Foundations in Europe: Denmark Where money meets visions Ulla Habermann Institut for Idræt, Københavns Universitet Nørre Allé 51, 2200 København N Tlf.: 3532 0829 • Fax: 3532 0870 • E-mail: IFI@ifi .ku.dk • homepage: www.ifi .ku.dk Foundations in Europe: DENMARK Ulla Habermann Institute of Exercise and Sport Sciences University of Copenhagen Foundations in Europe: DENMARK © Ulla Habermann, Institute of Exercise and Sport Sciences, University of Copenhagen 2004 Design & layout: Allis Skovbjerg Jepsen Institut for Idræt, Københavns Universitet Nørre Allé 51 2200 Copenhagen N Telefon: 3532 0829 Telefax: 3532 0870 E-mail: [email protected] Hjemmeside: www.ifi.ku.dk Projektet er støttet af London School of Economics, Centre for Civil Society og Socialministeriet Content CHAPTER 1 Introduction................................................... 5 Research on foundations ................................................6 Definition of foundations................................................7 CHAPTER 2 Profile........................................................ 9 A short history of foundations in Denmark.................................9 Legislation ...........................................................13 Empirical profile......................................................15 Sample of foundations in this study ......................................18 CHAPTER 3 Foundation Roles ............................................. 22 A sense of identity, purpose and autonomy............................... 22 The “Complementarity”-role 27 The redistributive role 30 Innovation 32 Social and Policy Changes 33 Preservation of traditions and culture 35 Promotion of pluralism 36 CHAPTER 4 Foundation Visions............................................ 39 CHAPTER 5 Foundations in a European context .............................. 43 CHAPTER 6 Developments and emerging issues .............................. 48 New government policies and the autonomy of foundations 48 Internal governance issues facing foundations 50 CHAPTER 7 Concluding summary .......................................... 53 The secret life of the foundations 54 The freedom of foundations 55 An individualistic self-image – but a similar way of thinking 57 The foundation world is a world of men? 58 A small opening towards Europe 60 Policy implications ....................................................61 3 Content CHAPTER 8 Litterature / References........................................ 64 CHAPTER 9 APPENDIX: Case-study summaries .............................. 66 1. Kjøbenhavns Understøttelsesforening: Legatfonden (KUF) – Copenhagen’s Charitable Association: The Bursary Foundation ......... 66 2. Helsefonden (Sygekassernes Helsefond) – The Health Foundation ........ 70 3. Velux Fondene (Villum Kann Rasmussens Fonden and Velux Fonden) – The Velux Foundations ............................................74 4. Carlsbergfondet – The Carlsberg Foundation............................77 Carlsbergfondet (The Carlsberg Foundation) 78 Ny Carlsbergfondet (The new Carlsberg Foundation) 78 Carlsberg’s Mindelegat and Tuborgfondet 79 5. A.P. Møller og Hustru Chastine Mc-Kinney Møllers Fond til almene Formaal – The A.P.Møller and Chastine Mc-Kinney Møller Foundation............ 84 6. Egmont Fonden – The Egmont Foundation ............................ 88 7. Enkefru Plums støttefond – The Plum Foundation ...................... 92 8. Fonden Realdania – The Realdania Foundation ........................ 95 Eight foundations in summary – 2002 98 4 Chapter 1 Introduction Why does a small country like Denmark have as many as 14.000 foundations? There are several explanations. Old traditions, a favourable legislation or attempts to evade taxes are only the tip of the iceberg. To this must be added the numerous reasons, which over the centuries have made people set up foundations, and which gives each foundation a special story. Gratitude to the Nation or to God. Secure the existence of the company for future generations. A plight to pay back to society. A wish to celebrate art. An obligation to help those in need. A love for a special cause. A war between heirs. A way to gain influence – or to be remembered. These are just a few examples. The total assets of the 14.000 foundations are estimated to be approximately DKK 200 billion. But most of the foundations are rather small. In fact the largest 70 own more than half of the capital. Unfortunately the Central Register of foundations has been abolished. This makes it difficult to come up with exact figures. However, in Denmark foundations usually are quite anonymous. Nobody knows much about them and with few exceptions they do not seek publicity. It is not unusual that even foundations with large assets do not publish their annual report. Some