In Pursuit of Cultural Equity: DEI Grantmaking Practices of U.S. Local Arts Agencies in Community Context
Abstract
As grantmaking intermediary organizations, local arts agencies (LAAs) play an important but under-researched role in realizing cultural equity—the incorporation of underrepresented groups and counternarratives into democratic discourse—in thousands of local communities throughout the United States. In deploying their diversity, equity, and inclusion grantmaking practices, LAAs vary in the degree to which they proactively encourage the artistic expression of underrepresented groups, such as immigrants and racial-ethnic minorities. Little research has been directed at the relationship between the relative population size of underrepresented groups in an LAA service area and an LAA’s likelihood of having a formal “race-ethnic targeting” policy, the proactive channeling of arts economic resources toward underrepresented community groups. Framing our analysis in sociological race relations theories, we examine patterns of association between an LAA’s likelihood of having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy and the percentage foreign-born of the residential population in an LAA service area based on 462 LAAs of the 2018 Local Arts Agency Profile collected by Americans for the Arts, a national dataset of LAAs that we augmented with U.S. Census demographic data on LAA service-area populations. We conclude by deriving from the curvilinear pattern of findings a “representation thesis” on the community social contexts in which proactive LAAs tend to target race-ethnic minorities for distributing arts economic resources.
Introduction
Struggles over cultural equity1—the incorporation of underrepresented groups and counternarratives into democratic discourse—concern community identity and take place in local art scenes across the United States (Tepper, 2011). Local cultural equity struggles often entail preservation of majoritarian Western cultural traditions or expanding community identity to incorporate countermajoritarian cultural expressions of underrepresented groups in the community (Bedoya, 2013; Engh et al., 2021; Frenette, 2017; Nicodemus et al., 2017).
Some 4,500 local arts agencies (LAAs) are at the center of cultural equity struggles in the United States. LAAs are intermediary grantmaking organizations that support public art and artists and engage rival community stakeholders—for example, business and political elites, grassroots underrepresented groups—who make competing claims for arts resources (Cornfield et al., 2018; Frenette, 2017; Markusen & Nicodemus, 2019). The total expenditures of the 70 largest LAAs in FY 2020 were approximately $700 million (Americans for the Arts, 2022). LAAs engage in grantmaking practices for increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in local communities, operationalized here as LAA “service areas.” DEI grantmaking practices include organizational branding, inclusive grantmaking practices, and targeting underrepresented groups for funding.
Some LAAs lean toward more proactive pursuit of cultural equity than others. In this paper, we examine interorganizational variation in LAA proactivity in DEI grantmaking. Specifically, we examine variation across a national sample of LAAs in their likelihood of having a formal “race-ethnic targeting” policy. Race-ethnic targeting is a proactive DEI grantmaking practice undertaken by LAAs to ensure the support of the artistic expression of underrepresented race-ethnic groups in their local communities. In the national arts policy domain of Americans for the Arts (AFTA), these race-ethnic groups are those that “historically” have been and continue to be “underrepresented” in the development of arts policy and in the distribution of arts resources and opportunities (Lord, 2018; also, see Skaggs, 2020). In our national sample of 462 LAAs—AFTA’s 2018 Local Arts Agency Profile (LAAP18) dataset, 31% of the LAAs have a formal race-ethnic targeting policy.
We seek to understand in which community social contexts, an LAA is most likely to have a formal race-ethnic targeting policy. Our study extends the research literature on community-based pursuits of cultural equity. In this literature, LAAs are an under-researched organizational force in the realization of cultural equity in local communities. After reviewing this literature, we frame our analysis in sociological race relations theories as applied to community demographic composition (Mai, 2023) and derive alternative hypotheses about how community demographic composition may shape an LAA’s likelihood of having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy.
Sociologically, organizational formalization is often considered to be a component process of bureaucratization whereby high-capacity, large, professionalized organizations institute written rules and procedures for managing an impersonal workforce. Indeed, sociological research on the formalization of organizational policies for diversifying workforces and realizing these policy objectives shows that these policies tend to be established in large, professionalized organizations (Dobbin & Kalev, 2016; Dobbin et al., 2015; Roscigno et al., 2018; Tomaskovic-Devey & Avent-Holt, 2019). However, race-ethnic targeting also constitutes an organizational boundary-spanning process by which an organization endeavors to control and adapt to stakeholders in its task environment (Kujala & Sachs, 2019), an instance of what Kaynak and Barley (2019) refer to as “corporate political activity.” Kaynak and Barley (2019) suggest that large, professionalized organizations not only have the organizational capacity for instituting boundary-spanning practices, but do so in order to adapt to and seize opportunities afforded them by the array of stakeholders—for example, “regulators, legislators, and activists” (p. 267)—in their task environment. Following Kaynak and Barley (2019), we treat formal LAA race-ethnic targeting policies as an instrument of corporate political activity and examine associations between the sociodemographic composition of the residential populations of LAA service areas and an LAA’s likelihood of having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy.
