Typologies of Arts Residencies

Nika Mušič

International artist-in-residence (AiR) programmes share many common features (we outlined the basic characteristics in the second article in this series), yet they can differ greatly from one another. Because they foreground different spheres of an artist's practice through a variety of approaches, they can be classified in several ways. For example, typologies may be based on the activities artists carry out during their residency, on the characteristics of the programmes or on the expectations of AiR organisers. Let us take a look at the types of AiR programmes that exist and the categories into which they can be placed, illustrated by a few examples from the Slovenian AiR landscape.

Classification Based on Binary Opposites

Jean-Baptiste Joly is one of the founders of the international network Res Artis, which has been connecting AiR organisers worldwide since 1993. In 2019, using the Res Artis database as a source, he proposed a typology of AiR programmes based on binary opposites. In developing this approach, he selected 12 pairs of criteria in an attempt to capture the diverse programme profiles and create a system that would encompass almost all existing variations. Using examples of Slovenian AiR programmes, we can illustrate Joly's binary opposites.

Rural or urban. This distinction dates back to the late 19th century when artists' colonies emerged in the countryside, while cosmopolitan avant-garde art communities formed in cities. Today in Slovenia, one of the most remote residency experiences is offered by the Krušče Creative Center, while the most urban programmes are those supported by the infrastructure of Center Rog in Ljubljana.
Small or large scale. A distinction based on the size or scale of the residency is also highlighted in the European Commission's Policy Handbook on Artists' Residencies. Contemporary residencies can be very small, for example, nano-residencies, and thus often go unnoticed; from artists who temporarily stay with other artists, to artists who regularly invite other artists to communal living and creating. On the other hand, an example of a large-scale residency is the Finnish Arteles Creative Centre, which welcomes over 90 selected artists each year. Although still smaller than the Finnish example, Švicarija is one of the largest residency centres in Slovenia.
Artist-led or non-artist-led programmes. Examples of artist-led residencies include those organised by the Art Stays Cultural Association, where academic painter Jernej Forbici is involved. Examples of non-artist-led residencies are those run by public bodies, such as the Residence Centre Cankarjeva, which is managed by the Public Fund for Cultural Activities of the Republic of Slovenia.
With costs for artists or with financing. Joly calls financing a "mirage" because only 9% of organisers in the Res Artis database provide some financing (i.e., not necessarily full financing). Most Slovenian AiR organisers cover part of the costs, usually at least accommodation, while a few provide no financing at all. On the other hand, there are programmes in which artists selected through open calls incur no costs, such as the DSAF Residency, AiR Celeia and GuestRoomMaribor.
Single-discipline or multidisciplinary programmes. In Slovenia, programmes dedicated to a specific art form are most commonly found in the literary field, such as the AiR programmes of Goga Publishing House or Sodobnost International Cultural Society, while most others encompass several artistic disciplines.
Independent or part of a larger organisation. Slovenian AiR organisers could be divided into private and public organisations. In Kamnik, two organisations run AiR programmes: the NGO Priden možic Cultural Association and the Public Institute for Culture Kamnik.
For international or national artists or both. Programmes exclusively for international guests include the Writer in the Park (intended for writers associated with one of UNESCO's Cities of Literature) and the Branislava Sušnik Humanities Residency (aimed at Spanish-speaking women researchers and artists). By contrast, the Alojz Kocjančič Residency House accepts only national artists.
Open public call or by invitation only. An example of a Slovenian programme with a regular public call is the Sovre's Study for translators, while a programme accessed only by invitation for artists working in music, multimedia or visual arts is Asylum Studio.
Accommodation, workspace or both. Providing accommodation is key for the inclusion of an AiR programme in the TransArtists information platform database, which presents AiR programmes worldwide and serves as a search tool for international artists. We also applied this requirement when documenting the Slovenian AiR programmes for our database. Most programmes also provide workspaces in one form or another, even if these are not part of the residential complex.
Short-term or long-term. The duration of the residency can vary from 1 or 2 weeks (short-term), to 1 or even 2 years (long-term). The differences in duration also vary by artistic field. Writers and visual artists often participate in longer programmes; while artists who work collectively, for example, in performing arts, often select shorter ones. The Policy Handbook on Artists' Residencies also notes a trend towards shortening stays, reflecting the contemporary economic situation. In Slovenia, one of the longer programmes is the Designer in Residency at Center Rog (from 3 to 6 months); many programmes last 1 month, and among the shorter ones is the Branislava Sušnik Humanities Residency (2 weeks).
With or without a required outcome. This division, discussed in more detail in the following section, emphasises key differences in AiR organisers' expectations and requirements.
Interaction with others (networking) or creative retreat. As we discuss below, we can develop this binary into a typology that emphasises the residents' different activities.

