The Macro Possibilities of a Micro Art Space- An Interim Report on Microresidence Research -June 2012
Youkobo Art SpaceTokyo

＜Contents＞

Page

Preface1

I．An Attempt to Define Microresidencies

2

II．An Examination of Microresidencies

3

Results and Analysis of Microresidence Survey

1. Objective and Outline of the Survey

3

2. Analysis of Collected Data (from the replies of 30 microresidencies)

4

3.

17

Summary

III．Microresidencies and their Possibilities of Network

18

Appendix

I．A Letter from Luis Recoder and Sandra Gibson

appendix 1

II. Survey Data

1. List of Microresidencies Approachedappendix 2

2. Questionnaire Sample “Microresidence Research”

appendix 6

3. List of Responding Microresidencies

appendix 9III．”AIR: Open Talk about Artist in Residencies” Forum Documentation（Digest）
・Vol.1：2005.12

appendix 10・Vol.2：2011.12

appendix 16

Ⅳ． Research Group Members on AIR & Microresidencies

appendix 20

Preface

As the co-director of a small scale artist in residence program (referred to AIR hereon), and amember of Res Artis for 10 years I have come to understand many different forms of AIR
management. AIR first and foremost exist as a base for artists to pursue their practice, but thereasons for their existence are various and dependent upon the intention of the managing
organization. In the case of art universities or academies there is a concern for art education andthe training of artists. In the case of local authorities there is often an aspect of community
development and tourism promotion. However in the case that AIR programs are run by artists
themselves, then actual artistic practice becomes the key point of focus and the fact that theartist takes up living as another resident of a local area can be viewed as a point of particularcommonality between such artist run programs.
The AIR program of Youkobo Art Space is an independent small scale residence program
which holds artists at its heart, and as the very phrase “residence” suggests, it provides a space forartists to pursue their practice with freedom, and builds a firm link with artists who have a strong
awareness of the importance of a comfortable environment for creative production. Here artists
are able to undertake a stay of up to 6 months and may also be accompanied by their partner
and/or children. Furthermore as Youkobo also undertakes the development of activities as a formof community art centre, in parallel to its other programs, artists also have the opportunity toengage with the local area upon a deeper level.
In participating in the Res Artis General Meetings which take place once every two years I havefelt that the main issues which can be shared between AIR leaders and associated organizations(including arts councils, foundations, education institutions, artists etc), along very different social
backgrounds depending on each country, are focused upon academic discourse on art andcultural theory, cultural economics and other popular issues of art. However up until now there has
been little discussion upon the issues of microresidencies, which in fact can be said to make up 1/4
of Res Artis members.
Within this context we began to seriously investigate the state of microresidencies in 2011. This
report included a collation of this survey and is put together in hope of instigating further discussion
and debate concerning microresidencies.
Tatsuhiko Murata
Youkobo Art SpaceThe Term “Microresidence”
This term was suggested to Youkobo Art Space in a short essay written by New York based artists Luis Recoder andSandra Gibson during their stay at Youkobo in 2005
Appendix I:
Youkobo Art Space: A Micro-Flexible Arts Community in Tokyo
A Brief Essay of Appreciation by Luis Recoder and Sandra Gibson 2005

1

I.

An Attempt to Define Microresidencies

The worldwide network of artist in residencies, Res Artis, has joined numerous members and promoted
the development of artist in residencies across the globe. Currently (April 2012) there are over 400
members of this network. These include not only large scale institutions, but residencies of all shapes
and sizes, drawing us to question how we in fact define an artist in residence. What is the function of aresidence? What are their benefits? The answer to this depends upon each residence itself and eachartist.
In tackling these issues it is important to consider the different environments and social context inwhich each residence engages in its activities. Amongst such varying conditions we must also
examine the awareness of society towards artists, their position within such a social framework and theimportance of their artistic engagements.
Today at a time when the development of independent artist spaces initiated by artists and artorganizations, for the purposes of promoting artistic and cultural exchange, is gaining further ground,autonomous, artist run, grass roots residence programs are also spreading worldwide. The growth ofsuch small scale residence programs surely points towards a new direction for AIR.
Further to understanding the possibilities of residence programs and their significant role,
microresidencies are joining in a movement to create a platform which joins together a range ofdifferent small scale groups and organizations in mutual support and collaboration.
This research was initiated by Youkobo Art Space, but we believe it is vital to encourage ade-centralized network in which each microresidence member takes responsibility and wish to foster
a discussion in which each member can take equal part, adding their own contribution to the
network itself.
What is a microresidence？
・Small Scale（in terms of size of facilities）
・Small Scale（in terms of budget）
・Artist Run
・Independent・Grass Roots
・Highly Flexible
High level of support for artists
Taking special care of human relationships
While we are aware of the ambiguity of the term “microresidence”, we would like to propose that even if
not all of the above categories are met, residencies which fulfill the majority of these conditions may be
defined as “microresidencies”, and while using such a subjective phrase it is up to each organization todetermine their own position.
In the ongoing development of this network we hope to give focus to the macro possibilities of the micro.

