THE AMBIGUOUS ROLE OF BANKING FOUNDATIONS
First, a word on the title of this essay on banking foundations.
Ambiguous is an adjective that is not necessarily negative; ambiguous is not necessarily synonymous with obscure, ill-defined, uncertain, indeterminate and even less with sneaky, double, false, equivocal.
Ambiguous is used here to indicate the plurality of positions that characterize the status, the role of foundations and therefore the possibility of a plurality of reconstructions of their nature and their functions. If you like, it is used here as a synonym for polyvalent, point of reference and coagulation of a plurality of conditions and functions. The ambiguity thus revealed prompts us to ask ourselves whether these multiple positions are consistent with each other or whether, on the contrary, the various functions to which foundations are called cannot enter into conflict and determine behaviors which may privilege some functions over others or may determine deadlock situations that jeopardize the efficient performance of some, if not all, of these functions.
Some profiles of banking foundations particularly highlight this ambiguity of their status. And, more exactly, these: 1) the coexistence of the private nature of foundations with the insistence on them of ministerial control; 2) their internal organization, poised between the typical structure of foundations and that of associations; 3) their being at the crossroads between civil society and political organizations; 4) their qualification, at the same time, as non-profit entities and as institutional investors; 5) the relationship between their function of social interest and their holding of prominent positions in the banking system.
Attached is the complete version of Renzo Costi's essay.
Attachments: The ambiguous role of banking foundations.doc