Classification Based on Host Requirements

On the TransArtists platform – probably due to its focus on practical aspects and the needs of users looking for suitable opportunities – AiR programmes are most broadly divided into those that provide artists with space and time without any conditions (allowing them to focus on research or creative process without being bound to produce a tangible result), and programmes that require a concrete outcome (completed artwork, exhibition, workshop, etc.).

In Slovenia, hosts most often expect residents to present their work or project publicly (through an exhibition, lecture, performance, workshop, etc.). Some programmes have no such expectations; in the early years of the Writer in the Park programme, for instance, residents were expected to write something during the residency and present it publicly, but this requirement was later abandoned as the outcomes often felt forced.

Given that the majority of programmes (around 80%) listed on Res Artis require some form of outcome, Jean-Baptiste Joly prefers to think of this binary as an exchange between the host and the guest. One needs to ask what the AiR organiser gains from the residency, what the artist gains, and if this exchange is balanced and fair.

Classification Based on Guest Activity

If we look at the activities that AiR programmes offer artists, we can generally divide them into those that provide isolation or retreat and those that encourage interaction with others. Isolation will benefit the artists for deep research, while interaction with others will be useful for networking and promotion.

These differences in activities can also form the basis for typologies that define the role of AiR programmes in different phases of the artistic process. Researcher and university professor Ellen Loots's typology identifies three programme archetypes: the research and development (or refuge) type, the production type and the dispersion type.

The first archetype includes programmes that play a key role in an artist's development. They provide a retreat and the focus for research and encourage (self-)reflection, inward exploration, the formation of artistic identity and personal and professional growth. They can have a direct or indirect impact on an artwork and its creation.

The second archetype covers programmes that actively contribute to artistic production because they offer an adequate work environment (e.g., specialised studios with equipment) and support. With the ability to access sources and resources, artists can dedicate themselves to creating, perhaps even experimenting, which would not be possible if they were facing the usual limitations.

The third archetype consists of AiR programmes that enable networking and opportunities for presentation and marketing. They function as meeting points where artists make contact with other artists, curators, gallery owners and so on. Through these programmes, artists become more recognisable, build a network of contacts, set up different partnerships or gain an opportunity for co-productions.

Classification into Chronotopes

Regardless of whether artists create, conduct research or engage in networking during a residency, the basic function of AiR programmes is to support artistic development by providing time and space. Professor of sociology of culture and politics at the Antwerp Research Institute for the Arts Pascal Gielen notes that a residency does not merely provide time and space but also intertwines them in a specific way. Based on these two key categories, Gielen classifies AiR programmes into 4 chronotopes (the chronotope concept was introduced by Mikhail Bakhtin). At the same time, Gielen emphasises that these are ideal types rarely found in reality in their pure form because most AiR programmes blend several approaches. Although his typology focuses on different intertwinings of time and space, it is also possible to single out residents' various activities – in this sense, we can also draw certain parallels with Ellen Loots's typology.

My Chronotope: Many AiR programmes try to recreate the temporal and spatial conditions of the art studio in isolation. Far from daily disturbances, routine and worries, the resident has the opportunity for full introspection and creativity; inspiration is considered as something inherent, as something that the artist discovers within their deepest self.