Building on Tepper’s (2011) pioneering work on immigration and community cultural conflict, Skaggs’ (2020) study of LAAs, and Lena and Cornfield’s (2008) study of immigrant artists, our focal indicator of community social context is the percentage of LAA service-area residents who are foreign-born. The post-1990 wave of immigration to the United States has been associated with ethnic-racial rivalry and community conflict over cultural equity issues (Budiman et al., 2020; Cornfield, 2009; Elbers, 2021; Frey, 2018, 2019; Jacobs, 2019a, 2019b; Singer et al., 2008), as shown by Tepper’s (2011) 70-city study of immigration and community cultural conflict. For example, the New York Times reported an instance of LAA intervention in a cultural conflict that erupted in 2018 after a neo-Nazi protest over the growing immigrant community and removal of Confederate monuments in Newnan, Georgia. Newnan is an Atlanta suburb of some 20,000 residents located approximately 40 miles southwest of Atlanta, a major metropolitan hub of immigrant settlement (Budiman et al., 2020). In the aftermath of the protest, the Newnan LAA, intending to celebrate the cultural and demographic diversity of its community, commissioned and displayed in public spaces throughout the town “17 large-scale banner portraits, images of the ordinary people who make up Newnan,” some wearing hijabs and all hailing from diverse racial-ethnic backgrounds (Burch, 2020).
Organized, Community-Based Pursuits of Cultural Equity
Cultural equity research arises from equity struggles involving local political–economic elites and underrepresented groups, such as racial, ethnic, religious, gender, and sexual minorities, in a process of making claims and counterclaims on shaping community identity (Tepper, 2011). Making claims about community identity often entails preservation of majoritarian Western cultural traditions with their historically embedded social hierarchies, or expanding community identity to incorporate countermajoritarian cultural expressions of underrepresented groups in the community (Aptekar, 2019a, 2019b; Banks, 2019a, 2019b; Bedoya, 2013; Frenette, 2017; Tepper, 2011; Zilberstein, 2019).
These struggles are expressed in arts grantmaking. Sidford and Frasz (2017) argue that the pursuit of cultural equity is increasingly jeopardized in the United States by the growing tendency of arts funders to support major arts organizations that express Western cultural traditions over small arts organizations and individual artists of underrepresented groups. Since the publication of Sidford’s (2011) pioneering report “Fusing Arts, Culture and Social Change” in 2011, arts funders and nonprofit leadership have become increasingly aware of such disparities in funding and launched field-wide discussions to help understand and address inequities in grantmaking, including expanded training opportunities and internship programs aimed at diversifying the workforce at cultural institutions. Sidford and Frasz (2017) outline some of these efforts but also find a widening of disparities since 2011. The top 2% of cultural organizations now account for an extra 5% (60% in total) of sector revenue. Part of the explanation for such consistent inequities, Sidford and Frasz (2017) suggest, is that the philanthropic institutions that fund the arts are still mostly run by white people, including 92% of foundation presidents, 87% of their board members, and 68% of their staff; such homogeneity may suggest “blind spots” in terms of hiring practices as well as other decision-making (also, see Americans for the Arts (2019, pp. 23, 26) and Tepper and Frenette (2019)).
Our study extends the small but growing research literature on organized, community-based, countermajoritarian initiatives to realize cultural equity in local communities. We endeavor to fill two gaps in this literature. First, this research literature has emphasized the countermajoritarian role of local art producers, consumers, and entrepreneurs in the pursuit of cultural equity (Woronkowicz, 2021). Banks (2019a, 2019b), for example, has examined the initiatives taken by local Black elites to establish African American art museums. In his study of Nashville Indie musicians, Cornfield (2015) shows how “artistic social entrepreneurs” develop initiatives to produce a diverse and inclusive, multigenre popular music scene and artist community. In their pilot study of immigrant artists, Lena and Cornfield (2008) maintain that immigrant artists function as agents of their ethnic community by displaying and legitimizing their cultural traditions before an often hostile native community. Zilberstein (2019) examines the formation of grassroots coalitions among Latinx and DIY artists in urban areas. Less attention, however, has been given to the role of the thousands of local intermediary organizations, such as state and LAAs, in realizing cultural equity in local communities (Noonan, 2015; Woronkowicz & Schert, 2020). Therefore, we seek to fill this gap in the literature with what we believe is the first systematic, comparative organizational study of the role of LAAs in realizing cultural equity in their local communities.
Second, Tepper’s (2011) 70-city study of cultural conflict focused on art censorship. Tepper found that cultural conflict and censorship tended to occur in cities experiencing high rates of immigrant settlement that were accompanied by conflicts over community identity. Following Engh et al.’s (2021) report on “We-Making,” our study complements Tepper’s study by examining how local contextual factors sustain proactive pursuits of cultural equity rather than censorship (Nicodemus et al., 2017; Woronkowicz, 2016). We extend Tepper’s research by examining patterns of association between the foreign-born share of the residential population served by an LAA and the likelihood of an LAA having a race-ethnic targeting policy.
Spatial Demographic Context, Relative Size of Immigrant Populations, and LAA Targeting
Our focus in this paper is on the relationship between demographic composition—and specifically, the percentage foreign-born—of an LAA service area and the likelihood of an LAA having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy. A formal race-ethnic targeting policy is an instrument for engaging in corporate political activity. As corporate political activity, race-ethnic targeting entails LAA networking with stakeholders in the service area in order to distribute arts economic resources among underrepresented groups of artists (Bedoya, 2013; Engh et al., 2021; Skaggs, 2020).
