Diversity, equity and inclusion

Theme

Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) together form one of the core themes of the Culture Monitor. To do justice to diversity, and make inclusion and equity a reality, the cultural sector must also be mindful of issues that perpetuate inequality, such as racism, discrimination, transgressive behaviour and inequality of opportunities. On this page, we explore existing research on diversity, equity and inclusion in the Netherlands.

Summary

Monitoring diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) (in Dutch ‘DIG’) is complex. Quantitative data is often lacking, while it is essential to monitor this data to be able to make good policy on this theme. The how and why of monitoring diversity are discussed, as well as the importance of inclusive language and choosing the right categories for research. The use and meaning of the words 'diversity, equity and inclusion' are critically examined. The three words are well known and frequently used, but it often proves difficult to express their meaning in concrete terms.

Furthermore, the most important issues on diversity, equity and inclusion are listed and an up-to-date overview of previous research on this theme in the Dutch arts and culture sector is maintained. Finally, the Tools offer insights into practical applications around DEI. With this, the Culture Monitor aims to extend a helping hand to the sector and to anyone who wants to work on monitoring diversity, equity and inclusion within their own organisation.

Introduction and significance of the theme

Diversity, equity and inclusion are only becoming more urgent as themes. International movements such as Black Lives Matter and #MeToo, transgressive behaviour in public broadcastingand in the music industry, or institutional racism at the national government, policeand with tax authorities: countless examples demonstrate a need for change because not everyone is heard or supported equally in society. Inequality must be combated, and more room must be created for diversity.

Because of the urgency of diversity, equity and inclusion, it is important to monitor the state of affairs regarding these themes, but this is proving difficult. In the Netherlands, various efforts are being made to collect data on diversity and inclusion in the cultural sector, but there is still a lack of sector-wide, cross-sectional, national or indeed regional figures. While these figures are crucial for visualising long-term trends. However, an increasing number of studies on diversity and inclusion in the cultural sector have appeared in recent years, often focusing on a specific subsector or case.

On this page, the Culture Monitor explores research on diversity, equity and inclusion in the Netherlands. In this analysis, we consider the definition of diversity, equity and inclusion, highlight some sector-wide issues, address the complexity of measuring diversity and inclusion, and explore what research questions lie ahead. It also maintains an up-to-date overview of all studies on diversity, equity and inclusion conducted in the Dutch cultural sector.

Want to know how diversity and inclusion policies have developed in the Dutch cultural sector since the 1980s? Read the exploration Diversity in cultural notes.

Complexity of measuring diversity and inclusion

The theme of 'diversity and inclusion' centres on the pursuit of representation, accessibility and equality in the cultural sector. The Diversity & Inclusion Code encourages cultural organisations to give substance to the theme. The Code is supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), which uses the pursuit of the Code as a subsidy requirement. As a result, all subsidised cultural institutions now include diversity and inclusion in their policy plan. 'Diversity and inclusion' thus emerge as a theme in the subsidy system of the cultural sector and, in that sense, are a political topic.

The concepts of diversity and inclusion are increasingly linked to the concept of 'equity'. In the English translation 'equity', this is known as part of the term DEI: Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. In Dutch, this term is often adopted as the abbreviation DIG (Diversiteit, inclusie en gelijkwaardigheid). The term diversity is used to indicate that people differ from each other on a range of visible and invisible characteristics - think for instance of (cultural) background, disability(s), health, gender, sexuality, religion, socio-economic status, level of education, political affiliation or age. Equity is about equal treatment tailored to all these diverse personal characteristics - equity does not mean equal and fair opportunities for all. Consider, for instance, the wage gap between men and women, or equal opportunities on the labour market regardless of background. equity is thus a precondition for inclusion, which refers to the way in which those actual differences and similarities between people are dealt with. In an inclusive environment, accessibility (whether physical, content or digital) is guaranteed for everyone, and all people feel welcome, safe and respected.

‘Diversity and inclusion' are now also regularly labelled as hype or 'buzz words' - this has to do with the fact that, although organisations are working on the topic with good intentions, too little structural change is taking place at these organisations and sector-wide. This is despite the fact that the topic has been on the policy agenda for decades. There is a lot of talk about diversity and inclusion, but organisations still often struggle with putting their good intentions into practice - as evidenced by the research 'Inclusive Theatre' research 'Inclusive Theatre' (Haeren et al. 2022) and interviews conducted with the sector for this theme page. The terms diversity and inclusion are broad and all-encompassing, which means (so the criticism goes) that the conversation in the cultural and creative sector does not cover what we should be talking about: discrimination, racism and institutional racism, unconscious prejudice (or bias), transgressive behaviour, inequality of opportunity, microaggression, homophobia, Islamophobia, whiteness, sexism, colonial knowledge structures and other forms of exclusion and inequality. Language - for naming these problems while not shying away from discomfort - plays an essential role if the cultural sector wants to combat structural inequality (see, for example, Noor 2022, Nourhussen 2022 and Samuel 2023).

Colonialism has left traces in our thinking about knowledge, about art and literature and philosophy, about science and ideology (Coppen 2021). Colonial knowledge structures are still present in the Netherlands, where a Eurocentric view, but also thinking and acting from a 'superior' position of leading (knowledge) institutions, determines what the value of knowledge is and where different forms of knowledge come from. To change this, there is an increasingly loud call for ' decolonisation' of the cultural sector. Decolonisation is not just about discarding the colonial project, it is about how people today are still struggling with the ideology of colonialism (Baboeram 2022, Debeuckelaere 2019). As a knowledge centre for arts, culture and policy, the Boekman Foundation strives to critically question what it means to gather knowledge about arts and cultural policy and track certain indicators in the Culture Monitor.


What are recent sector-wide issues?

