Juha Oksanen, Olli Kuusisto, Maria Lima-Toivanen, 
Maria Mäntylä, Mika Naumanen, Nina Rilla, Anna 
Sachinopoulou, Katri Valkokari 

In search of Finnish creative economy 

ecosystems and their development 

needs – study based on international 

benchmarking  

October 2018 

Publication series of  
the Government’s analysis, 
assessment and research  
activities  50/2018 



 

 

 

DESCRIPTION 

 

Publisher and release date Prime Minister´s Office, 8.10.2018 

Authors Oksanen Juha, Kuusisto Olli, Lima-Toivanen Maria, Mäntylä Maria, 

Naumanen Mika, Rilla Nina, Sachinopoulou Anna, Valkokari Katri 

Title of publication In search of Finnish creative economy ecosystems and their develop-

ment needs – study based on international benchmarking 

Name of series and number  

of publication 

Publications of the Government´s analysis, assessment and research 

activities 50/2018 

Keywords Creative economy, ecosystem, creative skills 

 Other parts of publication/ 

other produced versions 

 

Release date October, 2018  Pages 155 

 

Language English 

Abstract 

This report reviews the status of domestic creative economy ecosystem development, benchmarks cre-

ative economy focused policies and models in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the Republic of 

Korea (South Korea), and gives recommendations on how to support cross-sectoral use of creative 

competencies in ecosystem development in Finland. In the review of creative economy in Finland, crea-

tive activities are grouped into four categories (creative and cultural products, creative content, creative 

services, creative environments and platforms) that differ from each other in terms of value creation 

logic, easiness of scalability and recycling of intangible value, and the role of interaction and communi-

ties in the value creation process. This categorisation has been applied in updating the creative sector 

fact sheets.  

International benchmarking shows that official recognition, champions and organisations are needed to 

establish a common voice for creative sector actors. These have had an important enabling role for pro-

active policies supporting the creative sectors’ development. Strengthening of creative activities and 

connecting them firmly to wider regional and national networks across the economy are on policy 

agenda in all the three benchmarking countries. Supporting cross-sectoral collaboration and wider use 

of creative competencies calls for a clear national policy recognising pivotal role of regional hubs, atten-

tion to fostering practise oriented business skills in initial education, and flexible arrangements for ac-

cessing complementary expertise and facilities. To improve the availability and relevance of data on 

creative activity, we propose to study and pilot the use of textual data and text mining techniques to 

complement official statistics on economic activities, and systemise data collection on publicly funded 

projects. For ecosystem development, the public-private partnership model based growth engine initia-

tives of Business Finland could offer a platform for cross-sectoral collaboration and for connecting re-

gional hubs with national and global ecosystems. 

This publication is part of the implementation of the Government Plan for Analysis, Assessment and 

Research for 2018 (tietokayttoon.fi/en). 

The content is the responsibility of the producers of the information and does not necessarily repre-

sent the view of the Government. 



 

 

 

KUVAILULEHTI 

 

Julkaisija ja julkaisuaika Valtioneuvoston kanslia, 8.10.2018 

Tekijät Oksanen Juha, Kuusisto Olli, Lima-Toivanen Maria, Mäntylä Maria, 

Naumanen Mika, Rilla Nina, Sachinopoulou Anna, Valkokari Katri 

Julkaisun nimi Luovan talouden ekosysteemikehityksen tila ja kehitystarpeet– Kan-

sainväliseen vertailuun perustuva selvitys 

Julkaisusarjan nimi ja  

numero 

Valtioneuvoston selvitys- ja tutkimustoiminnan julkaisusarja 50/2018 

Asiasanat luova talous, ekosysteemit, luova osaaminen 

Julkaisun osat/ 

muut tuotetut versiot 
 

Julkaisuaika Lokakuu, 2018 Sivuja 155 

 

Kieli englanti 

Tiivistelmä 

Tämän selvityksen tavoitteena on ollut tuottaa uudelleen jäsennelty ja päivitetty versio luovien alojen 

ekosysteemitiedoista, kartoittaa luovan talouden kehittämismalleja Britanniassa, Hollannissa ja Etelä-

Koreassa, ja tehdä ehdotuksia luovan osaamisen monialaisen hyödyntämisen ja ekosysteemikehityk-

sen edistämiseksi sekä päätöksenteossa tarvittavan luovaa taloutta koskevan tietopohjan vahvista-

miseksi. Luova toiminta on selvityksessä jaettu neljään luokkaan; taide ja kulttuuri, luovat sisällöt, luovat 

palvelut, sekä luovat ympäristöt ja alustat. Nämä eroavat toisistaan arvonluonnin logiikan, toiminnan 

skaalautuvuuden ja aineettoman arvon kierrätettävyyden osalta. Myös vuorovaikutuksen ja yhteisöjen 

rooli arvon luomisessa ja tuottamisessa vaihtelee luovien toimintojen välillä. Luokittelua on sovellettu 

luovien alojen ekosysteemitietojen päivityksessä.  

Kansainvälinen vertailu osoittaa, että luovien alojen yhteisen äänen vahvistamisessa on suuri merkitys 

toiminnan tunnistamisella päätöksenteossa, alan aktiivisilla puolestapuhujilla (champions) ja yhteisillä 

organisaatioilla. Luovan osaamisen ja luovan toiminnan vahvistaminen ja kytkeminen alueellisiin ja kan-

sallisiin verkostoihin toimialoja poikkileikkaavasti on huomioitu osana talouden kehittämistä kaikissa ver-

tailumaissa. Luovan osaamisen laaja-alainen hyödyntäminen ja monialaisen yhteistyön kehittyminen 

edellyttää alueellisten osaamiskeskittymien roolin huomioivaa selkeää kansallisen tason politiikkaa, käy-

tännön liiketoimintaosaamista sekä monialaista yhteistyötä tukevan toimintakulttuurin edelleen vahvista-

mista perusopinnoissa, ja joustavia malleja täydentävän asiantuntemuksen ja muiden resurssien hyö-

dyntämiseksi luovien alojen kehittämistoiminnassa. Business Finlandin kasvumoottori-aloite voisi toimia 

monialaisen yhteistyön alustana ja kytkeä alueelliset osaamiskeskittymät laajempiin ekosysteemeihin 

kansallisesti ja globaalisti. Luovien alojen toimintaa koskevan tiedon saatavuuden ja edustavuuden pa-

rantamiseksi selvityksessä ehdotetaan, että virallisten tilastoaineistojen täydentämiseksi selvitetään ja 

pilotoidaan tekstipohjaisten aineistojen ja tekstinlouhinnan mahdollisuudet. Lisäksi suositellaan julkista 

tukea saaneiden hankkeiden seurantatiedon systematisointia mm. käytettävien luokitusten osalta.  

Tämä julkaisu on toteutettu osana valtioneuvoston vuoden 2018 selvitys- ja tutkimussuunnitelman 

toimeenpanoa (www.tietokayttoon.fi). 

Julkaisun sisällöstä vastaavat tiedon tuottajat, eikä tekstisisältö välttämättä edusta valtioneuvoston 

näkemystä. 



 

 

 

PRESENTATIONSBLAD 

 

Utgivare & utgivningsdatum Statsrådets kansli, 8.10.2018 

Författare Oksanen Juha, Kuusisto Olli, Lima-Toivanen Maria, Mäntylä Maria, 

Naumanen Mika, Rilla Nina, Sachinopoulou Anna, Valkokari Katri 

Publikationens namn Ekosystemutvecklingens tillstånd i den kreativa ekonomin och dess ut-

vecklingsbehov - en studie baserad på internationell jämförelse 

Publikationsseriens namn  

och nummer 

Publikationsserie för statsrådets utrednings- och forskningsverksamhet 

50/2018 

Nyckelord Kreativ ekonomi, ekosystem, kreativt kunnande 

Publikationens delar /andra 

producerade versioner 

 

Utgivningsdatum Oktober, 2018 Sidantal 155 

 

Språk engelska 

Sammandrag 

Syftet med denna studie är att kartlägga status av ekosystemutveckling i den kreativa ekonomin och att 

uppdatera information om kreativa branscher i Finland, samt att utföra en jämförelse av utvecklingsåt-

gärder av den kreativa ekonomin i Storbritannien, Nederländerna och Sydkorea och att ge rekommen-

dationer om hur man stärker tvärsektoriell användning av kreativ kompetens och ekosystemutveckling i 

Finland. Den kreativa verksamheten delas in i fyra kategorier: konst och kultur, kreativa innehåll, krea-

tiva tjänster, kreativa miljöer och plattformar. Kategorierna skiljer sig åt gällande logik för värdeskap-

ande, verksamhetens skalbarhet och möjlighet att cirkulera immateriella värden. Rollen av samspel när 

det gäller att skapa och producera värde varierar också mellan de kreativa aktiviteterna inom olika kate-

gorier. Denna klassificering har använts för att uppdatera de så kallade faktabladen för de kreativa 

branscherna i Finland. 

Enligt en internationell jämförelse, behövs officiellt erkännande, förespråkare (champions) och organi-

sationer för att skapa en gemensam röst för den kreativa sektorns aktörer. Dessa har haft en viktig, 

möjliggörande roll för den proaktiva politik som stöder den kreativa sektorns utveckling till exempel i 

Storbritannien och Holland. Att stärka de kreativa aktiviteterna och ansluta dem till bredare regionala 

och nationella nätverk finns på agenda i alla tre länder. Ett tvärsektoriellt samarbete och bredare an-

vändning av kreativa kompetenser förutsätter 1) en tydlig nationell politik som erkänner de regionala 

kompetenscentrans viktiga roll, 2)  vidare främjande av praxisnära affärskompetenser och färdigheter 

som krävs för företagande inom grundutbildningen och 3) flexibla modeller för användningen av kom-

plementära kompetenser och andra resurser i utveckling och innovation inom de kreativa branscherna. 

Business Finlands PPP-baserade tillväxtmotorinitiativ kan fungera som en plattform för tvärsektoriellt 

samarbete och länka regionala kompetenscentra till bredare ekosystem nationellt och globalt. För att 

förbättra representativiteten av information om verksamheten inom de kreativa branscherna, föreslår 

rapporten att potentialen för textbaserat material och text mining utforskas och testas. Dessutom rekom-

menderas att datainsamlingen om offentligt finansierade projekt systematiseras. 

