Learning and Inspiring – Reflections on Inclusion and Participation in Cultural Centres

Authors:

• Alatalo, Malla, M.A., specialist, Responsibility in Business and Services, Lapland University of Applied Sciences
• Appelblad, Håkan, Ph.D, lecturer, Department of Geography, Umeå University
• Feodoroff, Mona, M.Ed, specialist, Responsibility in Business and Services, Lapland University of Applied Sciences
• Silva, Jorge, student, Degree Programme in Tourism, Responsibility in Business and Services, Lapland University of Applied Sciences

Abstract

This publication explores inclusion and participation in cultural centres. It has been produced as part of the Interreg Aurora -funded project Inclusive Centres of Culture – Collaborative and Inclusive Cultural Tourism Through Nordic Cooperation. The aim of this publication is to share insights into the starting points of the project’s development work, as well as to define key concepts and clarify the project’s approach to this complex topic.

The publication consists of three parts. The first part introduces the framework and foundations for developing inclusivity in cultural centres. The second part explores current practices in cultural centres and gives voice to visitors’ experiences. It also broadens the perspective beyond the local context by presenting inspiring examples and good practices in cultural centres in different parts of the world. Finally, the third part looks to the future and considers how the insights gained through this background work can be translated into practical action.

1. Introduction

An active cultural life – and the possibility to participate in it in one’s own home region – is an important factor in promoting wellbeing. It is also a factor that makes the region more appealing to visitors, and perhaps, even to those considering moving to the area permanently. The idea that ‘a good place to live is a good place to visit’ was in our minds when we began shaping a project focused on inclusive cultural institutions and cultural tourism. We felt that while we would love to see cultural attractions gain more recognition as valued destinations in our region, the development work must begin with the local communities. There are plenty of local people who do not currently visit the cultural centres in their region. Perhaps they feel these places are not relevant to them for one reason or another. But what factors currently deter locals from visiting? And, on the other hand, what are the existing pull factors? How could these cultural sites become meaningful to a more diverse range of target groups?

As a traveller, you may recognise the feeling: instead of – or alongside – the ‘must‑see’ bucket‑list experiences, you may want to discover what matters to local people, and perhaps even encounter them in these places. Cultural centres and their services offer ideal opportunities for responsible travellers who wish to explore local culture and leave a positive footprint in the region, whether through ticket purchases or the purchase of locally made souvenirs. Even a single upward tick in visitor statistics is a valued indication that a place is considered important and worth visiting.

‘The right to culture encompasses the right of everyone to access, create, participate in, and enjoy culture. Cultural rights are recognised as both individual and collective, spanning all areas of culture – from cultural heritage to the cultural and creative sectors, including the digital environment.

Cultural rights are essential for dignity, personal fulfillment, and social cohesion. Exercising these rights fosters diversity and equity, while reducing inequalities. This is why guaranteeing the right to culture is an ethical, social, and economic imperative.’ (UNESCO 2026)

The purpose of our project can also be approached by reflecting on the cultural rights. Participating in and exploring culture is an essential part of being human. It is undoubtedly essential for human wellbeing to have access to cultural expression in any form. In fact, culture is such a fundamental part of human life that it cannot be accessible only to a privileged minority. As UNESCO (2026) notes, cultural rights as part of basic human rights belong to everyone.

Some of these cultural expressions are found in institutions like art galleries, museums, theatres and concert halls, etc. These are cultural centres that play an important role as spaces for artistic and cultural expression, showcasing the work of artists and others who create various forms of cultural content. In this capacity, these centres are among the providers of cultural rights. Cultural centres offer visitors and audiences opportunities to encounter new experiences, perspectives and sensations that can broaden their understanding, deepen their knowledge and enrich their cultural lives.

The value of cultural centres stems not only from the work they present but also from their ability to engage people in various ways and contribute to broader cultural development. The outreach they provide is a vital part of why cultural centres exist in the first place. Many of these institutions are publicly funded and owned by municipalities, regions or universities. In these cases, it follows a responsibility to reach out and remain accessible and welcoming to everyone. In this way, cultural centres can promote sustainability and enable people’s cultural rights.

Cultural centres may, in many cases, have a large outreach and a loyal base of visitors. At the same time, it is evident that certain people do not visit cultural centres at all. It is also evident that some specific segments of the population, local as well as temporal visitors, are rarely seen within the premises of cultural centres. Looking at specific cultural centres, obviously, individual preferences are also at play, as tastes and interests differ from one person to another.

From this brief introduction to the justification for cultural centres to reach all people, the issue of inclusion in cultural centres arises. This is the topic within the Interreg Aurora-funded project, Inclusive Centres of Culture – Collaborative and Inclusive Cultural Tourism Through Nordic Cooperation, in which four Nordic cultural centres in northern Sweden and Finland participate, namely, Korundi House of Culture, Rovaniemi, Kin Museum of Contemporary Art, Kiruna, Bildmuseet, Umeå, and The Forest and Saami Museum, Lycksele.

The key concept in the project is inclusivity, reflecting the principle that everyone should have equal opportunities for participation (see e.g. United Nations, 2016). Among the ICCE project partners, the overarching motive for participating the project is that cultural centres can strive to become more relevant to a larger and broader audience. Cultural centres are places that can facilitate understanding, dialogue and societal wellbeing through exposing, presenting and inviting people to different cultural expressions.

When exploring the concept of inclusivity, we in the project team have examined Heidi Schaaf’s dissertation on inclusivity and participation in museums. She encourages museums to critically assess what they mean by inclusion and participation, which should not refer only to visiting cultural sites but also to having the possibility to influence what happens in the museum. Schaaf proposes that, in their pursuit of inclusivity and genuine participation, museums should apply the philosophy and methods of service design, including research (University of Lapland, 2022). This is the approach applied to the project. The first part of the project is a joint process of learning and drawing inspiration from each other and beyond, including conducting visits, administering questionnaires and engaging with relevant literature. In this baseline report, we present what we have learnt from the first part of the ICCE project and how this will inform our work in the upcoming phases of the project.

The Inclusive Centres of Culture (ICCE) project seeks first to map the current state of the participating cultural institutions, their opportunities and challenges, and to deepen understanding of the terminology related to the theme, connecting the theoretical background to the project’s practical activities. In this initial phase, we also sought inspiration from existing good practices related to inclusivity in cultural centres through benchmarking activities. We believe we have made some interesting insights, which we are eager to share more widely in this publication. Whether you are part of the academic community, a representative of a cultural institution, or an enthusiastic consumer of culture, we welcome you to explore our work and hopefully find inspiration.

We extend our warm thanks to our partner organisations for their collaboration thus far, and of course, to the project funders: the Interreg Aurora programme, the Regional Council of Lapland, Region Västerbotten, and the Municipality of Lycksele. Our gratitude also extends to everyone who has supported the project in various ways – followers, event participants and collaborators.

---

Part 1

Framework and foundations for developing inclusivity in cultural centres

---

2. Attracting new visitors to cultural sites

2.1. Structures for development

The ICCE project aims to further develop and enhance cultural centres as spaces for community and tourists to interact; increase mutual understanding and cultural awareness; stimulate cooperation between the tourism industry and the cultural sector; and create a year-round desire to travel to cultural destinations for national and international visitors.

By embracing inclusivity, cultural centres can become more relevant to the target group and engage a broader audience. Cultural places could facilitate understanding, dialogue, and societal wellbeing through celebrating diverse cultures, histories and identities. The project will focus on ensuring locals feel a sense of ownership and belonging, and that tourists experience the importance of the place. It also aims to produce an environment for inclusive, sustainable and (re)generative tourism. It can, for example, reduce negative tourism impacts by increasing interaction and understanding between locals and travellers.

The overall goal is to increase the region’s attractiveness through the development of culture and tourism, as well as to promote Nordic art and culture and ensure they are recognised and appreciated by both residents and visitors. Central to the project is to elevate local citizens, emphasise their importance and provide them with improved opportunities to engage in art and culture. By emphasising the importance of art and culture to tourism, the project aims to challenge and improve conventional understanding of the cultural sector and highlight the value of art and culture for both residents and visitors.

The ICCE project consists of three parts that mainly follow each other in sequential order, and all stages of the project build on the insights and learnings of the previous stages.

1. Learning and inspiring

The first part aims to establish a knowledge base on the role of cultural centres in promoting sustainable cultural experiences by engaging and involving locals and tourists. The baseline study collects knowledge and experience from various sources, such as scientific articles, industry reports, questionnaires, benchmarks and other forms of organised observation.

2. Collaborative Design

The second part utilises both the results of the first part and collaborative methods to map the current challenges facing cultural centres. New solutions and inclusive practices for cultural centres will be sought in collaborative sessions together with different focus groups. Service design methods, as well as art-based methodology, will be applied to find solutions and inclusive practices. These are collaboration sessions aimed at brainstorming, creating and generating innovative ideas and solutions that can be moulded into models for collaborative development practices.

3. Piloting

In the third part, the piloting stage, the models developed in the previous part will be tested in the cultural centres. New concepts for cultural activities for both locals and tourists are tested and evaluated. Pilots can be new or existing but renewed events, exhibitions or other services that will be altered according to the outcomes of earlier design activities.

2.2 Project approach based on the Double Diamond model

ICCE is an ambitious project that embodies what a cultural centre could be expected to be and what it could become in its outreach to existing and potential audiences. Hence, the project addresses what we would argue is the main role or function of a cultural centre: to be a place for people who visit and engage with its content.

The cultural centres that are included as partners in the ICCE project may be recognised based on various criteria, as well-functioning institutions that provide their audience with knowledge, experiences, insights, provocations or any other kind of meaningful sensations that foster, build and talk to us as human beings and certainly, as cultural beings. Cultural centres are certainly in need of curational activities to maintain the collection and organise exposure, etc. Nevertheless, as the name of this project indicates, cultural centres, which are recipients of public funding, are justified by their ability to address an audience.

The underlying notion is that cultural centres, like museums, libraries, art galleries, and the like, are spaces that provide sources of memory, essence and meaning for people to explore and tap into. Thus, we believe that culture centres are and can be important parts of what could be labelled the cultural infrastructure in society and in the places where they are located. However, are cultural centres for all? Do all people feel they are welcome or part of the target audience for cultural centres? Have cultural centres made use of their potential outreach? Or are destination management organisations in the tourism and hospitality industry making full use of these cultural motifs for travellers? At the start of the project, we face multiple questions. While some may remain inherently unresolved, we aim to find answers to at least some of them as the development project advances.

