Netherlands 2017 report

Policies and Measures
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
The roles of various tiers of government in the funding of culture National regulatory
Code for cultural diversity National institutional
Activities concerning the History of Slavery National financial
Cultural education with quality (Cultuureducatie met Kwaliteit ‘CmK’) National financial
Culture Card (Cultuurkaart) and MBO Card National financial
Fund for Cultural Participation National financial
Art of Impact National financial
INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
Common Cultural Heritage policy (Gedeeld Cultureel Erfgoed (GCE)) International financial
International Cultural Policy (Internationaal Cultuur Beleid ‘ICB’) International financial
PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
Prince Claus Fund International financial
INTEGRATION OF CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - AT NATIONAL LEVEL
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
Culture and sustainable development in general National legislative, regulatory
EMERGING TRANSVERSAL ISSUES: Resolution 5.CP 9b
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
Frisian Language and Culture National regulatory
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
Charter Diversity National regulatory
Research on Stereotyping in the media National regulatory
Governance Code Culture National institutional
YOUTH
Name of the measure Scope of the measure Nature
Youth Representatives to Unesco National, International institutional
Youth Culture Fund (jeugdcultuurfonds) National financial
❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Culture Card (Cultuurkaart) and MBO Card

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The key objective is to lower the bar for students in secondary schools and in vocational education in the Netherlands to visit cultural institutions or get involved in their activities. The Culture Card is handed out to students in secondary schools, and provides them with a budget (funded by the ministry of Education, culture and science and by individual schools) to spend on cultural education.
On 1 January 2016, the Minister of Education, Culture and Science introduced the MBO-card. This card is handed out to MBO (TVET) students offering discounts in cultural participation. The aim of the MBO-card is to better embed cultural activities within the school curriculum[1].

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p.95

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

CJP (Cultural Youth Passport) has introduced the Culture Card which every secondary school student can use to visit cultural institutions or activities. It offers them a reduction on the entrance fees. Most secondary schools (65%) give this card to their students (age 12-18). More than 700.000 students take part in the Culture Card (73% of the total secondary school students).[1]

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijksoverheid/documenten/kamerstukken/2016/11/23/kamerbrief-cultuuronderwijs-najaar-2016/kamerbrief-cultuuronderwijs-najaar-2016.pdf.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

This measure has been very efficient to get young students involved in culture. Over 70% of the student population aged 12-18 received the card. Almost 90% of the MBO students received the MBO Card.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
CJP
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science donates 5 euro for each card that is handed out in secondary school (roughly 3,5 million euro). The Dutch government sponsors 5 euro on each card handed out to a student, 89% of secondary schools add 10 euro to this amount. 88% of MBO students received the MBO Card.[1]

 

[1] Ibid.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

This measure has been very efficient to get young students involved in culture. Over 70% of the student population aged 12-18 received the card. Almost 90% of the MBO students received the MBO Card.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

-

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Fund for Cultural Participation

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Fund for Cultural Participation stimulates active cultural involvement of all people in the Netherlands. The Fund aims to contribute to an open society in which people of all ages and backgrounds can develop their creativity. The Fund connects and supports people, organizations and the government who are involved in cultural participation.[1] The Fund is established and subsidized by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

 

[1] http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl/over-het-fonds/missie-en-doelstellingen/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

: The Fund subsidises cultural initiatives and schools throughout the Netherlands which stimulate culture participation. The Fund cooperates with cultural institutions, clubs, cultural heritage organizations, schools, other funds, the government and social institutions. With personal stories on its website (http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl) the fund raises awareness of the social value of culture.[1] An example of this is the project Let’s Dance, where young and experienced dancers danced together with elderly amateur dancers in a performance on migration and refugees. The project was funded by the FCP.

 

[1] Ibid.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The Fund funds several projects to stimulate cultural participation. In 2015, around 6 million people were involved in cultural activities[1].

 

[1] http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl/over-het-fonds/missie-en-doelstellingen/

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

In 2015, the Fund received almost 8 million euro from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.[1]

 

[1] http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl/file/1461226219.0817foSTYC/jaarverslag-2015-fonds-voor-cultuurparticipatie.pdf

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

All six national funds are evaluated every four years by an independent committee.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

All six national funds are evaluated every four years by an independent committee.

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Art of Impact

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Art of Impact was a programme that stimulated the collaboration between artists and social organisations. It tried to use creativity to solve social issues. The programme, that ran in 2015 and 2016, involved research on social issues and stimulated existing and new art projects with a clear social impact. In the period 2015-2016, 122 programmes were supported. [1]

 

[1] https://www.mondriaanfonds.nl/activiteit/art-impact/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The aim of The Art of Impact was to have artists, designers, mediators, cultural institutions and clients from inside and outside the cultural sector create plans that explore and strengthen the relationship between the arts and other social fields, and make this relationship more visible.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The Art of Impact was a programme which ended in 2016. The results are difficult to describe as the arts do not always conform to cognitive results. The majority of the projects are still in development, therefore it is not possible to describe the achieved impact.[1] The programme achieved a better establishment of social design in domains outside the cultural sector. Artists are increasingly asked to engage in social issues.

 

[1] http://theartofimpact.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Onderzoeksrapport-The-Art-of-Impact-door-KWINK-groep.pdf,

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
The Art of Impact was an initiative from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Fund for the Performing Arts
Fund for Cultural Participation
Fund for Dutch movies
Dutch Literature Fund
Fund for the Stimulation of the Creative Industry
Mondriaan Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science allocated seven million euro to the Art of Impact for the period 2015-2016.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

Art of Impact and the projects within the Art of Impact were reviewed.[1] Based upon the evaluation recommendations have been formulated for future projects.

 

[1]  http://theartofimpact.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Onderzoeksrapport-The-Art-of-Impact-door-KWINK-groep.pdf, p. 41.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

http://theartofimpact.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Onderzoeksrapport-The-Art-of-Impact-door-KWINK-groep.pdf

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

The roles of various tiers of government in the funding of culture

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

National cultural policy is implemented roughly along three lines:

- The basic national infrastructure consisting of 92 (in 2017) institutions which are directly funded by the government based on the criteria that they have a specific function in national arts and culture or play a key role in regional and urban cultural infrastructure.

- Six cultural funds for the performing arts, film, visual arts, literature, the creative industry and cultural participation respectively, which support initiatives in the different sectors on project basis or in two-year cycles. The Minister is responsible for the policy and the working methods of the funds, while the responsibility for the funding decisions rests with the cultural funds themselves. These are the Creative Industries Fund, Performing Arts Fund, Dutch Literary Fund, Mondriaan Fund, Netherlands Film Fund and Cultural Participation Fund.

- Policy programmes: a number of programmes are based on cooperation with other ministries including the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Economic Affairs, with other tiers of government (provinces and municipalities) and/or with other parties in the public and private sectors.

Cooperation between national government and other tiers of government, the provinces and municipalities, deserves special attention as each tier is autonomous in pursuing its own cultural policy. Together, the three tiers of government are able to provide a robust and wide-ranging level of cultural facilities.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Minister’s responsibility is confined to the main points of cultural policy. The “Thorbecke principle”[1] states that governments should refrain from making an artistic judgement on cultural expressions. For this judgement, the Minister relies on the Council for Culture [Raad voor Cultuur], the body that advises government and parliament on all (substantive) matters concerning culture and media policy. In accordance with the Cultural Policy (Special Purpose Funding) Act, the Dutch government makes a financial contribution to a wide-ranging and varied cultural offering for all citizens and in all parts of the country by funding institutions and establishing policy programmes.

For this reason, the basis of cultural policy in the Netherlands is in accordance with the principles and objectives of the Convention.

