RadicalxChange

← ASPIRE Policy Lab — Results

Every statement and vote

The full record: every substantive statement voted on in the Policy Lab — three test entries and eight moderator-removed statements (mostly duplicates, each seen by at most two voters) are excluded from this table but flagged in the CSV — with room-wide tallies and each group's agree rate. Sort and filter, or just read — the table works without JavaScript too.

Download the statement-level results (CSV)

◔ = thin data: fewer than 5 votes cast in that group; treat as directional. Thin cells are greyed.

# Statement Agree Disagree Pass A agree B agree C agree
1 The most effective arts and health work happening right now depends on individual relationships, not formal agreements. seed 43 14 15 55% 57% 70%
2 We already have enough good local examples in Australia to justify scaling without running more pilots. seed 56 8 7 90% 48% 95%
3 Community organisations are currently delivering health outcomes they are neither funded nor recognised for. seed 59 1 10 86% 76% 90%
4 The most promising work in this space is happening outside the health system, not within it. seed 40 16 15 58% 45% 65%
5 The portfolio that pays for the intervention is almost never the one that sees the benefit. seed 25 25 19 30% 32% 50%
6 There is already enough money in the system, it's just in the wrong places. seed 42 14 13 67% 45% 68%
7 This work will not scale without new, dedicated funding. seed 47 12 9 76% 55% 74%
8 Short funding cycles are the single biggest barrier to this work right now. seed 46 13 9 80% 26% 89%
9 Philanthropy is currently funding work that the government should be paying for. seed 42 14 13 57% 35% 95%
10 We have enough evidence — the barrier is political will, not proof. seed 52 7 8 96% 52% 78%
11 The evidence base is still too weak to justify major health system investment. seed 10 52 7 3% 40% 5%
12 Current measurement frameworks cannot capture the value this work creates. seed 47 12 9 63% 65% 83%
13 Social prescribing, neighbourhood health or other connections between clinical care and arts and cultural outlets are still treated as a nice-to-have rather than core health infrastructure. seed 64 2 3 97% 79% 100%
14 Framing arts and culture primarily in health terms risks damaging the arts sector. seed 30 24 15 13% 65% 68%
15 Clinicians currently see connecting people with things outside of health care as extra work rather than part of their job. seed 47 8 13 59% 60% 95%
16 Health services genuinely want to connect people to community activities but don't know how. seed 41 11 17 63% 55% 58%
17 Community organisations are already at capacity and could not absorb more referrals tomorrow. seed 28 20 20 34% 35% 58%
18 The communities that would benefit most currently have the fewest of these assets. seed 43 11 13 69% 55% 67%
19 Philanthropy is better placed than government to fund the innovative and experimental. seed 24 36 11 19% 43% 47%
20 The bridges and mechanisms that connect health and the arts are the missing infrastructure, not more programs. seed 57 3 9 84% 80% 83%
21 Loneliness and disconnection are now bigger drivers of poor health in my community than any clinical factor. seed 43 5 21 67% 37% 80%
22 I've seen the benefits of joined-up thinking land in one part of the system, while funding and credit stay with the old model. seed 41 5 23 73% 43% 56%
23 In my experience, there's little reward for working across silos — the incentives all point back to staying in your lane. seed 37 26 6 47% 45% 74%
24 The people who inspire me most in this field work outside the mainstream, and their stories rarely get told. seed 38 11 22 57% 29% 75%
25 My own breakthroughs have only come from breaking the rules, not following them. seed 25 28 17 30% 15% 65%
27 Arts and culture shouldn't have to compensate for a health system that ignores the whole person. seed 39 19 10 38% 60% 84%
28 Funding for arts-based health programs should come from health budgets, not arts budgets. seed 31 20 17 43% 29% 68%
29 I don't believe arts and culture make a measurable difference to health outcomes. seed 1 66 2 3% 0% 0%
30 In my experience, health services treat creative therapies as a "nice to have," not real care. seed 51 6 10 75% 75% 79%
31 The barriers people face accessing arts and culture for wellbeing are more about feeling worthy than about money or availability. seed 23 30 16 21% 30% 55%
33 Arts, culture and creative outlets should be considered essential parts of health prevention. seed 65 2 3 100% 75% 100%
34 Extra funding should go to community organisations and groups delivering health-improving activities, not to administrative bodies or systems that just connect people to them. seed 40 13 16 60% 37% 75%
35 Health is built in daily life, not in hospitals or clinics. seed 63 4 2 90% 95% 89%
38 Every time we ask a community program to prove itself in clinical terms, we risk destroying the very thing that made it work. seed 40 15 15 55% 50% 68%
39 Scaling what works in this space should be done carefully, so it doesn't strip out the relationships, creativity and local character that make it effective. seed 63 0 5 93% 85% 100%