The increased need for data on diversity, equity and inclusion also ensures that an increasing number of studies have been published in recent years on various topics within the theme. Some of these topics recur more frequently and can currently be regarded as the main issues within the theme.

Gender inequality

Research on gender inequality, difference or discrimination is being conducted in various sectors. In recent years, for instance, research has been conducted on the position of women artists in the visual arts (Haeren et al. 2024), on gender distinctions in the VSCD Theater Awards in the theatre sector (Hoilu Fradique et al.2022), and the position of women in the period 2011-2020 was charted for the film and television sector (Sanders 2022). Quantitative data on diversity or representation from an intersectional approach are still mostly lacking, but when it comes to gender (and this is often still only based on the binary gender categories male and female) we see relatively more data available. For example, CBS maintains data on working hours per week of men and women for creative and language professions.

Transgressive behaviour and social safety

Since #MeToo in 2017, international solidarity with the movement against transgressive behaviour has increased significantly. In the Dutch cultural sector, too, there are numerous examples of cases of transgressive behaviour that have come to light in recent years (Rijn et al 2024, Members 2021a, Members 2022). Mores.online, the independent hotline for sexual harassment in the cultural and creative sector, was set up in 2018 to handle the growing number of reports. However, in early 2023, the entire board resigned over suspicions of conflict of interest. In response, a new board was established in September 2023 with members who have no direct ties to the cultural sector. They will continue to shape Mores.online in the coming years (RCGOG 2023, Mores.online 2023).

In June 2022, the Council for Culture released its opinion Crossing the Boundary in which it made a number of observations and recommendations. For instance, the Council observed that transgressive behaviour is not only about sexual harassment, but also about other forms of undesirable behaviour such as bullying, intimidation, racism and discrimination based on skin colour, religion, gender or other personal characteristics. In addition, the cultural sector often has gatekeepers (such as curators, art teachers or artistic directors) who grant access to the field, which can lead to power relations and unsafe situations. Furthermore, the Council identifies a lack of inclusion within the sector, a culture of silence when it comes to transgressive behaviour, risks in arts education and a lack of structures focused on social safety (Raad voor Cultuur 2022a).

Social safety is about making shared norms explicit so that undesirable behaviour can be recognised or prevented, thus creating and maintaining a safe (working) environment. Social safety is thus a precondition for preventing transgressive behaviour. Research into this, for instance, was conducted in the media and culture sector and in the Rotterdam cultural sector.

Accessibility

Cultural institutions should be accessible to all, regardless of ability or disability (Bilo 2020, 7). However, this is often not yet the case. For people with physical disabilities, consider obstacles such as stairs, thresholds and doors in cultural buildings, or the lack of support for visually impaired and hearing-impaired people (Leden 2021b). Also, for example, the provision of a low-stimulation environment still happens very rarely (Haeren et al. 2022, 48). In her Multi-year letter 2023-2025, former State Secretary Uslu, among others, appoints additional investments in accessibility to remove both visible and invisible barriers (Uslu 2022). Studies on accessibility in the cultural sector include Rijksmuseum: unlimited access (Denekamp et al. 2022), Not accessible for a long time (Vermeij et al. 2021), Access to art and culture for people with disabilities (Leden 2021b) and Accessibility of cultural institutions for people with disabilities (Bilo 2020).

Representation

In the cultural sector, more and more institutions want to understand the 'degree of diversity' or representation in their organisation, be it in their workforce or audience. Surveys on representation are therefore usually customised and conducted at organisational or industry level. See, for example, CBS's survey on cultural diversity at the Rijksmuseum or the Book Industry Report measurement 57: thematic measurement of diversity (Nagelhout et al. 2021). At the sector-wide level, CBS maintains the Artists and Other Workers with a Creative Profession Monitor , which provides figures on artists and other workers with a creative profession by age, gender, migration background and sociodemographic status in terms of 'diversity' (CBS 2021). We will return to monitoring diversity or representation in more detail in Chapter 4 of this analysis.

Decolonisation

Decolonisation and dismantling power structures that maintain white privilege are an important topic of research and discussion in the cultural sector (as described above in Chapter 2). In 2020 the Council for Culture issued the advice Colonial collections and recognition of injustice and several museums have since announced that they are conducting investigations into their collections. However, decolonisation is not just about returning artifacts that have been removed from the country of origin by the Dutch occupier, it is about recognising and then rejecting colonial ideology from which policies and institutions have been built and still operate - also in the cultural sector (Coppen 2021).

Recognition of this and an apology were expressed in 2022 and 2023 respectively by outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte and King Willem Alexander, prior to the Dutch Slavery Memorial Year (July 1, 2023 to July 1, 2024). With this commemorative year, the national government hopes to contribute to the continued increase of knowledge and connection in society. The cabinet initially made 2 million euros available for organising activities during the Remembrance Year (Rijksoverheid 2022). The government later announced that it would make at least an additional 4 million euros available to facilitate cultural, social and educational activities from society for the Commemoration Year of the History of Slavery, making a total of 6 million euros available (Mondriaan Fund 2023).

Broad cultural understanding

'Culture belongs to and is for everyone,' former minister Van Engelshoven wrote in her letter Principles of Cultural Policy 2021-2024. Former State Secretary Uslu, in her Principles for Cultural Subsidies 2025-2028 adds that: 'the government stands for a diverse, broad cultural offer of high quality, which is accessible to everyone' (Uslu 2023). This also included an expansion of the basic infrastructure: new developments, missing genres and associated audiences also had to be given a place (such as urban arts, design, pop music and festivals). Broadening our understanding of culture is crucial if we want to portray all cultural forms and their participants. The Raad voor Cultuur has the advice at the beginning of 2024 Access to culture: towards a new order in 2029 on how the cultural system can be renewed from 2029 onwards to contribute as best as possible to a rich cultural life for everyone in the Netherlands (Council for Culture 2024).

