Each March, Art Month Sydney celebrates the significance and vibrancy of Sydney’s art scene. As a platform for emerging and established artists, the festival attracts art enthusiasts from across the city – encouraging everyone to experience the work of local creators in new and enjoyable ways.
Throughout the month, each event ignites discussion and creates pathways to inspire the next generation of contemporary art lovers and collectors. Art Month Sydney is operated by the Australian Art Events Foundation, which is a not-for-profit organisation.
The Australian Art Events Foundation engaged Culture Counts to conduct an evaluation of the festival by surveying members of the general public. In partnership with Culture Counts, this survey was designed and developed to evaluate the strategic goals and outcomes of the Australian Art Events Foundation and Art Month Sydney.
135 responses were collected from public attendees via online delivery links sent to the email addresses of festival attendees.
Each survey contained a range of ‘dimension’ questions, asking stakeholders about their experience of the festival. These dimensions have been developed and tested in collaboration with industry, practitioners and academics to measure the impact and value of arts and cultural events and activities.
Appropriate dimensions were chosen based on their alignment with the Australian Art Events Foundation's strategic objectives.
| Domain | Dimension | Dimension statement |
|---|---|---|
| Cultural | Curiosity | It sparked my curiosity and made me want to find out more |
| Contemporary Art | I feel more confident around contemporary art | |
| Social | Access | It gave me the opportunity to access cultural activities |
| Inclusion | It made me feel welcome and included | |
| Civic | Participation | It encouraged me to participate in community activities |
| Economic | Profile | It raised the profile of the artists |
| Quality | Cultural Contribution | It provides an important addition to the cultural life of the area |
Dimensions are assessed on a Likert scale, in which respondents move a slider to a point that indicates whether they agree or disagree with the dimension statement. An example of a dimension question in the Culture Counts survey tool is presented below.
Survey respondents were asked to provide their age, gender and identity. This data identifies the demographic sample of those who responded to the survey and took part in the festival. It enables data to be matched to the wider population and responses to be filtered to understand differences in demographics.
The following charts show the proportion of survey responses captured for each of the age, gender and identity demographic questions, compared with Art Month Sydney's 2021 and 2020 demographic data.
Art Month Sydney attracted visitors from a widespread range of age groups. The largest age group was the over 60 bracket, making up just over one-quarter of the sample (26%), closely followed by those aged 40-49 (24%), 50-59 (22%) and 30-39 (19%). Those aged 20-29 made up 9% of the sample. The largest difference in age demographics between the 2021 and 2022 festivals can be seen for the over 60 age group, which almost tripled from 10% to 26% of the total sample in 2021. There was a 5% increase in 2022 for the 40-49 age group, but an 11% decrease was seen for those aged 20-29.
The majority (78%) of respondents were female, with males making up 19%. Those who identified their gender as 'In another way' made up 3% of the sample. The 2022 festival displayed results similar to that of the 2020 festival, with the percentage of females and those identifying in another way increasing (by 10% in total) and the percentage of males decreasing (by 10%) compared to the 2021 festival.
One-fifth (20%) of the sample indicated that they speak a language other than English at home. This presents a 3% decrease from the demographic data collected last year, however still reflects a diverse audience of attendees from different backgrounds. 18% of respondents identified as being LGBTQIA+ (a 1% increase from 2021), 4% identified as caring for a person with disability (a 3% increase from 2021) and 4% were of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait ancestry (a 2% increase from 2021).
Survey respondents were asked to provide their current living location and postcode. This data identifies the demographic sample of those who responded to the survey and took part in the festival. It enables data to be matched to the wider population and responses to be filtered to understand differences in demographics.
The following charts show the proportion of survey responses captured for respondents' identified living location and top postcode results, compared with Art Month Sydney's 2021 and 2020 data.
The majority (72%) of respondents reported living in the City of Sydney Local Government Area and surrounds (an 18% increase compared to 2021), followed by those living in the Greater Sydney area (19%) (a 15% decrease compared to 2021). Respondents who were from interstate made up 5% of the total sample and those from elsewhere in NSW made up 3%. Less than 1% of respondents travelled from overseas.