41 Calling every park, library and choir "health infrastructure" risks stretching the term until it means nothing and helps no one make better decisions. seed 44 16 10 47% 76% 74%
43 Cross-portfolio funding pools only ever create confusion about who's accountable when things go wrong. seed 19 32 20 13% 43% 30%
44 The idea that we can grow something to national scale while keeping it intimate and human is not realistic seed 17 43 7 20% 28% 32%
46 Governments are already funding health-generating activity, it just isn’t being recognised or measured. seed 40 13 17 57% 50% 65%
47 Assigning an instrumental value to arts does not diminish their intrinsic value. seed 50 8 11 87% 74% 47%
48 The system rewards sticking to the status quo, rather than exploring what might work better. seed 51 8 11 87% 40% 84%
52 Should be cross sector investment. written live 63 1 4 97% 89% 89%
53 We have strong local evidence of success and economic impact written live 43 13 11 74% 28% 83%
54 Evidence continues to grow about the impacts of arts participation on welling, and in arts in health practice. Great examples of practice written live 54 2 7 93% 67% 94%
55 There are pockets of good work with no way to consistently evaluate and no consistent referral pathways written live 55 5 4 83% 82% 94%
56 This kind of framing supports more opportunities and links to traditional applications of arts and culture written live 41 3 24 71% 42% 61%
57 This needs to be accompanied by initiatives that support art for art’s sake written live 42 10 13 68% 35% 88%
58 Communities aren't supported to shape their environments for health & wellbeing. We need a Community Empowerment Act to address that gap. written live 32 8 20 62% 31% 60%
59 Funding is the biggest barrier to implementation. written live 30 24 11 52% 26% 59%
60 More data driven evidence written live 30 21 14 41% 63% 37%
61 Disconnect between stakeholders and working in silos. Shared understanding but perspectives not coming together to progress. written live 53 1 10 93% 67% 82%
62 Industry have social infrastructure that should be unlocked written live 49 2 13 76% 76% 78%
63 Cross sector partnerships are essential written live 64 0 0 100% 100% 100%
64 Not all arts, artists and arts programs are necessarily able to deliver health outcomes. written live 48 9 7 76% 82% 67%
65 Social prescribing has under-valued the scalable and accessible receptive arts participation written live 28 10 29 48% 16% 61%
66 We have strong local evidence and economic impact of successful projects…now is the time written live 49 5 6 89% 53% 100%
67 Capacity within our community structures need to be nurtured and developed so we can support localised solutions written live 59 1 4 100% 75% 94%
68 Young adults are not well catered for in current models of social prescribing written live 41 5 21 66% 53% 63%
69 Need to intervene upstream not at symptomatic stage. written live 53 1 10 79% 95% 75%
70 Committed and passionate people push the agenda forward. written live 57 3 4 100% 76% 83%
71 Arts communities don’t speak the same language as health industry, which limits effective communication written live 48 8 7 72% 76% 82%
72 Australia needs to prioritise community & ecosystem flourishing over $$ for war. End AUKUS & spend $350bn on community health & wellbeing! written live 37 7 18 54% 41% 88%
73 More focus needed on true local community development written live 54 2 10 90% 61% 89%
74 There needs to be more focus on evaluating the benefits of arts participation on society levels of social wellbeing written live 39 14 9 67% 69% 53%
75 Cross sector collaboration needs to be funded and recognised through policy incentives. written live 57 2 5 97% 76% 89%
76 Creating a positive ecosystem should include both arts and health and arts for art’s sake written live 54 1 7 90% 71% 95%
77 Social prescribing pilots need to move to ‘stage 2’ and beyond written live 52 2 7 96% 71% 82%
78 The mental/ health crisis is a cultural crisis - emerging from our disconnection as beings of nature and in relationship with all others written live 48 2 10 74% 69% 100%
79 The A&H sector needs support to set agendas for diverse economics-oriented research and advocacy, for now and for the future written live 41 4 14 81% 41% 80%
80 The key thing to do is help decision makers better prioritise to achieve positive outcomes written live 41 7 14 66% 56% 80%
81 It’s hard to invest in what’s common sense for the future, while meeting the expectations of the present…. written live 39 13 9 59% 65% 71%
82 We need shared language to communicate both health / wellbeing value, and non instrumental value(s) and benefits written live 52 4 6 93% 72% 80%
83 funding models should take into account long term costs /expenses avoided, uncoupling long term finance decisions from shorter term politics written live 52 1 7 96% 82% 73%
84 We need a good shared language to communicate the benefits without instrumentalisation written live 48 4 8 81% 59% 100%
85 Not all artists / arts org have the skills or the capacity or the inclination to add value in arts and health written live 51 7 3 76% 82% 100%