The need to better understand the societal role and mission of cultural centres, especially in terms of inclusivity, has been a key driver of the ICCE project. The first stage is therefore dedicated to making all these central questions visible and crystallising the core challenges that will be addressed in the next stages. The project has an overall approach that builds heavily on procedures derived from the research field of Service Design, especially the processing idea behind the Double Diamond model with its keywords, Discover, Define, Develop and Deliver. The model is illustrated in Figure 1, showing the four main stages of the process. The Double Diamond model structures the process into a problem phase (Discover and Define) and a solution phase (Develop and Deliver) (Design Council, 2026). This ICCE baseline study, Learning and Inspiring, translates largely to the first phase of the Double Diamond model.

Figure 1. The Double Diamond model and its four stages: Discover, Define, Develop and Deliver.

3. Concept review

In this section, a closer look is taken at the key concepts that guide and structure the project. These concepts are explored from the perspective of the project’s goals and practical activities, meaning the focus is on a selected/limited viewpoint rather than trying to include all possible definitions. The main concepts are then introduced and explained to show how they are understood and used in this context.

3.1 Addressing soft infrastructure

To start with, what do we mean by inclusion? What do we propose inclusion should target? In other words, inclusion to what? Moreover, it might also be necessary to discuss the notion of inclusion itself. The well-known phrase ‘if everybody is invited, nobody feels welcomed’ might be a valid statement when discussing cultural centres. The phrase highlights the difference between a formal invitation and a genuine inclusion, where the former is perceived as a broad, unfocused invitation that often lacks genuine inclusion, whereas the latter would, on the contrary, be recognised as an honest invitation in which each person feels respected. Another common sentiment relates to the presumed exclusivity of content addressing a specific cultural elite, like the notion that art galleries featuring modern art are perceived as exclusive or difficult to access, as being too abstract, too niche and hard for a broad audience to relate to, even if admission is free. From these probably well-known and common lines of argument, it is obvious that the concept of inclusion needs to be handled carefully.

Despite any hesitation regarding the positive or negative sides of inclusion, inclusivity in cultural centres can obviously mean many different things and vary from one individual to another. Inclusivity in cultural centres contains many different aspects, from physical inclusivity that says something about how easy it is for people to access the facilities and the site for the cultural centre, to social inclusivity in which the question is more about the ability to understand, relate, identify or simply feel welcomed to the culture content exposed to the audience.

From a planning or development perspective, cultural facilities like cultural centres can be seen as part of social infrastructure. The concept of social infrastructure has emerged as a strategy in which social goals are integrated into physical planning, thereby providing tangible, concrete ways to address with social sustainability issues (Alfengård et al., 2025, 13). As part of the social sphere, culture, too, might be viewed in terms of infrastructure. Infrastructure is probably understood mostly as something concrete or physical, like roads, power lines, built environments and the like. But when dealing with the social or cultural sphere, it is evident that we can also refer to some intangible elements when describing the cultural sector in terms of ‘infrastructure’. With reference to cultural infrastructure, Bryson (2007) makes a distinction between hard and soft infrastructure. Hard cultural infrastructure can be seen as a long‑term investment in physical venues such as theatres, galleries, museums, etc., while soft cultural infrastructure focuses on issues such as information systems, outreach, education and audience development. Bryson stresses that it is crucial to be aware of this distinction, ‘as the long-term success of hard cultural infrastructure investments is dependent upon the effectiveness of investment in soft cultural infrastructure. These investment types have different temporalities; hard capital investments can occur relatively rapidly, are extremely visible and easily evaluated, whilst soft revenue investments occur over long time periods, represent a process of performer and audience development, are relatively invisible, and are difficult to evaluate’ (Bryson, 2007, 99).

Regarding the segment above, dealing with inclusion and cultural centres is indeed a matter of temporalities. Physical entities, such as buildings, are long-lasting, while programs, content and exhibitions of cultural artefacts are subject to much shorter life spans. The potential for short-term inclusion enhancement is, therefore, presumably greater in relation to what Bryson refers to as the soft cultural infrastructure, and consequently, the major scope for the ICCE project to engage with.

3.2 Focus on social inclusion

Inclusivity is widely discussed today across many different contexts. As the concept is used in a variety of ways, it is important to clarify what is meant by inclusivity in this particular context. People often initially associate inclusivity with physical accessibility. This is a vital and necessary part of an equal society. At the same time, inclusivity also extends to factors that are less immediately visible but have a significant impact on who feels welcome in a particular space or place and who experiences it as their own.

Social inclusion is a core concept in this project, as it provides a framework for understanding how cultural centres can be open, accessible, and meaningful to people with diverse backgrounds and life situations.

According to the World Bank (2013), social inclusion means improving the conditions that enable people and groups to participate in society. More specifically, it means a process that enhances people’s ability, opportunities and dignity to take part in society, especially when their identity or background makes participation more difficult.

In this project, we look at the inclusivity of cultural centres mainly from a social perspective, focusing on internal, often invisible barriers that influence people’s experiences of belonging and their willingness to participate in or visit cultural centres. According to Lindholm (2011, 50), many people find art institutions unfamiliar and assume that cultural services are intended for ‘other kinds’ of people. Schaaf (2022, 212) argues that such invisible barriers are further supported by the specific behavioural culture associated with museums, as well as by assumptions about certain levels of intelligence and the capacity to understand information. Because of this, people may feel excluded even before they take part. Barriers to cultural and social accessibility are often difficult to identify. People who do not use cultural services for these reasons usually do not make demands in the same way as people facing physical barriers do (Lindholm 2011, 50–51). This makes invisible barriers especially challenging. It also shows why it is important to examine inclusivity in the everyday practices and structures of cultural centres. In this project, we ask how daily routines, spaces, encounters and communication in cultural centres can either support or weaken citizens’ sense of belonging.

According to Lestelä (2025,18), museums should offer different audiences opportunities to relate to the content, present national stories in new ways and support accessibility. Museums should also create chances for people to feel they are part of a community and to participate in different ways. Cultural content must be presented in ways that speak to diverse audiences and allow different experiences and interpretations.

The central issue is not only who participates, but also under what conditions participation is made possible and how cultural institutions are perceived by those with no prior relationship to cultural activities. Social inclusion is therefore an important starting point when thinking about the role of cultural institutions in supporting participation, community and equal opportunities.

Alongside inclusivity, we also touch upon the concept of ownership. This is not understood as legal ownership of a cultural centre, even in part. Instead, we focus on the sense of ownership – how individuals can feel part of something and, in some form, have power and control over it. Paul Lachapelle (2008) has explored the sense of ownership in the context of community development. His insights into the topic are highly relevant and transferable to the context of cultural participation and inclusion. Lachapelle suggests that there are three essential characteristics related to the sense of ownership. First, it relates to being heard: who has a voice and whether that voice is heard and considered valid. The second one concerns outcomes by asking who has power over the decisions made. Finally, the third addresses who is affected by those outcomes (Lachapelle 2008, 53). Against this background, it can be argued that actively engaging citizens in the development of cultural sites can enhance their sense of ownership, further strengthening their attachment to these places.

3.3 Identifying non-visitors

Who are the non-visitors to cultural centres? Why do they not visit, and how could they be reached? These questions are central to our project, as they are closely connected to accessibility, inclusivity and the ability of cultural centres to reach new audiences.

In this context, non-visitors refer to people or groups who do not participate in the activities of cultural centres or who visit them very rarely. However, this does not mean a single group of people who stay away for the same reasons. Instead, non-visitors form a diverse group, and the reasons for not participating vary widely between individuals and situations.

Lindholm (2015) presents research findings that support this view. Based on their research, the groups least likely to visit cultural centres include men, especially in cases where a partner does not encourage or initiate a cultural visit. People with lower levels of education visit cultural centres less often, as those with a basic or vocational education participate significantly less than people with higher education. People in lower-income groups are, on average, more likely to avoid cultural activities. Immigrants are also underrepresented among visitors to arts and cultural centres. Among age groups, people over 60 form a divided group where some are regular visitors, while a large number do not visit cultural centres at all. Young people often take part in cultural events only occasionally and are almost completely absent from the group of regular visitors to cultural centres (Lindholm 2015, 66–67). Lindholm (2011, 59) also notes that non‑visitors to art museums often include families with children, people who never had cultural hobbies, and people who have fewer free-time activities in general.

However, non-visiting cannot be understood solely in terms of these background factors. Balling and Kann-Christensen (2013, 67) point out that non-visiting cultural institutions are not a clear indicator of a person’s cultural activity. Not visiting institutions does not necessarily mean a lack of interest in culture. Some non-visitors may be active users and participants in cultural life outside institutions, for example, in digital environments, everyday spaces or informal communities (2013, 67). According to Virolainen (2015, 17), it is also important to recognise that non-visiting is not necessarily a permanent condition. Instead, it can be connected to a person’s current life situation, such as parenting young children, unemployment, demanding work or perceived health conditions (2015, 17).

3.4 Audience development and inclusivity – interconnected elements

‘Audience development involves the identification, engagement and retention of audiences. It is a planned and strategic management function aimed at delivering organisational objectives. Audience development sets out to affect a change in the attitudes, understanding and behaviour of both existing and potential audiences. It seeks to remove barriers, deepen relationships with audiences and create greater inclusion in the arts.‘

– Arts Council of Northern Ireland (Audiences NI 2013, 4).

Audience development can be understood as a strategic and long-term process that places audiences at the centre of an organisation’s work (Canavan 2018,1). The concept has evolved from a mainly marketing-oriented approach into a broader and more holistic process that aims to strengthen and widen the relationships between cultural institutions and different audiences. Its objectives can include increasing audiences, deepening relationships with existing audiences and diversifying audiences by reaching people with different backgrounds, including those with no previous engagement with the arts (Bollo, Da Milano, Gariboldi & Torch 2017, 54-55).