Role of the cultural funds

A significant part of the cultural sector depends on financial support from governments and public or private funds. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science has made subscribing to and applying the Diversity & Inclusion Code mandatory for cultural institutions that fall under the cultural basic infrastructure (BIS) and are supported by the National Culture Funds- in addition, private funds for culture such as the VSB Fund are also actively concerned with diversity and inclusion. Local governments are also increasingly emphasising the importance of complying with the Diversity & Inclusion Code. Governments and funds therefore also play a role in steering and monitoring diversity, equity and inclusion. Currently, there are no sanctions for not complying with the Code; organisations will still receive their subsidies.

In April 2023, the Council for Culture released its Advice on application and assessment procedure BIS advice 2025-2028 in which the Council advocates stricter monitoring of compliance with the Diversity & Inclusion Code by cultural institutions when assessing a subsidy application (Raad voor Cultuur 2023). In June 2023, former State Secretary Uslu responded to this in her Basic principles of cultural subsidies 2025-2028, in which it does not accept the advice for stricter control. A statement showing that the Diversity & Inclusion Code is endorsed by the institution is sufficient. Only failure to subscribe to the Fair Practice code becomes a ground for refusal for the inclusion of cultural institutions in the BIS scheme (Uslu 2023).

In the aforementioned advice for a new culture system in 2029, the Council for Culture proposes combining the six national culture funds into one fund (Raad voor Cultuur 2024). Further elaboration of this advice will have to show what the consequences are for diversity, equity and inclusion in the sector.

Uneven progress

A further observation following discussions with experts from the sector is that there is a difference in the progress of achieving diversity and inclusion per cultural domain, but also per organisation within a cultural domain. For example, much is already happening in the performing arts sector to ensure representation, accessibility and inclusion (although there is still much to be gained there too), but the games sector in particular is lagging behind. Furthermore, the research 'Inclusive Theatre' showed, for example, that progress on diversity, equity and inclusion among the nineteen participating theatres and theatre companies in the Inclusive Theatre incentive programme, could differ widely (Haeren et al. 2022).

Future research

In addition to existing studies, a number of research studies have been announced for the near future.

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) presented the OCW agenda against discrimination and racism, in which it announces, among other things, that it will set up a monitoring and evaluation strategy in the near future to monitor the effectiveness of the actions taken by the ministry against discrimination and racism, so that timely adjustments can be made where necessary (Dijkgraaf 2022).

Women in Pictures (Vrouwen in Beeld), in collaboration with Utrecht University, is researching income differences between women and men professionals in the audiovisual sector within the research track 'Experiences and perspectives of women film and television professionals'. This trajectory includes five in-depth studies to promote gender equality and visibility of women and raise awareness about gender (in)equality. The research publications are expected in summer 2024.

A key focus for future research is intersectionality (intersectionality thinking), a theoretical framework for thinking that understands how different dimensions of a person's social position (such as gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, religion, socio-economic position) determine how people and groups in society differ from and interact with each other (BKB 2021). Research from an intersectional perspective takes multiple perspectives and thus offers a more inclusive, multifaceted picture; after all, opportunity inequality has many dimensions. Many existing studies lack these intersectional data and perspectives.

Monitoring diversity, equity and inclusion

Why and how should we measure diversity, equity and inclusion?

The cultural and creative sectors share a need to research and collect data on diversity, inclusion and equity. This is particularly important at the organisational level, where, for example, one wants to gain insight into the representation of (local) society in one's own workforce, or the extent to which a diverse and broad audience is reached. This increased need for data moves with the trend of increased attention to the theme and could also be explained by the mandatory subscription to the Diversity & Inclusion Code for subsidised cultural institutions. Organisations, policymakers and funding bodies want to know where they stand in the field of diversity and inclusion so that they can adjust policy accordingly. For research customisation (e.g. of research questions) is often provided, depending on the organisation, industry or sector being investigated. There is no sector-wide consensus on how, for example, representation (or diversity) should be measured, and that customisation is needed to gain insight into the questions that organisations themselves have.

Apart from the question of how diversity, equity and inclusion must be measured, there is also the why-question: for example, organisations choose, for ethical reasons, not to ask their staff about their background and not to measure it– as is evident from conversations with the sector for the Culture Monitor, but also (on a small scale) from the research ‘Inclusive Theatre’. The answer to the why- question should be clear, however: we need to measure data on racism, discrimination, inequality, accessibility and transgressive behaviour, among other things, to make these problems visible, to substantiate them and to be able to formulate policy on them (on the four P's of public, personnel, programming and partners) and then monitor progress towards improvement.

However, quantitative data on, say, social class or ethnicity in the labour market is still lacking - even though these figures are very important in the cultural sector. This is especially true for sector-wide data; more and more organisations are undertaking internal research on diversity, equity and inclusion. However, these data are often not public and there is rarely a sector-wide approach to collect data collectively and uniformly. The fact that there is a lack of sector-wide, serial, national or regional figures on diversity, equity and inclusion is partly due to the complexity of measuring these in light of Dutch legislation. Two examples of that complexity are working with personal data and categorisation in research (this is explained below).

Sensitivity of personal data

Personal data is mostly protected by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore cannot simply be collected. For example, there are audience segmentation systems, which allow institutions to enrich audience data with customer segments from an external agency, such as Whooz or Motivaction. For this, however, it is important that data is collected systematically, and that it is comparable across organisations (national or local). This is why in 2021 the Collaborative Public Data Taskforce was launched under the leadership of DEN Knowledge Institute for Culture & Digital Transformation. Until the end of 2024, this Taskforce works, among other things, on standardisation and towards a national system of target group segmentation focused on culture (DEN s.a.).