How might the percentage foreign-born of an LAA service-area residential population be associated with the likelihood of an LAA having a race-ethnic targeting policy? Divergent sociological theories of employer race-ethnic discrimination suggest alternative hypotheses. Two different processes thought to explain employer discrimination are the basis of our hypotheses, but our primary goal is to better understand organizational action that fosters social inclusion rather than exclusion. The first hypothesis is based on group-threat theory, while the second hypothesis draws inspiration from contact theory. Our focus is on why organizations may promote social inclusion through formal race-ethnic targeting. In his 50-city audit study of the relationship between ethnic minority concentration in an urban labor market and employer race-ethnic discrimination in hiring, Mai (2023) finds partial support for the first of two sociological hypotheses, that is, the “visibility-discrimination” thesis. This thesis hails from the sociological group-threat theory, which maintains that increasing racial prejudice and discrimination against ethnic minorities accompanies the growth of ethnic minority populations who are increasingly perceived as a threat by whites. The thesis suggests a positive association among ethnic minority concentration, employer discrimination, and socioeconomic inequality across urban labor markets.
The visibility-discrimination thesis implies that a high level of ethnic-racial minority concentration in a community may lower the likelihood of an LAA having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy. LAAs serve multiple, rival community stakeholders, including economic and political elites and underrepresented race-ethnic groups of artists. The thesis suggests that LAAs beholden to economic and political elites may feel threatened by the increasing competition for arts economic resources that accompanies increasing ethnic minority concentration in their service areas. It is worth noting that the process of diversity tokenism (Mai, 2023, p. 27) has also been employed to describe how employers in majority-white areas may engage in inclusive behavior with respect to underrepresented groups on the basis of race and ethnicity, whether driven by optics or a sincere desire to promote change. With respect to the relative size of the residential foreign-born population in an LAA service area, LAAs in service areas with large concentrations of foreign-born residents may not perceive racial-ethnic minorities to be “underrepresented,” especially if the local percentage foreign-born exceeds the national average norm and the service area approaches the status of a “majority-minority” local community. Under these conditions, an LAA may not perceive a community need to engage in race-ethnic targeting and, therefore, may lack a targeting policy. Indeed, research on “immigrant incorporation” shows that dense immigrant settlements tend to have high rates of citizenship, highly developed ethnic enclave economies, and strong ethnic minority communal and political institutions (de Graauw & Gleeson, 2017; Portes & Rumbaut, 2006; Singer et al., 2008). From this theoretical tradition, we derive the overrepresentation hypothesis:
The percentage foreign-born of the residential population of an LAA service area is negatively associated with the likelihood of an LAA having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy.
We derive our second hypothesis from sociological contact theory of employer race discrimination (Mai, 2023). Contact theory holds that intergroup hostility diminishes as whites and ethnic minorities increasingly interact with one another especially in workplaces. This perspective suggests that employer race discrimination diminishes with increases in ethnic minority concentration in urban labor markets due to the reductions in intergroup hostilities and to the advent of minority-owned businesses that may be more inclined than other employers to hire ethnic minority workers (Mai, 2023).
Contact theory implies that LAAs in service areas with large concentrations of ethnic-racial minority residents may be those most likely to have a formal race-ethnic targeting policy. As an instance of corporate political activity, race-ethnic targeting is a practice whereby a proactive LAA seeking to serve underrepresented groups builds networks with these groups in their service areas in order to encourage their artistic expression. Service areas with large ethnic minority concentrations afford proactive LAAs greater opportunities for networking with underrepresented groups than service areas with small concentrations of ethnic minority residents. Proactive LAAs in service areas with large concentrations of ethnic minority residents, including immigrant populations, then, may perceive an opportunity to pursue cultural equity in their local community via race-ethnic targeting and adopt formal policies for doing so. From this theoretical perspective, we derive the opportunity hypothesis:
The percentage foreign-born of the residential population of an LAA service area is positively associated with the likelihood of an LAA having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy.
Data and Methods
To examine the two hypotheses about the association between foreign-born composition of the LAA service-area residential population and LAA race-ethnic targeting policies, we utilize AFTA’s LAAP18 dataset. We supplemented the LAAP18 with 2017 5-year U.S. Census Bureau estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) on the percentage foreign-born of the residential population for each LAA service area. The LAAP18 is a survey that allows LAAs to self-report on organizational structure, location, workforce, finances, grantmaking practices, and stakeholder engagement. In addition, the LAAP18 includes a module on DEI practices and investments, resulting in the most extensive dataset on LAA DEI grantmaking practices.
The survey was sent to a total of 3,887 LAAs across the United States between May and August of 2018, which make up all of the U.S. LAAs that are known to AFTA. A total of 537 of surveys were returned, yielding a response rate of 13.8%, comparable to previous surveys fielded by AFTA (Americans for the Arts, 2016). We used these data to identify the self-described service areas on each LAA’s website. The dataset was then augmented with the 2017 5-year ACS estimates of the percentage foreign-born of the residential population of each LAA service area. The ACS lacks foreign-born population data for 75 of the LAAP18 service areas, yielding an analytical sample N of 462. Descriptive statistics for the analytical sample are found in Table 1.
