Diversity, equity and inclusion

Gender inequality

Research is being conducted into gender inequality, distinction or discrimination in various sectors. For example, in recent years research has been conducted into the position of female artists in the visual arts (Haeren et al. 2024), into gender distinction in the VSCD Theater Awards in the theatre sector (Hoilu Fradique et al. 2022), the position of women in the period 2011-2020 visualized for the film and television sector (Sanders 2022) and research was conducted into the underrepresentation and experiences of female musicians in the Netherlands (Boeijenga 2025). Quantitative data on diversity or representation from an intersectional approach are still often lacking, but when it comes to gender (and in this case only the binary sex categories of man and woman are often assumed) we see relatively more data available. For example, the CBS keeps data on the working hours per week of men and women for creative and linguist professions.

Institutional racism

The term 'institutional racism' or 'institutional discrimination' refers to a system of 'systematic exclusion and/or discrimination of groups based on written but especially unwritten rules, traditions, behavior and etiquette'. This form of exclusion can occur in various ways, within all kinds of institutions (De Correspondent 2020). Think of discrimination on the housing market, or at the national government, police and the Belastingdienst.

Insufficient research has been done into discrimination in the cultural sector, but the available data provide insights that may indicate exclusion and discrimination (Movisie 2023). Within the museum sector, for example, where figures are also lacking, it is suspected that many incidents are not reported. Discrimination and exclusion are expressed in the area of ​​representation at all levels of the cultural sector; staff, programme, audience and partners. There is also a lack of polyphony (Verwey-Jonker 2024).

Transgressive behaviour and social safety

Since the emergence of #MeTooIn 2017, international solidarity with the movement against transgressive behavior increased significantly. In the Dutch cultural sector, too, there are numerous examples of cases of transgressive behavior that have come to light in recent years (Rijn et al. 2024, Members 2021a, Members 2022). Mores.online, the independent reporting center for undesirable behavior in the cultural and creative sector, was established in 2018 to handle the growing number of reports. In 2022, the reporting center received a record number of 365 reports, and in 2023 it professionalized as an organization with a new and independent board (RCGOG 2023, Mores.online 2025).

The Council for Culture issued the advice Across the border with a number of observations and recommendations. For example, the Council observed that transgressive behavior is not only about sexual harassment, but also about other forms of unwanted behavior such as bullying, intimidation, racism and discrimination on the basis of skin color, religion, gender or other personal characteristics. In addition, the cultural sector often has gatekeepers (such as curators, teachers at art schools or artistic directors) who provide access to the field, which can lead to power relations and unsafe situations. In Access to culture advises the Council to 'Continue to promote diversity and inclusion in key positions within cultural organisations'. After all, these people determine which talent gets a chance and which creators benefit from subsidies (Raad voor Cultuur 2024b).

Furthermore, the Council sees a lack of inclusion within the sector, a culture of silence when it comes to inappropriate behavior, risks in arts education and a lack of structures aimed at 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 must be accessible to everyone, regardless of capabilities or limitations (Bilo 2020, 7). However, this is often not the case. For example, for people with a physical disability, 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). Offering a low-stimulus environment is also rarely done (Haeren et al. 2022, 48). In her Multi-year letter 2023-2025 then State Secretary Uslu appointed additional investments in accessibility to remove both visible and invisible barriers (Uslu 2022). For example, studies into accessibility in the cultural sector are The power of deaf and hard of hearing visitors (Bakkers et al. 2025), 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 (Members 2021b) and Accessibility of cultural institutions for people with disabilities (Bilo 2020).

An initiative from the sector is, for example, Creative Access LabIn 2024, they worked in a special laboratory with seventeen makers on the 'inclusive design' of theatre performances in order to lower the threshold of theatre for people with disabilities.

Currently a Knowledge Center for Accessible Culture in development. This knowledge center should support cultural institutions in making their organization more accessible and inclusive, including for people with disabilities. The plans were developed by design agencies Greenberry and Zeewaardig, in collaboration with experts by experience, interest groups and cultural institutions, commissioned by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. A concrete plan has now been drawn up implementation advice delivered, and the ministry has reserved €500.000 for the implementation of this Knowledge Center. The coming period will be investigated which existing organizations can implement the Knowledge Center in their existing offering.