Den här publikation är en del i genomförandet av statsrådets utrednings- och forskningsplan för 

2018 (tietokayttoon.fi/sv). 

De som producerar informationen ansvarar för innehållet i publikationen. Textinnehållet återspeglar 

inte nödvändigtvis statsrådets ståndpunkt 



 

 

 

CONTENTS 
 
 

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2 

1.1. Background of the study ......................................................................................... 2 

1.2. Creativity and economic development .................................................................... 3 

1.3. Creative industries, creative economy and intangible value creation in Finland – 
Fast rewind ............................................................................................................. 4 

1.4. Systemic transition framework ................................................................................ 7 

2. Creative economy ecosystems and fact sheet updates ........................................... 9 

2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 9 

2.2. Updated information on creative economy ecosystems in Finland ...................... 14 

Creative and cultural products – key figures ................................................................. 20 

Creative content – key figures ...................................................................................... 22 

Creative services – key figures ..................................................................................... 24 

Creative environments and platforms – key figures ...................................................... 26 

2.3. Stakeholder insights on creative economy opportunities and challenges ............ 28 

2.4. Cross-sectoral collaboration in publicly funded projects....................................... 31 

3. International benchmarking ....................................................................................... 35 

3.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 35 

3.2. The United Kingdom ............................................................................................. 36 

3.3. The Netherlands ................................................................................................... 63 

3.4. South Korea .......................................................................................................... 76 

3.5. Lessons learned from the country benchmarks .................................................... 89 

4. Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 95 

4.1. Recommendations for supporting ecosystem development in a cross-sectoral 
context .................................................................................................................. 96 

4.2. Recommendations for developing information collection on creative areas and 
activities .............................................................................................................. 103 

5. References and Background material .................................................................... 109 

APPENDIX 1. Statistical analysis of Finnish creative industries ................................. 114 

APPENDIX 2. Stakeholder insights on creative economy opportunities and 
challenges .................................................................................................................. 147 



 

 

 

APPENDIX 3. Participants of the stakeholder workshop organised 16.3.2018........... 153 

APPENDIX 4. List of interviewed domestic stakeholders ............................................. 154 

APPENDIX 5. List of interviewed experts in the benchmark countries ....................... 155 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



 
 
 

 

 

2 
 

 
 

1. INTRODUCTION  

1.1. Background of the study 

This study has three objectives: 

• Review the status of creative economy ecosystems development in Finland and pre-

sent the results in an updated and newly arranged version of the creative sector Fact 

Sheets (original publication Facts Sheets Luovat alat 2010). 

• Benchmark models and policies used to advance creative economy development in 

the United Kingdom (UK), the Netherlands and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) 

– international forerunners in the design and implementation of proactive policies in 

favour of creative economy. 

• Identify and recommend actions supporting ecosystem development and embedding 

of creative competencies cross-sectorally in Finland1, and make recommendations 

for the improvement of systematic monitoring and assessment of creative economy 

development. 

Implementation and methods used 

The study consists of three work packages based on the above objectives. First work pack-

age (WP1) focuses on updating the creative economy Fact Sheets, the second (WP2) com-

prises the benchmark study of cross-sectoral policies and models in creative areas in three 

countries (United Kingdom, Netherlands and South Korea), and the third (WP3) outlines rec-

ommendations supporting ecosystem development in and beyond creative areas in Finland. 

In reviewing and updating the fact sheets (WP1), the sectors covered were re-grouped 

based on selected elements and characteristics derived using different data gathering and 

analysis methods.  

1. Review of existing literature and the 2010 Facts Sheets provided the background 

information for the fact sheet update and preliminary understanding of the constitu-

ent elements of creative economy in Finland. Our statistical analysis of creative 

growth potential replicates the method applied by NESTA2 in the United Kingdom 

and draws on official industry and occupation statistics. More detailed statistical in-

formation is provided in Appendix 1.   

 

2. A brainstorming workshop with key stakeholders was organised to discuss and de-

termine definitions of creative economy areas and identify ecosystems and their key 

players with the most significant growth opportunities. VTT’s online co-development 

tool Owela (https://owela.fi/) provided a platform for continued discussion with 

                                                      
1 The original objective was to develop a proposal for organisation and coordination of a creative economy ecosystem initiative as part of the activities of 
the newly established Business Finland and regional growth services under preparation in the context of regional reform. However, it was noticed during 
the process that creative domains conventionally clustered under the ‘creative industries’ label constitute a heterogeneous group of branches, which 
should be taken into account in support actions and policies. Therefore, proposals drafted in the report are based on the categorisation of creative sectors 
presented in Chapter 2 of this report. Furthermore, it seems that the individual branches also need branch-specific actions even if there are some com-

monalities under the four main areas. 

2 National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts 

http://pienyrityskeskus.aalto.fi/fi/midcom-serveattachmentguid-1e51322e19327ce132211e59e7b238047f535ba35ba/factsheets_luovat_alat_2010_final.pdf
https://owela.fi/


 
 
 

 

 

3 
 

 
 

stakeholders and for gathering insights on the potential and challenges of cross-

sectoral collaboration between creative and other sectors.  

3. In-depth interviews were carried out with 22 interviewees well versed in creative 

economy development in Finland. Appendices 3 and 4 lists the national interview-

ees and workshop participants. Key results of the review with analysis of the main 

strengths and weaknesses of ecosystem development in creative areas in Finland 

are presented in Chapter 2.  

 

Benchmarking of international practises (WP2) in the selected three countries focused 

on policies and arrangements that promote cross-sectoral collaboration, so-called crosso-

vers, in harnessing potential in intangible capital and creative competencies across the 

economy. The emphasis on crossovers is well-substantiated taking into account that crea-

tive competencies can be utilised and contribute to the competitiveness of the economy 

broadly beyond those sectors conventionally understood as creative. Comparison of interna-

tional practices is based on a review of relevant recent literature as well as telephone and 

skype interviews with identified experts in the benchmark countries (see Appendix 5 for list 

of international interviewees). In addition, local experts involved as subcontractors have 

contributed to the analysis in the case of the Netherlands and the UK. Chapter 3 of this re-

port consists of country reports and a summary of the main results of the international 

benchmark.  

In drafting policy recommendations (WP3), attention was paid to opportunities to advance 

ecosystem development and crossovers within and beyond creative sectors. The recom-

mendations should be interpreted against rearranged categories of creative sectors and dif-

ferent stages of ecosystem development. Creative sectors are heterogeneous groups of ac-

tors and differ from each other with respect to logic of action, immediate growth potential 

and opportunities for crossovers with other sectors of the economy. This variety needs to be 

taken into account in policies aiming to support ecosystem development and wider use of 

the potential that creative competencies hold for growth and internationalisation – one size 

does not fit all when it comes to policies targeting creative sectors.  

The recommendations for systematic monitoring and assessment of creative economy de-

velopment are based on a thorough analysis of existing official statistics on sectors and oc-

cupations in WP1, insights provided by the international benchmarks, and assessment of 

cross-sector collaboration at the project level in the case of three domestic funding instru-

ments. Cross-sector collaboration and demand for creative competencies are analysed for 

CreMa funding 2012-2017, the ESF-funded Creative Expertise programme, and the Innova-

tion Voucher of Tekes/Business Finland. The recommendations are presented in Chapter 4.  

1.2. Creativity and economic development 

Policy discussions on the importance of creativity for economic growth and development in 

different territorial frames have proliferated in Finland and abroad since the turn of the mil-

lennium. The rise of interest in the relationship between creativity and economy connects 

with the recent emphasis on innovation and differentiation as sources of competitive ad-

vantage in the context of increasing international competition. Indeed, creativity and innova-

tion are essentially part of the same process; creativity can be defined as an ability to com-

bine meanings and elements in novel ways, whereas innovation refers to the ability and 



 
 
 

 

 

4 
 

 
 

courage to transform creative ideas into new products, services and practices (adopted from 

the definitions given in the final report of the working group preparing a creativity strategy for 

Finland; Yksitoista askelta luovaan Suomeen, 2006). 

Drivers of the ‘creative turn’ listed in literature include on-going changes in industrial mass 

production and international division of labour, which call for new sources of sustainable 

growth and added value in (developed) economies. These changes are linked to a long-

term shift in economic structure as, in relation to GDP, share of services has continued to 

grow whereas share of industry producing tangible products has been in decline. Techno-

logical development, particularly ICT as a generic technology and the way it enables ever-

growing digitalisation of goods and services, is changing society rapidly. Digitalisation chal-

lenges existing practices while simultaneously creating new opportunities for immaterial 

value creation. Changes in lifestyle and values are also important drivers impacting con-

sumer perceptions and preferences and accentuating demand for intangible services and 

experiences. Furthermore, understanding of the concept of creativity has been widening 

over time. (e.g. Canadian Heritage, 2013) 

Several interrelated and partly overlapping constructs have been introduced to describe and 

explain the key role of creativity in economic and territorial development. Approaches focus-

ing on the sectoral dimension include, for example, cultural industries (UNESCO/GACD, 

2006), creative industries (Creative Industries Task Force, 1998), copyright industries 

(WIPO, 2003) and content industries. More encompassing constructs circulating in the dis-

course include experience economy (Pine and Gilmore, 1998), creative economy (Howkins, 

2001), and creative class (Florida, 2002), to name a few. 

In Finnish policy making, the contribution of creativity to economic development has been 

framed especially through three terms; creative industries, creative economy and intangible 

value creation. 

1.3. Creative industries, creative economy and intangible 

value creation in Finland – Fast rewind 

At the national level, the Ministry of Education and Culture (OKM) and the Ministry of Eco-

nomic Affairs and Employment (TEM and its predecessor KTM) are the principal public bod-

ies involved in the planning and implementation of policies connected with creativity and the 

integration of creative competencies in business and society in Finland. Starting from the 

late 1990s, the ministries have developed policies in close cooperation following a joint 

agenda. 

Since the early 2000s, the two ministries have published a number of strategic policy docu-

ments, reviews and assessments dealing with the promotion of creativity and wider use of 

creative competencies in the Finnish economy. As part of its mandate, the Ministry of Edu-

cation and Culture has focused on outlining and implementing policies supporting arts and 

culture and cultural export. Allocation of funding for product and service development in this 



 
 
 

 

 

5 
 

 
 

area is an important element of the support provided.3 National implementation of the Euro-

pean Social Fund programme is another policy instrument used to support expertise and in-

novation within the cultural and creative sectors and in cooperation with other sectors.4 The 

Ministry of Education and Culture has also been active in strengthening the knowledge base 

regarding the development of the cultural industries (development of so-called culture satel-

lite accounts in cooperation with Statistics Finland).  

