Aug 22 (IPS) – CIVICUS speaks with Chris Garrard, co-founder and co-director of Culture Unstained, about the campaign to end fossil fuel sponsorship of cultural institutions, which oil companies use to try to present a positive public image.
The campaign has achieved some notable successes, with the Royal Shakespeare Company and Tate group of art galleries ending BP sponsorship deals and the Edinburgh Science Festival rejecting fossil fuel funding. Recently, the Science Museum in London ended its sponsorship arrangement with the Norwegian state-owned oil giant Equinor. It’s now under pressure to reconsider its relationships with Adani and BP.
How significant is the London Science Museum’s decision to end its sponsorship by Equinor?
The museum’s decision to end its eight-year sponsorship deal with Equinor is a major victory for the campaign against oil sponsorship. The museum finally cut ties with the oil company because it had failed to align its business plans with the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
The museum’s decision also highlights a significant shift in its policy because its director, Ian Blatchford, had strongly defended taking funding from fossil fuel companies in the past, stating in a Financial Times interview that he would still seek such sponsorship ‘even if the museum were lavishly publicly funded’. The decision to cut ties with Equinor contradicts his stance and hopefully represents a step towards greater ethical responsibility, in line with the museum’s scientific mission.
Alongside our allies, Culture Unstained played a key role in this campaign win. I was involved in protesting against Equinor’s sponsorship when it was first announced and ‘Wonderlab: the Equinor Gallery’ first opened to the public, so it was incredibly exciting to finally see this shift happen. Crucially, the campaign involved interventions by various groups over several years, including scientists, youth climate activists and young people from Norway.
Over time, pressure has grown on the museum to adopt new ethical sponsorship criteria that now require sponsors to have aligned their business plans with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C pathway, as assessed by the Transition Pathway Initiative. Its recent assessment clearly showed that Equinor didn’t meet this standard, which ultimately led to the ending of its relationship with the museum.
Why do oil companies sponsor cultural bodies?
Oil companies such as BP, Equinor and Shell sponsor arts and cultural institutions for two main reasons. Firstly, sponsorship deals help them to maintain what’s known as a ‘social licence to operate’. This is essentially a form of consent from wider society which relies upon a belief that they are responsible corporate citizens, and that what they are doing is ethically acceptable. By attaching their logos and brands to cultural institutions, they associate themselves with the progressive values of the arts, so when people think of BP, for example, they don’t associate it with climate impacts, polluting oil spills or toxic gas flaring in places like Iraq, but rather with culture, philanthropy and positive social contributions. It’s a form of cheap advertising and a way to clean up a toxic image.
This practice has been particularly widespread in the UK. BP, for example, had sponsored BP Exhibitions at the British Museum, the BP Portrait Award at the National Portrait Gallery and BP Big Screens at the Royal Opera House, all of which helped to normalise its tarnished brand. Our research has revealed how sponsorship deals are strategically planned to project a misleading image of these companies as philanthropists and responsible corporate citizens rather than the major polluters they are.
Relationships with cultural institutions also give fossil fuel companies a strategic platform for lobbying. For instance, our research found that BP sponsored a Day of the Dead event at the British Museum just before the Mexican government auctioned off new drilling licences in the Gulf of Mexico – several of which were awarded to BP. So while the public enjoyed the cultural event downstairs in the British Museum’s Great Court, BP executives were meeting with Mexican government officials upstairs, using the event as the backdrop for their corporate agenda.
Now, in response to the growing opposition to oil sponsorship of the arts, fossil fuel companies are increasingly shifting their focus to sport and music sponsorships, and often using their subsidiaries or ‘green energy’ brands for these partnerships. This combination of greenwashing and artwashing is a new strategy of fossil fuel companies, and we’re determined to oppose it.
What have been the most notable successes and challenges of your campaign so far?
