Visual arts

Organizations

The above figures give an indication of the number of museums and galleries that operate within the visual arts sector. In addition to museums and galleries, institutions for contemporary visual arts (also called 'presentation institutions'), art fairs, art academies, post-academic institutions and festivals also play an important role in the visual arts field. In the Collective Selfie 5: Figures and Trends in the Visual Arts (Vinken et al. 2025) an overview can be found of the independent post-academic institutions (4 in 2025, of which two in Amsterdam, one in Oisterwijk and one in Maastricht), institutions for contemporary visual arts (98 in 2025 spread throughout the country, based on the number of members of The Case Now) and art fairs (15 in 2021). Recent information about visual arts festivals is not available, but an earlier edition of the Collective Selfie showed that there were almost 2019 visual arts festivals in 100. In addition to the number of organizations, the Collective Selfie 5 including a representation of the available information on financing of post-academic institutions and festivals, which are likely to increase in the coming years supplemented will be from the sector.

The CBS collects figures on museums and makes a distinction between museums for art, history, business & technology and natural history & ethnology. The category 'art' covers a broad category of museums for different types of art, and is therefore not specifically about museums for visual arts.

Job market

Visit & practice

Money flows

Fair pay & Fair practice

Fair Pay

Fair Pay is an essential step to bring the income of visual artists closer to the Dutch average and is necessary to make the sector sustainable, flexible and resilient. Various studies show that the visual arts sector is lagging behind in this area. In 2023, it will be mapped out what the additional costs are for Fair Pay in the cultural sector: for the category 'Visual arts and creative industry' 3,2 million euros are needed. 63 percent of this (2 million euros) is needed for the visual arts. This high percentage is caused by the fact that the visual arts have many small and medium-sized organisations that only receive short-term or limited subsidies. Of the additional costs within the visual arts and creative sector, almost half (1,5 million euros) relate to additional costs of salaried personnel and slightly more than half (1,7 million euros) to self-employed persons (Geukema et al. 2023).

To achieve Fair Pay, the sector has developed a number of instruments, such as the Guideline for function and salary structure for visual arts institutions van The Case Now, and collective labor agreements such as the Museum collective labor agreement. Also since 2017 there is the Artist Fee Guidelines. From one evaluation of the guideline it has become clear that in the period 2018-2020 presentation settings for this purpose are the most Funding applications did (Berenschot 2021). The evaluation also showed that the guideline was considered a useful instrument, but that there was a desire for further refinement and differentiation in the directiveBased on this evaluation, the Artists' Fee Guideline Revised, with more possibilities for differentiation, namely flexible build-up and break-down hours, additional artistic-content activities and size of the institution (Goudriaan et al. 2023). However, the new proposed guideline, which would apply from 1 January 2025, was accompanied by ambiguities. In addition, the adjustments would have to be made for both artists and institutions unforeseen financial consequences can lead (fairPACCT 2025). An independent second opinion (Social Finance Matters) has been called in to re-examine the guideline. As a result, clarity on the guideline to be followed must be provided by 1 September 2025. In the meantime, organisations can apply to the Mondriaan Fund for compensation request with both the new and classic Artist Fee Guidelines.

Fair Practice

The Fair Practice Code was launched in 2017 and is about more than just Fair Pay – it serves as a moral compass for everyone working in the cultural sector and endorsement of it ('apply and explain') is a condition for grant awards for subsidised institutions. In recent years, various institutions have tried to address the still persistent inequalities to increase the pressure and translate the increased attention for inclusion and diversity into structural, concrete change. For example, De Zaak Nu and Kunsten '92 presented in 2021 Fair care: code of conduct and protocol. This addition to the Fair Practice Code could, by means of clear guidelines, mean an important step towards safer, inclusive working environments. Various funds and institutions are focusing more on compliance with the Fair Practice Code by offering more tools for this. The Gallery Fair Practice Code is such a tool to better incorporate Fair Practice in the gallery sector. The Mondriaan Fund provides the Gallery Fair Practice Code now as a fixed condition for galleries that want to receive a contribution for a foreign art fair, for example. The aim is to ensure that the principles of the Fair Practice Code also become self-evident in the gallery sector (Mondriaan Fund n.d.).

Connection to the region

Culture must become more accessible to the region – this applies to the entire cultural sector after criticism in recent years about an unfair distribution of government support, with some regions getting the short end of the stick came off. The Raad voor Cultuur spoke out about this in the system advice Access to culture (2024). The Interprovincial Consultation (IPO) and the Association of Dutch Municipalities (VNG) also endorse the importance boil. As a result of this focus on the region, the National Cultural Funds are also committed to investigating how they can better connect with the region and reduce the distance to the funds. For example, the Mondriaan Fund has expanded its team of regional brokers and appointed a regional coordinator.

