The Cultural fingerprint: what we could learn from Sherlock about data.
In a sector that values imagination and originality, it's striking how difficult it is to organize and share digital information about cultural offerings efficiently. Gaining audience insights, having an overview of what’s culturally on offer and developing evidence-based policy are key ambitions within the cultural sector — but without a shared digital foundation, these remain complex and labour-intensive.
The article “The Idea about Cultural IDs” makes a case for introducing unique cultural IDs for performances, productions, creators and organizations. These digital fingerprints could serve as a linking pin between diverse systems — from ticketing and planning to audience analysis and policymaking.
The concept isn’t new
Other sectors, like the publishing (ISBN) or retail (EAN), have been using standard identifiers for decades. Within the cultural field, initiatives like DDEX in the music industry or DIP in the performing arts have already demonstrated the added value of standardization. The benefits are clear: less duplicate work, better data exchange and more control over the impact of cultural programming.
Standardization requires collaboration — not just on a technical level, but especially in terms of governance. Who manages these IDs? What definitions do we agree on? And how do we ensure that such a new infrastructure is actually embraced by a critical mass?
This article not only outlines the need for cultural IDs, but also addresses the conditions for successful implementation. It’s an invitation to the sector to start a conversation about building a shared digital infrastructure that supports innovation, efficiency and better-informed decision-making.
