European Economic
and Social Committee
TRUST THE ARTIST, NOT THE SPREADSHEET
Culture contributes to democracy, social cohesion, health and the economy. But these wider benefits happen only if we support culture for its own sake, Luiza Moroz - Head of Policy at Culture Action Europe - told EESC Info. In the next EU budget, culture must have a clear place, visible identity and dedicated funding.
EU funding in the cultural sector often favours large, well-established institutions with the capacity to handle complex applications. To support emerging artists and first-time applicants, the Culture Action Europe proposal suggests introducing a 'micro-grant fast-track'. How can the next MFF help lower these barriers and ensure that the next generation of European cultural talent can access funding?
First, the issue is one of resources. The Commission has proposed a budget of EUR 1.8 billion for the Culture strand of AgoraEU over seven years. This corresponds to approximately EUR 260 million per year — roughly equivalent to the annual budget of the French National Library. Culture Action Europe is calling for an increase with a concrete proposal: top up AgoraEU with digital fines imposed on big tech under EU digital legislation. For example, the EUR 120 million fine imposed on X for breaching the Digital Services Act could be channelled towards supporting creators.
Second, funding needs to be made more accessible. The European Parliament's draft report on AgoraEU proposes useful tools: operating grants (support the organisation itself rather than a single project), two-stage applications (a full application is developed only after the concept note has been accepted, which saves applicants' resources), more cascading grants redistributed among smaller organisations, and a the possibility of a 100% co-funding rate, under which EU funds would cover the full cost of a project. At present, the requirement for co-financing often disadvantages smaller organisations with limited resources.
Finally, AgoraEU should also make greater use of private funding from foundations and other third parties, as envisaged in Article 12 of the proposal.
A major structural change is the merging of Creative Europe into the new 'AgoraEU' programme, with the aim of increasing efficiency. However, there are concerns that culture could lose its distinct identity or be overshadowed by other priorities. How can the EU ensure that culture remains a visible, standalone priority in future MFFs?
The Culture strand within AgoraEU must be autonomous and clearly visible. In practice, this means a strand with a fixed percentage of the budget for culture (we are calling for at least 25%), its own work programmes, indicators and logo.
The visibility of culture also depends on artistic freedom: the freedom to be unconventional, radical, experimental and uncomfortable. In many Member States, this freedom is being restricted, often under austerity arguments. Culture Action Europe is part of a civil society coalition drafting a Blueprint for the European Artistic Freedom Act. In addition, we are calling for EU funding to national governments to be made conditional on respect for artistic freedom.
Underpinning both demands is a call to support culture's intrinsic value. Of course, culture contributes to democracy, social cohesion, health and the economy. However, these wider benefits can only materialise if culture is supported for its own sake. Only then can culture create space for the unconditional imagination that allows societies to rethink themselves and envision new futures. At Culture Action Europe, we say: Ask, Pay, Trust the Artist. Embrace the unpredictability of the arts. We deliver results, even if we do not always tick every box.
Your analysis highlights that culture is often mentioned only marginally in other major funds. What specific structural changes would you propose to ensure these broader funds actively support the cultural sector, rather than treating it as an afterthought?
We should recognise that the current EU budget includes some good examples of culture mainstreaming: Horizon Europe has a dedicated space for culture under Cluster 2, and the EU intends to allocate around EUR 5.3 billion for culture from cohesion funds. The first priority is to keep and strengthen these entry points in the next budget.
To make this structural, culture needs a clear place: dedicated policy windows, pillars, calls, budget lines. If culture appears only as a horizontal principle, it is too easy to overlook. This is why our current campaign on Horizon Europe and the European Competitiveness Fund is called ‘Name, Place, Fund’: culture should be named, placed in the architecture, and backed by funding.
Governance is key to achieving this. Culture sector representatives need to be involved in designing and monitoring broader funds. Take the bodies set up under the AI Act: the Scientific Panel, the Advisory Forum, the EU AI Board. Culture has no strong presence in any of them. Nor were cultural experts part of the high-level group shaping the future of Horizon Europe. Perhaps this is why culture is often neglected in AI and research policies. The answer is to include culture in decision-making early on!
The new National and Regional Partnership Plans will determine local spending, yet there is no mandatory requirement to fund culture in these plans. If this remains voluntary, what mechanism would you recommend to guarantee that every region invests in its cultural future?
During the pandemic, the European Parliament and cultural networks called for at least 2% of each national recovery plan to be allocated to culture. While this target was never included in the official regulation, in practice it was met. This time we should not rely on political goodwill. The target needs to be in the National and Regional Partnerships legal base.
If the Commission already proposes to earmark 14% for social objectives, why not 2% for culture? Regional funding is important because it reaches communities directly and makes culture more accessible for Europeans, through local cultural infrastructure and socially engaged arts.
For that to happen, we need pressure from the local level: cultural organisations, communities, mayors, all making the case that culture belongs in these plans. At Culture Action Europe, we are encouraging our members to write to their ministries and municipalities to push for exactly that.
Luiza Moroz is Head of Policy at Culture Action Europe, a major Brussels-based European cultural advocacy network. She leads the organisation’s advocacy on EU funding for culture, the Culture Compass and artists’ working conditions. Previously, she worked at Ukraine’s Ministry of Culture, where she helped introduce the concept of creative industries into the government agenda and establish the sector’s analytical and statistical framework. A philosophy graduate of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, she also holds an MA from the College of Europe and has worked on European integration in culture.