The visual arts sector is strongly linked to local policy. This is evident, for example, when the income mix of visual arts museums is compared with that of other museums. This shows that museums of art are dependent on municipal subsidies for a larger part of their income than other museums. In financing visual arts, the municipalities that receive money from the Decentralization Allowance for Visual Arts and Design have been spending the largest part of this budget on museums for years (Vinkenburg et al. 2018). The share of presentation institutions is also increasing, but at 8 percent this is still nowhere near the 63 percent that museums for visual arts receive (Ibid.).

Art museums after corona

The cultural sector has become increasingly robust since the end of the corona pandemic. This also applies to art museums. In 2023, museums of art an own income of 257 million euros, which means it has risen above the pre-pandemic level of 2019 (237 million euros) (see figure 'own income museums for art' under 'Overview and key figures'). The number of visitors also continues to rise, according to figures from the Collective Selfie 5 and Museana (see figures below). At museums of visual arts we see that the size of the audience is almost – but not yet completely – back to the pre-pandemic level. However, a change in the composition of the audience is visible: the average number of visits by adults between 18 and 64 years remains on the low side compared to the other age groups, which are almost at the same level as 2019 (Vinken et al. 2025). The industry research also Museum figures 2023 shows that domestic visits are back to 2019 levels, although foreign visits has not yet been fully recovered (Museum Association 2024). The Collective Selfie 5 further shows with figures on the number of people employed in museums that museums have had to say goodbye to freelancers ('other salaried employees') on a large scale during the corona years - and in 2022 a strong recovery can be seen among this group in particular (Vinken et al. 2025).

However, small and medium-sized museums in particular continue to worry financially. In 2023, they received significantly fewer visits than in 2019: for small museums this applies to -33 percent, for medium-sized museums to -18 percent (Museum Association 2024). Incidentally, this applies to all museums taken together, not just art museums.

International art market

Globally, the art market has recovered from the COVID-2021 pandemic. In 2022 and 2020, the total value of sales on the art market increased compared to 2023. In 4, the value decreased by 65 percent compared to the previous year (to $2019 million). Nevertheless, the total value of sales on the international art market remains above the 64,4 level (then $2024 billion) (McAndrew 2023). However, the growth of the market is lower than expected, partly due to political and economic instability worldwide (McAndrew 2023). Despite the decline in the total value of sales in 4, the number of transactions increased that year (by 2022 percent compared to 2024) – there were mainly more transactions at lower price points and fewer transactions at the top end of the market (McAndrew XNUMX).

'Online-only' sales on the international market continue to rise, despite the decline in the total value of all sales. In 2023, $11,8 billion was sold online, an increase of 7 percent compared to 2022. Online sales are twice as high as in 2019 and the years before, and will account for 2023 percent of the total market turnover in 18 (Ibid.). Figures on online purchases at Dutch galleries reinforce the picture of a strong increase in online sales. The Art Market Research 2021 (NGA 2022) shows that in 2017 buyers bought online on the artist's website (8 percent) or the gallery's website (6 percent), whereas in 2021 this is a much larger share of 20 percent online purchases on the artist's website and 18 percent on the gallery's website.

It would be valuable to gain insight into the share that Dutch artists make up of the international art market. Contemporary visual art is an important sales market for the visual arts sector, and that contemporary art market operates internationally to a large extent. There are no figures available yet that provide insight into how much Dutch art is sold to/in other parts of the world. However, DutchCulture has a database available in which the activities of Dutch artists abroad are recorded. It shows that in 2023 the visual arts sector will account for 12 percent of all international activities of the Dutch cultural sector (DutchCulture 2023). In 2024, the activities of Dutch artists will take place in Europe (61 percent), Asia (20 percent), North America (14 percent), South America and the Caribbean (2 percent), Oceania (1 percent) and Africa (1 percent). Since 2017, these proportions have remained more or less the same, although the number of activities in Europe continues to rise steadily (DutchCulture 2024).