The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment together with the agencies under its ad-

ministration have focused on supporting business development and promoting companies in 

search of new sources of value creation. A part of this support is funding for companies’ re-

search and development activities allocated by the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation - 

Tekes (now operating as Business Finland after merging with Finpro in 2018). Nationally co-

ordinated regional development programmes (e.g. AKO and KOKO programmes) have also 

provided channels to advance and tap into creative potential in business development and 

value creation.  

Figure 1 presents a selection of documents published by the two ministries over the past 

twelve years. In addition to those listed here, several other reviews and reports with specific 

recommendations have been prepared at the national level regarding, for example, public 

funding and its suitability for firms in creative industries, export of creative products and ser-

vices, and increasing use of design expertise in business, public sector and society.5  

 

Figure 1. Policy reports published by the Ministry of Education and Culture and the Ministry of Eco-
nomic Affairs and Employment 2006-2018. 

                                                      
3 The Ministry of Education and Culture allocates funding for the development of ideas into concepts, pilot projects, prototypes and demos in the form of 
DigiDemo, CreaDemo and CreMA subsidies, which are operated by the Promotion Centre for Audiovisual Culture AVEK. 

4 During the current programming period 2014-2020 the Ministry of Education and Culture and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment are 
jointly coordinating the implementation of a Creative Expertise programme aimed at advancing the integration and use of creative potential across sec-
tors.  

5 Funding is in focus for instance in ’Julkinen rahoitus luovien alojen yrityksissä’ by Ramboll Management Consulting in 2013 and ‘Luova raha. Näkökul-
mia luovien alojen rahoitukseen’ published in 2011 in context of creative economy strategic initiative administered by the Ministry of Economy and Em-
ployment. Reports on export include e.g. the project report of ‘Luova vienti’ (Creative export) project in 2011. Interim review of Design Finland programme 
assessed progress of the programme in 2017. 



 
 
 

 

 

6 
 

 
 

Our literature review shows that the policy focus in Finland has shifted gradually from more 

narrowly defined ‘creative industries’ towards the integration and use of creative competen-

cies across the economy (‘creative economy’) and the broader context of intangible value 

creation. Concurrently with this evolution towards intangible value co-creation, new con-

cepts have emerged: information society, bioeconomy, cleantech economy, circular econ-

omy, doughnut economics, platform and sharing economy are all referring to system-level 

changes in society and economy and the significant need to understand new competitive 

advantages (systemic transition is discussed in the next section). The dynamics of change 

reverberates and have impact on modes of production, distribution and consumption.   

In the early 2000s, in line with the international discussion, the concepts ‘creative industries’ 

and ‘creative economy’ were adopted in Finnish policy making to describe, analyse and 

make actionable the relationship between creativity and economic activities including ex-

ports. The emergence of the sector-focused ‘creative industries’ concept was linked with the 

awareness that the economic importance of sectors deemed creative was growing. In com-

parison, the ‘creative economy’ as a more extensive idea emphasised the potential contribu-

tion of creativity and creative capabilities to economic development irrespective of sectors. 

This would take place through a cross-sectoral approach integrating the creative sectors’ of-

ferings and competencies with the activities of other public and private sector actors. From 

this perspective, creative industries and creative economy focused policy making has had a 

twofold aim: to advance activities within the more narrowly defined creative domain, and to 

create the conditions for increased interaction and collaboration with actors from other sec-

tors using the creative competencies and skills residing in the creative sectors. 

Regarding creative industries, there has been no universally agreed standard definition of 

the fields covered by the concept.6 Consequently, especially the older policy documents in-

clude lists of sub-sectors included or longer descriptions delineating the domain of creative 

industries in Finland. For instance:  

- Koivunen (2004) lists almost 20 sub-sectors in a report dealing with the promotion 

and creation of favourable conditions for cultural exports.  

- Kaunisharju (2006) identifies 9 creative sub-sectors known for their commercial op-

erations in a study on the development of business activities in creative industries. 

- A strategy report on the development of entrepreneurship in the creative industries 

by 2015 presents a list of 14 creative sub-sectors (KTM 2007).  

The latest report also outlines a matrix model describing the interconnections between busi-

ness activities in the creative industries and other industry and service sectors – i.e. the cre-

ative economy. The model has since been used and further refined in a number of policy 

documents.7  

                                                      
6 There is conceptual ambiguity regarding the two concepts, which have been discussed in length especially in the older reviewed documents. In the case 
of the creative industries questions abound regarding the areas covered by the concept, as well as comparability of sub-sector activities. The sectors 
usually listed as creative present disparate domains of activity, follow different logic of action and use different business models and earnings logics – 

making policy-making a challenging task. 

7 For example, a report prepared by a joint working group of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment on growth and renewal from creativity 
(2012), the Government resolution on a development programme for intangible value creation 2014-2020 (2014), and the recent report of the working 
group on recognising the creative sectors as a driver of Finnish economy and employment (2017). 



 
 
 

 

 

7 
 

 
 

The search for a precise definition of creative industries has shifted to the background as 

the policy focus has moved away from a sectoral approach to the promotion of cross-sec-

toral collaboration. Indeed, the promotion of interaction between actors in an innovation-

driven economy has been a common theme of policy documents over the past 15 years. 

The development strategy for entrepreneurship in the creative industries by 2015 (ibid.) en-

visages cross-sectoral collaboration between companies from the creative and other sectors 

as an important source of development and creation of new offerings and innovation.  

A document jointly prepared by the Ministry of Employment and the Economy and the Minis-

try of Education and Culture (2011) outlines a way from scattered policies towards a crea-

tive economy ecosystem. The given understanding of the creative economy in the document 

denotes the use and application of the creative sectors’ competencies, products and ser-

vices widely in society and the economy. Creative competencies have significant potential to 

contribute and improve the competitiveness of the Finnish economy not only in sectors con-

ventionally classified as ‘creative’ but across the economy (TEM, 2011).  

In the same vein, the Government’s resolution on a development programme for intangible 

value creation 2014–2020 notes that creative activity – understood as individuals’ ability to 

create novel ways of working, service concepts, products and brands – characterises not 

only creative sectors but all kinds of organisations. While intangible value creation (e.g. in 

forms of R&D and innovation) is internally important in organisations, the resolution high-

lights that creativity takes place in different settings and often in collaborative arrangements 

across organisational and sectoral borders. 

More recently, the working group led by professor Anne Brunila (2017) did not consider the 

provision of an exact definition of creative sectors and creative economy as viable, as the 

boundaries between business sectors are in continuous flux (e.g. due to digitalisation). In 

the opinion of the working group, the full potential of creativity as a driver of the Finnish 

economy and competitiveness cannot be realised by promoting only those sectors conven-

tionally understood to be the core of creative activity. Rather, the task calls for ‘the efficient 

utilisation of intellectual capital, which is a driver of current and future economic growth, and 

creative competence as well as the generation of economic added value across the entire 

enterprising sector’ (ibid. 16). 

1.4. Systemic transition framework 

Ecosystem change in the creative economy context can be approached from a systemic 

perspective as a complex interactive process, an approach that has been highlighted in 

transition management research (e.g. Geels 2002, 2005, 2010). The systemic transition 

framework provides a tool to identify factors affecting the potential for change in institutional 

structures and actor networks over time. Figure 2 illustrates the core of the framework in 

which there are three analytical levels, from bottom up: 1. Niches, 2. Regimes/systems and 

3. Landscape. The niche level refers to so-called protected spaces, often spatially delimited, 

with flexible actor groups and rules, such as experimentation cultures and temporary collab-

oration arrangements, which intentionally aim to work as a springboard for variety and the 

emergence of innovation. The regime or system level describes established “actor networks 

with well-aligned rules within and between different regimes” (e.g. technological, industrial, 

market, governmental, and cultural) (Ulli-Beer 2013). The landscape denotes the external 



 
 
 

 

 

8 
 

 
 

environment and trends, which can bring pressure for change at the regime level but also 

incentivise experimentation. 

 

Figure 2. Systemic transition framework for analysing change in the creative field. (Adopted from 
Geels & Schot, 2007)  



 
 
 

 

 

9 
 

 
 

2. CREATIVE ECONOMY ECOSYSTEMS AND FACT 

SHEET UPDATES 

2.1. Introduction 

How is creative economy defined? 

In this study, the term creative economy is understood to include all creative areas of the 

economy (defined based on the general meaning of creative, i.e. having or showing an abil-

ity to make new things or think of new ideas). In essence, creative economy refers both to 

creative industries and creative work (see the definition provided by Higgs et al, 2008). The 

creative industries cover a range of economic activity involving the generation or exploitation 

of different immaterial creative competencies. Thus, it is possible that a creative industry 

sector has also non-creative jobs and creative work is done also in non-creative sectors.  

For the purposes of this study, i.e. aiming to explore the current status of the creative sec-

tors at Finland as well as to recognise future opportunities for growth, we have highlighted 

the integration of different creative competencies and cross-sectoral collaboration (Figure 

3). 

 

Figure 3. Creative competencies in different sectors8. 

Currently, both the traditional industries and the creative sectors are facing remarkable 

changes due to global trends such as digitalisation and servitisation (see Figure 2, systemic 

transition). Due to Finland’s high innovation capability, i.e. creativity and skilled work force, 

future opportunities can be found through cross-sectoral open-minded collaboration. One 

interviewee even stated that:  

                                                      
8 Adapted and modified from Higgs et al (2008). See Appendix 1 for the original classification. 



 
 
 

 

 

10 
 

 
 

‘We should get rid of sectoral thinking and the ‘innovation mantra’. Instead, in 

Finland we should focus strongly on understanding intangible customer value 

when seeking future development paths. We should be able to create products, 

services and brands that provide excellent customer experience through usabil-

ity, usefulness, attractiveness, beauty, meaningfulness and responsibility. In 

other words, we should focus on generating value for customers, users and 

consumers.’  

