Same Same, and Different: Documenting the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress

From 18 to 22 May, Singapore hosted the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress alongside the AFA programme, bringing a burst of global perspectives to the city’s performing arts scene. The International Society of Performing Arts (ISPA) is a global network that convenes practitioners at two annual congresses, while the Anthony Field Academy (AFA) programme supports local arts communities alongside ISPA’s international gatherings. Over 477 delegates from 43 regions attended, creating opportunities for exchange across diverse artistic and geographical contexts. 

Throughout the Congress, the Centre 42 team attended a range of sessions, roundtables, talks, and performances featuring leading voices from across the performing arts sector. This report documents some of the conversations, ideas, and exchanges that emerged over the week, highlighting key takeaways and insights from the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress. 

For the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress, Centre 42 was commissioned by the National Arts Council to manage an invited ASEAN delegation comprising 65 performing arts practitioners from 10 ASEAN member countries, excluding Singapore (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Vietnam). Throughout the Congress, delegates participated in the main programme, with 30 of them also taking part in the AFA. Beyond supporting their participation, the delegation programme created opportunities for practitioners from across the region to connect, exchange ideas, and build relationships across borders.

The journey began with the Welcome Dessert on 18 May 2026, which brought the 65 delegates together ahead of the Congress and offered an opportunity to meet fellow practitioners from across ASEAN. 

Throughout the week, informal moments, including accompanied travel between venues and conversations beyond the scheduled sessions, allowed these connections to deepen organically. The Congress concluded with Kopi Klatch, where delegates shared their local arts ecosystems through country booths and exchanged stories, practices, and cultural perspectives in a celebratory regional gathering. 

Alongside Centre 42's documentation of the Congress, selected delegates were invited to contribute situated reflections on specific sessions, capturing the multiplicity of perspectives and practices represented. These reflections are woven throughout the report as part of our key takeaways and insights from the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress.

AFA PROVOCATION: Why is Arts & Culture so critical to this transformation?

For the first session that opened the AFA talks, we heard from two speakers as part of the AFA Provocation on "Why is Arts & Culture so critical to this transformation?", each offering distinct but intersecting perspectives on culture, sustainability, and lived practice.

The first speaker, Louis Kwok Lit Yu, Founder and Executive Director of the Hong Kong Culture and Sustainability Centre, drew on over three decades of experience working in Hong Kong’s cultural sector, spanning arts administration, venue development, and festival leadership. He situated his current work within a longer inquiry that began with his talk, How to Culture a City. In it, he questioned how culture is defined, circulated, and made meaningful within urban systems. Those questions became increasingly central to his practice and, in 2019, he left institutional roles to focus more explicitly on the relationship between culture and sustainability. This shift reflected his belief that culture cannot be confined to a sector, but is something far more expansive and embedded in everyday life.

He described culture as a circulating system made up of belief, value, daily practice, memory, and tradition - constantly shaping and reshaping society across generations. From this perspective, he noted that culture is shaped by overlapping conditions including geography, political systems, economics, technology, and the natural environment, pointing out that climate change is already reshaping lived realities, particularly in Hong Kong.

Kwok also highlighted a gap in dominant sustainability frameworks such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals, where culture remains largely absent despite shaping how environmental, social, and economic dimensions are understood. In response, he proposed a framework linking culture and sustainability through four interlinked dimensions: advocacy, practice, conservation, and culture itself. Advocacy refers to using cultural platforms to engage with sustainability discourse; practice to how cultural work is produced responsibly; and conservation not just as preservation, but as sustaining the social relationships and fabrics that hold communities together.

Alongside this, he reflected on the relational infrastructure behind his work, describing more than 200 informal conversations over the past two years with artists, educators, environmental practitioners, and scientists. A recurring insight from these exchanges was how rarely these groups actually encounter one another in meaningful ways. What began as these informal conversations over coffee eventually grew into the Hong Kong Culture and Sustainability Conference. This was an initiative that emerged less from formal funding structures, and more from accumulated relationships and shared intent across sectors.

He concluded by returning to the central provocation of the session: that culture is not peripheral to sustainability but fundamental to it; operating both as an instrument and as an ultimate objective.

The second speaker, Dr. Letila Mitchell, artist, director, and founder of Rako Pasefika, grounded her intervention in Indigenous Oceanic knowledge systems and lived cultural practice across the Pacific. She positioned herself not as a knowledge holder, but as an artist and enabler of creative practice, emphasising access, community, and relational responsibility as central to her work. Speaking across multiple geographies, she reflected on scale and place, contrasting Pacific island contexts with Singapore to open up questions about density, movement, and how environments shape cultural life in different ways.

She described sustainability in Pacific contexts not as a future aspiration, but as an inherited, everyday practice rooted in reciprocity with land and ocean. At the same time, she highlighted the tension created by imposed development models that prioritise extraction, speed, and growth, which is often in conflict with Indigenous ways of living. A central concern in her reflection was the visible impact of climate instability on everyday life. She spoke about stronger storms, shifting seasons, and disrupted food cycles, noting how "we have no idea when the mangoes are out, when they’re not," grounding climate change in lived, sensory experience rather than abstract data.

She also pointed to increasing urban migration and cultural disconnection among younger generations moving away from village life into dense urban environments. In response, she described artists as active agents of memory and critique, "documenting change, holding memory, questioning systems that are being imposed upon us." 

In her practice with Rako Pasefika, process is prioritised over outcome. Work is developed through land-based practice, community engagement, and intergenerational collaboration, often involving elders, custodians, and young people working together. "We don’t separate ourselves from people or from our place," she explained, framing this as embodied sustainability rather than concept.

She also shared an example from a performance developed during bushfire season in Australia, where the team paused production to sit with local custodians and re-negotiate how the work could continue safely and respectfully within the land, rather than proceeding in spite of environmental conditions. This pause, she suggested, was not an interruption but part of the work itself, and an act of listening and accountability to place.

Across her reflection, Mitchell returned to relational responsibility as the core of sustainability: how people care for land, materials, and each other through everyday creative practice. This extends into decisions around material use, reuse, and sourcing, which are embedded rather than treated as add-ons. She also highlighted cultural gatherings such as the Festival of Pacific Arts as living spaces of continuity, where language, dress, and knowledge systems are actively practiced and renewed across generations. In closing, she returned to the idea of 'the spark'; small acts that accumulate into larger shifts over time, especially for young people navigating uncertainty and change.

Taken together, both speakers offered complementary articulations of sustainability as fundamentally cultural. Kwok foregrounded systemic gaps and cross-sector relationality, while Mitchell grounded sustainability in Indigenous epistemologies and embodied, land-based practice. Across both, culture emerged not as an adjunct to sustainability, but as its underlying structure and how it is lived and continually reimagined.

AFA ROUNDTABLE 1: Looking after ourselves and each other: Human sustainability & Care

Artists, practitioners and creatives form the backbone of every arts industry. To build a thriving ecosystem, how can we better care for the needs of our arts workers? Shifting the conversation from structural reform to human-centred welfare, the first roundtable of the day was moderated by director and dramaturg Chong Gua Khee, delving into what it means to cultivate an internal culture of sustainability for the positive wellbeing of artists and their collaborators. Rosie McGowan, a freelance applied theatre practitioner, facilitator and educator, drew on her personal struggles and experiences working with mental health to spotlight the importance of building strong, empathetic communities of support. Leah Manaema Avene, who is a musician, therapist, researcher and educator, also spoke about creating spaces that welcome vulnerability and open communication, as well as modelling a sense of dignity for younger generations. While resisting the pressures of productivity and output remains a challenge for contemporary society, this session highlighted a need to reshape unhealthy notions surrounding work and self-care in the arts, advocating for greater caregiving resources and institutional support. 

The following reflection was contributed by Yon Sokhorn, the Director of Cambodian Living Arts (CLA), an organisation that supports artists and organisations across all art forms. She regularly represents CLA at various international and regional festivals, forums, and performing arts markets. With experience in strengthening and developing the broader arts sector, her reflection presents insights into ongoing concerns regarding the sustainability of arts workers today.

"The roundtable Looking after ourselves and each other: Human Sustainability & Care stayed with me because it expanded the meaning of sustainability beyond institutions, funding, or environmental discourse, and redirected the conversation toward people, emotions, and relationships. In the arts sector, sustainability is often discussed through organisational survival or productivity. However, this session asked a more difficult question: how do artists and cultural workers remain emotionally and physically sustainable within systems that constantly demand output?

One idea that resonated with me strongly was the reminder that care is not always soft or comforting. The moderator challenged the tendency to romanticise care as something 'fluffy', instead describing it as something that can involve difficult conversations, boundaries, and saying no. I found this particularly relevant because many arts ecosystems normalise exhaustion as proof of passion and commitment. In this discussion, care was framed not as comfort alone, but also as honesty and refusal.

