears et al., 2020). However, this innova�ve landscape is not without its challenges: as indicated in OpenMusE D1.1, these include fair remunera�on and precarious working condi�ons. Policymakers and industry stakeholders recognise the need for data and indicators that can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of the sector's dynamics (Ahlers et al., 2019). 2.3.8 Transac�on: Par�cipa�on in musical life This section summarises a selection of literature on so-called ‘passive’ participation in musical life, i.e., attending performances and listening to recordings. Guiding questions are: how can the consumption of musical goods and services in Europe be better assessed, in view of sectoral characteristics such as informality and the prevalence of zero-price uses? How can improved consumer-side data support improved price-setting and asset valuation (cf. Open Music Europe D1.1)? The ESSnet-Culture Final Report defines cultural ac�vi�es as “marketor non-market-orientated ac�vi�es, with or without a commercial meaning and carried out by any type of producers and structure (individuals, organisa�ons, businesses, groups, amateurs or professionals)” (Bína et al., 2014, p. 57). This defini�on and the resul�ng taxonomy of cultural func�ons thus do not directly encompass the most common musical experiences in the everyday lives of most people: atending performances and listening to recordings. However, such modes of so-called ‘passive’ cultural par�cipa�on are dealt with extensively throughout the report, under the broader heading of “cultural prac�ces”. It is in the context of the challenge of measuring cultural par�cipa�on within a changing societal context that the ICET model was introduced (p. 237). Three dimensions of “cultural prac�ces” are proposed, the first and third of which overlap with the narrower category of “cultural ac�vi�es” (p. 242): • Practicing as an amateur, e.g., in music: singing: alone, in a choir, a vocal ensemble, opera or operetta troupe, popor rock band, rapping, etc.; playing a musical instrument. • Attending/receiving, e.g., in music: visiting operas and operettas, performances, concerts of all kinds, musical festivals and feasts of all kinds; viewing direct broadcasts of operas, D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 51 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 operettas, concerts, festivals and feasts; viewing and listening to recorded operas and operettas and recorded music of all kinds in audiovisual media (radio, cd, mp3 player, tv, video, Internet etc). • Social participation/volunteering, e.g., in music: having classes; being a member of a club or a group; showing own performances on the Internet. The second dimension, “atending/receiving”, is also o�en described as ‘passive’ cultural par�cipa�on and is represented in the EU-level sta�s�cal data. Relevant data sources are: • EU Adult Education Survey ad-hoc modules (2007 and 2011): number of times going to live performances (2007: CA1V; 2011: CULPAR1) • EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions ad-hoc modules (2008 and 2015): number of times going to live performances (2008 and 2015: PS020) • Surveys on ICT usage in households and by individuals (2012-2017): internet use for listening to web radio (2014: I_IUWEB2); internet use for listening to music (2016: I_IUMUSS); online purchases of films/music (2012-2017: I_BFILM); online purchases of tickets for events (20122017: I_BTICK); ); online purchases of films/music, delivered or upgraded online (2012-2017: I_BFILMO); internet storage space use to save or share music • Household budget surveys (HBS) (2010 and 2015): spending on CP09111 Equipment for the reception, recording and reproduction of sound; CP0914 Recording media; CP09221 Musical instruments; and CP09421 Cinemas, theatres, concerts. • Harmonised European time use surveys (HETUS) (2010): time spent on 522 Theatre and concerts, 831 Listening to radio or recordings. While not an official sta�s�cal source, Eurobarometer 79.2 (2013) on cultural access and par�cipa�on provides more music-specific data than EU-SILC: • Frequency of concert attendance (QB1) • Barriers to frequent concert attendance (QB2) • Frequency of attendance at concerts by artists from another European country (QB3) • Use of the internet for listening to radio/music and downloading music (separate items; QB6) As men�oned above, EB79.2 is under considera�on as a harmonisa�on target for the cultural access and par�cipa�on survey to be conducted in Open Music Europe task 3.2 (see Sec�on 4.3 below). On the level of scien�fic research, a diverse range of research methodologies have been employed capture the mul�faceted nature of music's role in society. For instance, survey methods tap into the subjec�ve experiences and preferences of individuals, revealing the nuanced rela�onship between cultural prac�ces, such as religiosity, and music consump�on paterns (Salehababi et al., 2019). Largescale data analy�cs offer a macro perspec�ve, showcasing how genre preferences and download behaviours can be influenced by personality traits and cultural backgrounds, as observed in global consump�on trends and the invariant nature of certain genres like metal across different countries (Woolhouse & Renwick, 2016). These analyses also extend to the digital realm, where the interplay between human and algorithmic cura�on shapes the musical landscape, influencing the diversity of content consump�on on streaming pla�orms (Villermet et al., 2021). Meanwhile, a focus on subcultures delves into the collec�ve iden��es that form around music, examining how eclec�c styles and ideologies within 'Dionysian music subcultures' contrast with mainstream norms (Ulusoy, 2016). The synthesis of findings from the various studies on music consump�on elucidates the intricate rela�onship between evolving cultural prac�ces and technological advancements. The integra�on of D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 52 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 music into daily life is profoundly influenced by sociocultural factors, such as the significant role religiosity plays in shaping youths' musical choices, as observed in Sabzevar (Salehababi et al., 2019). The ubiquity of digital pla�orms suggests a transforma�on in music engagement, with technologies like smartphones enabling Brazilian youth to access a world of music at their finger�ps, fostering personalised listening experiences (Riegel & Pellerano, 2023). The global uniformity of certain genres, such as metal, transcends local cultural condi�ons, sugges�ng a universal appeal linked to inherent human traits (Woolhouse & Renwick, 2016). This globalised digital landscape intersects with local cultural policies, like France's music quotas, which aim to maintain the na�onal cultural character amid the sea of global content (Niu, 2018). Moreover, music's role in the forma�on of subcultural iden��es reveals how it can be both a personal sanctuary and a collec�ve expression of ideology and style (Ulusoy, 2016). However, despite music's perceived psychological value to youth, its monetary worth is challenged by the prevalence of free digital alterna�ves (Happonen 2016). Unanswered ques�ons remain that could be fer�le ground for further study include the long-term effects of algorithmic recommenda�ons on musical diversity and ar�st exposure; the impact of digital music consump�on on live music atendance and the sustainability of local music scenes; and the balance between digital consump�on and physical music sales, such as the much-hyped vinyl resurgence. 2.3.9 Music, health, and well-being This section summarises a selection of literature on music and (physical and mental) health care and music and social well-being. Guiding questions are: how is music used in physical and psychological health care systems in Europe? How can the impacts be assessed? How can the impact of music on general well-being be assessed, on the level of individuals and communities? Despite its emergence as a policy priority, the health and well-being impact of culture is not considered in current EU-level cultural sta�s�cs. However, the topic of health and well-being among musicians was the focus of a significant study commissioned under the Music Moves Europe framework (2023). The aim of the study was to elevate the significance of music professionals’ health in the consciousness of policymakers, thereby fostering a robust founda�on for informed decision-making and targeted investment by Member States. It seeks to bring to the forefront the cri�cal risks that musicians in the EU face regarding their physical and mental well-being. By si�ing through per�nent research, the study aims to extract essen�al policy lessons and ar�culate recommenda�ons that can inform both policy and prac�cal applica�ons. Furthermore, it endeavours to showcase a selec�on of successful strategies that have been implemented across various EU Member States, serving as exemplars of effec�ve ac�on in this domain. The study adopted a robust methodology, conduc�ng 37 interviews with music creators across the EU to capture diverse experiences and gain deep insights into the challenges they face. These discussions were supplemented by a mapping of suppor�ve ini�a�ves, analysed through a combina�on of literature review and expert consulta�ons. The findings were synthesised to highlight common themes and validated through a workshop with key stakeholders from the music industry. This comprehensive approach ensured that the study's recommenda�ons were well-founded and reflec�ve of the realworld context of music creators' occupa�onal health risks. In the realm of professional music crea�on, the landscape is fraught with risk factors that span both physical and mental health domains. Musicians contend with the physical toll of repe��ve movements and constant exposure to high sound levels, while simultaneously naviga�ng a compe��ve environment that o�en lacks adequate social support systems. Financial instability and the demand for diverse skill sets, coupled with irregular working hours, amplify stress levels. Moreover, tradi�onal music educa�on has not kept pace with the evolving demands of the industry, leaving musicians illequipped to confront these mul�faceted challenges. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 53 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 The occupa�onal hazards of the music industry profoundly affect the mental and physical well-being of its members. Intrinsic personality traits like high sensi�vity and a propensity for rumina�on, when combined with the stresses of performance and an intense work environment, can spiral into serious mental health concerns, including anxiety, depression, and substance dependence. Physically, the profession predisposes individuals to a spectrum of condi�ons, from musculoskeletal disorders to hearing impairment, all of which are exacerbated by the very nature of their cra�. Quality of work in the music industry has also suffered, par�cularly in the wake of economic strains brought about by global crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The financial duress experienced by music creators o�en goes unmi�gated, as there is a lack of systemic encouragement to seek out necessary medical or psychological assistance. Moreover, the music scene is rife with environments conducive to substance abuse, further endangering the health of those within the profession. Amidst these challenges, the social, cultural, and economic landscape for music creators is rapidly evolving. Digitalisa�on has imposed a relentless demand for online visibility and a constant stream of content, pressuring ar�sts to remain perpetually engaged with their audiences. This digital hustle, coupled with a general sen�ment of being undervalued and inadequately compensated, underscores the pervasive undervalua�on of ar�sts. Access to professional support for mental and physical ailments is o�en seen as prohibi�vely expensive and insufficiently specialised to cater to the unique needs of music professionals, leaving many to bear the brunt of their profession's demands in solitude. Considerable scien�fic research has confirmed that working condi�ons in the music industry can have a detrimental impact on well-being (for more on precarity in the music industry, see Open Music Europe D1.1). However, scien�fic research has also shown that musical prac�ce can benefit health and wellbeing among professional musicians (Musgrave, 2023). Turning from the music industry to the general popula�on: as with music, society, and poli�cs, the lack of compara�ve cross-na�onal data collec�on on the rela�onship between music and health/well-being is undoubtedly in part due to the difficulty of opera�onalising such complex cross-domain constructs. With regard to physical and psychological health as narrowly defined, medically ac�onable conclusions demand a precision and certainty that can only be achieved through experimental methods. With regard to well-being