Network Chronotope: Serves as an artist's springboard, offering many social opportunities necessary for professional development. Such a residency is not secluded but functions as an urban intersection where art, capital and influential institutions meet. Activities are not introspective but rather exhibitionist – the artist must be noticed to succeed. Time is felt as pressure, as the residency period represents the artist's opportunity to have others recognise their talent and to establish themselves.

Alter-Chronotope: Enables artists to explore certain topics or find inspiration outside of themselves, in the external world – in objects, natural or cultural phenomena, skills, social issues, etc. These are project-oriented, thematic AiR programmes that offer their space to bring artists into proximity with something different, with otherness or alterity. Time within this residency is understood as the period required to understand something new, to gain a skill or to establish contact with a certain social group.

Embedded Chronotope: Transcends temporal restrictions of traditional programmes. The artist is not just a temporary guest but becomes a part of the place and the community. The duration of the artist's presence is unlimited – they can stay their entire life. They don't search for inspiration and creativity merely in the artistic process but in the entire cohabitation with the environment. The artist's space becomes a part of the broader community, and the art blends with everyday life.

Classification Based on Purpose and Organisational Structure

The main purpose of the AiR programmes (research and development or production) also informs the typology in the European Commission's Policy Handbook on Artists' Residencies. However, this typology is based not only on the programmes' functions but also on their organisational structure and context. If we ask ourselves who organises and manages the AiR programme, what is the principal goal of the programme, how it is conceived, and what is the role of the visiting artist, we can form seven models. The handbook stresses that although this classification is useful, we must be aware that other typologies and classifications are possible.

The "classic" residency model: Governments and funds invest in residential institutions that are often well-established and respected. Such institutions carry out programmes focused on the development of artists and their works as their principal activity. The reputation of such institutions attracts curators, programme managers and collectors, thus encouraging artistic exchange and development. These programmes often include public activities, such as exhibitions, open studios and meetings.

Residencies connected with art institutions and festivals: The advantage of the programmes based within contemporary arts centres or institutions is the proximity of an artistic environment with professional management, promotion and access to interested audiences. These programmes often offer artists opportunities to present their work.

Artist-led residency centres: Because they are established by artists or artistic collectives, these programmes have a clear vision that reflects the interests and priorities of their founders and are often focused on a particular artistic field or network.

Research-based residencies: In these, the artistic process is focused on research and experiment. Occasionally, artists also formulate solutions or alternative approaches to issues arising from research. Research-based residencies differ from thematic residencies in the close relationships they foster between the artist and the people or the places.

Thematic residencies: The purpose of the programmes that focus on a particular theme or topic goes beyond merely artistic development and includes wider societal or cultural goals. These programmes can be related to heritage, regional identity or a specific theme, such as ecology, social justice or technological development.

Production-based residencies: The focus is on the practical realisation of an artistic project, and the programmes provide the artists with the infrastructure, material and expert support necessary to complete their work. This model is common in fields that require specific technical conditions.

Interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral residencies: This group includes programmes that intertwine different creative sectors and even sectors outside the realm of arts. The AiR organisers and visiting artists explore the possibilities of collaboration with science and technology. Such residencies go beyond the classic art practices and encourage innovative approaches.

The different models of AiR programmes allow the artists to develop, research and produce in different contexts and organisational structures. In the last few years, there has been a noticeable shift towards interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral programmes – they bring new approaches and forms of collaboration as well as indicate important trends.

Author Bio

Nika Mušič has a background in comparative literature and many years of experience in publishing, where she worked as an editor in the field of contemporary and children's literature, as well as a proofreader and literary critic. Since 2024, she has been employed at Motovila (CED Slovenia), fostering cooperation in the cultural and creative sectors.

The text was written in March 2025 in the framework of the public procurement "Development and upgrade of information portals of the Ministry of Culture for the transition to the eKultura platform" in which Motovila Institute collaborates as a partner with Ljudmila Art and Science Laboratory.

External links

Typologies of Arts Residencies

Contents