do not want public insight or interference. Some are just modest or do not want to spend funds on their own “fame”. Furthermore Danish foundations do not seem to have a feeling of belonging to a special “sector” in Danish society, they have no “common identity”, and they all see themselves as being unique. Most Danish foundations work inside the Danish borders. Usually the statutes do not allow any donations for foreign countries. The explanation that is often put forward is that the money is generated in Denmark and therefore should remain here. A few foundations have (as shown later in this report) re-interpreted their rules in the name of globalisation and supported projects outside Denmark, but these initiatives are clearly exceptional. This corresponds with the fact that Danish foundations show very little interest in being internationally active. Until now, only one single foundation has become a member of The European Foundation Centre, and only a handful have attended one of its meetings. The issue of a common – not to speak of a European – foundation policy is not on the agenda among Danish foundations. As noted by one of the interviewees “We live in a cosy little corner, there is no need to meddle with our favourable conditions”. 5 Introduction This does not on the other hand mean that Danish foundations isolate themselves. When it comes to the practical work foundations often set up partnerships with each other, with voluntary organisations, with business companies and with the state and the local authorities. However, the eight foundations interviewed for this study are very keen not to be taken for granted. They do not “automatically” want to have a role of complementarity in their relationships with the state. Research on foundations1 As already mentioned, in Denmark foundations usually are quite anonymous and often prefer “a quiet life”. This is reflected in the way knowledge in this field is almost conspicuous by its absence. In a way this also is a mirror of the lack of interest society on the whole has shown the “secret life “of foundations. The Danish literature on foundation theory and history is extremely meagre. Foundations are under-researched and there are no common theoretical models for the way foundations act and function. Lynge Andersen (2002) identifies two reasons for this academic and administrative lack of interest. Firstly, in earlier times, respect for the idea of setting up foundations was integrated in the norms and traditions of society. It was readily accepted that “good people” donated money for “good causes”2. This tradition seems to have more or less survived even today, although from time to time a short-lived public debate questioning the role and activities of foundations flares up. Secondly, foundations have not until the middle of the 1950s been used as an instrument for tax-exemption – at least not in greater numbers. At that time “stiftelse” became “fond”. Andersen finds a noteworthy difference in the tone of the younger literature, where the authors are more concerned with the founder’s interests in his business and profit that with his intentions of “doing good”. The early literature clearly states that the “will to charity” and feelings of patriotism combined with an urge to be remembered by later generations are important factors in understanding foundations (Philomusus 1771). Later it was stated that foundations should have purposes that are useful for society but which cannot be dealt with by the state (Oppermann 1860). In 1872 Nellemann refers to the difference between origin/”oprindelse” (private and public) and purpose/”øjemed” (charitable or business). Olivarius published a book on the administrative praxis in 1910. And between 1910 and 1963 practically nothing was written on the subject. Then Kaufmann's book on foundations was published in three editions from 1963 to 1973 – and was followed by several important articles. Kaufmann was especially 1 For a more comprehensive reading see Lynge Andersen 2002 pages 105-121. 2 An example is The Carlsbergfoundation set up in 1876. The gift of the donor, A.C. Jacobsen, was so grandiose that questioning it would have been almost blasphemy. 6 Introduction interested in investigating the Danish speciality: the “selvejende institution” (self- governing institution). In the 1980s and –90s the theoretical interest in foundations grew as foundation laws were being taught in the universities (Lynge Andersen 1996 and 1998). But in comparison to other Scandinavian countries3 very little research has been done apart from Lynge Andersens writings, his dissertation from 2002 and a few students reports. In addition, there have been several in depths historical studies normally published on the occasion of anniversaries and jubilee