Diversity, equity and inclusion

There seems to be no shortage of initiatives to promote diversity, inclusion and equality within the visual arts. Some institutions focus primarily on involving the public, such as making exhibitions for visitors with disabilities. Other institutions are mainly concerned with the content of their exhibitions, by a critical look to throw on the permanent collection, to investigate their colonial past and to focus on decolonization, or to take gender diversity and polyphony into account in the purchasing policy. In line with this, much reflection is also taking place around the use of language in exhibitions. Various insights regarding inclusive exhibition texts are summarized in the Handout Values ​​for a New Language of Code Diversity & Inclusion (Samuel 2022) and Words matter (Modest 2018).

The openness around the theme is increasing. An example of this is the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, which had its process of change towards more diversity and inclusion in the museum recorded in the documentary White Balls on Walls. This has given impetus to these discussions within the field of Visual Arts, where there is increasing reflection on the inequalities that play a role within the field – and society. However, it is questionable whether reflection always translates into actual equality of opportunity, both in terms of income and influence. Inequality is evident in various areas undesirable behavior to play into the hands, about which many reports have also been received at Dutch art academies and within visual arts organizations (Members 2022).

The above figures are from the research Diversity of staff, self-employed supervisors and advisors in the cultural and creative sector: what will the situation be in 2024? (Bosma et al. 2025). They show diversity in terms of origin, gender and age per cultural discipline: the figures relate to the staff (including paid interns) of subsidized institutions. Visual arts, museums and heritage are considered here together as one discipline. As for ancestry the figures show that within this category, 74 percent of the staff have a Dutch origin, 11 percent a European origin and 15 percent a non-European origin. This means that the category of visual arts, museums and heritage has the largest share of staff with a Dutch origin compared to the other disciplines, where relatively more employees have a non-European origin (excluding film). However, the proportions in visual arts, museums and heritage do not deviate significantly from the national average: in 2023, 75 percent of employees will have a Dutch origin, 9 percent a European origin and 16 percent a non-European origin.

In terms of age, the largest group of workers is between 35 and 65 years old in the visual arts, museums and heritage (61 percent). With the distribution of the age categories, this discipline does not differ much from the other disciplines: only in film there is a considerably larger group of young people up to 35 years old working. Nationally, the distribution is different: there 43 percent are younger than 35 years old, 53 percent are 35 to 65 years old and 4 percent are 65 years old and older. So there are above average more people between 35 and 65 years old working in the visual arts, museums and heritage sector (this also applies to most other cultural sectors).

Gender (in)equality

The position of women in the visual arts is disadvantaged compared to that of their male colleagues, as shown by various studies (including by Women Inc. in 2021 (Heithuis et al. 2021) and Boekmanstichting in 2024 (Haeren et al. 2024)). The subject has been regularly discussed in recent years. news reports and programs dedicated and it tends to dominate conversations about diversity and inclusion in the visual arts.

The above figures show that sex see that 65 percent women and 35 percent men are employed at subsidized institutions within the visual arts, museums and heritage. Women are therefore in a large majority, which is reasonably consistent with the other disciplines. The research Female visual artists in the Netherlands: labor market position, career progression, representation (Haeren et al. 2024) shows that of the number of visual artists working in the Netherlands, an average of 2017 percent were women and 2022 percent were men between 54 and 46. Furthermore, this study shows that an average of 2002 percent of the visual artists who graduated between 2022 and 64 were women. This means that more women graduate as visual artists than ultimately work on the labor market.

The reason for this cannot be demonstrated from the figures, but from discussions held for the research (Haeren et al. 2024) with the sector it can be concluded that the inaccessibility of the visual arts sector for artists with (young) children may play a role in this. In recent years there has been an increasing number of attention for the position of parents (and mothers in particular) who work as visual artists. The survey research Pregnancy & Parenthood in the Visual Arts Sector shows that a majority of artists (both male and female) find parenthood completely or partially incompatible with a career in the visual arts. In addition, 64 percent of the women surveyed experienced negative stereotyping surrounding their pregnancy, while men experienced little or no such experience. In response to concerns about the inaccessibility of the visual arts sector for parents, the Mondriaan Fund has launched the 'Voucher Artist with child' was created. Parents can apply for this when they need financial support in caring for their non-compulsory school-age child, for example when they are following a residency.

The study by Haeren et al. (2024) also makes it clear that the average personal income of female visual artists is 20 percent lower than that of their male colleagues – although this is even lower for the total of other creative professions (20 percent) (see figure below). The research into diversity among personnel also shows that women aged 35 and older earn substantially less high salaries than men of the same age (Bosma et al. 2025). This picture is consistent with an exploratory study by the Verwey-Jonker Institute, in which respondents indicated that they believe women are overrepresented in the sector as a whole, but that high positions are mainly held by white men (Bosma et al. 2025, De Wit et al. 2023). This last observation applies to the cultural and creative sector as a whole, and not just to the visual arts.