2

II.

An Examination of Microresidencies

Results and Analysis of Microresidence Survey
Between August 2011-June 2012 Youkobo Art Space, Youkobo sent out a survey to 164 different
residence programs across the world which we felt may correspond with the term
“Microresidence”.
1. Objective and Outline of the Survey
The intention of this survey was to gain an insight into the range of small scale independent
residence programs being facilitated world wide, the kind of support they offer to artists, theemphasis of their programs, their organization and vision towards a proposed “microresidence
network”.
Identification of Suitable Residencies for this Survey
These residency programs were identified through the information gained through the following
resources and network. A list of the residencies approached may be found in the Appendix II-1:
List of Microresidencies Approached-International Networks:
Res Artis

http://www.resartis.org/en/

Trans Artists

http://www.transartists.org/

Intra Asia Network

http://intraasianetwork.org/

Triangle Arts

http://www.trianglearts.org/-Japan Based Networks:
Air-J (database of the Japan Foundation)

http://air-j.info/

J-Air Network

http://www.endeavor.or.jp/j-airnet/

Trans Cultural Exchange

http://www.transculturalexchange.org/-Personal network
Through research of members of staff of Youkobo
Through introduction by artists in residence at Youkobo
Through introduction of other cooperating organizations
Survey Categories
The categories of the survey may be viewed on the questionnaire sample paper.
Appendix II-2: Questionnaire Sample “Microresidence Research”

Survey Data
From the 164 residence facilities apporached we received 30 responses from across Europe, Asia,
Oceania and the Americas. Here in this interim report we have attempted to collate andanalyze these responses. We do not claim these results to show a universal trend in
microresidencies and our sources of data are of rather limited number and only from certain
regions of the world so can not be said to representative of microresidencies in general, however3

from the answers we have very kindly received from these surveys we have been able to put
together an overview of information which includes residence programs from many different
regions of the world, working in many different circumstances. We hope this survey willencourage an appreciation of these differences as well as commonalities between the various
residence programs and provide the first step in examining the presence and important role ofmicroresidencies.
Part of this survey was also to gauge interest in creating a microresidence network and gain
opinions on how such a network should function. Based upon the responses of each organization
we have drawn up some very simple suggestions on how to move forward in the formation of thisnetwork, which we hope you may all still have interest to be part of.
For a list of residencies which responded to the survey please view Appendix II-3: List of
Responding Microresidencies

2. Analysis of Collected Data (from the replies of 30 microresidencies)
Below we have analyzed the gathered data through a series of pie charts which enable us tovisualize information on the following details of the responding microresidencies:
Region, type of organization, residence duration, residence period, support offered to artists,
occupancy capacity of facilities, sources of funding and budget, method of selecting artists,
approach to promotion and various other information. Furthermore qualitative data which can
not be put into such a format is collated at the end.

4The largest number of residencies are based in Europe, shortly followed by Asia (half of which are
based in Japan), a significant number are also based in Ocenia, with a minority of respondants
coming from the Americas, while no respnding residencies are based in Africa.

13

out of the 30 residencies responding to the questionnaire are currently res artis members

5

Most organizations define themselves as artist run or independent. The consciousness towards“artist run” particularly high amongst the responding group.

Most residence programs can cater up to a 3 month duration of residence, with a significant
percentage being focused on 1-2 monthly residence projects.

6

The strong majority of residence facilities hold their programs throughout the year

Over half of the organizations define their residence program as both artist and community
focused. One third of the organizations position themselves as artist focused and only 13% define
themselves as community focused.

7

There is a wide spectrum of art forms supported by the residencies, with visual art being a corefocus, accompanied by design, music, writing and performance.

Support provided to artists is mainly focused on production costs, as well as significant support
provided towards accommodation, daily expenses and studio.

8

There a wide range of different artists participating in these programs, with a marginal leadbeing taken by mid-career and studio based artists, along with significant presence of young, fulltime and community based artists.

The majority of residence programs cater for small numbers of artists at any one time ranging
between 1-5 persons

9More than one 40% of all income for residence programs comes from earned income, illustratingthat micro-residencies often depend on being self-sustaining. Furthermore with 18% of income
coming from individual contributions this reflects the dependence on individual funds andpersonal dedication to such programs. However in counter to this over one quarter of funding isrelied upon from government sources.

