Terra sebv s acta mvsei sabesiensi s

Terra Sebus: Acta Musei Sabesiensis, Special Issue, 2014, p. 147-159 

 

 

SOURCES OF FUNDING FOR CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS  

IN RUSSIA AT THE TURN OF THE 21ST CENTURY 

 

 

Irina Valeryevna CHERNYAEVA



 

 

 

The turn of the 21

st

 century has emerged as a period of profound economic 

changes in the sphere of culture and art. Reductions in state funding have 

affected all cultural institutions regardless of their departmental and 

territorial jurisdiction. New lifestyles have brought forgotten traditional 

approaches - such as patronage charity, philanthropy - to the cultural 

sphere, as well as introducing new concepts like subsidies, sponsorship, 

management, marketing, fundraising and public relations, all of which have 

been analysed by Russian and foreign researchers. 

The relationship between business and culture, the opportunities for 

marketing and fundraising in the sphere of the arts, long-term forecasting of 

the development of artistic culture, and art’s relationship with the 

economics of the socio-cultural sphere have all been discussed in the works 

of Russian researchers A. Dymnikova,

1

 V. A. Barezhev,

2

 M. P. Pereversev,

3

 

V. A. Samorodov,

4

 V. A. Babkov,

5

 Y. M. Pompeev,

6

 G. L. Tulchinskiy, E. L. 

Shekova,

7

 B. A. Denisov

8

 and foreign authors A. McIlroy,

9

 J. Walsh,

10

 R. 

Florida and others. 

Currently, sources of funding of cultural organisations in Russia can 

be divided into budget (state) funding - including current budget and 

programmes (federal, regional, multiregional, sectorial, intersectorial, local) - 

and non-budget (non-state) funding, which includes sponsorship, charity, 

international programmes, projects (grants, awards) and cultural institutions’ 

                                                 



 Altai State University, Barnaul, Altai Territory, Russian Federation; e-mail: gurkina-

[e-mail]. 

1

 Dymnikova 2007. 

2

 Barezhev 2005. 

3

 Pereverzev 2010. 

4

 Samorodov 2006. 

5

 Babkov 2002; Babkov 2010. 

6

 Pompeev 2003. 

7

 Tulchinsky, Shekova 2012. 

8

 Denisov 1996. 

9

 McIlroy 2005. 

10

 Walsh 2007. 

www.cclbsebes.ro/muzeul-municipal-ioan-raica.html   /   www.cimec.ro

---

I. V. Chernyaeva 

 

148

own business activities. 

Most cultural institutions in Russia have a low level of income from 

self-generated sources which is not enough to cover all the necessary 

expenses. Therefore they must be either fully funded from the state budget 

(according to the level of institution, i.e. federal, subject of the Federation 

or local) or they obtain some financial assistance from the state budget to 

cover a part of their costs. 

The ratio of state to private funding within the budget of cultural 

organisations is variable and determined by the priorities of the state’s 

cultural policy, the institution’s history of private philanthropy and 

sponsorship, tax laws and the economic efficiency of the cultural 

organisation. A similar situation defines the economic position of cultural 

organisations in any country. The use of different sources of funding means 

it is necessary to examine each single source as an independent sphere with 

its own relevant marketing requirements. 

Employees of cultural institutions have become accustomed over the 

years to receiving full state support, so many do not trust new funding 

technologies and often do not possess the necessary knowledge to properly 

organise extra-budgetary funding. The experience of cultural professionals 

abroad may provide a useful example in this regard. 

Budget cuts to museums in Canada and USA in the late 1980s 

prompted the Milwaukee Public Museum (Wisconsin, USA) to gain 

complete independence from the state, as it had lost a fair amount of 

government subsidies and realised that Milwaukee County would not 

allocate any further money. A joint commission was set up by concerned 

parties to consider alternative approaches to the museum’s development. 

The Commission elected a Board of Directors to explore different sources 

of financing, to oversee management and development policies, and to 

control financial matters. The Board of Directors included business 

representatives and community leaders. As a result, the position of the 

museum changed dramatically. Since its independence from the county, it 

has been able to carry out several profitable projects. For example, the 

museum’s exhibition space, which served as backdrop for the streets of the 

1930s, was expanded for performances of avant-garde theatre groups; a 

centre of future technologies was established, etc. The museum did not 

shun traditional ways of obtaining funds, such as attracting new members to 

the Society of Friends of the Museum or expanding their donation 

campaign; but these kinds of major projects were implemented with the 

support of sponsors. 

In today’s parlance, sponsorship means more than just philanthropy 

or finding the money for a specific programme. Unlike charity (a single act 

of financial support), sponsorship is perceived by those who give money or 

www.cclbsebes.ro/muzeul-municipal-ioan-raica.html   /   www.cimec.ro

---