Existing studieson the representation of women in museums make it clear that women are strongly underrepresented in various parts of the art world. Figures on the representation of art by female makers in museums are still lacking on a national scale. However, there are valuable initiatives such as 'The Collection Netherlands in Figures' from Metropolis M which, although the figures are an estimate and in 2024 only 14 museums can indicate the distribution of m/f/x within their collection, clearly shows that art by women is underrepresented in museum collections.  

Finally, not enough is known about the representation of female artists at fairs and in galleries in the Netherlands, although the available figures show that the share of female artists at international fairs has increased in recent years (see figure below).

While some institutions are already taking major steps towards more inclusive and diverse programming, staff, audiences and partners, other institutions do not always know where to start and see working towards diversity, inclusion and equality as a major and complex task (Borg 2020). What do diversity and inclusion mean at the institutional level? How can different institutions best give substance to these concepts? Do existing collections need to be fundamentally adjusted, or is a new, 'critical' reading sufficient? The theme report Diversity, inclusion and equality expands on this and shows which measurements are already being made, but also addresses the complexity of measuring diversity. Is it possible to measure the effect of different approaches in a clear way, or can diversity and inclusion not be captured quantitatively? Such issues are increasingly being addressed and will continue to elicit many different answers in the coming years – but it is clear that a thorough discussion about (in)equality, diversity and inclusion is now manifesting itself in the visual arts.

digitization

Digitalization has a profound impact on the visual arts, as described in the publication Value of image, image of value (Manshanden 2023). Hybrid forms or digital works are increasingly emerging. At the same time, the profits that digitalization can yield, for example in increasing reach and access, do not yet contribute to better economic positions for creators. The online environment revolves around 'sharing', so collecting a reasonable fee for 'content' (whether amateur art or professional visual art) is not an easy matter. For the many ways in which images can be used online, appropriate compensation is not always available for visual artists - although copyright organization Pictoright advocates for compensation for visual creators.

The research Online breaches in focus (Blaker et al. 2025) provides insight into the unlawful online use of photos, following a motion adopted by the House of Representatives on the need for fair compensation for photographers for the online use of their photos. The study focuses on 'small users' (private individuals, small non-commercial organisations such as foundations and associations, and self-employed persons). The study shows that these small users have a low level of knowledge about image rights: they are aware of their existence, but many are unaware of the exact rules that apply to them. Of all small users (around 286 to 360 thousand), around 30 percent post a photo each year in which an online infringement takes place - ultimately, this amounts to hundreds of thousands of infringements per year. Only a small proportion of these users are aware that they are infringing on image rights. The research also shows that there is a substantial gap between the annual license value that photographers lost due to online infringements (between 26,9 and 36,4 million euros) and the willingness to pay for this by small users (between 1,4 and 1,9 million euros). According to focus group discussions conducted for the research, this corresponds with the feeling of photographers, who say they feel little appreciation for their profession (Blaker et al. 2025).

Signals from various cultural domains also indicate that there are limits to the use of digital resources in reaching the public. For example, during the corona pandemic, the first interaction of an art buyer with a work of art often took place on location, and not online (NGA 2022). However, the corona years gave museums a positive boost to making their collections digitally available. In 2023, 70 percent of the permanent collection of museums will be accessible to the public via the internet - in 2015 this was only 23 percent (Museum Association 2024). The number of museums offering an online activity has decreased in 2022, especially among small and medium-sized museums (over 30 percent). This decline is less pronounced among larger museums. In 2023, the trend of this decline will continue, except among medium-sized museums. They are the only ones showing an increase in the online offering of activities (Museum Association 2024). See the page Heritage for a further explanation of figures on online activities of museums.

Photography

With the advent of the smartphone, photography has become an omnipresent medium, it penetrates every capillary of society. It brings us news, illustrates texts, tells stories in magazines and books and sells products and services (Prüst 2025). Photography is not easy to define because it has many manifestations and occurs in a large number of cultural disciplines. However, it is located in both the domain of culture and the domain of media and creative industry, but can also be reassembled within them. to overflow (Prüst 2025). Photography has its own museums, art fairs, galleries en professional associations. In 2022, the photography industry (which includes photochemical products, photographing and developing, equipment, licenses and royalties) generated over 1 billion euros in added value for the Dutch economy – good for 3,5 percent of the total added value that the entire culture and media sector delivers to the Dutch economy (CBS 2025). However, for example, from the Raad voor Cultuur no separate sector advice for photography and no photography institutions are established from the BIS (cultural basic infrastructure) financedPhotographers are at risk of falling between the cracks when it comes to subsidy applications, as the advice also illustrates Access to culture Raad voor Cultuur (2024b, 86) – this also applies to other disciplines such as hip hop and games. The essay collection Focus from the Mondriaan Fund (2023) shows that not everyone agrees, for example, on the question of whether photography belongs within the visual arts (Mondriaan Fund 2023). As is evident from various urgent letters the photographic sector feels insufficiently recognized (Kruit 2022).