Representation

In the cultural sector, more and more institutions want to have insight into the 'degree of diversity' or representation in their organization, be it in their workforce or in the public. Research into representation is therefore usually tailor-made and carried out at organizational or industry level. See, for example, CBS's research into cultural diversity Rijksmuseum or the Report book industry measurement 57: diversity theme measurement (Nagelhout et al. 2021). At a sector-wide level, CBS maintains the Monitor Artists and other workers with a creative profession (CBS 2025), which contains figures on personal characteristics about artists and other workers with a creative profession by age, gender, migration background and position in the household – see the heading 'Representation of artists on the labour market' on this page for a selection of these figures. Furthermore, the magazine Boekman #140 fully dedicated to the theme of 'representation' (Boekmanstichting 2024). We will return to monitoring diversity or representation in more detail in chapter 5 of this analysis

Decolonisation

Decolonization 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 3). The Council for Culture issued the advice Colonial collections and recognition of injustice in XNUMX several museums have since announced that they will investigate their collections. The Raad voor Cultuur In 2024, the Dutch government published an advisory report on how to deal with shared sources of the colonial past (Raad voor Cultuur 2024a). However, decolonization is not just about returning artifacts taken from their country of origin by the Dutch occupier, it is about recognizing and then rejecting the colonial ideology from which policies and institutions were built and still operate – also in the cultural sector (Coppen 2021).

This recognition and apologies were expressed in 2022 and 2023 by then outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte and King Willem Alexander respectively, prior to the Dutch Slavery Memorial Year (July 1, 2023 to July 1, 2024). With this commemorative year, the government hoped to contribute to the continued increase of knowledge and connection in society. The cabinet set a total of 6 million available to facilitate cultural, social and educational activities from society for the fulfillment of the Slavery Past Commemoration Year. (Mondriaan Fund 2023, Central Government 2022). The commemoration year will end on July 1, 2024. In the coming period, it must become clear what the impact of the commemoration year has been and what follow-up steps will be stimulated by the Central Government.

Broad cultural understanding

Former State Secretary Uslu wrote in her Principles for Cultural Subsidies 2025-2028 that: 'the government stands for a diverse, broad cultural offering 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 included (such as urban arts, design, pop music and festivals). Broadening our understanding of culture is crucial if we want to visualize a representation of all cultural forms and participants in them. The Raad voor Cultuur has the advice at the beginning of 2024 Access to culture: towards a new order in 2029 published on how the cultural system can be renewed from 2029 onwards in order to contribute as much as possible to a rich cultural life for everyone in the Netherlands (Raad voor Cultuur 2024b).

To the theme 'democratization of culture' To better map out, the Boekmanstichting organizes as part of the Knowledge Agenda 2025-2028 communities of practiceThese are working groups in which policymakers, researchers and makers from the field jointly formulate knowledge questions, exchange knowledge and lay the foundation for further research.

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 it's 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 (Council for Culture 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 cultivation system in 2029, the Raad voor Cultuur to merge the six National Cultural Funds into one fund (Raad voor Cultuur 2024b). In the meantime, there is somewhat more clarity about decisions that are taken in response to the advice: a complete reform does not seem to be in the cards yet. However, there will be more attention for cultural institutions outside the Randstad, the cycle would be extended from four to six years and it is being investigated whether the application procedure can be made easier (Hosman 2025).

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 Focus is done in collaboration with Utrecht University research into income differences between female and male professionals in the audiovisual sector within the research project 'Experiences and perspectives of female film and television professionals'. This trajectory contains five in-depth studies to promote gender equality and visibility of women and to stimulate awareness of gender (in)equality. The research publications are expected in the spring of 2025.

A key focus for future research is intersectionality (intersectional thinking), a theoretical framework that provides insight into how simultaneously analyzing different dimensions of someone's social position (such as gender, ethnicity, orientation, age, religion, socio-economic position) determines how people and groups in society differ from each other and react to each other (BKB 2021). Research from an intersectional perspective takes multiple axes into account simultaneously and thus provides a more inclusive, multifaceted picture; inequality of opportunity has many dimensions. Many existing studies lack these intersectional data and perspectives. For initiatives from the field, see for example the manifesto Gender Equality and Intersectionality in the Art World.

Why and how?

The cultural and creative sectors share a need to conduct research and collect data on diversity, inclusion and equality. This is particularly relevant at the organisational level, where, for example, one wants to gain insight into the representation of the (local) society in one's own workforce, or the extent to which a diverse and broad audience is reached. This increased need for data is moving in line with the trend of increased attention for the theme, and could also be explained by the mandatory endorsement of the Diversity & Inclusion Code for subsidised cultural institutions. Organisations, policymakers and subsidisers want to know where they stand in the field of diversity and inclusion so that they can adjust their policy accordingly. In studies we see that customization is often provided, depending on the organization, industry or sector being investigated. It becomes clear that there is no sector-wide consensus on how, for example, representation (or diversity) should be measured and that customization is needed to gain insight into the questions that organizations themselves have.