more generally, the ambiguity of the concept is a problem. Well-being is defined very broadly as a good or sa�sfactory condi�on of existence, characterised by health, happiness, and prosperity. Sa�sfac�on with life is considered the cogni�ve part of well-being, while happiness can be understood as the combina�on of sa�sfac�on with life and emo�onal well-being (Per, 2020). A significant body of research has been conducted to examine the well-being effects of both ac�ve and passive musical engagement , which include aspects like quality of life and social and mental health concepts, with a smaller por�on looking into physiological cogni�ve health effects (Sheppard & Broughton, 2020). Studies on music-making and well-being in Europe have u�lised a variety of methods to explore this topic; many have emphasised the beneficial effects of musical prac�ce across health and social care domains, incorpora�ng mul�disciplinary approaches and covering a variety of specific topics (MacDonald, 2013). There is o�en a focus on how ac�ve par�cipa�on in music and dance relates to key social determinants of health, serving as well-being and health promo�on tools for people with and without pre-exis�ng health issues in diverse social groups (Sheppard & Broughton, 2020). A scoping review by Dingle et al. (2021) offers an overview of how music ac�vi�es may affect health and wellbeing, considering both primary outcomes like health measures and secondary psychosocial processes such as mood and social connec�on (Dingle et al., 2021). Qualita�ve research projects have been integral, exploring the poten�al benefits of musical par�cipa�on within healthcare contexts (MacDonald, 2013). In Ireland, for instance, Sinclair & Tinson (2021) used interviews, par�cipant D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 54 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 observa�on of intergenera�onal music workshops, and music diaries to explore the experiences of older adults and teenagers with music. However, quan�ta�ve methods have also been used: for instance, Grau-Sánchez et al. (2017) u�lised a survey to inves�gate elderly people in different European countries’ habits and preferences related to music and its role in their everyday life, exploring the rela�onship between their musical ac�vi�es and their emo�onal well-being. While generalisable models of the rela�onship between music-making and well-being have not yet been widely established, the research generally concludes that music-making can contribute to finding purpose in life, fostering self-acceptance, and catalysing personal growth – elements that are founda�onal to leading a fulfilling life (Perkins et al., 2021). Accordingly, music therapy is seen as a promising prac�ce in both psychological and physiological health care (Croom, 2015). An addi�onal body of research on the individual well-being effects of listening to (as opposed to making) music has covered various aspects, such as athle�c performance, mo�va�on, emo�on management, self-expression, self-connec�on, and cogni�ve development. Various methods have been employed to explore these topics. Meta-analy�c reviews have delved into the role of music within exercise and spor�ng contexts, determining that music not only fosters a more posi�ve mood, but can also bolster athle�c performance, especially when the tempo of the music is upbeat and fast. Music does this not by altering the physical exer�on required but by reducing the perceived effort of exercise; this psychosoma�c effect of music, by which pleasure is amplified, subsequently mo�vates sustained and effor�ul exercise (Terry et al., 2020). Standardised ques�onnaires have been a popular tool for gauging the emo�onal and mo�va�onal impacts that music has on athletes, providing insights into the personal and psychological benefits that music brings to sports and exercise rou�nes (Terry et al., 2020). Experimental methods have also been employed to determine how music can be strategically used in sports and exercise to heighten one's sense of self-enhancement and directly contribute to improvements in athle�c performance (Elvers & Steffens, 2017). Another perspec�ve has come from studies that combine subjec�ve self-reports with psychophysiological measures to chart the immediate physical and emo�onal reac�ons individuals have when listening to music. Such studies probe the emo�onal arcs experienced during music listening, capturing the nuances of how music can sway and amplify emo�onal states over �me (Laukka & Quick, 2013). Systema�c reviews have cri�cally assessed a range of music interven�ons targeted at adults, highligh�ng the mo�va�onal power of music. These reviews underscore music's unique ability to encourage individuals to undertake and persist in effor�ul exercise, as well as to support those in addic�on recovery programs, sugges�ng music's u�lity as a complementary therapeu�c tool (Croom, 2015; Fuentes-Sánchez et al., 2021). Moreover, the act of musical listening has been found to shape the emo�onal landscape of adolescents, influencing their perceived sense of agency and overall emo�onal well-being. These effects, however, are not uniform; they are deeply influenced by the listener's context and individual personality traits, hin�ng at the personalised nature of music's impact (Welch et al., 2020). The collec�ve findings from various studies on music-listening and well-being enable several overarching conclusions. First and foremost is the recogni�on that music not provides a vehicle for the ar�cula�on of inner experience, but also aids in the development of emo�on regula�on and coping skills, thereby fostering resilience in the face of life's challenges (Gustavson et al., 2021). Cogni�ve and behavioural benefits of music have also been generally confirmed, par�cularly with regard to mo�va�on: music has regularly been found to sharpen self-evalua�ve cogni�on and fine-tune mental processes, which is crucial to achieving peak performance in both cogni�ve and athle�c endeavours. Lastly, the domain of music therapy offers compelling evidence that engaging with music can have holis�c benefits, improving both psychological and physiological health. This posi�ons music not just as a source of ephemeral pleasure, but as a contributor to a flourishing life, underscoring its value as a substan�al and mul�faceted wellness resource (Croom, 2015). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 55 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 There are s�ll many unanswered ques�ons on the health and well-being benefits of both ac�ve and passive musical engagement. With regard to ac�ve engagement, these include the long-term effects of musical ac�vi�es on well-being and the impact of music on different popula�on groups with various health condi�ons. Addi�onally, there is a dearth of studies with younger par�cipants. Further research is needed to establish comprehensive frameworks and to explore the complex interac�ons between music, health, and well-being in various contexts. With regard to passive engagement as well, the persistence of music's posi�ve effects over �me is unclear, necessita�ng longitudinal studies to assess long-term impacts. The detailed mechanisms by which music affects psychological func�ons like emo�on regula�on, mo�va�on, and cogni�on need further study. The influence of differing individualand group-level atributes on the rela�onship between music and well-being are also not well understood. Finally, the role of cultural and contextual factors in shaping music's efficacy and individual responses requires more research to ensure that music interven�ons are globally applicable and culturally sensi�ve. These areas represent key opportuni�es for deepening our understanding of music's role in health and well-being. 2.3.10 Music and sustainable development development, as viewed from an environmental, social, and governance perspective. Guiding questions are: How can the environmental, social and governance sustainability of the music industry be measured? Is there a connection between musical participation and pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours? Can musicians contribute to the development of a greener culture? The topic of music and sustainability proved too complex to address within the framework of this deliverable. This topic will be explored in a forthcoming project discussion paper. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 56 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 3 Data Availability and Gaps 3.1 Data Availability and Gaps in EU-Level Cultural Statistics Official cultural sta�s�cs in Europe are collected roughly in accordance with the ESSnet-Culture Final Report (2012). However, “there is no single European survey dedicated to culture” (Eurostat 2018b, p. 6): rather, data on culture are extracted from a wide range of more general data that are regularly collected on labour, business ac�vity, trade, educa�on, individual and household economic ac�vity, etc. Accordingly, official cultural sta�s�cs do not comprehensively cover the domains, func�ons, and dimensions defined in ESSnet-Culture. The visibility of culture in Eurostat datasets depends upon the standardised classifica�ons used in the data collec�on. For instance, data collected on employment and business ac�vity both use the Nomenclature of Economic Ac�vi�es (NACE), which entails four levels: sec�ons, divisions, groups, and classes (note that groups and classes are some�mes redundant). Some music-relevant examples are: Section Division Group Class C - Manufacturing 32 - Other manufacturing 32.2 - Manufacture of musical instruments 32.20 - Manufacture of musical instruments G - Wholesale and retail trade; Repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles 47 - Retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles 47.6 - Retail sale of cultural and recreation goods in specialised stores 47.63 - Retail sale of music and video recordings in specialised stores I - Information and communication 59 - Motion picture, video and television programme production, sound recording and music publishing activities 59.2 - Sound recording and music publishing activities 59.20 - Sound recording and music publishing activities Overall, the following classifica�on systems used to iden�fy cultural ac�vi�es within sta�s�cal data include the Interna�onal Standard Classifica�on of Occupa�ons (ISCO), Balance of Payments and Interna�onal Investment Posi�on Manual (BPM6) and Extended Balance of Payments Service Classifica�on (EBOPS 2010), Combined Nomenclature (CN)5, four-digit Classifica�on of Individual Consump�on by Purpose (COICOP) and extended five-digit European Classifica�on of Individual Consump�on by Purpose (ECOICOP), and Classifica�on of the Func�ons of Government (COFOG). The topics and data sources currently used in Eurostat cultural sta�s�cs follow, along with the classifica�on systems used to iden�fy cultural ac�vi�es. Although Eurobarometer is not an official sta�s�cal data source, it is included in the table as it provides music-specific data on cultural par�cipa�on: Topics Data sources Classifications Cultural employment EU Labour Force Survey (EU-LFS) NACE Rev. 2; International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) Cultural enterprises Structured business statistics (SBS) NACE Rev. 2 5 The Combined Nomenclature enables interoperability with the Harmonised Systems (HS), Standard Interna�onal Trade Classifica�on (SITC) and Classifica�on of Products by Ac�vity (CPA) (Eurostat 2018, p. 35). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 57 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 International trade in cultural goods International trade in goods statistics (ITGS) Combined Nomenclature (CN) International trade in cultural services Balance of payments (BoP): International trade in services (ITS) Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual (BPM6); Extended Balance of Payments Service Classification (EBOPS 2010) Participation in cultural activities Adult Education Survey (AES) (2007, 2011) Variable lists set through implementing legislation Participation in cultural activities EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) ad-hoc modules (2006, 2015) Variable lists set through implementing legislation Participation in cultural activities Eurobarometer 67.1 (2007), 79.2 (2013), 88.1 (2017) Variables defined by Eurobarometer team Use of the internet for cultural purposes Community survey on information and communication technologies (ICT) usage in households and by individuals Variable lists set through implementing legislation Time spent on cultural activities Harmonised European Time Use Survey (HETUS) HETUS harmonised list of activities (ACL) Private household expenditure on cultural goods and services Household Budget Surveys (HBS) Classification of individual consumption by purpose (COICOP) Harmonised index of consumer prices for cultural goods and services Harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP) European Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose (ECOICOP) Public (government) expenditure on culture Government finance statistics (GFS) Classification of the functions of government (COFOG) In principle, this is a robust collec�on of data. However, several factors complicate the task of pu�ng together cultural sta�s�cs from this wide range of datasets – and sta�s�cs on specific domains of culture in par�cular: • The classification systems used do not always include categories covering the full range of cultural activities, goods, and services. • Some categories mix “cultural” and “non-cultural” activities, goods, and services. • Not all systems are precise to the level of specific cultural domains, such as music. • The precision at which data are collected differ by data collection programme: for example, structured business statistics (SBS) and the Labour Force Survey (LFS) both use NACE, but some four-digit codes relevant to culture are present in one and not the other (Eurostat 2018, p. 6). In total, around 11 categories used in EU-level sta�s�cal data relate fully (or nearly fully) to music, and an addi�onal 33 relate par�ally to music; a table is provided in Annex 5. Note that a recent development in Eurostat’s own front-end is the introduc�on of domain-specific portals (htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/culture/database/data-domain): the “Music” portal includes links to data on formal employment (the number of persons employed as musicians, singers and composers [LFS: ISCO code 2652, main job], 2019-2021), business sta�s�cs (sound recording and music publishing ac�vi�es [SBS: NACE code 59.2], manufacture of musical instruments [SBS: NACE code D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 64 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Participation in cultural activities; cultural organisations; public (government) expenditure on culture 1108.1 NM (MK SR) 1-01 Annual report on the culture of national minorities Activities and funding of national minority culture from state and non-state sources, subjects of cultural activities, number and type of cultural events organised, funding of publishing entities from state and non-state sources. Cultural employment (formal education) 157. Schools (MŠVVŠ SR) 1-04 Quarterly report on work in education Average number of employees, including teaching and professional staff, agreements on work performed outside the employment relationship and the structure of wage resources by type of school and school establishment and by region and type of founder. Cultural employment (formal education) 158. Schools (MŠVVŠ SR) 2-04 Quarterly report on the work of universities and other organisations directly managed by the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic Average number of employees, including university teachers, researchers and artistic staff, structure of salary resources by public universities and other organisations directly managed by the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic. Participation in cultural activities (formal education) 163. Schools (MŠVVŠ SR) 11-01 University statement Number of students enrolled by field of study, years of study, forms of study, number of teachers, age structure of students, postgraduates and teachers, number of scholarship holders and amount paid for scholarships. Participation in cultural activities (formal education) 164. Schools (MŠVVŠ SR) 12-01 College Graduates Report University graduates broken down by field of study and by type of study, age structure of graduates of degree I, degree II, study programmes combining I. and II. degree and graduates of doctoral studies according to the type of study. Participation in cultural activities; cultural organisations 127. ZUC-NUT List of collectives and individuals in the field of interest artistic activities and nonprofessional artistic creation Basic information on the number of collectives of interest in artistic activities in the Slovak Republic. As with EU-level data, whether or not certain data sources shed light on music in specific will depend upon the precision with which ac�vi�es are classified. Some examples follow: • 55.1 Kult (MK SR) 8-01 Annual report on television broadcasting services: are music-related broadcast programmes specified? • 57.1 Kult (MK SR) 10-01 Annual library report: are music libraries specified? D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 65 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 • 59.1 Kult (MK SR) 12-01 Annual report on entities in the field of professional performing arts and 63.1 Kult (MK SR) 17-01 Annual report on festivals and shows in the field of professional performing arts: are venues and companies specialising in music-related performing arts, such as opera, specified? • 61.1 Kult (MK SR) 15-01 Annual report on church and religious society: are musical activities recorded? • 157. Schools (MŠVVŠ SR) 1-04 Quarterly report on work in education and 163. Schools (MŠVVŠ SR) 11-01 University statement: are teacher employment and student enrolment broken down by ISCED field at three or four digits? One aim of the ongoing dialogue between the Open Music Europe project team and Slovak governmental and scien�fic stakeholders is to determine this; throughout this process, a con�nual assessment will be made, as was done for EU-level data sources in Annex 5. This breakdown is available as a living document via a link in Annex 6. In addi�on to these sta�s�cal data sources, two survey-based research projects on culture were recently conducted by the Na�onal Public Educa�onal Centre (Národné osvetové centrum, NOC): • Mixed-methods study on the culture and value orientation of the Slovak population (2018), comprising six focus groups and a survey utilising face-to-face interviews with a quota sample of N=1008 respondents age 16 and above. Representative quotas were set on sex, age, place of residence, and education. Within the sample, ethnically Slovak and Hungarian respondents were slightly overrepresented and Roma respondents slightly underrepresented. The questionnaire design was inspired in part by the European Values Survey, European Social Survey, International Social Survey Programme, and the Centre for Research on Ethnicity and Culture in Slovakia’s 2003 study on Collective Identities in Contemporary Slovakia (pp. 10-11). In addition to the quota variables, the questionnaire covered subjective financial situation, value orientation (the 21-statement Schwartz value scale), cultural memory (positive and negative perception of 14 personalities and 23 events), spontaneous definitions of “culture” and “Slovak culture”, the importance of cultural education/transmission, attendance at cultural events and institutions (including “popular music concert”, “classical music concert”), attitudes toward other cultures and interculturalism, attitudes toward immigration, leisure activities (including “listening to music”, “playing a musical instrument”, “singing, recitation, music production”, “performance art”), online and offline social networks, and trust. On a general level, the study found a conservative value orientation to be predominant among residents of Slovakia. This was manifest in strong attachments to familiar structures and institutions (family, gender roles, the nation), closure toward outsides, and conceptions of “culture” as comprising typical cultural venues on the one hand (45%) and traditional folk culture on the other (20%). With regard to music, the survey found somewhat higher rates of concert attendance than Eurobarometer 79.2 (2013), but slightly lower rates of playing a musical instrument. • Survey on the consumption of culture (2019), conducted online using a quota sample of N=1200 respondents age 18 and above. Representative quotas were set on gender, age, region, and settlement size. The questionnaire covered affinity for domains of culture (including “music”), attendance at cultural events and institutions (including “popular music concert”, “alternative music concert”, “theatre – opera, operetta”, “theatre – ballet”, “classical music concert”), reasons for attending cultural events, predicted future attendance, attendance in other cities/regions, sources of information about culture, frequency of music D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 66 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 listening, preferred genres, preferred radio stations, opinion on the inclusion of a mandatory quota of Slovak music in radio, television habits, spending on culture (including “popular music concert”, “classical music concert”, “buying music”), museum attendance and opinions, and participation in organising cultural events (including “band”, “dance/folklore ensemble”, “choir”, “ballroom dancing”). During the data collec�on phase of the work package, outreach will be made to the NOC to inquire about the possibility of access to the survey methodological details, codebooks, and, if possible, microdata. Our ongoing dialogue with the Ins�tute for Cultural Policy should enable a detailed review of other non-official data collec�on conducted by the NOC and other stakeholders. 3.4 Cross-Domain Concepts in Data Collection As noted in OpenMusE D1.1 (Sec�on 5.2), certain cross-domain concepts will be applied in data collec�on across WP1, 2, and 3 – for instance: As also noted in D1.1, both prac�cal and theore�cal challenges affix to the measurement of such concepts. For example, crea�ng a consistent age measure from surveys and administra�ve records is more of a prac�cal sta�s�cal problem, whereas connec�ng a consistent sex (at birth) or gender (selfiden�fied) concept with administra�ve records requires a more theore�cal underpinning. Similarly to the domain-specific concepts proposed in Sec�on 2.3, these cross-domain concepts will be harmonised with a controlled vocabulary (yet to be selected). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 67 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 4 Data Sources and Collection Methods Open Music Europe intends to build an open sta�s�cal infrastructure that is compa�ble with the na�onal sta�s�cal infrastructures of the EU/EEA/candidate member states, but which is based on voluntary industry coopera�on. We will build a similar framework that na�onal sta�s�cal offices have in Europe, but at a smaller, cheaper, and more flexible scale, and on a different legal basis. The “datato-policy pipeline” will offer data in processed form that is ready to use in evidence-based business and policy administra�on. In brief, a data pipeline is a method in which raw data is ingested from various data sources and then ported to a data store for further analysis: in this case, to an open, shared, collabora�ve music observatory. We extend this pipeline using reproducible research techniques, good sta�s�cal prac�ces, and a novel applica�on of the Open Policy Analysis Guidelines in order to support evidence-based policy analysis, scien�fic music research, and sound business strategy-building (for further details, see Open Music Europe D1.1). Inputs to the data-to-policy pipeline will include secondary microdata and processed sta�s�cal data sources accessed in accordance with the Open Data Direc�ve, supplemented with primary data collec�on conducted using transferable methods. Specifically: • We will utilise secondary data from existing survey programmes (e.g., EU-SILC, Eurobarometer, national-level surveys, etc.) (see Section 4.1). • We will tap into administrative records (i.e., consistent data sources originally not intended for statistical purposes). Administrative data can complement, replace on a cost-benefit basis, or improve survey data (see Section 4.2). • We will collect primary survey data using questionnaires and procedures that are ex-ante harmonised with selected existing survey programmes (see Section 4.3.1). • We will use input-output data on environmental impacts within the context of the ESG sustainability reporting tool developed and piloted in task 3.3 (see Section 4.3.2) • We will experiment with other data sources, such as data harvested regularly from streaming service APIs, that Eurostat considers “experimental” in their definitions of statistical processes. The degree to which such data is relevant in WP3 is yet to be determined, but it could shed light on, for instance, the impact of platform user network relations on taste formation; for details, see Open Music Europe D1.1. These data sources are all considered in the following sec�ons. 4.1 Secondary Survey Data 4.1.1 Available survey data As men�oned above in Sec�on 3, survey data relevant to the topic of music, society, and ci�zenship exist on both the EU and na�onal levels. The following table summarises relevant EU-level data controllers, datasets, condi�ons for microdata access, along with a link to metadata or technical informa�on. Addi�onal datasets may be added as the work package progresses. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 68 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Survey Controller Microdata access Metadata or description LFS Eurostat Formal application https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/lfsa_esms.htm (Eurostat, 2018a) AES 2007, 2011 Eurostat Formal application https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/trng_aes_12m0_esms.htm (Eurostat, 2007) EU-SILC 2008, 2015 Eurostat Formal application https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/ilc_sieusilc.htm (Eurostat, 2015) ICT 20122017 Eurostat Formal application https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/isoc_i_esms.htm (Eurostat, 2012) HETUS Eurostat Formal application https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/tus_esms.htm (Eurostat, 2023b) HBS Eurostat Formal application https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/hbs_esms.htm (Eurostat, 2023a) EB67.1 GESIS Open access https://search.gesis.org/research_data/ZA4529 (Europäische Kommission, 2012) EB79.2 GESIS Open access https://search.gesis.org/research_data/ZA5688 (European Commission, 2015) EB88.1 GESIS Open access https://search.gesis.org/research_data/ZA6925 (European Commission And European Parliament, Brussels, 2022) PISA 2018 OECD Open access https://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/pisa2018technicalreport/ (OECD, 2018) Aggregated Eurostat data will be accessed via the eurostat package and processed using R, whereas microdata will be imported into R and processed. Relevant na�onal-level survey data are also available. Some aggregated data is made available via na�onal sta�s�cal ins�tute websites or can be requested in digital form by the general public. Other aggregated data and all metadata require a formal applica�on process and/or dialogue and formal agreements with governmental stakeholders to access. This process has been ini�ated in Slovakia, and microdata has been delivered for the 2014, 2015, and 2016 Kult 5-01 surveys (annual report on musical ensembles and ar�s�c ensembles). An early step in the data collec�on phase of the work package will be to check the condi�ons for access to data of interest in Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, and Italy. 4.1.2 Ex-post harmonisa�on of secondary survey data Retrospec�ve survey harmonisa�on usually refers to social science surveys conducted with a ques�onnaire, when researchers expose randomly selected respondents to randomly assigned treatments—for example, ask the respondent about their subjec�ve well-being before and a�er taking a pill or a placebo and combining it with blood pressure or weight measurement. These measurements may be human-transcribed to the survey ques�onnaire, or recorded by a different tool when a new data integra�on problem occurs. Our researchers have long been engaged in retrospec�ve survey harmonisa�on, for example, in the case of Cultural Access and Par�cipa�on surveys with the methodology created by the ESSNet-Culture working group of Eurostat and the par�cipa�ng EU na�onal sta�s�cal authori�es (Bína et al., 2014). We have extensive experience administering CAP surveys in Slovakia and Hungary and retroac�vely harmonising them with CAP surveys carried out within various EU-harmonised survey programs, such as Eurobarometer, EU-SILC and AES. Retrospec�ve survey harmonisa�on can join data from different surveys, if they use a similar sampling method and ques�onnaire items. If ex ante harmonisa�on is possible before the fieldwork, a much higher quality of harmonisa�on is possible: “To ensure that answers from respondents surveyed in different settings carry minimal methodological errors and biases and can be meaningfully compared, both data producers and D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 69 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 secondary users combine surveys from different sources, that is, they harmonise survey data. Generally, they do so at different stages of the survey lifecycle. Data producers mostly employ harmonisation ex-ante, when designing and implementing comparative studies (input harmonisation) and when processing the survey data in preparation for their public release (exante output harmonisation). […] Secondary users apply harmonisation methods retrospectively to already released data files.”(Wysmułek et al., 2022) Open Music Europe has engaged in dialogue with sta�s�cal ins�tu�ons in its target countries with regard to the benefits and challenges of ex-post and ex-ante harmonisa�on. In Slovakia, we have proposed an ex-ante harmonisa�on of key surveys to meet the subsample requirements for music professionals and music enterprises: namely, the Roč 1-01, Roč 2-01, KULT-05, KULT-10, KULT-11, and KULT-16 surveys (see Sec�on 3.3.5). If this is not possible, an alterna�ve is to use “small area sta�s�cs” to work from smaller samples. 4.2 Administrative Data Sources Administra�ve data collec�on refers to the ac�vi�es involved in collec�ng, processing, storing, and dissemina�ng sta�s�cal data from one or more administra�ve sources. In the context of na�onal sta�s�cal produc�ons, this usually means re-processing government financial sta�s�cs, tax administra�on data, public expenditure records, etc. Administra�ve data sources can replace, complement, and/or validate survey data. 4.2.1 Good prac�ces: Norway In Open Music Europe, we hope to further develop administra�ve data strategies that were developed in Norway. Norway has been conduc�ng household budget surveys since the 1960s and phased them out in 2012 in line with recent trends toward replacing costly surveying with direct data retrieval from other informa�on systems. Sta�s�cs Norway realised that instead of asking 7,000 households about what they were buying in the supermarkets, it is more accurate and cheaper to acquire the data directly from the sales logs of the supermarkets or the payment transac�on records of the credit card companies. Norway created sta�s�cal registers to tap into governmental data stores in 1990 and into municipal data stores in 1995. By 2019, it u�lised about 100 records and drew data from 30 public ins�tu�onal sources (Alemanno, 2018). As in most countries, such “administra�ve data” was retrieved from other governmental en��es, not the private sector. Collec�ng data from people, companies, and non-profits s�ll relies on census-like comprehensive and/or sample surveys, which entail filling out a digital or paper form or answering ques�ons posed by an interviewer who fills out the form instead of the respondent. Pulling data directly from the accoun�ng data of supermarkets or credit card companies is a novel technique which has been pioneered in Norway and some other countries, and which has been canonised by the UN and EU sta�s�cal bodies in recent years only. The Open Music Europe project does not have the legal status to tap into administra�ve records of tax authori�es and other state bodies; however, on a voluntary basis, we can tap into privately-held administra�ve data and reconcile this informa�on with our survey data. In the case of Slovakia, based on Memoranda of Understanding, we may also have the possibility of reconciling our findings with the administra�ve and survey data held in the Sta�s�cal Office of the Slovak Republic. The lessons of Norway are interes�ng because the new sta�s�cal law (in force since 2021) allows such data collec�on a�er a cost/benefit analysis and risk reduc�on carried out by Sta�s�cs Norway. Like all EFTA countries and Eurostat par�cipates in ESS, Norway applies the same sta�s�cal EU/EEA regula�ons that Slovakia, Bulgaria or Hungary apply. Open Music Europe has consulted the SOSR on the basis of D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 70 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 our working paper (Antal, 2023) which forms the basis of the following subchapter on data coordina�on. 4.2.2 Data sources to be queried As noted above, OpenMusE does not have access to tax records or other official administra�ve data. The primary sources of administra�ve data used in the project will be its music industry partner organisa�ons: the collec�ve management organisa�ons ARTISJUS, MUSICAUTOR, and SOZA and the digital distributor ALOADED. Data will be made available via legal agreements with individual partner organisa�ons or teams of organisa�ons, insofar as the Consor�um itself is not a legal en�ty. Addi�onally, the following official administra�ve sta�s�cs and administra�ve data sources may be u�lised within Open Music Europe work package 3: • Structured business statistics (SBS), international trade in goods statistics (ITGS), international trade in services data (ITS), harmonised index of consumer prices data (HICP), and government finance statistics (GFS). These data will be collected using the R package eurostat. • Potentially, Eurostat data on participation in education and training (educ_part), education personnel (educ_uoe_per), educational finance (educ_uoe_fin), and education and training outcomes (educ_outc). These data will be collected using the R package eurostat. • Data on EU-funded initiatives and projects (e.g., Creative Europe, Erasmus+, Horizon Europe, etc.) targeting policy-relevant topics highlighted in Annex 4: e.g., non-formal music education; music libraries and music data centres; music and social integration, civic engagement, cultural pluralism, etc.; musical heritage; the protection of minority music; music and working life; music piracy; music and health care; music and social well-being; and music and sustainable development. Relevant data on EU-funded projects that is available or will likely soon be available in machine-readable formats include the number of initiatives funded, participating organisations and countries, and financial scale and timespan, as well as potentially reported KPIs such as number of beneficiaries, etc. The R package dataset, developed by Open Music Europe partner REPREX, will expedite the collection and processing of such data. In order to demonstrate value-added, a manual collection of a limited set of data on selected EU-funded projects on music and sustainability was performed (see Annex 2). As with survey data, some (aggregated) na�onal-level administra�ve data are available via na�onal sta�s�cal ins�tute websites or can be requested in digital form by the general public, whereas other data requires a formal applica�on process and/or dialogue and formal agreements with governmental stakeholders to access. This process has been ini�ated in Slovakia. 4.3 Multi-Country Primary Data Collection Two major primary mul�-country surveying ac�vi�es will be undertaken within Open Music Europe: a music professional, music organisa�on, and music MSME survey and a cultural access and par�cipa�on survey (see Sec�on 4.3.1). Issues relevant to both surveying ac�vi�es are: • Concept matching • Identity matching and the coordination of data subjects/observations • Ex-post harmonisation with prior surveys D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 71 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 • Ex-ante harmonisation of the survey data collection instruments8 As the project’s Slovak surveying ac�vi�es are further along in the planning than the mul�-country surveys, these topics are considered in Sec�on 4.2 with reference to the concrete example of a music organisa�on and MSME survey currently planned in coordina�on with the Sta�s�cal Office of the Slovak Republic. Both mul�-country surveys will contribute data to WP1, 2, 3, and 4. As indicated in the Descrip�on of Ac�on, the cultural access and par�cipa�on survey can be regarded as the primary WP3 data collec�on ac�vity. it will yield significant new data on audience interac�ons with and through music. However, the music professional, music organisa�on, and music MSME survey may also assist in filling data gaps on the composi�on and evolu�on of music ecosystems in the data collec�on sites. In addi�on to these surveys, other data collec�on ac�vi�es will be undertaken, most significantly for WP3, mixed accoun�ng and survey data will be collected from partner MIH and poten�ally other music organisa�ons in order to produce environmental, social, and governance sustainability reports (see Sec�on 4.3.2). 