| Variable | N | Mean/proportion | SD | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race-ethnic targeting | 462 | 0.31 | 0.46 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| Percent foreign-born | 462 | 12.16 | 9.95 | 0.01 | 52.94 |
| Percent Black | 462 | 10.60 | 12.08 | 0.00 | 69.80 |
| Percent Hispanic | 462 | 14.68 | 14.56 | 0.00 | 85.20 |
| Percent Asian | 462 | 5.41 | 7.02 | 0.00 | 54.40 |
| Democrat 2016 | 462 | 0.47 | 0.50 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| Professionalization | 462 | 2.14 | 1.64 | 0.00 | 5.00 |
| (Log) Financial size | 462 | 12.43 | 2.78 | 0.00 | 18.42 |
In order to assess the generalizability of the findings from the LAAP18 dataset, we conducted two sociospatial analyses of response bias. An analysis of response bias based in a comparison of respondents and nonresponding LAAs in the LAAP18 was not possible because information on nonresponding LAAs was unavailable. First, we assessed the socioeconomic and ethnic-racial representativeness of our analytical sample of 462 service areas compared to the national mean based on the ACS 2017 5-year estimates. The mean median income of the 462 service areas of $63,958 exceeds the national median income of $57,652; the LAAP18 mean family poverty rate of 9.5% is slightly lower than the national poverty rate of 10.5%; and the mean percentages Black or African American (10.6%), Hispanic or Latino (14.7%), Asian (5.4%), and foreign-born (12.2%) of our analytical sample are slightly lower than or equal to their respective national percentages of 12.7%, 17.6%, 5.4%, and 13.4%, respectively. This suggests that our analytical sample of 462 LAAs is located in slightly more affluent service areas with slightly smaller ethnic minority populations than the national average.
Our second sociospatial analysis of response bias is a comparison of the geographical distributions of the 462 LAAs of our analytical sample and the 20,673 “grantmaking and giving services” establishments (NAICS code 8132) of the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2018 County Business Patterns national survey. Based on the Census Bureau’s nine regional divisions, our comparison suggests that LAAs in the Middle Atlantic and East North Central divisions are underrepresented in our analytical sample. Twenty-nine percent of the “grantmaking and giving services” establishments are located in these divisions, but only 19.9% of the LAAs are located in the Middle Atlantic and East North Central divisions. Our comparison also suggests that LAAs in the South Atlantic and Mountain divisions are overrepresented in our analytical sample. Only 26.2% of the “grantmaking and giving services” establishments are located in these regions, but 35.5% of the LAAs are located in the South Atlantic and Mountain divisions.
Frey’s (2019) analysis of the political composition of U.S. states in 2018 implies that our analytical sample is representative of state political ideologies. A majority of the states in both the under- and overrepresented regional divisions of our analytical sample voted for Trump in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Of the 8 states comprising the underrepresented divisions in our analytical sample, 5 voted for Trump in 2016; of the 17 states comprising the overrepresented divisions, 9 voted for Trump in 2016. This pattern suggests that our analytical sample neither over- nor underrepresents majority-Trump regions.
Dependent Variable
The outcome variable consists of a binary-dependent variable pertaining to LAA proactivity in pursuing cultural equity in a service area. More specifically, we utilize a binary variable to measure race-ethnic targeting, that is, whether or not (yes = 1; no = 0) an LAA has written grantmaking guidelines in place for taking into account the race-ethnicity of underrepresented groups.2 Approximately 31% of LAAs have a race-ethnic targeting policy.
Independent Variable
The independent variable in this analysis specifies the percentage of the residential population of a service area who are foreign-born. This variable is derived from the 2017 U.S. Census 5-year estimates and is constructed by dividing the total foreign-born population for the area by the total population for the area and multiplying by 100. A bivariate scatterplot with a superimposed quadratic fitted value indicates a curvilinear trend between the percent foreign-born and race-ethnic targeting, before including controls (see Figure 1). To model this, we include a squared term for percent foreign-born.
Control Variables
In order to determine whether the likelihood of targeting is also associated with organizational capacity for policy formalization and corporate political activity, we control for organizational indicators of organizational capacity. Following bureaucratization theory, professionalization and financial size are indicators of organizational capacity to engage community stakeholders. Professionalization measures the resources that an LAA may offer for staff professional development. The variable indicates whether an LAA supplies senior leadership, middle management, and entry-level employees financial resources for professional development, as well as whether an LAA holds trainings on communicating to different sectors about the place of art in the community. This variable ranges from 0 to 5 and indicates whether an LAA provides financial resources for professional development for each of three groups of employees—senior leadership, middle management, and entry-level employees, and whether an LAA provides educational trainings on communicating to nonarts sectors and LAA staff about the value of the arts to the community. This variable has a mean of 2.1. We also control for LAA financial size, which is measured as the natural logarithm of 2017 LAA expenditures. The mean financial size is 12.4 (with a mean unlogged value of $1,933,812).
To ensure that any relationship between the percent foreign-born and race-ethnic targeting is not due to other demographic factors, we also control for the racial-ethnic composition of the LAA service area. In this case, we control for the percentages Black, Hispanic, and Asian of the service-area residential population. These variables are derived from the 2017 U.S. Census 5-year estimates and were constructed by dividing the total number of each racial-ethnic group in the area by the total population for the service area and multiplying by 100. Finally, we control for state-level political context. Using New York Times data on the 2016 Presidential election, we constructed a binary variable to measure whether a state voted Democrat or Republican. States that voted Democrat in the 2016 Presidential election were coded 1, and states that voted Republican were coded 0.
Analytical Strategy
In order to analyze the relationship between the percent foreign-born and the likelihood of race-ethnic targeting, we utilize logistic regression between our binary dependent variable and the independent variables for the LAAs in our sample. Investigating the model for collinearity using the STATA “collin” command (Ender, 2010) indicates that some of the race-ethnicity variables, namely percent Hispanic and percent Asian, have moderate correlations with each other and percent foreign-born. To ensure that this does not affect our results, we run a series of models with these variables modeled separately and together.