Finland’s economic growth and employment are highly dependent on the success of its ex-

port industry. Policy making must therefore consider the international competitiveness of the 

creative industries and possibilities to build crossovers that integrate novel bundles of both 

creative and non-creative competencies. 

What is an ecosystem? 

The ecosystem concept has been actively discussed in management research, bridging, for 

instance, system thinking and evolutionary economics. Several partially overlapping con-

cepts such as industrial, business, service, platform, innovation, and knowledge ecosystems 

have been utilised without clearly determining their interconnections. In addition, entrepre-

neurial ecosystems are also discussed, especially in the entrepreneurship policy literature. 

As an example, Autio and Levie (2017) have presented a model for collective management 

of entrepreneurial ecosystems in which policy makers can take a leading role by acting as a 

steward of the ecosystem and by engaging stakeholders to find ways to mutually coordinate 

their actions. In order to build future competiveness it is important to understand the logic of 

action in different types of ecosystem. 

Research has typically focused on one ecosystem at a time. However, in real-world systems 

the interests of the actors (i.e. organisations or individuals), that is, the ecosystem inhabit-

ants, come bundled together with multiple ecosystem parts. In an ecosystem, all actors 

have their own role to play and, in this way, they view the partially overlapping ecosystems 

from their own unique perspective. Relationships and interactions between ecosystem types 

therefore need to be analysed at several levels in order to understand how connections flow 

between different ecosystems in the real business world. (Valkokari, 2015) 

 

 
Ecosystems are formed from interaction and interlinkages between 

actors; in a business ecosystem the linkages are based on aligned 

business models, in a knowledge ecosystem on shared knowledge 

interests (Figure 4). 



 
 
 

 

 

11 
 

 
 

 

Figure 4.Three ecosystem types and their focus. 

The three ecosystem types form a continuous transformation process resembling a multi-

level model (see Figure 2, Systemic transition framework). The ecosystem types do not nec-

essarily follow each other one-by-one, i.e. by connecting several knowledge ecosystems an 

innovation ecosystem can emerge that can again transform into several emerging and exist-

ing business ecosystems (Figure 5). In section 2.3, therefore, we have not evaluated only 

business ecosystems related to creative sectors, but also key actors and actions in 

knowledge and, especially, innovation ecosystems. 

 

  

 

Renewal and growth of the economy requires interaction between the 
three ecosystem types: knowledge ecosystems exploring new 
knowledge and future competencies, innovation ecosystems boosting 
commercialisation and business ecosystems building growth. 
 



 
 
 

 

 

12 
 

 
 

 

Figure 5. Interconnection between ecosystem types. 

Regarding ecosystem development within the creative industries, the importance of vertical 

and horizontal coordination as well as a shared vision at the national level was mentioned 

as a key success factor several times during this study. The creative industries are among 

the most dynamic sectors of the economy and development activities have often been pro-

ject-based. Creative industry actors stated that continuity and long-term commitment has 

been at least partly missing at the national level. On the other hand, regional hubs have a 

strong position in organising creative ecosystem development activities. 

Creative competencies and future growth ecosystems  

A (creative) ecosystem can be defined as a community of connected, but disparate actors 

interacting within an environment and between each other. As with any ecosystem, it is a 

living community of interacting organisms and diversity is key to its health. These interac-

tions involve dependency relationships leading to feedback loops of causality and enabling 

self-organisation. Creative economy ecosystems can operate around a regional hub or a 

single sector such as the film industry. Thus, no single ecosystem includes all creative in-

dustry actors, creative ecosystems overlap with each other and with other sectors (in 

the next chapter the networked value co-creation between creative actors is described using 

the example of the dance industry). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the viewpoint of business and future growth, Finnish creative eco-
systems have limited resources or capabilities to grow independently. 
The potential for new growth exists instead in the intersections between 
creative competencies and other sectors in which Finland has strong 
know-how. 
 



 
 
 

 

 

13 
 

 
 

Value creation within the creative industries  

Similar to other value creation processes, creative industry value chains start from an initial 

(creative) idea, which then moves through a series of interlinked and often iterative stages 

to end customers, i.e. users of the value created. Value creation within the creative sectors 

typically occurs in networks of several actors with different backgrounds which bundle to-

gether due to their limited size9. The case example of dance production shown below repre-

sents this kind of value co-creation network, i.e. a project-based business ecosystem of ar-

tistic dance production, combining the value chain and the related business ecosystem. 

 
Figure 6. Value creation process within the creative sector. 

Nowadays, there is a need for collaboration between different actors, and user-driven inno-

vation is strongly emphasised. In other words, value chains are turning into value networks 

and ecosystems connecting a variety of actors through digital channels. For instance, in the 

media industry, since the emergence of social media the role of users has changed and end 

users now play active role in content production and dissemination. Thus, the value chain is 

undergoing radical restructuring, forcing traditional business models to be reconsidered.  

Although the Nordic countries have excellent dance sector infrastructure, the sector mainly 

comprises micro companies or individual freelance artists. Thus, networks could provide 

new opportunities for cross-sectoral collaboration, with new digital distribution channels uti-

lised and social media links built between sectors and with the customer. 

 

                                                      
9 Siil, Ragnar, Rekola, Sanna & Lindholm, Katariina (Editors); keðja, Sustainability Think Tank Report 2015: Recommendations for a Sustainable Nordic 
Baltic Dance Field. Erweko Oy. Original picture by Kuvitellen Oy. https://issuu.com/danceinfofinland/docs/recommendations_for_a_sustainable_d 



 
 
 

 

 

14 
 

 
 

Today’s digital distribution channels enable global scalability and connectivity of business 

models within several categories such as creative and cultural products (music industry), 

creative content (media) and creative environments (game industries). This scalability ena-

bles significant growth through internationalisation of actors and novel networks. However, 

the competition is also global. In addition, some companies also operating in the third cate-

gory in creative services such as design, fashion and lifestyle can use digital channels to 

find their own consumer market niche, build strong relationships with their customers, and 

boost interaction and community between their customers. These kinds of distributed com-

munities sharing values and interests are an example of changes in consumer behaviour 

brought about by globalisation and digitalisation. 

2.2. Updated information on creative economy ecosystems 

in Finland  

An extensive review of Finland’s creative sectors was conducted in 2010 (Fact Sheets 

Luovat alat), but since its publication significant changes have taken place within the crea-

tive fields as well as in the operational environment and market (see section 1.3). Intangible 

capital and technology enabled trends, particularly digitalisation, have become important 

drivers of growth and productivity. To support decision-making and policy design for the cre-

ative economy, an up-to-date overview of activities, actors and development needs in the 

creative sectors is required. The growth of the Finnish game industry in recent years pro-

vides an illustrative example of the value of intangible capital and creativity for exports and 

the national economy. Against this background, the objective was to rearrange and update 

the Fact Sheets covering the creative sectors in Finland. In particular, the aim was to iden-

tify the main focus areas of creative competencies that support future competiveness and 

growth.  

Evolution of creative sectors 

To gain an overview of the potential for growth in the use of creative competencies, we 

grouped the creative industries into four main categories (see Table 1): 1) creative and cul-

tural products, 2) creative content, 3) creative services and 4) creative environments and 

platforms. This categorisation is based on the slightly modified UNCTAD (United Nations 

Conference on Trade and Development) Creative Economy Network definition of creative 

sectors with four main areas (heritage, arts, media and functional creations)10. In addition, 

the categorisation into three sectors - scalable products (monistettavat tuotteet), creative 

services (palveluliiketoiminta), arts and culture (taide- ja kulttuuri)11- by the Ministry of Eco-

nomic Affairs and Employment as well as the framework used by Business Finland12 have 

been taken into account in our categorisation. 

                                                      
10 Through the Creative Economy Network, UNCTAD has proactively facilitated the sharing of knowledge and best practices, forging strategic alliances 
and networking among governments, creators, the business community and civil society. 

11 Public funding of companies in creative sector (Julkinen rahoitus luovien alojen yrityksissä), downloadable at https://tem.fi/docu-

ments/1410877/2864661/Julkinen+rahoitus+luovien+alojen+yrityksiss%C3%A4+17092012.pdf 

12 Wevolve & Finpro (2016). Suomen luova loikka 



 
 
 

 

 

15 
 

 
 

Table 1. Categorisation of creative sectors.

 

The first category (see Table 1), creative and cultural products, forms the core of the cre-

ative sectors, i.e. heritage and arts highlighting uniqueness. The value of this category lies 

in strengthening cultural heritage and identity building. In the second category, creative 

content, intangible value can be recycled repeatedly; the category includes the media, film 

and publishing sectors. The third category, creative services, integrates different branches 

of advertising, architecture and design in which intangible value is typically generated 

through an interactive process. Thus, creative competencies are utilised also in different ar-

eas of consulting services. This is a significantly growing area with future growth potential – 

service design, arts and wellness services are examples of these kinds of services. These 

are not included in the statistics presented in this study as they are typically categorised un-

der management consulting. The fourth sector, creative environments and platforms, fur-

ther highlights the importance of communities for building and sharing values.  

We cross-walked the Finnish creative occupation codes identified by the UK Department for 

Digital, Culture, Media and Sport – the most referred to international benchmark – with their 

International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) equivalents. We then compiled 

estimates of national employment in the creative economy and creative industries, separat-

ing out creative and non-creative jobs. Employment microdata from workforce surveys were 

used to produce the estimates. We then analysed the creative intensity of different indus-

tries. Data on key measures of economic performance, such as employment, salaries, turn-

over and exports were accessed from official Statistics Finland datasets as follows:  

• The Finnish Longitudinal Employer–Employee Data (FLEED) merges comprehen-

sive taxation and other administrative records of all labour force members as well as 

all employers/enterprises subject to value added tax (VAT). FLEED has data on both 

firms and establishments (such as data about public institutions that is missing from 

the Business Register database). We use the establishment level in order to study 

the geographical division of creative and supportive employees within a firm and 

their respective wage levels. Data on public institutions seems to be of importance 

for certain industries such as film, TV, video, radio and photography as well as mu-

seums, galleries and libraries. 

• The Business Register database at the enterprise level covers the annual enterprise-

level statistics of enterprises and private non-profit organisations. The data includes 

basic information about enterprises’ industry, location, ownership, turnover, number 

of employees and wages and salaries. 