Rosie’s reflections on emotional support within theatre-making and educational spaces deeply resonated with me. She described the emotional difficulty of balancing teaching, facilitation, and artistic creation while personally struggling with mental exhaustion. What stayed with me most was her observation that there is often little emotional support within arts-making spaces, especially for practitioners who move between multiple forms of labor simply to survive financially. This reality feels very familiar within Southeast Asia, including Cambodia, where artists frequently hold several jobs while institutional structures often struggle to fully account for emotional well-being as part of working conditions.

What I appreciated was that Rosie spoke about care not only as theory, but as practice. Her creation of the Performers’ Emotional Support Group and later Intermission demonstrated that care requires continuity and infrastructure, not simply awareness. Participants repeatedly expressed the need for these spaces to continue, showing that artists are not lacking conversations about well-being, but rather sustained systems of support. This challenged me to reflect on how often arts organisations speak about artist care rhetorically while still prioritizing deadlines, visibility, and production over longer-term conditions that allow people to remain well.

Leah’s contribution expanded the conversation further by connecting care to land, climate, and embodiment. Her reflections on Tuvalu, a place threatened by climate change, transformed sustainability from an abstract concept into something deeply personal and existential. I was particularly moved by her description of the body as an extension of land: both warming, inflamed, and shaped by systems of extraction. This metaphor connected ecological destruction with emotional and bodily exhaustion in a powerful way.

I was also struck by her framing of artistic practice as a form of medicine-making. She spoke about artists constantly creating healing experiences for others while rarely having the opportunity to “partake in their own medicine.” This exposed an important contradiction within cultural work. Artists are expected to generate emotional and communal value while often lacking the time or resources to care for themselves. Her reflections on weaving, storytelling, and imagining future worlds also challenged dominant productivity-driven ideas of sustainability. Instead of emphasising efficiency, she emphasised slowness, embodiment, and intergenerational care.

Another important moment emerged when an audience member questioned why care is often justified only because it improves productivity. This exposed how deeply productivity culture remains embedded even within conversations about wellness. Rosie acknowledged how instinctive it is to measure care through usefulness or output, yet she also suggested that choosing to care for ourselves can already be a form of resistance against systems that define human value through constant production.

This part of the discussion strongly resonated with me because it reflects tensions I sometimes observe within arts organisations and cultural management. There is often an organic, though not always intentional, pressure to continuously produce programs, reports, and measurable outcomes, even when teams are already exhausted. This pressure feels less like a single cause and more like a system of expectations shaped by funding structures, visibility demands, and internalised professional norms. Within this context, sustainability becomes contradictory: institutions speak about care while simultaneously operating within conditions that can still reproduce burnout. The session made me reflect on how difficult it is to genuinely practice human sustainability within systems shaped by urgency, visibility, and constant production.

The discussion on accessibility was equally meaningful because it reframed accessibility not as a checklist, but as a relational practice. Leah emphasised that accessibility begins by asking communities directly what care and inclusion look like for them. Rather than aiming for perfection, she advocated for transparency, humility, curiosity, and dialogue. I appreciated this perspective because many smaller arts organisations often feel overwhelmed by the pressure to "get accessibility right" despite limited resources and uneven capacities.

Toward the end of the session, Leah said, "It’s really hard to say I need you and I love you." This simple statement stayed with me because it revealed how individualistic professional and artistic environments have become. Throughout the discussion, both speakers emphasised that sustainability is relational. We sustain each other through transparency, compassion, boundaries, and community.

In the Cambodian context, this conversation felt especially relevant. The arts sector still relies heavily on informal labor, emotional commitment, and personal sacrifice. Many artists and cultural workers navigate unstable funding systems while carrying multiple responsibilities. This roundtable therefore felt significant not only as reflection, but also as a challenge to rethink what sustainability truly means within cultural work.

Ultimately, the session reminded me that sustainability cannot only refer to the continuation of projects or institutions. It must also refer to whether the people within these systems are able to remain emotionally, physically, and relationally alive."

AFA FLASH TALK: The Theatre Green Book in Asia Pacific

Styled as a ‘flash talk’, this uniquely-structured presentation gave seven speakers the opportunity to briefly share about their approaches to adapting the Theatre Green Book. An initiative by Renew Culture in the United Kingdom (UK), the Theatre Green Book is a freely accessible resource which provides theatre practitioners and organisations with practical, actionable steps to prioritise environmental sustainability in their processes. Many different considerations went into the adaptation of the Theatre Green Book within the Asia Pacific. 

Several of the speakers spoke to the fact that the original Theatre Green Book was crafted in English, specifically with the UK in mind. Merita Huang, Assistant Professor at the Taipei National University of the Arts in Taiwan, brought up the issue of translation as a key concern - not just in terms of language, but in terms of contextualisation and localisation. As pointed out by Shridar Mani, an independent producer from Singapore and a part of the core team which adapted the local edition of the Theatre Green Book, the challenges, processes, available resources, and sociopolitical realities in the UK are vastly different from those in the countries from which the speakers hail (Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Australia, Japan, and South Korea). Any local adaptation of this resource thus needs to recognise and work within these constraints to be relevant and useful. 

The speakers also discussed the wider artistic and political contexts in which the task of adaptation exists, and how they can impact the adaptation process. Both Jisun Park, Co-Founder of Producer Group DOT, based in South Korea, and Hiroko Oshima, the Stage Designer, Researcher, and Co-Director of Image Nation Green Japan, brought up the challenges they faced in light of a lack of time, manpower, government support, and consistent funding. All of these challenges impact the timeline and continuity of the adaptation initiatives in South Korea and Japan. 

Some speakers also used the Theatre Green Book as a jumping-off point to discuss the broader issue of environmental sustainability. Both Prof. Anna CY Chan, Director of the Hong Kong Academy of Performing Arts (HKAPA), and Joey Cheng, Producer and Production Manager at The Theatre Practice (TTP), a Singapore theatre company, shared how sustainability is built into their organisations’ workflows. In HKAPA, sustainability is embedded into the curriculum, with the intention of shaping the next generation of practitioners to understand and embed sustainability into their practices as well. In TTP, it has been built into the company’s ethos for a very long time, even if it was not described as such, and has become more formalised over the past decade as our understanding of the concept has come to the fore. Chris Mercer, the co-author of the Theatre Green Book (Australia), also spoke about viewing sustainability and environment beyond a human-centred lens, shifting towards the perception of the environment as a living system, as understood by the indigenous communities in Australia. It is possible to think bigger than ‘reducing waste’ and ‘carbon management’ - rather, we strengthen relationships between people and land by developing a long-term relationship with sustainability. The Theatre Green Book should not be viewed as a definitive resource that will solve all environmental sustainability issues in theatre production, but as another step that we can take to viewing sustainability as a long-term mindset, rather than a short-term goal.

The following reflection was contributed by Wyn Hee, a Malaysian independent producer, creative programmer, and venue management consultant. She has served as Programme Director of the Klang River Festival, a multidisciplinary, community-driven initiative that connects art, ecology, and public space, and has also co-founded Stagebox, a company which aims to develop sustainable systems and training for arts venue management. Concerns regarding the complicated and multifaceted nature of sustainability in the arts are a major part of her practice, resonating with the discussions inspired by the Theatre Green Book. 

“The AFA FLASH TALK: The Theatre Green Book in Asia Pacific made a strong first impression on me because it felt highly relevant to the current environmental situation we are facing today. The discussion about environmental consciousness and sustainability reflected many of the concerns that society now faces on a daily basis. It also resonated deeply with the work I am currently involved in through the Klang River Festival project. Within the festival, we have been actively promoting conscious waste reduction and sustainable waste management practices with the aim of improving the Klang River’s water quality and biodiversity. The project collaborates closely with organisations and communities that share similar environmental goals, which are also growing rapidly by demand, including Zero Waste Malaysia, Kongsi Co-op, Free Tree Society, and many others. Because of this involvement, many of the ideas presented during the talk felt familiar, and highly applicable to the kind of work we are already trying to achieve.

I appreciated the approach that Professor Anna CY Chan from the Hong Kong Academy of Performing Arts has taken through the Theatre Green Book initiative. Humanity is currently living through an unprecedented climate crisis, and many people are still in the process of understanding the seriousness and long-term consequences of environmental damage. In this context, education plays an important role in shaping future generations to become more environmentally aware and responsible. I believe that introducing sustainability practices and environmental awareness to younger generations is one of the most effective ways to create long-term change. Therefore, the Theatre Green Book is not only a guideline for sustainable production, but also an educational tool that can help influence future practices within the arts and creative industries.