This demonstrates that the majority of microresidence programs work on a small budget under
50,000USD

10Models based on open calls, review panels and recommendations are most prevalent amongst
the residence programs

Art listing sites are most heavily relied upon in the promotion of residence programs, followed byblogs, websites and flyers

11Generally artists are expected to hold an artist talk as part of their residence program followed
by 15% expected to hold an exhibition, as well as being able to undertake part time work andsell their work.

As part of the residence program it is often the case that the artist engages with the local publicthrough exhibitions, workshops and artist talks.

12As one may predict dialogue between the residence organization and participating artist after
the residence program is largely conducted online via email and skype etc, however there isalso a significant outcome of future collaborations emerging between the artist andorganization and recommendations towards further participating artists.

Generally all the spaces surveyed provided some level of facilities for local artists as well as theresidence artists. These are largely centred on studio spaces,meeting spaces and event spaces
and gallery spaces.

13

Most organizations are not only concerned with running an artist in residence program but havea large range of other activities which are reflected in this graph, with workshops, exhibitions andresearch appearing to be a particular focus.

The graph demonstrates that there is no single answer to such a question however“independence” is a highly important factor in such a determination, with small scale andalternative also being provided with particular emphasis.

14

We would like to understand more about the benefits which potential members would wish togain from joining our proposed network. We can see here clearly the greatest demand is forexchange, then followed by a strong urge to collaborate and share advice, while if such activity
could also contribute to the publicity of the organizations this would also be welcome.

Qualatative Data
We also asked a range of qualitive questions which can not be collated into simple graphic form
but the responses are listed here below.
Why did you create a residence?
Meeting point for creators

International and cultural exchangeTime and space for experimentation

Support for young artists



Improve local understanding of art and culture

Distributing info about the world through artists – broadening awareness

Multicultural cross media dialogueProfessional development

Growing creative communities



Inspire new actions by new settingCollaboration

15



Engage new context

Critical discussion



Local education

What is the role of a microresidence?
Don’t know what is microAn alternative to institutions

An alternative economyIndividual driven which has + and – points

A space more personal and with more freedomSupport for young artists

Connecting with communityQuick turnaround

Issues you would like to deal with

Need for alternative space

Need to share experiences and audienceHow to get fundingStrengthen grass roots activities



Alternative economyImprove programming

Make connections with curators and writers

Building community

How should members cooperate as part of the network?


Residency exchange

Directors/staff/ researcher exchangeCollaboration project between artists in different residencies on set topic

Exchange experiences ideas



Joint workshops



Research collaboration

16

3.

Summary

The data gathered from the questionnaire responses indicates clearly the high range of diversity
between microresidencies, the category itself adding to the widening of our understanding ofartist in residence programs.
In summary we may discern that the organizations with gave their support to this survey wereconcentrated in Europe, Asia and Oceania, areas which Youkobo already has particular links
with. The slight majority of residencies are in fact not members of Res Artis, indicating that there isno comprehensive database of artist in residence programs. A great number of theseresidencies are artist run or independent organizations, indicating how autonomy and the role of
the artist are central to such programs. These programs generally run for up to 3 months at a time,throughout the year and give equal emphasis to supporting both artists (of many different
backgrounds) and communities, in not only the field of visual art but many other creative genres.
Yet the motivations of each organization towards establishing a microresidence are extremely
wide ranging and reflect the diverse philosophy of each centre, with some wishing to provide
support for the development of the individual artist, while others look towards the wider culturaland social impact of artistic exchange.
The funding conditions of these organizations also reflect that microresidencies are micro in termsof budget too, with the majority working with a budget of under 50,000USD, which is largely
earned income, demonstrating how microresidencies have pursued a self sustaining system andalternative economy in which over-reliance upon funding support is avoided. Having said this asignificant proportion of residencies do receive public funding which points to a particular
recognition which even small scale residencies have begun to gain.
Each residency is highly active in the provision of a public program, which gives the resident
artists the opportunity to engage with wider local communities, while the local art community
are also often provided with various facilities by the organizations. The strong ties which areformed between the artists and microresidence organizations may also be found in the fact thatin addition to continuous dialogue via email etc. the relationship between the two parties isoften developed through further collaboration or recommendation of other artists after the initialresidence has been completed.
As to their vision of microresidencies and the possibilities of their network the organizations
have a strong sense of microresidencies being defined not only by their small scale but also
through their autonomous independent position and their function as an alternative to large
scale long established programs. In considering the role of microresidencies here again anemphasis is placed on the personal relations between artist, host and local community, while thefreedom given to artists to pursue their own ideas is also highlighted. In joining a network theygreatly anticipate the opportunity for collaboration which presents their willingness to connect
and work with each other, engaging in exchange and sharing advice, while also seeking theopportunity for increased visibility and publicity, while many residencies naturally wish to deal
with issues of funding they also have a wider vision to improve their programming, community ties,
network of arts professionals and the provision towards the alternative through such a
microresidence network which they hope may be achieved through join projects focusing on
artist and staff exchanges, joint research, workshops, exhibitions and general sharing of
information.

