Cultural Heritage Expenditure. Effective Driver of Economic Impact or Just a Perception? A Spatial Perspective.

The impact of the public expenditure in Heritage and Culture is a problematic question. The application of input output methodologies to heritage investment appraisal is discussed, with particular reference to the assessment of backward and forward spillovers and leakages and procedures for awarding public contracts Maintenance and effective use and managements of cultural heritage involves many important economic and legal aspects. Cultural and Heritage expenditure and investments depends on the specific objectives of the policy-makers at national and local level. We assume two models governing these public choices: a targeted distribution model in which restauration and conservation are the main determinants; the paternalistic distribution model in which the characteristic of local and territorial priorities are the main drivers consistent with the comparative advantages of the cultural endowment. Implementing such strategies is strictly correlated with the ability to support decision-makers and to increase people’s awareness towards more comprehensive approaches to heritage preservation. In the present work, a robust socioeconomic impact model is presented. The analysis indicated that the impact of public procurements in cultural heritage sites provide a range of both market and non-market benefits to the local society. The level of competition and openness provided with open procedures is also debated. The originality of the impact analysis is to go beyond the official/traditional data and indicators and propose “alternative” data-gathering methodologies supporting the econometric analysis conducted at local level, using Italian provinces as units of analysis. More than 22.000 contracts or culture-led projects have been analyzed. As well as the impact of investment on the economy, the model also tries to explain the determinants of the distribution among the Italian provinces, considering the revealed preferences of the institutional authorities (the decision makers), the comparatives advantages of the cultural sites and the relative intensity of the expenditure and using a two stage regression model. The principal conclusion emerging from this analysis is a positive effect on cultural investment on employment. This may suggest that spending decisions need more attention: they should consider the relevant consequences of a 10 year long slow-down of the economic cycle, the structural changes of the local economy and the limitation to highlight the impact only in term of tourism and real estate impacts.