The applications of mediated, participatory approaches to cultural formation have been recognised as important contributions to the field of community education. Co-creative digital culture projects provide communities with a collaborative infrastructure to explore and share their ideas and beliefs (Russo &Watkins, 2005). While co-creative experiences have been defined as empowering (Cornish & Dunn, 2009; Füller et al., 2009), innovative (Nambisan & Nambisan, 2013; Mühlbacher et al. 2009) and engaging (Chowdhury, 2012; Matzler & Jawecki, 2009), both positive (Deuze, 2006; Russo & Watkins, 2005) and negative (Hand, 2016) impacts of participation in digital culture, can be found in the literature. Despite extensive research on the societal impacts of digital culture (for example Buckingham, 2013; Deuze, 2006; Miller, 2011), the outcomes of cultural co-creative processes have been described as unpredictable and ‘challenging to measure’ (RICHES, 2015). The use of traditional evaluation approaches has been critiqued for primarily “pre-empting the outcomes” (Lockie, 2001, p.281) and addressing funding criteria (Adams & Garbutt, 2008). Therefore, it has been argued that new tools should be developed in order to understand the impact of small-scale participatory digital projects which are “process oriented and creative in nature” (RICHES, p.6) The aim of this paper is to review current understandings of the social impact of digital culture co-creation. The analysis presented here has been gathered from secondary sources, as a part of a doctoral research project’s literature review, which includes the current scholarly debates on digital culture, co-creation, and social impact evaluation. This paper identifies a research gap in this area and aims to contribute to the ongoing scholarly discussion regarding the measurement of the value of digital culture. Emphasising small-scale community projects, it proposes that a more holistic and participatory approach to evaluation could enrich the current practice and understanding of the social impact of digital culture co-creation.

4. VOICE
EVALUATION

14. :)
"developed around “pre-existing valued interactions”
and enrich the value of these activities, instead of
substituting them"
(Deuze, 2006)
"opportunities for self-directed learning,
experimentation, and networking"
(Black et al., 2015)
"digital networks encourage greater connectivity,
collaboration, communication, community and
participation"
(Gere 2012, p.1)
:(
“illusionary freedom and autonomy”
(Herring, 2008, p.73)
“culture of streaming, texts, tweets and statuses
updates” can result in addictive behaviours (Turkle,
2011)
Digital communities and identities are less complex
than their older offline, traditional forms (Hand, 2008)

26. VOICE
EVALUATION

28. Studies agree that active community
collaboration in social impact assessment,
provides a more critical and informed view
of the process and its outcomes
(for example Akpofure-Ojile 2003; Becker et
al. 2003; Douthwaite et al. 2007).

30. NEW EVALUATION
TOOLS & APPROACHES?

31. (+ MY CONTRIBUTION)

32. 20 interviews
(Digital Community
Practitioners)
Focus Group
(Digital Community
Practitioners)
Digital Projects
Participants (16-25 yrs)