Is there a collective Nordic identity? Do Nordic foundations embrace it and to what extent do they draw on it for the common benefit of the countries of the region? In terms of identity, there are some obvious difficulties. Even conducting a conference in ‘Nordic languages’ requires a conscious effort. Finnish belongs to a completely different language group from the others. Some dialects of Norwegian are more intelligible to Swedes just across the border than they are to other Norwegians. All feel the pull of competing identities – national or local from below, European or more largely international from above. Most of the generalisations you could make have exceptions: they inhabit a territorial bloc (except the Danes). Their proximity to the Arctic (except the Danes) makes them more acutely sensitive to the climate crisis than most. In spite of this, the clear view of the conference, in fact the assumption underlying it, is that there is a Nordic identity. The countries have similar social structures, they have strong state welfare models. Similarities of geography, of climate and of culture create a sense of common outlook and purpose, fostered at an institutional level by the Nordic Council for inter-parliamentary cooperation. It may be, after all, that identity is more to do with how you see yourself than any objective measure.

Nevertheless, making common cause among the region’s foundations is not easy. A participant from a Finnish research foundation conceded that while his foundation was good at research, it was not good at collaborating. A Danish participant advanced the view that different standards of transparency across the countries made regional collaboration difficult. A side-session on pathways to collaboration among Nordic foundations was an appeal for more, rather than an exposition of means to do so.  Even Anne Berner, who has recently set up a Nordic foundation to create and run a Centre of Excellence for the Rehabilitation of Children in Ukraine, admits that the exercise is ‘not as easy as it sounds’. Still, she and her collaborators did it and other examples of successful collaborations were given: the Nordic Safe Cities initiative, which is supported by philanthropic as well as public funds, NORSI, the Norwegian Research School in Innovation and Entrepreneurship, is part-funded by the IKEA Foundation. In spite of the difficulties, there was a general conviction that foundations can find means and opportunities to work together both within and between the Nordic countries. Perhaps their most important task in doing so, argued the head of the Bikubenfonden in Denmark, is the maintenance of trust that he sees as the hallmark and perhaps the most important common characteristic of the Nordic societies. They work as well as they do, he believes, because people trust each other and trust their institutions. Foundations can sustain and foster this directly by the initiatives they fund and indirectly by embodying it themselves. In doing so, they will help affirm a distinctive Nordic identity.

Collaboration and creating a sense of community among Nordic foundations is still a work in progress. No-one at the conference doubted that it could be done.

Andrew Milner, special features editor at Alliance magazine