RESULTADOS - ESTADO DE CONOCIMIENTO DE ESTUDIOS EN ABEJAS (HYMENOPTERA: APOIDEA) EN COLOMBIA, C

An empirical and conceptual paper, which illuminates a particular form of legitimation, the ‘the past’, and investigates how this form of legitimation is invoked in a family philanthropic organisation.

The thesis addresses two specific audiences: First and foremost an academic audience interested in neo-institutional theory, cultural policy and foundations. Secondly the thesis addresses a wider audience of readers, concerned with cultural policy, interested in the underlying reasoning behind public and private support for visual art. These insights should be of particular interest to policy-makers who have a need to understand the role of two of the most significant Danish art foundations, more fundamentally, and gain insight into recent theory and extant research on cultural policy and foundations. In addition, artists and cultural institutions (museums, galleries, art academies etc.) that wish to gain a deeper insight into the nature of two of the most significant sources of art funding in Denmark should find the thesis of interest. The thesis also speaks to Danish journalists and cultural commentators, who wish to know and communicate about the role of the New Carlsberg Foundation and The Danish Art Foundation, and stay informed about current research. Finally, the thesis offers a theorization to foundations in general, and particularly to the New Carlsberg Foundation and The Danish Art Foundation, which offers a different more theoretical insight into the nature of their foundations than that of foundational work itself.

A pragmatic institution theoretical view

The following section provides a brief introduction to the theory and central concepts used in this thesis (see chapter 2, for a more elaborate overview). Given the ambiguity inherent in the field of cultural policy (Bennett, 2004), specifically within art foundations about the most appropriate way to conduct their work, the thesis takes an institution theoretical perspective attentive to the way in which organisations reflect and consciously engage with

“the rules, norms and ideologies of the wider society” (Meyer and Rowan 1983: 84). The institutional perspective is engaged throughout the thesis at different levels of analysis. In the first paper, I seek to show the value of a neo-institutional perspective to the conceptualisation of cultural policy, how these ‘rules’ both shape and enable the organisational field of cultural policy conductors, but also how recent debates in neo-institutional theory map on to

and offer analytical acuity to key debates in cultural policy analysis. I also seek to construct an overview over the key institutional arenas of the cultural policy field.

A key contention of neo-institutional theory is that organisations reflect wider societal institutions and create institutionalised, rule-like practices, not because they are the most efficient, but because organisations gain

“legitimacy, resources, stability and enhanced survival prospects” (Meyer and Rowan 1977). Legitimacy, and how organisations seek to acquire legitimacy, is therefore a key interest area of institutional theorists. The quest for legitimacy has significant explanatory power to elucidate why organisations, such as art foundations, which do not have a financial imperative, pursue particular practices and purposes. A key contribution to this literature was offered by Friedland and Alford who argued that:

“The central institutions of the contemporary capitalist West – capitalist market, bureaucratic state, democracy, nuclear family, and Christian religion […] These institutions are potentially

contradictory and hence make multiple logics available to individuals and organisations. [Who]

transform the institutional relations of society by exploiting these contradictions” (Friedland &

Alford 1991:232).

The second paper therefore investigates the higher order institutional logics or regimes of justification (Boltanski &

Thévenot, 2006) drawn upon by two influential Danish art foundations at critical moments in time (The New Carlsberg Foundation and Danish Art Foundation). The underlying premise of this is a pragmatic view, borrowed from French Convention theorists, Boltanski and Thévenot (2006), who argue that reasons and actions are intimately linked, and draw upon moral regimes of justification. The thesis takes the position that we can understand the reasons for action (in this case why public and private foundations support the arts) through the justifications invoked by these foundations. The thesis therefore favours attentiveness to studying legitimation through words (Suddaby, 2005) and conscious work (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006).

One of the key findings emerging from the investigation of the central ‘logics’ of foundational practice and purpose is the importance of time (particularly the past), humanistic and emotional as reasoning ‘logics’ which are not well reflected in the extant literature on institutional theory. Furthermore the investigation of higher order logics did not do justice to the immense variety and characteristic ways in which these central logics were invoked. A third paper therefore takes departure in a particular form of reasoning, the use of the ‘past’ and unfolds the characteristic ways in which this logic is invoked, by drawing on the charter, the family history, place, the moment and anecdotes, to contribute on one hand to a deeper understanding of institutional logics and more generally to the growing interest in rhetoric and uses of the past, in management and organisational theory. A brief lexis of the key concepts and their use has been provided below.