In practice, audience development involves taking audiences’ needs, interests and expectations into account when developing content and programming, while also considering whether venues are accessible, welcoming and inclusive. Audience development further includes listening to both participants and non-participants through feedback and audience research. (Canavan 2018, 1.) It also seeks to identify and reduce barriers that may prevent people from participating in or engaging with cultural activities (Audiences NI 2013, 10). Marketing forms also part of audience development, particularly through communication that uses language and channels relevant to different audience groups (Canavan 2018, 1).

In this ICCE project audience development is understood as a process focusing on inclusion. It aims to identify and remove barriers to participation, co-develop activities with diverse groups of people, strengthen the sense that. The cultural centre is also a place for them and support more equal opportunities to take part in its activities.

As discussed in the previous section, this project focuses particularly on invisible barriers. Such barriers can affect whether people feel welcome and whether they see the cultural centre as a place for them, even when there are no physical accessibility barriers. Audience development is therefore understood not only as a way of attracting new participants, but also as a means of examining and changing the conditions that make participation, belonging and meaningful engagement possible.

3.5 Cultural and creative tourism – pathways to engage in local culture

One component of the ICCE project deals with strengthening the role of cultural sites as tourist attractions. Cultural tourism is an important part of the tourism industry and UN Tourism (2026) defines it as tourism in which one of the traveller’s primary motivations is to learn about, experience and engage with local cultural sites and services (UN Tourism 2026a).

Cultural tourism has often meant visiting museums, galleries, historical sites and monuments. In these settings, visitors mostly observe and experience culture through exhibitions, guided tours or planned stories. According to Kathleen Scherf (2021), when an experiential dimension is added to cultural tourism, it can be understood as creative tourism (Scherf 2021, 4–5).

Creative tourism is also associated with the idea that travelers seek to live like locals – and, at the same time, to support the possibility for local communities to continue living in the area. A sense of place, immersion in the region’s unique cultural characteristics, as well as interaction with local people, are also key features of creative tourism. (Scherf 2021, 2.) In their approach to the topic, Duxbury, Bakas, Vinagre de Castro and Silva (2021) emphasize active participation, creative self-expression, and learning (Duxbury et al. 2021, 1). These elements help visitors to creative tourism make personal connections with places and people, thereby turning culture into an immersive experience.

Creative tourism is especially relevant today because it matches current trends that value experiences, authenticity, and personalisation (Scherf, 2021, 1–6). It also supports the idea that culture is always changing, not just something from the past.

For the ICCE project, cultural, and particularly creative tourism, is essential because it gives cultural centres new ways to reach different audiences. By using creative tourism ideas, these centres can do more than show exhibitions and host concerts – they can become places for participation, learning and conversation. This can help lower barriers to cultural participation, especially for people who do not usually visit museums, galleries, concerts or such.

Engaging local communities and ensuring that they benefit from it is a key aspect of creative tourism. Therefore, creative tourism is often discussed alongside sustainable and even regenerative cultural tourism. (Duxbury et al., 2021, 3; Scherf 2021, 4–5.) For this reason, it is essential that the development of cultural centres within the ICCE project – which also aims to attract tourists to these cultural destinations – is primarily built on collaboration with local people and on listening to their perspectives.

Cultural and creative tourism can also support social sustainability by encouraging cultural exchange, strengthening local identity and helping visitors and communities connect. When well planned, these types of tourism can boost the economy, promote social inclusion and involve communities more, which are the main goals of the ICCE project.

3.6 Sustainable tourism considers local culture and communities

According to UN Tourism (2026b), sustainable tourism is a comprehensive approach that encompasses the environmental, economic, social and cultural aspects of sustainability. This includes conserving natural heritage and biodiversity, respecting local culture, traditions, and cultural heritage, promoting sustainable economies and employment opportunities, and ensuring the fair distribution of economic benefits among stakeholders. A crucial aspect in the development of sustainable tourism, identified by the UN, is not only political leadership but also the participation of all relevant stakeholders, that is, all key actors concerned by tourism in the region (UN Tourism 2026b).

Travelling is often strongly connected to encounters with people, cultures and everyday ways of life in the destination. Encounters between locals and visitors can offer valuable opportunities to understand the character of the destination and to deepen the travel experience.

From the project’s perspective, cultural centres and environments play a key role, as they allow people to meet naturally through art and culture. One goal of the ICCE project is to strengthen the role of local art and culture in the eyes of both visitors and local people, and to develop cultural centres into places where encounters between locals and visitors can happen.

Through the project’s activities, the aim is to make cultural centres more attractive and easier to access for a wider audience. As mentioned earlier, there are many local people who do not visit these places. That is why our main goal is to encourage local communities to visit cultural institutions more often and to feel that these places belong to them. When a cultural centre is truly important to and valued by local people, it becomes a more authentic place, attracting travellers who are interested not only in what it offers but also in the wider cultural life of the area. Therefore, the development work of the project starts with local people, and as a natural result, it also benefits travellers.

Promoting sustainable tourism in the region is also one of the project’s aims. According to the State of Sustainable Tourism 2024 report, social sustainability in tourism means taking local people and communities into account and protecting cultural heritage. The report also says that tourism can, at its best, support local businesses, create jobs for local people and help protect, preserve and strengthen culture (Visit Finland 2025, 20). The ICCE project aims to do its part to reach these goals.

One important way to strengthen the role of art and culture is to build closer cooperation between people working in the culture and tourism sectors. By developing cultural tourism, it is possible to highlight local culture and art in a meaningful way, support creative professionals, and help them earn a living through tourism. Borseková and Vitálošová (2025) suggest that developing sustainable cultural tourism also requires cooperation with multiple stakeholders and participatory approaches to ensure the equitable distribution of tourism benefits as well as the safeguarding cultural assets (Borseková & Vitálošová 2025, 98). In the ICCE project, events are organised where culture and tourism actors can meet, discuss and develop cooperation.

From our project’s perspective, sustainable tourism also means strengthening year-round tourism. Art and culture are present in all seasons and help people experience the area’s liveliness and local character throughout the year.

---

Part 2

Mapping current and future practices

---

4. Cultural Centres engaged in the ICCE project

The cultural centres that are partners in the ICCE project represent various examples of cultural centres and face different internal and external conditions. In this section, we briefly highlight some of the major characteristics of each. The table below provides a structured comparison of the cultural centres, making it easier to understand their characteristics and place them in a broader local context.

Table 1. Cultural centres in context.

Culture centre	Entr. fee	Cont. art	Local hist.	Rest/Café	Gift shop	Open	Dist. city center	Pop. (town)
Korundi House of Culture, Rovaniemi	X	X		X	X	Tu-Su	800	65,000
KIN Museum of Contemporay Art, Kiruna		X		X	X	Tu-Su	0	17,000
Bildmuseet, Umeå		X		X	X	We-Su	1,000	94,000
The Forest and Saami Musuem, Lycksele	X		X		X	Tu-Fr, Su	1,300	8,580

Source: Information collected from the official websites of cultural centres.

4.1 Korundi House of Culture, Rovaniemi

Korundi House of Culture (figure 2) is a vibrant space for people and the arts in Rovaniemi. It brings together the Rovaniemi Art Museum and the Lapland Chamber Orchestra, offering a unique perspective on the world from the North. Korundi is named after a mineral (corundum) found in Lapland, which is known to be the second-hardest mineral in the world. The culture house Korundi connects artists and audiences, everyday life and celebration, history and the present. In addition to its cultural institutions, Korundi also features a concert and event venue, a restaurant and café, and a gift shop, all under one roof.

Figure 2. Korundi House of Culture. Photo: Tatu Kantomaa

The building has a history dating back to before World War II. It was a former mail truck depot built in 1933 and one of the few buildings in Rovaniemi to survive World War II. After the war, the building was expanded using bricks that were salvaged from the city’s ruins. Since 1986, it has housed the Rovaniemi Art Museum, and the full transformation into Korundi was completed in 2011, with renovations and expansions designed by renowned architect Juhani Pallasmaa. The Korundi Hall, built in the courtyard, was designed with acoustics by Akukon and is celebrated for its exceptional sound quality. It hosts a wide range of events, from concerts to conferences. (Korundi 2026.)

4.2 Kin Museum of Contemporary Art, Kiruna

Kin (Kin Museum of Contemporary Art) is Norrbotten County’s museum for contemporary art (figure 3). Founded in 2018, it is jointly operated by Kiruna Municipality and Region Norrbotten. Kin builds and preserves a growing collection while producing exhibitions and art projects rooted in the northern context by both national and international artists and collaborators. Its main venue is in Kristallen – The Crystal – the new town hall in the middle of Kiruna’s relocated city centre.

The relocation of Kiruna was prompted by the expansion of the iron ore mine, which led to the demolition of the old city centre as well as the old town hall. Like its predecessor, Kristallen is more than an administrative building; it is designed to be ‘Kiruna’s living room’. As background, it should be mentioned that the old town hall was awarded the Architects Sweden’s Kasper Salin Prize in 1964. The jury praised the former town hall, particularly its interior, which explicitly expresses the idea of a gathering place and a natural centre for residents to host meetings, exhibitions and celebrations, rather than merely a workplace.

Kristallen was the result of an architectural competition launched in 2012 by Kiruna Municipality, in collaboration with the state-owned mining company LKAB and the Swedish Association of Architects. The winning proposal, submitted by Henning Larsen Architects, envisioned a central crystal-shaped public space rising through five floors, uniting art, culture and politics in an open and engaging way.

Kin’s activities extend beyond its main venue through touring exhibitions, collaborations and site-specific projects across all fourteen municipalities in Norrbotten. (Kin Museum of Contemporary Art 2026.)

Figure 3. Art Workshop in Kin Museum of Contemporary Art. Photo: Maria Lind

4.3 Bildmuseet, Umeå

Bildmuseet is one of Sweden’s leading venues for international contemporary art. Since 2012, it has been part of Umeå University’s Arts Campus, alongside the Umeå Academy of Fine Arts, the Institute of Design and the School of Architecture. The museum is located on the banks of the Ume River, just a short distance from Umeå’s city centre.

Designed by Henning Larsen Architects in collaboration with White, the seven-story building has been recognised as one of the world’s most beautiful university museums (Figure 4). It offers a space where art, humanities and science intersect to explore the pressing issues of our time.

Figure 4. Bildmuseet. Photo: Mattias Pettersson.

