Advertisement

Revenue Diversification in Different Institutional Environments: Financing and Governing the Swedish Art Promotion Movement, 1947–2017

  • Martin Gustavsson
Chapter

Abstract

One conclusion in this chapter about the People’s Movements for Art Promotion (Folkrörelsernas Konstfrämjande, FKF), a non-profit organization with many ties to the Swedish popular movements (folkrörelser) and the social democratic state, is that the historical-economic-political context determined when employing a business logic to generate resources became a problem. Using a business logic was not a problem per se but becoming dependent upon it was. FKF was in need of supplementary sources of income in the form of government grants and membership fees, a diversification strategy that worked excellently during the years 1947–1975—coinciding with the success of Fordist capitalism and of intensified social democratic welfare reforms—but ceased to function when society became marketized during the post-Fordist era 1975–2015. Another conclusion is that FKF was de-hybridized due to pressure from the environment in the late twentieth century.

Keywords

Revenue diversification Critical junctures Critical moments Mission drift Legitimacy crises 

References

  1. Aglietta, Michel. 2000. A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: The US Experience. With a New Postface by the Author. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  2. Ahrne, Göran, and Nils Brunsson. 2008. Meta-organizations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexius, Susanna, Martin Gustavsson, and Tiziana Sardiello. 2017. Profit-Making for Mutual Benefit. Score Working Papers Series (2): 1–23.Google Scholar
  4. Bankruptcy Decisions 1992-09-23. National Association for Art Promotion [Konstfrämjandets riksförbund]. Case no. K4247-92. Stockholm District Court.Google Scholar
  5. Berg, Anne, and Samuel Edquist. 2017. The Capitalist State and the Construction of Civil Society: Public Funding and the Regulation of Popular Education in Sweden, 1870–1991. Cham: Springer Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomkvist, Rune. 1997. Jämlikhet inom bildkonsten. In Konstfrämjandet 50 år. Nationalmuseum, 28 november 1997–1 mars 1998, 22–35. Stockholm: Nationalmuseum.Google Scholar
  7. Boltanski, Luc, and Laurent Thévenot. 1999. The Sociology of Critical Capacity. European Journal of Social Theory 2 (3): 359–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boltanski, Luc, and Laurent Thévenot. 2006. On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Chang, Cyril F., and Howard T. Tuckman. 1994. Revenue Diversification Among Non-Profits. Voluntas. International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 5 (3): 273–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cornforth, Christopher. 2014. Understanding and Combating Mission Drift in Social Enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal 10 (1): 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crafts, Nicholas, and Gianni Toniolo. 2012. Les trente glorieuses.’ From the Marshall Plan to the Oil Crisis. In The Oxford Handbook of Postwar European History, ed. Dan Stone, 356–378. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dart, Raymond. 2004. Being ‘Business-Like’ in a Nonprofit Organization: A Grounded and Inductive Typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 33 (2): 290–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DiMaggio, Paul J. 1986. Introduction. In Nonprofit Enterprise in the Arts: Studies in Mission and Constraint, ed. Paul J. DiMaggio, 3–13. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Djelic, Marie-Laure, and Sigrid Quack. 2007. Overcoming Path Dependency: Path Generation in Open Systems. Theory and Society 36 (2): 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ebrahim, Alnoor, Julie Battilana, and Johanna Mair. 2014. The Governance of Social Enterprises: Mission Drift and Accountability Challenges in Hybrid Organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior 34: 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  17. European Social Fund (ESF). About the ESF. https://www.esf.se/Vara-fonder/Socialfonden1/. Accessed 31 May 2017.
  18. Evers, Adalbert. 2005. Mixed Welfare Systems and Hybrid Organizations: Changes in the Governance and Provision of Social Services. Journal of Public Administration 28 (9–10): 737–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Faxén Sporrong, Karin. 2017. Ett kärt besvär. Om Konstfrämjandets ombudsrörelse. In Konstfrämjandet 70 år, ed. Niklas Östholm, 178–205. Stockholm: The People’s Movements for Art Promotion [Konstfrämjandet].Google Scholar
  20. Gustavsson, Martin. 2002. Makt och konstsmak: Sociala och politiska motsättningar på den svenska konstmarknaden 1920–1960. Stockholm: Department of Economic History, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 2017. Klämd mellan stat och marknad: En ekonomisk historia om Folkrörelsernas Konstfrämjandet 1947–2017. In Konstfrämjandet 70 år, ed. Niklas Östholm, 114–163. Stockholm: The People’s Movements for Art Promotion [Konstfrämjandet].Google Scholar
  22. Hammerskog, Paula. 1986. Strid Splittrar Konstfrämjandet. Dagens Nyheter, December 15.Google Scholar
  23. Hirsch, Joachim. 1991. From the Fordist to the Post-Fordist State. In The Politics of Flexibility: Restructuring State and Industry in Britain, Germany and Scandinavia, ed. Bob Jessop, 67–81. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  24. Jansson, Bertil. 1997. Konstfrämjandet och kulturpolitiken. In Konstfrämjandet 50 år. Nationalmuseum, 28 november 1997–1 mars 1998, 8–19. Stockholm: Nationalmuseum.Google Scholar
  25. Jessop, Bob. 1991. The Welfare State in the Transition from Fordism to Post-Fordism. In The Politics of Flexibility: Restructuring State and Industry in Britain, Germany and Scandinavia, ed. Bob Jessop, 82–105. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  26. Konstfrämjandet under 70-talet. Rapport från en arbetsgrupp. 1972. Stockholm: The People’s Movements for Art Promotion [Konstfrämjandet].Google Scholar
  27. Leijonhielm, Maria. 1987. Krisen i Konstfrämjandet. Rekonstruktion med halv personalstyrka. Konstnären 2: 4–5.Google Scholar
  28. Mallmén, Anders. 2002. Lagen om ekonomiska föreningar: Kommentar med formulär m.m. Stockholm: Norstedts juridik.Google Scholar
  29. Östholm, Niklas. 2017. Folk i rörelse. In Konstfrämjandet 70 år, ed. Niklas Östholm, 10–59. Stockholm: The People’s Movements for Art Promotion [Konstfrämjandet].Google Scholar
  30. People’s Movements for Art Promotion. Annual Reports. 1947–2015. Various Printing Sites: Konstfrämjandet.Google Scholar
  31. Pierson, Paul, and Theda Skocpol. 2002. Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science. In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, ed. Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner, 693–721. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  32. Piketty, Thomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Powell, Walter W., and Rebecca Jo Friedkin. 1986. Politics and Programs: Organizational Factors in Public Television Decision Making. In Nonprofit Enterprise in the Arts. Studies in Mission and Constraint, ed. Paul J. DiMaggio, 245–269. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rothstein, Bo. 1992. Den korporativa staten: Intresseorganisationer och statsförvaltning i svensk politik. Stockholm: Norstedts juridik.Google Scholar
  35. Rubin, Birgitta. 1992. Konkurs för Konstfrämjandet. Dagens Nyheter, September 30.Google Scholar
  36. Schön, Lennart. 2000. En modern svensk ekonomisk historia: Tillväxt och omvandling under två sekel. Stockholm: SNS.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ScoreStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations