Who wants a Public Art Network

At the expert meeting on percentage art (the only pan European meeting of its type, Hague 2005) the following question was tabled : “Is there a need for a European organisation or network that supervises and commissions artworks and architecture for buildings which are part of the European Community? Is this question still relevant? Perhaps it should now be about "Responding to growth of the sector and interest in public art"? or "Responding to debate on professional practice and networking"?. Or simply is it just the absence of connectivity within the area? Does continued growth create a demand for association & sharing? Is it a means of challenging regulation led policy? or changes without consensus? Is percent for art a thing of the past? Is the proliferation of public art operators and a lack of resources and guidelines a reason? Should a network advocating for professionalism and standards of practice? Could a network aid in developing innovative working models? Jim Doyle

Public Art of the Sustainable City (View)

What are the Benifits of Professional Dialogue on Public Art

The following are some of the benifits for me: Cultural competency for the artists is enhanced via a dialogue with other artists. The skills base is extended by experiencing other and alternative approaches. The product it self is enhanced through peer critique. The experience is enhanced because the audience plays a dominate role in public art - the artistic / cultural dialogue is focused in one direction: Audience. Shared interests in questions important to Public Art connects artists. Jim Doyle