Results
Using logistic regression, we estimate a model to examine the relationship between percent foreign-born and the likelihood of race-ethnic targeting with controls for the full analytical sample. Results in Table 2 are presented in log odds with standard errors in the second column.
| Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Percent foreign-born | 0.0127 (0.011) | 0.1323** (0.043) | 0.1093** (0.041) | 0.0957* (0.047) |
| Percent foreign-borna | −0.0031** (0.001) | −0.0033** (0.001) | −0.0032** (0.001) | |
| Percent Black | −0.0037 (0.009) | −0.0061 (0.009) | −0.0034 (0.009) | −0.0021 (0.010) |
| Percent Hispanic | −0.0055 (0.010) | 0.0068 (0.011) | ||
| Percent Asian | 0.0496* (0.023) | 0.0575* (0.026) | ||
| Democrat 2016 | −0.2784 (0.231) | −0.3565 (0.239) | −0.4110 (0.241) | −0.3955 (0.243) |
| Professionalization | 0.3042*** (0.081) | 0.3201*** (0.082) | 0.3346*** (0.083) | 0.3368*** (0.083) |
| (Log) Financial size | 0.1290* (0.060) | 0.1352* (0.062) | 0.1443* (0.063) | 0.1435* (0.063) |
| Intercept | −3.156*** (0.729) | −3.8449*** (0.799) | −4.0364*** (0.816) | −4.0510*** (0.817) |
| N | 462 | 462 | 462 | 462 |
Note: Standard errors in second column.
a
The dependent variable is derived from question 16 of the LAAP18 (AFTA, 2018, p. 19): “Does your LAA have written guidelines that mandate the consideration of . . . [race-ethnicity] . . . when it is making decisions about programming and/or services (including grants and other forms of direct financial support, if applicable)?”
*
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
The findings in model 1 indicate that percent foreign-born is not significantly associated with race-ethnic targeting. In this case, as the percentage foreign-born increases, the log odds of race-ethnic targeting increases by approximately 0.01 (p = ns). This provides no support for either of our two hypotheses.
Model 2 includes a squared term to model the curvilinear relationship between percent foreign-born and race-ethnic targeting. In this case, the percent foreign-born is significant and positive. As the percent foreign-born increases, the log odds of race-ethnic targeting increases by approximately 0.13 (p < .01). The squared term is negative and significant (p < .05), indicating a curvilinear relationship between percent foreign-born and targeting. More specifically, as the percent foreign-born in an area increases, so does the predicted targeting up to a point, after which it decreases.3 Transforming log odds into odds ratios provides a more intuitive interpretation and may be achieved by exponentiating the regression coefficients. In model 2, as the value of percent foreign increases, so do the odds of targeting by 1.14 (exp [0.1323 = 1.14]) and is significant (p < .01). Both the percent foreign-born and its squared term remain significant across subsequent models.
The significant curvilinear association between percent foreign-born and the dependent variable holds in models 3 and 4 in Table 2. In order to address multicollinearity among the demographic controls for percentages Hispanic, Asian, and foreign-born, models 2–4 vary in their specifications of the controls for race-ethnic composition (model 2, only percent Hispanic; model 3, only percent Asian; and, model 4, percentages Hispanic and Asian). Across models 2–4, the magnitudes, signs, and significance for the coefficients for percent foreign-born and its squared term remain stable.
Results for control variables are also presented in Table 2. Regarding the demographic and political controls, the coefficients for percentages Black and Hispanic and for Democrat 2016 are statistically insignificant in all models. The positive percent Asian coefficient is statistically significant in models 3 and 4, consistent with our opportunity hypothesis which may apply to Asians who comprise a relatively small percentage of service-area residential populations in our sample (see Table 1). Consistent with bureaucratization theory, the positive coefficients for LAA professionalization and financial size are statistically significant in all models.
Figure 2 provides a graphic depiction of the predicted probabilities of targeting by values of percent foreign-born from the full analytical model (Table 2, model 4) using the STATA “marginsplot” command with control variables held to their mean values. This graph indicates that, net of controls, when percent foreign-born is zero, there is approximately a 20% probability of an LAA having a race-ethnic targeting policy. The predicted probability of an LAA having a race-ethnic targeting policy rises to its maximum value of 35% at the inflection point of 15.05% foreign-born, which slightly exceeds the national percentage foreign-born of 13.4% at the time of data collection. The predicted probability of an LAA having a race-ethnic targeting policy declines to virtually zero with increases in the percentage foreign-born greater than the inflection point and as the percentage foreign-born approaches its maximum value of approximately 53%.
Discussion
The findings indicate that the likelihood of an LAA having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy is greatest in LAA service areas in which the local percentage foreign-born of the service-area residential population approximates the national percentage foreign-born, and lowest in LAA service areas where the local percentage foreign-born is much smaller than or greatly exceeds the national percentage foreign-born. This curvilinear association (inverted U-shape) provides partial support for each of our two hypotheses on the association between the percentage foreign-born of an LAA service-area residential population and the likelihood of an LAA having a formal race-ethnic targeting policy: the opportunity hypothesis (positive association) is supported in the low side of the percentage foreign-born distribution; the overrepresentation hypothesis (negative association) is supported on the high side of the percentage foreign-born distribution. The findings hold controlling for LAA organizational capacity, race-ethnic composition of the service-area residential population, and the political ideology of the state in which an LAA is located.
