隨著川普上任美國新一屆總統的職位，美國藝文界開始憂慮政府可能會大幅減少國家藝術基金會（National Endowment for the Arts）的撥款，甚至乾脆廢除這個上世紀六十年代建立的聯邦政府藝術資助部門。不過，這一基金會的廢立所帶來的影響可能並沒有人們想像中那麼嚴重，因為美國非牟利藝術機構的主要經費來源從來都不是政府，而是大量的私人和商業贊助。相較而言，本澳的私人及商業藝術贊助氣氛薄弱，非牟利機構對官方資助的依賴程度極高，長遠而言，缺乏拓展和應對政策變更的能力。
論及本澳商業藝術贊助的發展，不得不討論龍頭產業博彩業的狀況。根據2015年的年報資料，博企對公益事業的贊助主要針對慈善及教育機構，對藝文項目的支持力度較低，有的年報內甚至對此隻字未提，可見重視程度有限。六大博企中，澳博算是較為樂意支持本地的藝文活動，金沙中國主要為大型藝術活動提供場地贊助，美高梅則較多自行舉辦藝術展覽活動。儘管部分博企願意在藝文項目上投放資源，但仔細觀察，多數目的是為了引進外地知名的項目，基於商業利益和宣傳效益的考慮，博企很少支持本地小型藝術團體及個體藝術家。
事實上，即使在商業藝術贊助發展情況較佳的美國，企業亦往往偏向支持知名及大型的藝術機構，結果極需資源的小型藝術團體及個人反而難以獲得贊助。因此，關注地區藝術發展的中介組織開始關注如何推動私人方面的贊助，美國舊金山灣區開展的一項刺激私人藝術贊助的計劃，或許能為我們帶來一些啟發。這項計劃名為「委約作品資金配對計劃」（The Fund For Artists Matching Commissions Program），由地方性的基金會運作，藝術家及藝術團體能申請最多5,000或10,000美元的資助，但必須配對同等金額的私人贊助，最好來自新的贊助人。2004至2010年間，計劃支持了181位藝術家完成116項委約創作，促成3,120位贊助人提供合共729,254美元的贊助。有關計劃的一份總結性研究報告中詳細分析了參與此一計劃的贊助人，發現他們與傳統贊助人有著相當不同的身份背景、價值取向和贊助動機，頗值得藝術管理者關注。
被鼓勵參與這一計劃的贊助人，他們更多本身便是藝術家和相關專業人士、青年或中年、關注社會公義和環境保護、對多元文化價值觀感興趣等。促使他們贊助的主要原因是他們可能與藝術家本身有聯繫，對項目涉及的文化及社區有關聯，或對作品主題或其藝術形式感興趣。許多成功獲得資金配對的藝術家意外地發現，爭取贊助沒有想像中那麼困難，原來在藝術家的身邊，已經可以發掘到認同他們自身理念和價值觀，並且願意為此提供支持的人。
研究報告內還介紹到一段相當有趣的短片，啟發藝術家為自己尋找藝術贊助人。短片中記錄一名藝術家在講座上即席演示如何為小型藝術項目籌集贊助，藝術家以簡短有力的介紹，吸引在場觀眾的興趣，在短短幾分鐘內便爭取到眾多觀眾淘出錢包，向舞台上砸錢──這一場幽默的演示尤如當頭捧喝，原來我們可以從下一刻、從我們身邊的人開始，為藝術找到埋單的人。
原載於 C2文創誌 第二十期
As Donald Trump becomes the new president, the arts sector in the United States is beginning to fear that the government will drastically reduce the funding support to National Endowment for the Arts, or even abolish this federal arts funding body, set up since the 1860s. However, even if it were to be removed, it may not be as serious as some imagine, because the non-profit arts organisations in the United States do not rely on government funding, but rely largely on private and commercial support. On the other hand, in Macao, private and commercial funding for arts is relatively scarce, and so non-profit organisiations tend to rely on the government for support. In the long term, this mode of operation limits the scope of development and adaptability of these organisations.
When we consider the commercial funding for arts in Macao, it is impossible not to think about the role of the gaming enterprises. According to annual report statistics in 2015, corporate donations from gaming enterprises went mainly to charities and educational institutions, while their support for the arts is less obvious. For some of these enterprises, donation to the arts was not even featured in the annual reports, which indicates that their low priority for supporting the arts. Among the six major gaming enterprises, SJM is seen as being more willing to support local arts and cultural activities, while Sands China previously offered venue sponsorship to major arts event(s), while MGM has focused more on organising its own arts exhibitions. While some of these enterprises are willing to offer some sponsorships to arts projects, a more detailed scrutiny shows that most of these sponsorships were for events that featured major international arts organisations. Given their considerations on the commercial viability and publicity impact of projects, these corporations are much less keen to support local, small-scaled arts groups or individual artists.
In fact, even in the United States where there is more commercial arts funding, corporations are keen to sponsor more prestigious and large-scale arts organisations, making it hard for smaller arts bodies and individual artists to obtain their much-needed funding. Hence, some mediating agencies involved in promoting regional arts development have become more interested in promoting private sponsorship. In San Francisco Bay Area, a project aimed at encouraging private sponsorship to the arts, The Fund For Artist Matching Commissions Program, is an excellent example. Operated by the regional trust, artists or arts groups can apply for a sponsorship up to the value of US$5,000-US$10,000, but this must be matched by a private sponsorship of the same value, preferably from a new sponsor. From 2004 to 2010, this scheme has helped a total of 181 artists with 116 arts commissions. Altogether, it has attracted a total of US$729,254 worth of donation from 3,120 sponsors. Findings from a conclusive study report on this scheme show that the backgrounds, values and sponsorship incentives for these sponsors are very different from the typical arts sponsors. Such findings are definitely revealing from the arts management perspective.
In fact, many sponsors participating in this scheme are themselves a large proportion of young or middle-aged artists or art practitioners, who are keenly interested in many issues such as social justice, environmental protection and cultural diversity. The primary reasons for their willingness to support art projects are likely related to their own identity as artists, or that they are related to the culture or community where these projects operate. Some of them decided to offer funding support because of the themes or formats of the art projects. Many successful applicants discovered, to their surprise, that the funding bids were not as difficult as they assumed. Apparently, there are people in the community who share the values and ideas of these artists, and are willing to support worthwhile causes.
The study report also highlights an interesting short film that encourages artists to identify their own patrons. In the film, the artist gives a talk to demonstrate to the audience how to source funding for his small-scale arts project. His persuasive speech captivates the audience to such an extent that, in just a few minutes’ time, many from the audience offered to make their donations. Humour aside, this film certainly brings home the message that, if we are willing to explore, there are indeed people around us who are generous enough to fund the arts.
Source: C2 Issue 20