Kulturpolitik in ländlichen Räumen. Eine Untersuchung von Akteuren, Strategien und Diskursen am Beispiel des Landes Niedersachsen

Cultural policy in Germany is predominantly cultural policy for cities, which is aligned on urban infrastructure and user groups. The splitting of the cultural participation is therefore next to socio-demographical factors also regionally structured. The rural area is part of the political discourses in the field of arts and culture, for example in the fields of demographical change, regional development or civil society. However, the structural and social characteristics of this region and their relevance for cultural policy were not make subject of discussion. There is a huge gap between the cultural policy for cities and rural regions. This gap is marking the field of cultural policy and the academic discourse. Nevertheless, there are many players, which are active in the political field, but their work is not much appreciated. This thesis tries to minimize this gap. Within the method of the Politikfeldanalyse done by 28 expert-interviews was the cultural policy of different players in the federal state of Lower Saxony examined. This should discover which player uses which kind of cultural policy for rural regions. The goal of this thesis is on the one hand to make an empirical pegged localization of cultural policy in rural areas and for rural areas in Lower Saxony. On the other hand it identifies aspects which could lead a responsible cultural policy for rural areas. Furthermore, this work would like to add a contribution for theory formation within the cultural policy science. So far political science was considered sporadically in the field of cultural political research. Therefore it is to examine in what extent political science theories like akteurszentrierter Institutionalismus and Governance could be used for the cultural policy research. Central conclusion of this research work is, that THE rural area doesn't exist and therefore neither ONE strategy for cultural policy in rural regions. However, it was possible to identify specific fields of actions for cultural policy. First, the rural area has to be put back in position, to act political independent. That means a reformation of local funding and an improvement of the expertise of the responsible people. Furthermore, a modern cultural policy on the local level needs a stronger coordination between politics, administration, cultural institutions and civil society as well as between the different municipalities. Especially the work between the municipalities is complicated because of a strong insistence of the political players of sovereignty. Next to the municipalities the regional policies bears special responsibility for the cultural development of the rural area – beyond supporting just the glamorous projects. First adequate funding of existing controlling tools for arts and culture in rural area is necessary. Second new tools has to be developed, which supports the players of the arts of amateurs without be measured by standards of artistic quality or innovation potential. Therefore it is necessary, that the cultural policy of every level renounces to transfer educational and quality standards of the professional arts to the arts of amateurs. Another conclusion is, that, if the cultural policy wants to be relevant for society they have to be more interlinked with other political fields. So the most important characteristic of the political and academically discourse of rural areas is that it has to be led interdisciplinary.