4.3.1 Surveys Music professional, music organisation, and music MSME survey A music professional, music organisa�on, and music MSME survey will be conducted under the auspices of WP1 and WP2, with scien�fic assistance from WP3 and technical assistance from WP4 and WP5. The aims of this survey are to: • Provide input for music valuation (WP1) via questions on sales/earnings • Fill data gaps on music professionals, organisations, and MSMEs (WP1, WP2) via questions on formal and informal employment • Fill data gaps on the composition and evolution of music ecosystems (WP3) by enabling a more comprehensive mapping of the full range of actors involved in musical life within a given data collection site, as well as via targeted questions on attitudes toward resources (e.g., education, funding, etc.) and governance (e.g., licensing, rights management, etc.). • Provide testing and training data for toolkit development (WP4) At least two varia�ons on this survey will be created, for distribu�on to different kinds of data subjects: one will target individual music professionals (i.e., natural persons who earn an income from musical ac�vi�es), while the other will target music organisa�ons and MSMEs. The music professional variant will aim for a sample of N=500 respondents per target country. Recrui�ng will be conducted via the Open Music Europe CMO partners and other music industry stakeholders within the target countries. The surveying mode is computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI), i.e., online surveying, poten�ally augmented with the distribu�on of paper ques�onnaires if recommended by local stakeholders in given target countries. In addi�on to unique links being sent to CMO members, an open link will be distributed via social media and made available to expedite a snowball sample. The datasets will be cleaned and treated separately, and the data of open link respondents will be subject to par�cular scru�ny. 8 A best-case outcome would be that the OpenMusE survey ques�onnaires could improve upon the ESSnetCulture Final Report’s proposal for “a survey formula with a limited number of ques�ons, which could be introduced in future European surveys, thus allowing input harmonisa�on” (2012, p. 21). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 72 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Poten�al targets for ex-ante harmonisa�on (concept and/or ques�on harmonisa�on) include the LFS, EU-SILC, and CEEMID music professional surveys. Cultural access and participation survey A cultural access and par�cipa�on survey will be conducted under the auspices of WP3, with scien�fic assistance from WP1 and technical assistance from WP4 and WP5. The aims of this survey are to: • Provide input for music valuation (WP1) via questions on consumer spending • Fill data gaps on music professionals (WP1, WP2) via questions on formal and informal employment and incidental earnings from music • Fill data gaps on audience interactions with music (WP3) via questions designed in accordance with the ICET model (Bína et al., 2014): o Information  Music education  Other music information behaviour o Communication and community  Music and social life  Music, society, and politics o Enjoyment and expression  Music and human rights  Musical creation [non-commercial] o Transaction  Musical creation [commercial]  Participation in musical life o Music, health, and well-being o Music and sustainable development • Provide testing and training data for toolkit development (WP4) The target group is individuals in the general popula�on, with an aim toward representa�vity. To this end, a random sample is preferred. With regard to the surveying mode, to the extent possible, the sampling and fieldwork recommenda�ons provided in the ESSnet-Culture Final Report will be taken as a best prac�ce. However, these recommenda�ons will be considered in light of methodological innova�ons in sampling and fieldwork during the post-COVID-19 era, e.g., the planned shi� on the part of the European Social Survey from a face-to-face surveying mode to a mixed or purely self-comple�on mode. Poten�al targets for ex-ante harmonisa�on (concept and/or ques�on harmonisa�on) include Eurobarometer, EU-SILC, the CEEMID CAP surveys, and surveys on piracy conducted by EUIPO and project partners UVA and SSA. 4.3.2 Environmental, social, and governance sustainability data As noted in Sec�on 1.3, in parallel to its research aims, WP3 harbours the innova�on aim of developing a semi-automated environmental, social, and governance sustainability repor�ng toolkit. The toolkit will be designed to produce reports that comply with the forthcoming EU Corporate Sustainability Repor�ng Direc�ve (CSRD) and European Sustainability Repor�ng Standards (ESRS). This entails collec�ng data on indicators in the environmental, social, and governance domains, as outlined in the following table. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 73 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 ESRS domains, topics, and indicators Domain ESRS topic Potential indicators Environmental E1 Climate change Energy consumption; climate change mitigation Environmental E2 Pollution Pollutant emission Environmental E3 Water and marine resources Water consumption and discharge Environmental E4 Biodiversity and ecosystems Impacts and dependencies on ecosystems (e.g., use of sustainable resources; animal rights; etc.) Environmental E5 Circular economy Resource inflows and outflows; resource optimisation Social S1 Own workforce Work-related rights (e.g., working conditions; work-life balance; freedom of association; equal opportunities for different groups; etc.) Social S2 Workers in the value chain Work-related rights in the value chain Social S3 Affected communities Impact of company and value chain activities on civil, social, and economic rights; social inclusion of different groups; social cohesion; community wellbeing; etc. Social S4 Consumers and end-users Impact of company products and services on consumers (e.g., data protection; child protection; etc.) Governance G1 Business conduct Anti-corruption and anti-bribery measures; protection of whistleblowers; lobbying; relations with suppliers The data subjects in this case will be individual enterprises: during the pilot study, partner MIH will serve as a test case, with other music MSMEs and organisa�ons invited to par�cipate on a voluntary basis. The details of data collec�on will be determined in the forthcoming task 3.2. However, in brief, the following data sources will likely be used: • Environmental sustainability: direct emissions and resource usage by the reporting company can be calculated using data on the company’s activities, while indirect emissions and resource usage by entities within the reporting company’s upstream and downstream value chains can be estimated using sectoral averages. The R package iotables will be used as the basis for the environmental sustainability data collection tool (see Section 4.5.2 below). • Social sustainability – own workforce and workers in the value chain: data on work-related rights within the reporting company can be collected using a self-completion survey (two modules, one to be completed by the management and one by either the entire workforce or a random sample, depending on the size of the company). It is currently unclear what data on work-related rights in the value chain might be available. • Social sustainability – affected communities: data on CSR expenditure and activities can be collected from the reporting company. It is currently unclear what additional data on the social impact of particular sectors might be available. • Social sustainability – consumers and end users: data on compliance with relevant regulations and standards, as well as potential violations, can be collected from the reporting company. • Governance sustainability: data on anti-corruption measures, as well as potential violations, can be collected from the reporting company. It may be possible to an extent to “dual-purpose” the ESG sustainability data collec�on with the abovemen�oned music organisa�on and music MSME survey by including bateries in the later on work-related rights, CSR ac�vi�es, compliance with consumer protec�on regula�ons, and an�- corrup�on measures. These bateries could then be condensed into a reduced version of the ques�onnaire designed for use in the ESG toolkit. This possibility will be explored in task 3.2. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 80 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 5 Indicator Candidates The sta�s�cal infrastructure of indicators serves as a guideline for the pursuit of mixed data sources in the Open Music Europe project. In brief, indicators are dis�lla�ons of policy-relevant data (see Figure 7 below; DOI: htps://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.23600571): Good indicators match ac�onable objec�ves to accessible data that describe the extent to which these objec�ves have been achieved. 5.1 EU-Level Indicator Candidates Current EU policy guidelines on culture – e.g., the Work Plan on Culture 2023-2026 – do not define indicators as such. However, they do define priori�es and ac�on areas (see Sec�on 2.1 and Annex 3). The first step in indicator development was to harmonise these policy priori�es and ac�on areas with dimensions of prac�ce on which data could be collected; this produced a policy-driven schema for the iden�fica�on of data availabili�es and gaps (see Sec�on 2.3, Annex 4, and Annex 7). Insofar as it is conceptualised on the basis of standing policy objec�ves, this schema can also serve as a framework for the iden�fica�on of indicator candidates. Each cell in the schema could, in principle, serve as an indicator candidate. This very long list of poten�al indicator candidates must be circumscribed through dialogue with stakeholders, in view of decision criteria such as ac�onability, cross-na�onal relevance, and the availability of data. This work is currently underway in Slovakia (see Sec�on 5.2.5 below) and will be pursued within other target countries over the course of the data collec�on phase. The defini�on of EU-level indicator candidates will follow through discourse with EU-level stakeholders during workshops hosted by partner UVA in Q1/Q2 2024. During this discourse, the S.M.A.R.T. guideline could be of assistance; this well-known mnemonic holds that effec�ve indicators should be: • Specific • Measurable • Achievable • Relevant • Time-bound Note here that WP1, WP2, and WP3, while working from a similar conceptual basis, have proposed slightly different schemata, which must be aligned prior to extensive stakeholder interac�on. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 81 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 5.2 National-Level Indicator Candidates 5.2.1 Bulgaria Indicator candidates for Bulgaria will be iden�fied during the data collec�on phase of the work package, following the example of Slovakia below. The precision at which this is possible will depend upon the extent of coopera�on possible with local stakeholders. 5.2.2 Germany Indicator candidates for Germany will be iden�fied during the data collec�on phase of the work package, following the example of Slovakia below. The precision at which this is possible will depend upon the extent of coopera�on possible with local stakeholders. 5.2.3 Hungary Indicator candidates for Hungary will be iden�fied during the data collec�on phase of the work package, following the example of Slovakia below. The precision at which this is possible will depend upon the extent of coopera�on possible with local stakeholders. 5.2.4 Italy Indicator candidates for Italy will be iden�fied during the data collec�on phase of the work package, following the example of Slovakia below. The precision at which this is possible will depend upon the extent of coopera�on possible with local stakeholders. 