Abstract
This article examines the conceptual referents of the term ‘creative’ as used in the terms ‘creative industries’, ‘creative class’ and ‘creative city’. The way in which these conceptually divergent usages can be conflated, and the difficulties this poses for policy, is considered with a particular focus on the deployment of the term within the current ‘Liverpool Cultural Strategy’. It is argued that both within and without the purview of this strategy, multiple aims for policy intervention are obscured by the use of this single term. It is also argued that this obfuscation is encouraged by a Floridian conception of creativity as a single, unified entity, but that the adoption of such a Floridian conception is not followed through to Florida's ultimate conclusions regarding the potential for the adoption of the creative agenda to exacerbate social problems.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