Attendees travelled from all over Sydney and beyond to attend the Art Month Sydney 2022 program. Darlinghurst was the most commonly cited postcode (7%), followed by Tamarama (5.3%), Redfern (5.3%) and Marrickville (4.4%). These results are similar to the top postcode results from 2020 and 2021, with the greatest difference being seen for Potts Point (3% decrease since 2021).
Respondents were asked to indicate whether this was their first time attending Art Month Sydney or if they had attended in previous years. This allows organisers to assess the proportion of new and returning attendees to the 2022 program.
The majority (80%) of respondents indicated that they had attended Art Month Sydney in previous years, with the remaining 20% attending for the first time in 2022. This reflects a highly loyal and returning audience, while still demonstrating the ability to attract new audiences.
Respondents were asked to indicate how many events they attended as part of Art Month Sydney, and the different types of events they attended as part of the program. Responses can be seen distributed in the charts below.
Most public respondents (25%) attended two events across Art Month Sydney overall, followed by those who attended one event (20%) and three events (17%).
The most common event type attended by respondents was exhibition(s) (89%), followed by Art at Night (47%), artist talk(s) (30%), artist studio visit(s) (25%) and special event(s) (17%). The least commonly cited response was tour(s), making up 13% of the sample.
Public respondents were asked to answer several questions about their gallery experience while attending Art Month Sydney. Responses can be seen distributed on the charts below.
Just over half (51%) of respondents reported discovering a new gallery as part of Art Month Sydney, demonstrating the festival's ability to connect attendees with new spaces. Almost the entire sample of respondents (93%) indicated that they would return to an art gallery discovered as part of Art Month Sydney, an excellent result.
Just under half (46%) of respondents indicated that they would be likely to purchase artwork in the next six months, based on their experience of Art Month Sydney, further reflecting the program's ability to connect audiences with visual artists and influence the purchasing behaviour of attendees.
Survey respondents moved a slider to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the included dimension statements in relation to the festival. The following charts contain the response data for 'public' responses, showing the average result for each dimension.
The Culture Counts platform provides various methods to capture survey responses at minimal marginal cost. Achieving larger samples enables organisations to be more confident about the average results and that opinions of the survey respondents are representative of all attendees. The accompanying margin of error chart shows the expected differences for the associated dimension results calculated at a 95% confidence level.
All but one dimension received an average agreement rate of 72/100 or over, a very positive result for the program.
'Cultural Contribution' received the highest average agreement rate at 82/100, followed by 'Profile' (79/100). This indicates that respondents were most likely to agree that the festival provided an important addition to the cultural life of the area and that it raised the profile of the artists. This was followed by 'Access' and 'Inclusion' which both received average scores of 77/100. This indicates that respondents were also highly likely to agree that the festival gave them the opportunity to access cultural activities and made them feel welcome and included.
While still positive, 'Contemporary Art' received the lowest average score overall (67/100), indicating that respondents were least likely to agree that the festival made them feel more confident around contemporary art. This may be due to attracting audiences who were already comfortable and confident around contemporary visual art.
At a 95% confidence level, the margin of error for dimensions ranged from 3.1% to 3.8%. This means that we can be 95% confident that if we surveyed the entire visitor population, the average outcome for 'Profile' would fall within 3.1% of the average generated by the sample.
Culture Counts uses a slider input to measure responses for dimension statements as part of the evaluation methodology. This method also provides the capability to understand response results within a typical 5-point agree-to-disagree format.
The following chart shows the percentage of people that agreed or disagreed with each of the statements, using a 5-point ordinal Likert scale.
All of the dimensions measured except for 'Participation' and 'Contemporary Art' achieved levels of agreement of 85% or, an excellent result. Of all dimensions measured, 'Cultural Contribution' (91%), 'Profile' (90%) and 'Access' (88%) received the highest levels of overall agreement. This indicates that almost the entire sample of respondents agreed that the festival provided an important addition to the cultural life of the area, that it raised the profile of the artists and that it gave them the opportunity to access cultural activities.
'Contemporary Art' (73%) received the lowest level of overall agreement, while still a positive result, indicating that respondents were least likely to agree that the festival made them feel more confident around contemporary art.