5.2.5 Slovakia As noted in OpenMusE D1.1, D2.1, and Sec�on 2.2.5 of the present deliverable, the Slovak Ins�tute for Cultural Policy (IKP) has worked extensively in recent years to develop a comprehensive strategy for the development of the CCSIs in accordance with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. One landmark in this process was the publica�on of the Set of Goals and Measurable Indicators for Cultural Policies in Slovakia (IKP 2022), which presents dra� objec�ves and indicator candidates for both an umbrella cultural policy and 13 sector-specific policies, including for the music sector. Another landmark was the publica�on of the Culture Strategy and Creative Industries of the Slovak Republic 2030 (2023), which iden�fies seven objec�ves and 50 quan�ta�ve key performance indicators for cultural policy in general – but not sector-specific sub-indicators. A primary objec�ve of our ongoing dialogue with the Ins�tute for Cultural Policy, Ministry of Culture, and Sta�s�cal Office of the Slovak Republic will be to align and refine these indicators. We will focus on ensuring alignment between versions, as well as with EU-level policy goals on the one hand and data on the other (see Sec�ons 2 and 3); iden�fying currently untapped data sources that could contribute to the measurement of the indicators (see Sec�on 3); and co-designing data collec�on plans and instruments capable of popula�ng the indicators in an efficient and accurate manner (see Sec�on 4). To this end, music-specific sub-indicators have been proposed which match the 50 quan�ta�ve KPIs iden�fied in the Culture Strategy and Creative Industries of the Slovak Republic 2030 (see OpenMusE D2.1, Table 31). The next steps are to determine which of these sub-indicators can be assessed using the current sources of target values iden�fied in the strategy document, and which require finding new data sources and/or collec�ng primary data. For the later, data collec�on methods must be proposed. An expanded spreadsheet “Dn.1_OpenMusE_SK_IKP_2030_indicator_candidates.xlsx” documen�ng this process is provided as a living document on the SINUS cloud at the following link: htps://cloud.sinus-ins�tut.de/public/b7465b D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 82 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 6 Conclusion and Outlook This deliverable cross-references good prac�ces in cultural sta�s�cs with current policy priori�es, deriving a framework for data collec�on on: 1. The ways audiences interact and engage with (and through) music; 2. The composition and evolution of music ecosystems – i.e., music actor systems, governance systems, resource systems, and action situations; 3. The environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainability of music ecosystems. A�er reviewing the scien�fic literature, it offers an ini�al mapping of data availabili�es, gaps, sources, and collec�on methods on the EU and Slovak level, which is methodologically transferrable to Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and any other EU member state. It explores indicators that have been developed in Slovakia, and proposes a framework for indicator development on the EU level. D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 83 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 References Agos�no, D., Almanza, R., Bodo, C., Bodo, S., Cicerchia, A., Da Milano, C., Dal Pozzolo, L., Di Blasi, C., Forte, P., Giordano, B., Stumpo, G., Taormino, A., & Valeri, A. (2022). Country Profile Italy. Compendium Cultural Policies & Trends. htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/database/searchby-country/country-profile/?id=20 Ahlers, M., Lücke, M., & Rauch, M. (Hrsg.). (2019). Musik und Straße. Springer Fachmedien. htps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-26101-6 Alemanno, A. (2018). Big Data for Good: Unlocking Privately-Held Data to the Benefit of the Many. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 9(2), 183–191. htps://doi.org/10.1017/err.2018.34 Allensbach Ins�tute for Public Opinion Research. (2021). Amateurmusizieren in Deutschland – Ergebnisund Methodenbericht. htps://miz.org/en/publica�ons/amateurmusizieren-indeutschland-ergebnis-und-methodenbericht-0 Allison-Cassin, S. (2016). A Scenes Approach to Metadata Models for Music. Journal of Library Metadata, 16(3–4), 181–201. htps://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2016.1258891 Anderton, A. (2016). Hearing Democracy in the Ruins of Hitler’s Reich: American Musicians in Postwar Germany. Comparative Critical Studies, 13, 215–231. htps://doi.org/10.3366/ccs.2016.0200 Antal, D. (2023). Pilot Program for Novel Music Industry Statistical Indicators in the Slovak Republic. htps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8399254 Antal, D., Barteková, M. K., & Remeňová, K. (2023, September 26). Economy of music in Europe: Novel data collection methods and indicators. htps://music.dataobservatory.eu/documents/open_music_europe/economy/report/report_ music_europe_data_collec�on.html Baltzis, A., & Gardikio�s, A. (2008, Januar 1). Influence of Social Values and Music Preferences on the Use of Music Distribution Channels: An Exploratory Study. Bauer, C. (2021, August 8). Music recommender systems: Challenges and opportunities for nonsuperstar artists. Chris�ne Bauer. htps://chris�nebauer.eu/publica�ons/bauer-2017nonsuperstars-bled/ Bennet, D., Hennekam, S., Macarthur, S., Hope, C., & Goh, T. (2019). Hiding gender: How female composers manage gender iden�ty. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 113, 20–32. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.07.003 Berbel, N., & Gómez, M. (2014). Formal and non-formal educa�on. A mee�ng point in music educa�on. Aula Abierta, 42, 47. htps://doi.org/10.17811/rifie.42.2014.47-52 Bergelid, L. (2018). Classification of explicit music content using lyrics and music metadata. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/Classifica�on-of-explicit-music-content-using-andBergelid/66613f990f05a0ea3c7053dc8f7dd59050802744 Bína, V., Chantepie, P., Deroin, V., Frank, G., Kommel, K., Kotýnek, J., & Robin, P. (2014, Mai 22). ESSnet Culture Final report [Text]. CROS - European Commission. htps://croslegacy.ec.europa.eu/content/essnet-culture-final-report_en Blumenreich, U. (2022). Country Profile Germany. Compendium Cultural Policies & Trends. htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/database/search-by-country/country-profile/?id=15 Blumenreich, U. (2023). Short profiles | Compendium of Cultural Policies & Trends. htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/wpcontent/uploads/pdf_short/germany/Germany_short_062023.pdf D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 84 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Bodo, C. (o. J.). Short profiles | Compendium of Cultural Policies & Trends. Abgerufen 30. November 2023, von htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/wpcontent/uploads/pdf_short/italy/italy_short.pdf Brennan, M. (2020). The Environmental Sustainability of the Music Industries. In K. Oakley & M. Banks (Hrsg.), Cultural Industries and the Environmental Crisis: New Approaches for Policy (S. 37–49). Springer Interna�onal Publishing. htps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49384-4_4 Brüt, M. (2020). EU Funding for Culture 2021-2027. Crea�ve Europe Desk KULTUR. htps://cultureac�oneurope.org/knowledge/eu-funding-for-culture-2021-2027/ Buchanan, D. A. (2006). Performing Democracy: Bulgarian Music and Musicians in Transition. University of Chicago Press. htps://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo3641153.html Budde, D. (1997). Take Three Chords... Punkrock und die Entwicklung zum American Hardcore (Schriften zur Popularmusikforschung). OpenEdi�on Journals. htps://journals.openedi�on.org/volume/2013 Calmbach, M. (2007). More than music: Einblicke in die Jugendkultur Hardcore. Transcript. Calmbach, M., & Rhein, S. (2007). DIY or DIE! Überlegungen zur Vermitlung und Aneignung von Doit-yourself-Kompetenzen in der Jugendkultur Hardcore. In U. Götlich, R. Müller, S. Rhein, & M. Calmbach (Hrsg.), Arbeit, Politik und Religion in Jugendkulturen. Engagement und Vergnügen (S. 68–86). Juventa. Carboni, M. (2014). The digi�za�on of music and the accessibility of the ar�st. Journal of Professional Communication. htps://doi.org/10.15173/jpc.v3i2.163 Cayari, C. (2014). Using Informal Educa�on Through Music Video Crea�on. General Music Today, 27(3), 17–22. htps://doi.org/10.1177/1048371313492537 Clarke, E., DeNora, T., & Vuoskoski, J. (2015). Music, empathy and cultural understanding. Physics of Life Reviews, 15, 61–88. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2015.09.001 Conceison, M. (2022). Studying Diversity in the Music Industry. Proceedings of the 2022 International Summit of the Music & Entertainment Industry Educators Association, 4–32. htps://doi.org/10.25101/22.12 Council of Europe. (2016). Indicator Framework on Culture and Democracy (IFCD). Council conclusions on the Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022, (2018). Council Resolu�on on the EU Work Plan for Culture 2023–2026 2022/C 466/01, (2022). htps://eurlex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022G1207%2801%29&qid=1671635488811 Work Plan for Culture 2019-2022, (2021). htps://en.unesco.org/crea�vity/policy-monitoringpla�orm/work-plan-culture-2019-2022 Court, B. (2017). The Politics of Musical Amateurism, 1968-1981. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/The-Poli�cs-of-Musical-Amateurism%2C-1968-1981Court/8188ba4e195b99e95b433b4a2476d4604a13bd34 Crawford, R. (2020). Socially inclusive prac�ces in the music classroom: The impact of music educa�on used as a vehicle to engage refugee background students. Research Studies in Music Education, 42(2), 248–269. htps://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X19843001 Crea�vesunite. (2023). OMC. htps://crea�vesunite.eu/work-condi�on/ Croom, A. M. (2015). Music prac�ce and par�cipa�on for psychological well-being: A review of how music influences posi�ve emo�on, engagement, rela�onships, meaning, and D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 85 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 accomplishment. Musicae Scientiae, 19(1), 44–64. htps://doi.org/10.1177/1029864914561709 Crosno, J. L., Nygaard, A., & Dahlstrom, R. (2007). Trust in the development of new channels in the music industry. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 14(3), 216–223. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2006.09.004 Crossley, N., McAndrew, S., & Widdop, P. (Hrsg.). (2014). Social Networks and Music Worlds. Routledge. htps://doi.org/10.4324/9781315867793 Cunningham, S., Bainbridge, D., & Mckay, D. (2007). Finding New Music: A Diary Study of Everyday Encounters with Novel Songs. Interna�onal Society for Music Informa�on Retrieval Conference. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/Finding-New-Music:-A-Diary-Study-ofEveryday-with-Cunningham-Bainbridge/5de446637b35661�d665715727f7915�6e631c de Boise, S. (2022). Digitaliza�on and the Musical Media�on of An�-Democra�c Ideologies in AltRight Forums. Popular Music and Society, 45(1), 48–66. htps://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2021.1984021 Deflem, M. (2020). Popular Culture and Social Control: The Moral Panic on Music Labeling. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 45(1), 2–24. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-019-09495-3 Dingle, G. A., Sharman, L. S., Bauer, Z., Beckman, E., Broughton, M., Bunzli, E., Davidson, R., Draper, G., Fairley, S., Farrell, C., Flynn, L. M., Gomersall, S., Hong, M., Larwood, J., Lee, C., Lee, J., Nitschinsk, L., Peluso, N., Reedman, S. E., … Wright, O. R. L. (2021). How Do Music Ac�vi�es Affect Health and Well-Being? A Scoping Review of Studies Examining Psychosocial Mechanisms. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. htps://www.fron�ersin.org/ar�cles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.713818 Directorate-General for Educa�on and Culture, & European Commision. (2013). Cultural Access and Participation Report. Directorate-General for Educa�on, Y. (2023). The status and working conditions of artists and cultural and creative professionals: Report of the OMC (Open Method of Coordination) group of EU Member States’ experts : final report. Publica�ons Office of the European Union. htps://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/46315 Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture, Factory 92, KEA European Affairs, Le bureau export, & Music Austria. (o. J.). Music Moves Europe—Study on a European Music Export Strategy | Culture and Creativity. Abgerufen 29. November 2023, von htps://culture.ec.europa.eu/node/352 Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture, Y. (2016). AB Music working group report. Publica�ons Office of the European Union. htps://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/450111 Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture, Y., ECORYS, & Hammonds, W. (2023). Culture and democracy, the evidence: How citizens’ participation in cultural activities enhances civic engagement, democracy and social cohesion : lessons from international research. Publica�ons Office of the European Union. htps://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/39199 Directorate-General for Educa�on, Youth, Sport and Culture, Y., KEA European Affairs, Panteia, Clarke, M., Vroonhof, P., Snijders, J., Le Gall, A., Jacquemet, B., Legrand, E., Miclet, F., Price, J., & Price, E. (2020). Feasibility study for the establishment of a European Music Observatory: Final report. Publica�ons Office of the European Union. htps://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/9691 Edwards J.(2023) A social-ecological systems view on COVID-19: Research findings and policy D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 86 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 recommenda�ons, White Paper, October 2023. COVINFORM H2020 Project No. 101016247. htps://www.covinform.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/39/2023/11/COVINFORM-BrochureA4-Whitepaper-A-social-ecological-systems-view-on-COVID-19.pdf Edwards, J., & Konishi, J. (2023). Like the growth rings of a tree: A socio-ecological systems model of past and envisioned musical change in Okinawa, Japan. In A.S. Allen & J.T. Titon (Eds.), Sounds, Ecologies, Musics (pp. 41-67). Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780197546642, 0197546641 Elvers, P., & Steffens, J. (2017). The Sound of Success: Inves�ga�ng Cogni�ve and Behavioral Effects of Mo�va�onal Music in Sports. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. htps://www.fron�ersin.org/ar�cles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02026 Epps-Darling, A. C., Cramer, H., & Bouyer, R. T. (2020). Female Ar�st Representa�on in Music Streaming. In Proceedings of the First MiniCon Conference. Ismir 2020 Virtual Conference. htps://program.ismir2020.net/poster_2-11.html Europäische Kommission. (2012). Eurobarometer 67.1 (Feb-Mar 2007) Eurobarometer 67.1 (Feb-Mar 2007): Cultural Values, Poverty and Social Exclusion, Development Aid, and Residential Mobility: Cultural Values, Poverty and Social Exclusion, Development Aid, and Residential Mobility (3.0.1) [dataset]. GESIS Data Archive. htps://doi.org/10.4232/1.10983 European Commission. (2018). COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A New European Agenda for Culture. htps://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2018:267:FIN New European Agenda for Culture, (2018). htps://www.cultureforhealth.eu/mapping/neweuropean-agenda-for-culture/ European Commission. (2015). Eurobarometer 79.2: Internal Market, Cultural Activities, Non-Urban Road Use, Science and Technology, and Undeclared Work and Tax Fraud, April-May 2013: Version 1 [dataset]. ICPSR - Interuniversity Consor�um for Poli�cal and Social Research. htps://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35505.V1 European Commission And European Parliament, Brussels. (2022). Eurobarometer 88.1 (2017)Eurobarometer 88.1 (2017): Parlemeter 2017, Cultural Heritage, Future of Europe, Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment: Parlemeter 2017, Cultural Heritage, Future of Europe, Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment (2.0.0) [dataset]. GESIS. htps://doi.org/10.4232/1.13896 Eurostat. (2015). EU-SILC 2015 Module on Social and cultural participation and Material deprivation (guidelines and questionnaire). Eurostat. (2007, 2011). Adult Education Survey. htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/trng_aes_12m0_esms.htm Eurostat. (2012, 2017). ICT usage in households and by individuals (isoc_i). htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/isoc_i_esms.htm Eurostat. (2018a, 2020). LFS series—Detailed annual survey results (lfsa). htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/lfsa_esms.htm Eurostat. (2018b, December 7). Guide to Eurostat culture statistics—2018 edition. htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-manuals-and-guidelines/-/KS-GQ-18-011 Eurostat. (2023a). Consumption expenditure of private households (hbs). htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/hbs_esms.htm D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 87 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Eurostat. (2023b). Overview—Harmonised European Time Use Surveys (HETUS)—Eurostat. htps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/�me-use-surveys Eurostat (European Commission). (2021). European business statistics methodological manual for statistical business registers: 2021 edition. Publica�ons Office of the European Union. htps://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2785/093371 Fagerving, A. (2023). Wikidata for authority control: Sharing museum knowledge with the world. Digital Humanities in the Nordic and Baltic Countries Publications, 5(1), Ar�cle 1. htps://doi.org/10.5617/dhnbpub.10665 Ferraro, A., Jeon, J., Kim, B., Serra, X., & Bogdanov, D. (2020). Artist biases in collaborative filtering for music recommendation. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/Ar�st-biases-incollabora�ve-filtering-for-music-Ferraro-Jeon/f251bb0fac5fc4075e73873e22e7138b10ac7ac0 Fonseca, X., Lukosch, S., & Brazier, F. (2019). Social cohesion revisited: A new defini�on and how to characterize it. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 32(2), 231–253. htps://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2018.1497480 Freemuse. (2021). The State of Artistic Freedom 2021. Freemuse. Fuentes-Sánchez, N., Pastor, R., Escrig, M. A., Elipe-Miravet, M., & Pastor, M. C. (2021). Emo�on elicita�on during music listening: Subjec�ve self-reports, facial expression, and autonomic reac�vity. Psychophysiology, 58(9), e13884. htps://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13884 Glaser, M., Krause, G., Rater, B.M.W., & Welp, M. (2012). New approaches to the analysis of humannature rela�ons. In M. Glaser, B.M.W. Rater, G. Krause, & M. Welp (Eds.), Human-nature interac�ons in the anthropocene: Poten�als of social-ecological systems analysis (pp. 3-12). Routledge. Grau-Sánchez, J., Foley, M., Hlavová, R., Muukkonen, I., Ojinaga-Alfageme, O., Radukic, A., Spindler, M., & Hundevad, B. (2017). Exploring Musical Ac�vi�es and Their Rela�onship to Emo�onal Well-Being in Elderly People across Europe: A Study Protocol. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. htps://www.fron�ersin.org/ar�cles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00330 Green, L. (2017). How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. Routledge. htps://doi.org/10.4324/9781315253169 Greenberg, D. M., Decety, J., & Gordon, I. (2021). The social neuroscience of music: Understanding the social brain through human song. The American Psychologist, 76(7), 1172–1185. htps://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000819 Guaus, E., & SMS Digi�sa�on Working Group. (2023, Dezember 1). Visualization of collected digital practices in HME institutions. Gustavson, D. E., Coleman, P. L., Iversen, J. R., Maes, H. H., Gordon, R. L., & Lense, M. D. (2021). Mental health and music engagement: Review, framework, and guidelines for future studies. Translational Psychiatry, 11(1), Ar�cle 1. htps://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-021-01483-8 Happonen, P. (2016). The Consumption and Perceived Value of Music in the Digital Age: Adolescents and Young Adults as Music Consumers. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/TheConsump�on-and-Perceived-Value-of-Music-in-theHapponen/87a5f353264f119f33aca7867a24c6f14ebd9060 Hardjono, T., Howard, G., Scace, E., Chowdury, M., Novak, L., Gaudet, M., Anderson, J., d’avis, N., Kulis, C., Sweeney, E., & Vaughan, C. (2019). Towards an Open and Scalable Music Metadata Layer (arXiv:1911.08278). arXiv. htps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1911.08278 Hitzler, R., & Pfadenhauer, M. (2004). Unsichtbare Bildungsprogramme? Zur Entwicklung und Aneignung praxisrelevanter Kompetenzen in Jugendszenen. Expertise zum 8. Kinderund Jugendbericht der Landesregierung NRW. (I. Bemerburg, D. Eichholz, & D. Tepe, Hrsg.). D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 88 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Universität Dortmund / Lehrstuhl für Allgemeine Soziologie; Nordrhein-Wes�alen / Ministerium für Schule, Jugend und Kinder. Hjelm, T., Kahn-Harris, K., & LeVine, M. (2011). Heavy Metal as Controversy and Counterculture. Popular music history, 6(1–2). Hoare, M., Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., & Chamberlain, A. (2014, Dezember 1). Doing it for themselves: The practices of amateur musicians and DIY music networks in a digital age. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/Doing-it-for-themselves:-the-prac�ces-of-amateura-Hoare-Benford/55234d4b920578a6bdd9e380a4bca3edd7b05c84 Hodgson, T. (2021). Spo�fy and the democra�sa�on of music. Popular Music, 40(1), 1–17. htps://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143021000064 Horecká, I. J. (2022). The summary results of the Satellite Account on Culture and Creative Industry of the Slovak Republic (2015-2020). Ilari, B., & Cho, E. (2023). Musical par�cipa�on and posi�ve youth development in middle school. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. htps://www.fron�ersin.org/ar�cles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1056542 IMPALA. (2022). Towards a more diverse and inclusive independent music sector. Inkei, P. (2021). Country Profile Hungary. Compendium Cultural Policies & Trends. htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/database/search-by-country/country-profile/?id=18 Inkei, P. (2022b). Short profiles | Compendium of Cultural Policies & Trends. htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/wp-content/uploads/pdf_short/hungary/Hungary-Short2022.pdf Janjusevic, L., & Salama, M. (2021). Sustainability in the Context of Event Management. In M. Salama (Hrsg.), Event Project Management (1. Aufl.). Goodfellow Publishers. htps://doi.org/10.23912/9781911635734-4775 Jenkins, P. (2011). Formal and Informal Music Educa�onal Prac�ces. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 19(2), 179–197. Kagan, S., & Kirchberg, V. (2016). Music and sustainability: Organiza�onal cultures towards crea�ve resilience – a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 1487–1502. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.044 Kaneshiro, B., Ruan, F., Baker, C. W., & Berger, J. (2017). Characterizing Listener Engagement with Popular Songs Using Large-Scale Music Discovery Data. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. htps://www.fron�ersin.org/ar�cles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00416 Kinnunen, M., Homi, H., & Honkanen, A. (2020). Social Sustainability in Adolescents’ Music Event Atendance. Sustainability, 12(22), 9419. htps://doi.org/10.3390/su12229419 Kirkegaard, A., & Oterbeck, J. (2017). Introduc�on: Researching Popular Music Censorship. Popular Music and Society, 40(3), 257–260. htps://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2017.1307656 Kirschner, S., & Tomasello, M. (2010). Joint music making promotes prosocial behavior in 4-year-old children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), 354–364. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.004 Kruse, N. B. (2012). Adult community musicians’ self-esteem of music ability. Research Studies in Music Education, 34(1), 61–72. htps://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X12438655 Laukka, P., & Quick, L. (2013). Emo�onal and mo�va�onal uses of music in sports and exercise: A ques�onnaire study among athletes. Psychology of Music, 41(2), 198–215. htps://doi.org/10.1177/0305735611422507 D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 89 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Lesota, O., Melchiorre, A., Rekabsaz, N., Brandl, S., Kowald, D., Lex, E., & Schedl, M. (2021). Analyzing Item Popularity Bias of Music Recommender Systems: Are Different Genders Equally Affected? Proceedings of the 15th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, 601–606. htps://doi.org/10.1145/3460231.3478843 Liimola, H. (2000). Some notes on choral singing. In J. Poter (Hrsg.), The Cambridge Companion to Singing (S. 149–157). Cambridge University Press. htps://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521622257.013 Lindsay, C. (2016, September 26). An Exploration into How the Rise of Curation Within Streaming Services Has Impacted How Music Fans in the UK Discover New Music. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/An-Explora�on-into-How-the-Rise-of-Cura�onWithin-Lindsay/564e0456245f7c8045027b0b393e0196b65132c1 Long, A., Godfrey, M., Randall, T., Bretle, A., & Grant, M. (2016). Long et al 2002 Feasibility Social Care Review—Part III [dataset]. Lunde Ha�ield, J. (2017). Determinants of Motivation and Self-regulation in Aspiring Musicians: The mental Edge of Musicianship. htps://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35819.75044 MacDonald, R. A. R. (2013). Music, health, and well-being: A review. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 8(1), 20635. htps://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v8i0.20635 McAndrew, S., & Everet, M. (2015). Music as Collec�ve Inven�on: A Social Network Analysis of Composers. Cultural Sociology, 9(1), 56–80. htps://doi.org/10.1177/1749975514542486 McGinnis, M.D., & Ostrom, E. (2014). Social-ecological systems framework: Ini�al changes and con�nuing challenges. Ecology and Society 19(2). htps://ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss2/art30/ McPherson, G., & Renwick, J. (2009). Multiple motives: Profiles of young Australians’ reasons for musical engagement. htps://www.seman�cscholar.org/paper/Mul�ple-mo�ves%3AProfiles-of-young-Australians'-McPhersonRenwick/b525578ffab4f22d7c6628cedc28f9b6baa29b4d Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic, Na�onal Cultural Centre of the Slovak Republic, & Sta�s�cal Office of the Slovak Republic. (2018). Country Profile Slovakia. htps://www.culturalpolicies.net/database/search-by-country/country-profile/?id=36 Müller, R. (1994). Selbstsozialisation. Eine Theorie lebenslangen musikalischen Lernens. htps://psycharchives.org/en/item/035f5813-12ea-4c02-a832-067718373630 Musgrave, G. (2023). Music and wellbeing vs. musicians’ wellbeing: Examining the paradox of musicmaking posi�vely impac�ng wellbeing, but musicians suffering from poor mental health. Cultural Trends, 32(3), 280–295. htps://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2022.2058354 Music Educa�on Network. (2023). meNet. htp://menet.mdw.ac.at/menetsite/english/topics.html?m=1&c=0&lang=en Niu, D. (2018). Music consumption in a changing ecosystem. OECD. (2022). The Culture Fix: Creative People, Places and Industries. OECD Publishing. htps://www.oecd.org/employment/the-culture-fix-991bb520-en.htm OECD. (2018). PISA 2018 Technical Report—PISA. htps://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/pisa2018technicalreport/ O’Grady, P. (2021). Sound City and music from the outskirts: The de-democra�sa�on of pop music produc�on. Creative Industries Journal, 14(3), 211–225. htps://doi.org/10.1080/17510694.2020.1839281 D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 96 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Annex 4: Concept Mapping of Work Plan Priorities and Actions The priori�es and ac�ons iden�fied in the Council Resolu�on on the EU Work Plan for Culture 20232026 (2022) can be mapped to the EuroVoc as follows. In the instance that a fi�ng EuroVoc concept could not be found, other EU-managed controlled vocabularies were used (e.g., ECLAS, which is based on the Macrothesaurus of the OECD complemented by the ILO thesaurus, and par�ally convergent with EuroVoc). Music-specific sub-concepts were proposed. Work Plan Actions Relevant Concepts Concept URI Proposed MusicSpecific Sub-Concept ICET Model Pillar and Proposed SubHeading a1 vocational education http://eurovoc.europa .eu/795 Music vocational education 1. Information: Music education a1 working life http://eurovoc.europa .eu/6150 Music and working life 4. Transaction: Music creation [commercial] a1 artistic creation http://eurovoc.europa .eu/283 Musical creation [commercial] 4. Transaction: Music creation [commercial] a2 freedom of expression http://eurovoc.europa .eu/1619 Freedom of musical expression 3. Enjoyment and expression: Music and human rights a3 digital transformation http://eurovoc.europa .eu/c_658ff033 Music and the digital transformation 4. Transaction: Participation in musical life a4 sustainable development http://eurovoc.europa .eu/5585 Music and sustainable development 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music, health, and well-being a5 electronic game http://eurovoc.europa .eu/c_e2de1ffd Music and electronic games 4. Transaction: Music creation [commercial] b1 social integration http://eurovoc.europa .eu/1469 Music and social integration 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics b1 economic and social cohesion http://eurovoc.europa .eu/5499 Music and economic and social cohesion 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics b1 political culture http://eurovoc.europa .eu/8419 Music and political culture 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics b1 civic engagement http://eurovoc.europa .eu/c_b007a1dc Music and civic engagement 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics b1 social movement http://eurovoc.europa .eu/2011 Music in social movements 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics b1 right to culture http://eurovoc.europa .eu/514 Right to music 3. Enjoyment and expression: Music and human rights D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 97 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 b1 protection of minorities http://eurovoc.europa .eu/2834 Protection of minority music 3. Enjoyment and expression: Music and human rights b2 health care http://eurovoc.europa .eu/5899 Music and health care 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music, health, and well-being b2 social well-being http://eurovoc.europa .eu/4881 Music and social wellbeing 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music, health, and well-being b3 library http://eurovoc.europa .eu/4865 Music libraries 1. Information: Music education b4 child protection http://eurovoc.europa .eu/3919 Music and child protection 1. Information: Other music information behaviour b5 cultural information http://data.europa.eu /bkc/005.02.03.0600 Music information 1. Information: Other music information behaviour b6 art education http://eurovoc.europa .eu/670 Music education 1. Information: Music education b6 social life http://eurovoc.europa .eu/4706 Music and social life 2. Communication and community: Music and social life b6 cultural organisation http://eurovoc.europa .eu/2174 Musical organisations 2. Communication and community: Music and social life b6 civil society http://eurovoc.europa .eu/8428 Music and civil society 2. Communication and community: Music and social life b6 cultural identity http://eurovoc.europa .eu/5667 Music and cultural identity 2. Communication and community: Music and social life b6 cultural pluralism http://eurovoc.europa .eu/4097 Music and cultural pluralism 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics b6 cultural heritage http://eurovoc.europa .eu/2278 Musical heritage 2. Communication and community: Music and social life b6 religion http://eurovoc.europa .eu/3257 Music and religion 2. Communication and community: Music and social life b6 artistic creation http://eurovoc.europa .eu/283 Musical creation [noncommercial] 3. Enjoyment and expression: Music creation [noncommercial] b6 cultural tourism http://eurovoc.europa .eu/443600 Music and cultural tourism 4. Transaction: Participation in musical life D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 98 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 b6 participation in cultural life http://data.europa.eu /bkc/005.02.02.0500 Participation in musical life 4. Transaction c1 community resilience http://eurovoc.europa .eu/c_505c95bd Music and community resilience 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music and sustainable development c2 corruption http://eurovoc.europa .eu/245 Music and corruption 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music and sustainable development c3 sustainable development http://eurovoc.europa .eu/5585 Music and sustainable development 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music and sustainable development c4 noise pollution http://eurovoc.europa .eu/2526 Noise pollution 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music and sustainable development c5 cultural heritage http://eurovoc.europa .eu/2278 Musical heritage 5. Health, well-being, and sustainability: Music and sustainable development c6 NA NA NA NA c7 audiovisual piracy http://eurovoc.europa .eu/5192 Music piracy 4. Transaction d1 cultural relations http://eurovoc.europa .eu/3200 Music and cultural relations 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics d2 cultural relations http://eurovoc.europa .eu/3200 Music and cultural relations 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics d3 cultural relations http://eurovoc.europa .eu/3200 Music and cultural relations 2. Communication and community: Music, society, and politics D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 99 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Annex 5: Data on Music in EU-Level Cultural Statistics The following EU-level sta�s�cal data relate fully (1) or par�ally (x) to music. For the Guide to Eurostat cultural statistics func�ons and dimensions of culture to which each data source is relevant, see Sec�on 3.1 (cf. Eurostat 2018b). Note that Eurobarometer is not an official sta�s�cal survey but has been included as it is considered a source of high-quality EU-level data on cultural par�cipa�on. Note that in the AES, EU-SILC, Eurobarometer, and ICT datasets, music-relevant variables are defined in programme-specific codebooks, not via the use of standardised classifica�on systems. Data Source Classification System used to Identify Music Data, if applicable Categories or Variables Relevant to Music Music Data LFS NACE Rev. 2 32.2 Manufacture of musical instruments 1 LFS NACE Rev. 2 47.63 Retail sale of music and video recordings in specialised stores x LFS NACE Rev. 2 59.2 Sound recording and music publishing activities 1 LFS NACE Rev. 2 60.1 Radio broadcasting x LFS NACE Rev. 2 90.01 Performing arts x LFS ISCO 2354 Other music teachers 1 LFS ISCO 2652 Musicians, singers and composers 1 LFS ISCO 7312 Musical instrument makers and tuners 1 SBS NACE Rev. 2 C32.2 Manufacture of musical instruments 1 SBS NACE Rev. 2 G47.63 Retail sale of music & video recordings in specialised stores x SBS NACE Rev. 2 J59 Motion picture, video & television programme production, sound recording & music publishing activities x ITGS CN MUSI musical instruments 1 ITGS CN RECMED music in manuscript, gramophone records, recorded magnetic tapes and optical media (CDs) 1 ITS BOPS6; EBOPS 2010 8.4.1 Licences to reproduce and/or distribute audio-visual products (SH41) x ITS BOPS6; EBOPS 2010 11.1.1 Audio-visual services (SK11) x AES (2007) NA CA1V Number of �mes going to live performances x AES (2007) NA CA5Q In the last 12 months did you take part in a public performance involving singing, dancing, ac�ng or music? x AES (2011) NA CULPAR1 In the last 12 months how many �mes have you atended a live performance? x EUSILC (2006, 2015) NA PS020 Number of times going to live performances x EB79.2 NA QB1 Been to a concert; seen a ballet, a dance performance or an opera 1 EB79.2 NA QB3 Been to a musical performance (concert, band, etc.) from another European country; seen a ballet, a dance performance or an opera from another European country 1 EB79.2 NA QB4 Sung; played a musical instrument 1 EB79.2 NA QB6 [internet use] Listening to radio or music; downloading music 1 D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 100 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 EB79.2 NA QB4 Seen a traditional or classical performing arts event x ICT NA I_IUGM Internet use: playing/downloading games, images, films or music x ICT NA I_IUWEB2 Internet use for listening to web radio x ICT NA I_IUMUSS Internet use for listening to music 1 ICT NA I_BFILM Online purchases of film/music x ICT NA I_BTICK Online purchases of tickets for events x ICT NA I_BFILMO Online purchases of films/music, delivered or upgraded online x ICT NA I_IUHD_GM Mobile internet use via handheld device: for playing or downloading games, images, video or music x ICT NA I_CC_MUS Internet storage space use to save or share music 1 HETUS ACL 522 Theatre and concerts x HETUS ACL 831 Listening to radio or recordings x HBS COICOP CP09111 Equipment for the reception, recording and reproduction of sound x HBS COICOP CP09113 Portable sound and vision devices x HBS COICOP CP09119 Other equipment for the reception, recording and reproduction of sound and picture x HBS COICOP CP0914 Recording media x HBS COICOP CP0915 Repair of audio-visual, photographic and information processing equipment x HBS COICOP CP09221 Musical instruments 1 HBS COICOP CP09421 Cinemas, theatres, concerts x HBS COICOP CP09423 Television and radio licence fees, subscriptions x HICP ECOICOP CP09111 Equipment for the reception, recording and reproduction of sound x HICP ECOICOP CP09113 Portable sound and vision devices x HICP ECOICOP CP09119 Other equipment for the reception, recording and reproduction of sound and picture x HICP ECOICOP CP09141 Pre-recorded recording media x HICP ECOICOP CP0915 Repair of audio-visual, photographic and information processing equipment x HICP ECOICOP CP09221 Musical instruments 1 HICP ECOICOP CP09421 Cinemas, theatres, concerts x HICP ECOICOP CP09423 Television and radio licence fees, subscriptions x GFS COFOG 08.2 Cultural services x GFS COFOG 08.3 Broadcasting and publishing services x D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 101 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Annex 6: Data on Music in SK-Level Cultural Statistics Music-specific sub-indicators have been proposed which match the 50 quan�ta�ve KPIs iden�fied in the Culture Strategy and Creative Industries of the Slovak Republic 2030 (see also OpenMusE D2.1, Table 31). The next steps are to determine which of these sub-indicators can be assessed using the current sources of target values iden�fied in the strategy document, and which require finding new data sources and/or collec�ng primary data. For the later, data collec�on methods must be proposed. An expanded spreadsheet documen�ng this process is provided as a living document on the SINUS Cloud under the name “D3.1_OpenMusE_Annex6_data_on_music_in_SK_level_cultural_sta�s�cs” via the following public link: htps://cloud.sinus-ins�tut.de/public/84c486 D3.1 v1.1 – Music, Society, and Ci�zenship: Methods and Indicators 102 © 2024 OpenMusE | HORIZON-CL2-2022-HERITAGE-01-05 | Grant Agreement No. 101095295 Annex 7: Schema for Assessment of Data Availabilities and Gaps The schema framework adopts the following structure. The full schema with an assessment of poten�al availability based on the scien�fic literature review (as of the date of deliverable submission) is available on the SINUS Cloud via the public link htps://cloud.sinus-ins�tut.de/public/23f164 Work Plan Action EuroVoc Concept Employment Expenditure Consumption Practices Governance a1 Music education Data source 1 Data source 1 Data source 1 Data source 1 Data source 1 a1 Music education Data source 2 Data source 2 Data source 2 Data source 2 Data source 2 Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.