The BigTop Label- European circus arts quality assurance system celebrates in 2026 its 10th anniversary. The following article of Mr Tamás Szalay gives an overview of the importance, and an eventual international impact of the BigTopLabel.
Tamás Lajos Szalay
(creative coordinator of BigTopLabel)
BigTopLabel – a decade in review and a possible global outlook
In the history of European circus arts, initiatives rarely emerge that are simultaneously capable of providing an institutional response to the question of quality, strengthening professional self-regulation, and at the same time becoming a politically meaningful reference point. BigTopLabel – now with more than ten years of operation – can be regarded precisely as such an exception. It is not merely a certification system, but a structural intervention that has addressed one of the most difficult challenges of the circus sector: how to credibly distinguish between quality and quality within an extremely heterogeneous, fragmented, and often informally operating industry. Its origins can be traced back to a moment that has since become symbolic: a proposal presented in the European Parliament in 2016, which raised the idea of creating an independent quality assurance system for the circus world, similar to Michelin stars. That initiative – which at the time may have seemed ambitious, even excessive to many – has by now become an operational reality. BigTopLabel has not only been established, but has also acquired tangible professional and institutional weight.
One of the fundamental characteristics of the circus sector is that it simultaneously embodies traditional, family-based operating models and contemporary, project-based, often experimental structures. In such an environment, the concept of “quality” can easily become relativised: the weight of audience experience, animal welfare standards, technical execution, or artistic concept may differ significantly from one troupe to another. In this context, BigTopLabel has introduced a clear, transparent, and multidimensional evaluation system that simultaneously assesses artistic performance, operating conditions, and social responsibility. This approach naturally goes beyond a simple “certification”: it in fact creates a system of standards capable of guiding the market, the audience, and – not least – the regulatory environment. At the same time, it is important to emphasise that BigTopLabel does not seek to establish a universal aesthetic benchmark. Rather, it defines a minimum level and an attainable quality horizon alongside which artistic diversity can be preserved. This delicate balance is one of the system’s greatest strengths, but at the same time also its greatest challenge.
A certification system of this type can only exert real impact if its independence and credibility are beyond question. In the case of BigTopLabel, this dimension has been consciously designed. While the programme works closely with key organisations such as the European Circus Association (ECA) and the Fédération Mondiale du Cirque (FMC), one of its core principles is precisely the preservation of institutional autonomy. This duality – the simultaneous presence of cooperation and distance – is not merely an organisational matter, but the key to credibility. BigTopLabel could not be what it is if it were to become merely an advocacy tool; at the same time, it could not function effectively if it were detached from the professional environment. The fact that certifications are awarded by an independent panel of experts, based on multi-criteria on-site assessments, fundamentally contributes to the legitimacy of the system.
The often-cited “Michelin star” analogy in relation to BigTopLabel may at first appear to be a simple communication device, but in reality it reflects a deeper structural parallel. As with the Michelin system, this is a certification mechanism that not only evaluates, but also provides direction: it influences consumer decisions, encourages quality improvements among providers, and in the longer term shapes the functioning of the entire sector. At the same time, the analogy is not complete. Compared to the gastronomic sector, the circus world is far more heterogeneous, less standardisable, and more strongly dependent on cultural context. For this reason, BigTopLabel cannot simply become a “global ranking” without jeopardising its own core principles.
After ten years of operation, the question logically arises: is the BigTopLabel model suitable for application beyond Europe? In other words, does a “global circus quality” exist that can be interpreted within a unified system? The arguments on one side are clear. The circus is a global genre, with strong international mobility and significant cultural export potential. A European-rooted but internationally recognised certification system could strengthen professional standards, increase transparency, and potentially open new markets for certified troupes. At the same time, the counterarguments cannot be ignored. Different regions – whether Asia, North America, or Africa – have distinct cultural traditions, regulatory environments, and economic conditions. The export of a European normative system could easily be interpreted as cultural dominance, potentially provoking resistance from local professional communities. Consequently, the question is not only whether expansion is technically feasible, but also whether the profession – in a global sense – is open to this type of standardisation.
The first ten years of BigTopLabel demonstrate that the circus sector is capable of creating institutions for itself that simultaneously serve quality, credibility, and professional development. This in itself is a significant achievement in a sector that for a long time remained outside the focus of structured cultural policies. However, the key question of the next decade will likely not be whether the system will endure – there is every reason to believe it will – but rather how it can adapt to a changing international environment. The possibility of global expansion is present, but it can only become a reality if BigTopLabel preserves the balance that has so far underpinned its success: the simultaneous enforcement of independence, professional credibility, and cultural sensitivity.
Brochure about the first ten years of BTL available here: https://bigtoplabel.com/btl10-booklet/
The economic and social role of the circus in Europe
– a rethinking of an undervalued sector
For a long time, European circus arts have primarily appeared as a cultural phenomenon in policy discourse and public thinking, while their economic role – although existing and measurable – has typically remained in the background. This imbalance in perspective is particularly striking in light of the fact that, over the course of its more than two-and-a-half-century history, the sector has continuously adapted to changes in the social and economic environment, and today can be interpreted as a complex, multidimensional player within the creative industries.
A comprehensive analysis prepared a few years ago for the European Commission – initiated by István Ujhelyi, former Member of the European Parliament and circus ambassador of the FMC – sought precisely to fill this missing perspective by examining the circus not only as a cultural, but also as an economic factor. This was not merely another cultural policy document, but an unusually broad attempt to map the sector from several angles. In this respect, Europe occupies a special position: there are few, if any, comparable examples elsewhere in the world where the circus sector has been assessed so systematically through an institutional European policy framework, including its social and economic dimensions.