17

III.

Microresidencies and their Possibilities of Network

In order to seek out the possibilities of a Microresidence Network 160 different microresidencies wereapproached world wide with a request to complete a questionnaire, amongst which 30 residencies
actively responded to the survey, sharing highly insightful information. Through the analysis of thisdata we have been able to discern the following potentials.
Microresidencies have become a global phenomenon and with numerous backgrounds to their
instigation, including development from shared artist studios, re-utilization of disused spaces andcommunity engagement through art, such residencies will continue to grow in widening diversity.
Amongst such a diversity of individual residencies pursuing their independent activities with such arange of objectives what necessity is there for such a network? And if there is such a need whatform should this network take?
If we take a long term perspective to building a sustainable platform perhaps it is most suitable if
each residence may actively participate with freedom in a de-centralized network.
In order to question the role of microresidencies within both the art world and wider society, and toprovide greater visibility to this significant presence we aim in particular to pursue the following
areas.
1.

To make clear the role and position of microresidencies

2.

Share advice and experiences in tackling issues which microresidencies face3.

Pursue new forms of collaboration/cooperation and widen the vision of residence programs

In order to implement such objectives Youkobo has engaged in various activities. In December 2011as an “Open Talk About Microresidencies” the directors of artist run residencies from Singapore,
Vietnam and Itoshima city, Fukuoka prefecture, gathered together for the first debate upon thepossibilities of a Micoresidence Network. Following this Youkobo continued to facilitate a regularseries of public events under the title of “Open Talk About Artist in Residencies” in which artists who
have direct experience in joining microresidence programs shared their experiences, while also
engaging in critical dialogue with the residence host as to the benefits of the program and how
they may be further improved. Furthermore this October and November 2012 a wide range of
microresidence leaders from around the world will be gathering in Tokyo, and we will discuss anddebate in detail which direction the network should take from here.
In addition to this in order to further the visibility of microresidencies and widen awareness towards
their diverse presence we aim to publish a microresidence directory in early 2013.
On the basis of this interim report of microresidence research we greatly anticipate the further
development of debate and engagement between microresidencies and look towards a
microresidence network which is able to offer something which will enrich all of our individual
engagements, the possibilities of which start from here.

18

APPENDIX

I. A Letter from Luis Recoder and Sandra Gibson

Youkobo Art Space: A Micro-Flexible Arts Community In Tokyo

A Brief Essay of Appreciation by Luis Recoder and Sandra Gibson
What makes Youkobo Art Space unique as an artist’s residency is its intimacy of scale – or more to
the point: Youkobo Art Space as micro-residency.
In an impromptu presentation at Youkobo, we spoke about what makes this particular residency
so extraordinarily different than the others and came to the conclusion that it had to do with“smallness of scale” coupled with “vastness of flexibility.”
The “micro” in terms of size coupled with the “macro” in terms of the flexible.
Which goes to say that nearly everything is possible at Youkobo. The artist is completely free to
explore, interpret, and personalize what Youkobo offers as “art space.”
What is “art space” at Youkobo Art Space?
It is an ensemble or network of spaces in constant flux: studio, gallery, residency.
For example, the studio can also be used as a gallery annex. And/or a residency accommodation
can be easily converted into a studio space.
One space drifts into another, is permeable by and through the other.
Question: What accounts for Youkobo’s exceptional disposition towards the flexible? Answer: The
unprecedented collaborative venture of a co-directorial couple-team - Hiroko and Tatsuhiko
Murata-san. Not only do they understand the needs and requirements of each and every artist
who arrives at Youkobo but they are also frequently asking the artist-in-resident: How to make
Youkobo a better place for artists?
Youkobo is that “better place” partially due to the solicitation of artist’s input and suggestion. And
this gives the artist a sense that he/she is an active participant in the shaping of a visionary art
center.
Micro as the micro-management of operation, with only two directors at the helm.
Micro as a concise, yet poignant, measurement of the social.
(2005)© Youkobo Art Space 2005
www.youkobo.co.jp

Appendix 1

[II-1]. List of Microresidencies Approached
Listed in alphabetical order of country

Appendix 2

Appendix 3

Appendix 4

Appendix 5[II-2]. Questionnaire Sample “Microresidence Research”

Appendix 6

Appendix 7

Appendix 8

[II-3]. List of Responding Organizations*Members of Res Artis are marked “res artis”

International
1.