Exhibitions are developed in collaboration with artists, museums and universities worldwide, often attracting both national and international attention. Visitors are invited to a wide range of free events, including exhibition openings, guided tours, creative workshops, artist talks, debates, lectures, film screenings and live performances. (Bildmuseet 2026.)

4.4 The Forest and Saami Museum, Lycksele

The Forest and Saami Museum in Lycksele (figure 5) aims to preserve and convey knowledge about the history of forests and forestry, and to make the Sami culture and cultural heritage visible and accessible. The museum is located on Gammplatsen, the old settlement, on a peninsula in the Ume River. Gammplatsen has, for centuries, been a meeting place for Sami, settlers and traders. Its strategic location by the Ume River has attracted people since the Stone Age. The site, with its ancient remains, historic buildings, cultural botanical gardens and museums, offers insight into the culture of the inland, from Stone Age settlements to the present day. The small town was relocated to its present location during the transition from the 18th century to the 19th century.

The area is also surrounded by beautiful natural forests, making it a place where history, culture and nature come together. As part of the project, we visited each partner on site to learn more about their work, surroundings and local context. The photo below was taken during our visit to The Forest and Saami Museum. (Skogs- och samemuseet 2026.)

Figure 5. Project team visiting The Forest and Saami Museum with staff members and local people as part of partner/study visits. Photo: The Forest and Saami Museum.

In addition to the Forest and Saami Museum, the local NGOs Lycksele Hembygdsgille and the Lycksele Sami Association are the partners responsible for Gammplatsen.

The museum is owned by Lycksele kommun (majority) and Region Västerbotten. In the Owners’ Directives, it is stated that the Forest and Sámi Museum in Lycksele AB has an overarching regional responsibility regarding the forest and the history of forestry, as well as for making visible and accessible the culture and cultural heritage of the Indigenous Sámi people.

In the Owners’ Directives, it is also stated that the Forest and Sámi Museum shall work to develop, renew and make cultural heritage accessible, while ensuring that activities for children and young people are grounded in a child‑rights perspective. It also specifies that the museum should strengthen its role as both a visitor destination and a meeting place that encourages engagement and exchange. In addition, the museum shall contribute to research and knowledge-building within its fields and take on a special responsibility for forest history. Its development should be guided by national and international perspectives to ensure continued relevance beyond the local context.

5. Self-reflection and visitor voices

This section describes the development actions carried out by the cultural centres involved in the project. The work has included both internal and external activities. These have helped to understand the cultural centres’ current situation, their role and their future direction.

To establish an internal point of departure for the project and the four cultural centres, all of them were, at the beginning of the project, invited to complete a self-assessment questionnaire, which included a SWOT analysis: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, and a couple of questions more directly related to inclusion and the scope for the ICCE project.

In addition to the self-assessment questionnaire, preconditions for development were also identified through study visits to each of the four cultural centres with the project team. Study visits enabled the partners to spectate the premises and programmes objectively, through ‘someone else’s eyes’. This exercise provided the partners with visitor observations on what the current assets are and the issues that could be improved. Alongside this, the project included an identity workshop as part of the internal development work of the cultural centres. As part of the external development work, the project also gathered views from people outside the centres through a questionnaire. The questionnaire asked both visitors and non-visitors about their views on the cultural centres.

5.1 SWOT analysis and inclusion measures today

At the beginning of the project, the cultural centres conducted a SWOT analysis, in which each centre reflected on its own strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

Strengths – What do you do well, and/or what are specifically favourable resources in your case?

All cultural centres describe their content and work in positive terms. They mentioned high-quality content and programmes, skilled staff, large and varied visitor groups, well-established networks, and international visibility and reputation. Some strengths were specific to individual centres. These included good cooperation with the wider organisation the centre is part of and strong expertise in the field it focuses on, and useful additional services such as a popular lunch restaurant and a museum shop.

Weaknesses – What could be improved?

Generally, the cultural centres highlighted two main weaknesses. The first was a lack of resources, both financial and human. The second was a lack of audiences or visitors in different forms. In this case, the issue may relate to the absence of broader audience groups or a lack of returning visitors.

Other weaknesses mentioned included location, difficulty in finding the facilities and limited visibility. One centre also pointed to the lack of a shared management structure for the whole cultural centre, as more than one organisation operates in it.

Opportunities – Externalities like trends and changes that your institution could benefit from.

When it comes to opportunities, the answers from the cultural centres show that they operate in different local contexts and have distinct strengths to build on. One centre saw stronger cooperation with external guides as an opportunity, as it could bring in more tourist groups to the museum. Another centre highlighted the growing importance of art and culture in city development and place branding. It also noted that the ongoing economic transition in the North may further support this development. The same centre pointed to its expertise as a resource that could be used more widely in cross-sectoral cooperation and art production. Another centre identified growing interest in local culture and local history as an opportunity that the museum could benefit from. One centre also referred to the strong annual flow of tourists to the area, mainly driven by the attraction of northern nature, as a further opportunity for the cultural centre.

Threats – Externalities that could harm your institution.

The cultural centres could also identify some of their current threats. Mainly, and maybe unsurprisingly, all cultural centres mentioned future funding prospects as a threat to their operations. The future of public funding for arts and culture is uncertain, and for some cultural organisations in the project, not all the grants and subsidies are available due to their legal status. Administrative duties were seen as a threat as they can deplete the centre’s limited financial resources. One centre also expressed concern that general interest in the specific field they work in is decreasing.

Inclusion measures today – Are you already actively using or working with measures that aim to encourage inclusion of new categories of visitors to your cultural centre? If so, please briefly explain how.

Inclusion is already part of the work and strategies of the cultural centres. One centre discusses its programs and its open, welcoming approach. The centre actively works with other organisations and workplaces to learn from them and, consequently, invites new groups to visit the museum. Another centre describes its ongoing work to develop the mediation department. The centre is responding to growing demand for services, such as guided tours and workshops. A third centre focuses on being ready to welcome people with special needs. The centre also markets its activities in English and in the official language. In addition, it offers streaming of exhibitions and workshops so people across the northern parts of the country can take part.

5.2 Exploring identity and values

As part of their self-reflection work, the cultural centres have also explored and clarified their identity. In any development process like this, it is useful to consider what the organisation is like now, who it is for and what kind of future it wants to build. Identity work includes thinking about the organisation’s core values, how it sees itself and how it places itself in the wider world. In that way, it provides a great foundation for its work.

A shared identity helps guide the work and development of the organisation. It should be shared by everyone working there and visible in all activities. Identity affects how the cultural centre communicates about itself and its activities, how it presents its work, how it operates in practice and how it explains its choices. A strong identity helps the organisation stay true to itself. That also helps visitors and others understand the character and meaning of the place more clearly.

As part of the project, pilot activities are being planned for the cultural centres. It is important that these activities align with each place’s identity. The aim is to make development realistic, practical and something the cultural centre can commit to over time. It is therefore important to consider the direction of development and what the centre is ready to do and to what extent they are willing to change and adapt to their audiences’ needs and expectations. This creates a clear framework for the whole development process.

To support this work, the project organised an open lecture, ‘Why Identity Matters – Driving Change in Cultural Organisations’. This session was organised to help cultural organisations understand how identity underpins meaningful and sustainable change.

After the open lecture, the cultural centres involved in the project continued the discussion in a workshop. The workshop used design thinking as its approach. It aimed to offer new perspectives on how inclusivity and participation can be integrated into development work while staying true to an organisation’s core purpose.

Through structured facilitation, the workshop brought forward a number of questions and insights. It explored how cultural centres currently define themselves, who they primarily serve today, which audiences are missing and what barriers may prevent these missing audiences from participating. It also considered the values that guide their daily work in practice.

The cultural centres identified their current key audiences in a realistic way. For two of them, the main groups were local residents, people who had moved back to the area and schools. One centre also highlighted professionals and other people connected to the same field in which the cultural centre operates. Some centres clearly felt that they attract people interested in art, such as art lovers and art enthusiasts. One organisation also identified women as a key visitor group, especially middle-aged and older women. In contrast, one centre felt that its visitors are quite evenly spread across all age groups.

The cultural centres were also able to clearly identify which audiences are currently missing, which included young adults, international tourists, international students, families with small children and specific professional groups.

Barriers and thresholds were mainly related to access and to how easy it feels to enter or take part. These included visibility and discoverability, language barriers and the need for more English and multilingual communication. Public image was also seen as important. Some people may have prejudices or feel that the centres are ‘not for me’ or too elitist, and some practices may be experienced as excluding. The centres also felt that barriers can be caused by wrong expectations, lack of awareness or a feeling of unfamiliarity with the activities. Other factors included lack of time, lack of interest and the fact that visiting cultural centres is not a familiar habit for everyone.

The answers from the cultural centres show some general patterns that are similar in all centres. At the same time, some answers show specific local conditions in each centre. This includes possible visitor groups that are large in the area but do not visit the cultural centre as much as could be expected. For example, in the case of Korundi, many Santa Claus tourists visit the Rovaniemi area, but this is not yet reflected in the number of visitors to the cultural centre.

The workshop also considered the values that guide the daily work of the cultural centres. Promoting inclusion is a value-based choice, so it is important that the cultural centres recognise their own values and make them visible in their everyday actions. The workshop showed that values are already present in practice, but that they should also be expressed more clearly and communicated more openly outside the organisation.

5.3 Visitor and non-visitor insights through a questionnaire

While internal self-assessment provides a crucial starting point for improvement, it is equally essential to hear the voices of those affected – in this context, both visitors and non-visitors of the cultural centres. Who participates, who does not and why. What are the current pull factors that people find attractive, and what kinds of issues are barriers to visiting? Who participates, who does not and the reasons behind these choices help identify the current pull factors that attract people, as well as the barriers that hamper people from visiting.

Eurostat has gathered useful statistical information on cultural participation. The statistics reveal, for example, that a large share of European adults engage in cultural activities, but participation varies across countries, age groups and social backgrounds. Eurostat (2026) reports that, based on 2022 data, more than half of adults in many EU countries reported participating in cultural activities such as visiting museums, attending performances or going to the cinema at least once in the previous year. Eurostat also highlights that participation in cultural activities is higher among women than men in many EU countries. In addition, age, education and income all influence participation. According to Eurostat, participation in cultural activities decreases with age. Cultural participation is also higher among individuals with higher levels of education. Similarly, the rate of cultural participation is greater in the highest income group than in the lowest income group (Eurostat 2026).