Another aspect that stood out to me was the variety of presentations from different countries within the arts industry. Seeing how each organisation adapted and implemented the Theatre Green Book according to its own circumstances helped me better understand the flexibility of the framework. It demonstrated that sustainability practices do not need to follow one fixed method, but can instead be adjusted based on the needs, limitations, and capabilities of different countries. This was particularly meaningful to me because the arts industry in Malaysia is still relatively underdeveloped and fragmented in many ways. Productions are often limited by tight budgets and restricted resources, which forces creative teams to work on creative solutions by recycling, renting, minimising, or scaling down props, costumes, and set designs. In some ways, these practices already align with some of the Theatre Green Book’s sustainability principles. For this reason, I believe The Theatre Green Book could serve as a useful guideline for Malaysian production teams that want to implement more environmentally friendly practices in a structured and practical way.

However, I also recognise that there may be challenges in applying these practices consistently, especially for older venues or organisations that may lack the resources, infrastructure, or funding to transition smoothly into sustainable operations. The process may require additional time, financial investment, and changes in mindset. 

For the artists, my only concern is whether stricter sustainability guidelines could potentially limit artistic creativity and freedom. For example, one of our alternative rock music performances involves the burning of effigies as part of the artistic expression and storytelling. If productions are required to strictly follow the Theatre Green Book’s principles, would performances like this eventually become restricted or no longer acceptable? I think this raises an important discussion about finding a balance between environmental responsibility and artistic expression.

Before attending the Anthony Field Academy, I had doubts about the purpose and identity of the Klang River Festival project. We were often being questioned whether it is an environmental festival or an arts festival? As a creative programmer, how can I programme a festival that will complement both themes without one servicing another? This flash talk session has brought clarity and helped me better understand how environmental awareness and artistic practice can coexist without sacrificing one or another.  

To conclude, I am genuinely interested in learning more about the Theatre Green Book and exploring how its principles can be applied within my own work and community. I also plan to share the Theatre Green Book (Singapore) with my team members and peers, as its context is more relevant to the Malaysian performing arts sector, so that we can continue discussing and exploring sustainable practices together.” 

AFA Bring Your Own Meeting (BYOM) Session 1, 2, & 3

The AFA Bring Your Own Meeting (BYOM) series on Day 1 comprised three meeting sessions held throughout the day. Prior to the Academy, an open call invited delegates to propose and convene discussions on topics related to the Academy's theme. Selected proposals were then presented during the BYOM sessions, with five participant-led discussions taking place simultaneously in each session across venues including the 42 Waterloo Street Rehearsal Studio, 42 Waterloo Street Black Box, and meeting rooms at The Theatre Practice. The Centre 42 team attended two of the five meetings in each session. 

Session #1: Sustainability & the Independent Producer

Sustainability & the Independent Producer, hosted by Singapore-based independent producer Shridar Mani, invited participants to collectively reflect on what sustainability means within independent cultural practice. Framed as an open discussion, Mani shared insights from implementing sustainability measures in a recent production alongside Singapore’s Green Book initiative, noting that for independent producers sustainability often requires prioritisation rather than perfection. With limited resources, practitioners must identify achievable actions, such as reusing existing furniture, sourcing second-hand costumes, reducing single-use materials, and experimenting with alternative production methods. He also emphasised communication, planning, and collaboration, illustrated by an example of a reinforced table found unused in Esplanade storage for six years - highlighting how institutional memory can surface existing sustainable solutions.

The discussion expanded beyond environmental considerations to include labour, care, and knowledge-sharing. Participants reflected on the cognitive and emotional labour carried by independent producers, raising the importance of mentorship, support networks, and making tacit knowledge more accessible across the sector. Many also noted that sustainable practices - such as reuse, resource-sharing, and community collaboration - often emerge out of necessity rather than formal frameworks. By the end of the session, sustainability was understood less as a fixed set of practices than as a relational and collective process grounded in resourcefulness and shared knowledge.

Session #1: What Sustains the Work When Funding Doesn’t?

What Sustains the Work When Funding Doesn’t? was led by Saatvika Kantamneni, a theatre producer based in India with a focus on touring and capacity-building. She opened the session with a quick introduction to arts funding structures in India, highlighting a lack of government funding and specific spaces carved out for housing and presenting performing arts works, leading to the majority of productions being independently funded. Following this introduction, attendees were divided into four groups. Each group was given a question related to the complex relationship between funding and creation, and most of the session was spent in discussion before coming back together at the end to share each group’s thoughts and findings with the rest of the room.

Group 1’s assigned question was: In your own practice, what sustains your work beyond funding? They noted that it comes down to a strong belief in what they do - in the importance of the art form they practice; in the creation of safe spaces; and in the crucial need to keep culture alive through their work. They also discussed concerns regarding the sustainability of such a mindset - when does it become ‘too much’?

Group 2’s assigned question was: What informal systems do you rely on to create your work? They shared about different examples of knowledge-sharing, resource-sharing, and cross-pollination, with connections being made between individuals and groups when they share similar perspectives and priorities in the creation of work. 

Group 3’s assigned question was: What do you think well-funded/resourced organisations might overlook? They discussed the possibility of younger practitioners with less extensive portfolios being passed over in favour of better-known ones, taking away potential opportunities, as well as issues of miscommunication and an unbalanced power dynamic between funders and artists. 

Group 4’s assigned question was: What becomes possible in low-resource environments that might not be in high-resource ones? They suggested the increased possibility of prominence in one’s field (due to the lack of other experts), being more creative in one’s process (out of necessity), and more flexibility in finding partners and collaborators, with the possibility of working with more unconventional individuals and groups. Group 4 also pointed out that ‘low-resource’ is a very broad term, and that sometimes an environment that appears to be ‘low-resource’ is not ‘low’ on all resources (perhaps low on financial resources, but high on cultural resources, for example). 

Session #2: Alone, Together: Sustaining the Lonely Dramaturg

As part of the second BYOM session, Alone, Together: Sustaining the Lonely Dramaturg was hosted by Singapore-based writer, researcher, and performance practitioner Corrie Tan. The gathering brought together participants from the arts community to reflect on sustainability through care, solidarity, and the often invisible labour that sustains artistic processes.  Drawing on conversations from the Asian Dramaturgs' Network and its ongoing project Continental Drift: Cross-Border Sustainabilities and Solidarities, the session expanded sustainability beyond environmental concerns to consider how arts workers sustain themselves, their communities, and their practices over time. Speakers reflected on the loneliness of intermediary roles such as dramaturgy, translation, producing, and facilitation, which often involve navigating between people, ideas, and institutions while remaining largely unseen.

The discussion emphasised shared responsibility and support systems, with examples ranging from a Slovenian youth theatre programme that distributed care across mentors, facilitators, and a psychotherapist, to reflections on mediation, power dynamics, and long-term advocacy work in shifting contexts. Rather than locating care in individuals, participants highlighted communities of practice, knowledge-sharing, and mutual support networks. Sustainability emerged less as endurance and more as reciprocity, shaped by conditions that allow care, knowledge, and responsibility to be distributed across a wider collective.

Session #2: From Constraint to Capacity: An Exploration of Sustainability through Social Presencing Theatre

Led by Sornchai “Sonny” Chatwiriyachai, a Thai theatre practitioner, actor, and director whose work intertwines performance and social change, From Constraint to Capacity: An Exploration of Sustainability through Social Presencing Theatre explored the hierarchies of power surrounding limited arts resources and opportunities. Focusing on building and understanding a sustainable arts ecosystem, participants were invited to share about their personal challenges with straining arts infrastructures. Drawing upon elements of forum theatre and social presencing theatre, participants then formed various tableaus based on the chosen scenario of an arts collective losing their performance space, adopting identities of different stakeholders such as the local city council, national government or a marginalised community. Throughout the guided activity, participants were encouraged to contemplate the distribution of power within that specific context, and consider emerging possibilities for change. 

The interactive physical embodiment of differing perspectives revealed how paving the road to sustainability relies on a collective commitment, from arts and non-arts entities alike. Within an interconnected society where a diverse range of wants and needs co-exist, compassion and a keen sense of responsibility become essential to navigating conflict resolutions and trade-offs. The session highlighted that achieving a sustainable future in the arts requires consistent negotiation and community effort. 

Session #3: Artists / Workers / Arts Workers: Should We Be Unionising?

The third session in the BYOM series featured the meeting Artists / Workers / Arts Workers: Should We Be Unionising?, hosted by Gabriela Green Olea, a Western Sydney-based dance and community artist, activist, and creative producer. Drawing from her own experiences and family history of political exile and activism, Gabriela invited participants to reflect on questions of labour, solidarity, and collective action within the arts. It explored whether artists should be understood as workers, and how collective organising is forming amid global pressures such as censorship, climate collapse, precarity, and rising costs of living, alongside questions of whether unionism in the arts is strengthening or fragmenting.

Participants highlighted the uneven, context-specific nature of union structures, from formalised systems in places like Denmark to more hybrid or indirect models in Singapore and Cambodia shaped by legal and institutional constraints. Many noted that artists often occupy multiple roles that fall outside standard labour classifications, creating gaps in protection, particularly during crises like COVID-19. The discussion ultimately shifted toward rethinking unionism beyond formal institutions, focusing instead on solidarity, informal networks, and transnational collective voice as evolving forms of support.