Caravansarai – Turkey http://www.caravansarai.info/ res artis

2.

GeoAir – Georgia http://geoairresidency.blogspot.com/

3.

Ne'-Na Contemporary Artspace– Thailand http://nena-artspace.org

4.

Acoss – Armenia

5.

BigCi – Australia www.bigci.org

6.

medea electronique – Greece http://www.medeaelectronique.com/ res artis

7.

Perte de Signal – Canada http://www.perte-de-signal.org

8.

Frise – Germany http://www.frise.de/9.

balkankult – Serbia http://www.balkankult.org/bk/

http://www.acoss.org/

res artis

res artis

res artis

10. INSTINC – Singapore http://www.instinc.com res artis
11. Kulttuurikauppila – Finland http://www.kulttuurikauppila.fi/ res artis
12. Art Break – Finland http://www.taidepaussi.fi/in-english/
13. Arquetopia – Mexico

http://www.arquetopia.org/

res artis

14. LEVEL artist run initiative – Australia www.levelari.org
15. Serial Space – Australia http://serialspace.org/about/
16. Low&High – UK

http://lowandhighplatform.wordpress.com/

17. NPS – New Zealand http://www.newpacificstudio.org/

res artis

18. Kitchen Budapest – Hungary http://www.kitchenbudapest.hu/en
19. Nha San Duc Studio – Vietnam http://www.nhasanstudio.org/
20. artistay – France http://artistay.com/home.html

res artis

21. imagine Residency – Australia http://www.artinmotion.com.au/residency.html
22. New Zero Art Space – Myanmar http://www.newzeroartspace.com/
23. Residencia en la Tierra –Colombia http://www.residenciaenlatierra.org/

24. HomeBase – USA/Germany/Israel http://www.homebaseproject.org/

Japan
25. 石彫千年の交感

Artist-in-Residence Sakuragawa http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~tq3m-asg/

26. スタジオ KURA Studio Kura http://www.studiokura.info/
27. Yugakutei Residence http://apoc-mie.org/yugakutei/air_record.html
28. 遊工房アートスペース Youkobo Art Space http://youkobo.co.jp/ res artis
29. 3331 http://www.3331.jp/en/ res artis
30. AIRY Artist in Residence Yamanashi http://air-y.net/ res artis

Appendix 9

[III-1] ”AIR: Open Talk about Artist in Residencies” Forum Documentation（Digest）
Vol1: 2005.12

Appendix 10

Appendix 11

5th Anniversary of Youkobo Art SpaceAIRs vol.1 Open Talk About Artist in Residencies

Organizers: Youkobo Art Space

Dates:
Day 1: 3rd December (Sat) 2005 15:00-18:00
Day 2: 10th December (Sat) 2005 15:00-18:00
Day 3: 17th December (Sat) 2005 15:00-20:00
Associated Event:
3rd December (Saturday) – 23rd December (Friday) 2005 12:00-20:00
Drop in Gallery
A collection of information on AIR from various regions of the world, along with a survey of artists
who have participated in AIR programs
Venue: Youkobo Art Space
Introduction
In Japan a movement towards discussion and debate has developed upon “Artist in Residence(AIR) programs” in which artists undertake a temporary stay and engage in creative practice.
However up until now there has not been much opportunity to hear the direct voice of artists who
have joined in participation of such programs. Here in the consideration of the possibilities of AIR,
we wish to give focus to the area of actually staying and making, proposing AIR, in their ability toconnect artists, art organizations and local communities, as one approach to art. Examining AIRfrom the perspective of artists and discussing their future possibilities, we wish to attempt toconcretely grasp the essential ability of AIR to provide an alternative art platform and to bringgreater clarity to importance of AIR and their key features. This event is proposed as a long term
engagement in which we plan to collate as a report. We hope this will form one stone in thebuilding towards research in connection with the conditions of the current art system, the relationof art with society and the promotion of international cross cultural exchange.

Event Overview
Taking “AIRs – The Possibilities of Artist in Residencies” as this event’s theme here artists who have
had experience of joining artist in residence programs will share their encounters through slides,
video and skype, providing an opportunity to exchange information in a relaxed atmosphere andreconsider the true essence of AIR. Over 3 consecutive Saturdays artists here have the chance toconnect with other artists and art organizers to speak directly of what the residence was like, andwhat they did there, honestly informing those who may have no experience of residencies as to
how it really was. In parallel to this “artist lounge” Youkobo also presents a “drop in gallery” inwhich documents, interviews, video and work relating to the artists’ time spent in various
residencies is exhibited. Furthermore a AIR information corner is also provided, along with a surveyof artists experiences of AIR.