In particular, collecting personal data on cultural organisations' own workforce can be sensitive, and employees may feel uncomfortable, disadvantaged or pigeonholed - this perception is confirmed by interviews with the sector and evidenced, for example, in the 'Inclusive Theatre' Survey: final analysis, in which several theatre organisations indicate that they do not want to ask about a person's background for ethical reasons. Here, discomfort overrides the importance of collecting data that capture representation and exclusion - while these are crucial, even at the micro level for organisations themselves, to understand the state of affairs, forwards or backwards, and to be able to adjust policy accordingly. With her statement 'State of the Theatre' in September 2022, Alida Dors advocated for uncovering everyone's background; she previously wrote a blog about this on the Diversity & Inclusion Code website (Dors 2022). Collecting such data could potentially also be used to combat racism and discrimination (Schipper 2023).

The problem with categories and the importance of problem definition

Monitoring diversity is complex. Besides the sensitivity around personal data, the way people (or human difference) are categorised in research, and the words we use in doing so, also play a role in this (read the example of CBS categories below under 'Inclusive use of language is crucial'). In doing so, it is also desirable to consider intersectional dimensions in research. That is to say, there are different dimensions of a person's social position on which social inequality can occur (such as gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, religion, socio-economic status). These dimensions determine how people and groups in society differ from and respond to each other (BKB 2021).

Monitoring diversity, like any other measurement, necessarily requires categorisation -at the same time preferably avoided for the sake of unconscious prejudice and discrimination. To better understand the categories of research in the measurement of diversity in the cultural sector, Jasmijn Rana and Anouk de Koning conducted small-scale qualitative research (Rana et al. 2023). On the categorisation involved, they say:

'Measuring means recording, and as many interviewees said, pigeonholing (overly restrictive categorisation). Both people 'with a migration background' and those 'without', felt uncomfortable with this. This is a deeply felt dilemma: you cannot reduce a person to a characteristic, and for many that was what happened. (...) Such categorisation remains a form of symbolic violence: constantly being seen as different, lesser, as not yourself, but your background. But: if we do not define and measure, we also cannot make effective policies, and monitor whether there is actually more diversity within the sector' (Rana et al. 2022).

In doing so, they clearly raise the dilemma of discomfort about measurement and its necessity. Furthermore, Rana and De Koning expose the fact that in the Netherlands, for instance, while data relating to gender are collected on the labour market, ethno-racial disadvantage or exclusion on the labour market is hardly captured, if at all. 'Measuring inequality along ethno-racial lines evokes a lot of resistance, not only because of pigeonholing, but also because it makes whiteness visible as an invisible norm and privilege. This is uncomfortable for many,' the researchers highlight the underlying problem (Ibid.). The recommendation of these researchers is to tailor research on diversity at the organisational level. It is not necessary for everyone to use the same categories or terms, as (slightly) different aspects of diversity, representation or discrimination may be important for each institution to capture. At the sectoral level, they do observe a greater need for unity in measuring diversity - currently these are often sought in CBS categories In doing so, they clearly raise the dilemma of discomfort about measurement and its necessity. Furthermore, Rana and De Koning expose the fact that in the Netherlands, for instance, while data relating to gender are collected on the labour market, ethno-racial disadvantage or exclusion on the labour market is hardly captured, if at all. 'Measuring inequality along ethno-racial lines evokes a lot of resistance, not only because of pigeonholing, but also because it makes whiteness visible as an invisible norm and privilege. This is uncomfortable for many,' the researchers highlight the underlying problem (Ibid.). The recommendation of these researchers is to tailor research on diversity at the organisational level. It is not necessary for everyone to use the same categories or terms, as (slightly) different aspects of diversity, representation or discrimination may be important for each institution to capture. At the sectoral level, they do observe a greater need for unity in measuring diversity - currently these are often sought in categories that can monitor forms of hierarchy and exclusion. They also found that the diversity policies that organisations outline (following the Diversity & Inclusion Code) often lack a clear problem analysis that focuses on what problem the policy should address. This is also important when conducting research on diversity and inclusion: clarifying the problem, what exactly needs to be monitored and what is the desired change in doing so.

The picture painted by Rana and De Koning is supported in interviews we heald with the sector for this theme page. There is fragmentation in the sector when it comes to how to measure diversity. There is no clear consensus (yet) on a solution either. On the one hand, there is a need for a responsible party that should oversee the collection of comparable data, a party that is 'above the sector'. Indeed, it would be desirable for the sector to start measuring in the same way. On the other hand, the importance of providing tailored approaches at the micro level - each organisation should measure in its own way in order to surface the most relevant and applicable data for them - resonates. In any case, it becomes clear that monitoring diversity and inclusion is essential for good policy.

Inclusive language use is crucial

Language shapes the way we think. It is therefore very important to be alert to inclusive language use if one wants to conduct and present equitable, representative and accessible research. This often involves focusing on gender equality or neutrality in language, where currently the masculine form is still dominant. However, inclusive language use should not only be limited to this. It is about being aware of our language use of all expressions that continuously uphold norms that are dominant but dated - because such language perpetuates stereotypes and/or exclusion.

Using the words 'diversity' and 'inclusion' may actually oppose addressing the problems that the theme presents. Diversity and inclusion are often perceived as a positive theme, everyone is in favour of it and everyone wants to work on it: because 'culture belongs to and for everyone', said former Minister Van Engelshoven of OCW (Engelshoven 2019). But discussing racism, discrimination, prejudice and whiteness is a lot more difficult, painful and can be jarring. It is precisely attributing the right language to these problems that can help promote change. And vice versa, it can 'beat around the bush' with 'buzz words' if diversity and inclusion stand in the way of change. Using the right language, terms and categories in research and policy is therefore crucial.