Session #3: Between Cancellation and Complicity

Between Cancellation and Complicity was hosted by Berlin-based artist Ming Poon, who specialises in applied choreography. He invited various participants to share about their challenges and struggles with navigating political censorship in their respective practices. From tackling self-censorship in programming to managing tensions with stakeholders, the personal experiences disclosed by the participants spotlighted escalating political pressures on artistic expression within a highly volatile global context. The uneasy question of accepting much-needed funding and support from politically contentious sources surfaced as a common dilemma amongst the participants. Following the enthusiastic discussion, participants reflected on the crucial changes and improvements they envisioned for the future, vocalising their hopes for stronger protections for creative voices.  

The session sparked conversations about building transparency, authenticity and flexible thinking in working with stakeholders with opposing political views. Challenging the idea of neutrality in arts processes and operations, participants demonstrated an urgent desire for value-alignment and nuanced conflict resolutions within artistic collaborations. Yet as practitioners and organisations are increasingly subject to political scrutiny and restrictive art-making stipulations, certain forms of compliance become critical to their survival. Sustainability therefore surfaces as an urgent pre-condition, rather than an afterthought. Where the longevity and integrity of art-making practices are concerned, sustainable thinking and problem-solving are fundamental tools to ensure the long-term welfare of both the art and the artist. 

AFA ROUNDTABLE 2: Building coalitions and alliances 

This roundtable assembled six speakers from various arts organisations, festivals and collectives to discuss how sustainable infrastructures can be cultivated through partnerships and community engagement. Moderated by Siree Riewpaiboon (BIPAM, Thailand), the session discussed the different strategies utilised for stakeholder management; including applying cultural wisdom to practical considerations, practising relationality and ensuring long-term value alignment.

The panel featured Eric Ch'ng (Pangkor Island Festival, Malaysia), Kuo Jian Hong (The Theatre Practice, Singapore), Nikan Wasinondh (Wonderfruit, Thailand), Catherine Jones and Angharad Wynne-Jones (Creative Climate, Australia). The speakers underlined a need for malleability, openness to feedback and trust within an interconnected society. Going beyond inclusive programming and redistributing resources, sustainable practice was understood as the embodiment of shared, deep empathy and mutual desire for positive social transformation.

The following reflection titled When an Alliance Goes Sour, What’s Left was contributed by Rebecca Kezia, a Jakarta-based curator, dramaturg, playwright and performing arts producer. She is the co-initiator of Indonesia Performing Arts Producer Network (a forum-based network that gathers and elevates Indonesian performing arts producers) and also the guest curator for Jakarta International Contemporary Dance Festival (JICON). Her work involves consolidating and fostering a dynamic network of local arts expertise, aligning with the ideas and values expressed in the roundtable. 

"What happens when an artistic alliance shifts from being supportive to being extractive, damaging the very purpose of our movement? The question emerged from a reflection prompted by Daeng Rate - an artist and activist from Makassar - at Roundtable 2 of the Anthony Field Academy session. Addressed to panelists speaking from the contexts of The Theatre Practice, Wonderfruit, Creative Climate, and the Pangkor Island Festival, the question lingered long after the forum itself had ended.

Daeng Rate’s question was never fully answered—perhaps because of time limitations, or perhaps because such a question cannot truly be resolved in a single sitting. Yet the interruption mattered. It unsettled the idealised narrative so often used to imagine coalitions and alliances. From the stories shared by the panelists, alliances clearly function as effective mechanisms for cultivating collective consciousness and sustaining an entity, an ecology, and a shared space of life. Still, I want to propose another lens through which these alliances may be viewed: the moment when a coalition ceases to be an ideal space and instead rebounds as a boomerang against the very movement it once sought to protect - often as a consequence of pragmatic compromise.

When initiatives such as the Pangkor Island Festival or Creative Climate formed alliances with local communities and other actors within their ecosystems, the principles agreed upon at the outset were continuously tested by time. At such a point, an alliance cannot merely function as a space of compromise; it must also contain an internal mechanism of interruption - an ability to intervene when one of its constituent forces begins to endanger the initiative’s original intention. The same dynamic can be observed within Wonderfruit. The expansion of scale, interaction, and capital within the festival must continually be matched by discipline in safeguarding its foundational values. Perhaps work of this nature requires a kind of ethical measure: a way of recognising when an alliance must pause, reevaluate itself, or even undergo structural transformation in order to preserve the harmonious relations that form the central consciousness of collective cultural work.

A similar tension appears in the repositioning of values within The Theatre Practice. As reflected in their presentation, the emergence of an awareness linking cultural labor to ecological sustainability transformed what had once been merely pragmatic domestic practices into a new ethical framework. The challenge was no longer simply technical - about selecting collaborators or partners - but epistemological. It produced a contested act and discourse with the group’s own traditional foundations. This new awareness functioned as a critical interruption: compelling the collective to reexamine inherited values and communal habits that may have become obsolete, or even ecologically destructive, despite once serving as the adhesive of identity itself.

What emerges from these cases is the understanding that the success of an alliance rests within a constantly shifting relationship between intention, objective, and method. Every cultural initiative therefore requires a mitigation strategy capable of responding to shifts in value and orientation.  Reflecting on several initiatives I have personally been involved in, I have come to realize that the aims of a coalition are never singular nor fixed. Recognizing this from the outset may be one of the few ways arts collectives can avoid becoming trapped within the gilded cage of funding structures or the pragmatism of alliances. At the same time, every collaborative effort still requires a core alliance—an ideological anchor willing to remain vulnerable to critique, including critique of its own practices. To keep such a structure flexible, it may be necessary to distinguish between the inner alliance that safeguards values and the broader alliance that sustains collective reach.

Yet when we speak of coalitions and alliances as instruments for ensuring sustainability, perhaps what must first be questioned is the meaning of sustainability itself. Too often, sustainability is understood through the logic of capital and linear progress: to expand endlessly, to scale, to preserve continuity through perpetual growth and reinvention. Within such a framework, relations risk being reduced into utility, while ecosystems, communities, and even cultural practices are treated merely as resources to be managed.

Artistic practice may offer another possibility. Sustainability, in this sense, is not simply the endurance of an institution or the survival of a program, but the capacity to dwell responsibly within a web of relations - between humans, ecologies, memories, labor, and the unseen structures that shape collective life. Its measure is not growth alone, but the ability to remain attentive to imbalance, rupture, and ethical consequence. From this perspective, stopping should not immediately be understood as failure or surrender. In this sense, interruption becomes not the collapse of an alliance, but a necessary gesture of care."

AFA ROUNDTABLE 3: Traditional Knowledge & Cosmologies

Starting off the second day of AFA talks, the third roundtable explored the intersections between ecological knowledge, embodied rituals and storytelling. Moderated by Dr. Letila Mitchell (Rako Pasefika, Fiji), this session examines the application of ancestral wisdom as sustainable practice through the artistic endeavours of three speakers; Dr. Jen Rae (Creative Climate and Centre for Reworlding, Australia), Zarina Muhammad (Artist, Singapore) and Sreymao Sao (Artist, Cambodia).

The roundtable began with the first speaker, Dr. Jen Rae, whose work focuses on working towards intergenerational justice and supporting dynamic transdisciplinary collaborations. Acknowledging the uncertainties of grappling with a volatile world operating at unprecedented levels of speed, scale and scope, she shared how the Centre for Reworlding situates itself in deep relational practice by applying indigenous ways of thinking to alleviate the colonial crisis of climate change. 

She described the Centre for Reworlding as a network map to honour the relationships between people, projects and organisations, thus responding to the divisive and constrictive effects of colonialism. Grounding their practice in deliberate structured improvisation that welcomes experimentation, she placed emphasis on resource-sharing and building an adaptive infrastructure of knowledge. Noting that we are currently living in the age of data and information, she also discussed the importance of enforcing personal autonomy and ownership over how one’s intellectual property is utilised and represented online. Her work expands the leadership capacity of the arts and culture sector, illustrating how intersectional collaborative approaches can contribute to climate disaster risk-reduction strategies and foster long-term creative resilience.      

Zarina Muhammad, the second speaker, similarly questioned the ways we construct, accumulate and interpret knowledge in her own practice. An artist, educator and researcher whose projects engage coastal and intertidal landscapes as phenomenological sites of memory, her works seek to reshape conventional frameworks of thinking through field-based inquiry and material experimentation. 

