Ukraine’s cultural and creative sectors have flourished since the Euromaidan revolution, helping the country to counter divisive Russian narratives and develop a greater sense of national identity.
Following Ukraine’s Euromaidan revolution of 2013–14 and Russia’s subsequent aggression against the country, Ukraine experienced an impressive cultural revival. From publishing to music, film production to theatre, fashion to curated exhibitions, the Ukrainian cultural scene grew in boldness, diversity and scale. The Euromaidan movement spurred a powerful wave of cultural activism, involving among other things the establishment of platforms for debates, the holding of pop-up exhibitions, urban regeneration projects, and initiatives by volunteer groups to protect crumbling national heritage sites around the country.
This revival drew on the dynamism of Ukraine’s grassroots creative community. In time, it was further sustained by funding from a network of new state institutions for culture – such as the Ukrainian Cultural Foundation (UCF), the Ukrainian Book Institute and the Ukrainian Institute – that emerged in the years following the Euromaidan movement. Institutions with a longer history, such as the Ukrainian State Film Agency, also had their capacity bolstered.
The creation of new institutions signalled a departure from the post-Soviet system of cultural management, and a move towards a consistent and comprehensive cultural policy. Most significantly, the creation of a new ecosystem of culture helped to bridge the gap between the state and independent cultural actors. This research paper will trace the roles played by different groups of actors – grassroots cultural activists, ruling elites, and external cultural relations organizations – in fostering this change. While the new institutions made important steps in asserting their independence vis-à-vis the respective ministries to which they are attached, they have remained vulnerable to political pressures and external shocks, including the economic and societal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Culture has been central to the state’s response to the threat from Russia since 2014. As Russia has continued its hybrid warfare against Ukraine, and has sought to create identity cleavages in society by promoting divisive historical and cultural narratives, Ukraine has demonstrated a high degree of resilience to this threat by pursuing a more robust identity policy through the activities of state institutions in the field of culture and identity. The policies of these institutions, together with the above-mentioned burst of cultural output and grassroots cultural activism, have contributed to the development of a new sense of civic national identity based on shared values of trust, tolerance, open access and pluralism, and relying in part on horizontal networks.
Grassroots cultural activism in Ukraine has helped to mitigate the consequences of the ongoing conflict in Donbas in the east of the country. More broadly, in the context of Ukraine’s nationwide process of political decentralization in the past few years, such activism has supported the transfer of decision-making powers from the centre to the periphery. In many cases, cultural initiatives have provided the initial impetus for efforts to strengthen local communities across Ukraine’s regions – giving them a voice, shaping the agenda for the regeneration of industrialized areas (especially in Donbas), and building partnerships with local government and business. In the war-torn Donbas region, cultural activism has helped people to overcome conflict-related trauma and has strengthened community resilience.
Rather than being viewed as a drain on state finances, culture is increasingly considered an important contributor to the national economy.
This flourishing of culture has helped to shift popular perceptions about the role and utility of culture in public life. Rather than being viewed as a drain on state finances, culture is increasingly considered an important contributor to the national economy, capable of generating profits, creating employment, and fostering innovation and social inclusion. Creative industries have become prominent in the policy discourse. However, state support to the sector remains weak.