Respondents were asked about their overall experience of attending Art Month Sydney 2022, with a choice of five options - Excellent, Good, Neutral, Poor and Terrible.
This chart shows the percentage of respondents that rated the festival across these five options.
The vast majority of respondents (91%) reported having a positive overall experience, an excellent result. Of this sample, 40% of respondents reported having an excellent experience and 51% reported their experience being good. 5% of respondents felt neutral about the festival and 3% of those surveyed found the experience to be poor. Less than 1% of respondents reported having a terrible experience.
Respondents were asked whether they would recommend Art Month Sydney 2022 to a friend or colleague. Respondents could choose a number from 0 to 10, with 0 meaning 'not at all likely' and 10 meaning 'extremely likely'.
These results can be used to calculate a Net Promoter Score (NPS). NPS is a standardised metric that seeks to measure loyalty between an organisation and its audience. Respondents with a score of 9 or 10 are considered 'Promoters'. 'Detractors' are those who respond with a score of 0 to 6. Scores of 7 and 8 are considered 'Passives'.
NPS is calculated by subtracting the percentage of respondents who are Detractors from the percentage of customers who are Promoters. This means that an overall Net Promoter Score can range between -100 to +100.
This chart shows the proportion of respondents that would or would not recommend Art Month Sydney, followed by the calculated NPS below.
51% of respondents scored either 9 or 10 indicating they would be classified as Promoters, 34% of respondents scored passive results (7 or 8) and 16% would be considered detractors (scoring between 0-6).
A NPS that is positive (i.e. higher than zero) is felt to be good, and an NPS of 50+ is excellent. Art Month Sydney's NPS of 35 shows a positive level of visitor loyalty and a reasonable likelihood of recommendations to friends and colleagues.
Respondents were asked to provide their age and gender as part of the survey. This data enables results to be filtered to understand any differences that exist because of demography.
The following charts highlight a selection of results based on the gender that respondents identified with as well as by age cohort.
The 30-39 age group gave the lowest average scores for all but one comparable dimension ('Access'), indicating that they were least likely to agree with the associated dimensions statements. The 50-59 and over 60 age groups scored similarly across the full range of dimensions.
There was not one single age group that consistently gave the highest score across all dimensions, suggesting that age influenced how respondents agreed with each dimension statement differently. Age had very little effect on the average scores for 'Profile' where the average score for each age group were all within (+1/100) of each other. This reflects that all age groups were highly likely to agree that the festival raised the profile of the artists involved. The greatest variation was seen for 'Curiosity' with those aged 30-39 scoring it 66/100 compared to those aged 40-59 who produced an average score of 81/100, suggesting age had a significant effect on the response to this statement. There were not enough responses from those aged 20-29 to draw comparative insights from.
Males and females gave similar average scores for six of the seven dimensions (all scores within +3/100 of each other). However, males scored 'Cultural Contribution' 87/100 compared to females giving it a score of 81/100, indicating a greater variance in responses to this statement between genders. The sample size for those who identified their gender in another way was not strong enough to enable a representative comparison.
Dimensions used in the evaluation were also measured during last year's festival. This consistent use of measurement allows organisers to benchmark their results and track progress in achieving strategic outcomes over time.
The dimension averages chart below compares the average response between 2020, 2021 and 2022.
The chart on the second tab compares the interquartile range of dimension responses. The interquartile chart represents the areas on the slider where most responses typically fell and the median result for each dimension (i.e. the most common response). Smaller ranges indicate similarity in agreement between respondents, whereas larger ranges indicate a wider spread of responses.
The average dimension scores in 2022 were equal to or slightly lower than the 2021 and 2020 scores. However, the differences were minimal, with no dimension receiving a score more than -6/100 lower than 2020 or 2021. The greatest decrease was seen for 'Contemporary Art', suggesting that this may be an area for improvement in the future. However, the large proportion of returning attendees indicates that the majority of respondents were already familiar with contemporary art prior to attending. 'Inclusion' received the same score as in 2020 and only reduced by -1/100 compared to 2021 suggesting respondents agreed with this statement to a similar degree in previous years.
