Since 2012 UK policy surrounding regional development has increasingly prioritised the development of creative clusters to support and bolster the country's creative economy. The Creative Industries Clusters Programme (CICP) is one such example of the current models of support being enacted through this policy and is mainly delivered by universities who act as intermediaries between the creative sector and government. The primary mechanism of support involves micro-funding initiatives aimed at supporting creative small, micro and medium-sized enterprises (SMME) within a given, usually medium to short, timeframe. However, as the sector is largely composed of micro-enterprises and freelancers, ongoing instability due to these types of funding cycles often leave organisations vulnerable once support ends resulting in a need to either ameliorate the impacts of these types of policies or holistically rethink these types of policy models. This paper examines the BSU Boost initiative (formerly Counting House), developed at Bath Spa University (BSU), as a case study of a ‘policy instrument affordance’ within the UK's creative cluster policy environment. Drawing on Hellström and Jacob's (2017) theoretical framework of policy instrument affordances, this paper argues that Boost operates as an intermediary mechanism that bridges critical gaps in public funding cycles. It offers new possibilities—or affordances—for creative micro-enterprises by enabling them to access grants that would otherwise be out of reach due to pre-financing requirements. Through a reflexive case study methodology, the paper details how these affordances do not emerge from the policy instrument alone but rely on active intermediation by the university. Acting as an intermediary, BSU translates complex policy into practical support through Boost, but faces challenges like administrative friction and sustainability concerns. This case highlights the importance—and limitations—of university-led intermediation in making policy affordances real for creative clusters. Accordingly, this initiative serves as an illustrative case of alternative mechanisms for addressing the limitations inherent in short-to medium-term policy frameworks designed to support creative clusters. • Examines a policy instrument affordance within creative cluster policy environment. • Draws on Hellström and Jacob's (2017) theoretical framework. • Describes an intermediary mechanism bridging gaps in public funding cycles. • Includes the capacity to access grants that otherwise remain out of reach due. • Includes a case study of the Boost pilot project.
Pullinger et al. (Thu,) studied this question.