Appendix 12

DAY 1: 3rd December 2005 Moderator: Tatsuo Inagaki, Kaoru Motomiya
Tatsuo Inagaki - Artist
Inagaki has participated in residence programs in numerous countries including Japan, Mexico,
Turkey, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Korea, Philippines, Thailand and Australia, with aparticular focus upon community engagement projects.
Hiroshi Egami – Artist
Director of the artist led Abiko Open Air Exhibition, which was rebranded in 2005 as the AbikoInternational Open Air Exhibition, developing a deep relation with the neighbourhood of Abiko. Inorder to invite international artists to join this event a residence facilities are provided.
Naoyuki Yamaguchi – Architect
Organizer of Yao Slow Art Show, held in an abandoned school in Yao, Toyama.
To date he has held two events in which he invites artists to stay in the local area while hecontinues to build his relation with the local area as an architect. Artists stay in the school during
their production period.
DAY2: 10th December 2005 Moderator: Tatsuo Inagaki, Kaoru Motomiya
Kaoru Motomiya- Artist

She has undertaken residencies in Australia, Thailand and in several areas around America andCanada. She has also joined symposiums and events such as “Artist in Residencies and the Matrixof Fortune” (Canada Embassy) and “Building Artist in Residence Partnerships” (Japan Foundation).
Kenji Endo
Organizer of Contemporary Artist in Residence Program Kanazawa (C.A.R.K). He has joined aresidence program between Kanazawa College of Art and Cork Artists Collective in Ireland. He is
also engaged in exchange residence programs with countries.
Shiro Masuyama
Masuyama has participated in residencies in Ireland, Germany, Austria, Spain and USA. He iscurrently in residence in Berlin. He is also at the centre of a network which aims to distributeinformation on artist in residencies. On this occasion he will join the talk event via skype.
Yoshiaki Kaihatsu – Artist
Kaihatsu has joined residencies in Germany, Canada and USA. He is the organizer of “Thank You
Art Day” held across the world on 9th March each year. On this occaision he will join us along with
Masuyama through skype and share information from on the ground in Germany.
Matoko Murata – Art Journalist
Murata has been engaged in an inspection of all artist in residence spaces associated with theJapan Foundation. He is currently the director of BANKART (Yokohama), where there is also a
residence provided for artists.

Appendix 13

DAY 3: 17th December 2005 Moderator: Tatsuhiko Murata
Aki Hoashi – ARCUS Director
ARCUS is an artist in residence program based in Moriya city, Ibaraki prefecture which hosts young
artists from the field of contemporary art, supporting close exchange with local people andoffering them a new opportunity to encounter art.
Chen Yi-Chien
Chen is participating in the 2005 ARCUS artist in residence program. She is currently studying at anart university in Taiwan. She presented the 2-d work “An Invitation” as part of her residency.
Yuri Takanashi - Artist
Joining sculpture symposia and residencies in Bolivia and Mexico he has built experience inworking with small scale, individual led art spaces which focus upon the artist and local
neighbourhood.
Atsushi Hosoi – Artist
Hosoi is a sculptor who has joined residencies in Macedonia, UK and USA. Here he will report uponeach of their different features and objectives which include production, lectures andexhibition.
Susana Roberdito - Artist
Born in Spain, currently resides in Germany. She is engaged in a 3 month residence at Youkobo. In
her studio she created 2d works depicting her impressions of Japan, presenting the final outcomein Youkobo’s gallery and a gallery space in Ginza.
Tatsuhiko Murata – Youkobo Art Space
Since 1980 Youkobo has been a place of arts engagement. Since 2001 Youkobo began its
concentrated activity as a small multi-purpose art space in Tokyo, providing an artist in residence
program, gallery and studios. Up until 2005 Youkobo has welcomed 70 artists from 15 countries
and is a member of Res Artis.
Drop in Gallery – Participating Artists
Tatsuo Inagaki, Hiroshi Egami, Tomoko Esashi, Kenji Endo, Misato Oka, Shinji Komiya, Shiro
Masuyama, Kaoru Motomiya, Kyougo Matsumoto, Naoyuki Yamaguchi, Ｃ.Ａ.Ｒ.Ｋ./Natsu Minami
Susana Roberdito, Chen Yi-Chien, Sam Smith + other past residents of Youkobo
・Exhibition Outline：
Tatsuo Inagaki /Project documentation from ＭｙＰｌａｃｅ（Turkey）、Griezedale Museum（UK）、NORDIC
ARTISTS' CENTRE DALE（Norway）+ others
Tomoko Esashi/Diary of residence in Scotland
Kenji Endo / “Reproduction” Photograph （Cork, Ireland）
Misato Oka/ “Night of Peace / Peace of Night”（Vermont, USA）
Shinji Komiya /Documents of residencies in Middlebury College , Vermont, USA, Rosenberg
Museum, Violín, Slovenia, Augustiner Chorherrenstift Monastry, Austria
Kyougo Matsumoto /“FOOTSTEPⅡ” （BankART Studio NYK/Kanagawa prefecture）
Shiro Masuyama /“7days of a week” DVD （Berlin, Germany）
Kaoru Motomiya/“water project”(Vienna, Austria) Diary of stay at Neighbours of the Headland、Ｃ．

