Cultural Leadership & Practice

Culture is a sector. Australia has not named it yet.

Australia has a national cultural policy. It is called Revive, released in 2023, and its centrepiece is an organisation called Creative Australia. Its five pillars address storytelling, artistic output, audience engagement, and cultural infrastructure. It is, in many respects, a thoughtful document.

It does not, however, define cultural work as a professional field. It does not establish certification pathways for cultural practitioners. It contains no workforce standards for the people who teach, transmit, and sustain living cultural knowledge. It has no mechanism for recognising a practitioner’s knowledge as a national asset — no equivalent of Japan’s formal designation of Living National Treasures, no provenance framework for the intangible skills that disappear when the person who carries them stops working.

This is not a criticism of Revive. It is an observation about what cultural policy in Australia has consistently understood culture to mean — arts, entertainment, expression, output. The funded and the performed. The visible product rather than the invisible practice that produced it.

CWA works from a different understanding.

Culture is not a product. It is a system — the governing mechanism through which knowledge is organised, skills are transmitted, and communities sustain continuity across generations. Creativity is one quality that operates within that system. It is not the system itself.

When work is named as creative, it becomes an adjective — expressive, supplementary, grant-eligible. When it is named as cultural work, it becomes a noun. Structural. Professional. Subject to standards, credentials, and economic recognition in the same way as any other field of national significance.

This distinction is the foundation of everything CWA builds.

What Japan understood

Japan’s Agency for Cultural Affairs does not administer arts funding. It administers cultural infrastructure.

Practitioners of traditional crafts, performing arts, and intangible knowledge are formally designated as bearers of living heritage — not because their work is beautiful, but because the knowledge they carry is irreplaceable. It exists only as long as they practice and transmit it. When it is lost, it is lost permanently.

The highest designation within Japan’s framework — formally, Preservers of Important Intangible Cultural Properties, known as Living National Treasures — is a government recognition that a person’s accumulated knowledge is a national asset. It is protected, documented, and supported accordingly.

Australia has no equivalent. The knowledge held by a master weaver, a cultural educator, a practitioner of embodied healing practice, a community knowledge holder — none of it is formally recognised as a national asset under any current Australian framework.

The Three fields of Cultural Leadership & Practice

Contemporary cultural practice operates across three interconnected fields, as defined by the Institute for Contemporary Culture.

Cultural Production — making, design, craft, manufacturing, and the tangible expression of cultural knowledge through skilled practice. The practitioner whose hands produce the object that carries the knowledge within it.

Cultural Knowledge — teaching, heritage, skills transmission, and the intergenerational practices through which cultural continuity is maintained. The embodied knowledge of a discipline that exists in practice, not in documentation, and that requires active transmission to survive.

Cultural Systems — social innovation, community practice, and creative health. The structural work through which culture shapes how communities function, how people heal, and how societies organise participation, meaning, and care.

Most practitioners work across more than one field simultaneously. The framework is not a boundary. It is a map of where the work lives and what it requires.

Recognition and certification

Practitioners working within these fields may seek formal recognition through the Institute for Contemporary Culture’s certification pathways — the Certified Cultural Practitioner credential for intangible practice, and the Certified Cultural Atelier for tangible making and production.

Their contributions may be nominated for recognition through the Women in Culture platform, recorded in CWA’s public registry of cultural practice, and considered for the annual Women in Culture Awards.

The highest recognition within this framework is the Women in Culture Laureate — awarded annually to a practitioner whose contribution is of extraordinary national significance.

Japan calls their equivalent a Living National Treasure.

CWA calls her the Laureate.

The Theory behind Cultural Leadership & Practice

The concept of Cultural Leadership as a professional field does not yet appear in Australian policy frameworks or academic literature in the way CWA defines it. What exists are adjacent bodies of work — cultural economics, social innovation research, creative economy theory — each of which captures part of the picture without naming the whole.

David Throsby, Professor of Economics at Macquarie University and one of Australia’s foremost cultural economists, has established through decades of research that cultural capital operates alongside physical and human capital as a primary driver of economic development. His concentric circles model — adopted by UNESCO and embedded in international creative economy frameworks — maps the relationship between core cultural practice and the broader economy it generates. The model confirms what practitioners already know: that the work closest to the centre carries the least economic recognition and the most cultural weight.

The Stanford Social Innovation Review, published by the Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, documents how cultural practice drives systems change — how new ways of organising knowledge, transmitting skills, and enabling community participation generate outcomes that policy and technology alone cannot produce. Within this research tradition, cultural work is not supplementary to social innovation. It is one of its primary mechanisms.

UNESCO’s creative economy frameworks, adopted across 178 countries, recognise cultural production, knowledge transmission, and community practice as measurable contributors to national economic development. These frameworks form part of the same international infrastructure as the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage — the framework Australia has yet to ratify.

Taken together, these bodies of work point toward a field that has not yet been named as such in Australia. CWA names it.

Cultural Leadership & Practice is the professional field in which women lead across Cultural Production, Cultural Knowledge, and Cultural Systems — the three pillars of contemporary culture as defined by the Institute for Contemporary Culture. It operates at the intersection of cultural economics, social innovation, and living heritage safeguarding. It encompasses the full range of work through which culture is produced, transmitted, and sustained — and it does so within a framework that treats that work as professional practice, not creative expression.

This framework does not yet exist elsewhere in Australia. CWA is building it now.

The work has always been there. The recognition has not.

Women teach the next generation how to make things with their hands. They carry the knowledge of how communities heal. They design the environments in which culture is transmitted. They run the studios, the guilds, the programs, the practices that hold cultural life together at every level from the kitchen table to the national stage.

This is not supplementary work. It is not creative hobby or cultural pastime. It is the infrastructure of a functioning society — and it has been performed, largely by women, largely without formal recognition, credentials, economic protection, or a place in the national record.

---