Strategies for funding culture after war: the case of Ukraine
The article discusses how culture can act during conflict: safeguarding heritage, condemning violence, and planning post-war reconstruction. It argues that culture must also define a broader strategy for rebuilding territorial culture and creating growth opportunities, restoring normalcy and trust. For Ukraine, the conflict has a strong cultural dimension, and the EU is expected to invest significantly post-war, including cultural funding. The article criticizes current EU funding models that favor large institutions and bureaucratic processes, advocating for a more pragmatic, result-oriented approach. It emphasizes the need to finance not only major theaters and museums but also small cultural enterprises like theaters, galleries, film industries, and communication agencies to rebuild the social fabric and foster diverse cultural expressions. The author, Stefano Monti, warns that without a shift from Mitteleuropean bureaucratic influence to a simpler, outcome-focused strategy, funds risk being wasted on untimely actions.
Key facts
- Culture can safeguard movable heritage during conflict.
- Culture should join international organizations in condemning violence against civilians.
- Post-conflict strategy must restore damaged heritage and return relocated items.
- Ukraine's conflict has a strong cultural dimension from the start.
- EU is expected to make significant investments in Ukraine post-war, including cultural funding.
- Current EU cultural funding favors large institutions and bureaucratic partnerships.
- Post-war funding should prioritize rapid, operational financing over research.
- Small cultural enterprises are essential for rebuilding social fabric and cultural diversity.
Entities
Artists
- Mario Botta
Institutions
- Artribune
- Monti&Taft
- European Union
- Commissione Europea
Locations
- Ucraina
- Leopoli
- Bruxelles
- Italia