 

[1] As chairman of the Constitutional Committee, the statesman Johan Rudolph Thorbecke (1798 – 1872) laid the foundations of the Dutch state in 1848. He led three governments as prime minister. Best known from this period is Thorbecke’s statement about the government’s position with regard to art: “Art is not the business of government as the government cannot judge art, nor yet control it”. What Thorbecke meant by this was that he, as a person, was indeed interested in art but that the government was no judge of science or art.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

a diverse and suitable cultural policy

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Diverse layers of government
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
No
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Code for cultural diversity

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Code Cultural Diversity was an initiative from organisations in the cultural sector. Created in 2009, the Code Cultural Diversity is a practical instrument for board members, supervisory board members, managing board members and employees. It is a behavioural code which cultural organisations are expected to implement. The Code offers practical assistance to embed cultural diversity in institutions.

Dutch society is has become increasingly diverse during the past decades . At the end of 2015, one in eight people in the Netherlands was of non-western origin.[1] However, audience, producers and buyers of the Dutch cultural offering do not fully reflect this diversity. This includes staff in the cultural sector. The six governmental funding agencies receive a lower number of funding requests by culturally diverse organisations. The Code Cultural Diversity is established in order to ensure that institutions, programmes and audience reflect the diversity of the population in a more visible way. It was initiated by the organisations themselves, through the branch organisations for the performing arts and museums.

For the period 2012-2015, institutions were not obliged to report on results achieved relating to the Code. Since 2016 cultural institutions are expected to increase their efforts to implement the Code and to reflect on the implementation of the Code within their organisations. For the period 2017-2020 every institution in the BIS (Special Purpose Funding- see p.3) is obliged to reflect on the code in their annual reporting.

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p. 10.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
institutional
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Code focusses on four elements: programme, public, personnel and partners. By using the Code, institutions are encouraged to develop an integrated diversity policy. The Federation of Culture is the overarching organisation of the performing arts, museums, libraries, visual arts and theatre. It promotes the common interest of these branches and brings the Code to the attention of the cultural institutions.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

It is expected that the Code will yield better results in the near future because it was given priority by the minister, the Federation of Culture and the Council for Culture. The six governmental funding agencies already endorsed the Code.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Federation of Culture
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

In the period 2015-2016, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science allocated 65,000 euro for the promotion of the Code Cultural Diversity. In 2014 this amount was 45,000 Euro.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
No
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

The government does keep track of diversity within the cultural sector in general, via ‘Culture at a first glance’[1] and other monitoring activities[2]. However the Code Cultural Diversity has not yet been evaluated as a specific measure. The Council for Culture advises a stronger promotion of the Code[3], something which is fully endorsed by the government.

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/11/14/cultuur-in-beeld, p. 89/90 and https://www.cbf.nl/Uploaded_files/Zelf/Rijksoverheid%20(2011)%20-%20Cultuur%20in%20Beeld.pdf, p.37

[2] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/11/14/cultuur-in-beeld, pp 67-95

[3] https://www.cultuur.nl/actueel/nieuws/raad-voor-cultuur-beoordeelt-subsidieaanvragen-culturele-basisinfrastructuur/item3596

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

see above

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Activities concerning the History of Slavery

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Minister Bussemaker strives for more visible and sustainable attention for the history of slavery. She organized a round table on this topic with institutions and experts from the cultural and scientific sectors. While many activities take place relating to this subject, more collaboration and coordination could be established to enhance impact.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 
  • The National Museum of World Cultures organised an international symposium on slavery as a shared past (2017).
  • Rijksmuseum, Tropenmuseum and Amsterdam Museum have been reviewing the descriptions of objects in their collections since 2015, and are replacing possible offensive texts and proposing alterations in the display of subjects. Starting in 2017, the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Ministry of Culture is offering support for this project.
  • Well known are the national commemoration of the abolition of slavery at the monument in Amsterdam (Oosterpark) and Keti Koti Festival in Rotterdam, both on July 1st. The commemoration in Amsterdam, organised by NiNsee (National Institute Dutch Slavery Past and heritage), is funded by the Ministry of Culture (via Mondriaan Fund) and the city of Amsterdam. NiNsee is an institution funded by the city of Amsterdam. Part of its activities is funded by the Ministry of Social Affairs.
  • The Ministry of Social Affairs is coordinating activities within the UN Decade for people of African descent. 
  • The Network for the History of Slavery (Netwerk Slavernijverleden) started in 2014. It consists of a diverse range of cultural and scientific organisations and experts. The network has three subdivisions: Education, Research & Heritage, and Art & Culture. Its mission is to disseminate knowledge on the history of slavery to the wider public, and to involve different stakeholders. The Municipality of Amsterdam provides some funding for the Network.
d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

An increase of the impact of activities regarding the history of slavery by more collaboration and coordination.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
NiNsee
Vrije Universiteit
Amsterdam Museum
Bijlmerparktheater
Mondriaan Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The commemoration is funded via Mondriaan Fund.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Cultural education with quality (Cultuureducatie met Kwaliteit ‘CmK’)

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The aim of the measure is: ‘to let children profit from quality cultural education in which they enjoy their education while learning important 21st century skills’.[1] In other words: to help develop children into creative and critical adults. Students should be in contact with music, dance, drawing, theatre and cultural heritage during their entire primary school career. [2] This measure is targeted at primary schools. An important aim of this measure is to give cultural education a stronger basis in the primary school’s curriculum. Other measures aim at boosting musical education in primary schools, coordinated by the Fund for Cultural Participation, and the training of music teachers in teacher training institutes.

Another noteworthy arrangement executed by The Fund for Cultural Participation is specifically targeted at younger students in vocational education. This intends to stimulate the collaboration of TVET-schools and cultural institutions. Minister Bussemaker allocated extra funding until 2020 to increase dispersion and to secure the position of culture education in TVET in collaboration with municipalities.
 

 

[1] http://www.cultuureducatiemetkwaliteit.nl/over-cmk/#het-doel.

[2] http://www.cultuureducatiemetkwaliteit.nl/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

CmK improves cooperation between schools and cultural institution and the knowledge and skills of teachers. Stimulating cultural education is not only the responsibility of the government; the effort of different parties from the cultural field and education such as local municipalities and provinces, is equally important,.[1] Projects are funded in a matching structure, where national and local government jointly provide funding.
 

 

[1] Ibid.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The focus in 2017-2020 will be on four different areas.

  • Improving the quality of cultural education.
  • Schools will have ownership of cultural education.
  • Cultural education needs to become an integral part of the school’s curriculum.
  • Closer cooperation between schools and the direct cultural environment.[1]
 

[1] Ibid.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Fund for Cultural participation
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

39 million euro from the Dutch government for the period 2013-2016, in which 54 different projects were financed.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

In the period 2015-2016, roughly 60% of all primary schools joined CmK, 36% of all primary school students took part in at least one of the cultural activities organised by CmK.[1] The measure will be continued for 2017-2020.

 

[1]http://www.lkca.nl/~/media/kennisbank/publicaties/2016/ce_review_culltuureducatie_met_kwaliteit_def%20(2).pdf, p. 7.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

[1]http://www.lkca.nl/~/media/kennisbank/publicaties/2016/ce_review_culltuureducatie_met_kwaliteit_def%20(2).pdf

❭ INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION

International Cultural Policy (Internationaal Cultuur Beleid ‘ICB’)

Context of the measure: 
INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Foreign cultural expressions and the history of the ‘other’ are of great importance to obtain new perspectives, images and knowledge. Artists and cultural institutions from the Netherlands offer new inspiration and knowledge abroad and vice versa.
The International Cultural Policy is aimed at facilitating international cooperation with the relevant parties: the cultural sector, civil-society organizations, governments, cities and private parties.[1]

The Common Cultural Heritage Policy (described in the next measure) falls under the International Cultural Policy.
 

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/beleidsnota-s/2016/05/04/beleidskader-internationaal-cultuurbeleid-2017-2020.

Government primarily has a facilitating role. On an international level, government focuses on 4 different aspects.