We derive from these findings a representation thesis about the local community social contexts in which the LAAs most proactive in serving underrepresented race-ethnic groups are located during the contemporary post-1990 wave of immigration to the United States. The findings suggest that local communities and LAAs use the national percent foreign-born as a benchmark for gauging the level of local immigrant incorporation and degree of local under- and overrepresentation of race-ethnic minorities, and channeling local arts economic resources toward race-ethnic minorities. The thesis holds that proactive LAAs tend to be located in communities with sizable foreign-born populations that may afford an LAA the opportunity to target race-ethnic minorities for distributing arts economic resources, but whose proportion of the local residential population does not greatly exceed the national norm and thereby render them “overrepresented” in the local community.
Our study is not without limitations, which may imply alternative interpretations of the findings that can be addressed in future research. Our cross-sectional dataset does not allow for a full examination of shifts in the balance of power between immigrant and native groups within communities over time and, therefore, limits our interpretations to discerning patterns of association, rather than making causal claims. Furthermore, the LAAP18 lacks information on which specific racial-ethnic groups LAAs target in pursuing culture equity in their local communities and the status of these groups as “underrepresented” racial-ethnic minorities.
Conclusion
Our study and the representation thesis have several implications for future research on organized pursuits of cultural equity in local communities. First, most LAAs located in communities whose foreign-born populations comprise a proportion of the local population that does not greatly exceed the national norm lack formal race-ethnic targeting policies. Accounting for the nonproactive LAAs in such communities requires further research on the structural characteristics of local arts ecosystems. From a creative placemaking perspective (Frenette, 2017), local arts ecosystems comprise a wide range of potential claimants for arts economic resources. These claimants include underrepresented social groups, large arts organizations, businesses, developers, public school systems, and government economic development agencies. The configuration of these organized claimants in a local arts ecosystem may shape the balance of power among them in the competitive claims-making process for arts economic resources in an otherwise pluralistic local community. Field studies of claimant configurations in local arts ecosystems can further elucidate those configurations that are most conducive to LAA proactive action in pursuing cultural equity.
Second, future research should address the mechanisms by which LAAs engage in targeting. From a relational stakeholder engagement theoretical perspective (Kujala & Sachs, 2019), targeting is an organizational measure taken to build relationships with external stakeholders, such as community claimants for LAA arts economic resources. Stakeholder engagement entails taking broad and focused measures in communicating and building trust with external stakeholders. Field research on LAA targeting practices can elucidate which stakeholder-engagement practices are most effective in developing collaborative relationships between LAAs and underrepresented groups in the ongoing pursuit of cultural equity.
Finally, race relations are an underexamined dimension of community context in research on the organized pursuit of cultural equity. Indeed, recent research suggests that LAAs often target Blacks or African Americans in their community engagements (Cornfield et al., 2018; Skaggs, 2020). Communities with large foreign-born populations often exist in multiethnic urban areas. In contrast, communities with large Black populations tend to be residentially segregated from other ethnic-racial communities (Cornfield, 2007; Elbers, 2021). What is more, Mai (2023) found that the visibility-discrimination thesis on employment discrimination applied only to Black jobseekers and not to Asian and Latinx jobseekers. Future research should widen the scope of community context by examining how historical patterns of residential race segregation may shape the organized pursuit of cultural equity.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to Joanna Woronkowicz, Douglas Noonan, Alexandre Frenette, Meagan Rainock, Bianca Manago, Quan Mai, Phillipa Chong, and the participants at the June 2022 Arts, Entrepreneurship, and Innovation Lab Workshop at Indiana University in Indianapolis for commenting on earlier drafts of this paper; Americans for the Arts for furnishing us with the 2018 Local Arts Agency Profile dataset.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The National Endowment for the Arts for supporting the research with grant #1863330-38 (Daniel Cornfield, PI; Alexandre Frenette, co-PI); the Vanderbilt University Curb Center for Art, Enterprise and Public Policy for intellectual and financial support; and to Darwin Baluran, Whitney Frierson, Hannah Ingersoll, Tulasi Iyengar, Dasom Lee, Rachel McKane, Meagan Rainock, Magdalena Sudibjo, and Rachel Zajdel for research assistance. Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of Americans for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the Vanderbilt University Curb Center for Art, Enterprise and Public Policy.
ORCID iD
Daniel B. Cornfield https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2959-7264
Footnotes
1. AFTA defines “cultural equity” as follows: “Cultural equity embodies the values, policies, and practices that ensure that all people—including but not limited to those who have been historically, and continue to be, underrepresented based on race/ethnicity, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, socioeconomic status, geography, citizenship status, or religion—are represented in the development of arts policy; the support of artists; the nurturing of accessible, thriving venues for expression; and the fair distribution of programmatic, financial, and informational resources. While intersectionality is real and crucial to providing entry for people at various stages of readiness, we acknowledge that racial inequity is central to most societal issues, particularly when it comes to the distribution of resources.” (Lord, 2018, p. 1)
2. The dependent variable is derived from question 16 of the LAAP18 (Americans for the Arts, 2018, p. 19): “Does your LAA have written guidelines that mandate the consideration of . . . [race-ethnicity] . . . when it is making decisions about programming and/or services (including grants and other forms of direct financial support, if applicable)?”