There is little data available on the photography sector and the data that is available is not centrally collected. Supported by the photography sector That's why Marc Prüst launched a explores from the photography sector. This study maps out the available data on, among other things, professional practice, cash flows, education, leisure activities and institutions within (cultural) photography. It is a relevant first inventory of the photography sector in figures. However, there is still a lack of multi-year and reliable sources that portray photography as an independently defined sector. The study therefore calls on the photography sector itself to structurally and jointly monitor data, so that they can form the basis for a better anchoring of photography in the Dutch cultural system (Prüst 2025).

What do we know?

Financiering

In terms of support from the government, photography institutions are missing from the BIS and in the cultural plan period 2025-2028 only FOTODOK (platform for photography in Utrecht) will be financed by the government via the Mondriaan Fund. From the Heritage Act Of the specific photography museums, only the Dutch Photography Museum (Rotterdam) is structurally funded. However, there are other museums that manage photography in their collection that also receive funding from the Heritage Act, such as the Eye Film Museum and the Rijksmuseum. Raad voor Cultuur says about the BIS in her Advice on Cultural Basic Infrastructure 2025-2028, that it is striking that many applicant institutions seek out the boundaries of their discipline and step beyond them by incorporating other art forms and genres. “This leads to more room for interdisciplinarity and to art forms and genres such as photography, musical and circus theatre still being part of the BIS offering, even though no specific photography, musical and circus institutions are admitted to the BIS” (Raad voor Cultuur 2024a, 11). The Raad voor Cultuur sees photography mainly in crossovers, which is a fair observation, but which can also cause photography to fall by the wayside as an independent discipline – this applies to both photographers and photography institutions (Raad voor Cultuur 2024a, 2024b p.86).

Number of companies

The CBS has figures available on the Industry Photography (74201) (excluding photo development companies), but no photographers are specified who work as artists. For example: an artist who uses photography as a (main) medium and registers as a visual artist in the trade register, is shown in the figures as a visual artist, while in practice he is seen as a photographer. Incidentally, the same possible overlap applies to designers and visual artists. In addition, as mentioned earlier, photography occurs within a large number of (cultural) disciplines. It is therefore difficult to get a grip on the size of photography as a sector at a glance. The figures below from Statistics Netherlands do provide a clear overview of the number of branches of photography companies, how many people work there and how they are spread across the country.

These figures from Statistics Netherlands show that the number of photography companies has been increasing continuously over the past 15 years, and that the number has more than doubled in that time. This is a remarkable development when we consider that photography has also become accessible to everyone through smartphones in that period. The figures also show that almost all photographers work as self-employed persons: the group of photography establishments with 1 employee is by far the largest. In the study by Prüst (2025), a further division is made between full-time and part-time jobs in photography. The vast majority of photographers are located in North and South Holland, followed by North Brabant and Gelderland. However, it is not necessarily the case that all these photographers are active in the cultural sector. This also includes wedding photographers, for example.

What else do we want to know about photography?

While in other domains industry organisations such as the Museum Association or the VNPF (Association of Dutch Pop Venues and Festivals) systematically collect and disclose data about their members, a comparable information structure is still lacking in photography. Think of data about professional practice (including the share of autonomous photographers), supply, audience reach, subsidy flows and the interconnectedness with other domains such as media and design. The data from Statistics Netherlands (CBS) also cannot yet be broken down sufficiently. Fine-grained data are important to provide a better picture of photography. From the Culture Monitor we will continue to monitor developments in the sector and make the available data visible. We note – in line with the advice of the Raad voor Cultuur – that the current system of data collection and policy is not always accessible to all forms of culture. This applies not only to photography, but also to domains such as hip-hop, games and digital culture, which often fall between the cracks (see also Raad voor Cultuur 2024b, 86). In consultation with the field, we want to continue working in the Culture Monitor to improve the visibility and recognition of the breadth of culture in all its disciplines and manifestations.