This article was first published in Danish on Filantropi, an independent journalistic online media about philanthropy and fundraising Filantropi – et uafhængigt journalistisk netmedie om den danske filantropiske sektor. – Filantropi.
A recent article in the Danish philanthropy media argued that Denmark has no community foundations.
That conclusion surprised us. Not because we necessarily disagree, but because we believe the evidence required to answer the question simply does not exist.
To our knowledge, no comprehensive mapping has ever been carried out of the foundations working to strengthen and develop local communities across Denmark. As a result, we do not know how many there are, where they are located, or what role they play in the places where they operate.
Denmark has one of the world’s strongest philanthropic traditions, and several Danish foundations rank among Europe’s most influential. Yet we know remarkably little about the segment of the foundation landscape that works closest to local communities.
As we visit projects across the country, we repeatedly encounter local foundations that play a decisive role in the development of their towns, municipalities and surrounding communities. They understand the history of the places they serve, know the local stakeholders, and are familiar with the challenges that matter most to local residents. Over many years, they build trusted relationships and often bring together people and organisations that otherwise might never have collaborated.
Despite this, these foundations rarely feature in the national conversation about Danish philanthropy. At a time when interest in local development, civil society and cross-sector partnerships is growing, we still lack an overall picture of the foundations that already play a central role in many communities.
The international debate offers a useful perspective. The term community foundations generally used to describe foundations with a strong geographical focus and a long-term commitment to improving a specific place. In recent years, the concept of place-based philanthropy has also become increasingly prominent in international philanthropic discussions. Both concepts refer to foundations that work from within a community and develop solutions in close collaboration with residents, civil society organisations, businesses and public authorities.
Both of us work within the international tradition of community foundations and place-based philanthropy. It is therefore only natural that we have followed the emerging Danish debate with great interest.
From our perspective, however, the discussion points to something more fundamental than whether Denmark has community foundations. It reveals a significant gap in our knowledge. When we consider the role that many Danish foundations already play, there is good reason to move beyond terminology and instead examine the functions these foundations perform in the communities where they operate.
Across Denmark there are commercial foundations, savings bank foundations, utility foundations, local development foundations and other charitable foundations that work with a long-term commitment to the development of a defined geographical area. They differ in size, history and legal structure, but many share the same underlying ambition: to create positive change in the places they call home.
We encounter many of these foundations through our work at Frederiksbergfonden and Gl. Skanderborg Fonden, not least through the Local Foundations Network established by Martin Dahl.
Some support local associations and volunteer initiatives. Others invest in culture, nature, children’s wellbeing, or the development of town centres and rural communities. Many also act as conveners, bringing municipalities, businesses and civil society together to address shared challenges.
This work is an important part of Danish philanthropy.
Yet no one has systematically documented it.
That leaves us without answers to some very basic questions.
How many place-based foundations are there in Denmark?
How are they distributed across the country?
Are there regions where local foundations constitute a significant driver of development, while other areas have access to far fewer philanthropic resources?
And how do local and national foundations complement one another?
These are not merely academic questions. They matter for the way we understand philanthropy and for the decisions made by foundations, municipalities and civil society organisations alike.
We need a shared picture
When we know so little about place-based foundations, it also becomes difficult to have a meaningful discussion about their significance. This applies not only to the debate about community foundations, but also to broader conversations about how municipalities, foundations and civil society can work together in new and more effective ways.
In our view, the time has come to develop a comprehensive overview of Denmark’s place-based foundations.
We envisage a nationwide mapping exercise that identifies where these foundations operate, the geographical areas they serve, the themes they prioritise, and the ways in which they collaborate locally. The findings could be brought together in a publicly accessible atlas of place-based philanthropy in Denmark.
Such a resource would have value far beyond the foundation sector itself.
Municipalities would gain a clearer understanding of the philanthropic resources already present in their local areas. Researchers would have a much stronger basis for analysing place-based philanthropy. National foundations would find it easier to navigate a landscape that is currently difficult to comprehend. And for local foundations themselves, such a mapping would make their work more visible, particularly at a time when expectations of collaboration continue to grow.
Today, this knowledge is scattered. Some of it can be found on foundation websites. Some is hidden in foundation registers. Some exists within local networks. Much of it resides only with the people who work in this field every day.
Through our own work, we regularly see national and local foundations addressing the same societal challenges without necessarily being aware of each other’s initiatives or experience. As a result, opportunities to build on existing local relationships, knowledge and capacity are not always fully realised.
A better overview would not, of course, alter the statutes, governance or strategic priorities of individual foundations. Nor should it. Its purpose would simply be to make existing opportunities more visible and to create a stronger foundation for collaboration whenever collaboration adds value.
This perspective is likely to become even more relevant in the years ahead.
The Danish Government’s ambition, set out in its recent government programme, to promote a more participatory and democratic Denmark through stronger collaboration between municipalities, civil society and foundations points in the same direction. If more societal challenges are to be addressed collectively, it is essential to understand the landscape of organisations that are already deeply rooted in the communities where these solutions must be developed.
This is particularly true of place-based foundations.
Many have spent decades building trust, long-term relationships and an in-depth understanding of their local communities. That kind of local knowledge cannot simply be replicated elsewhere. It is developed over time through a sustained and enduring local presence.
This is precisely why we believe that the debate about community foundations deserves a broader perspective.
We risk spending too much time debating whether Denmark has community foundations before we have even developed a clear understanding of the place- based foundations that are already operating across the country.
A national mapping exercise may not confirm one view or the other. It may reveal that Denmark has more community foundations than many currently assume. Equally, it may show that only a small number of Danish foundations fit the international definition. Either outcome would be valuable because it would be based on evidence rather than assumption.
That, ultimately, is the real issue.
Denmark has a strong tradition of developing philanthropy on the basis of sound knowledge and careful analysis. That tradition should also extend to place-based philanthropy.
We therefore believe the time has come to create a comprehensive overview of Denmark’s place-based foundations. Not to place foundations into rigid categories or determine who can legitimately call themselves a community foundation, but to strengthen our collective understanding of an important part of Danish philanthropy that is already making a significant contribution to the development of communities across the country.
That knowledge is missing today.
It is the logical place to begin.