Resisting the assumption that knowledge can only be contained and translated via verbal or textual means, Zarina spoke about how it can be embedded in movement, space and sensorial experiences. Drawing on the unique value of situated knowledge, she underlined that “not all knowledge is legible as data”, encouraging people to instead “move through spaces with the whole body listening”. Reflecting on her participation in a multi-port city project where she archived fragments of shipwrecks, she noted that adopting a cosmological approach towards the environment added an insightful depth to her research. Dismantling the notion of singular-entity storytelling, her practice embraces the idea that no element exists in isolation. Instead, diverse perspectives and knowledge systems can co-exist and interact to construct multi-dimensional, shared realities. Where documentation is concerned, she contemplated the possibilities of capturing sensorial experiences as part of the archival process. This thinking repositions human bodies as active instruments of research, rather than mere site spectators or clinical observers. 

The third speaker, Sreymao Sao, a multidisciplinary artist whose work explores personal memory and the evolving landscapes of Cambodian contemporary life, grounded her practice in the documentation of lived experiences and emotional geographies. Speaking on the collaborative nature of her works, she described how indigenous communities served as both inspiration and co-creators, where their intimate conversations enriched her projects.   

She shared selected pictures from her 2018 exhibition Under the Water, which combined photography and digital drawing to capture the experiences of villages displaced by the construction of dams. The concept of polyphonic narratives previously mentioned by Zarina is distinctly reflected across the presented examples of Sao’s work, demonstrating how socially-engaged artistic practice does not solely depict community, but instead it actively incorporates local perspectives into the artistic process and creation. Through her visual storytelling formats, personal, cultural and environmental histories are not only preserved, but re-activated for present-day dialogue. 

The aspiration to privilege indigenous knowledge in the three speakers’ respective practice sparked a discussion on the dominant use of Western paradigms of knowledge in research, particularly to comprehend local experiences. To confront and contend with these hegemonic epistemologies, the speakers emphasised the importance of resilience, a willingness to take risks and a strong sense of cultural responsibility. While the task of navigating institutional domains may be a challenging feat, meeting the diverse needs of the community remains a top priority.

From cross-sectoral partnerships to context-focused research strategies, the human agent is conceptualised as a living archive where knowledge is continuously produced, negotiated with, and transmitted. Not only do cultural wisdoms and indigenous practice offer historical data and more experiential ways of sensing and knowing, they also provide us with a blueprint for the future. In an increasingly unpredictable global context where everything is fundamentally interconnected, these rituals and modes of inquiry present positive alternatives to extractive forms of knowledge construction, creating potential pathways for sustainable artistic practice. 

AFA ROUNDTABLE 4: Speculative Futures... Hyphenation

This roundtable examined how sustainability might be reimagined when artists work across disciplines, forms, and ideas, rather than within fixed boundaries. It brought together practitioners whose work sits in these 'in-between' spaces, asking how such hybrid approaches might open up new ways of thinking about environmental and cultural futures. Moderated by Shawn Chua (Dramaturg, Singapore), the speakers included Ang Xiao Ting (The Theatre Practice, Singapore), Hanna 盧子涵 (Artenergy Generation, Taiwan), and Sasha Zahra (Patch Theatre, Australia).

This reflection was contributed by Micah Sofia Pinto, a Manila-based creative producer, curator, cultural programmer, and facilitator working across collaborative arts practice in Southeast Asia. She is co-founder of Para Sa Sining Collaboratory and a member of the Philippine Producers Network and MORASUM, a regional network supporting cross-border exchange among emerging producers and artists. Her practice focuses on collaboration, community engagement, and cultural programming, making her reflections valuable for this session’s focus on hybridity and working across disciplines and contexts. 

"Speculative Futures… was a critical discussion led by Shawn Chua. He began by asking questions and presenting ideas to ground the conversation. Can we take the present as blueprints for the future? Does our reality of hyphenation allow world building that opens up in the in-between?

Sasha Zahra of Patch Theatre (Australia) shared her work. They make theatre for 4-6 year olds who would often encounter theatre for the first time in their shows. Mainly, they make use of light and dance theatre styles. This motivates kids to experience theatre more freely because kids don’t need a linear style and they are experts in play. Their company even brings children into the process and creates works with them.

Similarly, Hanna of Artenergy Generation (Taiwan) presented her project which allows interdisciplinary collaboration across dance, visual art and music, while also allowing audiences to participate. The audience moves within and around the space to contribute to the show. Their movement generates energy that lights the performance space. Artenergy proposes that sustainability needs creativity. We need more creative ways to develop and shape sustainability.

In Theatre Practice (Singapore), they propose that multiple nodes of care can exist. Xiao Ting Ang presented questions from the Practice Tuckshop: What if dropping recyclable jars can bring different ways to interact and transact? What if these jars can perform and sing? How can recycling and food rescuing be both material and story? Our actions can be both generative and destructive; our imagination and exploration can help us create many different blueprints for a liveable future. And it can also help us drive a movement together.

These models are very helpful in imagining ways to create new, relevant work for a specific audience. While in highly dense cities with lots of different projects, we find ways to build relationships with our chosen communities and audiences. Contrary to a completed and finished work being marketed to a public, many models now try to find ways to build relationships and relevance by co-creating with their communities. This process adds value to the work while also rethinking performance as an agent for future building.

The discussion allowed me to also reflect on what we have in our communities. In Para Sa Sining (Philippines), we facilitate design thinking workshops with our audience community and our artist community. This process allows us to refine our existing programs while also creating new programs that answer the needs of the people and circles we engage with.

When we think about sustainability and the future, relationships remain at the core of creating new possibilities. How can we make spaces for us to be humans? How are we working across generations to create these futures?

While the panel discussion talked about existing projects that relate to sustainability practices in the arts, it allowed us to reflect and ask questions together. Questions about language and communication, joy and kindness. It brought us back to our dreams, our communities and our shared humanity. It calls for us to listen to each other more, and to listen to each other deeply.

“When we think about the future, how do we feel?”

Perhaps the answers are already present in the spaces we create together—in acts of care, in shared imagination, in the courage to experiment, and in the relationships that sustain us. The future is not simply something that arrives; it is something we practice, nurture, and build collectively.

As José Esteban Muñoz writes, “The here and now is a prison house. We must strive… to think and feel then and there… We must dream and enact new and better pleasures, other ways of being in the world, and ultimately new worlds.”

In dreaming together, perhaps we begin to make those worlds possible."

ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress Opening Address

The ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress commenced with an Opening Address delivered by Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, President of the Republic of Singapore. In his speech, Mr Tharman noted the paramount need for trust within an increasingly polarised world, commenting that the bridging of these divides rely on sustained commitment and collective action. Drawing on the Congress theme Creative Convergence: Same Same, And Different, he emphasised diversity to be a key strength of contemporary societies, and pointed to the vital role of the arts in fostering multiculturalism. He shared about the $20 million Multicultural Arts Programme (MAP) Grant, which had been announced by the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) earlier in March, and its objective of providing local arts practitioners, organisations and initiatives with greater support. Mr Tharman expressed his hopes for Singapore to not only serve as a 'node' for creative exchange within Southeast Asia, but for the regional arts ecosystem to be further strengthened through deeper engagement and collaboration.

Session 1 | What Endures, What Transforms: Art Across Cultures and Generations 

The first session of the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress delves into questions regarding contemporary art, heritage and cultural memory, exploring how the boundaries of art-making are continuously being re-negotiated. Art has both shaped and connected societies for millennia - but who determines what traditions to honour and how are they preserved? Moderated by Venka Purushothaman (LASALLE University of the Arts Singapore, Singapore), the panel featured 4 speakers: Maria Tri Sulistyani (Papermoon Puppet Theatre, Indonesia), Joon-Yee Kwok (OzAsia Festival, Australia), Gabriel Prokofiev (Nonclassical, United Kingdom), and Meenakshy Bhaskar (Bhaskar's Arts Academy, Singapore).  

Following their self-introductions where each speaker gave audiences a brief peek into their respective artistic practices, the panel began with a contemplation on the tensions between the past and present within the arts. Culture is often regarded as heritage to be protected and transmitted to future generations, yet it is simultaneously defined by its capacity to hybridise and respond to contemporary landscapes. 

As the adaptive nature of cultural forces comes into contest with its safeguarding of tradition and history, the question arises: How do we decide what gets reinterpreted and what gets left behind? For speakers Meenakshy Bhaskar and Gabriel Prokofiev, who both hail from artistic lineage, these concerns are especially pertinent to their work. 

Bhaskar’s experiences growing up with her parents’ experimental philosophies had instilled in her a deep appreciation for such boundary-pushing works. This honed a natural impetus to continue creating multicultural pieces when she inherited her parents’ practice, guided by a sharp intuition for deciding what traditional elements should be retained. For Prokofiev, his grandfather’s renowned legacy presented an opportunity for artistic growth; it challenged him to draw on his cultural roots and carve out his own unique identity as a musician and composer. 

Their perspectives illuminate the rich potential of intergenerational artistic dialogue. By engaging with their cultural lineage, one’s artistic voice is given room to expand and flourish. Rather than serving as a constraint, the arts’ ability to bridge the past and present surfaces as a key source of inspiration and creative strength. 