Eurostat statistics reveal behavioural patterns that closely align with how the cultural centres in the ICCE project perceive the situation. However, to gain deeper local insights and better understand how people experience cultural centres and why they choose to visit them or not, an open, anonymous online questionnaire was conducted. The questionnaire was for both visitors and non-visitors, including locals and people visiting the region. The aim was to find out who currently visits the cultural centres, which groups are reached less often and what factors influence these choices.

The questionnaire collected 225 responses from four regions: Rovaniemi, Kiruna, Lycksele and Umeå. The number of responses varied across different locations. There were 136 responses from Rovaniemi, 11 from Kiruna, 36 from Lycksele and 41 from Umeå. Nearly half of the respondents were locals (48%), and the other half (52%) were visiting the region (Figure 6).

Figure 6. The share of the responses between locals and travellers.

The questionnaire was open at the same time in all places. However, the methods for collecting responses differed. In most cultural centres, responses were collected by using a poster in the entrance area. The poster invited people to answer the questionnaire and included a QR code that directed them to the online questionnaire. Posters were also displayed in the spaces of some partner organisations. The centres also used other ways to collect responses. For example, they shared information about the questionnaire through social media channels and their newsletters. In Rovaniemi, the higher number of responses compared to the other centres is partly explained by more active, face-to-face data collection carried out by project interns. They approached people in public spaces and near tourist attractions. Respondents answered the questionnaire themselves using tablets provided by the interns.

The results show that cultural centres have already reached many people. Among respondents, 77% have visited the local cultural centre at least once, and more than half of these visitors are locals (Figure 7). In contrast, only 13% of non‑visitors are locals. Nearly three-quarters of respondents felt they belonged to the cultural centre’s target audience. Only a small difference was found between visitors (74%) and non-visitors (65%). At the same time, nearly one-third of all respondents either did not feel included or were unsure. This suggests that not everyone feels that cultural centres are accessible or relevant to them.

Figure 7. Questionnaire shows that 77% of the respondents had visited the local cultural centre.

Visitors most often perceived the cultural centres’ services as targeted at cultural enthusiasts (nearly 60%), whereas only one-third saw them as intended for everyone. Non-visitors, by contrast, were more likely to view the services as intended for everyone (47%) than for cultural enthusiasts (27%).

The main motivations for visiting cultural centres were interesting cultural events, local art and culture and curiosity about the cultural centre. For non-visitors, the most common barrier to visiting was a lack of awareness, as many had not heard of the cultural centre. Limited interest in cultural events was also mentioned, while the lack of time was especially noted by travellers. Interestingly, 37% of non-visitors reported that culture is one of the main reasons for their travel, and only about one-third reported that they usually do not visit cultural centres when travelling. In addition, 35% reported that they sometimes include visits to cultural centres in their travel plans. This may indicate that non-visiting is influenced by factors other than cultural interest, including how visible and accessible cultural centres are to visitors and how the destination is marketed.

Nearly 70% of non-visitors reported that the cultural centres’ marketing had not reached them. As most non-visitors (87%) were travellers, and a large share (42%) were in the 20–29 age group, this suggests that both visitors to the region and younger adults remain outside the reach of current marketing efforts. While they may have an interest in cultural activities, a more effective approach is needed to engage them and make the centres more visible and relevant.

‘More marketing; Was easy to find info about safaris but not about cultural centres’

– An open-ended response from a tourist respondent.

‘Rovaniemi has strong potential for cultural centres and they could be made more visible through advertising and collaboration with different organisations, such as educational institutions. Marketing could also be targeted more effectively at younger audiences. At present, the promotion of cultural centres seems almost non-existent. My impression is that their current marketing is mainly aimed at attracting existing audiences (culture enthusiasts) as well as tourists and encouraging them to visit and become regular visitors. Low-threshold events and collaboration with different organisations could be excellent ways to attract new visitors and spark greater interest. I feel that I am personally interested in art and history to some extent, but the spark that would turn this interest into something stronger is still waiting to be ignited.’

– An open-ended response from a local respondent, translated from Finnish by the author.

Respondents expressed a strong desire for content that is connected to the local context. Local cultural history was the most desired theme, followed by local contemporary art, opportunities for learning and gaining new knowledge and café and restaurant services (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Responses from the questionnaire on preferred activities and experiences at the cultural centre.

Because one of the long-term goals of the ICCE project is to enhance and enable encounters between different groups of people, such as local residents and travellers, it is encouraging to learn from the questionnaire that many respondents (23%) expressed interest in meeting new people in cultural contexts (Figure 8).

Based on the questionnaire results, we gained an overview of which groups are underrepresented among visitors. These included young adults and travellers. Families with children were highlighted in responses as a group in need of more content. Retirees were also identified as an important group in the separate feedback received by the cultural centre. This understanding helped us approach these groups in the next phase of the project, where people were invited to experience the services of the cultural centre and take part in developing them. However, the target groups invited to each centre could vary, allowing each centre to focus on the audiences most relevant to their local context while still gathering different kinds of viewpoints.

6. Learning through benchmarking activities

Benchmarking is one of the key activities within the ‘Learning and Inspiring’ stage of the ICCE project. Exploring current practices, ongoing initiatives and recent trends in the project area and beyond provides valuable opportunities to learn and gain inspiration. Ideally, the insights and ideas gathered from these benchmarking destinations will be adapted and tested in some form within the cultural centres currently under development.

6.1 Background to the benchmarking approach

The Cambridge dictionary defines benchmarking as ‘The act of measuring the quality of something by comparing it with something else of an accepted standard’ (Cambridge Dictionary 2026). In contrast, the Collins dictionary states: ‘In business, benchmarking is a process in which a company compares its products and methods with those of the most successful companies in its field, in order to try to improve its own performance’ (Collins, 2026).

Metin Kozak (2003) has examined benchmarking as a methodology and identified several dominant elements highlighted in benchmarking literature. According to his findings, benchmarking helps organisations identify their current strengths and weaknesses while also revealing opportunities for improvement. Benchmarking can support organisations in addressing customer needs and enhancing employee motivation – both in general and in relation to development efforts. Benchmarking also promotes continuous improvement and organisational agility, generating new ideas and fostering innovation (Kozak 2003, 2).

There are several definitions, approaches and methods related to benchmarking, and originally, the concept was mainly used by production and manufacturing companies. Over time, both the definition and the range of industries applying the method have broadened. Prašnikar, Debeljak and Ahčan (2005) argue that benchmarking is something every company engages in, intentionally or unintentionally, in many different forms. In their own approach, they highlight a strategic way of working and emphasise the importance of gaining business knowledge through benchmarking. Equally important is how this knowledge can support better decision-making (Prašnikar et al., 2005, 258–259).

Although benchmarking is most commonly associated with improving performance and standing out from competitors, this is not entirely the case with the ICCE project. In this context, the purpose of benchmarking is more about strengthening relevance and impact. For cultural centres benchmarking other cultural sites, the aim is not to stand out from competitors but to appear as appealing and desirable leisure or travel destinations in their own regions.

6.2 Benchmarking for relevance and impact

During the project, benchmarking activities have been implemented using a multichannel approach, combining digital benchmarking on the Internet with physical benchmarking visits. Some benchmarking targets were viewed through online channels, such as cultural centres’ and museums’ websites, social media platforms, digital exhibitions and other online content and materials. Online benchmarking has enabled a time-flexible and in-depth exploration of selected organisations. The focus of this review has been on how organisations communicate inclusivity and accessibility through their digital channels. We have examined, among other things, whether it is stated directly that different people and visitor groups are welcome, or whether this is communicated more indirectly, for example, by describing services and practical arrangements for families with children or specific groups that help make their visit easier.

Attention has also been paid to the clarity and usability of websites, the findability of information, the language used, and how easy it is to understand as well as the range of languages in which content is available. Reviewing organisations in digital environments has provided a useful basis for comparison in terms of how cultural centres reach out to and speak to audiences through online channels.

Today, websites and social media platforms serve as the main ways potential visitors get their first impression of a place, search for practical information and form an overall image of the institution. Digital communication, therefore, plays an important role in sharing information, making values visible and attracting new audiences and visitors.

One of the most impressive and inspiring examples the team encountered as part of the online benchmarking process was, for example, the Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History (MAH). On their website, they describe their mission and values in a way that highlights the people, communities and connections, all rooted in diverse cultural activities. Moreover, MAH’s strategic plan is open and available to anyone interested in learning more about its long-term goals and methods for achieving them. This kind of transparency, as well as a ‘get involved’ tab on their website, encourages anyone to share their ‘wild ideas’ or reach out for collaborations (MAH 2026). It is like a continuous call to action, implying that visitors are seen as community members whose thoughts and ideas are welcome and valued.

Not all the benchmarked cases are exactly equal to the cultural centres involved in the project. It is maybe not possible to objectively compare, for example, Korundi House of Culture and Out of the Blue (OOTB), based in Edinburgh, when Korundi is a more traditional concert venue and art museum. In contrast, the latter is a creative space with wider uptake of activities and purposes. However, there is a lot to learn from the way OOTB, on their website, shares their vision of being for everyone and influencing the whole city’s artistic landscape: ‘Our vision for Edinburgh is a place where everyone can freely express their creativity, with access to the spaces and resources they need, regardless of who they are or how they choose to create’ (Out of the Blue 2026). Aspects of inclusion and encounters are not only described in the vision but are also evident in how the premises are introduced. One of the main venues of the place, a wide drill hall, is described as: ‘A vibrant hub for participatory arts run for the benefit of the local and artistic communities where people can meet, relax and learn’ (Out of the Blue 2026).

