Beyond the Stage: How Cultural Venues Cultivate Community Engagement

“With the phrase ‘mind the gap,’ we've emphasized the importance of our gap analysis,” said session moderator Douglas Gautier, setting the tone for the discussion.

The panel, titled “Neighborhood Life: The Choreography of Cultural Venues and Communities,” featured three speakers: Gregorio Lucena Scarpella, Director of the Global Cultural Districts Network (GCDN); Yvonne Tham, CEO of Esplanade – Theatres on the Bay in Singapore; and Jean-Louis Bleau, Executive Director of the Chilliwack Cultural Centre. Together, they examined how their cultural venues and networks prosper by engaging with the surrounding communities.

After introducing the panelists and their respective venues, Gautier, as the chair, shared his initial insights drawn from his extensive experience as CEO & Artistic Director of the Adelaide Festival Centre since 2006. Reflecting on the gap analysis, three precincts were mentioned. First, sporting venues, which see around five million people passing through annually. This raises the question, “How do we get some of the spectators from sporting events to come and see what we're doing?” Second, museums, galleries, and arts centers. This leads to the question of how we relate to each other and how we share customers. Finally, the marketplace. He said that programmers should be thinking very hard about how to serve and attract this intercultural audience.

He also underscored that Australia is a traditional land of First Nations people who have been here for over 40,000 years. Notably, the Adelaide Festival Centre is located on the ceremonial grounds of the local Kaurna people, making the approach to this relationship critically significant.

Yvonne Tham, CEO of Esplanade in Singapore and Deputy Chair of AAPPAC, began by introducing Esplanade as a venue for more than just performances, noting that it also includes shops, restaurants, and gardens. “I like to think of us as a civic space,” she remarked.

The Esplanade is situated in close proximity to Marina Bays Sands and the Financial District, where the communities are characterized as a transient population. Given that the local communities the center serve are 30-minute train ride away and it is not feasible to hold fireworks displays daily, Tham has identified four key areas of focus for the art center over the past two decades.

First, create an arts calendar that is aligned to the different communities' highpoints in a year. Let different communities build a habit of celebrating their most important occasion or festival through the arts in Esplanade. Beyond creating its own calendar, Esplanade seeks to be integrated into the calendars of the communities it serves.

Secondly, Tham suggested activating public spaces to bring the arts beyond conventional ticketed venues and the four walls. She noted, “In many of our Asian counterparts, the temple and the village square are the heart of community life, where dance, music, and song take place. I like to think of our public spaces as equivalent to a temple square, village square, courtyard, or garden, where access to art is easy.”

The third focus is to foster a sense of ownership over time and let communities take over. This allows them to see themselves as curators, creators, and performers. For instance, there is a festival called "March On," which takes place in March, during the first school holiday of the year when children are not yet under the pressure of exams. For the past three years, Esplanade has set aside a section of the festival for children to take charge of, with the idea that “you run your mini festival within our festival.”

Finally, Tham reinforced the importance of bringing different communities together in the same space. Visitors to the center are exposed to a range of cultural experiences; for instance, someone heading to the concert hall for a western classical music performance might hear the sounds of classical Chinese music in the concourse. Meanwhile, Esplanade brings sacred rituals into public spaces, allowing people to experience them in a non-religious setting.

When asked how to achieve these goals, Tham highlighted that consistency over time is essential.

Jean-Louis Bleau, Executive Director of Chilliwack Cultural Centre, started his presentation by introducing the geographical context of Chilliwack, a city located in a beautiful valley 90 kilometers outside of Vancouver. The center is a modest performing arts facility, featuring a 575-seat theater and a smaller black box theater. Given that Chilliwack is home to a vibrant Indigenous community and is one of the fastest-growing cities in British Columbia, largely due to migration from Vancouver, diversity is a central focus for the art center.

Bleau shared an example of this focus by describing a residency at the center by Renaissance Opera, a young group of BIPOC artists. During their residency, the artists were given full access to the center and reinterpreted the story of Orpheus and Eurydice, portraying the duo as a single person struggling with trans identity. This interpretation was relatively progressive for a small community like Chilliwack, but Bleau also valued the importance of empowering young BIPOC artists.

“The other key point for me,” Bleau noted, “is building relationships with Indigenous communities.” He explained that these communities have their own centers and do not even have a word for “performing arts.” As such, Chilliwack Cultural Centre is not traditionally seen as a performing arts space for them. On the one hand, the center must figure out how to serve the Indigenous community; on the other hand, it must also be responsible for educating non-Indigenous people about the importance of the Indigenous community in Chilliwack.

Following the AAPPAC conference, Chilliwack Cultural Centre is preparing to launch its first season incorporating significant Indigenous elements. The season will begin with an exhibition highlighting the transformation stories of the territory, followed by a welcoming ceremony led by the Chief of Skwah First Nation, and a performance by a young Indigenous choreographer.

Concluding his presentation, Bleau stated that he was there to seek effective strategies for Indigenous engagement and noted that the experiences shared by colleagues from Taiwan and Singapore were particularly inspiring to him.

Gregorio Lucena Scarpella, Director of the Global Cultural Districts Network (GCDN), began by introducing the network. It is a growing network of 65 members now in about 20 countries, aiming at bringing together entities that are acting and thinking as cultural districts. For GCDN, instead of putting a hot edge definition of what a cultural district was, the network wants to think about what a cultural district should think about and how they should bring that thinking into their activities, goals and dreams.

