Art as a Human Need: Why Evidence Matters

Youth mental health is at a critical juncture worldwide, with rising rates of anxiety, depression, and trauma among children and adolescents. In response, a Network meeting and international conference were held in Salzburg, Austria, from April 29 to 30, 2026 - inaugurated by the Interuniversity Organization Arts & Knowledges (University of Salzburg/Mozarteum University Salzburg) in cooperation with Salzburg Global, the International Network for the Critical Appraisal of Arts & Health Research (INCAAHR), and the Salzburg Institute for Arts in Medicine (SIAM). The event brought together members of the INCAAHR as well as leading experts and authors of landmark publications in the field. During this two-day hybrid program, over 50 experts gathered to focus on a pivotal shift in the field: moving toward a rigorous, evidence-based framework that recognizes art not as a luxury, but as a fundamental human need.  

There was a refreshing honesty to the opening. The audience was welcomed by Dominic Regester and Júlia Escrivà Moreno from Salzburg Global, Constanze Wimmer und Eugen Banauch from Mozarteum University, as well as Katarzyna Grebosz-Haring and Stephen Clift, Co-chairs of INCAAHR. Participants were invited not just to celebrate the arts, but to interrogate them. By deliberately choosing to view arts and health through the lens of critical, evidence-based inquiry rather than merely advocacy, the conference sent a clear message: Since the arts are so essential, making "big claims without evidence" only serves to harm the field.

The urgency is sharpened by a revealing paradox highlighted by George Musgrave in his work on the mental health challenges associated with making a living out of music: If art heals, why do professional artists, especially young female musicians, show rates of anxiety and suicide dramatically higher than the general population? The answer, the room concluded, lies partly in the fact that artists are often structurally excluded from the very institutions they serve. They are brought in to help others heal but rarely receive support themselves.

Participants agreed that the core challenge is no longer about believing in the power of the arts but ensuring that belief can withstand strict scientific scrutiny. One individual shared:

Part of building that case means expanding the definition of what counts as evidence and where it is found. Nicole D’Souza from the University of Ottawa made a compelling case for universities as ideal testing grounds for Social Prescribing. She described campuses as contained communities where loneliness is endemic and the urgent need to feel that one matters often goes unmet, and where structured arts interventions could be both delivered and rigorously measured. Tasha Golden, Consultant, Artist, Behavioral Scientist, and Adjunct Faculty at the University of Florida Center for Arts in Medicine pushed this further, introducing a socio-ecological model of health that argues community conditions are the primary shapers of young people’s well-being. Clinical interventions matter, but so does the environment around a child: the relationships, the belonging, the sense of being seen. This imagination is what allows us to see clearly enough to identify what needs to change, and to build the evidence that makes change possible.

Against this backdrop, the conference spotlighted work demonstrating that the biological and psychological impact of the arts is already within scientific reach. Leonhard Thun-Hohenstein, Chair of SIAM, who has 20 years of experience with art-based interventions in child and adolescent psychiatry (CAP), gave perhaps the most grounding contribution. Art, he argued, belongs inside clinical practice not as decoration but as a genuine therapeutic tool, one that offers children a way to express thoughts and traumas they do not yet have words for. The “Art is a Doctor” project (2013–2017) provides measurable proof: Activities like singing or clowning significantly reduce cortisol, the body’s primary stress hormone.  

Anita Jensen and Nicola Holt built on this with findings from a systematic review of Arts on Prescription (AoP), a model where general practitioners refer young patients to community art workshops, across 25 studies in five countries. The results showed consistent psychological and social benefits: greater confidence, reduced isolation, and expanded opportunities for development. The significance of this work lies in its design: A multi-country systematic review delivers the replicable, cross-cultural proof needed to secure widespread, institutional backing for the field.

Closer to home, Alexandra Häupl brought the conference into the wards of Salzburg’s own University Hospital for Pediatrics, where the YOUNG.ART program uses collage, dance, music, photography, and literature with hospitalized children and teenagers. One project invited teens to photograph their own “places of strength.” Another used blacklight dance to create a safe, wordless space for expression. A vinyl record, produced in collaboration with Mozarteum University, gave young patients something lasting and entirely their own.

These documented clinical interventions move past anecdotes, generating the real-world data needed to drive systematic research forward. 

The conference closed with firm commitments to a shared agenda: scaling from small pilots to systemic policy, pursuing global equity, protecting artist well-being, and building the rigorous evidence governments require. Participants also agreed on the need to formalize informal knowledge, capturing the vital work done daily by teachers and youth workers that often goes undocumented.

What happened over two days in Salzburg was proof of what becomes possible when there is space to listen, challenge each other, and let ideas grow. As dialogue turns into implementation, the real work begins: solidifying the insights into a robust empirical foundation capable of effecting permanent, structural change across the health ecosystem.