3. To determine whether the inflection point might shift a third time, we ran an additional model including a cubed term for percent foreign-born. This variable was not significant, indicating no higher order polynomials.
References
Americans for the Arts. (2016). Local arts agencies in America: 2016. https://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/25%20Highlights%20from%20the%202015%20LAA%20Census_0.pdf
Americans for the Arts. (2018). 2018 profile of local arts agencies: Survey instrument. https://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/2018LAAProfileQuestionnaire_PDFVersion_0.pdf
Americans for the Arts. (2019). Research report: 2018 profile of local arts agencies, a detailed report about the local arts agency field in 2018. Retrieved March 13, 2019, from https://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/2018_LocalArtsAgencyProfile_FullReport_REVISED.pdf
Americans for the Arts. (2022). 6-Year budget history of the United States urban arts federation (USUAF). https://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/FY2016_to_FY2021_USUAF_BudgetHistory.pdf
Aptekar. (2019a). The public library as resistive space in the neoliberal city. City & Community, 18(4), 1203–1219. https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12417
Aptekar S. (2019b). The unbearable lightness of the cosmopolitan canopy: Accomplishment of diversity at an urban farmers market. City & Community, 18(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12371
Banks P. A. (2019a). Black artists and elite taste culture. Contexts, 18(2), 62–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504219854722
Banks P. A. (2019b). Money, museums, and memory: Cultural patronage by black voluntary associations. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 42(15), 2529–2547. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2018.1540789
Bedoya R. (2013). Placemaking and the politics of belonging and dis-belonging. GIA Reader, 24(1), 20–21.
Budiman A., Tamir C., Mora L., Noe-Bustamante L. (2020, August 20). Facts on US immigrants, 2018: Statistical portrait of the foreign-born population in the US. PEW Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/20/facts-on-u-s-immigrants-trend-data/
Burch A. (2020). How 17 outsize portraits rattled a small southern town. New York Times. Retrieved December 2, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/us/newnan-art-georgia-race.html
Cornfield D. (2007). Seeking solidarity. . .why, and with whom? In Turner L., Cornfield D. (Eds.), Labor in the new urban battlegrounds: Local solidarity in a global economy (pp. 235–251). Cornell University Press.
Cornfield D. (2009). Immigrant labor organizing in a “new destination city”: Approaches to the unionization of African, Asian, Latino and Middle Eastern workers in Nashville. In Ansley F., Shefner J. (Eds.), Global connections and local receptions: New Latino immigration to the Southeastern United States (pp. 279–297). University of Tennessee Press.
Cornfield D. (2015). Beyond the beat: Musicians building community in Nashville. Princeton University Press.
Cornfield D., Skaggs R. E., Barna E. K., Jordan M. L., Robinson M. E. (2018). Equity and engagement in the arts: Regional differences in the missions of local arts agencies in the United States (Policy Paper). Curb Center for Art, Enterprise, and Public Policy, Vanderbilt University. https://www.americansforthearts.org/by-program/reports-and-data/legislation-policy/naappd/equity-and-engagement-in-the-arts-regional-differences-in-the-missions-of-local-arts-agencies-in-the
de Graauw E., Gleeson S. (2017). Context, coalitions, and organizing: Immigrant labor rights advocacy in San Francisco and Houston. In Greenberg M., Lewis P. (Eds.), The city is the factory: New solidarities and spatial strategies in an urban age (pp. 80–98). Cornell University Press.
Dobbin F., Kalev A. (2016, July–August). Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail
Dobbin F., Schrage D., Kalev A. (2015). Rage against the iron cage: The varied effects of bureaucratic personnel reforms on diversity. American Sociological Review, 80(5), 1014–1044.
Elbers B. (2021). Trends in U.S. residential racial segregation, 1990 to 2020. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 7, 23780231211053982. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211053982
Ender P. (2010). Collinearity issues. Applied categorical & nonnormal data analysis course. http://www.philender.com/courses/categorical/notes2/collin.html
Engh R., Martin B., Kidd S. L., Nicodemus A. G. (2021). WE-making: How arts & culture unite people to work toward community well-being. Metris Arts Consulting. https://www.communitydevelopment.art/sites/default/files/we-making_appendices_041321_a.pdf?msclkid=65c5f546d15811ec81b6c9f5d6986357
Frenette A. (2017). The rise of creative placemaking: Cross-sector collaboration as cultural policy in the United States. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 47(5), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632921.2017.1391727
Frey W. H. (2018). Diversity explosion: How new racial demographics are remaking America. Brookings Institution Press.
Frey W. H. (2019, October 2). US foreign-born gains are smallest in a decade, except in Trump States. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/01/us-foreign-born-gains-are-smallest-in-a-decade-except-in-trump-states/
Jacobs P. (2019a, May 8). Where the nation’s foreign-born live has changed over time. America Counts: Stories Behind the Numbers. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/05/where-nations-foreign-born-live-has-changed-over-time.html
Jacobs P. (2019b, May 8). Most live in the South and West, a dramatic shift from a century ago. United States Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/05/where-nations-foreign-born-live-has-changed-over-time.html
Kaynak E., Barley S. (2019). Shaping the political environment: An ethnography of public affairs professionals at work. Work and Occupations, 46(3), 265–306.