When mapped across broader communities, the cultural responsibility of balancing innovation and cultural preservation at a larger scale carries a different set of considerations. Within these multicultural settings, championing for diverse representation and the enhanced visibility of marginalised issues can be more harmful than empowering when handled carelessly. Speaking from her experiences as a festival director, Kwok shared about how her curatorial approach focuses on encouraging self-determined artistic practices. Understanding that artists may feel confined to exploring specific aspects of their personal identity in their works, she hopes to provide artists with full creative autonomy and cultivate authentic intercultural engagement, instead of prescribing to cultural diversity mandates. Viewed through the lens of arts leadership, her framework calls for a closer examination and rethinking of how multiculturalism is both portrayed and understood in contemporary discourse, for the benefit of audiences and practitioners alike. Moreover, it highlights how cultural preservation is not only derived from the artistic content of a performance, but through intentional, meaningful programming as well. 

However, the survival of any cultural tradition also heavily relies on the audience, whose reception and engagement determine what ideas and rituals should be carried into the future. For theatre founder Maria Tri Sulistyani, the desire to forge an intimate connection sits at the heart of her puppetry practice. Drawing influence from wayang kulit, Indonesia’s traditional shadow puppetry art form, her company blends original puppet designs with compelling narratives for multi-generational audiences. Sharing a keenness to develop a common language with her spectators, Sulistyani described how her company’s affective storytelling tactics unifies people through an emotional experience, bridging linguistic barriers between the artist and the audience. Her input reaffirms the value of revitalising traditional art forms in contemporary practice, showcasing the boundless potential of such interdisciplinary works.

As art-making becomes increasingly hybridised in both content and genre, creatives enjoy greater prospects of attracting and captivating new audience demographics. When prompted about their respective strategies for expanding their audience base, the speakers’ responses shared a common aspiration: To create exciting, innovative works that could spark newfound curiosity, achieve a form of resonance with their audiences, and appeal to a collective sense of humanity. Widening the public’s access to the arts also emerged as a consideration, which included lowering barriers to entry and leveraging on social media marketing. 

As digital infrastructure continues to influence cultural participation, it becomes increasingly vital for artists to be able to flexibly adapt and respond to these rapidly-changing landscapes. While the question of the extent to which the arts will evolve is difficult to answer, the transformative and healing power of the arts remains clear. Serving as the glue for humanity, the ability of the arts to transcend time, space and memory continues to be one of its most valuable qualities.

Session 2 | Viewer, Participant, Co-Creator: Capturing the Evolving Audience

Audiences today are constantly shifting; in who they are, what they expect, and how they experience art. This session explored how artists and arts organisations can better understand their evolving audiences, while also considering how audiences themselves shape the work being made.

Moderated by Paul Tan (Community Foundation of Singapore), the speakers included Sharon Chang (National Arts Council / The Culture Academy, Singapore), Sornchai Chatwiriyachai (Malongdu Theatre, Thailand), Forrina Chen (The A.S.K., China), Angela Tan (ART:DIS, Singapore), and Malcolm Whittaker (re:group performance collective, Australia).

This following reflection was contributed by Jenny Logico-Cruz, a Manila-based director, performance-maker, educator, and founder of Langgam Performance Troupe. Her practice spans experimental and practice-as-research performance, alongside extensive work in teaching and cultural production across Asia, the US, and the UK. She was invited to reflect on this session for her perspective as a practitioner working across performance-making, education, and cross-cultural collaboration.

"To a theatre-maker, the audience is oftentimes regarded as our mission’s great white whale: indefinable, unpredictable, and perhaps, evolving faster than we can get a hold of. This mission becomes further complicated as we theatre-makers tend to keep different and contested views towards spectatorship. Are our audience members mere passive attendees, viewers, and receptors of our work? But will such classical viewpoint of spectatorship still hold true and sustainable given our fast-paced, techno-contemporary milieu? Can we instead use an economic lens and appropriate our audience members into target numbers, consumers, and capital? But will such statistical framing be enough to capture and forecast our ever-evolving contemporary audiences? Or should we start embracing the notion that our audiences are neither traditional passive viewers nor quantitative figures, but active co-creators and collaborators of our work, powered and sustained by relational synergies, forever evolving and journeying, but never quite evolved, never fully arrived? But in today’s economy which constantly asks us to prove the value of our work in exchange for better funding and support, how can such open definition of the audience help justify theatre as a worthwhile investment in the creative labor industry? 

These questions and debates were further unpacked and confronted during the plenary session, Viewer, Participant, Co-Creator: Capturing the Evolving Audience, held on the 20th of May 2026, the second day of the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress. Moderated by Paul Tan, the Chief Executive Officer of the Community of Foundation of Singapore (CFS), the session hosted a roster of speakers from various backgrounds and disciplines, each practicing different and specific engagements with the audiences. Angela Tan from ART:DiS focuses on disability inclusion and representation in the theatre, not only as audience members, but as participants and co-contributors onstage as well. Malcolm Whittaker and his company, re:group performance collective, partakes in an interactive approach with the audience as they utilize technology and navigate its role in the shaping of contemporary spectatorship. Forrina Chen’s work at A.S.K. redefines the boundaries of children’s theatre by producing highly immersive and educational theatrical experiences for children, bringing these young audience members front and center of the work. Sornchai Chatwiriyachai’s Malongdu Theatre adapts Augusto Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed to Thailand’s cultural and political contexts, using theatre as tool and platform to empower local audiences in exploring their own civic voices. And lastly, Dr. Sharon Chang, Director of Data & Research at the National Arts Council and Research Director at The Culture Academy Singapore, brings a full-blown economist’s perspective to spectatorship by looking at audienceship as valuable data currency that has the potential to be further examined, measured, and calculated. All speakers demonstrated varying perspectives on the evolving audience, igniting both insights and debates in an auditorium full of theater-makers, carrying the age-old question: How can our work catch up and capture the audience that never stops evolving? 

Throughout the plenary, the conversations and queries naturally made me reflect on my own ongoing practice. For over a decade, I’ve been the artistic director of Langgam Performance Troupe - a small, independent, and experimental performance collective based in Manila’s fringe theatre community. Commercially and economically speaking, our work does not reach large audience numbers. More often than not, our box office hardly breaks even with our production budget. And with the experimental, contemporary practice that we produce, our projects are a hard-sell to sponsors and patrons who would rather see their investments in the lucrative musical theatre industry - which is what mostly occupies and dominates the current landscape of Philippine Theatre. However, there must be a reason why our collective has managed to continue and sustain for over 10 years, despite the lack of commercial and fiscal appeal. And I realise that our focus has always been in cultivating our relationship with our multifaceted audience - no matter their size, no matter their demographics, no matter if they can afford our tickets, no matter if they comprehend experimental work or not. In agreement with Tan, Whittaker, Chen, and Chatwiriyachai, understanding the audience requires deep relational work that goes beyond measure. The theatre-makers in the panel remind us that the art and history of theatre is ultimately grounded and fuelled by the purity of human exchange: the human performer and the human witness. And this continuing interpersonal ritual remains the focus of our practice’s sustainability since time immemorial - regardless of differences in our respective genres, regardless of size and scale. 

However, this is also not to discredit the economic stance of Dr. Chang. Even though there was much resistance in the room towards Dr. Chang’s perspective of needing to break down our audience in terms of data and capital framework, I believe her input still brings vital information, not only in the work we do, but also in anticipation of our possible future with the fast-shifting contemporary audience. As Dr. Chang reasoned for the economic and statistical overview of audienceship with her plenary peers, I realise that the crux of the argument (a healthy banter by the way!) was not really so much a debate of whether we see our audiences as either relationships or target numbers. Rather, her economic proposition and analytical contribution in the panel demonstrates a wider need: a consideration for a more holistic study of spectatorship.

The contemporary audience is a multifarious beast, made even more complex by our shifting cultural and technological landscapes. Their attention capital is layered yet very delicate, for they are faced with multiple options for amusement - from cinema to television to streaming platforms to content creations in social media. With the unique circumstances surrounding and compounding our contemporary audience, perhaps the most fitting response is to approach today’s spectatorship with a more interdisciplinary mindset and methodology. As a theatre-maker, naturally I will always agree with the theatre-makers in the panel as I share their experience on the field. To meet the audience, one must engage with relational work as the primary groundwork. Acknowledge that they are, first and foremost, humans than they are numbers to be accounted for. Our focus is to ensure the quality of space we create for them, for it is in this space that determines the quality and sustainability of audienceship. And yet at the same time, as an interdisciplinary practitioner, I also see the necessity of intersecting our work with scientific and industry perspectives and practices. For our understanding of spectatorship to become more comprehensive, collaboration with non-artists is needed in order to generate a more macro, well-rounded purview of our discipline. Dr. Chang’s research and work on the economic front is equally vital in the conversation and deserves attention, serious consideration, and even collaboration when tackling the crucial subject of the evolving contemporary audience. 

