Understanding cultural policies and innovation policies: differences, overlaps, and societal benefits

“It´s almost impossible for a cultural and creative idea to get a place in an incubator or acceleration program and finding investments. The sector is not easily fitted in the normal tech-based system. This is why open innovation as a standard practice in ecosystems are important”, says Katarina Scott, Senior Project Development at Future by Lund in Sweden and a member of ekip. Photo: iStockphoto

Why cultural and innovation policies are often seen as separate

Although cultural policies and innovation policies might seem different at first glance, there are key areas where they overlap. By bridging the gap between these two, we can create policies that benefit society, support creative industries, and help build a better future for the next generation.

Innovation policy focuses on pushing the boundaries of what whether it’s new technologies, services, or solutions rather than supporting who is involved. It’s all about creating something new and scalable that can be repeated, improved, and ultimately made profitable or self-sustaining.

“Innovation policy main target is economic impact. The expectation is that beneficiaries come in, create something whether it’s an invention or an idea develop it, and then move on. You innovate, secure intellectual property, IP, and once it starts to grow and evolve into a business venture, you exit the innovation support system,” says Katarina Scott, Senior Project Development at Future by Lund in Sweden and a member of ekip.

Who gets access to cultural policy support

If we move on to cultural policy, it plays a key role in supporting and sustaining the infrastructure that allows culture to thrive in society. But an important aspect of this policy is determining who gets access to its benefits and who is allowed to influence cultural and social values.

In other words, cultural policy is not open to just anyone.

“Cultural policy is largely about sustaining the infrastructure that supports culture, and that’s where the ‘who’ becomes crucial,” says Marcin Poprawski, Humak University of Applied Science in Helsinki, a partner of ekip.

Accreditation, or deciding who is eligible, is an important part of this process. Governments or cultural institutions often determine who gets to shape and participate in cultural programs, access funding, or use cultural infrastructure. It’s a careful selection.

“It’s not just anyone who can access the benefits of cultural policy. There’s a need to ensure that those shaping culture are aligned with the values society wants to uphold whether it’s preserving heritage, encouraging artistic expression, or promoting inclusivity,” says Marcin Poprawski.

Cultural policy driven by values rather than profit

One of the challenges within cultural policy lies in its non-commercial nature. Cultural work is often viewed as something driven by values rather than profit. “Non-commercial logic” is deeply rooted in the system, creating a significant barrier for many cultural organizations that struggle to become financially sustainable.

“I would say that a problem within the culture policy is because you have this societal part, you’re not supposed to earn money on what we do. On the other hand, that means that there are very few organisations that can benefit from the culture policy and become sustainable on their own mandate,” says Katarina Scott.

Different angles, shared societal goals

Cultural and creatives often feel stuck between pursuing purely independent, value-driven work or entering the more commercialized side of the sector where profit and sustainability are required.

While innovation policies are seen as practical and straightforward, focused on scaling and impact, cultural policies carry heavier intellectual and social weight.

In essence, both innovation and cultural policies contribute to societal progress, but from different angles. Innovation policies usually aim for economic and technological advancement, while cultural policies grapple with societal values, aesthetics, inclusivity, and identity.

Despite these differences, the support systems share a surprising amount of overlap when it comes to shaping societal progress.

“At the core, an innovation policy is designed to foster the creation and development of new inventions and ideas. But it also addresses how to scale those innovations, ensuring they have broader impact,” says Marcin Poprawski.

“Think of these as the building blocks of the innovation system: grants, investments, digitalisation initiatives, and regulatory frameworks. However, innovation policies don’t operate in isolation. They intersect with cultural policies, as both are intertwined with production systems in society.”

Cultural policies also deal with regulations, funding, and institutional support.

“These policies are often subject to more emotional and political engagement, as they aim to promote societal values like democracy, inclusion, and access to cultural practices,” Marcin Poprawski explains.

Why both policy fields are needed

The challenge lies in the fact that both policy fields are essential to societal development but operate in different realms. Cultural policies support creativity, identity, and heritage, while innovation policies drive technological and practical advancements.

However, in creative fields such as arts, design, and gaming, both policy fields are needed.

Despite this, the two neighboring policy areas are often treated as separate entities, with different funding streams and siloed practices leading to confusion, even though their core focus remains the same: supporting the creative sector.

How can we bridge the divide?

“A great example is the gaming industry. They can be super commercial and super non-commercial at the same time,” says Katarina Scott.

“What’s fascinating is that it didn’t develop because of any specific innovation or cultural policy it grew naturally on its own terms.”

This shows that when creative sectors are not constrained by rigid policy frameworks, they can reach new heights.

Open innovation as a bridge between policy fields

In many places, cultural policies focus heavily on the public sector, leaving limited room for private and civic involvement. Open innovation can change this by creating balanced systems where government, business, and communities work together.

By involving stakeholders as active participants, open innovation accelerates breakthroughs and leads to more impactful outcomes.

“ekip identifies and formulates policies for the creative industries, and it is crucial for us to emphasize that our core focus is on open innovation and an ecosystem-based approach,” Katarina Scott explains.

Current innovation systems focus heavily on TRL and IP, often leaving social impact behind.

“It’s almost impossible for a cultural and creative idea to get a place in an incubator or acceleration program. This is why open innovation as a standard practice in ecosystems is important,” she emphasizes.

Towards unified and future-proof policy support

One of the key challenges facing the cultural sector today is generational. Limited funding has led to preserving existing institutions, making it difficult for new cultural spaces to emerge.

Younger generations approach creativity differently.

“They move fluidly between non-commercial artistic projects and commercially driven work. This flexibility highlights the need for new policies that allow growth across both worlds,” says Katarina Scott.

Looking ahead, Marcin Poprawski envisions more unified policy frameworks.

“In the next 10 to 15 years, I imagine a revolution in how subsidies are distributed, with creative professionals receiving not just cultural funding but also business support.”

The key will be creating spaces where innovators and cultural creators can meet, share ideas, and validate the bridging of cultural and innovation policies.

Watch ekip talk about Innovation Policy vs Cultural policy: