Between fall 2025 and today, CLCF folks have been kept busy writing up research findings, articles, and grant applications. In this post, and in preparation for our next sets of interviews of several people in the Canadian culture sector, we share some thoughts about the policy documents and actions that we have been referring to and analyzing in Canada.

In recent years, rapid technological advances have prompted widespread institutional adoption of genAI in the culture sector (Chun 2021; Erickson 2024; Gibson 2024; Hogan 2024). Naturally, this has disrupted established vocational practices in cultural sectors worldwide, sharpening calls for regulatory frameworks that balance innovation with the protection of creative workers (Bourcheix-Laporte 2021; Hu & Chen 2025; Hylland, Berge and Haugsevje 2025; Luka, Grohmann & Idiz 2025; McKelvey, Redden, Roberge & Stark 2024). Federal data reveals that information and cultural industries demonstrate the highest AI adoption rates of any Canadian sector at 35.6% (Statistics Canada 2025). Similarly, current discourse emanating from various professions in cultural production has highlighted the seemingly limitless and efficiency-optimizing affordances of genAI’s use (Peukert 2019; Delfanti & Phan 2024; Derda 2023; Swords & Willment 2024). And yet, cultural industries experience the lowest rates of AI-driven job displacement among sectors adopting these technologies. Supposedly, 12.8% of cultural businesses use AI to replace employees; meanwhile, 68.5% employ it to accelerate creative content development (Statistics Canada 2025). This apparent contradiction evidently underscores the complexity of AI integration within cultural production, demanding further inquiry.

Government policy responses markedly intensified following the emergence of genAI in late 2022. These responses shifted from exploratory frameworks to action-oriented directives seeking specific legislative interventions (House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage 2024; House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry and Technology 2024). Despite taking steps to become a groundbreaker in national AI strategy– for example, by introducing the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy and appointing a Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation–Canadian AI policy discourse has tended not to centre workers in general and cultural industries in particular, including during the National Summit on AI and Culture held in April 2026. However, as part of this shift, the federal government has committed some resources to address AI’s impact on creative industries. This includes $50M for the Sectoral Workforce Solutions Program supporting creative industry workers and an additional $50M for the Canadian AI Safety Institute (Government of Canada 2024a; Government of Canada 2024b). These investments reflect recognition that while Canadians assign the lowest positive impact scores to AI in arts and culture at 26.1% (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2024), the sector requires proactive support rather than reactive damage control.

On the basis of federal reports in the past five years, we observe four major policy challenges that have crystallized around AI’s intersection with cultural production. First, algorithmic curation systems increasingly function as gatekeepers determining the visibility of Canadian content across streaming platforms including Netflix, YouTube, and Spotify (substantially an intensification rather than a new way of being). This raises questions about cultural sovereignty and the effectiveness of existing regulatory frameworks such as Bill C-11 in ensuring Canadian content discoverability (CRTC 2024). Second, copyright and intellectual property concerns have generated extensive consultation processes examining whether creative works should be subject to licensing requirements when used for AI training. Deep divisions have emerged between technology developers advocating for broad fair use exceptions and creators demanding consent-based compensation models (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and Department of Canadian Heritage 2022). Concerns of AI bias and challenges to Canada’s commitment to diversity (Canada Council for the Arts 2022) as well as misinformation and disinformation (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2024) complete these quadrants of concern.

On the industry side, responses have been swift and coordinated. Cultural sector unions and professional associations have developed unprecedented protective frameworks. The Writers’ Guild of Canada (2024) secured the first Canadian production agreement incorporating AI protections in 2024. This agreement requires disclosure of AI use and prohibits AI systems from receiving writing credits or compensation. ACTRA Toronto‘s (2023) survey of more than 28,000 members revealed that 98% of the surveyed population were concerned about AI misuse of performer rights, with 93% believing AI will replace human actors in specific roles. The Directors Guild of Canada (2023) established a four-principle framework defending creative work, supporting job categories, protecting intellectual property rights, and demanding ethical AI implementation.

Meanwhile, provincial policy frameworks have emerged as testing grounds for AI governance approaches. Ontario introduced Canada’s first provincial AI framework focusing on government use and ethical implementation (Government of Ontario 2024). However, these frameworks often prioritize economic development over cultural protection. This is evidenced by the Vector Institute’s celebration of 17,196 new AI jobs and $2.6 billion in investment while providing no analysis of creative sector workforce impacts (Vector Institute 2024). This disconnect between AI economic development strategies and cultural sector needs reflects broader tensions between innovation-focused policies and cultural worker protection that characterize current policy debates.

Our review of popular and academic literature inquiring into the current relationship between the culture sector and genAI reveals that there is limited insight into this topic (Vear & Poltronieri 2022). While a small handful of studies account for how specific culture sector professions make use of AI in processes of cultural production and workflow optimization (Canadian Media Producers Association 2024; Interactive Ontario 2024; Work in Culture & Nordicity 2025), these studies are dwarfed by the majority of literature focused on the speculative threats and opportunities that culture sector workers face with the advent of genAI (Benjamin 2024; Gibson 2024; Mohamed 2024; Mueth 2023). This reflects broader needs for the reduction of uncertainty and the increase of evidence-based inquiry about human engagements with genAI. Such needs are imbued with a sense of urgency in a sector whose locus is presumed to be human creativity and intelligence (Chiang 2024; Cizek & Uricchio 2022; Loveless 2019). Policy frameworks like those developed by City of Toronto (2025), the Toronto International Film Festival (2024) and industry guidelines from organizations such as the Canadian Media Producers Association (2024) represent initial attempts to bridge the gap between technological possibility and creative practice. These efforts remain largely untested in terms of their effectiveness in supporting sustainable cultural work (Hogan 2024; MIT 2023). While creative industries and their relationship between genAI and its perceived threats and opportunities are technically considered in Canada’s Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (2023), this substantially mirrors that of most existing federal vocational- and/or business-related legislation and policy and are largely inapplicable to key features of cultural work’s characteristic occupational arrangements and related inequities (Barzilay 2018; Bourcheix-Laporte 2025; Wall-Andrews & Luka 2022). Given this context, longitudinal research examining the iterative integration of genAI within the daily operations of cultural organizations is critically needed. That’s one of our objectives in the next few years.