After all, spectatorship is not solely an artistic concern, but a vastly interdisciplinary one. And for us to set sail for the high seas to meet our great white whale that is our audience, then we need all - and I mean all - hands on deck."

Open City

Open City was envisioned as a series of diverse encounters where ISPA delegates could discover three arts spaces in Singapore - Goodman Arts Centre, Aliwal Arts Centre, and Stamford Arts Centre and the Waterloo Arts Belt. In each arts centre, delegates went on a ‘tour’ through different spaces - studios, rehearsal rooms, performing areas, and more. In these spaces, they met the diverse range of artists and arts organisations which call these centres home. Each artist and organisation presented a unique encounter which allowed delegates to learn more about their work and practice. Each ‘tour’ was also accompanied by a specially curated lunch presented by three different culinary organisations - Geni Singapore, Ahimsa Sanctuary, and Eight Treasures. 

Centre 42 was one of the several arts organisations which participated in the Open City programme at Stamford Arts Centre, introducing delegates to our work through a part-installation, part-interactive experience that put the spotlight on our archival and documentation efforts. Find out more about our encounter here: https://www.centre42.sg/archive/writings/26512/the-village-open-city/

Session 3 | Beyond Boundaries: Arts in an Interconnected Age - Part A: Healthcare 

The first of a two-part session exploring the possibilities that arise when the arts engage with other fields, this panel focused on the ways artists can, and have, created work in dialogue with the healthcare sector. A/Prof Gan Wee Hoe, CEO of SingHealth Community Hospitals, spoke in detail about the concept of ‘social prescribing’ - approaching care and wellbeing in a more holistic manner, understanding how an individual’s sociocultural and personal contexts can impact their health beyond the medical field - and how the arts can promote social connection in service of this effort. Edwin Wee, Creative Director and Co-Founder of Decadance Co (a Singapore contemporary dance company which prioritises collaborative and socially conscious works), shared real-life examples of Decadance productions which actively engaged seniors in the creation process, utilising the performing arts as a form of connection which benefited their physical, mental, and emotional health. The conversation with A/Prof Gan and Edwin Wee was guided by moderator Pooja Nansi, a Singaporean poet and performer.

This reflection was contributed by Ngụy Hải An, a Vietnamese curator, project manager, producer, programmer, and facilitator across diverse scales and formats. She has worked across several artistic genres and embraces multidisciplinary collaborations. She is the Head of Education and Communications at the Center for Art Patronage and Development (APD) — a Hanoi-based organization operating at the intersection of art and social development, bridging artists and creative practice with diverse social spheres in order to build an inclusive network that nurtures and expands Vietnam's art ecosystem. The collaborative and boundary-pushing nature of her work resonates with the concepts and principles discussed in the Healthcare panel. 

“‘Arts for health can be impactful, but it needs good design.’

This statement, shared by A/Prof Gan Wee Hoe during ISPA Session 3 | Beyond Boundaries: Arts in an Interconnected Age - Part A: Healthcare, immediately struck a chord with me. As he sought to debunk the myth that arts programmes in healthcare are "too soft to be measured," I found myself staring at the crux of a question that has long hovered over my own practice as a curator and facilitator in Vietnam: What actually constitutes 'good design' when we bring art into spaces of care, vulnerability, and healing?

In a rapidly developing cultural landscape like Vietnam, we often champion the undeniable power of art to heal. Yet, moving within the realm of inclusive and community-based projects, I am preoccupied by the question: How do we actually do it? What is the right approach? How do we create a suitable and sustainable structure for such projects?

The answers that stayed with me from the session did not lie in grand theories, but in two simple yet essential words: sincerity and pace. Sincerity, as Edwin Wee reminded us, is about showing up ‘100% human’ for those we serve. In this light, art itself can be the tool that breaks the ice; it is the non-verbal language that can help us to start a difficult conversation. Edwin Wee captured this beautifully when discussing how to ensure a safe space for people to participate. He doesn't approach a group by explaining a rigid, structural dance program. Instead, he lets the experience hit them organically and allows emotions to spill out naturally. Through music and movement, art can be turned into a raw energy and an influence that strikes on a completely different level, forming bonds that feel refreshingly unfamiliar to participants.

This tactile artistic persuasion must move hand in hand with a profound respect for each participant's acceptance and individual pace. As A/Prof Gan Wee Hoe noted, healthcare interventions can often sound cold, but true care lies in addressing the unique social determinants of health for each individual. Trust is a slow process that cannot be rushed.

This resonates deeply with my own practice in Hanoi. When working alongside blind and visually impaired participants, we realised that we couldn't just rush to any kind of artistic output. We used sound and tactile experiences as our primary vocabulary to slow down, listen to individual and collective 'voices', and establish psychological safety organically. In a world that demands rapid output, using art to slow down and connect is a radical act.

Yet, the session also revealed urgent, unresolved questions. During the Q&A, Ramesh Meyyappan, a deaf theatre practitioner, shared how deaf individuals with dementia face terrifying social isolation and depression, as they find a healthcare system completely unequipped to communicate with them, lacking signing medical professionals or specialised care.

That moment was a sharp reality check. It exposed the stark gaps in our institutional structures. In Vietnam, inclusive art and arts-for-health are still largely driven by independent, grassroots efforts. We are at the very beginning of building resilient, creative ecosystems that can systematically support vulnerable communities. It highlights how much work we have ahead of us to advocate for structural inclusivity.

The dialogue also broadens how I perceive healthcare itself. It challenges the clinical boundaries of medicine, reminding us that health is not merely the absence of disease, but the presence of holistic well-being. When the traditional healthcare framework reaches its structural limits - as seen in the heart-wrenching isolation of deaf individuals with dementia - art steps in not as a fleeting distraction or a privilege for the few, but as an essential, complementary lifeline.

Moving forward, this session leaves me with a renewed sense of purpose. It reminds me that as cultural workers, we must be careful not to infantilise or instrumentalise the communities we serve. Whether I am organising a community project or an inclusive ‘laboratory’, I want to design spaces that aren't goal-oriented, but relation-oriented. By treating art as an immediate, honest conversation on a completely different level, we can  design spaces that refuse to rush - spaces where a human body can just patiently trace the frequencies of presence and connection, and where we can be, above all, 100% human together.” 

Session 3 | Beyond Boundaries: Arts in an Interconnected Age - Part B: AI 

Expanding the interdisciplinary discussion on how the arts can partner and engage with other domains for societal benefit, the second panel explored the role of AI in an artist’s creative process. With moderation by Singaporean poet Pooja Nansi, the sole speaker for this session was London-born neurodivergent artist and technologist Harry Yeff (also known as Reeps100), who spoke about employing augmented technologies in his voice research to assist and enhance human expression. 

While adaptive devices such as AI may be advantageous for marginalised groups with different communicative needs, he also noted that anthropomorphic agents were potentially dangerous in encouraging unhealthy human connections. Reflecting on the tense discourse surrounding the implications of AI application in the arts, Yeff emphasised the importance of enforcing personal autonomy and safe ownership in such practices, advocating for greater AI literacy and the implementation of clear ethical frameworks. 

The following reflection was contributed by Faiq Airudin, a Brunei-based creative producer, advisor, content strategist and researcher. As a core committee member of the National Theatre Festival Brunei and the co-founder of the reading advocacy group Bruneians Read, Faiq is passionate about widening participation in Brunei’s creative industry. Having extensively collaborated with a diverse range of organisations, he brings a critical perspective towards the intersection of technology and creativity in today’s arts and cultural landscape.  

"Before the session began, I heard an incomprehensible sound that was hard to pinpoint. I couldn’t tell whether it was a technical glitch with the speakers, an alarm warning me of some impending danger, or something else more threatening. It was beatboxing, and the panel had begun. As I was seated close to the stage where the sound emanated, I finally noticed Harry Yeff, aka Reeps100, closing his eyes and demonstrating his beatboxing skills. Rapidly creating drums and digital sounds with his voice, he changed the mood in the auditorium.

​Suddenly, the room was attentive, a change from being slightly sedate after the two intensive days of the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress. One theme throughout Harry’s session with Singaporean poet Pooja Nansi was the uniqueness of the human voice. With his opening, Harry, the London-born technologist specialising in voice, demonstrated the power of just voice to change a room, not by screaming but through controlled beatboxing.

​Throughout the panel on Arts in an Interconnected Age, he repeatedly shared that the voices are “miracle engines”. The beatboxing, accompanied by the projected AI-generated graphic, certainly showed that. Also, “good augmentation enhances human experiences in a healthy or meaningful way”. The characteristics of the voice are further demonstrated in his project Voice Gems, created in collaboration with Trung Bao. Created from 200,000 computer-generated 'particles', the colours and the shapes of the gems are formed by features in a recorded voice. Resembling natural crystals, jagged and undulating, two never quite the same, all the voices are submitted voluntarily by their originator. One that stood out for Harry was an interaction between a father and daughter. The delicateness of the daughter's voice was encapsulated forever in a Voice Gem.