The starting point is clear: the circus “provides quality entertainment to millions and ensures livelihoods for tens of thousands of people,” while being “an integral part of the European economy.” This statement is not merely a rhetorical turn, but a structural fact supported by the available data.
According to the European Commission’s study, there are currently approximately 1,600–2,100 circus enterprises operating in the European Union, employing a total of 11,000–15,000 people – although this figure has evidently changed somewhat since the study was completed. At first glance, this number may not seem particularly significant in volume; however, considering the structure of the cultural and creative industries – where the dominance of micro-enterprises is typical – it can be regarded as particularly substantial.
A further dimension of economic weight is provided by turnover and audience reach. Some of the companies examined generate annual revenues exceeding EUR 1 million, while one-third of the troupes attract more than 30,000 spectators per year. It logically follows that the circus is not a marginal form of entertainment, but a service with a significant consumer base and a stable revenue structure.
At the same time, it is important to nuance this picture. The sector is highly fragmented: alongside large, traditional troupes, a considerable number of smaller, often project-based contemporary circus enterprises are also present. This duality represents both strength and a challenge. On the one hand, it enriches the artistic and organisational landscape of European circus; on the other, it makes unified economic policy treatment more difficult.
The economic significance of the circus is not limited to direct revenues and employment. Equally important are the so-called multiplier effects, which appear in tourism, hospitality, transport and local services. One of the fundamental aims of the BigTopLabel programme is precisely to strengthen the link with the tourism sector and to raise awareness of the role of the circus as an attraction. This is particularly relevant in countries where circus performances form part of seasonal tourism offerings and contribute to increased visitor numbers.
In this regard, it is also worth briefly looking beyond Europe. In China and Mongolia, circus arts – partly with state support – have become a tool of national cultural export, while in the United States, large-scale productions, for example resident shows in Las Vegas, form an integrated part of the entertainment industry, generating significant tourism revenues. Although these models cannot be transferred in all their elements to the European environment, they clearly demonstrate that the economic potential of the circus extends far beyond traditional cultural frameworks.
This is also where the European experience may offer a useful reference point for countries outside Europe. The preservation of circus heritage is becoming an increasingly visible topic in several national cultural strategies, but the socio-economic role of the circus has rarely been articulated in such a structured way. The European example therefore opens a door to a broader discussion: when governments and institutions assess the value of circus arts, they should take into account not only questions of heritage, culture and identity, but also employment, tourism, local economies, education, innovation and community-building.
One of the most important and often underestimated resources of the circus is its capacity for adaptation and renewal. Over recent decades, the sector has continuously responded to changing consumer demands, technological possibilities and the regulatory environment. The European Commission’s analysis clearly pointed out that innovation “is one of the defining factors of the circus’s success.” This innovation appears at multiple levels: artistic, technological and organisational.
At the same time, the tension between traditional and contemporary circus cannot be ignored, but it should not be reduced to a simple hierarchy of innovation. Contemporary circus often operates with a more experimental, conceptual and theatre-like language. It tends to search more visibly for unusual forms of expression, interdisciplinary approaches and new dramaturgical structures. It is also often more experienced in project-based cultural financing, international grant applications and institutional networks.
Traditional circus, by contrast, usually rests on more direct market exposure and a more stable audience-based economic model. Precisely because of this, it is also under constant pressure to adapt: to renew its shows, modernise its communication, respond to changing audience expectations, comply with evolving regulatory environments, and maintain relevance in an increasingly competitive entertainment market. In other words, innovation is present in both models, but it takes different forms. The real question is not which model is more innovative, but how the sector can recognise the different types of renewal taking place within it and turn this diversity into a strategic advantage.
The exploitation of the sector’s economic potential is significantly influenced by the regulatory environment. One of the fundamental problems is that the status of the circus differs from one Member State to another: some treat it as a cultural sector, while others regard it more as a business activity. This heterogeneity hinders the development of unified development and financing strategies.
Access to EU funding is also limited, and this must be clearly stated – not for the first time. Although Creative Europe and other programmes are, in principle, open to circus projects, the sector’s participation is low, partly due to a lack of information and partly due to administrative burdens. At the same time, it is evident that financing problems cannot be attributed solely to external factors. The lack of proactive coordination within the sector, limited willingness to cooperate, and the restricted effectiveness of joint interest representation also contribute to the current situation.
In this context, initiatives such as BigTopLabel – which create quality standards and a shared platform – are of strategic importance not only from a cultural, but also from an economic perspective. Especially if the profession itself views and uses them as such.
Based on the available data and analyses, it can be clearly stated that the economic role of the circus in Europe is undervalued. Although the size of the sector cannot be compared to that of major industries, its complex system of impacts – from employment through tourism to innovation – justifies examining it not only from a cultural policy, but also from an economic policy perspective.
At the same time, it is also clear that the future of the circus does not depend solely on external recognition. The sector’s internal adaptability, willingness to cooperate, and strategic thinking are at least as decisive. In this sense, the current situation is not only a challenge, but also an opportunity: to reinterpret its own narrative and, building on its cultural heritage, to occupy a consciously constructed economic position on the map of the European creative industries – while also offering a model that may be relevant beyond Europe.