  1. Cultural institutions, artists or heritage professionals often have limited knowledge about international exchanges. The government helps them to get in contact with the relevant institutions which stimulate and facilitate exchanges, presentations and international cooperation, such as embassies, funds and supporting institutions.
  2. Government involvement may be desirable or necessary to engage in international cultural cooperation and exchange. This applies to countries where the government has a decisive role in cultural policy or where it has a strong influence on cultural life.
  3. The cultural sector’s visibility and appreciation may be enhanced by working together. Collective international promotion is by definition not a matter for an individual institution or artist.
  4. Culture can be used as part of diplomacy.[1]
 

[1]  Ibid.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The International Cultural Policy aims at facilitating international cooperation of the parties concerned: the cultural sector, civil-society organizations, governments, cities and private parties.[1]

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/beleidsnota-s/2016/05/04/beleidskader-internationaal-cultuurbeleid-2017-2020.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

Improvement in mutual understanding, interest in cultural expressions, cultural identity and history.  

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science yearly spend 21.2 million euro together.[1]

 

[1]  Ibid.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
International
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

After the evaluation of the policy over the period 2013-2016, the priorities for the International Cultural Policy 2017-2020 are:

  • Attention to both the intrinsic and social value of culture, as well as its economic value;
  • Emphasis on the importance of exchanges, networks and reciprocity;
  • Development of a coherent and integral international approach, with more room for initiatives from the field;
  • More attention for the unifying role culture can play internationally, with a focus on the countries around Europe;
  • More support for cultural diplomacy worldwide.
i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

-

❭ INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION

Common Cultural Heritage policy (Gedeeld Cultureel Erfgoed (GCE))

Context of the measure: 
INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Netherlands have maintained intensive relationships with a number of countries all over the world. These relations have left us with tangible and intangible heritage, generally called Common Cultural Heritage. Examples include u the heritage in other countries from the times of the East India Company and West India Company, from our colonial past, or from a time of intensive cultural or other relations.

Objectives of the GCE-policy are fostering international relations, sustainable conservation of heritage and promoting the visibility of and positive impression of The Netherlands.[1]

 

[1] http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/sites/default/files/docs/gce_beleidskader_2013-2016_definitief__2_a.pdf

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Netherlands worked with the following GCE countries: Australia, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Japan, Russia, Suriname, Sri Lanka, the United States of America, and South-Africa.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

GCE offers points of departure for international collaboration. International collaboration fosters intercultural dialogue and deepens insights in the cultural identity and solidarity between peoples. In this way it promotes peace and security and helps solve problems of economic, social, cultural or humanitarian nature.

Collaboration on shared cultural heritage may also add to critical reflections on our history and enlarge the mutual understanding of past and present. Furthermore it could play a role in diplomacy, from a public or economic perspective: when incorporating cultural heritage within international relations the visibility of the Netherlands may be improved and it may raise goodwill abroad.[1]
This may take place in the form of training, knowledge exchange, ameliorating access to archives, discussing intangible heritage or repurposing of immovable cultural heritage.

 

[1] Ibid.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Nationaal Archief
Dutch Culture
Cultural Heritage Agency
Mondriaan Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

: one million euro annually from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and one million euro annually from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, for the years 2013-2016. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs primarily funds embassies within the GCE structure. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science primarily funds the National Archive and the Cultural Heritage Agency.[1]

 

[1] http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/sites/default/files/docs/gce_beleidskader_2013-2016_definitief__2_a.pdf .

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
International
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

In general, the policy has been considered to be successful[1]. In the 2012 Mid-term review , the audit services of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs advised to continue the policy. They also suggested to improve the efficiency, this could be done by revaluating the GCE priority countries and increasing transparency in policymaking. Furthermore, the policy should work more with a demand based attitude and less with a supply based attitude.[2]

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/06/14/iob-cultuur-als-kans-beleidsdoorlichting-van-het-internationaal-cultuurbeleid-2009-2014, p. 85.

[2] Ibid.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

see above

❭ PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT

Prince Claus Fund

Context of the measure: 
PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Prince Claus Fund was founded on 6 September 1996 as a tribute to Prince Claus's dedication to culture and development. It was founded by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Development and the Prime Minister on the occasion of HRH Prince Claus’ 70th birthday[1]. The Fund states that culture is a basic need and the motor of development. Based on the principle that culture is a basic need, the Prince Claus Fund’s mission is to actively seek cultural cooperation founded on equality and trust, with partners of excellence, in spaces where resources and opportunities for cultural expression, creative production and research are limited and cultural heritage is threatened.[2]

 

[1] https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-24886-1.html

[2] http://www.princeclausfund.org/en/the-fund

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Prince Claus Fund supports artists, critical thinkers and cultural organisations in spaces where freedom of cultural expression is restricted by conflict, poverty, repression, marginalisation or taboos. Annually, the Fund grants eleven Prince Claus Awards to individuals and organisations for their outstanding achievements in the field of culture and development. The Fund also provides first aid to cultural heritage damaged by man-made or natural disaster.

The Fund has built a diverse global network of people, many of them role models in their own societies. This network of trust and mutual respect is the backbone of the Fund. Local partners and initiatives guide all the Fund’s work, following the conviction of Prince Claus that people are not being developed, but develop themselves.[1] Individuals and organizations cannot request funding themselves, the Prince Claus Fund selects artists and organisations who receive funding.

 

[1] http://www.princeclausfund.org/en/programmes/about

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

Over 2013-2015 [1] (results over 2016 have not yet been published) the fund supported 151 projects (total amount of funding 2.7 million Euro), and 108 Cultural Emergency Responses.

 

[1] http://www.princeclausfund.org/nl/the-fund/facts-and-figures

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Prince Claus Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Fund is financially supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Dutch Postcode Lottery and individual donations. In 2015 the budget totalled 5,446,960 euro.[1]

 

[1]http://www.princeclausfund.org/files/docs/2015%20Prince%20Claus%20Fund%20Annual%20Report%20online.pdf.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
International
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

The Prince Claus Fund’s total budget in 2015 was €5,446,960, of which €3,805,555 went toward the direct support of cultural initiatives and dedicated partners, primarily in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. In addition to the steadfast support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Dutch Postcode Lottery, €1,133,862 was raised through contributions from private donors.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

see above

❭ INTEGRATION OF CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - AT NATIONAL LEVEL

Culture and sustainable development in general

Context of the measure: 
INTEGRATION OF CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - AT NATIONAL LEVEL
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Culture bears an artistic and social value (identity, development, dialogue, connection, history), but also an economic value (creative industry, innovation, planning). The Sustainable Development Goals support the importance of culture as driver of sustainable development, for example the importance of non-violence and cultural diversity (SDG 4.7), safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage (SDG 11.4) and creative industry (SDG 8.3).

As shown before, the Netherlands have legislation on these subjects, and has drafted national and international cultural policies, specifically targeting the diversity of cultural expressions and the safeguarding, management and accessibility of cultural heritage. The Unesco conventions of 1954, 1970, 1972, 2003 and 2005 are ratified and implemented. The ratification of the 2001 convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage is in preparation.

Regarding the management of monuments, policies have been developed to support the transition towards sustainable use of natural resources.

The Dutch Heritage Act (Erfgoedwet)[1], which came into force in 2016, stipulates how our heritage is managed, designates the responsible parties, and specifies how supervision is to be exercised. For the first time, there is now a single comprehensive piece of legislation covering Dutch museums and their holdings, historical sites and archaeology both on land and under water. Together with the new Environment and Planning Act (expected to come into force in 2018) the Heritage Act allows for comprehensive protection of the country’s cultural heritage. It combines existing laws and hundreds of sets of regulations in the areas of e.g. construction, environment, water, spatial planning and nature.

The Netherlands also play an active role internationally: via its membership of the World Heritage Convention, in donating to funds related to conventions, and through the Shared Cultural Heritage programme (chapter 2.2).

