I get a bit nervous when I am asked to write about the issues and challenges that conservation faces. I am uncomfortable with the perception that conservation should be seen as a 'special case' when all areas of operation in the museum sector are under similar pressures.
I am also conscious that the very word conservation can cause groans from anyone with responsibility for the management, interpretation and use of collections.
In my experience this is because conservation can be seen as an inconvenience, an ideology that stops things happening, or a process that takes too much time and costs too much. It can seem inconvenient when a key object that is wanted for an exhibition requires extensive conservation work or is assessed as too delicate to travel.
It is natural to want to spend exhibition budgets on display, rather than on behind the scenes activities such as conservation. But balancing these different demands is part of delivering cultural services, and conservation is as essential as any other part of that process.
Collections are the primary asset of a museum and it makes sense to invest in their conservation. But as government policy has increased the emphasis on education, access and use, it seems to have diminished in equal measure in the areas of collections care and conservation.
This has meant that in recent years there has been a steady reduction in conservation provision in publicly-funded museums and galleries.
To some extent this has been compensated for by conservators going freelance. A healthy private sector is to be encouraged and the use of private practitioners undoubtedly offers some benefits to museums. But there is a danger of producing our own 'junior doctor crisis'.
Junior doctors have nowhere to train except NHS hospitals, and if they can't get training placements in the NHS, then they can't develop the skills they need for the future. Until now, conservators have normally trained in public museums and galleries and then gone freelance later in their career.
But freelance professionals are rarely in a position to offer the kind of training that a large museum department can. Museum conservation departments are repositories of knowledge and provide opportunities for research and development that are not generally possible in the private sector.
There is a danger that as the use of freelance conservators increases, conservation knowledge is dissipated and there is no mechanism for training the next generation of practitioners.
Sustainability is a key issue if we are to maintain an effective private sector and that means that it must be financially viable. The average rates for professional conservation services are shockingly low, which is partly due to low-cost 'kitchen sink' conservators who not only keep rates unrealistically low, but also impede the development of the sector. A minimum rate of £25 per hour for an accredited conservator should be the industry standard.
If you think this is expensive, would you hire a plumber or a car mechanic for less? A minimum rate at this level would create a sustainable sector that could afford to underpin and contribute to the collective conservation knowledge base.
The role of conservators in public institutions is also changing. As pressure to produce more frequent exhibitions and loans increases, some conservation departments seem to resemble object-cleaning assembly lines, which in turn reduces opportunities to learn about collections and threatens to de-skill and de-motivate the conservation workforce.
The government says 'collections are at the heart of everything we do', but it remains silent on conservation and collection care. At a House of Lords Enquiry into Science and Heritage, David Lammy, the culture minister, said it was up to individual institutions to decide how they used their resources, implying that if there was a lack of investment in conservation, then this was down to the institution and not the result of government policy.
The reality is that the relationship between government and museums is not neutral and directors will use resources from government to advance government policy and to meet the various targets they are set.
The conservation profession has to respond to these specific developments, the wider demands of society and the need for change in museums, galleries, archives and libraries. The formation of the Institute of Conservation (Icon) two years ago shows that the profession welcomes these challenges.
Icon has been working with the Museums Association on issues such as collections management and workforce development. We also manage a scheme for the professional accreditation of conservators, which is our main vehicle for raising standards.
And Icon has received £1m from the Heritage Lottery Fund to run an internship programme to give trainees a chance to develop their practical skills in the workplace. This scheme encourages participants from non-traditional backgrounds and provides a much-needed stepping-stone for those wanting to develop a career in conservation.
I don't believe that conservation should plead a special case, but if we are to maintain a viable, effective sector, we need a profession that is able to play its part, along with other specialisms, in shaping the future of public collections, how they are used and understood.
That requires curators, managers and conservators to agree what they want from conservation services. It also requires government to recognise that collections care and conservation have a significant contribution to make to the cultural well-being of the nation.