 
 
 

 

 

16 
 

 
 

• The International Trade Statistics describes the commodity trade between Finland 

and other European Union (EU) Member States and between Finland and third 

countries, i.e. internal and external trade. International Trade Statistics is the official 

information source on the importation, exportation and balance of trade of Finland.  

• Regarding the several sub-categories of creative economy it should be noted that 

public sector (municipal) employment is not included. Based on statistics of munici-

pal activities it can estimated that this totals approximately 10,000 employees (in-

cluding arts education, libraries, museums and galleries, theatres, dance and circus, 

music and other cultural activities). 

 

Where possible, we use these datasets to produce estimates of employment, salaries and 

creative intensity for both the national and local levels. A detailed statistical analysis of Finn-

ish creative sectors and the analysis methods used is provided in Appendix 1. 

All creative employment in the economy is aimed to be estimated within the method utilised 

in this study. That is, employment in all creative activities along with creative jobs in non-cre-

ative activities. The estimate can be performed by using two classifications (NACE and 

ISCO) used in the European Labour Force Survey.  

Once the aforementioned classifications are filled in, an estimate of creative economy from 

perspective of employment can be calculated: 

Creative employment = creative occupations (creative specialists) + non-creative occupa-

tions in creative activities (support creatives) + creative occupations in non-creative activi-

ties (embedded creatives).  

Creative intensity is specified as the share of creative occupations’ employment in each in-

dustry. 

Table 2 presents the key data of the four categories used in the study. 

Table 2. Summary of creative sector categories utilised in this study. 

Category Num-
ber of 
actors 

Turnover 
(1000 €) 

Number 
of crea-
tive em-
ployees 

Creative 
intensity 

Number 
of ex-
porting 
firms 

Exports 
(1000 €) 

Creative and cul-
tural products 

3 954 583 199 4 983 53%13 15 23 945 

Creative content 2 871 3 663 245 11 223 52% 11 10 173 

Creative services 10 071 2 562 860 12 666 64% 1 65 

Creative environ-
ments and plat-
forms 

7 079 8 733 445 26 236 61% 64 37 111 

Other14 1 432 740 554 438 11% 33 35 980 

TOTAL 25 407 16 283 303 55 546 56 % 124 107 274 

 

                                                      
13 The average creative intensity percentage is lower than the percentages presented in the creative and cultural products category. This percentage 
includes the cultural education category (8552), which employs 2179 persons and has a creative intensity of only 31%. Also, most of the employment 
takes place in the sub-category of ”Music, performing and visual arts”. In that sub-category, the number of employees in non-creative occupations almost 

equals the number of employees in creative occupations. 

14 The ‘others’ category include printing and retail and wholesale of cultural items. 



 
 
 

 

 

17 
 

 
 

Table 3 represents employment in Finland within the creative industries (including its three 
main components: specialist, non-specialist and embedded employment) from 2011 to 
2015. 
 
Table 3. Creative economy employment in Finland, 2011-2015.  

Year Specialist Support 
Creative 
industries 

Embed-
ded 

Creative 
occupa-
tions 

Creative 
economy 

2011 55 200 42 500 97 800 65 200 120 400 162 900 

2012 50 700 44 400 95 200 68 000 118 700 163 100 

2013 49 200 40 600 89 900 65 300 114 500 155 100 

2014 51 300 39 400 90 800 66 000 117 300 156 700 

2015 54 100 36 800 90 900 67 800 121 900 158 700 

Average 52 100 40 700 92 900 66 400 118 500 159 300 

Share of 
workforce 

2.5% 1.9% 4.4% 3.2% 5.6% 7.6% 

Share of 
creative 
economy 

32.7% 25.5% 58.3% 41.7% 74.4% 100.0% 

 
Fact sheets – how to read 
 
Summaries of the analysis of each sector are presented in the following sub-sections. The 
summaries include: 
 

1. Summary of the statistical analysis of the creative category from year 2015 (at the 

sub-category level). Number of actors (both private and public organisations), turno-

ver, number of employees (both creative occupations and non-creative occupa-

tions), number of exporting firms and total export volume. 

2. Top three Finnish regions ranking based on highest location quotient for the crea-

tive industries (Appendix 1, Table 16). In general, the creative economy workforce 

(in all four categories) is heavily concentrated in the Greater Helsinki area, with 

the region of Uusimaa accounting for 57 per cent of employment in the creative 

economy. However, there are regional variations in creative industry concentration. 

The top three ranking enables comparison of the importance of employment in cer-

tain occupations or industries in a region compared with the country as a whole. 

3. A case example highlighting emerging areas or special categories. 

4. Growth potential based on average annual employment and salary growth rates 

over the period 2011-2015. The summary shows that the economic recession also 

hit the creative economy. In many cases, the number of creative industry employ-

ees has decreased. However, in general, Creative Specialists managed to do better 

than Support Creatives. Creative Specialists are those working in creative occupa-

tions in creative industries whereas Support Creatives work in a creative industry, 

but are not themselves employed in a creative occupation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
 
 

 

 

18 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FACT SHEETS 
  



 
 
 

 

 

19 
 

 
 

  



 
 
 

 

 

20 
 

 
 

Creative and cultural products – key figures 

 Number 

of ac-

tors 

2015 

Turno-

ver 

(1000 €) 

2015 

Number 

of em-

ployees  

2015* 

Total Number 
of ex-

porting 
firms 

Exports 

(1000 €) 
 

       

Museums and 
galleries (1) 

68 14 868 678/435 
 

1 113 
(61%) 

1 23 

Crafts 

 

342 119 271 323/232 
 

555 (58%) 11 23 489 

Music, perform-
ing and visual 
arts (2) 

3 544 449 060 3892/2566 
(3) 

9 514 
(60%) 

3 432 

Total 3 954 583 199   15 (4) 23 945 k€ 
 

*creative / non-creative occupations 

 
(1) Not all museums and galleries are included as some fall under other categories (e.g. 4299, 9499) or are 

public institutes such as libraries (i.e. employer is a municipality). 

(2) Music, performing and visual arts includes Performing arts (9001), Support activities to performing arts 

(9002) and Artistic creation (9003). Dance, theatre and circus are included to some degree under per-

forming arts. Sound recording and music publishing activities are presented in the creative sector cate-

gory Creative content. 

(3) Cultural education (8552) which employs 2,179 persons (intensity 31%) is not included here as it is not in 

Finland’s official Cultural Statistics. If it is included, the total number of employees is 8,637 (intensity 

53%). It is included in the summary figures in Table 2. 

(4) Almost all exports in the Creative and cultural products category are produced by one firm operating in 

the Striking of coins industry (3211). The highest number of exporting firms, eight, is in the Manufacture 

of jewellery and related articles industry (3212).  

Regional significance 

Top three regions in creative and cultural products category in terms of location quotient15  

 
 

                                                      
15 Creative workforce shares can be analysed using location quotients (LQs). These are defined for the creative economy as the creative workforce share 
of the region (CER⁄WFR) divided by the creative workforce share of the national workforce (CEFI⁄WFFI). As such, they allow us to compare how the im-
portance of employment in particular occupations or industries in a region compares with their importance in the country as a whole. An LQ>1 means the 
regional workforce is more concentrated than the national one, an LQ=1 means that the concentration is the same and an LQ<1 means that it is less 
concentrated. The highest location quotients of the creative industries presents the importance of employment in particular occupations or industries in a 
region compared with their importance in the country as a whole (Appendix 1, Table 16). When analysing the results, one must understand that much of 
the cultural activities are taken care of municipalities directly and the relating creative workforce does not show up the category results. For example, in 
Museums and galleries sub-category, there are a number of separate legal entities in Etelä-Savo region: their employments are reported under this sub-
category whereas in many other regions in Finland that is not the case. Moreover, creative industry occupation is not high in Etelä-Savo in general, which 
further highlights Museums and galleries sub-category’s relevance for the region. 



 
 
 

 

 

21 
 

 
 

Case-example of cross-sectoral collaboration 

 

Future growth and competencies16 
 
  

 
The changes (decrease in personnel and/or salaries in several cases) between 2011 and 
2015 have been rather significant. For instance, support personnel (not included in this fig-
ure) diminished by 23%.  
  

                                                      
16 Figure shows the average annual employment and salary growth rates over the period 2011-2015. 

The Oulu information and communications technology boom is being highlighted at the 
Printocent exhibition at the Oulu Museum of Arts as part of the Hype in the Arctic Silicon 
Valley programme. The new exhibition produced by the Museum and Science Centre 
Luuppi combines research data, fictional narrative, hands-on activities and visuality by 
telling a fictional story of inventor-engineer Toivo Ruokko and his Raakku device. 
(https://www.ouka.fi/oulu/luuppi-english/hype) 
 
Setting up this exhibition has brought together technology entrepreneurs and creative 
sector actors. One entrepreneur has driven the idea forward and discussed with the rep-
resentative of the City of Oulu opportunities to bring visibility to Oulu, for example by or-
ganising an installation at the Oulu Light festival, and stated that such cross-sectoral col-
laboration with creative professionals opens up new ways to promote different competen-
cies. This is one example of how innovation centres such as Printocent and cities as in-
novation platforms can serve as places of innovation for the Creative Industry. 

https://www.ouka.fi/oulu/luuppi-english/hype


 
 
 

 

 

22 
 

 
 

Creative content – key figures 

 Number 

of actors 

2015 

Turnover 

(€) 

2015 

Number 
of em-

ployees 
2015* 

Total  
number of 
employees 

and intensity 

Number 
of ex-

porting 
firms 

Exports 

(1000 €) 
 

Film, TV, video, 
radio and pho-
tography (1) 

1 765 1 190 844 5760/2599 8 359 (69%) 6 8 341 

Publishing (2) 1 106 2 472 401 5463/7898 
 

13 361 (41%) 5 1 832 

Total 
2 871 3 663 245 

11 223/10 

497 

21 720 (52%) 11 (3) 10 173 

 

*creative / non-creative occupations 

 
(1) Television programming and broadcasting activities (6020) employs altogether 

4 300 persons, a public institution employs over 89% of employees of these. 

(2) Publishing of newspapers employs 7,508 persons (48% of total), but its creative in-

tensity is limited at 39%. Translation and interpretation are included in this sector.  

(3) Exports within the creative content category are widely distributed among eleven 

firms with no single firm in dominance.  