 

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p. 35.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
legislative
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

Culture bears an artistic and social value (identity, development, dialogue, connection, history), but also an economic value (creative industry, innovation, planning). The Sustainable Development Goals support the importance of culture as driver of sustainable development, for example the importance of non-violence and cultural diversity (SDG 4.7), safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage (SDG 11.4) and creative industry (SDG 8.3).

As shown before, the Netherlands have legislation on these subjects, and has drafted national and international cultural policies, specifically targeting the diversity of cultural expressions and the safeguarding, management and accessibility of cultural heritage. The Unesco conventions of 1954, 1970, 1972, 2003 and 2005 are ratified and implemented. The ratification of the 2001 convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage is in preparation.

Regarding the management of monuments, policies have been developed to support the transition towards sustainable use of natural resources.

The Dutch Heritage Act (Erfgoedwet)[1], which came into force in 2016, stipulates how our heritage is managed, designates the responsible parties, and specifies how supervision is to be exercised. For the first time, there is now a single comprehensive piece of legislation covering Dutch museums and their holdings, historical sites and archaeology both on land and under water. Together with the new Environment and Planning Act (expected to come into force in 2018) the Heritage Act allows for comprehensive protection of the country’s cultural heritage. It combines existing laws and hundreds of sets of regulations in the areas of e.g. construction, environment, water, spatial planning and nature.

The Netherlands also play an active role internationally: via its membership of the World Heritage Convention, in donating to funds related to conventions, and through the Shared Cultural Heritage programme (chapter 2.2).

 

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p. 35.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

-

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ EMERGING TRANSVERSAL ISSUES: Resolution 5.CP 9b

Frisian Language and Culture

Context of the measure: 
EMERGING TRANSVERSAL ISSUES: Resolution 5.CP 9b
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

In line with the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Framework Convention)[1] and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (European Charter)[2] of the Council of Europe - the Province of Friesland has the necessary powers to protect its own (Frisian) language and culture. The Frisians are the only recognised minority covered by the Framework Convention and Frisian is the only official language in the Netherlands recognised under Part III of the European Charter.

 

[1] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001714/geldigheidsdatum_16-02-2011  

[2] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001223/geldigheidsdatum_22-02-2012

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

In line with the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Framework Convention)[1] and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (European Charter)[2] of the Council of Europe - the Province of Friesland has the necessary powers to protect its own (Frisian) language and culture. The Frisians are the only recognised minority covered by the Framework Convention and Frisian is the only official language in the Netherlands recognised under Part III of the European Charter.

 

[1] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001714/geldigheidsdatum_16-02-2011  

[2] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001223/geldigheidsdatum_22-02-2012

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The Frisians are the only recognised minority covered by the Framework Convention and Frisian is the only official language in the Netherlands recognised under Part III of the European Charter.

 

 

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Province of Friesland
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY

Charter Diversity

Context of the measure: 
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Charter focuses on employers in the private and cultural sector. By signing the Charter, the employer is required to actively make an effort to stimulate diversity and inclusion on the workfloor. The commitment is an inclusive corporate culture with a balanced workforce and equal opportunities for all.[1] The ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Federation of Culture signed the charter.

 

[1] http://diversiteitinbedrijf.nl/charter-diversiteit-wat-is-het/wat-is-het-charter-diversiteit/

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Charter focuses on employers in the private and cultural sector. By signing the Charter, the employer is required to actively make an effort to stimulate diversity and inclusion on the workfloor. The commitment is an inclusive corporate culture with a balanced workforce and equal opportunities for all.[1] The ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Federation of Culture signed the charter.

 

[1] http://diversiteitinbedrijf.nl/charter-diversiteit-wat-is-het/wat-is-het-charter-diversiteit/

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

an inclusive corporate culture with a balanced workforce and equal opportunities for all

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Diversiteit in Bedrijf
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY

Research on Stereotyping in the media

Context of the measure: 
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

In 2016, WOMEN Inc. (a gender equality organization) took the initiative to conduct a research regarding gender stereotyping in the media. The way media policy advisors see their role and responsibility in stereotyping, and how they can contribute to an inclusive society, were central themes in the research project.[1] One of the conclusions was that diversity should be a key factor to determine quality.[2]

 

[1] https://www.womeninc.nl/Uploaded_files/DownloadLinks/beperkt-zicht-de-rol-van-mediamakers-in-beeldvorming.799def.pdf, p. 6.

[2] Ibid, p. 41.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

In 2016, WOMEN Inc. (a gender equality organization)took the initiative to conduct a research regarding gender stereotyping in the media. The way media policy advisors see their role and responsibility in stereotyping, and how they can contribute to an inclusive society, were central themes in the research project.[1] One of the conclusions was that diversity should be a key factor to determine quality.[2]

 

[1] https://www.womeninc.nl/Uploaded_files/DownloadLinks/beperkt-zicht-de-rol-van-mediamakers-in-beeldvorming.799def.pdf, p. 6.

[2] Ibid, p. 41.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

diversity should be a key factor to determine quality – quality of what?.[2]

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
WOMEN INC
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY

Governance Code Culture

Context of the measure: 
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Culture Governance Code is a tool for good governance in the culture sector.[1]

Organisations in the cultural sector strive to create cultural, economic and social benefits. Publicly funded institutions have a moral responsibility to maintain an inclusive and accessible policy.

The Code provides supervisory boards and boards of directors with recommendations on standards and procedures.[2] It pays attention to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, knowledge and socio-economic dimensions.

 

[1] http://www.governancecodecultuur.nl/

[2] http://www.governancecodecultuur.nl/over-de-code

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
institutional
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Code provides supervisory boards and boards of directors with recommendations on standards and procedures.[2] It pays attention to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, knowledge and socio-economic dimensions.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

It pays attention to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, knowledge and socio-economic dimensions.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
all institutions
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ YOUTH

Youth Representatives to Unesco

Context of the measure: 
YOUTH
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The National Youth Council (Nationale Jeugd Raad, NJR) has two youth representatives to Unesco. They give guest lectures in schools (secondary and tertiary education), one of them on cultural diversity. The youth representatives also actively collect the thoughts and opinions of the groups they represent and share them with the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science,  the Netherlands Commission for Unesco and the Netherlands Permanent Delegation to Unesco in Paris.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
institutional
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The National Youth Council (Nationale Jeugd Raad, NJR) has two youth representatives to Unesco. They give guest lectures in schools (secondary and tertiary education), one of them on cultural diversity. The youth representatives also actively collect the thoughts and opinions of the groups they represent and share them with the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science,  the Netherlands Commission for Unesco and the Netherlands Permanent Delegation to Unesco in Paris.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

-

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Nationale Jeugdraad
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ YOUTH

Youth Culture Fund (jeugdcultuurfonds)

Context of the measure: 
YOUTH
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Every child in the Netherlands should be able to follow lessons in art and culture, regardless of its socio-economic background[1]. The fund provides children aged between 4 and 18 with the possibility to participate in cultural life. The exploration of the child’s own passions is a priority.

An independent intermediary or professional, involved with the family, may request a maximum of 450 euro per child, per year, for cultural lessons.

The number of children receiving support from the fund has grown from 147 in 2009 to 7620 in 2016.

 

[1] https://www.jeugdcultuurfonds.nl/over/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

Every child in the Netherlands should be able to follow lessons in art and culture, regardless of its socio-economic background[1]. The fund provides children aged between 4 and 18 with the possibility to participate in cultural life. The exploration of the child’s own passions is a priority.

An independent intermediary or professional, involved with the family, may request a maximum of 450 euro per child, per year, for cultural lessons.

The number of children receiving support from the fund has grown from 147 in 2009 to 7620 in 2016.