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

At the top of this page, a number of figures are presented that provide insight into the representation of gender, age, origin, position in the household and income of artists and creatives. Although valuable, these data are quite global and do not provide sufficient support for organisations to work on their own policy goals. That is why more and more organisations are working on internal research into diversity, inclusion and equality, focusing on their own situation and goals. However, these data are often not public and there is no sector-wide approach to collect such data jointly and in the same way. The fact that there are no more focused and long-term sector-wide, national or regional figures on diversity, inclusion and equality is partly due to the complexity of measuring this in light of Dutch legislation. Two examples of this complexity are working with personal data and categorisation in research (this will be 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, the collection of personal data about cultural organizations' own workforce can be sensitive and employees can feel uncomfortable, disadvantaged or pigeonholed - this picture is confirmed by conversations with the sector and is evident, for example, from Research Theatre Inclusive: final analysis, in which several theater organizations indicate that they do not want to ask about someone's background for moral reasons. Here the discomfort outweighs the importance of collecting data that map representation and exclusion - while these are crucial, also at a micro level for organizations themselves, to gain insight into the state of affairs, progress or decline and to adapt policy accordingly. can fit. With her State of the TheaterIn September 2022, Alida Dors advocated exposing everyone's background, having previously written about this blog on the Diversity & Inclusion Code website (Dors 2022). Collecting such data may also be used to combat racism and discrimination (Schipper 2023).

Categorization and 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 ddimensions in research. That is to say: there are different dimensions of someone's social position on which social inequality can occur (such as gender, ethnicity, orientation, age, religion, socio-economic position). 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 map out the dilemma of discomfort with measuring and the necessity of it. Furthermore, Rana and De Koning reveal that in the Netherlands, for example, data on gender are collected in the area of ​​the labor market, but that ethnoracial disadvantage or exclusion on the labor market is not or hardly visualized. 'Measuring inequality along ethnoracial lines provokes 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 point out the underlying problem (Ibid.). The recommendation of these researchers is to provide customized research into diversity at the organizational level. It is not necessary for everyone to use the same categories or terms, because for each institution (slightly) different aspects of diversity, representation or discrimination may be important to visualize - this is also intersectionality thinkingAt the sectoral level, they do note a greater need for unity in measuring diversity – which is currently 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 importance of customization is underlined in recent research into the impact of policies on diversity, inclusion and equality. The more specific the policy focuses on a target group or one of the P's, the more positive and effective the outcome. In addition, inclusive leadership is crucial for tangible results of the policy (Zhou et al. 2024).

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

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. The focus is often on gender equality or gender neutrality in language, where the masculine form is still dominant. Inclusive language use should not be limited to that. It is about being aware of all expressions in language use with which outdated norms that dominate are continuously confirmed – because such language use maintains stereotypes and/or exclusion.

Discussing racism, discrimination, prejudice or whiteness is uncomfortable, painful and can be abrasive. It is precisely assigning the right language to these issues that can help bring about change. And conversely, 'beating around the bush' with only 'nice terms' like diversity and inclusion can bring about change stand in the way of change. Using the right language, terms and categories in research and policy is therefore crucial.

In the meantime, there is also a growing awareness in monitoring diversity about the sensitivity of language and which categories are useful and desirable for research. This can be seen, for example, in the decision of Statistics Netherlands (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 (retroactively) Statistics Netherlands will use a classification of the population by origin, which looks at a person's country of birth and their parents. However, we still see colonial history in this classification: Statistics Netherlands divides the countries of origin into four levels, with the 'classic migration countries' (including Suriname, Indonesia and the Dutch Caribbean) forming a separate category. Measuring the integration of immigrants in itself and the division that is made between people from 'here' and from 'there' can be understood as a colonial thought structure, as Willem Schinkel also critically noted (Schinkel 2018). At the same time, it is important to gain insight into how colonial thought structures still influence everyday experiences. This example from Statistics Netherlands also shows how sensitive it is to choose the right language and therefore categories for research, and that these choices can also unintentionally lead to forms of prejudice or inequality. maintain and even fuel forms of prejudice or inequality.

Needs research and data

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.

In addition, there is the question to what extent organizations can take the next step within diversity, inclusion and equality. For example, once there are more people of color in the workforce of an organization where whiteness is dominant, will the organizations be able to retain these employees, or will they quickly flow out due to a lack of inclusion and equality? Research by Been (2025) showed, for example, that uncertainty in the cultural labor market is experienced more by some than by others. 

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 subsidy 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 report Access to culture: towards a new order in 2029 Raad voor Cultuur (Raad voor Cultuur 2024b).

Future additions

In the coming years, we will continue to pay attention to the theme of diversity, inclusion and equality on this page. These topics cut across all the themes discussed in the Culture Monitor (from professional practice, culture and participation to culture in the region) and domains (from heritage to games or performing arts). That is why we try to include trends and developments in the field of topics concerning diversity, inclusion and equality in each of the reports for the various domains where possible. Because diversity, inclusion and equality also form an overarching issue, they deserve this own landing page where information about the theme is bundled.

