Issues and arguments

Sustainability has become a topic of interest and a hotly contested term (Agyeman & Evans, 2004) with diverse and conflicting uses depending on context. Due to the urgency of addressing issues related to climate change, social differences, and inequalities, a shared and recognized use of the term is missing. Most research focuses only on the environmental and tangible dimension of sustainability (Foster & Kreinin, 2020) neglecting its social implications. Therefore, the role of the cultural economy in contributing to a more sustainable future is a topic of discussion. (Kagan, 2014; Soini & Dessein, 2016; Štreimikienė & Kačerauskas, 2020).
Culture is conceived to be an actor of change for its ability to raise awareness but also to implement sustainable practice, with cultural organisations potentially becoming, as other firms, “sustainable development agents” (Mio et al. 2020). In addition, the nature of cultural organizations and public financing makes them responsible for fulfilling their mission, which includes maintaining a positive social and environmental attitude and being accountable for how they spend public resources. (Moxham, 2009).
Cultural organizations are thus increasingly challenged to take an active stance around contemporary social issues and a growing number of cultural organisations are implementing new strategies to become more sustainable and consider the social issues of the territories in which they operate.
The adoption of the 17 SDGs in 2015, along with the signing of the Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in the same year, can be considered as two milestones in the pursuit of a more concrete approach to sustainability.Despite the fact that scholars still disagree about the relevance and efficacy of this framework to guide efforts towards building a more sustainable future (Torelli, Fiandrino & Scarpa, 2022). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a well-established and widely accepted framework for approaching sustainability. The implementation of SDGs by various competent agents, from government to business, has transformative potential depending on the approaches adopted (Pogge & Sengupta, 2015). The cultural sector has mainly focused on interpreting the role of culture for sustainability, with most studies measuring its impact on society (Partal & Dunphy, 2016). This approach has led to misaligned expectations between cultural organizations and their counterparts.
Despite the importance of cultural institutions in promoting sustainable development, research investigating the role of SDGs in the cultural sector remains peripheral in academic debates. Instead, the policy lens dominates the scene, while limited studies address the topic at the organizational level (Cerquetti & Montella, 2021). The lack of research on the role of SDGs in the cultural sector means that there is a significant gap in knowledge and understanding of how cultural institutions can meaningfully contribute to sustainable development.
Therefore, there is a need for more research to be conducted on the role of SDGs in the cultural sector. This study tries to fill this gap by exploring whether and how SDGs are becoming integrative to management in cultural settings, and with which consequences. In particular, the study will focus on UNESCO World Heritage Sites for their presupposed paramount concern with sustainability in managing and preserving cultural heritage of internationally recognized outstanding value. How is this sustainability concern made practice? Specifically, are SDGs becoming integrative to World Heritage Sites management plans, and with which consequences?

Methodology: The study intends to study the extent and characteristic of how SDGs are developed and interpreted inside the strategy of WHS management plans. The sample consists entirely of WHS sites inscribed on the WHS list after 2017. Since the management plan should be representative of the organization's strategy, we chose 2017 as the representative year for the possible integration of SDG principles (adopted in September 2015 by 193 countries) into the strategy of organizations. Only management plans completed after 2015 will be considered for analysis. The sample consists of 148 properties.
World Heritage Sites (WHS) are a suitable context to explore the issue of SDGs implementation in cultural settings for two main reasons. First, sustainability is a core concern, intrinsically linked to the very nature of being nominated as a WHS: WHS are representative of outstanding and internationally recognised heritage, that should be purposefully preserved and sustainable used and developed (Loulanski, 2006). WHS organisations, although varying in governance and structures make use of local resources and skills, preserve local knowledge systems and infrastructures and make local communities and individuals, including marginalized populations, the primary beneficiaries of these investments for the sustainable conservation and management of the heritage resources (UNESCO, 2015). World Heritage Sites (WHSs) embody a double nature that is potentially conflicting. They are strictly linked to the communities in which they are based, but they also hold an outstanding universal value for society at large. This means that theoretically, "all the peoples of the world are equal stakeholders" (Tucker & Carnegie, 2014). Moreover WHSs (especially those listed “at risk”) are affected by multiple factors and problems which emerge from a combination of pressures mainly generated by unsustainable strategies in terms of ecological, social and financial behaviour.

Second, to carry out their mission of managing and preserving cultural heritage of outstanding value and keep their WHS status, they must develop and implement Management Plans under UNESCO’s oversight (UNESCO recommendations): this offers documental material to explore SDGs implementation at the organizational level. Even though the expected participatory approach and the involvement of the community, formally required by WHO, didn’t always happen, Management Plans are still considered a tool of performance measurement and sustainability reporting (Badia, 2018).