Monitoring diversity also creates more awareness about the sensitivity of language and which categories are useful and desirable for research. We see this, for example, in the decision by CBS to replace the word migration background with 'origin' and to abandon the use of the categories 'Western' and 'non-Western'. Instead, from 2022 onwards, CBS will (retroactively) use a classification of the population by origin, which takes into account the country of birth of a person and their parents. Yet we still see colonial history in this classification: CBS divides the countries of origin into four levels, with the 'classic migration countries' (including Suriname, Indonesia and the Dutch Caribbean) forming their own category. Measuring the integration of immigrants, and the division it creates between people from 'here' and 'there', can be understood as a colonial thought structure, as Willem Schinkel also critically noted (Schinkel 2018). This example from CBS also highlights how sensitive choosing the right language and therefore categories for research is, and that these choices can also unintentionally maintain and even fuel forms of prejudice or inequality.

Conclusion

Currently, there is no long-term and large-scale quantitative data on diversity, equity and inclusion, or representation, for the cultural sector that can be monitored in the Culture Monitor. That is why, on this page, we bring together the most important (small-scale) qualitative and quantitative studies on the theme – concerning the sector-wide, domain-specific and local level. In addition, developments and needs in the discourse regarding research into diversity and inclusion are collected from the sector and brought together on this page. With this, the Culture Monitor wants to provide guidance to the sector and to anyone who is looking for ways to start monitoring diversity, equity and inclusion in their own organisation.

What research and data do we still need?

We need quantitative data on representation, equity and inclusion in the cultural sector, figures that can be monitored longitudinally at national or local level. The basis for this is still lacking, yet there is a clear need for it. This requires both tailored monitoring at organisational level and a sector-wide approach to collecting data uniformly. In addition, more research must emerge from discussions with the sector.

There is a need for more insight into the responsibility that people feel about inclusion. What is the awareness about inclusion, and how great is the intrinsic motivation to become truly inclusive? Are historically white institutions really changing, and are institutions willing to change their structures? This is not yet clear.

In addition, the question emerges: to what extent will organisations continue to cling to the 'hype' of diversity and inclusion. For example, once there are more people of colour in the workforce of an organisation where whiteness is dominant, are the organisations successful in retaining these employees, or are they leaving due to a lack of inclusion and equity?

And how does the government itself, by supporting institutions and artists in the BIS and through the National Culture Funds, implement the Diversity & Inclusion Code? Which parties have knowledge of the subsidy options, which parties apply for grants and who ultimately receives financing? For example, to what extent is it important that applicants speak the 'language of the funds' and have some experience in writing grant applications? In short: what about accessibility and equity of opportunity for different applicants for cultural subsidies? These questions are also part of the Council for Culture’s report Access to culture: towards a new order in 2029 (Raad voor Cultuur 2024).

What are future ambitions for this page?

In the coming years we will continue to pay extra attention to the theme of diversity, equity and inclusion on this page. These topics cut across all themes discussed in the Culture Monitor (from Professional Practice, Culture and Participation to Culture in the Regions) and domains (from Heritage to Games or Performing Arts). That is why we try to reflect trends and developments regarding diversity, equity and inclusion on each of the domain pages. Because DEI also form an overarching issue, they also deserve their own designated page where information about the theme is bundled.

In the future, we hope to be able to make quantitative datasets on diversity, equity and inclusion available in the Culture Monitor, but the reality is that there is currently no clear insight into the creation of such long-term (sector-wide) datasets. Government encouragement of partnerships between research institutions in this regard could advance such efforts. The Knowledge Agenda, compiled by the Boekman Foundation, also addresses the democratisation of diversity (Knol et al. 2022).

In the Culture Monitor we will investigate how we can collect multi-voiced knowledge in the future, with the aim that data about culture relates to all 'layers' of society. Furthermore, the exploration of research into diversity, equity and inclusion in the cultural sector on this page will be kept as up to date as possible.

Tools

The list below contains links to tools that provide various practical applications of diversity, equity and inclusion within organisations and policies. Note that these resources are all in Dutch.

Step-by-step plan for Diversity & Inclusion Code(Diversity & Inclusion Code, n.d.)
Gain insight into where your organisation stands when it comes to diversity, inclusion and equity, create an action plan based on the four Ps: program, public, personnel and partners, and monitor progress and results.

From words to actions: a guide to an inclusive organisation(Denktas et al. 2023)
This book is a practical guide to promoting diversity and inclusion within organisations. It offers concrete tips and insights for designing, implementing and evaluating interventions and policies. Various chapters discuss, among other things, connection and involvement, inclusive organisational culture and communication, HR policy, monitoring and research, and inclusive leadership.

Map of inclusive performing arts(LKCA 2022).
Map with an overview of what is happening in the Netherlands in the field of inclusive performing arts. The map can also be helpful in seeking collaboration or finding experienced experts.

Matrix for assessing diversity plans in the cultural sector(Rana et al. 2023)
Through the matrix, organisations can effectively evaluate their diversity plans and map progress. This tool offers organisations concrete guidelines for measuring, assessing and visualising diversity.

Working materials: practical tools and practical examples about diversity, accessibility, equity and inclusion(Together Inclusive, n.d.)
This collection of practical tools and real-life examples on diversity, accessibility, equity and inclusion, were collected during the 'Together Inclusive' programme. Each case study concludes with contact details and relevant links, providing a network based on shared experiences.

You are also not allowed to say anything anymore: a new language for a new time(Samuel 2023)
This book uses humour to highlight the ways in which language can be inclusive or exclusive and how we can change that. It is a guide for anyone who strives for an inclusive, safe and accessible environment, teaching us how to communicate in a value-oriented way.

Roadmap for accessible festivals(Coalition for Inclusion 2023)
Roadmap for accessible festivals, intended as a guideline to make festivals more accessible for people with disabilities.

