is what it means

and finely tuned cost-cutting or draconian measures are being weighed/considered

I don't think that the true extent of "kaasschaaf" and "botte bijl" has been appreciated here. They are both terms which are used in cost-cutting contexts and that reflect a particular way of applying cost-cutting by governments and companies.
"Kaasschaafmethode" meaning linear cuts, or cuts across the board, so every department x%. In the arts that would be the whole of the culture sector receives less and so galleries, museums etc. receive also x% less money each, without regard to any of their uses/needs/etc.

"Botte bijl" refers to 'the chop' or synonymous in Dutch: de stekker eruit trekken. So no longer any financing at all. No linear cuts, but just eradication of any financing for x activities, say musicals for example.

Neither of them are finely tuned, and both are draconian, or have the tendency to be.

If think though that you can better paraphrase as you can't make nouns of both methods in cost reduction like you can in Dutch.

"Zowat overal op het oude continent staat onze sector (kunst) onder toenemende druk en worden kaasschaven of botte bijlen boven gehaald."

"Our sector (the arts) is finding it increasingly difficult on the old continent and nearly everywhere it has been subject to linear cuts or it has got the chop altogether."

Zie bijv. Grote Van Dale N-E.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs (2011-11-07 19:54:47 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I think you could use 'indiscriminate measures' as an alternative.

Please see my previous answer and my response to Kirsten in particular.