Methodology

The rates offered in this section are a guide only as fees for Welcome to Country and Smoking Ceremonies are determined by Land Councils, community organisations and individuals such as Elders and representatives. The indicative fee ranges have been produced from consultation and available pricing structures. 

The Artist Fees and Loan Fees are built on NAVA’s research and work from across two decades of consultation, surveys, sector feedback and benchmarking since the Code was first launched in 2001. The recently developed methodology for the sixth edition of the Code aims to improve equity by providing a sliding scale of minimum fee ranges which take organisation size and capacity into account, expanding NAVA’s previous work in identifying artists’ career stage as a factor that informs minimum rates of pay. 

The minimum fee ranges consider numerous variations within each organisation category including geography, physical scale of space, context, different limitations on income and expenses, as well as the need to pay artists fairly and be more ambitious. 

Artist and loan fees are built from a minimum fee recommendation taken from previously published commission fees in the Code that were calculated from survey responses and then measured against comparable industry awards. From this data point we have scaled the fees accounting for larger organisations having greater capacity to pay, and artists in later career stages earning higher fees for their labour, time and skills in the same way that workers’ career development is recognised in other industries. NAVA has also improved equity in the rates for group exhibitions, with fees scaled up for larger groups of artists.

Following the application of this methodology the fees were tested against current practice, sector feedback and international standards to ensure they are feasible as recommended minimum rates, while also meeting standards of fair pay. 

Key factors taken into account in the development of the methodology for touring fees are tour duration and the size and capacity of a host and managing organisation. Artist career stage was removed as a determinant in this fee set as it is standard practice in touring exhibitions to pay all artists at the same rate, regardless of career stage. The methodology combines the same organisational scaling approach as developed for fees and loans, with data from substantial sector consultation on current payment rates and practices.

As part of NAVA’s partnership with Precarious Movements: Choreography and the Museum, performer fees have been drawn from the Live Performance Award (LPA) and should be read together with NAVA’s fee schedule for Artist Fees or Loan Fees. 

Precarious Movements is a research project that will model best practice in commissioning, curating, conserving, presenting and interpreting choreographic work in the museum and gallery context. The project was awarded an ARC Linkage Grant over three years from 2021 to 2024 with in-kind support from partner organisations University New South Wales (UNSW), National Gallery of Victoria (NGV), TATE UK, Art Gallery New South Wales (AGNSW) and Monash University Museum of Art (MUMA) and independent artist Shelley Lasica. New content is being developed for the Code of Practice as part of this work.

The LPA wage is a performance call for a hired performer on a casual basis up to three hours and is not an Artist Fee. When commissioning new performance work in a visual arts context, the artist is paid an artist fee to develop the new work as per NAVA’s fee schedule for Artist Fees or Loan Fees, and production costs are to include performer wages as per the LPA.

The rates for both concept design and artist fees within the Public Art section, were developed from consultation in 2018-2019 and specific feedback provided on a 2019 release of draft numbers. Project budget size is generally indicative of the proportion of work involved for an artist in both developing a concept during the shortlisting phase and time and skills utilised in creating the artwork. Budget size was consequently used as a referential data point to scale the fees against. Both types of fees have a recommended minimum range to account for variables that occur in practice and cannot be captured in these numbers, for example two projects of similar overall budget amounts may differ in complexity.

The concept design fees have increased at the higher end of the minimum recommended range based on majority sector feedback to the 2019 draft numbers. The methodology created to scale the fee ranges takes into account a larger proportion of the project budget at the smaller end and then scales based on key data anchor points. There are overlapping ranges between the $100,000+ and $500,000+ budget sizes as these condensed brackets (added as a majority of public art projects take place between these budget amounts) will encounter different variables and levels of project complexity.

Artist fees have increased overall based on majority sector feedback to the 2019 draft numbers. Similar to the concept design fees, the methodology created to scale the fee ranges takes into account a larger proportion of the project budget at the smaller end and then scales based on key data anchor points. However, the scale is not as steep, taking into account that a larger budget will more directly correlate to more time, work and skills being required of the artist.

The research and development hourly fees have been produced by applying the same methodology developed for artist and loan fees in the sixth edition of the Code. This approach uses a sliding scale of minimum fees ranges which take organisation size and capacity into account, expanding NAVA’s previous work in identifying artists’ career stage as a factor that informs minimum rates of pay. 

The lowest end of the scale has used the national minimum wage for casual workers as the establishing reference point, with early career artists paid by a micro organisation receiving a comparable fee to the minimum wage. 

NAVA acknowledges that many residency programs in Australia operate on business models that do not support the payment of artist fees. The fees produced are intended for organisations receiving public funding for residencies, as such organisation size has been removed from this fee set. The research and development hourly rates for medium organisations (as a midpoint reference) have been used to produce the residency fees that are scaled based on artist career stage. As the duration extends, a percentage discount has been applied to the fee.

The minimum standard fee ranges for workshops are based on recommendations made by the Australian Society of Authors (ASA).

ASA rates have been used in previous iterations of the Code and while widely used, were also found to be beyond capacity for some smaller and regional galleries through NAVA consultation. As a result NAVA applied the methodological approach developed for artist fees to scale workshop fees according to organisation capacity. Artist career stage was not applied to this set of fee recommendations as an artist’s experience will not always correlate directly to their facilitation skill. The percentage fee increase based on organisation size was also flattened to reflect current sector practice of paying comparable workshop rates.

The judging and assessing fees have been produced by applying the same methodology developed for artist and loan fees in the sixth edition of the Code. This approach uses a sliding scale of minimum fees ranges which take organisation size and capacity into account. Artist career stages have been removed as a factor from this data set as it is not common practice to pay judges and peer assessors based on career stage criteria. Key benchmark data for the scaled fees was sourced from sector consultation on current levels of payment. A small percentage discount has been applied to the full day fee amounts.

The freelance rates are drawn from the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, the Australian Society of Authors and the Life Models' Society as well as NAVA’s research and consultation for the Code revision in 2021 and 2022 with a group of independent art workers as well as a number of First Nations Art Centres. Public Art consultant fees were developed from consultation in 2018-2019 and specific feedback provided on a 2019 release of draft numbers. 

Arts worker salaries and wages have been benchmarked against data collected from various organisations, recently advertised roles and a number of state based public sector awards which apply at the major institutions. The same logic employed to scale the artist fees has then been applied to the number set to scale a set of salary ranges which take organisation size and capacity into account, noting a steeper increase in salaries at the management level. 

Following the application of this methodology the salaries and wages were tested against current practice and sector feedback to ensure they are feasible as recommended minimum rates, while also meeting standards of fair pay.

Independent Art Worker rates were developed from consultation in 2021 with a group of independent art workers and benchmarked against data collected from various organisations. Rates vary significantly depending on the scale and length of the agreement as well as the specialist knowledge of the practitioner.