Self-scan: festival unhindered(Coalition for Inclusion, et al., n.d.)
Do the self-scan within 5 minutes and gain insight into the accessibility of your festival or event. The scan is based on the Roadmap for accessible festivals. There are practical tips on how accessibility can be improved, and it is possible to receive these tips in a report after the scan.

The incomplete style guide (WOMEN Inc. 2024)
This guide promotes an inclusive society by providing insight into innovative language use and the redefinition of existing words. It is committed to inclusive stories and images, breaking through limiting stereotypes. The guide shows how WOMEN Inc. works on this and reflects on their ongoing learning process, given the rapid development of language and continuous evolution of discussions.

Researching diversity, equity and inclusion in the Dutch cultural sector

The bibliography below contains sources of research into inclusion and diversity in the Dutch cultural sector, classified by 'Cultural sector-wide', 'Domain-specific' and 'Local', in chronological order.

Cultural sector-wide

Boekman Magazine (2024) Boekman #140: Representation. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.

Leden, J. van (2024) Diversity in cultural notes. In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2024, no. 46, 1-13.

CBS (2023) Barometer of cultural diversity. The Hague: Central Bureau of Statistics.

Meijer, E. (et al.) (2023) Ir(re)replaceable: the innovative power of the Culture. The Hague: UNESCO.

Rana, J. and A. de Koning (2023) Measuring diversity: a step towards more meaningful definition and measurement. In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2023, no. 41, 1-31.

White, N. de (et al.) (2023) Exploration of discrimination and racism in sport and culture. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Institute, Mulier Institute, LKCA, Movisie.

Janssen, S. and M. Verdooi (2022) 'Culture of and for everyone?' Cultural diversity and cultural participation in the migration society, In: The migration society. Migration and diversity as a Gordian knot. Amsterdam: Boom Uitgevers.

Raad voor Cultuur (2022) Across the border: towards a shared culture.. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.

Tieben, B. and M. Flanders (2022) Gender Diversity Monitor 2022. Amsterdam: SEO.

Veldwiesch, N. (2022) Unlimited visibility in the Netherlands? A comparative study into the inclusion of people with disabilities within cultural policy. Groningen: Master's thesis, University of Groningen.

Leden, J. (2022) Undesirable behavior in the cultural sector, what next? In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2022, no. 35, 1-11.

Leden, J. (2021) Transgressive behavior in the cultural sector, In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2021, no. 27, 1-14.

Leden, J. van (2021) Access to art and culture for people with disabilities, In: Boekman extra, jrg. 2021, no. 29. 1-14.

CBS (2021) Monitor artists and other workers with a creative profession, 2021. The Hague: Central Bureau of Statistics.

Samuel, M. (2021) Values ​​for a new language. Utrecht: Diversity and Inclusion Code.

Vermeij, L. and W. Hamelink (2021) Not accessible for a long time: experiences of Dutch people with a physical disability as a mirror of society. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office.

Bilo, N. (et al.) (2020) Accessibility of cultural institutions for people with disabilities: interim report, inventory. The Hague: Significant APE.

Vermeulen, M. (2020) Growing towards more inclusion in the cultural sector: from Theory of Change to measurement plan. Rotterdam: Impact Center Erasmus.

Jongerius, M. (et al.) (2020) Experience unlimited culture: final reportThe Hague: Significant APE.

Molen, Y. van der (2020) The more the merrier: analysis of diversity and inclusion within the BIS and heritage institutions. Report of a research internship at the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (2019) Unlimited participation: progress report 2019. The Hague: Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport.

Veen, S. van der (et al.) (2019) Research into diversity in the cultural sector: research into the diversity of boards and staff of multi-year subsidized art and cultural institutions and subsidy advisors [visual representation]. The Hague: APE.

Eijck, K. van and E. Bisschop Boele (2018) From the canon and the mosquito: an inventory of insights surrounding the cultural non-visitor: note written on behalf of the Ministry of Education, Culture & Science. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Modest, W. and R. Lelijveld (2018) Words matter: an incomplete guide to word choice within the cultural sector. National Museum of World Cultures Foundation.

Veen, S. van der (et al.) (2018) Research into diversity in the cultural sector: research into the diversity of boards and staff of multi-year subsidized art and cultural institutions and subsidy advisors. The Hague: APE.

Veen, S. van der and N. Bilo (2018) Research diversity in the cultural sector: breakdowns of BIS institutions and non-BIS institutionsThe Hague: APE.

Domain specific

Crone, V. et al. (2023) You can't be what you can't see: diversity and inclusivity in film and AV. Amsterdam: DSP group.

CBS (2023) Cultural diversity Rijksmuseum 2022. The Hague: Central Bureau of Statistics.

Olfers, M. et al. (2023) Shadow dancing: a study into transgressive behavior in dancing. Driebergen-Rijsenburg: Verinorm.

Together Inclusive (2023) 'Together Inclusive: working together on more diverse, accessible and inclusive science museums and science centers' On: www.samen-clus.nl.

VPNF (2023) Music venues and festivals in 2022 figures. Amsterdam: VNPF.

Bruijn, Y. de, and J. Mesman (2022) Diversity and collection development at the school library. Amsterdam: Reading Foundation.

Denekamp, ​​C. and P. Kintz (2022) Rijksmuseum: unlimited access. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum.

CBS (2022)'Cultural diversity Rijksmuseum, 2020 and 2021'. On: www.cbs.nl, 24th of June.

Haeren, M. van and S. Roosblad (2022) Research Theatre Inclusive: final analysis. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.

Hoilu Fradique, D. et al. (2022) Each plays [her/their/his] role and gets [their/his/its] share: a study of the gender distinction in the VSCD Theater Awards. Amsterdam: Blueyard, VSCD.

Mulder, M. (2022) The Dutch live music monitor 2008-2019: pop concerts and festivals in the era between streaming and closure. Rotterdam: Knowledge Center Creating 010, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Erasmus Research Center for Media, Communication and Culture.