 

[1] https://www.jeugdcultuurfonds.nl/over/.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

Every child in the Netherlands should be able to follow lessons in art and culture, regardless of its socio-economic background

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Jeugdcultuurfonds
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
Name of the designated official signing the report
Title:
Ms
Family Name:
Bussemaker
First Name:
Mariëtte (Jet)
Position:
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Organization:
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Culture Card (Cultuurkaart) and MBO Card

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The key objective is to lower the bar for students in secondary schools and in vocational education in the Netherlands to visit cultural institutions or get involved in their activities. The Culture Card is handed out to students in secondary schools, and provides them with a budget (funded by the ministry of Education, culture and science and by individual schools) to spend on cultural education.
On 1 January 2016, the Minister of Education, Culture and Science introduced the MBO-card. This card is handed out to MBO (TVET) students offering discounts in cultural participation. The aim of the MBO-card is to better embed cultural activities within the school curriculum[1].

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p.95

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

CJP (Cultural Youth Passport) has introduced the Culture Card which every secondary school student can use to visit cultural institutions or activities. It offers them a reduction on the entrance fees. Most secondary schools (65%) give this card to their students (age 12-18). More than 700.000 students take part in the Culture Card (73% of the total secondary school students).[1]

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijksoverheid/documenten/kamerstukken/2016/11/23/kamerbrief-cultuuronderwijs-najaar-2016/kamerbrief-cultuuronderwijs-najaar-2016.pdf.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

This measure has been very efficient to get young students involved in culture. Over 70% of the student population aged 12-18 received the card. Almost 90% of the MBO students received the MBO Card.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
CJP
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science donates 5 euro for each card that is handed out in secondary school (roughly 3,5 million euro). The Dutch government sponsors 5 euro on each card handed out to a student, 89% of secondary schools add 10 euro to this amount. 88% of MBO students received the MBO Card.[1]

 

[1] Ibid.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

This measure has been very efficient to get young students involved in culture. Over 70% of the student population aged 12-18 received the card. Almost 90% of the MBO students received the MBO Card.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

-

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Fund for Cultural Participation

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Fund for Cultural Participation stimulates active cultural involvement of all people in the Netherlands. The Fund aims to contribute to an open society in which people of all ages and backgrounds can develop their creativity. The Fund connects and supports people, organizations and the government who are involved in cultural participation.[1] The Fund is established and subsidized by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

 

[1] http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl/over-het-fonds/missie-en-doelstellingen/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

: The Fund subsidises cultural initiatives and schools throughout the Netherlands which stimulate culture participation. The Fund cooperates with cultural institutions, clubs, cultural heritage organizations, schools, other funds, the government and social institutions. With personal stories on its website (http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl) the fund raises awareness of the social value of culture.[1] An example of this is the project Let’s Dance, where young and experienced dancers danced together with elderly amateur dancers in a performance on migration and refugees. The project was funded by the FCP.

 

[1] Ibid.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The Fund funds several projects to stimulate cultural participation. In 2015, around 6 million people were involved in cultural activities[1].

 

[1] http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl/over-het-fonds/missie-en-doelstellingen/

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

In 2015, the Fund received almost 8 million euro from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.[1]

 

[1] http://www.cultuurparticipatie.nl/file/1461226219.0817foSTYC/jaarverslag-2015-fonds-voor-cultuurparticipatie.pdf

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

All six national funds are evaluated every four years by an independent committee.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

All six national funds are evaluated every four years by an independent committee.

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Art of Impact

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Art of Impact was a programme that stimulated the collaboration between artists and social organisations. It tried to use creativity to solve social issues. The programme, that ran in 2015 and 2016, involved research on social issues and stimulated existing and new art projects with a clear social impact. In the period 2015-2016, 122 programmes were supported. [1]

 

[1] https://www.mondriaanfonds.nl/activiteit/art-impact/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The aim of The Art of Impact was to have artists, designers, mediators, cultural institutions and clients from inside and outside the cultural sector create plans that explore and strengthen the relationship between the arts and other social fields, and make this relationship more visible.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The Art of Impact was a programme which ended in 2016. The results are difficult to describe as the arts do not always conform to cognitive results. The majority of the projects are still in development, therefore it is not possible to describe the achieved impact.[1] The programme achieved a better establishment of social design in domains outside the cultural sector. Artists are increasingly asked to engage in social issues.

 

[1] http://theartofimpact.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Onderzoeksrapport-The-Art-of-Impact-door-KWINK-groep.pdf,

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
The Art of Impact was an initiative from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Fund for the Performing Arts
Fund for Cultural Participation
Fund for Dutch movies
Dutch Literature Fund
Fund for the Stimulation of the Creative Industry
Mondriaan Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science allocated seven million euro to the Art of Impact for the period 2015-2016.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

Art of Impact and the projects within the Art of Impact were reviewed.[1] Based upon the evaluation recommendations have been formulated for future projects.

 

[1]  http://theartofimpact.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Onderzoeksrapport-The-Art-of-Impact-door-KWINK-groep.pdf, p. 41.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

http://theartofimpact.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Onderzoeksrapport-The-Art-of-Impact-door-KWINK-groep.pdf

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

The roles of various tiers of government in the funding of culture

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

National cultural policy is implemented roughly along three lines:

- The basic national infrastructure consisting of 92 (in 2017) institutions which are directly funded by the government based on the criteria that they have a specific function in national arts and culture or play a key role in regional and urban cultural infrastructure.

- Six cultural funds for the performing arts, film, visual arts, literature, the creative industry and cultural participation respectively, which support initiatives in the different sectors on project basis or in two-year cycles. The Minister is responsible for the policy and the working methods of the funds, while the responsibility for the funding decisions rests with the cultural funds themselves. These are the Creative Industries Fund, Performing Arts Fund, Dutch Literary Fund, Mondriaan Fund, Netherlands Film Fund and Cultural Participation Fund.

- Policy programmes: a number of programmes are based on cooperation with other ministries including the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Economic Affairs, with other tiers of government (provinces and municipalities) and/or with other parties in the public and private sectors.

Cooperation between national government and other tiers of government, the provinces and municipalities, deserves special attention as each tier is autonomous in pursuing its own cultural policy. Together, the three tiers of government are able to provide a robust and wide-ranging level of cultural facilities.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Minister’s responsibility is confined to the main points of cultural policy. The “Thorbecke principle”[1] states that governments should refrain from making an artistic judgement on cultural expressions. For this judgement, the Minister relies on the Council for Culture [Raad voor Cultuur], the body that advises government and parliament on all (substantive) matters concerning culture and media policy. In accordance with the Cultural Policy (Special Purpose Funding) Act, the Dutch government makes a financial contribution to a wide-ranging and varied cultural offering for all citizens and in all parts of the country by funding institutions and establishing policy programmes.

For this reason, the basis of cultural policy in the Netherlands is in accordance with the principles and objectives of the Convention.

 

[1] As chairman of the Constitutional Committee, the statesman Johan Rudolph Thorbecke (1798 – 1872) laid the foundations of the Dutch state in 1848. He led three governments as prime minister. Best known from this period is Thorbecke’s statement about the government’s position with regard to art: “Art is not the business of government as the government cannot judge art, nor yet control it”. What Thorbecke meant by this was that he, as a person, was indeed interested in art but that the government was no judge of science or art.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

a diverse and suitable cultural policy

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Diverse layers of government
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
No
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Code for cultural diversity

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Code Cultural Diversity was an initiative from organisations in the cultural sector. Created in 2009, the Code Cultural Diversity is a practical instrument for board members, supervisory board members, managing board members and employees. It is a behavioural code which cultural organisations are expected to implement. The Code offers practical assistance to embed cultural diversity in institutions.

Dutch society is has become increasingly diverse during the past decades . At the end of 2015, one in eight people in the Netherlands was of non-western origin.[1] However, audience, producers and buyers of the Dutch cultural offering do not fully reflect this diversity. This includes staff in the cultural sector. The six governmental funding agencies receive a lower number of funding requests by culturally diverse organisations. The Code Cultural Diversity is established in order to ensure that institutions, programmes and audience reflect the diversity of the population in a more visible way. It was initiated by the organisations themselves, through the branch organisations for the performing arts and museums.

