Artists and cultural organisations draw from a diverse range of sources of income, both public (funding from the Flemish, Federal, local, and/or international level) and private (such as ticketing, membership fees, patronage, sponsorship, etc.). Series of figures on income structures exist for organisations receiving multi-year funding through the Arts Decree (for the period 2007-2016) and organisations funded through the Decree Socio-Cultural Work for Adults (for the period 2007-2014). In both cases, the mean ratio between public and private income remains relatively stable throughout the years.
Former Flemish minister of Culture Sven Gatz (2014-2019) ordered two studies (in 2015 and 2017) to get an overview of private financing of culture in Flanders. These concluded that, although different opportunities for this do exist, there is no widespread ‘culture’ of private financing of the sector — especially so when compared to other regions and countries. The studies identified as causes a lack of expertise in the cultural sector about the opportunities for private financing, a limited interest in financing culture among private donors and sponsors, and a restricted scope of government policy on these matters.
Other research finds that cultural goals represent about 10 to 12% of individual donations to charity in Belgium. The most recent data on crowdfunding campaigns for culture in Belgium suggest that 17% (or EUR 4.2 million) was spent on creative projects. Recent figures indicate that around 19% of corporate givings (by both small- and large-scale companies in Belgium) are aimed at culture and cultural patrimony, most of which go to causes in music, architecture, and visual arts. Next to these companies, there are hundreds of philanthropic foundations active in Belgium, many among them in the domain of art and culture. Prominent philanthropic foundations and corporate giving programs that provide support for culture are the King Baudouin Foundation (under which ca. 500 different foundations reside), SPES (which offers grants to artists in different disciplines), CERA (which focuses on social-artistic and participatory projects), the National Lottery (which also acts as sponsor), and Sabam for Culture (which offers grants for producing and presenting repertoire of Sabam-members, see 4.1.6). With regard to sponsorship of culture in Flanders and Belgium, there are few figures available.
Policy makers have shown interest in stimulating private funding of arts and culture for quite some time. Measures taken in earlier legislations included a tax shelter system (see 4.1.4) for audiovisual productions (since 2003) and performing arts (since 2017), the establishment of Cultuurinvest (an independent investment fund that existed between 2006 and 2017) and microcredits for artists (such as the ‘minitoelagen’ in 2008). Partly as a reaction to the mentioned studies, former minister Gatz published a concept note devoted to private financing and entrepreneurship (2017). This note announced a number of initiatives, such as establishing a network of financial institutions that supply tailor-made credit and financing opportunities for the cultural sector, initiating Cultuurloket (see 7.2.1) — an organisation that acts as information portal for the culture sector for all matters of entrepreneurship, administration, complementary financing, etc. — and enhancing cross-sectoral collaboration through a system of open calls — the ‘innovative partner projects’, which aim to both diversify the revenue streams in the culture sector and boost innovation in other sectors.
Current minister of Culture Jan Jambon (2019-2024) declared he would continue (and possibly expand) some of the existing measures with regard to private funding and entrepreneurship. It should be noted that initiating or adjusting fiscal measures for stimulating philanthropy and sponsorship in culture would in many cases require negotiation between the Flemish and the Federal level, where a large deal of the legal framework for these matters resides (as is the case with, for example, tax shelters; see also 1.2.6).
 For an analysis of artists’ income and their socio-economic position, see Siongers, Jessy, Astrid Van Steen, and John Lievens. 2016. Loont passie? Een onderzoek naar de sociaaleconomische positie van professionele kunstenaars in Vlaanderen. Ghent University; Siongers, Jessy, Mart Willekens, Lucas Pissens, and John Lievens. 2018. Wie heeft het gemaakt? Een onderzoek naar de sociaaleconomische positie van architecten en designers in Vlaanderen. Ghent University. With regard to the diversity of income structures of arts organisations, see Van de Velde, Ward, Delphine Hesters, and Bart Van Looy. 2013. ‘Kunstenorganisaties op zoek naar inkomsten. Welke businessmodellen zijn haalbaar?’ In Kunstzaken. Financiële en zakelijke modellen voor de kunsten in Vlaanderen, Brussel: Kwarts, 4–25.
 Leenknegt, Simon. 2018. ‘De ins en outs revisited. Analyse van de opbrengsten en kosten van organisaties met meerjarige subsidies via het Kunstendecreet (2010-2016)’. In Cijferboek Kunsten 2018, Brussel: Kunstenpunt, 335–66; Janssens, Joris, and Dries Moreels. 2011. De ins & outs van het Kunstendecreet. Een blik op de opbrengsten en uitgaven van Kunstendecreetstructuren (2007-2008). BAM/MCV/VAi/VTi.
 Deckmyn, Sam (ed.). 2008. Boekstaven 2008; —. 2009. Boekstaven 2009; —. 2010. Boekstaven 2010; —. 2011. Boekstaven 2011; —. 2012. Boekstaven 2012. Brussel: Federatie van organisaties voor Volksontwikkelingswerk (FOV); Post, Mathijs, and Joris Smeets. 2015. Boekstaven 2015. Brussel: Federatie van organisaties voor Volksontwikkelingswerk (FOV).
 Sonecom, Prométhéa, and Observatoire de Politiques Culturelles de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. 2019. Étude sur le Mécénat/Sponsoring d’entreprise. Brussel. This report also considers tax shelter arrangements as corporate patronage.
 Mernier, Amélie, and Virginie Xhauflair. 2017. De stichtingen in België – Rapport 2017. Brussel: Philantropy & Social Investment Baillet Latour Chair, 14. This report examines two types of foundations with philanthropic goals (‘stichtingen van openbaar nut’ and ‘private stichtingen met een doelstelling van algemeen belang’) and concludes that 20% of these are active in arts and culture.
 Jambon, Jan. 2019. ‘Beleidsnota Cultuur 2019-2024’, 16-17; —. 2020. ‘Strategische Visienota Kunsten’, 16-17. For a more detailed discussion of private funding and entrepreneurship in Jambon’s policy statements and their relation to the history of cultural policy in Flanders, see: Wellens, Nikol. 2020. ‘Hybride economie’. Kunsten.be. 23 July 2020.