Centuries have passed since British culture, at the height of its empire, dictated global aesthetics, social standards and education. The British influence once extended far beyond colonial control, shaping tastes around the globe—there’s a reason English remains the world’s lingua franca, cemented through trade, diplomacy and an enduring knack for storytelling. While British literature, music and film experienced a resurgence in global popularity over the past fifty years—from the Beatles to Harry Potter—the country’s cultural exports have lost their glam in the aftermath of Brexit, with few exceptions like streaming sensation Bridgerton.
Enter the Labour government, which aims to reestablish the country’s global influence, investing in its soft power through its cultural and creative industries. To achieve this goal, it established the “Soft Power Council,” a 26-member advisory body designed to leverage British cultural clout for diplomatic and economic gain. Foreign Secretary David Lammy put it plainly in a statement: “That is why I have created the Soft Power Council to channel British expertise as we look to re-imagine Britain’s role on the world stage, reinvigorate alliances and forge new partnerships.”
Notably, the decision comes after years of public policies that have slashed the U.K.’s art and culture budget. Local government funding has fallen by 48 percent since 2017, while arts subjects have been downgraded and almost eliminated from school curricula.
“Soft power is fundamental to the U.K.’s impact and its worldwide reputation. I am often struck by the enormous love and respect our music, sport, education and institutions generate on every continent,” Lammy told the press. “But we have not taken a sufficiently strategic approach to these huge assets as a country. Harnessing soft power effectively can help to build relationships, deepen trust, enhance our security and drive economic growth.”
The numbers back him up. In 2023, Britain’s cultural sector pumped an impressive £36 billion into the economy, supporting 9,755 businesses. The broader creative industries contributed a staggering £124.6 billion—5.7 percent of the country’s gross value—employing 2.4 million people.
SEE ALSO: Afghanistan’s Art Scene Weighs in On Taliban Move to Ban Images of Living Things
Lisa Nandy, Secretary of State for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, doubled down on the economic argument at a recent conference. “We are determined to strengthen our soft power abroad and, in turn, deliver a major boost to our economy as we focus on our missions to create jobs and spread opportunity across the U.K.,” she said. The government is putting money where its mouth is: on January 17, Nandy announced a £60 million funding boost for creative industries. “From the Premier League and Peaky Blinders to Adele and the BBC World Service, Britain’s cultural exports showcase the best of Britain around the world,” she added. “When international investors look to the U.K., it is so often our iconic sporting events, performing arts, media outlets and creative industries that make the U.K. such an attractive place to grow and invest.”
The Soft Power Council will serve as an advisory body, stacked with major players from Britain’s cultural scene. Chaired by Lammy and Nandy, the council includes heavyweights such as Victoria and Albert Museum director Tristram Hunt, Royal College of Art chair and pro-chancellor Peter Bazalgette and Roland Rudd, a member of Tate’s board of trustees. Also on board is Ewan Venters, former chief executive of Artfarm, the hospitality arm of Hauser & Wirth—a growing art empire that has brilliantly blurred the lines between culture and commerce.
A nation at the forefront of cultural-led development strategies
The U.K. currently ranks among the top three nations across all major soft power indices, a testament to its long-standing leadership in cultural policy, creative economy research and the art of turning cultural capital into economic growth. For years, British academics have dissected and tested the impact of artistic and creative industries, demonstrating how they can spark regeneration and drive local development.
Cultural-led development strategies have been in play across England and Wales since the early 2000s, with local councils pioneering initiatives that transformed entire regions. The creative reinvention of Newcastle and Gateshead in the North of England, for instance, is proof that culture is a joint tool for the development of a society’s human and social capital. In the late ’90s, a local arts and cultural organization called Northern Arts convinced the government to back an ambitious regeneration plan dubbed Case for Capital. The strategy funneled £400 million into the cultural sector, focusing on infrastructure, education and local identity—an early model of what we now recognize as a “cultural district.”
Newcastle seized the opportunity by leaning into its rich cultural heritage, directing funds toward the urban redevelopment of the historic city center, Grainger Town, which created not only new commercial spaces but also public art, cultural venues and social services. The numbers speak for themselves: 106 new jobs, 286 businesses, 289 new homes, 70 buildings restored and £145 million in private investment attracted to the area. Meanwhile, Gateshead took a different route, opting to rebrand itself through contemporary culture and landmark cultural venues. The city funneled funding into transforming its neglected Quayside into a world-class cultural promenade, anchored by the Baltic Centre for Contemporary Art (opened in 2002), the state-of-the-art Sage Gateshead music center and the striking Millennium Bridge, connecting the two halves of Gateshead in a statement of cultural ambition.
These case studies of cultural-led local development show how a joint investment in both cultural infrastructure and local governance allowed not only a complete transformation of the cities’ image, perception and attractiveness but also created new economic and cultural opportunities. Cultural participation surged, communities became more engaged and a virtuous cycle of sustainable development took hold, fostering the development of the region over an extended period.
For decades, the U.K. has been at the forefront of concepts like “Creative Cities,” cultural quarters and the strategic use of culture in urban regeneration. British experts have gone further than just implementing these ideas—they’ve measured their impact, quantifying how cultural consumption fuels innovation and growth. The logic is simple but profound: the more diverse the cultural experiences available, the broader the framework through which individuals interpret reality and shape their actions. Much like Newcastle and Gateshead, cities across Britain have used cultural-led redevelopment to counteract the economic devastation of deindustrialization, creating alternative revenue streams, enhancing their reputations and improving overall quality of life.
Meanwhile, institutions like the British Council have played a pivotal role in fostering cultural exchange and championing creative industries on the global stage. Though years of austerity threatened the sector’s momentum, the tide may finally be turning.
Soft-power strategies in other parts of the world
In recent years, we have seen how some countries have successfully rewritten their global narratives by making strategic, big-money investments in culture and creative industries. South Korea stands as one of the most striking examples: since the late 1990s, the South Korean government has aggressively backed its entertainment industry, recognizing it as a vehicle for both national branding and economic growth. The result was the now seemingly un unstoppable “Korean Wave,” which started with K-pop’s infectious hooks and K-dramas’ irresistible binge-worthiness but has since expanded into art, fashion, beauty, food and even language learning. At the time, South Korea borrowed liberally from Japan’s playbook, which propelled its culture to global prominence in the ’90s and early 2000s. But unlike its neighbor, Japan’s cultural dominance faded, and despite recent efforts by the Japanese government to regain lost ground, it has yet to recreate the same level of international obsession.
Meanwhile, cultural budgets have taken a beating in the U.S., with one of the most dramatic being Governor Ron DeSantis’s veto of Florida’s entire $32 million state arts budget, impacting over 600 organizations. The NYC’s Department of Cultural Affairs also faced budget cuts exceeding $25 million in recent rounds, pushing many organizations’ budgets into deficits and forcing them to cut staff, programming and services, although these entities are calculated to contribute at least a $110 billion value to the city’s economic activity. The uproar generated by the contested decision eventually forced New York City Mayor Eric Adams to reconsider—he ultimately restored $111 million in cultural funding for the year.
While Trump’s agenda has practically no mention of culture, and there was nothing about cultural policies in his inaugural speech celebrating a new “golden age of America,” his administration is expected to profoundly affect the sector. Immediate concerns revolve around trade, particularly the tariffs he’s itching to impose, but broader anxieties loom over the ideological direction his policies might take. Artists and institutions are already bracing for further funding cuts and the ever-present specter of censorship.