Our campaign has had some notable successes, particularly in recent years. Since 2016, around 18 major UK cultural organisations ended their sponsorship deals with fossil fuel companies such as BP and Shell. They included the National Portrait Gallery, the Royal Opera House, the Royal Shakespeare Company and Tate ending long-running sponsorship deals with BP and, on London’s South Bank, three major institutions – the British Film Institute, the National Theatre and the Southbank Centre – ending their partnerships with Shell, which has its headquarters next door.
This trend has also gained traction internationally, with groups such as Fossil Free Culture NL in Amsterdam successfully pushing fossil fuel companies out of cultural institutions such as the Van Gogh Museum.
However, despite these successes, the Science Museum has explicitly avoided stating that Equinor’s dire record on climate change was the reason for ending its sponsorship deal and, even now, continues to defend its deals with Adani and BP, even though neither company is aligned with the Paris Agreement goals. Adani in particular is the world’s largest private coal producer, and the Science Museum has cynically sought to deflect criticism by weakly claiming it is only being sponsored by Adani’s renewable energy subsidiary, even though there are clear links between Adani Green Energy and the company’s coal mining business. This is a clear example of greenwashing and the Science Museum is actively helping promote it. Nevertheless, we see this victory with Equinor as a first step, and we’ll continue to push for Adani and BP to be removed from the museum as well.
Meanwhile, the British Museum took a huge backward step last year when it signed a new 10-year sponsorship deal with BP, despite numerous large-scale protests and growing opposition for over a decade. One of the biggest challenges, particularly with institutions such as the British Museum, is their lack of transparency and accountability and, in some cases, their closeness to the government. Although the museum is supposed to be independent, it will often be used for cultural diplomacy. Its notable lack of transparency isn’t limited to decisions around oil sponsorship, but also extends to issues such as the return of stolen artefacts and failure to address its origins in colonialism.
While many museums and galleries have shifted away from fossil fuels and other unethical sponsors, some institutions will, when challenged, defend the records of their corporate sponsors. For example, even when presented with clear evidence, the British Museum has continued its partnership with BP while falsely claiming that BP is helping to lead the transition away from fossil fuels. Often, staff and workers at these institutions support or are sympathetic to our campaign, so the real obstacle to change is the concentration of decision-making power in a few people who aren’t properly accountable.
A different but important challenge is to ensure our campaigning in the UK and the global north is connected and accountable to those directly affected by the fossil fuel companies we are campaigning against. Whether it’s communities in Egypt, the US Gulf Coast or West Papua suffering from pollution and environmental degradation, or those already feeling the effects of climate change, we seek to build relationships of solidarity with them and find ways to offer them a platform.
What space is there for climate activism in the UK?
The space for climate activism in the UK is certainly under threat and needs defending. Recently introduced laws have restricted protests and free speech, and we’ve seen climate activists given lengthy and draconian sentences that discourage others from getting involved, speaking out and taking action. This is deeply worrying and many are calling on the new government to review and repeal these laws. What’s disturbing as well is that we’ve also seen attempts to stifle discussion of issues such as the genocide in Palestine, notably when Adani’s partnership with the Israeli arms company Elbit has been highlighted during protests at the Science Museum.
On the positive side, there are many in the climate justice movement who are constantly finding creative and imaginative ways to protest, in cultural spaces and on the streets. More importantly, there’s also a growing awareness of the need to adopt an intersectional approach emphasising not just climate action, but climate justice. For instance, a group called Energy Embargo for Palestine is currently campaigning against BP’s sponsorship of the British Museum, but linking different struggles and highlighting how fossil fuel extraction is connected to the repression of Palestinian people. It is essential to support and amplify such efforts, as our activism must constantly evolve and adapt to address complex and overlapping concerns. As the activist and poet Audre Lord put it, ‘There is no such thing as a single-issue struggle because we do not live single-issue lives’.
Civic space in the UK is rated ‘obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.>
Get in touch with Culture Unstained through its website, and follow @Cult_Unstained and @TheGarrard on Twitter.
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service
Discussion about this post