The Malta Entertainment Industry and Arts Association (MEIA), through its Literature Subcommittee, has published consolidated, anonymised feedback in response to the National Book Council’s 5-Year Strategic Vision (2025–2030). The responses, gathered from authors, publishers, and readers across Malta, reflect a broad appreciation of the vision’s intent, paired with clear calls for concrete action, stronger support mechanisms, and more inclusive stakeholder engagement.
“While the strategy outlines ambitious goals, contributors highlighted the urgent need for clear execution plans, measurable outcomes, and policy mechanisms that truly support those working across the literary value chain,” said the MEIA Literature Subcommittee.
Below are the top concerns raised by each group.
Authors’ Feedback:
The strategy has been received as a positive and necessary step, but many authors have expressed concern that it remains too vague. Several called for concrete implementation plans, clearly defined terms, and measurable outcomes. There is an overarching need for more robust data collection and serious market research to ground future decision-making. While the vision is appreciated, many fear it will remain a document of aspirations without detailed action plans.
The need for equitable financial support is a major theme. There is strong consensus around the idea of introducing a basic income scheme for authors, but contributors stressed that this must be administered with transparency, with clear criteria, definitions of what constitutes a “book,” and accountability structures.
A pressing concern for many writers is the lack of proper infrastructure to support their work. There were repeated calls for more bookshops, particularly in key educational institutions like the University of Malta, MCAST, and Junior College. Distribution remains a weak link in the local book ecosystem, and some authors urged the state to encourage new startups in book retail and distribution logistics.
Visibility was another recurring point. Several suggested that winners of the National Book Prize deserve more than accolades, they should be translated, promoted abroad, and supported in touring their work, both locally and internationally. Authors also noted the power of social media and public displays, citing poetry posters on public transport as an example of effective outreach.
Some contributors emphasised the importance of not forgetting older readers. They proposed setting up libraries and organising reading events in elderly homes, especially considering that older adults often have more time to engage with literature. The shortage of trained reviewers and accessible review platforms was also raised as a significant gap in the current ecosystem.
Finally, authors flagged the difficulty of sustaining a literary career, as writing remains largely a side endeavour due to economic pressures. Suggestions included fostering cross-sector collaborations (such as adaptations into film or theatre), protecting the independence of the NBC, and establishing clear boundaries between vanity publishers and professional ones, to preserve quality and public trust.
Publishers’ Feedback:
Publishers generally appreciated the effort and tone of the strategy but pointed out that the document heavily favours literary ambitions while neglecting the financial and structural backbone of the industry: the publishers themselves. A consistent concern is the absence of recognition for the entrepreneurial risks that publishers take. Without their continued investment, the book market would falter. Therefore, many called for more direct support to sustain the publisher base, especially in times of crisis. Publishers also pointed out that while new publishers are offered support, long-standing publishers who have consistently invested in the industry are being overlooked.
There was significant scepticism about the accuracy of statistics cited in the strategy, such as the number of active publishers and editors. Contributors questioned the reliability of the NSO survey data, suggesting that it misrepresents the real situation. The need for precise, transparent data was highlighted multiple times.
Another policy gap identified is the unchecked distribution of free books by state institutions and embassies, which undermines the commercial value of books and harms publishers’ ability to survive. Several respondents urged the NBC to push back against this practice.
On infrastructure and technology, publishers took issue with proposals for training on ebooks and audiobooks. They argued that they already understand the technology—it’s the lack of a viable market and financial feasibility that hinders adoption. Instead, they recommended direct financial support, such as investment grants or tax breaks. The NBC’s digital systems, including ISBN applications and prize submissions, were also described as increasingly bureaucratic and not user-friendly.
The internationalisation strategy, while well-intentioned, was met with realism. Publishers pointed out the challenges of selling Maltese literature abroad, noting that the local context may not always resonate internationally. They also called for better support in promoting non-fiction works, particularly in the Melitensia category, which could appeal to niche but valuable international markets.
Finally, publishers raised concerns about the proposed Book Centre project. Many described it as an unnecessary expenditure that does little to resolve the pressing market issues. They called for these funds to be redirected to more immediate needs in the publishing ecosystem. More broadly, they expressed a desire for the NBC to serve as a vocal advocate for publishers, especially in discussions about funding and national policy.
Readers’ Feedback:
Although readers are frequently mentioned in the strategy, many contributors felt that they were not meaningfully included as active stakeholders. One common suggestion was to differentiate between readers and book buyers, noting that not all readers contribute to the economic health of the industry. Understanding and segmenting the local readership—by age, interests, or accessibility needs—would offer more targeted insights into promoting reading culture.
From an author-reader hybrid perspective, feedback called for a searchable national database of Maltese publications, each with brief synopses to help guide potential readers. Respondents also encouraged campaigns to foster a love of reading in schools, not just through curriculum but as a form of pleasure and discovery. Some emphasized the use of digital tools, influencers, and creative marketing campaigns to keep books visible and relevant in the everyday lives of young people.
There was also a desire to see more integration of literature into public spaces—beyond traditional events or bookshops. Posters, installations, and public readings were suggested as ways to give literature a physical presence in the community and rekindle the everyday encounter with books.
This collective feedback offers valuable insights into how Malta’s literary landscape can evolve over the next five years. It underscores the need for actionable, inclusive, and data-driven planning, grounded in the realities of authors, publishers, and readers alike.
The MEIA Literature Subcommittee encourages cultural stakeholders and the public to read the full feedback report and engage with the ongoing conversation shaping Malta’s literary future.