For the period 2012-2015, institutions were not obliged to report on results achieved relating to the Code. Since 2016 cultural institutions are expected to increase their efforts to implement the Code and to reflect on the implementation of the Code within their organisations. For the period 2017-2020 every institution in the BIS (Special Purpose Funding- see p.3) is obliged to reflect on the code in their annual reporting.

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p. 10.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
institutional
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Code focusses on four elements: programme, public, personnel and partners. By using the Code, institutions are encouraged to develop an integrated diversity policy. The Federation of Culture is the overarching organisation of the performing arts, museums, libraries, visual arts and theatre. It promotes the common interest of these branches and brings the Code to the attention of the cultural institutions.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

It is expected that the Code will yield better results in the near future because it was given priority by the minister, the Federation of Culture and the Council for Culture. The six governmental funding agencies already endorsed the Code.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Federation of Culture
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

In the period 2015-2016, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science allocated 65,000 euro for the promotion of the Code Cultural Diversity. In 2014 this amount was 45,000 Euro.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
No
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

The government does keep track of diversity within the cultural sector in general, via ‘Culture at a first glance’[1] and other monitoring activities[2]. However the Code Cultural Diversity has not yet been evaluated as a specific measure. The Council for Culture advises a stronger promotion of the Code[3], something which is fully endorsed by the government.

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/11/14/cultuur-in-beeld, p. 89/90 and https://www.cbf.nl/Uploaded_files/Zelf/Rijksoverheid%20(2011)%20-%20Cultuur%20in%20Beeld.pdf, p.37

[2] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/11/14/cultuur-in-beeld, pp 67-95

[3] https://www.cultuur.nl/actueel/nieuws/raad-voor-cultuur-beoordeelt-subsidieaanvragen-culturele-basisinfrastructuur/item3596

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

see above

❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Activities concerning the History of Slavery

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Minister Bussemaker strives for more visible and sustainable attention for the history of slavery. She organized a round table on this topic with institutions and experts from the cultural and scientific sectors. While many activities take place relating to this subject, more collaboration and coordination could be established to enhance impact.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 
  • The National Museum of World Cultures organised an international symposium on slavery as a shared past (2017).
  • Rijksmuseum, Tropenmuseum and Amsterdam Museum have been reviewing the descriptions of objects in their collections since 2015, and are replacing possible offensive texts and proposing alterations in the display of subjects. Starting in 2017, the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Ministry of Culture is offering support for this project.
  • Well known are the national commemoration of the abolition of slavery at the monument in Amsterdam (Oosterpark) and Keti Koti Festival in Rotterdam, both on July 1st. The commemoration in Amsterdam, organised by NiNsee (National Institute Dutch Slavery Past and heritage), is funded by the Ministry of Culture (via Mondriaan Fund) and the city of Amsterdam. NiNsee is an institution funded by the city of Amsterdam. Part of its activities is funded by the Ministry of Social Affairs.
  • The Ministry of Social Affairs is coordinating activities within the UN Decade for people of African descent. 
  • The Network for the History of Slavery (Netwerk Slavernijverleden) started in 2014. It consists of a diverse range of cultural and scientific organisations and experts. The network has three subdivisions: Education, Research & Heritage, and Art & Culture. Its mission is to disseminate knowledge on the history of slavery to the wider public, and to involve different stakeholders. The Municipality of Amsterdam provides some funding for the Network.
d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

An increase of the impact of activities regarding the history of slavery by more collaboration and coordination.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
NiNsee
Vrije Universiteit
Amsterdam Museum
Bijlmerparktheater
Mondriaan Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The commemoration is funded via Mondriaan Fund.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES

Cultural education with quality (Cultuureducatie met Kwaliteit ‘CmK’)

Context of the measure: 
CULTURAL POLICIES AND MEASURES
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The aim of the measure is: ‘to let children profit from quality cultural education in which they enjoy their education while learning important 21st century skills’.[1] In other words: to help develop children into creative and critical adults. Students should be in contact with music, dance, drawing, theatre and cultural heritage during their entire primary school career. [2] This measure is targeted at primary schools. An important aim of this measure is to give cultural education a stronger basis in the primary school’s curriculum. Other measures aim at boosting musical education in primary schools, coordinated by the Fund for Cultural Participation, and the training of music teachers in teacher training institutes.

Another noteworthy arrangement executed by The Fund for Cultural Participation is specifically targeted at younger students in vocational education. This intends to stimulate the collaboration of TVET-schools and cultural institutions. Minister Bussemaker allocated extra funding until 2020 to increase dispersion and to secure the position of culture education in TVET in collaboration with municipalities.
 

 

[1] http://www.cultuureducatiemetkwaliteit.nl/over-cmk/#het-doel.

[2] http://www.cultuureducatiemetkwaliteit.nl/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

CmK improves cooperation between schools and cultural institution and the knowledge and skills of teachers. Stimulating cultural education is not only the responsibility of the government; the effort of different parties from the cultural field and education such as local municipalities and provinces, is equally important,.[1] Projects are funded in a matching structure, where national and local government jointly provide funding.
 

 

[1] Ibid.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The focus in 2017-2020 will be on four different areas.

  • Improving the quality of cultural education.
  • Schools will have ownership of cultural education.
  • Cultural education needs to become an integral part of the school’s curriculum.
  • Closer cooperation between schools and the direct cultural environment.[1]
 

[1] Ibid.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Fund for Cultural participation
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

39 million euro from the Dutch government for the period 2013-2016, in which 54 different projects were financed.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
National
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

In the period 2015-2016, roughly 60% of all primary schools joined CmK, 36% of all primary school students took part in at least one of the cultural activities organised by CmK.[1] The measure will be continued for 2017-2020.

 

[1]http://www.lkca.nl/~/media/kennisbank/publicaties/2016/ce_review_culltuureducatie_met_kwaliteit_def%20(2).pdf, p. 7.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

[1]http://www.lkca.nl/~/media/kennisbank/publicaties/2016/ce_review_culltuureducatie_met_kwaliteit_def%20(2).pdf

❭ INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION

International Cultural Policy (Internationaal Cultuur Beleid ‘ICB’)

Context of the measure: 
INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Foreign cultural expressions and the history of the ‘other’ are of great importance to obtain new perspectives, images and knowledge. Artists and cultural institutions from the Netherlands offer new inspiration and knowledge abroad and vice versa.
The International Cultural Policy is aimed at facilitating international cooperation with the relevant parties: the cultural sector, civil-society organizations, governments, cities and private parties.[1]

The Common Cultural Heritage Policy (described in the next measure) falls under the International Cultural Policy.
 

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/beleidsnota-s/2016/05/04/beleidskader-internationaal-cultuurbeleid-2017-2020.

Government primarily has a facilitating role. On an international level, government focuses on 4 different aspects.

  1. Cultural institutions, artists or heritage professionals often have limited knowledge about international exchanges. The government helps them to get in contact with the relevant institutions which stimulate and facilitate exchanges, presentations and international cooperation, such as embassies, funds and supporting institutions.
  2. Government involvement may be desirable or necessary to engage in international cultural cooperation and exchange. This applies to countries where the government has a decisive role in cultural policy or where it has a strong influence on cultural life.
  3. The cultural sector’s visibility and appreciation may be enhanced by working together. Collective international promotion is by definition not a matter for an individual institution or artist.
  4. Culture can be used as part of diplomacy.[1]
 

[1]  Ibid.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The International Cultural Policy aims at facilitating international cooperation of the parties concerned: the cultural sector, civil-society organizations, governments, cities and private parties.[1]

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/beleidsnota-s/2016/05/04/beleidskader-internationaal-cultuurbeleid-2017-2020.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

Improvement in mutual understanding, interest in cultural expressions, cultural identity and history.  

