Considering global models of arts funding can sometimes evoke a sense of envy. One might appraise Germany’s flourishing theatre landscape, Spain’s Bono Cultural Joven scheme wherein 18-year-olds are granted €400 for arts consumption, South Korea’s integration of music as a staple in their education system, or even Ukraine’s recent legislation, signed by President Zelenskiy, that introduces subsidies for bookstores and book vouchers for both newly-turned adults and fresh parents. Then there’s Ireland hosting the trial run for Basic Income for the Arts, providing tax reliefs for artists, and leaving the majority of their museums and galleries free with the exemption of some specialty exhibits. So, which approach fares best? Five influential individuals from the diverse arts sector worldwide share the strategies employed in their home nations.
USA
Insights from Rachel S Moore, CEO of the Los Angeles Music Center
Each method holds its unique benefits and drawbacks. In the USA, public funding for cultural establishments is scant. For instance, during my tenure at the American Ballet Theatre, government-based funds only contributed to 1% of our budget. Consequently, we heavily relied on private generosity. In contrast, corporate donations serve marketing interests, such as when a corporation like Coca-Cola decides to finance a major event – this is more akin to sponsorship than actual philanthropy. Foundations, on the other hand, represent a cornerstone of the philanthropy scene. Some substantial foundations have played a pivotal role in promoting arts nationwide, albeit they usually offer a maximum of three-year commitments, which necessitates a swift escalation.
Indeed, personal donors are tremendously loyal and generous, although their preference frequently leans towards traditional iterations of the arts, making them less receptive to novel, experimental formats. However, given that the government foregoes a hefty sum from tax income due to deductions on philanthropy, it’s imperative to develop programmes that cater to all. It’s not an exclusive club; it’s a wide community.
The National Endowment for the Arts allocates a relatively minor amount of funds compared to the country’s total economy. Over time, they have shifted their focus away from individual artists. Although large foundations such as Mellon and Ford still provide funding for individuals, their resources are typically directed towards more accomplished artists. Local art commissions provide support for developing artists, but this support varies across different cities and states. The diversity of communities from Alabama to California results in dissimilar decision-making due to the current polarised climate.
The Music Center, North America’s third largest venue for performing arts, operates four theatres in addition to a park and plaza. The land and buildings of the center belong to the County of Los Angeles who are also responsible for essential costs, while fundraising is done for programming purposes. One program that they are particularly proud of is Spotlight, a complimentary program accessible to any student from high school located between Santa Barbara and San Diego. It offers seven various areas of study, including classical dance and voice, jazz, and Broadway. Students participate by sending in a video and all of them receive written feedback. The program includes masterclasses, and 14 students get the chance to perform on the Walt Disney Concert Hall stage and receive a $10,000 prize. However, the program is more significant than that: it’s an endorsement, a message saying, “We recognise your talent, and we support you.” Renowned artists Misty Copeland and Josh Groban are amongst those who have taken part in this program.
As a former professional dancer, my former company only offered 36 weeks of work annually, leaving me and my co-workers relying on unemployment for the remainder of the year. A significant hurdle faced by artists not affiliated with an institution or university is gaining access to healthcare – a prominent issue in our nation. However, the Californian state passed legislation in November to invest $1 billion annually in the recruitment of arts educators. This enables artists to secure teaching positions and consequently gain access to healthcare, paving the way for them to pursue their craft.
In Estonia, the governmental support for arts and culture is noteworthy. The national identity’s strength, preservation of language, and historical protection are considered essential defences against potential invasions. Provisions are in place to ensure that the country’s 1.3 million residents can access performing arts services no more than 50km from their residences.
A total of 20 state-backed theatres, both national and regional, receive roughly 70% of their annual operating budgets from funding. This includes support for traditional and modern art forms such as theatre, opera, ballet, music, and dance. The national Kultuurkapital, also known as Kulka, body provides aid for projects, performances, festivals, mobility, and scholarships across multiple domains – performance art, folk culture, music, literature, audiovisual, architecture, visual and applied arts, and sport. The endowment boards undergo a change every three years.
Though support is attainable for artists in traditional art forms throughout their career journey, competition is formidable. Artists involved in non-traditional forms or those who haven’t been educated in Estonian tertiary institutions might find it difficult to secure funding. There’s a shortage of available venues for booking due to high rent and low average wages, which falls short of the purchasing power found in other European countries.
In Estonia, the concept of philanthropy is relatively undeveloped and securing private funding often involves significant branding compromises. The prevalent belief is that the state should subsidise culture and art, although definitions of what encompasses art and culture remain on the traditional and narrow side.
Lastly, Oswaldo Ruiz, a renowned visual artist originates from Mexico.
State policies have always placed a significant emphasis on the arts in Mexico, considering them to be of paramount importance. The crucial role they play is shown by the well-structured support provided by the government since the Mexican Revolution, which has helped to sustain artists, writers, and thinkers. In a bid to rejuvenate cultural policies during the 1980s, the Secretaría de Cultura was established. Simultaneously, The National Fund for Culture and the Arts or Fonca was also attached to it.