Expected results: The main objective of this research is to map the disclosure and communication of sustainable activities related to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) found within management plan of WHS. In doing so, the research aims to identify how this information is disclosed and whether certain sustainability dimensions (e.g environmental) are more relevant than others. Additionally, the research seeks to identify the target audience for these activities and address any potential conflicts between local communities and the universal value of sustainable development.
The analysis will determine whether the discourse of sustainability is integrated into the strategy of WHS and how it is implemented. This research will also identify whether the discourse of sustainability is used only rhetorically, or whether sustainability is a key component of WHS's strategy.
By exploring the discourse on sustainability in the cultural sector, this research will contribute to a better understanding of how sustainability can be integrated into the cultural sector. This research can also help to identify best practices for sustainability reporting and disclosure within the cultural sector. Ultimately, this research has the potential to contribute to the broader conversation around sustainability and cultural heritage, and to promote the integration of sustainable practices into cultural institutions.

• Bibliography

· Agyeman, J., & Evans, B. (2004). ‘Just sustainability’: the emerging discourse of environmental justice in Britain?. Geographical journal, 170(2), 155-164.
· Badia, F. (2018). The management plan for the world heritage sites as a tool of performance measurement and sustainability reporting: opportunities and limits in the Italian context. Aspects of Management Planning for Cultural World Heritage Sites: Principles, Approaches and Practices, 25-36.
· Fiandrino, S., Scarpa, F., & Torelli, R. (2022). Fostering Social Impact Through Corporate Implementation of the SDGs: Transformative Mechanisms Towards Interconnectedness and Inclusiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(4), 959-973.
· Foster, G., & Kreinin, H. (2020). A review of environmental impact indicators of cultural heritage buildings: A circular economy perspective. Environmental Research Letters, 15(4), 043003.
· Ibáñez-Forés, V., Martínez-Sánchez, V., Valls-Val, K., & Bovea, M. D. (2023). How do organisations communicate aspects related to their social performance? A proposed set of indicators and metrics for sustainability reporting. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 35, 157-172.
· Lo Piccolo, F., Leone, D., & Pizzuto, P. (2012). The (controversial) role of the UNESCO WHL Management Plans in promoting sustainable tourism development. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 4(3), 249-276.
· Loulanski T. (2006), “Revising the concept for cultural heritage: the argument for a functional approach”, International Journal of Cultural Property, vol. 13, n. 2, pp.207-233.
· Mio, C., Marchini, P. L., & Medioli, A. (2020). Forward‐looking information in integrated reports: Insights from “best in class”. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(5), 2212-2224.
· Nian, S., Chen, M., Zhang, X., Li, D., & Ren, J. (2023). How Outstanding Universal Value Attractiveness and Tourism Crowding Affect Visitors’ Satisfaction?. Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 112.
· Partal, A., & Dunphy, K. (2016). Cultural impact assessment: a systematic literature review of current methods and practice around the world. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 34(1), 1-13.
· Pogge, T., & Sengupta, M. (2016). Assessing the sustainable development goals from a human rights perspective. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 32(2), 83–97
· Soini, K., & Dessein, J. (2016). Culture-sustainability relation: Towards a conceptual framework. Sustainability, 8(2), 167.
· Štreimikienė, D., & Kačerauskas, T. (2020). The creative economy and sustainable development: The Baltic States. Sustainable development, 28(6), 1632-1641.
· Tucker, H., & Carnegie, E. (2014). World heritage and the contradictions of ‘universal value’. Annals of Tourism Research, 47, 63-76.

Today, arts organisations are being confronted with an extended period of rapid and unpredictable uncertainty, driven by factors such as evolving audience behaviours and tastes, the accelerating impact of climate crisis, and technologically-fueled transformations. Additionally, with the globally-popular policy mobility of the creative economy concept, governments and cultural policies are placing increasing expectations on the arts to be a financially sustainable and viable sector. This has led to the need for arts organisations to source for stable ways of managing, funding and justifying their activities, while being able to communicate and leverage on their unique value propositions.

This paper proposes a cultural value-based business model framework as an operational and analytical approach that is able to critically articulate, assess and track the multidimensional dynamics of value creation in the arts. This paper will demonstrate the suitability and relevance of this framework by applying it to empirical case studies of arts organisations in Singapore. In particular, it will highlight how a cultural value-based business model framework will allow arts organisations to remain mission congruent, while communicating their multidimensional value and capturing the key inputs required for growth and innovation.

Ultimately, this paper will argue for the significance of a cultural value-based business model
as a framework that will allow arts organisations to manage risks for organisational survival and resilience. Importantly, this framework will allow the arts to shift towards a more sustainable and independent ecology, especially in cities like Singapore that are heavily reliant on government agendas.