Central Asia is gaining cultural momentum. Across the region, major art and cultural institutions are opening in rapid succession, signaling a shift in how these countries see themselves and how they want to be seen.
What is driving this wave of cultural investment and how might it reshape the region’s artistic landscape and its global visibility?
From philanthropy to public impact
Since its opening in mid-September last year, the Almaty Museum of Arts (ALMA) has quickly become one of the most talked-about cultural developments in the region.
Positioning itself as a contemporary art hub for Central Asia, the museum presents the long-assembled private collection of its founder, businessman and philanthropist Nurlan Smagulov, alongside newly commissioned works by leading international artists.
Related
In just a few months, ALMA has attracted 250,000 visitors — a figure that speaks more convincingly about the demand for cultural spaces than any official statements could.
The Almaty Museum of Arts, with NADES (2023) in the foreground. – Photo: Alexey Naroditsky for Almaty Museum of Arts
Almost simultaneously, Almaty marked another milestone with the long-anticipated opening of the Tselinny Center of Contemporary Culture. The institution was founded in 2018 by businessman and philanthropist Kairat Boranbayev, but its permanent home — a reconstructed Soviet-era cinema — was only completed last year.
The transformation was led by British architect Asif Khan, who preserved the building’s modernist character while adapting it for contemporary use. Since opening, the institution has welcomed around 60,000 visitors.
Tselinny differs from ALMA in both concept and mission. Without a permanent collection, it is the first private institution in Kazakhstan devoted specifically to supporting contemporary culture through a dedicated, multidisciplinary space.
Tselinny Center of Contemporary Culture, Almaty. – Photo: Atelier Cauchemar for Tselinny
According to Jamilya Nurkaliyeva, general director of the Tselinny Center of Contemporary Culture, the institution’s focus extends beyond exhibitions:
“Over the seven years of our work, we have focused on building intellectual infrastructure and forging connections with intellectual communities — scholars and researchers who study our region and the issues that matter to us today. We work with local artists who are creating here and now.”
Tselinny’s programme spans visual art and music projects, film screenings, theatre productions and experimental formats. At present, it is hosting Union of Artists, an exhibition curated by Vladislav Sludskiy.
Beyond exhibitions and performances, Tselinny also carries out research and educational work, positioning itself as a platform for intellectual exchange among artists, theorists and cultural professionals from diverse social, cultural and ideological backgrounds.
Culture as a state project
Uzbekistan, too, has made decisive moves to position itself on the contemporary art map. One of the most visible signals was the Bukhara Biennial, which concluded in November 2025. Titled Broken Hearts, it was the first biennial of its kind not only in Uzbekistan but across Central Asia.
Related
Another highly anticipated development is the opening of the Centre for Contemporary Arts Tashkent, scheduled for March this year. Located in Tashkent, the new institution was designed by the award-winning architecture firm Studio KO.
Centre for Contemporary Arts in Tashkent – Photo: Studio KO for the Uzbekistan Art and Culture Development Foundation
Conceived as a long-term platform rather than a single event, the centre aims to host exhibitions, artist residencies, research programmes and educational initiatives, positioning Tashkent as a year-round hub for contemporary art production and exchange.
The list of upcoming developments does not end there. A new National Art Museum of Uzbekistan is scheduled to open in 2028 in Tashkent.
Together, these initiatives point to a carefully structured and long-term approach to cultural development. They are being driven by the Art and Culture Development Foundation of Uzbekistan, a state institution operating under the presidential administration’s department of creative economy and tourism.
One goal – two approaches
As Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan approach four decades of independence, their contemporary art scenes — once fragmented and largely unsustainable — are entering a new stage of maturity.
Artists from both countries have long been present in major international institutions — from the Centre Pompidou to Museum of Modern Art and museums in Antwerp — often gaining recognition abroad faster than at home. Today, however, cultural infrastructure in both countries is finally beginning to catch up with the level of their artists.
Meruyert Kaliyeva, art gallerist and director of the ALMA, notes that the Kazakh case carries a strong generational dimension: “Both projects are rooted in very personal trajectories. The first generation of entrepreneurs of independent Kazakhstan is reaching an age where questions of legacy become central.”
Kazakh curator Yuliya Sorokina also welcomes these changes, calling them a point of no return for the country. “Everything has changed now,” Sorokina says. “Life in Kazakhstan has shifted because two world-class institutions have opened. And the fact that they are not state-run matters.”
She notes that in Kazakhstan, contemporary art has historically received little to no government funding. As a result, institutions and artists have relied largely on fundraising, private patronage and philanthropy.
Uzbekistan, by contrast, has pursued a predominantly state-led model. Most large-scale cultural initiatives are publicly funded, and many artists and cultural professionals view this concentrated, concept-driven approach as effective.
Normurod Negmatov, an artist and founder of the private Ruhsor Museum of Contemporary Art in Samarkand, sees tangible results: “In Uzbekistan, culture is supported by the state. The country is betting on tourism, exhibitions and museums are being rethought from the ground up,” says Negmatov. “This produces results. In just a few years, the Foundation’s strategy has begun to bear fruit — Uzbekistan has become more active and more visible on the global stage.”
At the same time, observers caution that strong state involvement can be fragile if political priorities shift. Meruyert Kaliyeva recalls the example of Azerbaijan, where heavy government investment in culture was followed by a decline in long-term engagement. She hopes Uzbekistan’s trajectory will prove more sustainable.
Whether privately run or state funded, in both cases the expansion of cultural infrastructure is increasingly seen as a catalyst for tourism, as newly opened institutions become destinations in their own right.
The difference lies in intent. In Uzbekistan, cultural development is conceived from the outset as a state-led strategy tied to tourism and economic policy.
As Jamilya Nurkaliyeva explains: “In Uzbekistan, culture is defined at the state level as a core public value, and the government is investing heavily in increasing tourist flows, promoting cities, and building modern cultural infrastructure as part of a broader development agenda.”
In Kazakhstan, by contrast, touristic impact is not the driving logic but an expected side effect of privately initiated cultural projects. This does not mean, however, that cultural professionals do not aspire to the so-called “Bilbao effect” — the idea that landmark cultural projects can transform cities and regional economies.
“We do expect a Bilbao effect,” says Yuliya Sorokina, speaking of Kazakhstan. “In Bilbao, they have the sea — we have mountains, striking landscapes and a fascinating city.”