The arts through the eyes of the others
Elena Polivtseva is an independent researcher and a co-founder of Culture Policy Room, think tank advancing cultural policy-making by bridging research and policy. She worked as a Senior Researcher at IFACCA (International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies) and a Head of Policy and Research at IETM (International network for contemporary performing arts). Elena authored several publications on cultural policies and funding strategies, and artists’ working conditions. She was one of the co-initiators and a project manager of Perform Europe, a Board member at Culture Action Europe, and a Consultant at UNESCO.
Art through the eyes of policymakers
Elena worked on the ‘State of culture’ report of Culture Action Europe, a European advocacy network. The report intends to answer the broad question: what’s important for the cultural sector in Europe? How is culture positioned in our current political context?
The report, released at the end of 2024, analysed the cultural policies, strategies and programmes of the 27 EU Member States, explored the evolution of the EU cultural policy over the last 15 years. The report includes the results of the “State of Culture Barometer” as well as data collected through a series of workshops and interviews, while taking into account the broader political, social and economic context.
Before linking cultural policymaking to today’s challenges, Elena first provided the worldwide context – a necessary starting point for understanding how policies have evolved.
“We are talking constantly about the crisis that we are living through”, Elena notes. Researchers, journalists and policy-makers refer to polycrisis, metacrisis, and perma crises. Some would argue the digital age, with its information overload and easier access to knowledge, contributes to this alarming context. But there is clear evidence now that we are living through an unstable reality:
- Environmental degradation: 2024 was the warmest year on record and the trend shows no sign of slowing.
- Conflicts: According to the Global Peace Index, 2024 was also the least peaceful year since the Index exists (2008).
- Economic problems: In Europe, concerns over competitiveness with the U.S. and China are rising, and the initial enthusiasm for the digital revolution has given way to fears of its disruptive effects.
- Social polarisation: Recent elections demonstrate European societies are increasingly fragmented.
- Democratic erosion: According to the Democracy Index, democracy has deteriorated in 20 out of 27 EU Member States over the past two decades. Only three countries have shown slight improvements, while four have remained unchanged.
This general sense of anxiety and urgency is also reflected in the key policy guidelines – at the level of the EU, the UN and national governments. They are compelled to make difficult choices. Decision-makers regard everything that is intangible or unpredictable as unreliable.
Can culture be a solution, or at least a partner in meeting the challenges of the 21st century? The State of Culture report suggests that while the intrinsic value of culture was recognised in the political discourse earlier, the approach of cultural policies has shifted. There is a tendency of instrumentalisation of culture for diplomacy, external relations, economic and tourism purposes.
The report explores how policymakers justify the existence of cultural subsidies or even the cultural policy itself, through emphasising the value of culture for all sorts of external missions, be it tourism or innovation, health or climate action, education or democratic resilience. The cultural and creative sector (CCS) has also followed this tendency of instrumentalising culture and describing the value of their work in terms that are nothing to do with its intrinsic value.
Art through the eyes of cultural workers
Although cultural professionals also recognise the social dimension of culture as main positive impact, their understanding of this ‘social outcome’ significantly differs from that of policymakers:
“The cultural sector sees its value predominantly through a social lens, and so do policy-makers. But here, there is already quite a mismatch. For cultural workers, the social value of culture is not about social cohesion or cultural harmonisation. It is quite the opposite. The culture sector sees itself as an instigator of debate. Critical thinking accommodates difference, plurality, ambiguity and doesn’t create socially or culturally cohesive communities.”
This perspective of the cultural sector contrasts with the policymakers’ position, notably in the role of promoting national identity, which is ranked among the least important by cultural professionals.
Blinded by positive outcomes: the adverse effects of adapting to the eyes of others
The cultural sector is expected to justify its access to funding, and it is to some extent normal. But when competing for funding with other sectors and instrumentalising its value for all sorts of external missions culture typically struggles to measure and demonstrate its tangible, quantifiable impacts. It is hard for the cultural sector to compete with other policy fields, when talking about health, economics or education, and by the way of the day, why would we need a ministry of culture at all if culture is only to serve other sectors? Elena also emphasised how the hyper-instrumental approach of subsidies led to homogenisation of cultural offerings. By being asked repeatedly to meet the same criteria to secure funding, artists adapt their work to “tick the boxes” in what is often referred to as the politics of survival.
A global eye on cultural funding
According to UNESCO’s report of 2022, global investment in culture has not recovered to pre-2008 levels. If we look at Eurostat, at EU Member States’ level, the average percentage of investment in cultural services is 0.5% of national GDP. In 12 countries of the EU, it has decreased in the last ten years alongside growing precarious working conditions. More than 70% of people in the cultural sector have a second or third job.
Elena pointed out that culture has also not made it into other policy fields to the point that it could rely on subsidies from other ministries. Only 6% of cultural policy instruments actually receive funding from non-cultural ministries. 95% of these policy instruments claim that cross-sectoral collaboration is relevant to their work. When it comes to the Sustainable Development Goals, culture has not been recognised as a standalone goal either.
“This idea was deliberately left out from the UN’s Pact for the Future. Culture is also not embraced in the implementation of the EU Green Deal. Culture is not an explicit part of any of the important political agendas. The references to culture in these strategies are either too specific and too minimal for what culture actually is, or too general, so that nothing can, in policy terms, be done with it.”
Despite clear opportunities for cross-sectoral funding, culture could have been expected to find its place within other policy instruments – yet it remains consistently excluded.
Eyes Beyond 2025: What lies ahead for culture?
The ‘State of Culture’ 2024 report delivers a challenging picture for the cultural sector. The situation of 2025 has not drastically improved. With budget cuts in France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, in other countries; a more right-wing and polarised European Parliament that may tend to use culture as a nationalistic tool – and growing conservative pressures – suggesting a tendency toward self-censorship in art.
Meanwhile, Europe deals with a difficult geopolitical context. What will the economic position of Europe be? What is Europe’s strategy to rethink and consolidate its position in the world? Culture has not yet been integrated clearly in the priorities of the new European Commission except for some references to ‘creative industries’ and competitiveness of the cultural sector in a few documents.
New eyes for culture
In parallel, UNESCO promotes culture as a ‘global public good’, with a positive narrative that supports culture as a human right.
This is a significant first step. Rather than recognising the role of culture in social, environmental or economic terms, it is high time to redraw the narrative and to define the ‘cultural value’ (i.e. intrinsic value of culture). For instance, this could mean recognising culture as a sustainable development goal, redefining the status of the artists and supporting new types of relationships between funders and the sector. The primary value of culture is culture itself, not anything else.
Elena claimed that in her research, she never found anything easier to instrumentalise than festivals, “because they are praised for being flexible, experimental, agile, multi-functional and multifaceted as policy tools. So whenever you need to test something, go to festivals. Whenever you need to stage something to show that things can be different, go to festivals.” Elena concluded, “Culture should resonate with the place, the people, thecommunities, butit should not be usedas a tool to serve specific agendas. And if there is any agenda that should exist for culture, it is to be as diverse and as vibrant as possible.” activity be effective at delivering other agendas […] And if there is any agenda that should exist for culture, it is to be as diverse and as vibrant as possible.”
This text is based on the keynote of Elena Polivtseva at the European Festivals Association’s Arts Festivals Summit on 29 April 2025 in Edinburgh, hosted by the Edinburgh International Festival, Festivals Edinburgh, and the City of Edinburgh Council.
Festival Life creates shared moments of audiences and artists, eye-to-eye