WOMEN Inc. (2022) An untold story: exploratory research into gender (in)equality in the art world. Amsterdam: WOMEN Inc., ABN Amro.

Marinelli, C. and L. Herschoe (2022) Map of inclusive performing arts. Utrecht: LKCA.

Motivaction (2022) Exploration of inclusive heritage lines. The Hague: Province of South Holland.

Rammeloo, J. et al. (2022) Diversity and inclusion in the book market: an exploratory study. Amsterdam: KVB Boekwerk.

Sanders, W. (2022) Better is not yet good: the position of women in the film and television sector 2011-2022. Utrecht: Women in Focus, Utrecht University.

Visser, N. et al. (2022) A Distant Reading of Gender Bias in Dutch Literary Prizes. Utrecht: Utrecht University.

Nagelhout, E. and C. Richards (2021) Report book industry measurement 57: diversity theme measurement. Amsterdam: KVB, Intomart Gfk.

Scholtens, J. (et al.) (2021) Representation of women in Dutch non-fiction television programs in 2019 and 2021: research report commissioned by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. Hilversum: Media Authority.

Borg, L. ter (2020) 'Dutch art museums: diversity is policy, but the director is always white'. On: www.nrc.nl, 17th of June.

Gemert, S. van and N. Feenstra (2020) What you see is you: decolonial homework for tour guide and museum. Amsterdam, Eindhoven: STUDIO i.

Wigbertson, JI, Moore, RA and S. Maas (2020) Baseline: a baseline measurement of queerness in Dutch museums. Amsterdam: STUDIO i.

Feenstra, N. (2019) Visitor trip or travel organization: the importance of relationships within the museum organization for an accessible and inclusive museum visitAmsterdam, Eindhoven: STUDIO i, Van Abbemuseum, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.

Kerchman, A. and P. Salet (2019) The position of women artists in four art disciplines in the Netherlands. A report for Mama Cash by Astrid Kerchman and Pauline Salet. Amsterdam: Mama Cash.

Kolsteeg, J. (2019) 'Inclusivity is the practice: Grand Theater Groningen'. In: Boekman Extra, no. 19, 1-11.

Scholtens, J. and E. Lauf (2019) Representation of men and women in Dutch non-fiction television programs: research report commissioned by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. Hilversum: Media Authority.

Vermeulen, M. (et al.) (2019) Measuring inclusion in museums: a case study on cultural engagement with young people with a migrant background in Amsterdam, In: The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum, no. 12, 1-26.

Nijkamp, ​​J. and M. Cardol (2018) Literature research including theater: examples and dilemmas. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences.

Nijkamp, ​​J. and M. Cardol (2018) Audience research including theater at Theater Babel Rotterdam: research among visitors to the performance 'The dream café'Rotterdam: Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences.

Nijkamp, ​​J. (et al.) (2018) Research into inclusive theater: proceeds from the symposium of June 8, 2018, organized by Theater Babel Rotterdam and Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Disability Studies professorship; Diversity in ParticipationRotterdam: Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences.

ACT (et al.) (2016) Advice to promote diversity in the film and television sector; Inventory of practical proposals to promote cultural diversity in the film and television sectorAmsterdam: Dutch Directors Guild.

Locally

Gauneau, L. (2023) The cultural wishes and needs of residents of Amsterdam South East. Amsterdam: Municipality of Amsterdam, VU.

Klarenbeek, S. (2022) Research report on social safety in the Rotterdam art and culture sector. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Zijlstra Center.

Berkers, P. (et al.) (2020) Cultural diversity in the cultural sector of The HagueThe Hague: Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Perlstein, S. (et al.) (2020) Research into views on cultural diversity among employees of Rotterdam cultural organizations. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Amsterdam Arts Council (2019) Art, cultural diversity and inclusivity in Amsterdam: the next stepAmsterdam: Amsterdam Arts Council.

Rotterdam Council for Art and Culture (2019) Reflections on inclusivity, innovation and interconnectivity: trends in the Rotterdam cultural sector. Rotterdam: Rotterdam Council for Art and Culture.

Berkers, P. (et al.) (2017) Research cultural diversity in the Rotterdam cultural sector. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Want to know more about the theme of Diversity, Inclusion and Equality?

All publications that the Boekman Foundation itself produces on this theme can be found via the online file Diversity, equity and inclusion.

More literature on the theme of Diversity, Inclusion and Equality can also be found in the Knowledge base of the Boekman Foundation.

Previous editions of this theme page can be found here (Dutch only):
2021
2022

Do you have any additions or would you like to discuss research and data on diversity, inclusion and equity with us? Then we would like to hear from you!

Sources

Agterberg, R. (2022) 'Success of diversity policy can only be measured through monitoring'. On: www.erasmusmagazine.nl, December 9.

Ahmed, S. (2012) On being included: racism and diversity in institutional life. Durham: Duke University Press.

Arikoglu, F., S. Scheepers and A. Koranteng Kumi (n.d.) Intersectional thinking: manual for professionals who want to apply intersectionality or intersectional thinking in their own organization. Brussels: Ella.

Baboeram, Pr. (2022) From research object to knowledge producer: decolonization within the National Archives. A constructive conversation about decolonization. Amersfoort: National Cultural Heritage Agency.

Beeckmans, J. (2019) 'Eighteen months Mores. An interim score'. On: www.theaterkrant.nl, December 11.

Bell, J.M. and D. Hartmann (2007)'Diversity in everyday discourse: the cultural ambiguities and consequences of “happy talk”'. In: American Sociological Review, volume 72, issue 6.

BKB (2021) Report on intersectionality knowledge tables: exploration of how an intersectional approach can strengthen the preventive approach to racism and discrimination. Amsterdam, The Hague: BKB Campaign Bureau, Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment.

