We are aware that the registration fees are somewhat higher for this conference than they have been in recent years. We have tried our best to keep costs down, but were unable to reduce fees any further, due to a number of reasons detailed below.
Hosting the meeting at a commercial conference centre is necessary to accommodate the expected number of participants. Many previous CAA organisers have been able to secure inexpensive or free spaces at universities, but this is not an option due to the limited availability of university rooms within the city. Additionally, Amsterdam is a more expensive city overall, and the high rate of inflation, both in the Netherlands and globally, has driven up the price of the venue and other expenses associated with organising the conference since planning began. Also, as a relatively small conference, CAA is rarely able to secure large subsidies from sponsors.
The organising team and CAA’s Executive Steering Committee have done their best to keep the expenses as low as possible under the circumstances. We encourage every attendee to register before the early-bird deadline of 27 February to take advantage of the discounted fee.
Budget
To be transparent about where your membership and conference fees go, we have shared a summarised version of our budget below:
Conference Registration Fee:
| Cost breakdown | Percentage |
| Venue | 49,03% |
| Catering | 27,05% |
| Materials | 4,51% |
| Registration | 5,96% |
| Congress app | 2,46% |
| Keynotes/volunteers | 1,26% |
| University overhead | 5,99% |
| Organisation | 3,74% |
CAA Membership Fee:
The majority of CAA’s annual membership fee funds travel bursaries for low-income and student delegates. The remainder is used for the organisation’s administrative expenses. Any surplus funds from the conference flow back into the main CAA budget to fund future bursaries.
Remote Participation
We regret that we cannot offer remote participation this year. A hybrid conference would have added significant costs (an increase of 30% or more) on top of the already high budget, regardless of the number of remote participants. This would imply a financial risk to the local organisers that we deemed unacceptable.