Appendix 14

Ａ．Ｒ．Ｋ/Introductory DVD
Antti Ylonen（Finland）, Asuka Yokoyama, Ryozo Takashima /Unique Works of Trolls in the Park DVD
Sam Smith / “Tokyo EXERCISE SUITE 2005” Youkobo Resident （Australia）
Sarah Oppenheimer/ “A Study for Box Man” Youkobo Resident Artist（USA）
Susana Roberdito /“ Rainy day” Youkobo Resident Artist （Spain）
David Sawtell /Ferit Ozsen /Youkobo Resident Artist （Australia）

Youkobo Resident Artist （Turkey）

Marita Liulia / “Sublime” Youkobo Resident Artist（Finland）+ Others

Appendix 15

[ＩＩＩ-2] ”AIR: Open Talk about Artist in Residencies” Forum Documentation（Digest）
Vol.2: 2011.12

Appendix 16

Appendix 17

Tenth Anniversary of Youkobo Art SpaceAIRs vol.2 Open Talk About Artist in Residencies
Organizers: Youkobo Art Space
Support: Agency for Cultural Affairs, EU-Japan Fest Japan Committee
Cooperation: Asian Cultural Council, Embassy of the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg

Dates
Day 1: December 23, 2011 13:00-18:30
Day 2: December 24, 2011 16:00-19:00
Venue
Youkobo Art SpaceDAY 1 (Open Forum)
Part 1 “Joining Artist in Residencies”
This was a forum in which artists who have joined in AIR programs could share their experienceswith artists seeking to join such programs. In this event Fumiko Kobayashi and Tatsuo Inagaki
introduced the artist residence programs which they had participated in. Kobayashi commented
upon her stay at Hweilan International Artists Workshop (Taiwan), KHOJ KOLKATA (India),
GERTRUDE CONTEMPORARY ART SPACES (Australia), and Stiftung Künstlerdorf Schöppingen(Germany), displaying a wealth of experience in joining foreign residence programs throughwhich she has built up a significant career while taking Japan as her base. Inagaki meanwhile
introduced the residencies at Royal Holloway, University of London (UK), Nordic Artists' Centre in
Dale (Norway), 18th Street Arts Center (USA), Aomori Contemporary Art Centre, Grizedale Arts
(UK) and Compeung (Thailand), through which his artistic practice has come to form a process ofengagement with local people, strongly lining the participation in AIR programs to thedevelopment of his work and career. Furthermore Ritsu Yoshino of the Asian Cultural Council
presented, from the perspective of an organization which supports artists to undertake residencies,
the contents and objective of ACC’s program. Here there was deeper consideration towards theact of temporarily undertaking a base for work and everyday life overseas, and it was highlighted
that such opportunity allows the artist to further their network within society while also developing
motivation towards their next career step.
Part 2 Artist-Run AIR (Microresidence)
Here the artists Shih Yun Yeo (INSTINC, Singapore) and Hirofumi Matsuzaki (Studio Kura, Fukuoka)
who run their own artist in residence programs presented about their activities. They also have an
exchange program where they host the same artists and in addition to providing an environment
in which artists can make work they also provide examples of how AIR programs may instigate
exchange amongst artists and the building of a network.
After the forum we offered a tour of the Youkobo facilities, and introduced the residence artist
Stina Fisch who held an open studio session and explained about her work. In the gallery Kyougo
Matsumoto opened up his site of production where he was preparing for his solo exhibition to start