Kujala J., Sachs S. (2019). The practice of stakeholder engagement. In Harrison J. S., Barney J. B., Freeman R. E., Phillips R. A. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of stakeholder theory. Cambridge University Press.
Lena J., Cornfield D. (2008). Immigrant arts participation: A pilot study of Nashville artists. In Tepper S. J., Ivey B. (Eds.), Engaging art: The next great transformation of America’s cultural life (pp. 147–169). Routledge.
Lord C. (2018). Equitable investment policies and practices in the local arts field. Americans for the Arts. https://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/Equitable%20Investment%20Policies%20and%20Practices%20in%20the%20Local%20Arts%20Field%20FINAL.pdf
Mai Q. (2023). The demographic context of hiring discrimination: Evidence from a field experiment in 50 metropolitan statistical areas. Work and Occupations, 50(4), 463–498.
Markusen A., Nicodemus A. G. (2019). Creative placemaking: Reflections on a 21st century American arts policy initiative. In Courage C., Mckeown A. (Eds.), Creative placemaking: research, theory and practice (pp. 11–27). Routledge.
Nicodemus A. G., Engh R., Walker C. (2017). Not just murals: Insights into artists’ leadership in community development. Metris Arts Consulting. https://metrisarts.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/LISC-ArtistsAsLeader_12-05-17_v4.pdf
Noonan D. S. (2015). Arts of the states in crisis: Revisiting determinants of state-level appropriations to arts agencies. Poetics, 49, 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.002
Portes A., Rumbaut R. (2006). Immigrant America: A portrait (3rd ed.). University of California Press.
Roscigno V., Sauer C., Valet P. (2018). Rules, relations, and work. American Journal of Sociology, 123(6), 1784–1825.
Sidford H. (2011). A philanthropy at its best® report. Fusing arts, culture and social change: High impact strategies for philanthropy. National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy. https://www.ncrp.org/publication/fusing-arts-culture-social-change
Sidford H., Frasz A. (2017, July). Not just money: Equity issues in cultural philanthropy. Helicon Collaborative. giarts.org
Singer A., Hardwick S., Brettell C. (2008, April 30). Twenty-first century gateways: Immigrants in suburban America. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/twenty-first-century-gateways-immigrants-suburban-america
Skaggs R. (2020.) A networked infrastructure of cultural equity? Social identities in the missions of local arts agencies. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 50(6), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632921.2020.1845890
Tepper S. J. (2011). Not here, not now, not that! Protest over art and culture in America. University of Chicago Press.
Tepper S. J., Frenette A. (2019). Cultural policy. In Grindstaff L., Hall J. R., Lo M.-C. (Eds.), Handbook of cultural sociology (2nd ed., pp. 378–386). Routledge.
Tomaskovic-Devey D., Avent-Holt D. (2019). Relational inequalities: An organizational approach. Oxford University Press.
Woronkowicz J. (2016). Art-making or place-making? The relationship between open-Air performance venues and neighborhood change. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 36(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X15597759
Woronkowicz J. (2021). Arts, entrepreneurship, and innovation. Journal of Cultural Economics, 45(4), 519–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-021-09432-5
Woronkowicz J., Schert J. M. (2020). Artists in local government. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 18(1), 63–64.
Zilberstein S. (2019). Space making as artistic practice: The relationship between grassroots art organizations and the political economy of urban development. City & Community, 18(4), 1142–1161. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fcico.12458
Biographies
Daniel B. Cornfield is a Professor of Sociology at Vanderbilt University and Editor-in-Chief of Work and Occupations. In his Beyond the Beat: Musicians Building Community in Nashville (Princeton University Press, 2015), he presents a sociological theory of artist activism that addresses how artists build inclusive, genre-diverse and demographically diverse, place-based artist peer communities, derived from the case of Nashville Indie musicians. He is presently collaborating with Alexandre Frenette in an NEA-funded research project on the DEI grantmaking practices of U.S. local arts agencies, based on Americans for the Arts’ 2018 Local Arts Agency Profile dataset.
Chancey Herbolsheimer is a PhD student of Sociology at Vanderbilt University and an Associate Editor of Work and Occupations. Their dissertation focuses on the criminalization of pregnancy, and the intersection of law and deviance in substance use treatment programs for pregnant individuals. Her recent works on prenatal care utilization and LGBTQIA+ stigma can be found in SSM—Population Health and International Journal of Transgender Health. She is presently collaborating with Daniel Cornfield in an NEA-funded research project on the DEI grantmaking practices of U.S. local arts agencies, based on Americans for the Arts’ 2018 Local Arts Agency Profile dataset.
Savannah Bastian is a Sociology PhD student at Vanderbilt University and an Associate Editor at Work and Occupations. With a research focus on sexualities, gender, and work, her most recent work explores women’s sexual experiences across the lifespan and disclosures of sexual assault in medical records qualitatively. Her dissertation will unpack the social construction of expertise among “sexperts.” She collaborated with Daniel Cornfield on this NEA-funded research project to examine the DEI grantmaking practices of U.S. local arts agencies using Americans for the Arts’ 2018 dataset.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: June 13, 2023
Issue published: October 2024
Keywords
Rights and permissions
© 2023 SAGE Publications.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Request permissions for this article.
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in American Behavioral Scientist.
View All Journal MetricsArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 1157
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 0
There are no citing articles to show.
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
View options
PDF/EPUB
View PDF/EPUBAccess options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