86 We are beyond evidence, let’s define the pathway ahead written live 53 3 6 97% 60% 89%
87 The evidence is very strong. It needs structured leadership and advocacy. written live 48 1 11 100% 47% 80%
88 The public isn’t as aware of the benefits of art:culture on health and that makes it harder for politicians and govs to fund things now written live 46 10 2 74% 81% 87%
89 Art for art’s sake is a false binary - all arts can generate health. written live 43 9 8 78% 59% 75%
90 clinicians have insufficient knowledge of the evidence written live 42 9 10 66% 65% 80%
91 Social prescribing risks becoming medicalised or yet another silo written live 31 19 10 31% 73% 69%
92 The problem is not only one of political will, it’s also one of political capital and getting the public on board written live 51 8 3 75% 88% 88%
93 We need longitudinal data to address the evidence gap. It is just adding relevant questions to the existing health surveys. written live 39 14 8 67% 44% 81%
94 True local participatory design is essential for meaningful engagement written live 56 2 2 96% 88% 94%
95 We all intrinsically understand the health benefits of health participant, but we are unable to articulate at the collective level written live 37 12 9 67% 75% 47%
96 It’s time to stop trying to locate virtue within health or within arts. Cross sector partnering is essential. written live 53 1 4 89% 93% 93%
97 Such an opportunity to engage with industry for funding and participation written live 42 0 19 71% 65% 69%
98 Every commonwealth and state/territory new policy proposals should contain a wellbeing impact statement written live 53 3 6 96% 65% 88%
99 It doesn't have to be arts or health, it has to be an experience, and led by what the community needs The arts as a health behaviour written live 46 4 9 79% 87% 67%
100 What we need most is shared funding infrastructure to bring together arts and health and respect their differences written live 45 5 9 82% 53% 93%
101 Healthcare should honour life( not industry) written live 43 4 10 74% 71% 81%
102 This arts and health agenda could create a perverse business model that monetizes the experience in unhealthy ways written live 31 15 12 30% 75% 73%
103 Practioners are supported and well trained written live 17 33 11 37% 12% 29%
104 Consider how existing approaches can support sustainability written live 47 2 14 93% 53% 63%
105 Examples are needed of how large system infrastructure (national or state) can filter to local context sp written live 40 7 14 72% 56% 63%
106 We need a paradigm shift to a wellbeing economy that prioritises human and ecological flourishing, not corporate profit maximisation written live 55 1 6 90% 82% 94%
107 Acknowledgement of what went before I.e vichealth and WHO - promoting mental health -Herman, sacens, moodie written live 28 2 29 44% 33% 65%
108 Everyone deserves access to art and it’s way more fun than a gym membership… which an insurer might fund… let’s treat art the same written live 34 3 4 95% 50% 92%
109 we need to question our own paradigms if we wish to initiate change written live 25 2 4 75% 88% 82%
110 The idea that there is additional funding available for such initiatives is naive - existing programs need to be leveraged written live 18 7 4 45% 71% 73%
111 Artists bring a different way of thinking that should not be co-opted written live 17 4 4 56% 60% 82%
112 by focusing purely on arts are we not creating the same silos and structures we wish to avoid or change written live 13 4 7 56% 75% (thin) 45%
113 We need an equivalent to the UK’s All Parliamentary Group for arts and health written live 16 2 5 100% 50% (thin) 55%
114 We are amid a right of passage, we will either flourish or fail - and invited to consider what futures are worthy of the best of us written live 8 3 5 50% 50% (thin) 50%
115 our current theories on health change are not adequate to explain why SP is important. written live 9 1 2 60% 100% (thin) 83%
116 A structure is needed for cross sectoral collaboration that allows everyone, down to grassroots practitioners, to share knowledge and learn written live 3 0 0 100% (thin) (thin) 100% (thin)

“Most consensus” ranks by the lowest agree rate across the three groups (a statement only ranks high if all agree); “most divisive” by the spread of net agreement between them. Statements with fewer than 4 votes in any group are unranked and sort last.

All results are anonymous by design: aggregate tallies and verbatim unattributed statements only. Vote tallies and group breakdowns are computed from the participant-vote matrix in the Pol.is report export; the statement export is used only for statement text, so counts may differ by a vote or two from other snapshots of the same conversation. Pol.is re-clusters as votes accumulate: the groupings shown live in the room (28/14/30 of 72 voters) differ from the final export this page is computed from (31/21/20 of 73, plus one unclustered participant). Quadratic-vote results are aggregate option totals only; voter-level records never enter this site.