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science yearly spend 21.2 million euro together.[1]

 

[1]  Ibid.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
International
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

After the evaluation of the policy over the period 2013-2016, the priorities for the International Cultural Policy 2017-2020 are:

  • Attention to both the intrinsic and social value of culture, as well as its economic value;
  • Emphasis on the importance of exchanges, networks and reciprocity;
  • Development of a coherent and integral international approach, with more room for initiatives from the field;
  • More attention for the unifying role culture can play internationally, with a focus on the countries around Europe;
  • More support for cultural diplomacy worldwide.
i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

-

❭ INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION

Common Cultural Heritage policy (Gedeeld Cultureel Erfgoed (GCE))

Context of the measure: 
INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL COOPERATION
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Netherlands have maintained intensive relationships with a number of countries all over the world. These relations have left us with tangible and intangible heritage, generally called Common Cultural Heritage. Examples include u the heritage in other countries from the times of the East India Company and West India Company, from our colonial past, or from a time of intensive cultural or other relations.

Objectives of the GCE-policy are fostering international relations, sustainable conservation of heritage and promoting the visibility of and positive impression of The Netherlands.[1]

 

[1] http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/sites/default/files/docs/gce_beleidskader_2013-2016_definitief__2_a.pdf

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Netherlands worked with the following GCE countries: Australia, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Japan, Russia, Suriname, Sri Lanka, the United States of America, and South-Africa.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

GCE offers points of departure for international collaboration. International collaboration fosters intercultural dialogue and deepens insights in the cultural identity and solidarity between peoples. In this way it promotes peace and security and helps solve problems of economic, social, cultural or humanitarian nature.

Collaboration on shared cultural heritage may also add to critical reflections on our history and enlarge the mutual understanding of past and present. Furthermore it could play a role in diplomacy, from a public or economic perspective: when incorporating cultural heritage within international relations the visibility of the Netherlands may be improved and it may raise goodwill abroad.[1]
This may take place in the form of training, knowledge exchange, ameliorating access to archives, discussing intangible heritage or repurposing of immovable cultural heritage.

 

[1] Ibid.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Nationaal Archief
Dutch Culture
Cultural Heritage Agency
Mondriaan Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

: one million euro annually from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and one million euro annually from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, for the years 2013-2016. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs primarily funds embassies within the GCE structure. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science primarily funds the National Archive and the Cultural Heritage Agency.[1]

 

[1] http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/sites/default/files/docs/gce_beleidskader_2013-2016_definitief__2_a.pdf .

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
International
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

In general, the policy has been considered to be successful[1]. In the 2012 Mid-term review , the audit services of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs advised to continue the policy. They also suggested to improve the efficiency, this could be done by revaluating the GCE priority countries and increasing transparency in policymaking. Furthermore, the policy should work more with a demand based attitude and less with a supply based attitude.[2]

 

[1] https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/06/14/iob-cultuur-als-kans-beleidsdoorlichting-van-het-internationaal-cultuurbeleid-2009-2014, p. 85.

[2] Ibid.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

see above

❭ PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT

Prince Claus Fund

Context of the measure: 
PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Prince Claus Fund was founded on 6 September 1996 as a tribute to Prince Claus's dedication to culture and development. It was founded by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Development and the Prime Minister on the occasion of HRH Prince Claus’ 70th birthday[1]. The Fund states that culture is a basic need and the motor of development. Based on the principle that culture is a basic need, the Prince Claus Fund’s mission is to actively seek cultural cooperation founded on equality and trust, with partners of excellence, in spaces where resources and opportunities for cultural expression, creative production and research are limited and cultural heritage is threatened.[2]

 

[1] https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-24886-1.html

[2] http://www.princeclausfund.org/en/the-fund

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Prince Claus Fund supports artists, critical thinkers and cultural organisations in spaces where freedom of cultural expression is restricted by conflict, poverty, repression, marginalisation or taboos. Annually, the Fund grants eleven Prince Claus Awards to individuals and organisations for their outstanding achievements in the field of culture and development. The Fund also provides first aid to cultural heritage damaged by man-made or natural disaster.

The Fund has built a diverse global network of people, many of them role models in their own societies. This network of trust and mutual respect is the backbone of the Fund. Local partners and initiatives guide all the Fund’s work, following the conviction of Prince Claus that people are not being developed, but develop themselves.[1] Individuals and organizations cannot request funding themselves, the Prince Claus Fund selects artists and organisations who receive funding.

 

[1] http://www.princeclausfund.org/en/programmes/about

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

Over 2013-2015 [1] (results over 2016 have not yet been published) the fund supported 151 projects (total amount of funding 2.7 million Euro), and 108 Cultural Emergency Responses.

 

[1] http://www.princeclausfund.org/nl/the-fund/facts-and-figures

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Prince Claus Fund
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

The Fund is financially supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Dutch Postcode Lottery and individual donations. In 2015 the budget totalled 5,446,960 euro.[1]

 

[1]http://www.princeclausfund.org/files/docs/2015%20Prince%20Claus%20Fund%20Annual%20Report%20online.pdf.

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
Yes
i.1 At what level the evaluation was conducted?: 
International
i.2 What were the main conclusions?: 

The Prince Claus Fund’s total budget in 2015 was €5,446,960, of which €3,805,555 went toward the direct support of cultural initiatives and dedicated partners, primarily in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. In addition to the steadfast support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Dutch Postcode Lottery, €1,133,862 was raised through contributions from private donors.

i.3 Which indicators were used to determine impact?: 

see above

❭ INTEGRATION OF CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - AT NATIONAL LEVEL

Culture and sustainable development in general

Context of the measure: 
INTEGRATION OF CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - AT NATIONAL LEVEL
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Culture bears an artistic and social value (identity, development, dialogue, connection, history), but also an economic value (creative industry, innovation, planning). The Sustainable Development Goals support the importance of culture as driver of sustainable development, for example the importance of non-violence and cultural diversity (SDG 4.7), safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage (SDG 11.4) and creative industry (SDG 8.3).

As shown before, the Netherlands have legislation on these subjects, and has drafted national and international cultural policies, specifically targeting the diversity of cultural expressions and the safeguarding, management and accessibility of cultural heritage. The Unesco conventions of 1954, 1970, 1972, 2003 and 2005 are ratified and implemented. The ratification of the 2001 convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage is in preparation.

Regarding the management of monuments, policies have been developed to support the transition towards sustainable use of natural resources.

The Dutch Heritage Act (Erfgoedwet)[1], which came into force in 2016, stipulates how our heritage is managed, designates the responsible parties, and specifies how supervision is to be exercised. For the first time, there is now a single comprehensive piece of legislation covering Dutch museums and their holdings, historical sites and archaeology both on land and under water. Together with the new Environment and Planning Act (expected to come into force in 2018) the Heritage Act allows for comprehensive protection of the country’s cultural heritage. It combines existing laws and hundreds of sets of regulations in the areas of e.g. construction, environment, water, spatial planning and nature.

The Netherlands also play an active role internationally: via its membership of the World Heritage Convention, in donating to funds related to conventions, and through the Shared Cultural Heritage programme (chapter 2.2).

 

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p. 35.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
legislative
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

Culture bears an artistic and social value (identity, development, dialogue, connection, history), but also an economic value (creative industry, innovation, planning). The Sustainable Development Goals support the importance of culture as driver of sustainable development, for example the importance of non-violence and cultural diversity (SDG 4.7), safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage (SDG 11.4) and creative industry (SDG 8.3).

As shown before, the Netherlands have legislation on these subjects, and has drafted national and international cultural policies, specifically targeting the diversity of cultural expressions and the safeguarding, management and accessibility of cultural heritage. The Unesco conventions of 1954, 1970, 1972, 2003 and 2005 are ratified and implemented. The ratification of the 2001 convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage is in preparation.

Regarding the management of monuments, policies have been developed to support the transition towards sustainable use of natural resources.

