Last month saw the Cultural Comms’ team, led by Charlotte [pictured below with TEFAF’s Global Head of Comms Magda Grigorian] spend two weeks in the Netherlands for TEFAF Maastricht, the world’s preeminent organisation for fine art, antiques and design.
Held during the Fair, the theme for this year’s TEFAF Summit felt less like a talking point and more like a quiet challenge to many of the assumptions we’ve relied on for years, writes Matthew Bessant.
Attending the TEFAF Summit in Maastricht in March, it was hard to ignore the sense that the cultural sector is at a bit of an inflection point. This year’s theme – Beyond Economic Impact: Rethinking Culture in Public Policy – felt less like a talking point and more like a quiet challenge to many of the assumptions we’ve relied on for years.
There was a clear push throughout the day to move past the usual economic arguments. Yes, culture drives jobs, tourism, and growth, but that’s no longer enough, and arguably never was.
As underscored by Kathleen Ferrier, Chair of the Netherlands Commission for UNESCO, culture needs to be understood as a core component of international cooperation, identity, and long-term societal resilience, not just an economic lever.
That shift in perspective was especially evident in discussions around social impact. Martin Müller of AEA Consulting pointed towards tangible examples where cultural practice is actively shaping communities, from education-led initiatives to place-based projects embedding creativity into local development. Rather than abstract claims, there was a growing confidence in pointing to tangible examples: projects and policies that are actively changing communities for the better. It felt like a sector becoming more comfortable, and more credible, in explaining its role beyond the balance sheet.
The conversations around health and wellbeing were another standout. Professor Daisy Fancourt, drawing on her research for Art Cure, articulated a compelling case for the integration of arts and culture into public health systems. The idea that cultural engagement can support mental health, prevention, and recovery is no longer peripheral; it is increasingly backed by evidence and gaining traction at policy level.
Questions of investment and infrastructure were also brought into focus by Victoria Simonsz-van Krieken of the Brabant C Fund, who highlighted the importance of more flexible, forward-looking funding models – ones that recognise cultural value in broader social terms and enable organisations to operate across sectors.
What tied it all together was a recognition that the way we talk about investment in culture needs to evolve. If the sector continues to frame its value too narrowly, it risks limiting its own influence. The more compelling argument, and the one echoed across the Summit, is that culture intersects with everything: education, health, community development, and even climate thinking.
If there was an overarching takeaway, it’s this: the case for culture is becoming broader and harder to ignore. The next step is making sure that this shift in narrative translates into policy and practice – not just at moments like TEFAF, but in the decisions that follow.