Furthermore, during the project, several site visits have been carried out in the project area in northern Sweden and northern Finland as part of other project activities. Alongside partner visits, opportunities were taken to explore other cultural and tourism organisations and spaces that offer strong and good examples of local operating approaches, audience work and cross-sector collaboration. One of these regional study visits was a visit to Piteå Museum. The museum presents exhibitions on both contemporary and historical themes, including a permanent display that highlights Piteå’s history. It is operated by the non-profit association Föreningen Piteå museum. From an inclusivity perspective, some activities stand out. One unexpectedly popular initiative is the museum’s Twilight Walks, designed to spark interest in local history and culture. These guided evening tours attract participants of all ages and backgrounds, blending historical storytelling with drama through the involvement of educators and local theatre groups. The museum’s session hall hosts a wide range of activities and is available for rental, with reduced rates for NGOs to support community engagement. It is also worth noting that the municipality previously, until 2025, required the museum to engage with the tourism industry.

A visit was also made to the Aine Art Museum in Tornio, where systematic work is being done to promote inclusivity. The museum has several key guiding documents: a collection policy, an education policy, an equality plan, an anti‑racism strategy and principles for a safer space. Inclusivity is an important part of the museum’s mission and vision, and it is visible throughout its work.

This can be seen in exhibition planning, such as the spring 2024 exhibition Lähellä – Close, which young people from vocational special education and employment programs curated. It is also visible in the events organised in the museum, such as BorderPride, the Finnish Red Cross Act Against Racism and an event for the UN International Day of Persons with Disabilities.

Inclusivity is also reflected in the museum’s partnerships and projects. For example, together with the Culture for All organisation, Aine Art Museum carried out a project and exhibition titled Making Space for Artistry (Kanniainen 2025).

The attention to different audiences – and a gentle reminder that art truly belongs to everyone – was beautifully present in the collection exhibition from 10/2023 to 3/2025. In the exhibition ‘Mitäs täällä tapahtuu?’, there was a section called ‘A Museum for Everyone’, where the text stated: ‘The Aine Art Museum’s collection is everyone’s art collection. It is meant for everyone to enjoy’. This simple, concrete sentence helps visitors understand that the museum wants everyone to feel a sense of belonging and connection to the art collections. Elsewhere in the exhibition, visitors were also encouraged to think about what kinds of artworks they believe the museum should present in the future.

During a partner visit to Umeå and Lycksele, the project team had the opportunity to visit Granö Beckasin AB, a tourism company that provided an inspiring and thoughtful company presentation. Granö Beckasin is a tourism operator offering accommodation, restaurant services and nature-based activities. A particularly interesting element of the visit was the company’s Husky House concept. Husky House allows visitors to explore the history of husky sledging in an exhibition environment, learn about sledge dog training and meet the dogs up close. The experience is complemented by a café and a souvenir shop, which extend the visit and offer opportunities to broaden the visitor’s experience.

The company owner explained that the starting point for developing the concept was a desire to offer visitors a holistic, experiential and educational experience that is not tied to a single activity, weather conditions or season. What was particularly interesting was that the roots of the idea came from a benchmarking trip during which the entrepreneur visited a chocolate factory. The factory visit was designed as a multi-sensory experience consisting of several stages, including learning about the topic, becoming familiar with the practical process and engaging in discussion and reflection. During the visit, participants learned about the history, production process and story of chocolate in an engaging and experiential way. This experience inspired the entrepreneur to apply a similar way of thinking to a completely different field.

Granö Beckasin AB’s example clearly demonstrated to the project team that benchmarking is not limited to organisations within the same sector. Valuable insights, operating models and principles for developing customer experience can also be learned from entirely different sectors and be adapted for use in a new context. This way of thinking is also a core element of the ICCE projects’ development approach, which does not aim to copy ready-made solutions, but instead seeks to identify transferable principles and adapt them to local contexts.

6.3 Benchmarking trip: Malmö – Copenhagen

Although learning has taken place in many different ways throughout the project so far, the benchmarking trip to Copenhagen and Malmö has been the most central and comprehensive benchmarking experience. The trip served as a deepening phase, allowing previously gathered observations, questions and themes to be explored across a range of different operational environments. Combining two geographically close but distinct cities into a single trip enabled efficient, smooth benchmarking visits across two countries.

The sites visited in Copenhagen and Malmö were consciously selected to represent a wide range of cultural and publicly accessible institutions. The selections were guided by the idea that cultural institutions can also learn from actors outside their own sector, as demonstrated by the Granö Beckasin AB example encountered earlier in the project. The entrepreneur’s experience highlighted the importance of benchmarking trips and cross-sector learning for developing new and effective concepts. This insight directly influenced the choice of sites visited in Copenhagen and Malmö.

To support the benchmarking trip, a shared travel notebook was prepared and given to all participants. An example page from the notebook is shown below (Figure 8). Its purpose was to support observation during the visits and to encourage participants to write down their observations, feelings and insights throughout the trip. The notebook included specific focus questions for each place we visited, as well as small preparatory tasks, sections to be completed on site, and reflection exercises to be completed afterwards. The photo below shows an example page from the notebook, illustrating the types of questions and reflection tasks used during the trip. The questions ranged from quick yes/no choices to open reflections. The aim was not to find correct answers, but to help notice and reflect on the aspects the project seeks to explore, such as inclusivity, accessibility, visitor experience and the creation of a sense of belonging. The following section on the places visited is based on notes from this notebook.

Figure 9. Example page from the shared travel notebook used during the benchmarking trip.

6.3.1 Experimentarium, Copenhagen

The science centre Experimentarium in Copenhagen was included in the benchmarking visit from the perspective of multisectoral learning described above. Although Experimentarium is a science centre rather than a traditional cultural institution, it offers a strong example of an inclusive, experiential and low-barrier visitor experience. The visit made it possible to explore how hands-on activities, playfulness and learning by doing can make even complex topics easier to approach and understand. At Experimentarium, technology was integrated into fixed furniture and structures in a playful way, making it a natural and interesting part of the visitor experience. Encouraging visitors’ curiosity appeared to be a key method for lowering the threshold to participation.

Overall, the visit confirmed the idea that cultural institutions could learn a great deal from the pedagogical and participatory approaches used in science centres. The image below (Figure 10) shows an example from Experimentarium, where visitors can create their own versions of artworks displayed on the wall. They can also use plastic food items from a box to create their own compositions and draw them. It also creates the possibility of looking at objects more closely, which makes it easier to draw their shapes. Visitors can then take their work home or put it in a frame on the wall.

Figure 10. Example of an interactive activity in Experimentarium where visitors can create their own artworks. Photo: Mona Feodoroff

6.3.2 Absalon, Copenhagen

Folkehuset Absalon appeared during the benchmarking trip as a particularly interesting example of a cultural and social community space. The venue is in a former church, which creates a meaningful contrast to Absalon’s current open and informal way of operating. At the core of Absalon’s work are encounters, doing things together and everyday community life. Absalon is intentionally designed like a park, a place where people can spend time and feel comfortable without the pressure to buy anything. This idea is also reflected in the look and atmosphere of the space, where strong colours, recycled and homelike furniture and the absence of traditional guiding signs create an informal and welcoming environment. The venue offers free Wi-Fi, affordable coffee and food, and aims to make visitors feel relaxed there, as if they were in a park or at home.

Community becomes especially visible in the daily communal dinners. People sit at long tables together with others they do not know. Food is served from shared dishes, bread is passed around and visitors may ask the person next to them to hand over butter or other food. These small everyday actions lower the threshold for interaction and turn the meal into a shared experience.

At Absalon, social interaction is clearly designed into both the space and the activities through small, thoughtful details. For example, there is no sugar bowl placed next to the coffee. Instead, visitors ask for a sugar cube, which creates a natural interaction between staff and visitors. Ping-pong tables are also placed in a way that supports spontaneous encounters. When the ball rolls towards the dining tables, it often leads to casual interaction between different visitors. In this way, social contact is not forced but happens naturally in everyday situations. The image (Figure 11) below illustrates this everyday social setting, with members of our project team playing ping-pong in the restaurant area while other visitors are having lunch nearby.

Figure 11. Project team members playing ping-pong during the visit to Absalon. Photo: Laura Laivamaa

Absalon has carefully considered how people with different needs can share the same space. Even though the venue is lively and active, it does not feel overwhelming. Instead, it feels inviting. Alongside long shared tables, there are also individual seating options. This allows visitors to choose whether they want to be socially active or spend time more quietly on their own. This freedom of choice is a key part of inclusivity in the space.

Visitors at Absalon are seen as active participants. People are encouraged to suggest and organise activities together with the Absalon team. Every day, the space offers a wide range of activities, such as music, dance, yoga and hands-on creative work. The activities are politically nonaligned, and all proposals are carefully reviewed to ensure they fit with Absalon’s core mission and values.

‘Every agenda that finds its way onto Absalon’s programme has the hidden agenda that people should meet and interact with each other.’ (Thingstrup & Grønborg Poulsen 2018, 56).

Absalon offered an inspiring example of how simple and everyday elements, such as a shared meal, a game or a common space, can be powerful tools for strengthening a sense of belonging. From a benchmarking perspective, Absalon shows that community is built through thoughtful planning, human-centred details and a space that permits people to be together in their own way.

6.3.3 Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Copenhagen

The Louisiana Museum of Modern Art is known as one of the most significant museums of modern and contemporary art in the Nordic countries. However, its importance is not based only on its high-quality exhibition programme or its unique location. From the very beginning, the museum has built its work around the idea that its role is to reach as wide and diverse an audience as possible. This way of thinking is visible both in the museum’s programmes and in how visitors are invited to participate in experiencing art.

Youth participation is clearly visible in Louisiana. The museum regularly organises Youth Nights, planned and carried out by young people themselves who are paid for their work and given both responsibility and recognition. Young people are also effective at reaching their fellow peers and creating content that speaks to their age group. Through this model, the museum builds long-term relationships with young people. It helps ensure that Louisiana remains a meaningful place even after early childhood and school visits come to an end.

Louisiana also runs the Nature through Art programme, which is aimed at kindergartens and schools. The programme includes several museum visits during which children work with themes related to natural materials and natural phenomena. The programme concludes with a family day at Louisiana, where the children act as guides for their parents or family members and present what they have learned. This role reversal strengthens children’s sense of participation and brings experiences of success and joy. When children bring their family members to a place that has become familiar to them, the threshold for families to visit a cultural institution is also lowered.