GCDN has developed an intellectual framework built around four pillars: operational realities, environment, society, and economy. This framework is distilled into 14 key themes, covering practical issues like programming strategies, collaborations, and energy partnerships, as well as larger existential questions such as the role of culture in the climate crisis and the responsibility of anchor institutions in promoting equity and inclusion.

GCDN’s members have diverse shapes, sizes, models, and structures. For GCDN, a cultural district could be a top-down, master-planned project or a grassroots organization united by the goal of improving their local area. One of the more common structures within the network involves anchor institutions—often performing arts centers—working to engage with and activate their surrounding communities beyond their traditional venues.

Scarpella addressed the two key questions in the session: “How can cultural venues become a bridge between international arts and local culture?” and “How can they prosper with their surrounding communities and neighborhoods?” He believes the answer lies in thinking like a cultural district, viewing oneself as part of an ecosystem, and understanding one's role within that ecosystem. He praised the previous panelists, noting how the Chilliwack Cultural Centre humbly acknowledged that Indigenous communities may not need them, and how Esplanade thoughtfully considered its location in Singapore and the communities it serves.

Scarpella highlighted four key principles in responding to these questions. First, meaningful engagement with all stakeholders. Second, promoting accessibility in all its forms—physical, financial, and in content—by crafting programming that resonates with local communities. Third, striving for constancy, steadfastness, and sustainability in every aspect of operations. Finally, he stressed that intention is key.

In closing, Scarpella said that “minding the gap” is less about reforming practices and more about integrating new tools. “So that gap is going to get bridged as long as you keep your eye on that place that you have in the ecosystem,” he concluded.

After the individual presentations, Gautier posed a few questions to the panelists. First he asked the panelists for their thoughts on the young, online community, particularly after COVID. Tham responded, noting that today, community-building often starts with social media and the content shared there. As a result, institutions need to rethink when marketing and programming actually begin. In the past, there was a reluctance to engage influencers in the arts, as it felt inauthentic to pay someone to promote the work. However, attitudes are changing. If one is interested in building a community, one needs to engage with the mediums through which that community communicates.

Scarpella followed up with a question: “As a leader, how do you manage that engagement with the online community while protecting your brand, your staff, and your programs?” Referring to his earlier example of providing a platform for a BIPOC group to discuss trans issues in a conservative community, Bleau responded by emphasizing the importance of pressing forward, even when there’s resistance—especially if the issue is important. Tham added that Esplanade has been fortunate not to face similar confrontations, but she also accentuated the significance of “creating a safe space.” 

Gautier then asked about the relationship between venues and schools. Bleau acknowledged the importance of engaging with schools to build future audiences, but noted that it’s becoming increasingly challenging, as many young people consume art primarily online. Tham shared that Esplanade welcomes interns, who bring energy and curiosity. However, she highlighted a common challenge: many young people, focused on financial stability, view unpaid internships as exploitative.

The discussion then shifted to making arts programs accessible, particularly for young people with limited financial resources. Scarpella shared an example of kids filming TikTok videos outside a theater. They may not buy tickets, but their presence is a form of “access” that costs the venue nothing.

During the Q&A session, Alvin Tan from the Singapore Chinese Cultural Centre asked how to measure the impact of arts programs on communities. Tham explained that, beyond observing how younger audiences respond, Esplanade uses automatic surveys and impact reports. Ultimately, she noted, it’s the funders who need to see quantifiable outcomes. She emphasized the model of input-output-outcome-impact, where funders should be seen as part of the input process in shaping impact. 

Scarpella added that The Lowry in Greater Manchester recently released a social impact report to quantify the value of their work. He mentioned frameworks such as SROI (Social Return on Investment) and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance), but stressed the importance of adapting these frameworks to make them meaningful for specific contexts. He also advised starting early with data collection to ensure impact can be effectively measured.

Another question from the audience, posed by Phare, The Cambodian Circus, was about balancing public service with private earnings. Gautier shared his experience in Adelaide, where they dedicate resources to public projects that don’t generate revenue, while also embracing commercial works like musicals to maintain financial stability.

Tham discussed the Singapore model, noting that while public funding supports many public-interest projects, there is also increasing interest from sponsors and donors—especially large companies—who are keen to contribute as part of their corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Bleau added that while they receive significant government support, they also ensure that community art is valued even when showcasing large, commercial performances.

Scarpella discussed the “blockbuster strategy,” suggesting a shift in perspective— from “you have to do it” to “it's okay to do it.” He also stressed the growing importance of being cautious of funding sources and the potential strings attached. In response, Tham added that corporate sponsors should be viewed as part of the community, and it's crucial to cultivate long-term, mutually beneficial relationships. Both agreed that the focus should remain on building partnerships based on shared values and goals.

In conclusion, the panel underlined the significance of cultivating meaningful community engagement, encouraging accessibility, and building sustainable relationships with diverse audiences. Whether in Singapore or Chilliwack, the discussions showed how cultural institutions constantly reevaluate their roles and adapt strategies to remain relevant in evolving social contexts. The panelist highlighted the necessity of thoughtful, long-term collaborations that align with both cultural and community values in order to guarantee the sustainability of art organizations within their ecosystem.