Fonca’s two projects, Jóvenes Creadores and the National System of Art Creators hold considerable weight. The former provides artists aged 18-35 with a monthly allowance and one-year grants and mentorship, while the latter, meant for artists above 35, offers three-year financial support with monthly payments for artists from various practices such as literature, film, music, and the visual arts. The beneficiaries of these programmes are selected by their contemporaries, lending credibility and fairness to the distribution of resources. This does not, however, discount the fact that resources are also extended to artists by local states, as well as private entities like Jumex and Pac, through their respective grants.
Artists receive substantial benefits from the Pago en Especie system, which permits taxes on art sales to be paid in kind by donating a piece of their work. Initially applicable only to paintings, engravings, and sculptures, the system was extended over time to include a wider variety of art forms. Still, it is worth noting that numerous large-scale projects supporting the arts have been discontinued and their resources redirected to social and other governmental programmes. Even though private funding has seen an increase, there has been a corresponding decline in state assistance for the arts.
It is better for state institutions to take charge of supporting the arts because the perception of what constitutes valuable art can greatly differ when left to private corporations. Support for the arts has been a topic of fervent debate recently, but the arts scene continues to thrive. Notably, the commentary is attributed to Anne Cleary, a visual artist, curator, and producer based in France.
I reside in the city of love, Paris, collaborating seamlessly with my partner, Denis Connolly. Having battled for years to finance our ventures in both Ireland and France, I’ve garnered significant insight into the ecosystem. In France, the allocation of funds towards the arts is largely contingent on the discipline. A large portion of performing arts funding is handled by a social security system known as Intermittent du Spectacle. This system is designed to account for the fleeting nature of performing arts, offering social security provisions to artists during their downtime. This arrangement is expensive, but the French public are generally accepting, given they perceive that they are receiving quality services.
However, visual arts appears to be the poor cousin, receiving a significantly lesser portion of the pie. Direct grants and scholarships for artists are comparatively meagre. Project funding tends to go through commercial galleries and regional art centres, with the hope that the artists will be compensated. This method is flawed as the artists often do not receive due payment. This, coupled with diminishing artistic liberty and decline in creative quality as artists feel compelled to adapt to the tastes of local officials or committees, is far from ideal.
Studio conditions for artists in France are somewhat favourable. Many towns offer designated and reasonably-priced residential artistic studios to artists, although the studio space is limited and waiting time is long, especially in Paris. Artists often join forces, forming associations or cooperatives to rent larger spaces that are usually empty structures earmarked for redevelopment.
In comparison, the Irish system, where Arts Council funding is assigned through peer review, might just be the better solution to this global issue. It aims to limit the impact of biased agendas and aggressive lobbying on arts financing decisions, a rampant issue in France. Financial reliance on the state or the market appears to be the top quandary facing French artists.
– Joy Gerrard, Artist from Northern Ireland
In the aftermath of completing my degree studies in Ireland, I progressed to undertake an MFA and an MPhil at the esteemed Royal College of Art in London, where I graduated in 2008. During this period, arts education in the UK was generously funded, a situation which made my journey possible. The benefits of a comprehensive system of artist residencies across the EU also availed itself to me, serving as an advantageous avenue for forming networks and constructing careers for artists. Nevertheless, the increasing cost of living in London, especially for families, led to our relocation to Belfast in 2018. The predicament is now strikingly contrasting.
Belfast presently exudes an energy reminiscent of Dublin in the 1990s. There exists a sense of potential buoyed by the availability of affordable housing and studio spaces, despite the general low income. The spacious and well-lit studio I rent cost a mere £200 monthly, far below the roughly £2000 similar spaces command in London or the near impossible find in Dublin.
Thanks to a Northern Ireland policy that provides landlords with total rebates for leasing to registered charities, they can offer significantly reduced rents to such qualifying organisations. This creates a dynamic network of enduring groups including Queen Street Studios, where I currently operate, Catalyst, PS2, and Flax. Despite operating on minimal budgets, these groups have succeeded in making significant impacts. As an illustration, with a meagre funding of just over £30,000 from the Arts Council of Northern Ireland, Queen Street Studios maintains 48 studios and two galleries. Conversely, in Dublin, the Temple Bar Gallery + Studios, with 30 studios and a gallery space, received €490,000 from the Arts Council of Ireland in 2024.
Regrettably, legislative stagnation in Northern Ireland, a consequence of the Assembly at Stormont’s suspension, has resulted in an impasse in developing arts funding. Through the practice of equality measures, funds are evenly distributed amongst communities. However great in theory, they often prove impracticable. Despite these challenges, Northern Irish artists can seek funding from the Arts Council of Ireland if their projects have substantial involvement in the South.
I aspire for an alternative outcome in Northern Ireland once the economy starts to flourish. It’s concerning to see the essence and vigour of a place getting eroded due to escalating real estate costs and diminishing artistic arenas, as witnessed in Dublin and other urban landscapes. Could there be a different path, one might wonder.