For eighteen years, I had the privilege of heading the FONDATION SUISA secretariat. I will now be retiring at the end of September 2026. A farewell always provides an opportunity to look back: on programmes, projects, encounters and successes – but also on questions that remain unanswered. For me, this is particularly the following:
How should music and cultural funding be structured in a world where the framework conditions are constantly changing and where every decision has side effects that are difficult to foresee?
As a funding foundation, we do not stand apart from the culture we support. We are subject to the same social, economic and political developments as the beneficiaries – and, conversely, our decisions influence these developments.
When I joined FONDATION SUISA in 2008, the funding landscape was organised differently from how it is today. The transformation since then, however, cannot be traced to individual, clearly definable disruptions, but was made possible by many small, gradual changes: different lifestyles and working models became more commonplace, diversity received greater attention, the cultural sector became more professional, and technological developments have enabled new forms of creation, production and dissemination. People working in music and culture are now more likely to have specific training and a professionally developed awareness of the economic realities of artistic work.
The self-image of funding organisations has also changed: in many places, traditional patronage based on the motto ‘doing good’ has given way to a partnership-based form of philanthropy that is more aware of its impact – and potential side effects.
Space for development
One concrete consequence of this changed understanding of funding was ‘Get Going!’. Since 2018, the programme has not been funding clearly defined end products or ready-made ‘projects’, but has instead been creating time and space for artistic development: research, reorientation, experimentation and open-ended processes. After all, not everything of significance can be planned in advance, budgeted for or measured by a specific outcome. Development requires trust, freedom and the opportunity to discard ideas. ‘Get Going!’ consciously accepts this risk, thereby opening up avenues that would often have no place in traditional project funding.
I am particularly pleased that other institutions have adopted parts of this model. It shows that funding can not only finance outcomes, but also facilitate development and create focal points.
Funding with consequences
However, supporting open processes is only one aspect of this responsibility. Equally important is the question of what conditions funding instruments create overall – and what unintended consequences they may have.
Good music funding must always assume responsibility on two levels. Firstly, it creates conditions under which music can emerge, develop and even take detours. This does not mean patronising assistance, but rather scope for action on an equal footing. Secondly, it must keep a close eye on the economic and social consequences of its own funding instruments. Low-threshold funding schemes can enable and stabilise; yet, precisely because of their easy availability, they can also reinforce dependencies if they fail to open up sustainable prospects.
This also involves taking a critical look at the growing ‘logic of attention’. Not every relevant piece of artistic work can be made immediately visible, photogenic or marketed in a short pitch. Funding bodies should therefore not primarily reward what is easiest to present. Art does not take place in a vacuum – and cultural funding must not forget this either.
Coordination and clarity
No single institution can shoulder this responsibility alone. The pandemic has not only shown how vulnerable existing funding structures are, but also how important the interaction between the various stakeholders is. Once the immediate crisis was over, however, many returned (too) quickly to familiar routines, and fundamental lessons could not be put into practice. On the contrary, the demands and expectations placed on cultural funding increased in volume, and ‘production cycles’ accelerated – not always for the better …
Looking ahead, I would like to see greater coordination between the public sector, private-sector sponsorship and charitable foundations. They do not need to support the same things – quite the opposite. Their differing approaches and remits can be a strength. What is crucial is that they complement one another more effectively, rather than overlapping or leaving gaps.
FONDATION SUISA, too, will need to further refine and focus its priorities. Its openness to all genres and styles has always been a great strength. However, in view of the growing number of applications and widely varying expectations, it is becoming increasingly important to clearly identify where the foundation can make a particular contribution. Impact is not created simply by supporting as much as possible, but also by an institution understanding its role and making decisions.
People, music, togetherness
After 18 years, it is above all the people who remain in my memory: the team, the Board of Trustees, musicians of all genres, project leaders and many others who are passionate about their cause. To single out individual encounters would not do justice to this diversity. For me, what was always decisive was working together: the exchange of ideas, the friction, the passion and the determination to take music seriously not merely as a product, but as a living part of our society.
The question of how music funding can enable artistic freedom, take economic realities seriously and continually reorient itself in a changing society will remain open even after I have left. For a funding organisation that no longer asks itself questions can hardly fulfil its remit.
A new rhythm
I myself will now be ‘taking it a bit easier’: as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Biel Music School and a member of the Municipal Culture Commission, I will once again be able to devote more of my time to the exciting cultural life of ‘my’ city. Otherwise, I shall take my cue from the opening line of Joe Dassin’s ‘Les Champs-Élysées’: ‘Je m’baladais sur l’avenue, le cœur ouvert à l’inconnu …’