_The Cultural Trade Index_ Page | **12** of **14**

# **V. Conclusion**

“There is no indicator that can capture something as complex as our society,” as Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen and Jean-Paul Fitoussi argue in Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn't Add <u>Up. “Even if we succeeded in constructing the perfect measure for today, changes in our economy</u> and our society would necessitate” constant revisiting.<sup>33</sup> The Cultural Trade Index (the focus of this discussion) is a modest beginning, one that intends to consider one sliver of trade in our society. Moreover, the data feeding into this index will need to be improved. That said, the index could stimulate debate on how creative trade could better be harvested for development.<sup>34</sup> The complimentary index on cultural exchanges (even if pursued with great care) will also have limitations, and in both cases these indices must be interpreted with caution. Yet we cannot move forward by just focusing on limitations. We need to focus on possibilities.

In the intellectual space, moreover, the debates can be endless. For instance, it is not easy to tell where all the parts and even services that go into making a piano in China (or elsewhere) originate. Also, in distinguishing between goods and services, while it is plausible, there is no need to know how to play the piano to make or assemble the piano. Whereas to make a movie (as an actor) you need to act. Another issue is the measuring of the quality of goods and services, a task difficult to execute,<sup>35</sup> yet it can be a marker of progress.

In our constantly changing world, as Coyle accentuates, “we now have an economy dominated by services and intangibles, with _much_ greater variety of products and closely linked across national boundaries.”<sup>36</sup> In the cultural context, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, global trade in creative goods and services reached a record 624 billion in 2011.<sup>37</sup> What is more, these billions do not include informal trade activities that directly and indirectly support livelihoods across the world.

Again, the CTI will not answer to all we need to know about cultural trade. But it may help explain what we understand and what we do not. This, among other benefits, is likely to encourage debate and inform policies that advance cultural activities in economic diversification and meaningful development. It may also help organizations and countries see the need to allocate scarce resources to develop national cultural statistics. On that end, sufficient resources have to not only be made available to collect data. They also have to be made available to analyze and to effectively use the data.<sup>38</sup>

> 33 Stiglitz, Sen, and Fitoussi 2010, p. xxvii.

> 34 See Kabanda 2016a.  This exercise could also lead to the development of the Cultural Commerce Index (CCI), or the Cultural Domestic Product (CDP).  Unlike the CTI, the CCI (or the CDP) would account for not only the cultural exports and imports, but also for the country’s overall cultural economy.  Think of it as GDP minus everything else except the commerce of cultural goods and services.  The International Trade Index (ITI) may also be considered.

> 35 For related discussions See Stiglitz, Sen, and Fitoussi 2010, p. 9; Coyle 2015, pp. 35, 130, 145; and Mwabu 2016. 36 Coyle 2015, p. viii.

> 37 UNCTAD 2013.

> 38 <mark>See Mwabu 2016.</mark>