In many ways, arriving at and moving through the museum feels more like entering a home than stepping into a traditional museum space (Figure 12). This homelike, approachable atmosphere is closely connected to the building’s history. The museum has been built and expanded through seven different construction phases, and its core was originally a residential villa. Over time, new wings and extensions have been added, creating a layered and intimate feel. The museum also consciously seeks to maintain a warm and accessible atmosphere by using materials and design solutions that feel familiar from everyday environments.

Figure 12. Members of the project team approaching the museum entrance. Photo: Laura Laivamaa

Overall, Louisiana offers a strong example of how a museum can build inclusivity over time through long-term programmes, genuine youth participation and learning-based audience work. Art functions not only as content but as a tool for encounters, learning and community building.

6.3.4 Nordhus, Copenhagen

Last but not least, on our Copenhagen trip, we had the honour of visiting a place called Nordhus. Nordhus represents an interesting example of a community-based cultural concept, where learning from the experiences of other actors has clearly influenced how the activities have developed. The family that founded Nordhus has been in close contact with the founders of Folkehuset Absalon, and the benchmarking carried out there can be recognised in the basic idea of Nordhus. Community, openness and everyday encounters are also central at Nordhus, but the concept has evolved into a somewhat different model.

At Nordhus, cultural and social activities are a natural part of everyday services, such as the café, accommodation, space rental and shared dinners. The communal dinners are built around the idea of a shared table and shared experience, like Absalon, but at a higher price point. Image below (Figure 13) shows one of the long-shared tables where the community dinners are held, as well as the venues carefully considered interior design and atmosphere. The activities are complemented by a variety of events and cultural programmes that bring together people from different backgrounds and life situations.

Figure 13. One of the long-shared tables where the community dinners are held. Photo: Laura Laivamaa

A key part of Nordhus’s activities is a model aimed at young people, in which young adults aged 18–25 live, work and develop the cultural house together. Nordhus brings together cultural content, work, learning and youth housing under one roof offering a practical and accessible pathway into the cultural field. The opportunity to learn through work and the possibility of affordable accommodation ensure that housing costs do not limit young people’s participation and support long-term engagement in the activities.

6.3.5 Kulturhyllan & Visit Malmö

We began the Malmö day with a visit to Kulturhyllan, which is a new cultural complex that brings several cultural functions together under one roof. It is part of the city’s long-term commitment to supporting culture and creative activities aimed at young people. The concept is based on the idea of an open, easily accessible place where culture, learning and participation are part of everyday life.

At Kulturhyllan, discussions also touched on the city’s attractiveness and the role of culture in tourism, as we met with a representative from Visit Malmö. This added a city-level perspective to the visit and connected Kulturhyllan to a broader context of urban development and strategic planning.

Malmö is an exceptionally young and diverse city. According to the Visit Malmö representative, almost half of the city’s residents are under 35 and more than 180 nationalities are represented in the city. This population structure creates a strong context for spaces like Kulturhyllan, which aim to meet the needs of a young population and diverse audiences.

One of the key components of the complex is Malmö’s newest public library, Hyllielibrary, located in a central area next to the large Emporia shopping centre and opposite the Hyllie train station. Its location makes the library a natural part of residents’ daily routes and supports the idea of the library as an open and approachable meeting place. Hyllielibrary also functions as a gateway to the other activities within Kulturhyllan, strengthening the public and welcoming character of the building as a whole. The complex also includes the Dawit Isaak Library, which is dedicated to freedom of expression. The core idea of the library is that all books and perspectives should have a place. Its collection highlights books that are not always freely available elsewhere.

Creative activities for young people are developed especially through the Work in Progress (WiP) concept. WiP is a space for young people aged 16–25, where creative young people can grow, test new ideas and develop their work, regardless of whether they are beginners, hobbyists or aiming towards a professional path. Low-threshold participation and the possibility to progress at one’s own pace are central to the concept. Around one thousand young people have been involved in the development process, ensuring that young people’s views, wishes and experiences have genuinely shaped both the space and its activities. The spaces can be used and changed for many different needs, as shown in the image (Figure 14) below.

Figure 14. The flexible and multi-purpose spaces at Kulturhyllan can be changed for different activities and needs. Photo: Laura Laivamaa

Overall, Kulturhyllan represents a way of thinking about cultural institutions as multifunctional environments where a library, questions of freedom of expression and youth-led creative activity come together. It lays the foundation for participation and experimentation in a city whose young, diverse population continuously challenges cultural actors to develop more open and inclusive ways of working.

6.3.6 Malmö Art Museum

The visit to Malmö Art Museum highlighted how inclusivity is reflected, especially in the way visitors are welcomed and approached. Inclusivity is not only visible in programmes or spaces, but also in everyday encounters between staff and visitors. At the museum, staff members are not referred to as guards but as hosts, a term that clearly describes their role. Rather than acting as distant supervisors, they are present, approachable and supportive, with the main aim of ensuring that visitors feel comfortable and at ease during their visit.

The museum strongly emphasises that experiencing art does not require prior knowledge or the use of specialist language. Visitors are explicitly encouraged to say things like ‘this is strange’ or ‘this looks fun’, and such reactions are considered completely valid. There is no pressure to appear knowledgeable or to interpret artworks in a ‘correct’ way. What matters most is how the artwork feels and how it is personally experienced. In this way, all interpretations and emotional responses are treated as equally acceptable.

A central principle guiding Malmö Art Museum is the idea that the museum’s collection belongs to the city and all its residents. Because the artworks are publicly owned, everyone has the right to see, experience and understand them from their own perspective. This way of thinking enhances equality between staff and residents. It also shapes both the museum’s practices and the attitude of its employees. Although the staff manage the collection and the premises, they do not possess superior ownership over the place or its items. The museum presents itself as a shared space where visitors are permitted to be themselves.

The museum’s history is also made visible in the building itself. An image (Figure 15) below presents a large photograph in the lobby of the same space in the 1940s, when it was temporarily used to accommodate people rescued from Nazi concentration camps. In response to an urgent shortage of accommodation in Malmö, the museum’s then-director Ernst Fischer, made the premises available for this purpose (Malmö Stad 2015).

Figure 15. The lobby of Malmö Art Museum with a large photograph on the wall showing the same space in the 1940s. The photograph brings the history of the place into the present. Photo: Håkan Appelblad

6.3.7 Malmö Konsthall

We also visited Malmö Konsthall, which operates as an open and low-threshold art space. Special attention has been paid to the design of the premises, signage and wayfinding to ensure that movement and orientation within the building are easy for all visitors. In addition to physical accessibility, strong emphasis is placed on how visitors are welcomed and on the overall atmosphere created within the space.

The central location of the Konsthall further supports this approach. Situated close to Triangeln train station, the building is easy to access and can be entered spontaneously as part of everyday routes, without prior planning. From the outside, the Konsthall does not appear distant or monumental, which may help lower the threshold for stepping inside.

The Konsthall offers activities for audiences of different ages and backgrounds. The Konsthall organises open creative workshops, especially for young people, which can be joined without previous experience. Visitors are also welcome to spend time in the space without any obligation to participate. Free snacks and refreshments are offered, sending a clear message that the Konsthall is a place where simply being present is allowed and valued. This message is also communicated in practice through visible signs outside the Konsthall, as shown in the photo below (Figure 16). Located in the shared outdoor area of Triangeln train station, the sign is visible in a busy everyday setting where many people pass through daily.

Figure 16. A workshop sign outside the Konsthall, inviting people to create, take part or simply stop by for a free snack as part of the centre’s low-threshold approach to participation. Photo: Laura Laivamaa

A particularly strong example of extending access to art is the Konsthall-bikes, which are used to take art workshop materials beyond the institution itself. Through these bikes, art workshops can be organised in places such as reception centres, shelters and neighbourhood community spaces. In this way, the activities are not limited to a single building but actively move closer to people and their everyday environments.

---

Part 3

Insights and learnings to inspire the next steps

---

7. From groundwork to action

This first stage of the project has been exactly what its title suggests: an opportunity forlearning and inspiring. Exploring concepts through literature and earlier research has helped the project clarify its focus and reinforce the choices and limitations made. Understanding the scope – the breadth and complexity – of the theme has helped to put things into the right perspective. However, probably the most important learning and inspiring activity done in the first part of the ICCE project has been the exchange of experiences and ideas, both among us as partners in the project, and with others working on issues related to inclusion and inclusive centres of culture.

Inclusivity covers a broad spectrum of dimensions, ranging from the comprehensibility of texts and physical accessibility to opportunities for interaction and participation, and further to possibilities for social inclusion as well as experiences of agency and a sense of ownership. Needless to say, inclusivity as a whole cannot be solved within a single project. Instead, what matters is finding the time and place to begin and building from there. Moreover, it is not a one-time task, but an ongoing, iterative and continually evolving phenomenon that requires constant monitoring and improvement.

In our project, the work towards more inclusive cultural centres starts with enhancing the different audiences’ sense of belonging and ownership of the shared cultural capital. By involving different groups of people in the development of cultural spaces, it is possible to give voice and the opportunity to influence what goes on in cultural centres, also for groups currently underrepresented there. For this purpose, service design will be applied in future development work of the project. As Schaaf (2022) suggests, the use of service design methods can be valuable. According to her study, service design is a human-centred approach rooted in empathy and guided by research. These methods can therefore provide a framework for cultural centres to develop their activities in more open, inclusive and participatory ways thereby becoming more relevant in our society and contributing to the promotion of equality (Schaaf 2022, 214; 216).

The self-assessment study and SWOT analysis, followed by the identity workshop, were important exercises for the participating cultural centres, enabling them to critically examine where they currently stand with inclusivity, what their current audience base looks like and which groups they should engage with more actively. These reflections also helped clarify the kinds of needs potential visitors may have and whether those needs align with how cultural organisations define their identity, values and mission. Improving inclusivity is a value-based choice that signals an organisation cares about its community and aims to serve all its members as well as possible. Therefore, this was an excellent opportunity to examine how inclusivity is reflected in the organisation’s stated values and mission.

The power of learning from others and drawing inspiration from them cannot be overemphasised. The lessons gained through benchmarking activities have broadened perspectives and sparked new enthusiasm and motivation for new experiments and further development. The ICCE project provides participating cultural centres with an excellent opportunity to try out and pilot new ideas. The key challenge lies in reflecting on how these new practices can be naturally integrated into organisational structures and everyday operations in ways that align with the identity and story of the place – so that new ideas become an organic part of daily practice.