The Dutch Heritage Act (Erfgoedwet)[1], which came into force in 2016, stipulates how our heritage is managed, designates the responsible parties, and specifies how supervision is to be exercised. For the first time, there is now a single comprehensive piece of legislation covering Dutch museums and their holdings, historical sites and archaeology both on land and under water. Together with the new Environment and Planning Act (expected to come into force in 2018) the Heritage Act allows for comprehensive protection of the country’s cultural heritage. It combines existing laws and hundreds of sets of regulations in the areas of e.g. construction, environment, water, spatial planning and nature.

The Netherlands also play an active role internationally: via its membership of the World Heritage Convention, in donating to funds related to conventions, and through the Shared Cultural Heritage programme (chapter 2.2).

 

 

[1] Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Culture at a first Glance 2016 (2016), p. 35.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
No
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

-

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ EMERGING TRANSVERSAL ISSUES: Resolution 5.CP 9b

Frisian Language and Culture

Context of the measure: 
EMERGING TRANSVERSAL ISSUES: Resolution 5.CP 9b
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

In line with the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Framework Convention)[1] and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (European Charter)[2] of the Council of Europe - the Province of Friesland has the necessary powers to protect its own (Frisian) language and culture. The Frisians are the only recognised minority covered by the Framework Convention and Frisian is the only official language in the Netherlands recognised under Part III of the European Charter.

 

[1] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001714/geldigheidsdatum_16-02-2011  

[2] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001223/geldigheidsdatum_22-02-2012

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

In line with the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Framework Convention)[1] and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (European Charter)[2] of the Council of Europe - the Province of Friesland has the necessary powers to protect its own (Frisian) language and culture. The Frisians are the only recognised minority covered by the Framework Convention and Frisian is the only official language in the Netherlands recognised under Part III of the European Charter.

 

[1] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001714/geldigheidsdatum_16-02-2011  

[2] http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBV0001223/geldigheidsdatum_22-02-2012

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

The Frisians are the only recognised minority covered by the Framework Convention and Frisian is the only official language in the Netherlands recognised under Part III of the European Charter.

 

 

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Province of Friesland
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY

Charter Diversity

Context of the measure: 
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Charter focuses on employers in the private and cultural sector. By signing the Charter, the employer is required to actively make an effort to stimulate diversity and inclusion on the workfloor. The commitment is an inclusive corporate culture with a balanced workforce and equal opportunities for all.[1] The ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Federation of Culture signed the charter.

 

[1] http://diversiteitinbedrijf.nl/charter-diversiteit-wat-is-het/wat-is-het-charter-diversiteit/

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Charter focuses on employers in the private and cultural sector. By signing the Charter, the employer is required to actively make an effort to stimulate diversity and inclusion on the workfloor. The commitment is an inclusive corporate culture with a balanced workforce and equal opportunities for all.[1] The ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Federation of Culture signed the charter.

 

[1] http://diversiteitinbedrijf.nl/charter-diversiteit-wat-is-het/wat-is-het-charter-diversiteit/

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

an inclusive corporate culture with a balanced workforce and equal opportunities for all

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Diversiteit in Bedrijf
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY

Research on Stereotyping in the media

Context of the measure: 
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

In 2016, WOMEN Inc. (a gender equality organization) took the initiative to conduct a research regarding gender stereotyping in the media. The way media policy advisors see their role and responsibility in stereotyping, and how they can contribute to an inclusive society, were central themes in the research project.[1] One of the conclusions was that diversity should be a key factor to determine quality.[2]

 

[1] https://www.womeninc.nl/Uploaded_files/DownloadLinks/beperkt-zicht-de-rol-van-mediamakers-in-beeldvorming.799def.pdf, p. 6.

[2] Ibid, p. 41.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
regulatory
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

In 2016, WOMEN Inc. (a gender equality organization)took the initiative to conduct a research regarding gender stereotyping in the media. The way media policy advisors see their role and responsibility in stereotyping, and how they can contribute to an inclusive society, were central themes in the research project.[1] One of the conclusions was that diversity should be a key factor to determine quality.[2]

 

[1] https://www.womeninc.nl/Uploaded_files/DownloadLinks/beperkt-zicht-de-rol-van-mediamakers-in-beeldvorming.799def.pdf, p. 6.

[2] Ibid, p. 41.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

diversity should be a key factor to determine quality – quality of what?.[2]

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
WOMEN INC
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY

Governance Code Culture

Context of the measure: 
CURRENT UNESCO GLOBAL PRIORITY: GENDER EQUALITY
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The Culture Governance Code is a tool for good governance in the culture sector.[1]

Organisations in the cultural sector strive to create cultural, economic and social benefits. Publicly funded institutions have a moral responsibility to maintain an inclusive and accessible policy.

The Code provides supervisory boards and boards of directors with recommendations on standards and procedures.[2] It pays attention to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, knowledge and socio-economic dimensions.

 

[1] http://www.governancecodecultuur.nl/

[2] http://www.governancecodecultuur.nl/over-de-code

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
institutional
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The Code provides supervisory boards and boards of directors with recommendations on standards and procedures.[2] It pays attention to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, knowledge and socio-economic dimensions.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

It pays attention to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, knowledge and socio-economic dimensions.

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
all institutions
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ YOUTH

Youth Representatives to Unesco

Context of the measure: 
YOUTH
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

The National Youth Council (Nationale Jeugd Raad, NJR) has two youth representatives to Unesco. They give guest lectures in schools (secondary and tertiary education), one of them on cultural diversity. The youth representatives also actively collect the thoughts and opinions of the groups they represent and share them with the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science,  the Netherlands Commission for Unesco and the Netherlands Permanent Delegation to Unesco in Paris.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
International
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
institutional
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

The National Youth Council (Nationale Jeugd Raad, NJR) has two youth representatives to Unesco. They give guest lectures in schools (secondary and tertiary education), one of them on cultural diversity. The youth representatives also actively collect the thoughts and opinions of the groups they represent and share them with the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science,  the Netherlands Commission for Unesco and the Netherlands Permanent Delegation to Unesco in Paris.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

-

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Nationale Jeugdraad
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No
❭ YOUTH

Youth Culture Fund (jeugdcultuurfonds)

Context of the measure: 
YOUTH
b. Key objectives of the measure: 

Every child in the Netherlands should be able to follow lessons in art and culture, regardless of its socio-economic background[1]. The fund provides children aged between 4 and 18 with the possibility to participate in cultural life. The exploration of the child’s own passions is a priority.

An independent intermediary or professional, involved with the family, may request a maximum of 450 euro per child, per year, for cultural lessons.

The number of children receiving support from the fund has grown from 147 in 2009 to 7620 in 2016.

 

[1] https://www.jeugdcultuurfonds.nl/over/.

c. What is: 
c.1. the scope of the measure: 
National
c.2. the nature of the measure: 
financial
c.3. the main feature of the measure: 

Every child in the Netherlands should be able to follow lessons in art and culture, regardless of its socio-economic background[1]. The fund provides children aged between 4 and 18 with the possibility to participate in cultural life. The exploration of the child’s own passions is a priority.

An independent intermediary or professional, involved with the family, may request a maximum of 450 euro per child, per year, for cultural lessons.

The number of children receiving support from the fund has grown from 147 in 2009 to 7620 in 2016.

 

[1] https://www.jeugdcultuurfonds.nl/over/.

d. Does it specifically target individuals and/or social groups as defined in Article 7 of the Convention?: 
Yes
e. What are the results expected through the implementation of the measure?: 

Every child in the Netherlands should be able to follow lessons in art and culture, regardless of its socio-economic background

f.1 Name of agency responsible for the implementation of the measure: 
Jeugdcultuurfonds
f.2 Financial resources allocated to implement the measure: 

-

h. Was this measure introduced or revised in order to: 
h.1. Implement the provisions of the Convention?: 
No
h.2. Support/nurture policy discussion inspired by the Convention?: 
No
h.3. Other reasons unrelated to the Convention?: 
Yes
i. Has the implementation of the measure been evaluated?: 
No