Viewing the Interquartile Range chart shows that variance in response to each dimension has stayed consistent throughout 2020, 2021 and 2022. The largest interquartile ranges across all years were seen for 'Inclusion' and 'Participation', indicating the most variance in opinion from respondents when asked if the festival made them feel welcome and included and if the festival encouraged them to participate in community activities.
Respondents were asked to indicate how they first heard about Art Month Sydney with the ability to select from a dropdown list of options. This allows organisers to assess the effectiveness of various marketing methods. The chart below demonstrates the proportion of responses to each answer.
Respondents were asked to indicate if they could recall any of the sponsors from Art Month Sydney that they may have experienced while attending the festival in a multiple-choice question. The chart below demonstrates the proportion of responses for each sponsor.
Just under a third (30%) of the total sample indicated that they first heard about Art Month Sydney as they've always attended, 23% found out as someone told them about it and 22% found out through Instagram.
In relation to sponsors of the festival, almost all (95%) of respondents recalled 'City of Sydney', followed by 'Create NSW' (33%), 'KPMG' (17%) and 'AON' (13%).
Respondents were asked to leave any additional feedback about their experience at the Art Month Sydney. This feedback has been classified into positive, neutral or negative categories, with the percentage of feedback sentiment types presented in the following chart.
Feedback helps organisations understand where the value of visitor experiences lies and how they can be improved and strengthened in the future. A selection of comments are highlighted here:
"It's important that The Art Month Sydney and beyond keep alive for cultural inspiration not only for art lovers but for much wider community."
"I try to take part in as much as I can each Art Month, its something I and a lot of other artists look forward to. Its great to have artists in the spotlight, I hope it only gets bigger and stronger!"
"Excellent program!"
"An Excellent and enjoyable event."
"Art Month was unique in the way it brought together artists, gallerists, collectors and admirers in a way that I had never experienced before. I will certainly travel back to Sydney next year for your marvellous event. Bravo!"
"There was a great variety of exhibits on offer. I don't believe it was widely enough publicised though as lots of my friends were unaware."
"Great organisation this year! Visitors still asked for paper maps."
"More signage for the event and galleries participating."
"Maybe a longer viewing period."
"Art Month this year was difficult to navigate. We didn't hear much in regards to what was on and who was participating. People we asked also knew not much or nothing about what Art Month was offering."
"I love art month in sydney and especially art night! I noticed something this year when i did art night in Chippendale / Redfern = there was no last venue open late where all art nighters could gather? and that's a shame because it is not the same without it and you can exchange as much with people or feel that community spirit if we cannot gather somewhere? it will be great to keep that happening for each art night next year please!"
"Sydney is always a welcoming city to visit. This event is awesome."
"Loved the exhibitions- very interesting and inspiring."
"I try to take part in as much as I can each Art Month, its something I and a lot of other artists look forward to. Its great to have artists in the spotlight, I hope it only gets bigger and stronger!"
Spending questions ask survey respondents about how much they spent in the local area on items like shopping, food and beverage etc. as part of their attendance at the festival. Respondents were asked to exclude accommodation or other travel expenses as these are a separate part of the economic impact calculations.
Respondents are also asked what they would have done otherwise if it was not for their attendance at the festival. This question is used to determine 'additionality', which is the percentage of spending that could be considered to be additional, or could genuinely be attributed to the festival. Respondents were then asked if Art Month Sydney was an important factor in their decision to visit the City of Sydney Local Government Area and surrounds, with the results being displayed below.
The following charts show the attendee spending, stimulated spending and visitor additionally. Stimulated spending refers to spending from local residents that would not have occurred if not for the festival. Visitor additionally identifies spending from visitors where the festival was an important factor in their decision to visit the City of Sydney local area and surrounds.
The majority of respondents (83%) reported spending less than $200 per person at the festival and in the local area, with most people reporting to have spent between $50-$100 (36%) and $0-$50 (33%). This was followed by those who spent between $100-$150 (21%) and between $200-$250 (8%).
For any given event at the festival, the average spend per person was determined as $156. This includes spending in the local area directly before and after the event - for example, travel or dining.
Almost half (46%) of the sample would have stayed home or gone to work if they had not attended the festival and 37% of attendees would not have visited the area without the festival. The majority of the sample (63%) indicated that Art Month Sydney was one of the main reasons they visited the City of Sydney Local Government Area and surrounds.
