Who keeps culture alive?
In 2026, the Romanian state allocated approximately 1.44 billion lei (some 277 million Euros) for culture, through the budget of the Ministry of Culture, which is less than 0.1% of GDP
Iulia Hau, 01.07.2026, 14:00
Despite insufficient resources, the Romanian artistic community continues to make itself known at the European level. For example, Banffy Castle in Răscruci has been awarded, this year, the most prestigious European title for heritage by Europa Nostra.
Miruna Găman, a PhD candidate in cultural studies and Horizon Europe project manager, says culture represents everything we express as people, rather than a field that necessarily belongs to a specific specialization.
Miruna Gaman: “You can analyze scientifically, as objectively as possible, phenomena at the societal level. But, if we take it at an individual level, at a community level, anyone can be a creator of culture and a consumer of culture. The problem, from my point of view, arises when certain types of human expressions, certain acts of creation and certain cultural products are not considered part of culture because they convey messages that certain social categories do not agree with. But, at the end of the day, they say something about the concerns of a group of people at that moment. They say something about what a society or a part of society looks like at a certain moment, in a certain place, in a certain context.”
Miruna Găman offers the example of “manele”, a controversial musical style, a subject that polarizes public opinion but, nevertheless, represents the result of a complex act of creation, with a long history, which speaks about the concerns and themes of interest of certain social groups. Asked why culture matters, Miruna Găman answers:
Miruna Gaman: “First of all, we look at what a functional society does beyond this hard infrastructure, let’s say, functional transportation, health infrastructure, hospitals that you don’t leave sicker than you entered, and others that cover your basic needs, a functional society is based on education and culture. If we look at the salaries of museum curators, we are talking about figures somewhere around 3,000 lei (about 577 Euros). So, first of all, we are talking about a very low budget allocation that, somehow, triggers a vicious circle. You don’t have money to pay decent salaries, so implicitly you can’t attract new, qualified human resources who can enter your system and bring some fresh ideas. I look at the generations who took a master’s degree in heritage at the Faculty of History, at the same time with me, and make a comparison: how many manage to work in the system and how many go into other fields to manage to support themselves.”
The case of museums is emblematic for the entire sector: low salaries, few positions and a young generation that, although qualified, migrates to other, better-paid fields. The expert points out that many cultural workers have to do many other things in addition to their full-time jobs to support themselves, such as involvement in various projects, collaborations with NGOs, and teaching courses. A recent study shows that only 19% of cultural workers in Romania earn enough to meet their needs, while 43% carry out activities outside the sector to supplement their income. The same study shows that the level of psychological well-being of cultural workers is considerably below the European average of 64 points on the WHO-5 scale, 49.5 to be precise. A score below 50 points is clinically considered the threshold for a low quality of life. In other words, many of those who produce culture live on the border between passion and exhaustion.
Miruna Găman also speaks about the problem of cultural entrepreneurship initiatives. Although she encourages such projects, considering that it would be complicated for the public budget to support the entire cultural sector, the problem arises, the expert says, when such initiatives promote an elitist discourse, which are “not for everyone” and whose main goal is to maximize profit.
Miruna Gaman: “What do you do with that profit? Aren’t you trying to give something back to the community? For example, in the building where you opened a restaurant/bistro, can’t you find a space that you can make available for free to some artists at the beginning of their journey, let’s say.”
Another problem that Miruna Găman points out is related to various lines of public funding. She talks about the unequal competition for non-reimbursable funds, in which small organizations compete with large state institutions for the same money.
Miruna Gaman: “You have non-governmental organizations fighting with public institutions on the same lines, so you have David and Goliath fighting for the same money. And you can’t put an NGO that is made up of three volunteers and one ‘part-time employee’ on an equal footing with a national museum, which has paid employees to look for opportunities to take their work to the next level. And they will clearly have better chances and other resources, later, to implement a project. From my point of view, there should also be separate funding lines for NGOs and public institutions.”
Miruna Găman concludes by saying that we still look at culture as a distant phenomenon, locked in an ivory tower, and not necessarily as something that could be part of our daily lives, helping us to mentally rebalance and connect with each other. And as long as culture is still perceived as a luxury and not as a basic need, it will be difficult for budget allocations to increase and for the work of those who produce it to be recognized and rewarded accordingly.
(bill)