​Another point brought out from the discussion with Pooja was how “limitation is where creativity comes from”. Adding how, “the limitation of the voice is that it is limited, and it's that limitation that is what makes it wonderful.” This perspective offers a contrast to the limitless nature of AI, which posits it as a way to endlessly improve human creativity. Every day, there are discussions about the boundless ceiling of AI, aiming to improve productivity or critical thinking, while others seem to completely supplant human creativity. The discussion was careful to put limits and restrictions on this kind of framing.

​There are anxieties and apprehensions about using AI technology, but Harry’s work demonstrates the possibility of unique creations using AI as a tool, dependent on human creativity. Whether that can be applied to a performing arts context, where the collaborative nature and longitudinal process are not as clear, remains to be seen. The use of AI in any part of the creative process in Brunei is polarising. While used primarily in the visual arts, I would be hard-pressed to find someone who admits to using it in their ideation or development process for a script or performance. The discussion brought up some considerations regarding the use of LLM’s in the creative process. The most pressing issues are the energy consumption required to power LLMs and the consensual use of data for model training. These considerations reinforced my personal reluctance to integrate AI into artistic practice. The session on the breadth covering AI and human creativity could not offer a ready-made solution. The talk further affirmed that a more nuanced discussion of AI use is required. AI, or artificial intelligence, is not a monolith that can’t be stopped in its tracks. We can apprehend its momentum by taking time to evaluate and reflect on its purpose. There doesn’t need to be a seamless integration, as AI encompasses data centres, government interests, and language models trained on different datasets. Rather than rushing along with trends or external pressures to create, AI can be used in an intelligent, nuanced way alongside human creativity."

Session 4 | The Art of Regeneration: Leadership in Times of Change

The ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress’s final panel focused on leadership, bringing together a moderator and three panelists who act as leaders in different organisations with varying structures and priorities. Moderator Kok Heng Leun is the Founder of Drama Box, a socially engaged Singapore theatre company which presents works that inspire dialogue, reflection, and change. The panelists included María Claudia Parias Durán, Director General of Instituto Distrital de las Artes (IDARTES) in Colombia, a public establishment responsible for managing public policies related to artistic practices in the city of Bogotá; Phloeun Prim, Executive Director of Living Arts International, an NGO with Cambodian roots which incubates cultural initiatives contributing to a peaceful, sustainable future; and Yvonne Tham, CEO of Esplanade - Theatres on the Bay, one of Singapore’s foremost performing arts centres which has presented over 58,000 performances and activities since its inception in 2002. 

This panel prompted them to discuss issues of change, accountability, community-building, empowerment, and collaboration in these uncertain times - how arts and cultural leadership requires a delicate balancing act to make space for these ideals and build the resilience of the organisations which practice them. The panelists each provided examples of programmes and processes that have been activated in their organisations, which demonstrate the complexity of this balancing act. 

The following reflection was contributed by Helly Minarti, a Yogyakarta-based contemporary performance curator, dramaturg, and producer. She is the founder of LINGKARAN | koreografi, a platform designed to initiate collaborative research among practitioners, researchers, and scholars focusing on the discourse on and around ‘choreography’. From 2013 to 2017, she was also the Head of Programmes at the Jakarta Arts Council. This reflection is enriched by Minarti’s wealth of personal experience as an arts and cultural leader in her own artistic field and geographical context. 

“As expected, the Anthony Field Academy (AFA) Conference and ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress this year offered quite a line-up of issues to unpack across its various sessions. It wrapped up with a closing panel, The Art of Regeneration: Leadership in Times of Change. It does sound like a perfect theme to end an activities-packed week, as it suggests a moment of reflection, maybe even a token to take home. 

Moderated by Kok Heng Leun, the panel presented three speakers, each a leader of a major organisation in their respective city/country, albeit different in nature. Their different backgrounds, generations, and trajectories were a deliberation, in the hope that the panel could be a platform to explore diverse experiences and evolving values that can shape resilient art organisations. The fact that the speakers hailed from Bogota, Phnom Penh, and Singapore promised contrasting contexts of each respective national level, and perhaps this could address the above prompts rather well.

Heng Leun suggested for each to focus on a case study, but as the panel unfolded, only Maria followed this guideline. She introduced Artefactum (Latin for ‘making with art’), a project that pairs emerging artists, local community creators and citizens, with expert mentors and artists of long, well-known trajectories. The intention is to create a new quality of art in a co-laboratory format that is based on dialogue. Launched in 2024, Artefactum claims to have engaged more than 900 artists with works presented in various platforms (international festivals in Bogota and Cartagena, among others) and also in local neighbourhoods. 

Bearing in mind that Artefactum is a major initiative of a higher arts institution, my take is that the notion of ‘regeneration’ here could be applied within the context of artistic practice. Without any knowledge about how arts education is carried out in Columbia, I could only guess that Artefactum offers an alternative way of learning, maybe critically responding to some issues in its arts education. Maria gave a hint when she said that Artefactum could be “an example of how to understand leadership, which is to understand the risk of creating something new; which means generating new questions, knowing the reality and having the intention to engage with this reality”. Listening to this, I would love to hear what she perceived as ‘reality’ that somehow gave birth to a project like Artefactum.

The other speakers represent two contrasting contexts of Southeast Asia, to say the least - one leads a foundation (founded by artists and cultural workers), and the other leads the biggest arts venue in the country, if not in the region. The first, Cambodia Living Arts (CLA), came out with a background of a post-genocide traumatic history, while the other has been boldly taking up a position of cultural leadership in the region through its unabashedly industrious approach (flipping through three volumes of the Renaissance City Report and reading an article by Ken Takiguchi on Curating Nation affirmed this!). 

For Phloeun (who joined CLA in 2008 and co-envisioned founding the umbrella organisation of Living Arts International (LAI), which he now leads), regeneration is already at work (and executed) through a succession plan and a shifting vision from ‘doing’ to ‘facilitating’. CLA now positions itself to be a catalyst by holding ‘multi spaces’ (quoted verbatim from Heng Leun), now that Cambodia (with only 30 years or so of modern history, to quote Phloeun) has started seeing the emergence of its young generation of artists. 

Meanwhile for Yvonne, leadership boils down to being conscious of the notion of power and agency - of our own, and of others. Running such a big arts complex (to give an idea of its scale, it holds around 4,000 events per year) must bring its own challenges, which seems to be zooming into ‘balancing’ (e.g. how to cater to mainstream audiences, whilst still holding a space for experimentation). Practically, it is all about orchestrating the staff across the board and being aware of the various stakeholders’ needs. 

How much can one squeeze from just a ninety-minute panel on such a complex subject? It is understandable if the discussion only touched on the surface - it is up to us, the audience, to jot down the notes that are relatable to our own practice. I personally resonate with Phloeun, who spoke about leaning on the resilience of the arts sector itself. In my own national context of being an arts worker in Indonesia, we have experienced a time without any national public funding (not dissimilar from Cambodia, once upon a time), but now that this is starting to change in recent years, we are all too aware of the different challenges we now have to deal with. I think the key lies in the profound understanding of how the arts scene is currently at; and how the state’s presence is needed more to facilitate the artistic/cultural process than control it. This means that neither too little funding nor too much is beneficial. This is, of course, a simplified way of describing the 'before and after' contrast in Indonesia, where access to funding also comes with rigid bureaucratic processes. Indonesia seems to be still in the process of finding the right method of being transparent and accountable without having to get lost in the maze of bureaucrazy (pun intended). It is the early days of a long journey. But as in life, the arts, too, will always find a way."

Across the conversations documented here, one idea quietly resurfaced in different forms: the future of the arts is not built through certainty, but through relationships. Whether discussing Indigenous knowledge, audience participation, labour, leadership, climate action, or artistic experimentation, speakers and delegates repeatedly returned to the work of listening across difference, sharing responsibility, and remaining open to perspectives beyond our own. Sustainability, in this sense, is not simply about maintaining what already exists, but about creating the conditions for people, ideas, and practices to continue evolving together.

Perhaps this is what Creative Convergence: Same Same, And Different ultimately invited us to consider. Not that we arrive at a common answer, but that we make room for multiple ways of knowing, making, and imagining the future to exist in dialogue with one another. Across the Congress, artists, producers, researchers, policymakers, and cultural workers gathered not to resolve complexity, but to engage with it collectively. If there is a lasting takeaway from the ISPA 2026 Singapore Congress, it is that the performing arts remain one of the few spaces where difference is not an obstacle to overcome, but a vital resource from which new possibilities can emerge.

Published: 29 July 2026