Survey respondents who identified as living Intrastate (within NSW), Interstate or Overseas were asked additional questions about their spending and reasons for visiting. This data is used to determine the economic impact of the festival on tourism-related spending.
Respondents were asked whether the festival was an important factor in their decision to visit the City of Sydney Local Government Area and surrounds. Only tourism spending from visitors who indicated that it was were included in the economic impact calculations. The visitors who indicated they were were unaware of the festival before visiting were excluded.
There were not enough responses from overseas, interstate or tourists from elsewhere in NSW at Art Month Sydney 2022 to make a meaningful sample. For tourists from the Greater Sydney Area, 63% reported that Art Month Sydney was their primary reason for travel, with the remaining 37% indicating that they would have visited the City anyway.
Survey respondents were asked to estimate how much they had spent as part of their visit, whether the festival was an important factor in their decision to visit the area, as well as what they would have done if they had not attended. Combining this data with the overall festival attendance figure allows an overall impact figure to be generated.
Economic impact is determined by three main factors:
Attendance: The total number of unique attendees to the festival.
Spend: Spending at the event, in the local area, and on accommodation. Excludes spending on tickets or other items that would be captured through organisation expenditure.
Additionality: The percentage of spending that would not have occurred otherwise.
The tables below detail a breakdown of the event impact and accommodation & trip impact. The event impact is determined by event spend, additionally and the number of attendees. The accommodation & trip impact is determined by the accommodation spend, trip spend, additionally and number of nights stayed.
A summary table is then provided to indicate the total direct impact and, after the application of output multipliers derived from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), a multiplied impact. Multiplied impact refers to the broader economic contribution as a result of the festival.
| ORIGIN | EVENT SPEND | ADDITIONALITY | ATTENDEES | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| City of Sydney LGA | $108.33 | 49% | 16,403 | $866,259 |
| Greater Sydney Area | $92.31 | 63% | 4,233 | $246,789 |
| Elsewhere in NSW | $400 | 67% | 706 | $188,139 |
| Interstate/Overseas | $575 | 63% | 1,411 | $507,092 |
| TOTAL | 22,753 | $1,808,279 |
| ORIGIN | ACCOM SPEND/NIGHT | TRIP SPEND | ADDITIONALITY | NIGHTS | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| City of Sydney LGA | - | - | - | - | $0 |
| Greater Sydney Area | - | - | - | - | $0 |
| Elsewhere in NSW | $175 | $200 | 50% | 543 | $59,547 |
| Interstate/Overseas | $432 | $662.50 | 63% | 1,040 | $524,278 |
| TOTAL | 1,583 | $583,825 |
| DIRECT IMPACT | MULTIPLIED IMPACT | |
|---|---|---|
| Total Nights Generated | 1,138 | |
| Attendee Spending | $2,392,103 | $6,913,209 |
| Event | $1,808,279 | $5,280,173 |
| Accommodation | $421,955 | $1,160,376 |
| Trip | $161,870 | $472,660 |
| Organiser Expenditure | $125,000 | $251,250 |
| Total Impact | $2,517,103 | $7,164,459 |
| Direct Attendee Impact | $2,392,103 |
| Organiser Expenditure | $125,000 |
| Return on Investment | 19.1 |
Note: For the purpose of this analysis, output multipliers derived from ABS Output Tables 2012-13 have been applied to direct impact expenditure.
Event expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.96, the national Food and Beverage multiplier (2.96).
Accommodation expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.75, the national Accommodation multiplier.
Trip expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.92, representing an average of national Retail and, Food and Beverage multipliers (2.88 and 2.96 respectively).
Organisation expenditure scaled by the Australian National Heritage, Creative and Performing Arts Output Multiplier (2.01).
This report has been prepared by Rosie Tooby and Jack Midalia of Culture Counts. The authors would like to thank all stakeholders and staff for their participation in this research.
Approved by: Laura Doyle
Date of Approval: 30 May 2022
We respectfully acknowledge the Traditional Owners of Country throughout Australia and recognise the continuing connection to lands, waters and communities. We pay our respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures; and to Elders past and present.