[Paper Review] La Loi organique relative aux lois de finances (LOLF) dans les institutions culturelles publiques du spectacle vivant en France

Ammar Kessab|ArXiv.org|Apr 24, 2009

French Urban and Social Studies1 references3 citations

TL;DR

This paper analyzes the implementation of France's Organic Law on Finance Laws (LOLF) in public performing arts institutions, examining how performance indicators and targets were introduced to modernize state management. It reveals that while LOLF aimed to enhance accountability and efficiency, it sparked controversy over its rigid metrics and unintended consequences on artistic autonomy and institutional flexibility.

ABSTRACT

In a crisis of public finances, France bases all its hopes on the "evaluation of performance" to moderate the effects of a complex crisis. Under the banner of "modernization of the State", a new "financial constitution" called the Organic Law on finance laws (LOLF) became the main lever of reform of public management. Fully applied to the Cultural Affairs since 2006, the LOLF is based on a set of performance indicators and sets the public performance arts institutions specific targets. This article defines and analyzes the pattern of the design and the course of these indicators and targets. It also examines the controversy generated by this new mode of governance.

Motivation & Objective

• To investigate the design and implementation of performance indicators under the LOLF in French public performing arts institutions.
• To analyze how the LOLF's performance-based governance model affected institutional management and decision-making.
• To explore the controversies and tensions arising from the introduction of quantitative targets in culturally sensitive public institutions.
• To assess the impact of the 'modernization of the state' agenda on artistic institutions' operational autonomy and cultural mission.

Proposed method

• Qualitative analysis of policy documents and institutional reports related to LOLF implementation in French cultural institutions.
• Case study approach focusing on public performing arts institutions subject to LOLF reforms since 2006.
• Thematic analysis of institutional responses, debates, and critiques surrounding performance indicators.
• Comparative examination of pre- and post-LOLF governance models in cultural sectors.
• Use of institutional theory to interpret shifts in management practices and power dynamics.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How were performance indicators and targets structured under the LOLF in public performing arts institutions?
• RQ2 What were the institutional and managerial consequences of applying financial performance metrics to culturally sensitive organizations?
• RQ3 How did the introduction of LOLF affect artistic autonomy and institutional identity in public cultural institutions?
• RQ4 To what extent did the LOLF achieve its stated goal of modernizing public management in the cultural sector?
• RQ5 What were the main sources of controversy and resistance to the LOLF's implementation in the performing arts sector?

Key findings

• The LOLF introduced a standardized framework of performance indicators that redefined accountability in public cultural institutions.
• Institutional managers reported increased administrative burdens due to the need to meet quantified targets.
• The reform led to tensions between financial accountability and artistic mission, particularly in institutions with long-standing autonomy.
• Controversy emerged over the perceived incompatibility of rigid performance metrics with the inherently qualitative nature of artistic work.
• Despite the modernization agenda, the implementation of LOLF did not uniformly improve institutional efficiency or transparency.
• The study highlights a governance gap between centralized financial control and decentralized artistic practices in public cultural institutions.