Let’s Change Culture: Considering patronage
Fossil fuel companies have historically patronised the arts for several reasons, most of which serve their strategic interests rather than a purely philanthropic desire to support culture. Here are some key motivations:
1. Social License to Operate
Sponsoring the arts helps fossil fuel companies maintain public goodwill and legitimacy, particularly in societies where environmental concerns are growing. By associating themselves with respected cultural institutions, they can soften their image and position themselves as benefactors of public life rather than as polluters.
2. Reputation Laundering ("Artwashing")
The arts often hold a moral and intellectual authority that companies seek to borrow. When institutions like the Tate, the Royal Opera House, or the British Museum accept funding from fossil fuel companies, it can make those companies appear as cultured, sophisticated, and responsible corporate citizens. This is particularly useful when they face criticism over their environmental impact.
3. Influence Over Cultural Narratives
Patronage allows fossil fuel companies to shape the stories that cultural institutions tell. They may encourage exhibitions that focus on technological progress, human ingenuity, or themes of exploration and adventure—aligning with their corporate narratives. It may also discourage institutions from curating work that is too critical of fossil fuel dependency.
4. Networking and Elite Influence
Arts sponsorships place fossil fuel executives in rooms with policymakers, intellectuals, and influential cultural figures. This can help them build relationships that serve their business interests, from regulatory lobbying to forging alliances with other sectors.
5. Tax Breaks and Financial Benefits
Many countries offer tax incentives for corporate philanthropy, meaning that donations to the arts can be written off as business expenses or attract government-matched funding. In some cases, it is a cost-effective way to enhance corporate image compared to direct advertising.
6. Diverting Attention from Environmental Harm
When companies like BP or Shell sponsor an exhibition or a theatre season, it can distract from ongoing environmental damage, lawsuits, or controversies. The association with culture provides a counterpoint to negative press, helping to dilute criticism.
7. Creating Dependence and Stifling Dissent
By embedding themselves as long-term sponsors, fossil fuel companies can make cultural institutions financially reliant on their support. This can make it difficult for those institutions to cut ties, even when public pressure to divest increases. In some cases, institutions self-censor to avoid jeopardizing funding.
Shifting Tides
Despite these long-standing relationships, many arts organisations are now severing ties with fossil fuel sponsors due to public pressure and shifting ethical perspectives. High-profile cases like the Royal Shakespeare Company and the National Portrait Gallery dropping BP sponsorship, or climate activists targeting museum exhibitions, show that the landscape is changing.
Several major cultural institutions have severed ties with fossil fuel sponsors in recent years, often due to sustained activist pressure, changing ethical stances, and the growing recognition that taking fossil fuel money contradicts their environmental commitments. Here are some notable examples and the strategies that led to these decisions:
1. The Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) – Ending BP Sponsorship (2019)
Key Reason for Cutting Ties:
The RSC faced pressure from young audiences, particularly schoolchildren, who saw BP’s sponsorship as inconsistent with their future and climate concerns.
High-profile figures, including actor Mark Rylance, resigned from affiliations with the RSC in protest.
The RSC ultimately announced it would end its BP sponsorship, citing the need to listen to young people and align with their concerns.
Strategy Used by Activists:
Public pressure and direct action from groups like BP or Not BP?
High-profile resignations drawing media attention
Highlighting the contradiction between youth engagement and climate concerns
2. National Portrait Gallery – Dropping BP as Sponsor (2022)
Key Reason for Cutting Ties:
Long-term activist campaigns exposed how BP used sponsorship to "artwash" its environmental damage.
The gallery was facing a £35.5m renovation project and realized that keeping BP as a sponsor might deter other donors.
The public mood had shifted, making fossil fuel sponsorship a reputational risk rather than an asset.
Strategy Used by Activists:
Direct interventions at BP-sponsored events, including creative protest performances
Persistent media coverage showing public discontent
Leveraging behind-the-scenes influence from artists and curators
3. Scottish Ballet – Cutting Ties with BP (2021)
Key Reason for Cutting Ties:
Scottish Ballet had positioned itself as an environmentally conscious organization, making its BP sponsorship increasingly untenable.
Campaigners argued that fossil fuel money directly conflicted with the organization’s sustainability goals.
The ballet company decided to quietly end its relationship with BP rather than risk backlash.
Strategy Used by Activists:
Internal pressure from staff and audiences
Calling out contradictions in the organization’s sustainability messaging
Engaging directly with leadership to show reputational risks
4. British Museum – BP Sponsorship Ends (2023)
Key Reason for Cutting Ties:
The British Museum had been under intense scrutiny for years due to BP’s long-standing sponsorship.
Internal resistance from museum staff, curators, and artists made continued partnership difficult.
While the museum claimed the decision was mutual, BP's worsening public image likely played a major role.
Strategy Used by Activists:
Creative disruptions inside the museum, including unauthorized performances, installations, and sit-ins
Legal challenges questioning the ethics of fossil fuel sponsorship
Sustained public pressure through social media and petitions
5. National Theatre – Ending Shell Sponsorship (2019)
Key Reason for Cutting Ties:
The National Theatre declared a climate emergency and recognized that continuing to take money from Shell was incompatible with that stance.