 

Regional significance 
 
Top three regions per creative content category in terms of location quotient17  
 

 
 

  

                                                      
17 The highest location quotients of the creative industries presents the importance of employment in particular occupations or industries in a region com-
pared with their importance in the country as a whole (Appendix 1, Table 16).  



 
 
 

 

 

23 
 

 
 

Case-example of digital disruptions challenging the media industry 

 

 

Future growth and competencies18 

 

  

                                                      
18 Figure shows the average annual employment and salary growth rates over the period 2011-2015. 
 

Digital disruption of the media sector is a broadly discussed example of system-level trans-
formation affecting the business models of all of key actors, i.e. advertisers and marketers, 
publishing companies (content providers), printing and distribution companies and end users 
(either consumers or business users). All actors have had to re-think their current value flows, 
as well as their partnerships with customers and suppliers. Furthermore, media convergence 
reflects the blurring boundaries between the media, telecommunications and information 
technology sectors – and the emergence of new actors, such as technology and service pro-
viders. Within this change, the focus of the media ecosystem should be on end users’ contexts 
and purposes rather than on channels and sites in order to be able to offer novel value to both 
end users (consumers, B-to-B media users) as well as to advertisers and marketers.  
The media ecosystem is transforming towards a platform-centric ecosystem, where 
digital technologies are connecting content users, providers and advertisers together 
in a new, more collaborative way. In such platform ecosystems users may also be produc-
ers of user-generated content (UGC) as, e.g., the rise of the blogging and vlogging phenom-
enon shows. This has affected publishing companies and created the need to provide content 
for all possible channels. 
Different possibilities for monetisation are emerging through licensing, selling user data or 
business intelligence information or offering the platform as a service concept (PaaS). Social 
media companies have emerged as the main competitors of traditional media companies in 
both advertising and consumer coverage, as they offer their content (gathered from different 
sources) for free and offer a vast consumer base. Decisions regarding new monetising mod-
els may be difficult to make and require agility and changes in thinking. Creativity is therefore 
now valued more than ever and media ecosystem actors should be looking to embed creativ-
ity into their core strengths such as quality of content and brand. 



 
 
 

 

 

24 
 

 
 

Creative services – key figures 

 

 Number 

of ac-

tors 

2015 

Turnover 

(€) 

2015 

Number 
of em-

ployees 
2015* 

Total num-
ber of em-

ployees 
and inten-

sity 

Number 
of export-
ing firms 

Exports 

(1000 €) 
 

Architecture 1 407 388 462 2 663/990 3 653 (73%) 0 0 

Advertising and 
marketing 

4 142 1 697 411 5270/ 
5017 

10 287 
(51%) 

1 65 

Design (product, 

graphic and fash-

ion design) (1) 

4 522 476 987 4 733/1 

144 

5 877 (81%) 0 0 

Total 
10 071 2 562 860 

12 666/7 
151 

19 817 
(64%) 

1 (2) 65 

 

*creative / non-creative occupations 

 
(1) Service design not included.  

(2) There is almost no export activity within the creative services category. Architecture 

exports are included to some degree in the construction industry and design in the 

export of designed products. 

 

Regional significance 
 
Top three regions per creative services category in terms of location quotient19 

 
 

                                                      
19 The highest location quotients of the creative industries presents the importance of employment in particular occupations or industries in a region com-
pared with their importance in the country as a whole (Appendix 1, Table 16). 



 
 
 

 

 

25 
 

 
 

Case-example of how service design supports the renewal of an industrial 
company 
 

 
Future growth and competencies20 

 
 

 
Design belongs to the few growing sub-categories showing an increase in average salary of 
both creative specialists and support creatives between 2011 and 2015. The number of sup-
port creatives has also increased indicating a growing demand for creative competencies.  
  

                                                      
20 Figure shows the average annual employment and salary growth rates over the period 2011-2015. 

Design is, as its best, a good tool for renewal and building competiveness: with it, pro-

found understanding of the operational environment can be gained, and large, complex 

problems swiftly conceived and concretized. The current new wave of design, such as 

the service design approach, aims to create meaning and success in the changing 

world. 

Leading elevator and escalator manufacturer Kone has historically been known world-

wide for its products, although the company’s goal of providing excellent service to cus-

tomers has been part of its core mission from the start. What has changed is that Kone’s 

customers are increasingly looking for a partner who can help them through all stages 

of their product’s lifecycle. For Kone, this means providing its customers with flexible 

and attentive maintenance services, and being able to think about how modernisation 

and upgrades can improve its customers’ lives and the ways in which they can use their 

equipment. Service design has in this way brought the user to the core of development 

and emphasised the importance of customer experience.  

(http://www.kone.com/en/stories-and-references/stories/design-in-its-truest-
form.aspx) 

http://www.kone.com/en/stories-and-references/stories/design-in-its-truest-form.aspx
http://www.kone.com/en/stories-and-references/stories/design-in-its-truest-form.aspx


 
 
 

 

 

26 
 

 
 

Creative environments and platforms – key figures 

 

Creative environ-

ments and plat-

forms 

 

Number 

of actors 

2015 

Turnover 

(1000 €) 

2015 

Number of 

employ-

ees* 2015 

Total num-
ber of em-

ployees and 
intensity 

Number 
of export-
ing firms 

(1) 

Exports 

(1000 €) 
 

IT, software and 
computer services  

5 845 8 290 325 25 326/14 
689 

40 051 (63%) 62 37 010 

- Computer pro-

gramming activi-

ties (6201) 

3 811 6 388 087 19 654/ 
10 121 

29 775 (66%) 49 28 100 

Creative environ-
ments 

1 234 443 120 874/2 393 3 267 2 101 

Total 
7 079 8 733 445 

26 236/17 

082 

43 318 (61%) 64 (2) 37 111 

 

*creative / non-creative occupations 

 
(1) It is very difficult to estimate the exports of the gaming industry companies. In most case the players pur-

chase services directly in the gaming platform, and these are shown in the company’s turnover. For sta-

tistical purposes, it is recommended that this turnover were shown as royalty income but for many com-

panies this seems not to be the case. Neogames Finland, Hub of the Finnish Game Industry states there 

are ca. 260 gaming industry companies in Finland. The combined turnover of these companies was 

about 2,3 and 2,4 Mrd euros in 2017 and 2016, respectively. One company, Supercell, called for about 

80% of this combined turnover. We can expect that over 90% of the industry’s turnover comes from 

abroad. 

(2) Within the creative environments and platforms category, the highest number of exporting firms is in 

Computer programming activities (6201) in which 49 exporting firms account for a total export revenue of 

EUR 28.1 million. In Computer consultancy activities (6202) 8 exporting firms account for a total export 

revenue of EUR 6.2 million. It is noteworthy that there were no exporting firms in the Publishing of com-

puter games (5821) sector in 2015. Most of the gaming industry companies list themselves under the 

aforementioned Computer programming activities. 

 

Regional significance 
 
Top three regions of creative environments and platforms category in terms of location quo-
tient21 

 
  

                                                      
21 The highest location quotients of the creative industries presents the importance of employment in particular occupations or industries in a region com-
pared with their importance in the country as a whole (Appendix 1, Table 16). Note: The highest location quotients do not present all perspectives of re-
gional strengths. For instance, Uusimaa is not in the top three in this location quotient comparison, although Helsinki based game company Supercell was 
the biggest taxpayer (tax year 2014). 



 
 
 

 

 

27 
 

 
 

Case example – game companies are born global 

 
 

Future growth and competencies22 
 

 

 

  

                                                      
22 Figure shows the average annual employment and salary growth rates over the period 2011-2015. 
 

Critical Force is an illustrative example of the growth of a game industry company from 
start-up to a company employing over 50 people. In 2016 Critical Force received 4 M€ 
funding from a South Korean company, NHN Entertainment (3500 employees). A small 
agent company played a central role in finding the partner, although the company’s own 
office in Thailand (three employees) had strengthened its position in the Asian market. 
The Thailand office was originally established because three employees wanted to work 
there after their student exchange period. This illustrates how employee work satisfac-
tion is appreciated and responsibility shared in the company.  
 
The roots of the company are in the University of Applied Sciences of Kajaani, where 
the entrepreneur worked as a teacher of coding in the early 2000s and spearheaded the 
establishment of a gaming education programme in 2005-2006, following a long career 
of more than 18 years as a software developer in Finland and in Germany.  
 
https://kauppapolitiikka.fi/yritykset/critical-force-kun-kajaani-kohtasi-korean/ 
https://www.oulunkauppakamari.fi/?id=36&news_id=165&archive= 
https://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/peliyhtion-rankat-opit-veli-pekka-piirainen-joutui-siir-
tamaan-tarkean-tyotoverin-sivuun-olisi-pitanyt-kayttaa-kontrollia-enemman/044f00ff-
14ca-36af-8e00-e639b5899cda 

https://kauppapolitiikka.fi/yritykset/critical-force-kun-kajaani-kohtasi-korean/
https://www.oulunkauppakamari.fi/?id=36&news_id=165&archive
https://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/peliyhtion-rankat-opit-veli-pekka-piirainen-joutui-siirtamaan-tarkean-tyotoverin-sivuun-olisi-pitanyt-kayttaa-kontrollia-enemman/044f00ff-14ca-36af-8e00-e639b5899cda
https://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/peliyhtion-rankat-opit-veli-pekka-piirainen-joutui-siirtamaan-tarkean-tyotoverin-sivuun-olisi-pitanyt-kayttaa-kontrollia-enemman/044f00ff-14ca-36af-8e00-e639b5899cda
https://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/peliyhtion-rankat-opit-veli-pekka-piirainen-joutui-siirtamaan-tarkean-tyotoverin-sivuun-olisi-pitanyt-kayttaa-kontrollia-enemman/044f00ff-14ca-36af-8e00-e639b5899cda


 
 
 

 

 

28 
 

 
 

2.3. Stakeholder insights on creative economy opportunities 

and challenges  

The insights of creative economy opportunities and challenges in Finland were collected 

from variety of experts and stakeholders using different interaction channels (workshop, in-

depth interviews and VTT’s online co-development tool Owela). The participants and the in-

terviewees came from the Ministry of Education and Culture (OKM), the Ministry of Eco-

nomic Affairs and Employment (TEM), educational institutions, branch-specific promoter or-

ganisations, branch organisations, Business Finland, cities and venture capitalists (listed in 

Appendixes 3 and 4).. 

