CONTEXT
About the investments of the private foundations
Achieving an ethical economy within the existing capitalist system is utopian. Nevertheless, there is scope within the private foundations' investment policies for a much greater degree of responsibility and sustainability in the support economies of the cultural sector, even within the existing guidelines, where returns are often prioritised as the sole objective.
We urge all private foundations to take a critical look at their own investments and investment policies. And we urge grant recipients to initiate discussions with the foundations about their investments so that the economy of the cultural sector can reflect the art it finances. We insist on dialogue and transparency about the true state of the economy until the foundations' investment policies have changed.
Please reach out to us for advice and share relevant cases from cultural foundations with us.
Our context: Bikubefonden
Most of the actors in Not Just Art receive support from the Bikubefonden. As part of its policy of openness and transparency, the fund has made its ESG policy and investment portfolio public. We are therefore aware that the fund has investments in companies that appear on the UN Human Rights Council's blacklist.
A total of 112 companies appear in the UN Human Rights Council reports A/HRC/37/39 and A/HRC/57/21 on companies involved in activities related to Israel's illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories (the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza), and/or companies that financially support Israel's ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people (see Francesca Albanese's report A/HRC/59/23 FROM ECONOMY OF OCCUPATION TO ECONOMY OF GENOCIDE from 16 June 2025).
We have been in dialogue with the management of the Bikuben Foundation about these investments for a period of almost a year and a half. During this time, we have raised critical questions about the foundation's investment policy and investments. In September 2025, on behalf of around 50 grant recipients (artistic and curatorial platforms as well as employees), we sent a recommendation to the foundation’s CEO and board to strengthen social responsibility in the area of investment by divesting from these companies.
The management has welcomed our interest and demonstrated transparency regarding the various sustainability analyses and screenings they operate with.
The Bikuben Foundation complies with all international legal standards and criteria adopted in the investment field, including the UN Global Compact and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, as well as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
However, the global investment system allows both companies and asset managers to hide behind principles of sustainability and social responsibility, while the same economic system violate the International Court of Justice's declarations on breaches of international law and human rights principles. This is a problematic and systemic paradox.
On 19 July 2024, the International Court of Justice declared that Israel's occupation and annexation of the Palestinian territories (the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza) is illegal under international law. As a result, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights declared that the international community has a duty to end Israel's occupation.
The International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on Israel's illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories is not legally binding until the EU or the UN Security Council imposes sanctions. However, the UN Declaration of Human Rights is what is known as jus cogens in international law: inalienable and fundamental principles to which all states, institutions, companies and individuals are accountable and should make every effort to comply with.
We therefore maintain our recommendation to the Bikuben Foundation to exclude companies that appear on the UN blacklist from their portfolio. As a foundation that clearly values responsibility and ethical principles highly, we continue to hope that the Bikuben Foundation will seize the opportunity to take the lead and show an even greater willingness to act in the interests of responsibility and sustainability over profit.
The funds can take concrete action. Among other things, they can:
choose an ESG policy that operates with exclusion lists and, on this basis, divest from unethical companies
investigate opportunities for alternative investors and external asset managers that operate with different political and ethical requirements
commit to not reinvesting in these pools when they expire
For more information about the investment field, see various articles and reports in MATERIALS.