CBS (2022) Integration and coexistence 2022. The Hague: Central Bureau of Statistics.

CBS (2021) Monitor artists and other workers with a creative profession, 2021. The Hague: Central Bureau of Statistics.

Jongen, E., J. Bolhaar, R. van Elk et al. (2019) Income inequality by migration backgroundThe Hague: Central Planning Bureau.

Coppen, P. (2021) 'Decolonization is no longer just a historical term'. On: www.trouw.nl, October 9.

Debeuckelaere, H. (2019) 'Colonialism lives on in the present. That is why decolonization is important.'. On: www.decorrespondent.nl, October 14.

DEN (zj) 'Audience data task force'. On: www.den.nl, nd

Denekemap, C. and P. Kintz (2022) Rijksmuseum: unlimited access. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum.

Denktaş, S., G. de Bruin and J. van den Ring-Bax (2023) From words to actions: a guide to an inclusive organization. Meppel: Boom.

Dijkgraaf, R., Wiersma, D. and Uslu, G. (2022) OCW agenda against discrimination and racism: policy task. The Hague: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Dors, A. (2022) 'A diverse workforce is not just about the number of black and white employees'. On: www.codedi.nl, 30 March.

Engelshoven, I. van (2019) Principles of Cultural Policy 2021-2024. The Hague: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Gillham, J., T. Thomas and J. Finney (2021) Ethnicity Pay Gap Report 2021. London: Strategy&, PwC.

Haeren, M. van and S. Roosblad (2022) Research Theatre Inclusive: final analysis. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.

Halouchi, S. (2023) 'The theatre is increasingly full of new audiences'. On: www.nos.nl, 8 January.

Knol, J. and C. Rasterhoff (2023) Cultural and creative sector knowledge agenda 2025-2028. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.

Leden, J. van der (2021a) Transgressive behavior in the cultural sector, In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2021, no. 27, 1-14.

Leden, J. van der (2021b) Access to art and culture for people with disabilities, In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2021, no. 29, 1-14.

Leden, J. van der (2022) Undesirable behavior in the cultural sector, what next? In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2022, no. 35, 1-11.

Leden, J. van der (2023) Return of colonial cultural objects: not the end of a process, but a new beginning, In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2023, no. 38.

Marinelli, C. and L. Herschoe (2022) Map of inclusive performing arts. Utrecht: LKCA.

Mondriaan Fund (2023) 'Additional awards for the first round of the commemoration year of the history of slavery announced'. On: www.mondriaanfonds.nl, 30th of June.

Mores.online (2023) 'New board for Mores.online'. On: https://mores.online, nd

Movisie (2019) 'Intersectionality, what should we do with it?'. On: www.movisie.nl, February 25.

Nourhussen, S. (2022) ''Diversity & inclusion'? It has become an industry'. On: www.oneworld.nl, 6th of June.

Noor, S. (2022) 'Working on inclusion is not always pleasant. It needs sanding!'. On: www.nieuwwij.nl, October 6.

Pak, V. (2020) 'Diversity criteria cause anger and impoverishment in the cultural sector'. On: www.ewmagazine.nl, 10 August.

Raad voor Cultuur (2022a) Across the border: towards a shared culture.. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.

Raad voor Cultuur (2022b) Work program 2022-2023. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.

Raad voor Cultuur (2023) Advice on application and assessment procedure BIS advice 2025-2028. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.

Raad voor Cultuur (2024) Access to culture. On the way to a new order in 2029. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.

Rana, J. and A. De Koning (2022) 'Diversity in the cultural sector: about the inconvenience and importance of measurement'. In: Boekman, jrg. 2022, no. 133, 42-45.

Rana, J. and A. de Koning (2023) Measuring diversity: a step towards more meaningful definition and measurement. In: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2023, no. 41, 1-31.

Rana, J. and A. de Koning (2023) Matrix for assessing diversity plans in the cultural sector. Attachment from: Boekman Extra, jrg. 2023, no. 41.

RCGOG (2023)'Government Commissioner: further professionalization of the Mores reporting point is necessary'. On: www.rcgog.nl, April 14.

Rijn, M. van (et al.) (2024) Nothing seen, nothing heard and nothing done. The lost responsibility. The Hague: Commission of Inquiry on Behavior and Culture of Broadcasters.

National Government (2022) 'Commemoration year for the history of slavery: structurally more attention and recognition for our shared past'. On: www.rijksoverheid.nl, October 14.

Samuel, M. (2023) You are also not allowed to say anything anymore: a new language for a new time. Amsterdam: New Amsterdam.

Schinkel, W. (2018) 'Against “immigrant integration”: for an end to neocolonial knowledge production'. In: Comparative migration studies, jrg. 6, no. 1, 1-17.

Schipper, M. (2023) 'Racial data maintains the distribution of power, but it can also overturn it'. In: Lillith Magazine, December 5.

Smaling, E. (2022) 'EUR is currently the only university in the Cultural Diversity Barometer'. On: www.erasmusmagazin.nl, November 17.

Leiden University (2019) ''Diversity is not something you can create with a magic wand''. On: www.universiteitleidingen.nl, December 2.

Uslu, G. (2022) Multi-year letter 2023-2025: the power of creativity, culture at the heart of society. The Hague: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Uslu, G. (2023) Basic principles of cultural subsidies 2025-2028. The Hague: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Justification text and image

Editorial note: An earlier version of this page was written by Maxime van Haeren.

Discussion partners: In 2022 we spoke to various people to collect information for the development of this theme page.

Graphics and design: Unseen Amsterdam / Photography: Lisa Maatjens.

Feedback wanted!

What do you think of the Culture Monitor? We would like to hear about your experience. Help us by filling out a short survey. Thanks in advance!

Would you rather fill it in later? You can also find the link to this survey on our homepage.

To the survey