Activist pressure highlighted that artists and audiences did not want to see fossil fuel sponsorship in the arts.
Shell was quietly dropped without much public fanfare.
Strategy Used by Activists:
Using the theatre’s own climate emergency declaration as leverage
Engaging directly with actors and theatre professionals to apply pressure internally
Public campaigns targeting contradictions in messaging
Key Takeaways on Successful Strategies
These cases highlight several recurring strategies that helped push institutions to cut fossil fuel ties:
✅ Expose Contradictions: Activists pointed out how fossil fuel sponsorships conflicted with institutions’ environmental goals and audience values.
✅ Leverage Public Figures: Artists, actors, and curators who publicly opposed sponsorships helped generate media attention and credibility.
✅ Target Reputational Risk: By framing fossil fuel sponsorship as a liability rather than an asset, activists made it a business decision rather than just an ethical one.
✅ Sustained Pressure: Most sponsorships didn’t end overnight—years of relentless campaigning, direct action, and dialogue were needed to shift institutions’ positions.
✅ Offer Alternative Funding Narratives: Some campaigns helped cultural institutions see that cutting fossil fuel sponsorship might attract new funders who wanted to support sustainable arts.
Should Green Energy Companies Invest in Arts Sponsorship?
✅ Values Alignment: Sponsorship from renewable energy companies could create a more authentic relationship between cultural institutions and climate action, reinforcing the role of the arts in inspiring change.
✅ Public Trust & Legitimacy: If the arts have historically given fossil fuel companies a "social license to operate," renewables could instead be positioned as responsible civic leaders, supporting culture while advancing sustainability.
✅ Storytelling & Public Engagement: The transition to clean energy is about more than just technology—it’s about cultural and behavioral change. Arts sponsorships could help tell the story of energy transformation in a compelling, human way.
✅ Economic & Brand Benefits: As renewables grow in influence, they need public buy-in. Sponsoring the arts could strengthen their brand, create goodwill, and demonstrate their commitment to communities.
However, there are risks if these relationships aren’t carefully considered.
🚧 Avoiding "Greenwashing" Perceptions: If companies aren’t fully committed to ethical practices (e.g., if they have supply chain issues or aren’t addressing environmental justice), they risk being accused of using arts sponsorship to distract from shortcomings.
🚧 Funding Limitations: Many renewable energy companies, especially community-led or cooperative ones, don’t have the deep pockets of fossil fuel giants. Their ability to sustain long-term arts sponsorships may be more limited.
🚧 Corporate Influence on Creative Freedom: Even with good intentions, companies need to avoid influencing artistic content in a way that feels promotional or restrictive. Arts institutions must retain independence.
Challenges of Green Energy Sponsorship in the Arts
🔸 Financial Constraints:
Fossil fuel companies historically had massive profits to distribute. While some renewable companies (e.g., Ørsted, Iberdrola) are growing, the sector overall operates with tighter margins, and many smaller organizations focus on reinvestment over sponsorship.
🔸 Long-term Commitment Uncertainty:
The fossil fuel industry had long-term arts sponsorship agreements spanning decades. Renewables, still expanding and adjusting to policy shifts, may struggle to offer that level of commitment.
🔸 Cultural Sector Skepticism:
Some arts organizations, burned by past sponsorship controversies, might be wary of partnering with energy companies at all, even if they are green. Trust needs to be built.
🔸 Ensuring Equity & Inclusion:
If renewables become arts funders, there’s an opportunity to shift power dynamics—ensuring that funding reaches diverse communities, not just high-profile institutions. However, this requires deliberate strategy.
Measuring the Positive Impact of Green Energy Sponsorship
For sustainable energy companies to make arts sponsorship meaningful, they need ways to measure their impact. Here’s how they could track success:
1. Environmental Impact Metrics
Carbon Reduction Linked to Sponsorships: If funding supports eco-friendly arts practices (e.g., sustainable materials, low-carbon touring), companies could quantify the emissions saved.
Energy Transition Awareness: Surveys or research measuring whether public understanding of clean energy improves through arts partnerships.
2. Community & Cultural Impact Metrics
Engagement with Underserved Communities: Tracking how sponsorships enable access to arts and education in low-income or marginalized areas.
Behavioral Change Indicators: Measuring whether people exposed to energy-themed art projects report shifts in their attitudes or actions toward sustainability.
3. Business & Reputational Metrics
Brand Perception Shifts: Tracking public sentiment through surveys or social media analysis to see if associations with the arts improve a company’s reputation.
Employee & Stakeholder Engagement: Measuring whether sponsorships boost morale and attract talent who value sustainability and culture.
Final Thought: A Different Model of Sponsorship?
Instead of replicating the fossil fuel sponsorship model (which was often extractive and transactional), green energy companies could approach arts funding differently:
🌍 Co-creation: Instead of just branding exhibitions, renewables could collaborate with artists to create participatory projects about energy transition.
💡 Decentralized Funding: Rather than large sponsorship deals with major institutions, funding could be distributed to grassroots and community-based arts projects.
🎭 Long-Term Cultural Investment: Instead of short-term PR benefits, renewables could support long-term cultural shifts—funding artist residencies, storytelling projects, and educational programs.