EC(m1) – The Cultural Ecosystem of the city of Rome

The main results of the first six months of monitoring are the following:

1. Abundance of operators, their poor interconnection and a massive amount of outsiders.

• More than 7000 operators have identified, together with a huge branch of active population in culture. That one corresponds to non-formalized cultural actors involved with music, art and cultural activities in very different ways  (from food bloggers, to writers or makers);
• Few operators are highly interconnected with each other;
• Less than 10% of the actors create more than 50% of the good communicated and appreciated activities on social networks;
• Despite some exceptions, the operators work by their own (about 34 %) or in collaboration with a maximum of 2 others operators (about 25%);
• Almost all the operators (around 86%) do not communicate in a collaborative and/or synergic way with the others ones.

2. Low-interest in discovery: citizens take part in events organized by few operators.

• Most of the audience takes part in events promoted by only one operator (12%) or by 2-5 operators ( 49 %);
• Data radically change according to the price of the events: regarding non-free events, the audience that declares to attend events organized by only one operator increases at 62%;
• This kind of result needs to be collecgìted and analyzed seasonally; the reason is that every season new operators forme and groupe together, also due to the rise of new trends that are able to influence in a crucial way the cultural landscape of the city.

3. The niches working as interconnectors among different communities.

• Niches of subjects capable to take on the role of “bridge” are clearly distinguishable. In their daily lives, they express a highly interest for a vast number of operators and different audiences, therefore, they are able to build natural bridges among different communities;
• Bridges are different from the “influencers”, which are subjects capable of augmenting the visibility and importance of contents, thanks to their reputation or the number of of contacts;
• While influencer are more rare, bridges are more widespread among population. By evidence they generate interests capable to go through different audiences and to create  thematic mobility.

4. A limited but present mobility.

• Comparing the places of origin with the different placees of cultural fruition, a limited but present level of mobility emerged ffrom the analysis;
• Setting tourists aside, about 28% of the subjects move in 3-5 different districts in order to attend events, whereas only 3% of them does not move from their district;
• An interesting phenomenon is the “one-direction movement”, according to which around 30% of the observed citizens state to take part to events set in only one district, that possibly corresponds to the one in which they live.
• .