Arts & International Affairs: Volume 2, Issue 1 | Page 129
serves as an active bridge between East and West and is located at the nexus
of the Nordic and Baltic regions” (SRG Foundation ����:��).
The foregoing begs the question, why do corporations get involved in some
of these arrangements? The Deutsche Bank provides perhaps the greatest
insight because they partnered with Guggenheim for the Berlin location.
Outside of the relationship with Guggenheim, Deutsche Bank has identified
the promotion of art as a component of its corporate philanthropy. This
sort of corporate social responsibility practice can burnish the bank brand
and provide it with an opportunity to forge a distinctive corporate social
responsibility policy. Beyond its partnership with the Guggenheim, Deutsche
Bank oversees Art Works, its “global art program.” The bank has its own
collection of art, some of which it exhibits on its premises. It supports a
myriad of projects, including an “Artist of the Year” award and a magazine
about art, ostensibly making are more widely accessible. Ultimately, then,
the various actors who participate in the transnationalization of the museum
do so for their own political, economic, and cultural reasons. �
The Museum—What kind of transnational actor?
The seeds of the current conversation about transnational actors date to
the early ����s when scholars like Keohane and Nye questioned the state
centric nature of the international system (Jönsson ����, ��). They saw
greater complexity of as well as significant activity by non-state actors. Early
versions of this debate asked whether increased influence by transnational
actors translated into declining influence for the state. Attention returned
to transnational actors again in the ����s with a spate of scholarship on
globalization, transnational advocacy networks, and epistemic communities
(see Risse ���� for a review of this second wave).
Contemporary definitions include the following: transnational actors
“operate on a cross-border basis, pursue the same set of goals everywhere,
and address a global audience. This does not mean that their national
affiliates, subsidiaries, or chapters have no autonomy: but they possess a
clear overall image and exist as international, often legal entities, whether as
church, corporation, or federation” (Josselin and Wallace ����:�). The term,
transnational, “refers to actors, interactions and flows that cross conventional
borders, go beyond established patterns, and can be seen as an alternative to
state-centric perspectives” (Jönsson ����:��). These definitions seem able to
accommodate the museum as a transnational actor, but what kind?
�
.
128