At the category level, the main needs can be summarised as follows: 

- Creative and cultural products: Need for marketing, sales and business competen-

cies and/or mediators for largely domestic markets.  

- Creative content: Need for distribution channels and marketing content for interna-

tional markets.  

- Creative services & Creative environments and platforms: Contacts, networks 

and funding for growth and internationalisation. 

 
The creative economy opportunities (and challenges) identified are illustrated in Figure 7 be-

low and addressed in more detail in Appendix 2. 

 

Figure 7. Creative economy opportunities based on stakeholder insights. 



 
 
 

 

 

29 
 

 
 

Key findings on creative sectors in Finland  

Table 4 summarises the qualitative analyses of the weaknesses and strengths of the four 

main categories of creative industry. As the export and turnover figures in the previous sec-

tion (Fact Sheets) show, growth in recent years is very much limited to the ‘creative environ-

ments and platforms’ category (specifically the software and game industry sectors).   

In the first category, creative and cultural products, digitalisation has changed the distribu-

tion channels of the music business. There are also some actors with strong global positions 

within their own niche market segment or certain value chain positions (such as music pub-

lishing/digital production). Most others act mainly nationally with limited resources and po-

tential for growth and globalisation. 

Table 4. Four main categories – weaknesses and strengths. 

Category Weaknesses Strengths 

Creative and cultural 

products 

Heritage and arts 

Antique and art deal-

ers 

(Visual) Arts and Gal-

leries 

Crafts 

Music 

Dance 

Theatre and circus 

Polarised market  

Limited development of the 
visual arts market (domestic) 

Handicraft companies small 
and entrepreneurial-driven 

Export of music concerts re-
mains Lack of professional 
producers and managers of 
dance / lack of networks 

Financial resources of thea-
tres very scarce / little devel-
opment / mutual competition 

Growing interest in antiques / 
‘retro’ as a working object 

New business models / rental & 
digital channels have increased in-
terest / new users / internationally 
high-quality education in Finland 
enables use of visual art skills in 
other areas (games) 

Handicraft as a part of cultural her-
itage / interest in self-making 

Scalability and digitality of music / 
strong niche communities / music 
publishing competence 

Modern dance as a pioneer in light 
and sound design / international 
attention 

Importance to regional well-being 
and communality (Visual and per-
forming arts) 

Creative content 

Media 

Animation 

Film 

Literature 

Television 

Publishing 

Animation narrowly under-
stood as a genre for children 

Small size is a barrier to in-
ternationalisation of Finnish 
film producers 

Minimal literary exports (mar-
keting / brand building) (only 
a few big publishers and 
scarce number of authors) 

Mass communication has 
been challenged by social 
media 

Television watching is in 
transition, streaming services 

Strong Finnish know-how in com-
puter animation (especially for the 
games industry) 

Finnish ‘niche’ film production, with 
its own international audience is 
opening up to the wider public 
(when new distribution channels 
are utilised) 

Digital distribution channels create 
new opportunities for literary dis-
semination and co-writing (creative 
commons licenses, etc.) 



 
 
 

 

 

30 
 

 
 

require a new kind of target 
group-based marketing / in-
teraction 

Consumers have shifted to 
the Web and advertisers 
have followed. Newspaper 
and many magazine reader-
ships are in decline. Tradi-
tional revenue streams do 
not work on the Web 

Some breakthroughs have been 
achieved in the international TV 
format markets 

Many publishers have started to 
gain revenues from digital content. 
Based on experiences with digital 
music, consumers are willing to ac-
cept moderate monthly fees. Re-
sponsible journalism is gaining 
more appreciation 

Creative services 

Functional creations 

Architecture  

Marketing communi-

cations 

Design 

Conflicting interests between 
the construction industry and 
architecture slows the inter-
nationalisation and creation 
of new concepts 

Market intelligence and 
broader media structures 
have changed with digitalisa-
tion / players are looking for 
new business models / large 
market share of international 
market players 

International orientation and 
lack of networks limit the de-
sign to the domestic market / 
use of design expertise is not 
integrated to the strategic 
level thinking in other indus-
tries 

Architecture is an attractive and in-
teresting subject / passionate atti-
tude of actors 

Demand for communication and 
communication expert services is 
growing as data volume and distri-
bution channels exponentially in-
crease, new ways of interacting 
are required for stakeholder com-
munication 

Design is a recognised component 
of business competiveness, e.g. 
service design is considered a key 
competitive edge builder 

Individual designers are gaining 
experience through exporting their 
own niche productions (for in-
stance in fashion) 

Creative environ-

ments and platforms 

Software/Digital 

games 

Businesses remain small; 
ownership is sold to interna-
tional players / credibility and 
attractiveness is limited, 
which may lead to slowdown 
of growth, as witnessed in 
2016 when growth fell to 4% 
(https://www.neo-
games.fi/fgir2016/) 

Technology know-how is top qual-
ity and international reputation is 
good / community and network ef-
fects help new companies towards 
international break through 

 

 

Table 5 summarises the key characteristics of each ecosystem type (knowledge, innovation 

and business, see Figure 4) and the challenges and strengths of the Finnish creative sector. 

 
Table 5. Ecosystem phases, strengths and weaknesses (challenges) of the Finnish creative sectors. 

 Knowledge Innovation Business 

Characte-  

ristics 

Decentralised knowledge 

nodes, synergies through 

knowledge exchange 

Geographically clustered 

actors, innovation plat-

forms, different levels of 

collaboration and open-

ness 

Global business rela-

tionships both com-

petitive and coopera-

tive 

https://www.neogames.fi/fgir2016/
https://www.neogames.fi/fgir2016/


 
 
 

 

 

31 
 

 
 

Challenges of  

Finnish crea-

tive Industry 

Education happens in ‘si-

los’ and has limited con-

tact points with innovation 

activities 

Career paths are unclear 

and/or mixed  

 

Project-based funding of 

regional hubs and integra-

tors, limited continuity and 

national vision missing 

In some sectors creative 

actors are working alone 

(own brand development 

hinders networking) 

Funding difficult to secure 

in the scale-up phase 

Limited number of 

core companies and 

globally small size 

(insufficient re-

sources to boost in-

ternationalisation and 

networking with other 

companies) 

Strengths of 

Finnish crea-

tive industry 

Institutes of Applied Sci-

ence (AMKs) have strong 

regional position as facili-

tators of knowledge base 

and activities  

They and Universities 

provide multidisciplinary 

activities internally and 

with companies    

Cities as innovation plat-

forms form networks con-

necting different actors 

also at the international 

(European level): 

‘Tested/made with the City’ 

Creative methods could 

support transformation 

also in other sectors (ser-

vice design as an example 

of conceptual thinking uti-

lising creativeness) 

Start-up funding possibili-

ties have grown rapidly  

Game industry as a 

success story of 

global competitive-

ness  

Open possibilities 

also for other compa-

nies with digital, scal-

able business models 

(networked born 

globals) 

 

2.4. Cross-sectoral collaboration in publicly funded projects 

We conducted a small case assessment of cross-sectoral collaboration patterns within the 

framework of three policy instruments that either specifically target creative sector actors or 

are recognised as potential sources of support for them. The following three instruments 

were selected for analysis: 

• CreMa funding which is granted for product and service development projects pro-

moting the transfer of expertise from creative industries to other industries and vice 

versa. The funding originates from the national lottery proceeds of the Ministry of Ed-

ucation and Culture and is distributed by The Promotion Centre for Audiovisual Cul-

ture (AVEK) to applicants from creative industries. 

• ESF (European Social Fund) 2014-2017 ‘Luovaa osaamista’ (‘Creative expertise’) 

action programme projects. 

• Business Finland’s Innovation Voucher which is intended for small and medium 

sized companies engaged in well-established business that need external expertise 

in the form of knowledge and skills to further their innovation activities. 

 
Our assessment of collaboration in publicly-funded projects sheds light on industries with 

which creative sector actors team up and the availability of policy-relevant data on collabo-

ration. Thus, the findings give some indication of sectors in which there is an identified de-

mand for creative skills and expertise. In addition, the results signal in which areas creative 

sector actors see potential for collaboration and expertise complementing their development 

efforts. 



 
 
 

 

 

32 
 

 
 

Next, we present the main findings of the assessment of cross-sectoral collaboration in the 

three publicly-funded instruments. 

CreMa, coordinated by AVEK, 2012-2017 

Methodology: For the years 2012 and 2014 information on collaboration was available in ex-

post funding descriptions, whereas for 2015-2017 information was scarce due to access to 

funding decisions only. Funding information was not consistent for the studied period. 

Criteria: selection of projects that contained information on collaboration partners, i.e. name 

of collaboration partner and/or field of collaborator. 

Results: Total 39 projects (out of 91 project decisions) included the above information. In 

these projects, information on collaboration was available for 58 partners. The majority of 

these projects (67%) involved a single collaboration partner.  

The collaboration partners belonged to the following creative areas and traditional indus-

tries:  

 

In the CreMa projects, collaboration with the tourism sector (16%) and software (14%) were 

the prime areas that emerged from the assessment. In traditional areas, collaboration with 

different kinds of retailers (other services 12%), the construction sector (10%) and the social 

and health services (9%) were frequent. Links to traditional sectors, such as construction, 

are due to the inclusion of architecture services and the creative design of construction ma-

terials. In public services, creative competencies have been applied especially in art and 

Creative and cultural products 

(heritage and arts)

Tourism, 16%

Productions & events, 12%

Performing arts, 3%

Creative content (media) Communication, 3%

Creative services 

(functional creations)
Design services, 3%

Creative environments and platforms

(new media, games)
Digitalisation, 14%

Traditional industries 

Construction, 10%

Metal & manufacturing, 9%

Forest sector, 3%

Public services

Social-health services, 9%

Education, 3%

Public services, 2%

B-to-C services Other services, 12%



 
 
 

 

 

33 
 

 
 

culture for wellbeing type of activities in social and health sector with aim to promote health 

and social welfare and strengthen social inclusion by combining for example arts in elderly 

care and child care. 

 

ESF (European Social Fund), 2014-2017. ‘Luovaa osaamista’ (‘Creative exper-

tise) action programme23 

Methodology: Consistent project descriptions were available for the studied period. The 

‘Luovaa osaamista’ (‘Creative expertise’) action programme is largely centralised at univer-

sities of applied sciences and in collaboration between them or other education institutions.  