In summary, we propose a three-step process (Figure 18) for cultural centres seeking to become more inclusive:

1. Explore your core identity, purpose, values, and vision for the future.
2. Engage with visitors and stakeholders to better understand their needs, expectations, and ideas.
3. Broaden your perspective by learning from others, bearing in mind that valuable insights can also come from organizations that differ significantly from your own and operate in entirely different sectors.

Figure 17. A few key principles for inclusive development.

When it comes to strengthening sustainable cultural and creative tourism, the project aims to promote the potential of cultural centres as part of tourism service offerings. With inclusive and participatory strategies in place, museums and other cultural spaces can offer travellers an intriguing opportunity to familiarise themselves with local culture and actively engage with it.

Promoting creative and cultural tourism requires cross-disciplinary cooperation among professionals from both the tourism and cultural sectors. Solid cooperation is built on trust and a deep understanding of one another’s practices and realities. This is why the cultural tourism cooperation in the ICCE project focuses on familiarising cultural professionals with the realities of tourism and, in turn, introducing tourism actors more thoroughly to the cultural field. Active dialogue between professionals from both fields, together with a shared vision for the future of cultural tourism, is essential to strengthen the role of art and culture as a more central element of tourism offerings and to enable visitors to engage with and immerse themselves in local culture in meaningful ways. In the ICCE project, the aim is to lay the foundation for this by organising cultural tourism network meetings. While there is a recognised need for enhanced cooperation, no established structures currently exist to support it. One of the key issues to be addressed is not only how to sustain but also to further strengthen cross-disciplinary cooperation in the future.

This first part of the project, with some of the main insights compiled in this publication, has functioned as the ‘first diamond’ of the design thinking Double Diamond model. The Discover and Define phases focused on familiarising with and clarifying the key concepts, exploring the internal starting points for development activities and sourcing inspiration through benchmarking other cultural centres.

These activities have directed our attention to the second diamond, which consists of the Develop and Deliver phases. In the context of the ICCE project, these phases include collaborative service design and art-based development activities carried out in each participating cultural centre.

The highlight will be the Deliver phase, during which new or improved services and events in the cultural centres will be piloted to learn how the ideas work in practice and what kind of public response they receive from participants. This learning-oriented and inspiring process has been highly fruitful for participating organisations. It would be a valuable addition if our findings could benefit other organisations as well.

References

Alfengård M., Berglund-Snodgrass L. and Högström E. 2025. Planering för gemenskap: Hur social infrastruktur formas på stadsdelsnivå, En kartläggning av mötesplatser och dess förutsättningar i två stadsdelar i Helsingborg. Faculty of Landscape Architecture, Horticulture and Crop Production Sciences. Report 2025:1. Accessed on 10 February 2026 https://doi.org/10.54612/a.226n2k991k

Audiences Northern Ireland. 2013. Putting audience development at the core of your organisation. CultureHive. Accessed on 29 June 2026. https://www.culturehive.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Audience-Development-Manifesto1.pdf

Balling, G. & Kann-Christensen, N. 2013. What is a non-user? An analysis of Danish surveys on cultural habits and participation, Cultural Trends, 22:2, 67-76. Accessed on 17 February 2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2013.783159

Bildmuseet 2026. About Bildmuseet. Accessed on 20 January 2026. https://www.bildmuseet.umu.se/en/about-bildmuseet/

Bollo, A., Da Milano, C., Gariboldi, A. & Torch, C. 2017. Study on audience development. How to place audiences at the centre of cultural organisations. Final report. European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, Fondazione Fitzcarraldo, Intercult, Culture Action Europe, ECCOM Progetti s.r.l. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Accessed on 29 June 2026. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/711682

Borseková, K. & Vitálošová, K. 2025. Participatory models and approaches in sustainable cultural tourism. In Borowiecki, K. J., Fresa, A., & Martín Civantos, J. M. (eds.), 2025. Innovative cultural tourism in European peripheries. Routledge, 92–113. Accessed on 29 June 2026. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003422952

Bryson, J. R. 2007. Arts, dance, cultural infrastructure, and city regeneration: Knowledge, audience development, networks, and conventions, and the relocation of a Royal Ballet company from London to Birmingham. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift -Norwegian Journal of Geography, 61(3), 98–110. Accessed on 10 February 2026 https://doi.org/10.1080/00291950701553848

Cambridge Dictionary 2026. Accessed on 2 February 2026 https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/benchmarking

Canavan, C.R. 2018. Thrive Audience Development Guide. CultureHive. Accessed on 29 June 2026 https://culturehive.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Thrive-Audience-Development-Guide.pdf

Collins 2026. Collins English Dictionary. Accessed on 2 February 2026 https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english

Design Council 2026. The Double Diamond. Accessed on 7 May 2026 https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/resources/the-double-diamond/

Duxbury, N., Bakas, F. E., Vinagre de Castro, T., & Silva, S. 202). Creative tourism development models towards sustainable and regenerative tourism. Sustainability, 13(1), 2. Accessed on 28 May, 2026. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010002

Eurostat 2026. Culture statistics – cultural participation. Accessed on 6 February 2026 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Culture_statistics_-_cultural_participation

Kanniainen, V. 2025. Aine Art Museum. Museum director. Presentation in Inclusive Centres of Culture Symposium I: Inclusivity as a tool for attracting new visitors. Creating Space for Diversity Inclusion and diversity through operations at the Aine Art Museum, 28 May, 2025.

Kin Museum of Contemporary Art 2026. About Kin. Accessed on 20 January 2026. https://kinmuseum.se/en/om-kin

Korundi 2026. Story of the House. Accessed on 20 January 2026. https://korundi.fi/en/korundi/korundi-house-of-culture/story-of-the-house

Kozak, M. 2003. Destination Benchmarking: Concepts, Practices and Operations, CABI.

Lachapelle, P. 2008. A Sense of Ownership in Community Development: Understanding the Potential for Participation in Community Planning Efforts. Community Development, 39(2), 52–59. Accessed on 8 May 2026 https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330809489730

Lestelä, L. 2025. Osallisuus menestystekijäksi! Suomalaiset museot osallisuuden edistäjinä. Dissertations in Social Sciences and Business Studies, University of Eastern Finland. Accessed on 27 January 2026 http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-61-5525-8

Lindholm, A. (ed.) 2015. Ei-kävijästä osalliseksi Osallistuminen, osallistaminen ja osallisuus kulttuurialalla. Humanistinen ammattikorkeakoulu, Helsinki. Accessed on 3 February 2026 https://www.humak.fi/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Arto-Lindholm-ei-kavijasta-osalliseksi.pdf

Lindholm, A. 2011. Ei-kävijyystutkimukset. Teoksessa Arto Lindholm & Jyrki Simovaara & Timo Cantell & Helena Mielonen: 159 Yleisötutkimus kulttuurialan opinnäytetyönä. Humanistinen ammattikorkeakoulu, Sarja C. Oppimateriaaleja 27. Helsinki: Humak, 49–60. Accessed on 22 January 2026 https://www.humak.fi/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/humak-yleisotutkimus-2011.pdf

Malmö Stad 2015. Malmö Museum som flyktingförläggning 1945. 27.4.2015. Accessed on 30 June 2026 https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/malmo/pressreleases/malmoe-museum-som-flyktingfoerlaeggning-1945-1148442

Out of the Blue 2026. Shaping our city’s artistic Landscape. Accessed on 19 February 2026 https://www.outoftheblue.org.uk/

Prašnikar, J., Debeljak, Ž., & Ahčan, A. 2005. Benchmarking as a tool of strategic management. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 16(2), 257–275. Accessed on 6 April 2026 https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360500054400

The Forest and Saami Museum 2026. Accessed on 20 January 2026. 2026 https://skogsochsamemuseet.se/en/

The Santa Cruz Museum of Art & History 2026. About the MAH. Accessed on 19 February 2026 https://www.santacruzmah.org/about

Thingstrup, M., Grønborg Poulsen, L. 2018. The Absalon Book. Copenhagen: Folkehuset Absalon.

Schaaf, H. 2022. The Meaning of Participation. Detecting the space for inclusive strategies in the Finnish and German museum context. Doctoral dissertation, University of Lapland. Accessed on 13 April 2026 https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-337-328-0

Scherf, K. 2021. Introduction: Creative Tourism in Smaller Communities: Collaboration and Cultural Representation. In Scherf, K. (Ed.), 2021. Creative tourism in smaller communities: Place, culture, and local representation. University of Calgary Press, 1–26. Accessed on 28 May 2026. https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/90520

United Nations 2016. Leaving No One Behind: The Imperative of Inclusive Development. Accessed on January 20, 2026. https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/2016/full-report.pdf

UNESCO 2026. Cultural rights. Accessed on 6 May, 2026. https://www.unesco.org/en/mondiacult/cultural-rights

University of Lapland 2022. Väitös: Museoiden rakenteita tulee avata aidon osallistumisen ja inkluusion näkökulmista. 16.11.2022. Accessed 12 January 2025. https://ulapland.fi/vaitos-museoiden-rakenteita-tulee-avata-aidon-osallistumisen-ja-inkluusion-nakokulmista/

UN Tourism 2026a. Tourism and Culture. Accessed on 25 May, 2026. https://www.untourism.int/tourism-and-culture

UN Tourism 2026b. Sustainable development. Accessed on 11 May, 2026.
https://www.untourism.int/sustainable-development

Virolainen, J. 2015. Kulttuuriosallistumisen muuttuvat merkitykset: katsaus taiteeseen ja kulttuuriin osallistumiseen, osallisuuteen ja osallistumattomuuteen. Cuporen verkkojulkaisuja 26. Kulttuuripoliittisen tutkimuksen edistämissäätiö. Accessed on February 17 2026 https://www.cupore.fi/images/tiedostot/kulttuuriosallistumisenmuuttuvatmerkitykset_000.pdf

Visit Finland. 2025. State of Sustainable Tourism annual report 2024. Accessed on 15 January 2026. https://www.visitfinland.fi/globalassets/visitfinland.fi/vf-julkaisut/2025/state-of-sustainable-tourism-2024.pdf

World Bank. 2013. Inclusion Matters: The Foundation for Shared Prosperity. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed on 22 January, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0010-8