There is no doubt that in the last decade or so, arts in the UK has seen a massive injection of money for new projects and exhibitions.

But is the money being put to good use? Is the dedication to Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) projects politically motivated that is only leading to mediocre projects?

A new book being published next week, edited by Munira Mirza, examines the UK arts policy and says the government is being wasteful in its effort to promote socially inclusive art.

'Culture Vultures: Is UK arts policy is damaging the arts?', shows official claims about the social benefits of art are based on exaggeration, and that arts practice suffers as a result. The book is being published by the think-tank Policy Exchange.

"Whilst this government has given generous funding to the arts, the evidence suggests they have been damaged as a result. Official thinking is slave to bureaucratic policy targets rather than the spirit of creativity" says Mirza.

Since the National Lottery was set up in 1994, it has awarded £2 billion to arts, with the Labour government increasing its own support by £100 million over three years on top of a £237 million base since the millenium. In 2003 this was topped with an extra £75 million to Arts Council England.

"If you read the policy literature, it seems uncontroversial that the arts can stimulate economic growth, reduce social exclusion and improve our health – in short transform our society. Yet, as this book seeks to show, there is surprisingly little evidence for these claims," Mirza adds.

The book is also critical of the Arts Council's diversity initiative Decibel, which has spent £5 million to raise the profile and develop further arts opportunities for people from Asian, African and Caribbean backgrounds; invested £30 million in a capital portfolio of BME and disability-led organisations; and created a seperate diversity department.

The book states: "These decisions create a distinct institutional stratum, BME culture. It creates a context where appointments and decisions are made for political ends. Claims to universality are voided. While artist may try to use these contexts and funds to make serious art, the framework in which they operate will signify a pre-determined meaning and value."

The collection of essays show that many of the claims made about the social benefits of arts are exaggerated, resulting in wasteful projects of poor artistic quality. The criteria for funding means that arts organisations are drowning under a tidal wave of 'tick boxes and targets'.

The book's authors are a mixture of academics and commentators. They recommend:

More honest and independent use of evidence in cultural policy. Too much research is driven by arts advocacy and is therefore biased.

Less bureaucracy around arts funding. The funding framework forces artists to spend valuable time and resources on ‘ticking boxes’, at the expense of producing excellent work.

Debate about true value of the arts. The government and arts quangos should promote the importance of art for its own sake.

Culture Vultures: Is UK arts policy damaging the arts? is being launched on Tuesday 7th February at Policy Exchange offices in London.
Media info: info@policyexchange.org.uk or 020 7340 2650.