Criteria: selection of projects that contained information on collaboration partners, i.e. name 

of collaboration partner and/or field of collaborator. 

Results: Total 14 projects (out of 19) included information about collaboration partners. In 

these projects information was available on 55 collaboration partners. Compared to CreMa 

funding, the ESF-funded projects involve slightly more collaboration as the majority of pro-

jects (57%) had established collaboration with two to four partners, and 29% with five or 

more partners. Furthermore, it is worth noting that many of the projects were ongoing at the 

time of assessment. 

The collaboration partners belonged to the following fields (see Figure 8). 

 

Figure 8. Collaboration partners' fields. 

The ESF funding through the ‘Luovaa osaamista’ (‘Creative expertise’) action programme 

aimed to increase collaboration with education actors, which is reflected in the large number 

of collaboration partners coming from this sector (47%). Although the projects mainly involve 

education partners, the educational institutes represent different sectors (such as health, 

business, bioeconomy, software etc.). For this reason, we cannot talk about a strong cross-

sectoral industry but cross-sectoral educational collaboration. Within the EFS projects, it is 

                                                      
23 ESF projects for 2014-2016 have been more thoroughly evaluated in ‘Luovan osaamisen ja nuorten osallisuuden alueellinen vahvistaminen: alueelliset 
rakennerahastohankkeet 2014–2016’ by Kirsi Siltanen, Taideyliopisto, 2017. 

26

5 3 7 5 3 2 4

47%

9%
5%

13%
9%

5% 4%
7%

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Number of partners % share



 
 
 

 

 

34 
 

 
 

more beneficial to assess which areas these projects were concentrated on. The majority of 

projects (29%) focused on digitalisation (incl., games, software, virtual reality, digital media) 

and 21% on social and health services. However, as the table above reveals, these projects 

did not include many industry partners, or the information on industry partners was not ex-

plicit in the evaluated project descriptions. Furthermore, several projects (21%) focussed on 

the development of creative industry competence without a specific industry focus. 

Business Finland Innovation Voucher24  

Methodology: Innovation Voucher data for October 2016 - May 2018 was used in the analy-

sis. During the period, a total of 5,447 applications for the innovation voucher were received 

and 2,875 projects were granted.  

Criteria: Collaboration in the Innovation Voucher funded projects was analysed by reviewing 

the sectoral distribution of the projects in which creative sector companies were involved ei-

ther as a voucher applicant or a service provider. 

Results: The data on the granted vouchers shows that companies use the voucher to ac-

quire a variety of skills. Thematically, the funded projects spread fairly evenly across intel-

lectual property rights (IPR) and patenting (18%), product development (16%), service de-

sign and development (15%) market and customer assessment (13%), prototyping and pi-

loting (12%), and others (16%). From the creative sectors’ perspective IPR, product devel-

opment, service design and development, and industrial design are closely linked with these 

areas.  

Companies presenting creative sectors have been involved as service providers in 369 pro-

jects, which is 12.8% of all innovation voucher funded projects. The share is twice as high if 

companies classified in information and communication are included in the creative sectors. 

Creative sectors companies have also applied the voucher 351 times (6.4% of all the appli-

cations) to purchase external expertise.25 

Based on feedback from actors in creative sectors, the innovation voucher is a highly im-

portant funding instrument for very small companies in enabling them to engage in rapid ex-

periments, agile product development and intellectual property protection. The innovation 

voucher projects have also significantly increased cross-sectoral collaboration and provided 

an opportunity to display the added value of creative solutions in the development of com-

petitive new products and services. The creative sectors’ expertise has been utilised for in-

stance in the development of medical products and services, design of services, preparation 

of visual assembly instructions and visual appendices of patent applications and furthered 

the design of visual and functional elements, user interfaces and usability as well as the cre-

ation of scripts, stories and conceptualisation for games and tourism services. In general, it 

seems that the innovation voucher has contributed to collaboration between companies and 

increased use of the knowledge residing in research centres, universities and universities of 

applied sciences. This has had a positive impact on the business competency of the crea-

tive sector companies. 

                                                      
24  Information on the Innovation Voucher is provided by Business Finland. 

25 35 percent of all innovation voucher applications are rejected. Functionalities of the project database in use at Business Finland does not make it possi-
ble to get precise approval and rejection rate for the innovation voucher applications made by creative sectors companies. Based on his experience of 
handling applications, Risto Lustila, product manager of the innovation voucher instrument assesses that rejection rate is lower than average for applica-
tions involving creative sectors companies as an application or a service provider. 



 
 
 

 

 

35 
 

 
 

3. INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKING 

3.1. Introduction 

Just as the creative economy stretches beyond the conventional creative sectors, creative 

competence can be utilised in other sectors to increase their competitiveness. To this end, it 

is important to come up with arrangements that promote cross-sector collaboration in order 

to harness the potential of intangible capital and to creative competencies across the econ-

omy. For that purpose, we compared and benchmarked a selection of key interna-

tional models and arrangements to advance cross-sector development in the creative 

economy.  

The UK, the Netherlands and South Korea are considered among the forerunners in design 

and implementation of creative economy policies. Our aim was to benchmark models and 

policies used in these three countries to promote creative economy ecosystem develop-

ment. The focus was on models and policies that aim to bring together actors from different 

sectors and to nurture and advance co-creation and cross-sectorial activities, thus support-

ing new value creation. The choice of target countries for benchmarking was aimed at max-

imising the benefit of international experiences in support of Finnish policy design/making in 

the area of creative economy and ecosystems. The Netherlands, South Korea and the UK 

have been successful in exporting creative contents. They have also adopted new ap-

proaches and policies that can serve as a lesson for Finland (OKM, 2017). 

It is important to emphasise that there is no uniform view of how creative industries are de-

fined and institutionalised at the country level. For example, Berg and Hassink (2014) identi-

fied that creative industries are interpreted differently in Europe and East Asia. In Europe, 

creative industries are often divided into two categories: ‘core’ creative industries (arts-re-

lated activities) and ‘partially’ creative industries (advertising, architecture, design, and me-

dia industries), whereas in Asian countries creative industries is defined in a more inclusive 

manner aggregating, for example, activities such as hairdressing, theme parks and furniture 

manufacturing, as seen in China. Sweden, whose approach is leaned towards the ‘experi-

ence economy’, includes the restaurant industry along with its creative industries, while In-

dia includes in its definition lifestyle products and services such as yoga and ayurvedic med-

icine. International agencies have also adopted the idea of the creative industries or the cre-

ative economy, led by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 

(UNCTAD) (Bop Consulting, 2010). 

Governance arrangements may also vary depending on the context. For example, in Japan, 

the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology is in charge of cultural 

art promotion, and the Ministry of Economy in charge of creative industry policy. In Germa-

ny, France, the Netherlands and Italy, the Ministry of Culture provides the main policies on 

creative industries (Berg & Hassink, 2014). 

Berg and Hassink (2014:657-8) identified four common mutually related characteristics of 

creative industries, some of which also refer to creativity in the manufacturing industries: 



 
 
 

 

 

36 
 

 
 

1. Creative industries are deeply involved in the process of new value creation, as their 

value-added works derive from innovation and they provide various innovation ser-

vices direct to the consumer market, therefore having a pivotal role in the socio-eco-

nomic process of adoption and retention of new ideas; 

2. Most creative products (e.g. film and television drama) require very diverse and spe-

cialised skills and knowledge and are therefore highly concentrated in specific loca-

tions; 

3. Creative industries benefit from both agglomeration economies (a shared specialised 

labour market, knowledge spillovers, sustained relationships between individuals and 

firms, and institutional thickness) and urbanisation economies (geographical proxim-

ity facilitates the creative recombination of knowledge, ideas and technologies, which 

is a source of innovation), although the tendency to concentrate differs from sector to 

sector; 

4. Creative industries affect and are affected by the institutional infrastructure and gov-

ernance structures at several spatial levels, since they engage with a range of insti-

tutional frameworks, such as economic development, local regeneration and social 

inclusion (a two-way impact).  

 
An overview of the creative economy in each of the benchmarking countries is presented 

below, followed by a summary of the main lessons learned from the cases as good prac-

tices for Finland. 

3.2. The United Kingdom 

The UK has a long and indisputably rich history of arts and culture. It is also seen as a major 

reference for benchmarking due to its recognition of creative industries as an economic sec-

tor following a mapping exercise conducted at the end of the 1990s, and the majority of ef-

forts towards systematising the sector in other countries refer to the original work of the UK 

Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) published in 1998. 

The term creative industries was popularised in 1997-1998 under the Labour government 

led by Prime Minister Tony Blair, and with the publication of Creative Britain in 1998 by 

Chris Smith, then Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and the first mapping of 

the creative economies in 1998. The mapping of creative industries in the UK has been 

since re-evaluated and updated in the works of NESTA, for example. Smith called for the 

popularisation of access to arts and bringing the creative industries’ contribution to society 

and the economy to the political agenda (Smith, 2013). Further developments in the estab-

lishment of organisational and institutional support for creative industry development have 

also helped shape the policy process.  

An overview of the economic growth of creative industries in the UK is shown in Table 6. 

Statistics from the DCMS (2017) show that between 2010 and 2016, the creative industries 

sub-sectors grew their economic contribution by 44.8 per cent. Much of the growth thought 

to be coming from the field of createch, in which technology is used to enable creativity, and 

vice versa. Within the creative industries, for instance, the category for information technolo-

gies, software and computer services grew by 11.4 per cent in 2016, spurring hope that 

emerging fields, such as virtual/immersive technologies, augmented reality and artificial in-

telligence to spur further innovation and growth. 



 
 
 

 

 

37 
 

 
 

Table 6. Gross value added (GVA) expressed in current prices (£ million), for Creative Industries sub-
sectors in UK, for 2010-2016. (DCSM, 2017)

 

The number of UK creative economy businesses and their size is shown in Table 7. 
 
Table 7. Businesses (thousands) in creative industries sectors, by number of employees in 2016. 
(DCMS, 2018) 

 Micro Small Medium Large Total 

Sector 1 to 9 10 to 49 50 to 249 250+  

Creative indus-
tries 
(in thousands) 

269.7 12.1 2.1 0.4 284.4 

 
Figure 9 illustrates the contribution of creative industries to the UK econ