Where have all the theatre companies gone?

In his comment on my post about Montreal, Music, and Vice, Ian asks about the “performing arts presenters” variable. I actually combined two NAICS codes from Canadian Business Patterns to make that variable: “Live Theatres and Other Performing Arts Presenters with Facilities” and “Performing Arts Promoters (Presenters) without Facilities.” Since these variables are part of a puzzle I’m looking for help in solving, I thought it would be worthwhile to do a post about it.

Take a look at the below chart:

This shows trends in some performing arts and theatre variables from 1999-2008 in Canada as a whole. These, like most of the other Canadian performing arts in this period, show a tremendous increase, sometimes doubling, tripling, and almost quadrupling. Later, maybe we’ll get into some more general discussion of what is going up, what is going down, where, why, and what it all might mean. But for now, contrast the above chart to this one:

Theatre companies have dropped almost 60%! And they are decreasing at similar rates in Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia (almost 70% in B.C.). What is going on here?

A first guess might be that something this big is a data artifact, maybe having to do with some redefinition of the categories. This seems to me unlikely. First, because if NAICS codes are redefined, that typically happens at Census years (2001, 2006), but the big drop in theatre companies started in 2004-2005. Second, because the decline is steady. And third, because it seems, maybe, to be linked with the increase in “Live Theatres and Other Performing Arts Presenters with Facilities” that started around the same time.

So, what do these categories mean? Here’s some of their definitions, from Stats Canada’s manual.

One hypothesis these definitions suggest is that the trend is largely driven by a decline in theatre companies that own their own buildings, coupled with a separation between the production, organization, and promotion functions, leading to a rise in live theatre and performing arts promoters with facilities who contract with companies for specific events or runs. Does this seem plausible?

If so, a number of questions arise: why did this start in 2004? Are there bigger, structural factors in play that broke through then? What are the consequences of this change for actors and audiences? Is this division of labour healthy for the theatre world, leading to salutary specialization, or a dangerous loss of autonomy and stability for actors and companies?

If there are any theatre professionals out there with some knowledge about what has been happening, it would be great to hear from you!