| This dissertation explores whether two frameworks--economic ideas about public, private and merit goods, and social capital ideas about networks--can be used to understand rationales for grant-supported arts and culture in the state of Maine. The study's goals are to describe support for art in recent awards; develop and examine propositions about criteria of value; and discuss implications for grantors, grantees, and policymakers.;The dataset samples 785 grants awarded to cultural nonprofit organizations by federal, state and private funders between 1998 and 2007. Using content analysis, the study looks at three grantmaking dimensions: distribution, purpose, process. Signals of support in award announcements are coded as elements that reflect an ongoing national shift in cultural policy related to characteristics of preservation, access, participatory engagement, social agendas, and bonding/bridging networks.;The research questions are: Are cultural grants appropriately described as merit goods? If so, can public benefit be categorized in social capital and/or economic terms? Does such a typology help explain support for art? Where does Maine's cultural policy fit in shifting conceptions of public benefit from art, and which characteristics are evident? What are the implications for policy evaluation?;The findings suggest that the older and emerging cultural trends coexist in Maine. Two of the three conditions of merit goods as defined in this study are supported: positive externalities exist and a political agenda encouraged their production. The third condition, support for public benefits that are only weakly desired, is ambiguous. Consumer preferences cannot be determined from these data; interpretation may depend on whether consumers care more about the broad benefit or the specific art form. The grantmaking dimensions with the strongest relationships suggest a typology of support could be constructed that builds on both of the frameworks used in this study. However, the largely categorical data do not permit an analysis of explanatory power.;The author's purpose relates to future evaluation; we cannot assess "successful" grants unless we understand the rationales behind policy. Merit good theory's insistence that value judgments apply to decisions on public benefit provides avenues for new research on the evaluation of public support for art. |