A number of topics within Diversity, inclusion and equality are missing on this page. Think of neurodiversity, intergenerational diversity, socio-economic diversity and mental health. In the following updates we want to map the theme DIG in relation to the cultural sector even more broadly and assess in conversation with the field which topics require further attention on the page.

In the future, we hope to be able to unlock more and more quantitative datasets on diversity, inclusion and equality in the Culture Monitor. Stimulating collaborations between research institutions on this subject by the government could promote this. In the Knowledge Agenda, compiled by the Boekmanstichting, the democratisation of diversity also discussed (Knol et al. 2023). The start of the communities of practice around 'democratization of culture'. These learning networks provide input for a broadly supported Knowledge Agenda and further research initiatives.

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.

Cultural sector-wide

Bosma, MI Demir, M. van Engel et al. (2025) Diversity of staff, self-employed, supervisors and advisors in the cultural and creative sector: what will the situation be in 2024? Amsterdam: Significant APE.

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

Lesman, J. (2024) Leadership in color. Leiden: Leiden University.

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

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.

Zhou, C., Dijk, van H. and B. Doornenbal (2024) The Art of Diversity: Creating Cultural Organizations and their Personnel, Public, Program, and Partners. Journal of Cultural Management and Cultural Policy, vol. 10, issue 1.

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. 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 report. The 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 institutions. The Hague: APE..

Domain specific

Harjadi Herman, E. (2025) Measuring diversity among employees: case study Stedelijk Museum AmsterdamAmsterdam: Stedelijk Museum.

Bakkers, A., J. Retel Helmrich, S. Boertien et al. (2025) The power of deaf and hard of hearing visitors: toolkit for stages, festivals and artists. Utrecht: Revelland.

Boeijenga, Y. (2025) Rise up: a comparative study of the underrepresentation and experiences of female musicians in the Netherlands. Hoofddorp: Buma / Stemra.

Haeren, M. van, Sweering, H. and H. Mariën (2024) Female visual artists in the Netherlands: labour market, career development, representation. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.

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.

Daru, S, Kros, K. and H. Matemantiek (2023) Transgressive behavior in the music industry in pictures. Utrecht: Movisie.

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 visit. Amsterdam, 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 Participation. Rotterdam: 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 sector. Amsterdam: Dutch Directors Guild.

Locally

Berghorst, P (2023) Inclusivity and regional museums. Utrecht: LKCA.

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 Hague. The 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 step. Amsterdam: 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.

Characters

Bosma, MI Demir, M. van Engel et al. (2025) Diversity of staff, self-employed, supervisors and advisors in the cultural and creative sector: what will the situation be in 2024? Amsterdam: Significant APE.

CBS (2025) Monitor artists and other workers with a creative profession, 2025 edition. The Hague: CBS.

CBS, Boekman Foundation, Mulier Institute (2022) 'Culture and participation'. On: www.cultuurmonitor.nl.

ROA Statistics (nj) 'Key figures school leavers surveys'. Database of ROA Maastricht University. On: https://roastatistics.shinyapps.io/AIStot2028/

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.

Leg, W. (2025) 'Entrepreneurial, precarious or leaving altogether? Work trajectories in the creative industries in the Netherlands'. In: Cultural Trends, March, 1-21.

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.

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

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.

CMA (2023) Ethnicity Pay Gap Report 2022 to 2023. London: Gov.uk.

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.

The Correspondent (2020)) Institutional racism in the Netherlands: what it is, where it is, and what you can do about it. Op www.decorrespondent.nl, 10th of June.

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.

Haeren, M. van, Sweering, H. and H. Mariën (2024) Female visual artists in the Netherlands: labour market, career development, representation. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.

Hall, S. (2005) 'The rediscovery of “ideology”; return of the repressed in media studies'. In: Culture, society and the media, 52-86.

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

Hosman, H. (2025) 'The cultural subsidy system needed a major overhaul: but where is that innovation? – NRC'. On: www.nrc.nl, on February 10th.

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

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 (2025) 'About Mores'. On: www.mores.nl, nd

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

Movisie (2023) Discrimination in the arts and culture sector: figures and solutions. On www.movisie.nl, 11 January.

Nourhussen, S. (2023) ''Diversity & inclusion'? It has become an industry'. On: www.oneworld.nl, October 3.

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

NOS (2024) Cultural sector wants safety protocol after disruption of Lenny Kuhr concert. On www.nos.nl, 27 March.

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 (2024a) Dealing with shared resources of the colonial past: advice on restoration and restitution in relation to colonial archives. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.

Raad voor Cultuur (2024b) 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.

Swartjes, B. (2024) 'Everyone Welcome? Dealing with Representation in Festival Marketing'. In: Boekman, jrg. 36, no. 140, 34-39.

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.

Verwey-Jonker (2023) New research into discrimination and racism in sports, culture, housing market and healthcare. Op www.verwey-jonker.nl, December 15.