Asean adopts creative economy framework but lacks tools to measure it

KUALA LUMPUR, 24 AUGUST 2026 —

ASEAN’s Creative Economy Push Faces Urgent Need for Clearer Definitions and Better Data

At the 2025 ASEAN Summit, regional leaders adopted the Creative Economy Sustainability Framework, marking the bloc’s first coordinated commitment to developing industries such as gaming, film, and digital content. Yet even as governments pledge investment, a fundamental question lingers: What is the actual economic footprint of the creative sector?

More than a decade ago, the creative economy was hailed as a new driver of growth. In 2013, the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) estimated the global “orange economy”—encompassing film, music, design, gaming, publishing, and crafts—at US$4.3 trillion, or 6.1% of global GDP, supporting 144 million jobs. That same year, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) reported global trade in creative goods and services at a record US$624 billion.

Governments took notice. By 2025, the creative economy had become a staple in national development strategies across ASEAN. But today, despite its prominence, there remains no agreed definition of what constitutes the sector. Countries measure it differently: Indonesia includes culinary arts, Thailand factors in traditional medicine, while international bodies apply varying frameworks. The IADB tracks 45 industries, UNCTAD 54, and UNESCO 37.

ASEAN’s own framework acknowledges this gap, stating that the region still lacks baseline definitions and metrics.

This inconsistency distorts comparisons. UNCTAD’s 2024 Creative Economy Outlook found the sector’s share of GDP ranging from 0.5% to 7.3% across 36 reporting countries—differences driven not just by economic performance, but by what each nation chooses to count. The IADB has not updated its US$4.3 trillion valuation since 2013, leaving policymakers with outdated benchmarks.

Measurement gaps extend beyond size. Some sub-sectors are well-tracked—music, for instance, benefits from streaming platforms that generate real-time data—while others, like crafts and traditional cultural expressions, remain invisible. Trade statistics often fail to distinguish handmade goods from mass-produced items, and much of their value is generated through informal markets and tourism, which official data struggles to capture.

The uneven picture extends to who benefits. Most official statistics focus on aggregate indicators like GDP or exports, offering little insight into income distribution. Available data suggests a concentrated sector. Spotify’s 2024 “Loud & Clear” report found that of 12 million artists on the platform, fewer than 0.6% earned more than US$10,000 annually. On YouTube, the top 10% of creators captured 62% of ad revenue in 2025, up from 53% in 2023.

Yet few countries track median incomes or income inequality within creative occupations, leaving policymakers unable to assess whether growth is inclusive or whether public support—such as film subsidies—delivers meaningful returns.

The challenge is compounded by technological disruption. Generative AI is reshaping content creation, with some roles disappearing entirely. One study found freelance writing job postings fell 30% within eight months of ChatGPT’s launch. Yet statistical frameworks have not adapted. UNCTAD’s latest framework does not classify AI-generated content as creative-economy output, and there is no international consensus on how to measure it.

ASEAN’s 2025 Creative Economy Sustainability Framework acknowledges these gaps but stops short of prescribing solutions. Experts argue the bloc must act urgently. Standardizing definitions—such as adopting UNESCO’s 2025 Framework for Cultural Statistics, its first update since 2009—could improve comparability. Malaysia’s 2025 satellite cultural and creative account, the first in Southeast Asia, demonstrates that such reforms are achievable within a single budget cycle.

The UK’s use of defined industry codes to isolate creative activity from overlapping sectors offers another model.

Beyond definitions, governments should expand data collection to include median earnings, income distribution, and employment quality—not just GDP or export values. This would allow policymakers to evaluate whether incentives like film tax credits deliver positive returns. Independent assessments, such as those by Good Jobs First on U.S. state-level film subsidies, have found negative ROI in multiple cases, including Georgia’s US$1 billion credit in 2023.

Comparable studies on ASEAN’s creative grants are scarce, limiting confidence in their cost-effectiveness.

The creative economy still holds promise, but its potential cannot be realized without clarity. ASEAN’s push for standardized definitions and modernized statistical frameworks is a critical first step. Without it, policymakers risk flying blind—allocating resources based on outdated or inconsistent data, and failing to ensure that growth translates into broad-based opportunity.

The vision of human creativity as an engine of economic progress remains compelling. But without better data, its true impact—and the policies needed to harness it—will remain uncertain. The region’s leaders have set a course. Now, they must ensure their compass is calibrated to reality.

Related: Kuala Lumpur