Key concepts

Institution A rule-like social practice, affecting exchanges from micro-social exchanges such as the handshake, to the macro-social phenomena like the structure of organisations; their purposes and practices.

Legitimacy The resonance of a practice with the rules, norms and ideologies of the wider society.

Legitimation The process of pursuing legitimacy, where this thesis focuses particularly on legitimation through written texts. In this thesis legitimation and justification are used interchangeably.

A brief reflection on the research strategy

The strategy employed in this research is inspired by, but does not dogmatically follow, Glaser and Strauss grounded theory methodology (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The key aspect of grounded theory methodology, which resonates with the approach taken in this thesis, relates to the way in which material was collected and theorized upon, which is particularly relevant to the process behind the thesis’ two empirical papers (paper 2 and 3). Briefly, Glaser and Strauss argue for an open-minded entry into the empirical and theoretical framing of research, and argue that theorization (and ultimately theory) should arise from the findings of empirical material. They argue this in opposition to the placement of a particular paradigm over the material from the beginning, with the aim of merely extending theory with meticulously pre-defined material, and an early closure of the mind, that in their view creates findings and theory marginal to the purpose of academic research. A key feature of Glaser and Strauss’ approach is the constant comparison between empirical material and theorization, and the reluctance to settle on empirical material. The approach, particularly with regard to the empirical work, has taken a great deal of inspiration from Glaser and Strauss, and at the earliest stages of this project the choice of theory had not been settled upon, nor had the key concepts of interest (institutions, legitimacy and legitimation), or empirical material, only the theme

“private and public art foundations” had been decided. However, where the approach differs from the ideals of Glaser and Strauss, concerns the dismissal of serious consideration of existing theory, a dogma which this thesis does not share. The thesis therefore takes a more ‘updated’ approach to grounded theory (Suddaby, 2006), in which a vast variety of theory, academic literature on cultural policy and foundations, and empirical material was

considered and eventually pared down to an investigation into the institutional context (paper 1) and institutional legitimations (paper 2 and 3) invoked by the two most influential foundations supporting the visual arts in Denmark. The consideration of theory and data was thus a tandem process, where neither theory nor data was settled upon at an early stage but was gradually settled upon in an iterative process.

The empirical material considered in this process, ranged from legal text, newspaper articles, foundation websites, interviews and informal conversations, government reports on cultural policy, annual reports, speeches, biographies and detailed academic accounts. This process led to the gradual concentration on the Danish Art Foundation and New Carlsberg Foundation, which revealed these two foundations to be the most significant public and private foundations respectively supporting the visual arts. Importantly, it was during this process that the most relevant document for the analysis – the annual report – was finally selected. This document, was selected because it was the source that most clearly and consistently explains and argued for support, resonating both with the empirical interest, to elucidate the respective foundations’ reasons for supporting the arts and the theoretical imperative to theorize the arguments for support. In total 151 reports were analysed in detail, 104 from the New Carlsberg Foundation and 47 from the Danish Arts Foundation, upon which the empirical analysis was conducted (see Chapter 3 for a detailed description of the analytical approach and annual report). A brief introduction to the empirical setting and the most necessary background information about the two foundations will now be offered.

Art support in Denmark: An introduction

The role of art and concomitant support has been part of ancient civilizations, through early Modernity, to contemporary society; gradually attaining a more organised and rationalized form. The earliest forms of direct support for cultural life in Denmark arose with the employment of artists by the Church and Royal Family, this was support through commissioned work (Thyssen, 1998: 11). With the Protestant Reformation, the Churches role was greatly diminished (Duelund, 1995: 29) and the Royal Family and wider royalty became the most significant patrons of the arts.¹ With the Constitution of 1849 and “the advent of democracy” and the establishment of a ministry for education, church and science,² the government gradually began to play a role in the support of art and culture (Duelund, 1995; M. F. Jeppesen, 2002). The growth of private ownership and wealth after 1849 also saw the advance of private patronage and engagement in the arts. The visual arts were a favoured pastime, through collection and the occasional donation, of a growing class of cultured and wealthy industrialists, who became the most visible patrons of the arts in the late 19^th/early 20^th century, where also the creation of Danish foundations for public purposes takes off – it is in this period both the Carlsberg Foundation and the New Carlsberg Foundation are founded in 1876 and 1902 respectively (Glamman, 1990, 1997; Nørregård-Nielsen, 2002a; see also Lund and Berg, 2016/forthcoming). During the 20^th century, particularly in the social-democratic zeitgeist following the Second World War, the state takes a gradually increasing role in direct support of the arts, with the emergence of the welfare state (Bomholt, 1953; Duelund, 2001; M. F. Jeppesen, 2002). As a result of this increased emphasis on art support (including the establishment of an art fund for visual art in 1956) as a form of cultural support, and an increasing amount of cultural administration undertaken by the Ministry of Education (M. F. Jeppesen, 2002: 27) a separate Ministry of Culture was created in 1961. However, due to a growing awareness and reflection on the ills of state controlled cultural life, in aftermath of WWII, an independent Danish Arts Foundation³ was created in 1964, for the support of a variety of art-forms including visual art. The following section provides a brief introduction to the New Carlsberg Foundation and Danish Arts Foundation.

