Algorithms to assess music cities: Case study-Melbourne as a music capital

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The global Mastering of a Music City report in 2015 notes that the concept of music cities has penetrated the global political vernacular because it delivers “significant economic, employment, cultural and social benefits.” This article highlights that no empirical study has combined all these values and offers a relevant and comprehensive definition of a music city. Drawing on industry research,1 the article assesses how mathematical flowcharts, such as Algorithm A (Economics), Algorithm B (Four T’s creative index), and Algorithm C (Heritage), have contributed to the definition of a music city. Taking Melbourne as a case study, it illustrates how Algorithms A and B are used as disputed evidence about whether the city is touted as Australia’s music capital. The article connects the three algorithms to an academic framework from musicology, urban studies, cultural economics, and sociology, and proposes a benchmark Algorithm D (Music Cities definition), which offers a more holistic assessment of music activity in any urban context. The article concludes by arguing that Algorithm D offers a much-needed definition of what comprises a music city because it builds on the popular political economy focus and includes the social importance of space and cultural practices.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-12
Number of pages12
JournalSAGE Open
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2017

Keywords

  • urban economics
  • economic science
  • social sciences
  • music history
  • music
  • humanities
  • political economy
  • cultural anthropology
  • anthropology
  • mathematical and quantitative methods in economics

Cite this