Who Gets to Be Seen? Museums, Visibility and Inequality in the Art Ecosystem

By Nycole  da Cunha

Museums are important because they hold the memories of our history that society sometimes insists on forgetting, as well as the emotions of those who lived through it. Beyond preserving memory, they function as public spaces that enable access to culture, education and collective reflection, and act as bridges between past experiences and contemporary societies. Therefore, their survival matters not only socially, but also economically, particularly through tourism.

However, despite their importance, not all museums receive the same level of attention, funding or recognition. The report ‘Supporting the Art Ecosystem’, prepared by ArtTactic and commissioned by Arts Council England, seeks to identify where these inequalities lie and to explore possible ways to address them. Although the report focuses on England, the dynamics it describes reflect broader patterns that can be observed in cultural sectors across different national and international contexts.

One of the central issues highlighted by the report is the concentration of cultural resources and networks in London while other regions, especially the North and the Midlands, benefit the least from funding opportunities, visibility and institutional networks. Therefore, it is clear that location plays a central role in shaping access to funding, networks and visibility within the cultural sector. Museums based in London benefit from proximity to political decision-making, established institutional networks, media attention and international tourism. In contrast, museums located in other regions often operate with fewer resources and limited exposure, which directly affects their capacity to grow, innovate and reach wider audiences.

This imbalance limits the capacity of regional museums to sustain their collections, acquire new works, develop long-term projects, and engage wider audiences. As a result, recognition and value remain concentrated in the same places, making it difficult for cultural spaces outside these centers to develop and gain visibility. It is important to note that, when certain museums consistently receive more attention, funding and visibility, they also gain greater influence over how culture is represented and circulated. Exhibitions, narratives and artistic practices associated with these institutions are more likely to reach national and international audiences, while others remain locally confined. This concentration of visibility does not only affect institutions, but also shapes public perceptions of what is considered culturally valuable or worthy of preservation. Over time, this dynamic narrows the diversity of voices and histories represented within the cultural sector, reinforcing dominant narratives that are prioritized while silencing those from marginalized communities and limiting visibility and legitimacy to groups already in positions of power.

While the report focuses on England, these dynamics are far from unique. Similar patterns of concentration and marginalization can be observed globally, where museums located in political, economic or cultural centers tend to receive greater recognition than those situated in peripheral regions. On an international scale, museums and artistic production from wealthier nations are more likely to be recognized as references of culture and heritage, while those from the Global South often struggle for visibility. As a result, cultural value is unevenly distributed, reinforcing global hierarchies that determine whose histories, artistic practices and memories are preserved, exhibited and circulated beyond local contexts.

These dynamics raise important questions about the role of public funding and cultural policy in shaping the art ecosystem. When resources, institutional support and visibility are disproportionately allocated, cultural policies risk reproducing existing hierarchies rather than promoting diversity and inclusion. In this sense, addressing regional and global inequalities in the cultural sector requires not only recognizing these imbalances, but also rethinking how funding frameworks, institutional priorities and decision-making processes are structured.

The report further suggests that these inequalities are not driven by funding alone, but also by unequal access to professional networks and long-term relationships within the art ecosystem. Many regional museums depend on fragile, informal connections with galleries, auction houses and collectors, relationships that are often concentrated in London and shaped by individual careers rather than institutional support. When these connections rely on specific curators rather than stable structures, they become difficult to sustain over time, particularly for museums with limited staff and resources. Therefore, access to global cultural networks plays a decisive role in shaping which museums, artists and narratives gain international recognition. As a result, access to acquisitions and visibility continues to favour already well-connected institutions, particularly those located in countries with greater economic and political influence, which tend to be more integrated into international circuits of exhibitions, partnerships, art fairs and cultural diplomacy, reinforcing existing hierarchies within the cultural sector.

Ultimately, supporting a more balanced art ecosystem means acknowledging that cultural value is not inherent to geography or power, but constructed through policy choices, institutional practices and patterns of visibility. When recognition, networks and opportunities remain concentrated in the same places, both regionally and globally, the cultural sector risks reproducing narrow and exclusionary narratives. Building fairer cultural environments requires not only sustained investment in regional institutions, but also opening cultural networks, making space for different voices, and allowing multiple narratives to circulate beyond traditional centres of power. Only then can museums truly fulfil their role as spaces of memory, dialogue and collective reflection, both locally and globally.