The New Carlsberg Foundation

The Carlsberg Foundation (for the support of science and humanities), was created by J.C. Jacobsen in 1876. It became a pioneering foundation, in part because it became the world first foundation to own a company, the brewing company Carlsberg, as and alongside its philanthropic activity⁴, and in part since it was a

highly-professionalised foundation, with board-members selected from and by the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters⁵, as opposed to the existing practice of direct patronage. This set-up garnered the Carlsberg Foundation

1 The King thus was able to draw on the foundation ‘ad Usos Publicus’ from 1765, for public and therefore also cultural purposes (Duelund, 1995: 30).

2 Kultusministeriet was split into separate Church and Education ministries in 1916.

3 This was called the Danish State Arts Foundation, but for clarity its current name, The Danish Arts Foundation is used throughout.

4 The possibility of running a company through a foundation is a unique feature of Northern Europe, in which corporate activity can be viewed as a public purpose (Thomsen & Rose, 2004).

5 The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters is an élite society established in 1742, admitting only the most recognized Danish scientists and researchers as members.

significant legitimacy, and it was this model of professionalised funding Carl Jacobsen (J.C. Jacobsen’s son) introduced to art support, with the establishment of the New Carlsberg Foundation, with the exception that he reserved a seat for his male descendants on the board (Glamman, 1997; Jacobsen, 1902; Nørregård-Nielsen, 2002a).⁶ With an education in brewery and by having rented brewing space from his father on favourable terms, Carl had become a wealthy industrialist in his own right, from his “New Carlsberg” brewery (Glamman, 1997;

Nørregård-Nielsen, 2002a). Since relations were difficult between Carl and his father, Carl was effectively cut out of his father’s inheritance through the establishment of the Carlsberg Foundation, which instead became the owner of the ‘old’ Carlsberg Brewery, a brewery that Carl otherwise would have inherited (Glamman, 1990, 1997). Carl, a passionate art collector and philanthropist, created the New Carlsberg foundation in 1902, for the support of visual art, and in a simultaneous “act of reconciliation”, donated the foundation and along with the New Carlsberg brewery to the greater Carlsberg Foundation (Nørregård-Nielsen, 2002a). Due to its significant resources (see Appendix 1) momentous and consistent work from establishment; for the visual arts, mainly from the acquisition of artworks donated to public museums and places, decorative projects and its support for museums, particularly the New Carlsberg Glyptotek (founded by Carl Jacobsen in 1882), the New Carlsberg Foundation is arguably the most significant Danish private foundation supporting the visual arts both historically and today. This central position is also reflected in the public perception, where its Chairman is often considered among the most powerful people in Danish Cultural life alongside the museum directors of the country’s most significant museums and the Chairman of the Danish Arts Foundation (Brovall & Thorsen, 2013; Nielsen & Heltoft, 2016). The central role of the foundation has thus made it one of the two foundations chosen to investigate the reasoning of art support in Denmark.