Appendix 18

the next month and presented a video work which he developed in a residence held through
Youkobo’s network with the Finnish residence “Art Break”.
Day 2 (Closed Network Meeting)Directors and associates of microresidencies in Singapore, Vietnam, Fukuoka and Tokyo came
together to share in discussion of their experiences in running microresidencies and the possibilitiesof developing a microresidence network. The following participants joined this meeting – Tatsuhiko
Murata (Youkobo Art Space co-director), Shih Yun Yeo (INSTINC director, Singapore), Hirofumi
Matsuzaki (Studio Kura director, Fukuoka) and via Skype Linh Phoung Nguyen (Nha San Studio
representative, Vietnam).
At first there was an introduction to the research already instigated by Youkobo Art Space into
microresidencies, sharing information gathered upon the various forms of residence program, theirtrends and characteristics which have been identified through analysis and going on to set thescene for debate as to what form a microresidence network should take and what possibilities it
may hold. (Note)
In the first half of the meeting each member introduced their motive for initiating a residence,along with its background and their model of management while sharing their perspectives upon
the importance of microresidencies. In the second half they engaged in debate as to how tobuild an effective network which can ensure mutual benefit for all members, while increasing thevisibility of microresidencies. Here it was suggested that the important role of microresidencies
consists of offering an opportunity for young artists with limited experience to bypass the large
scale institutional residencies and take on a space where they may engage in various
experiments, while these residencies also flexibly adapt to the needs of the artists and build up
long term relationships through this. With this objective in mind various concrete means of creatinga platform for the sharing of information, resources, advice and promoting collaboration andinternational exchange were considered.
There were various proposals as to the structure of such a network but there was a consensus on
the point that the network should rest responsibility on each member in a decentralized format.
With the future view to building a website, it was suggested that at first that the members engage
in dialogue first via Facebook, Ustream and various other SNS. There were also a range ofsuggestions of how the members may cooperate together through an artist database, the sharingof critics/curators contacts, collaborative touring exhibitions and exchange programs forexample.
Through this discussion the direction of the microresidence network became clearer. The
communication between members was deepened and various collaboration projects between
Youkobo, INSTINC and Studio Kura have been moulded. Continuing on from this 2012 has becomea year in which the possibilities of a microresidence network have been given even greater spacefor debate.

Appendix 19

Ⅳ． Research Group Members on AIR & Microresidencies

Research Members-Youkobo Art SpaceHiroko Murata: Director
Tatsuhiko Murata: Co-director
Meiko Kobayashi: Staff (2002~05) / AIRs Open Talk About Artist in Residencies Vol.1, 2005
Yuri Kabata: Staff (2004~) / AIRs in China
Yuko Kodera: GIP (Global Internship Program) Intern 2007 / AIRs in Netherlands
Jaime Humphreys: GIP Intern 2008 / AIRs in UK
Marta Gracia: GIP Intern 2009 / AIRs in Spain and Latin America
Keiko Suzuki: Staff (2009~) / AIRs in Asia and Scandinavia 、 AIRs Open Talk About Artist in
Residencies Vol.2, 2011
Utako Shindo: Staff (2011~), GIP Intern 2010 / AIRs in Australia
Emma Ota: Staff (2011~), GIP Intern 2011 / AIRs in Asia, Research & Analysis 2011~
Co-operators
Gorun Ozsen: Architect / AIRs in Europe 1989~2007
Ferit Ozsen: Artist / AIRs in Europe 1989~
Antti Ylönen: Artist / AIRs in Finland 2002~
Kaisa Kerätär：Environmentalist & Director of ArtBreak / AIRs in Finland 2002~
Maria Tuerling: Director of Trans Artists / AIRs in the world 2002~
Marleen Wijngaarden: Artist / AIRs in Netherlands 2004~05
Elizabeth Mead: Artist / AIRs in USA 2003
Iskra Dimitrova: Artist / AIRs in Macedonia 2003
Margaret Shiu：Director of Bamboo Culture International / AIRs in Asia 2005~
Valerie Jomini: Designer / AIRs in Switzerland 2006
Stanislas Zimmermann：Architect / AIRs in Switzerland 2006
Luis Recoder & Sandra Lee Gibson / AIRs in New York 2009
Tamiko O’brien & Mark Dunhill: Artists / AIRs in UK 2010
Takahiro Ishii：Artist / AIRs in Germany 2011~
Yoshie Sasaki：Designer / AIRs in Western Europe 2011~
Julie Upmeyer：Artist & Director of Caravansarai / AIRs in Istanbul 2012~
Res Artis
TransArtists
J-AIR Network forum
Intra Asia Network
AIR-J
Trans Cultural Exchange

Appendix 20

The Macro Possibilities of a Micro Art Space-An Interim Report on Microresidence Research

Accreditation

Editor-in Chief: Tatsuhiko Murata
Editors:

Utako Shindo,

Emma Ota

Translation: Emma Ota, Jaime Humphreys, Utako Shindo

Publisher : Youkobo Art Space
167-0041
Tokyo Suginami-kuj Zempukuji 3-2-10
Tel: +81(0)3-5930-5009 FAX:+81(0)3-3399-7549
Date of Release: June 2012
© Youkobo Art SpaceThis report may viewed online at www.youkobo.co.jp