The Danish Art Foundation

Since its establishment in 1964 The Danish Art Foundation has been the central public foundation supporting the arts in Denmark, initially it was established to support the visual, literary and sound arts (music) although its purview grew as the foundation and other art-forms gained legitimacy. The foundation emerged in the social democratic-zeitgeist of WW2, where the state increased social support and its involvement in all areas of the Danes’ lives. It was particularly from the initiative of the Danish Social-Democrat, Julius Bomholt, that the Danish Ministry of Culture was formed. Bomholt, then the Minister of Education, presided over a ministry where art support was increasingly part of the ministries’ portfolio. Furthermore Bomholt had significant ideas about the role of art and culture in Danish society which he had written about in a number of books (Bomholt, 1932, 1938, 1953) about working class culture and cultural democratization. Although Bomholt saw culture as being held by society, he also held the view that particularly high culture should be spread to the “farthest corners of the kingdom” and wanted to educate society to appreciate the arts (M. F. Jeppesen, 2002; Jørgensen, 2011) and lead to the “cultural improvement for all people” (Bomholt, 1953). A key feature of the 1961-Ministry of Culture, which Bomholt became the first Minister of, was that cultural professionals made suggestions to the Minister about support, but that the Minister took decisions about support.

6 Since the death of his son Helge Jacobsen, who was chairman from 1914-1946, the board has consisted only of educated art-professionals (mainly art-historians).

The central challenge for the Danish state in supporting the arts in the aftermath of the Second World War was how to support but not control the arts, since the control of cultural life was feared and perceived to be highly

illegitimate. The solution was one with an ‘arms-length’ between the Ministry and the foundation, meaning the Ministry provided the funds, but a professional board composed of the chairmen of the committees of professional artists decided and distributed the allocated funds for a 3-year period, after which they were (and continue to be) replaced. In addition, a Representative Committee (Representantskab) consisting of elected politicians from the different political parties would oversee the foundations work. This, arm-length form of support resonated with the well-established institutional organisation of science funding in Denmark (both public and private), the form of support in the, by then, highly esteemed New Carlsberg Foundation (which now had a fully professional board) and the wider international context of art foundations with various degrees of arms-length springing up in the West starting with British Arts Council in 1946.

A brief overview of the two foundations has been provided in Table 1.

20 Table 1: Brief overview of the two foundations

7 Until 1979, now mainly preservation of antiquities.

8 Substantial increase due to amalgamation with Danish Arts Council.

Purpose, agenda and overview

The purpose of this thesis is to better understand why public and private foundations support the arts, this is a large overarching question which has guided the work and the thesis specifically offers an answer which attends to the institutional organizational legitimation of public and private support (which is poorly understood at present), this is done based on a detailed analysis of the reasoning employed by the Danish Art Foundation and New Carlsberg Foundation. We need to understand this legitimation, if we are to better understand the role of public and private foundations – and specifically why they support the arts. The theoretical and empirical research agenda have been intimately connected; at an empirical level there has been a desire to shed light on the foundations’ own reasoning, and from a theoretical perspective there has been a desire to improve theorization of art support and cultural policy, since the extant cultural policy literature is greatly under theorized.

The emphasis on public and private support for the arts situates the thesis within the empirical fields of cultural policy and philanthropy, these fields are reflected in separate literatures that have come to consider the mechanisms underlying (public) art support and (private) art philanthropy as overwhelmingly separate. However, the following thesis argues that this approach is less suitable to understand a complex phenomenon like art support, which emerges on both public and private initiatives. This has given the thesis an additional impetus to theorize art support in a way that would be suitable to understand this complex phenomenon cutting across these literatures. It was this challenge, which led me to consider how art support is reflected by different institutionalised organisations (in this case private and public foundations), and in turn how cultural policy is conducted by a variety of

institutionalised organisations (among these the state and private foundations, see paper 1), and how the reasons for the purpose and practice of art support could be understood as a reflection on and of wider societal institutional logics (paper 2).

Figure 1 (next) illustrates the iterative process between the theoretical consideration and empirical analysis and their resulting papers. The detailed theoretical and empirical considerations are unfolded in Chapter 2 and 3 of this frame.

22 Figure 1: Iterative process of thesis

The iterative process of understanding the extant (institutional, cultural policy and philanthropic) literature and the public and private support for visual art has motivated the thesis to consider how we might fruitfully understand art support, both public and private, by drawing upon, and iteratively developing an institution theoretical lens (Paper 1). Specifically, as this thesis shows, we can develop a better empirical and theoretical understanding of the

In document ESTADO DE CONOCIMIENTO DE ESTUDIOS EN ABEJAS (HYMENOPTERA: APOIDEA) EN COLOMBIA, CON ÉNFASIS EN SU ECOLOGÍA FUNCIONAL AUTOR (página 10-14)