Perhaps the biggest challenge that we face is balancing our need to use cultural material against our desire to preserve it. There is a balance to be struck and conservators can help to make sure that we use rather than consume the finite resource that is our cultural heritage.
Simon Cane is chairman of trustees at the Institute of Conservation
I am also conscious that the very word conservation can cause groans from anyone with responsibility for the management, interpretation and use of collections.
In my experience this is because conservation can be seen as an inconvenience, an ideology that stops things happening, or a process that takes too much time and costs too much. It can seem inconvenient when a key object that is wanted for an exhibition requires extensive conservation work or is assessed as too delicate to travel.
It is natural to want to spend exhibition budgets on display, rather than on behind the scenes activities such as conservation. But balancing these different demands is part of delivering cultural services, and conservation is as essential as any other part of that process.
Collections are the primary asset of a museum and it makes sense to invest in their conservation. But as government policy has increased the emphasis on education, access and use, it seems to have diminished in equal measure in the areas of collections care and conservation.
This has meant that in recent years there has been a steady reduction in conservation provision in publicly-funded museums and galleries.
To some extent this has been compensated for by conservators going freelance. A healthy private sector is to be encouraged and the use of private practitioners undoubtedly offers some benefits to museums. But there is a danger of producing our own 'junior doctor crisis'.
Junior doctors have nowhere to train except NHS hospitals, and if they can't get training placements in the NHS, then they can't develop the skills they need for the future. Until now, conservators have normally trained in public museums and galleries and then gone freelance later in their career.
But freelance professionals are rarely in a position to offer the kind of training that a large museum department can. Museum conservation departments are repositories of knowledge and provide opportunities for research and development that are not generally possible in the private sector.
There is a danger that as the use of freelance conservators increases, conservation knowledge is dissipated and there is no mechanism for training the next generation of practitioners.
Sustainability is a key issue if we are to maintain an effective private sector and that means that it must be financially viable. The average rates for professional conservation services are shockingly low, which is partly due to low-cost 'kitchen sink' conservators who not only keep rates unrealistically low, but also impede the development of the sector. A minimum rate of £25 per hour for an accredited conservator should be the industry standard.
If you think this is expensive, would you hire a plumber or a car mechanic for less? A minimum rate at this level would create a sustainable sector that could afford to underpin and contribute to the collective conservation knowledge base.
The role of conservators in public institutions is also changing. As pressure to produce more frequent exhibitions and loans increases, some conservation departments seem to resemble object-cleaning assembly lines, which in turn reduces opportunities to learn about collections and threatens to de-skill and de-motivate the conservation workforce.
The government says 'collections are at the heart of everything we do', but it remains silent on conservation and collection care. At a House of Lords Enquiry into Science and Heritage, David Lammy, the culture minister, said it was up to individual institutions to decide how they used their resources, implying that if there was a lack of investment in conservation, then this was down to the institution and not the result of government policy.
The reality is that the relationship between government and museums is not neutral and directors will use resources from government to advance government policy and to meet the various targets they are set.
The conservation profession has to respond to these specific developments, the wider demands of society and the need for change in museums, galleries, archives and libraries. The formation of the Institute of Conservation (Icon) two years ago shows that the profession welcomes these challenges.
Icon has been working with the Museums Association on issues such as collections management and workforce development. We also manage a scheme for the professional accreditation of conservators, which is our main vehicle for raising standards.
And Icon has received £1m from the Heritage Lottery Fund to run an internship programme to give trainees a chance to develop their practical skills in the workplace. This scheme encourages participants from non-traditional backgrounds and provides a much-needed stepping-stone for those wanting to develop a career in conservation.
I don't believe that conservation should plead a special case, but if we are to maintain a viable, effective sector, we need a profession that is able to play its part, along with other specialisms, in shaping the future of public collections, how they are used and understood.
That requires curators, managers and conservators to agree what they want from conservation services. It also requires government to recognise that collections care and conservation have a significant contribution to make to the cultural well-being of the nation.
Perhaps the biggest challenge that we face is balancing our need to use cultural material against our desire to preserve it. There is a balance to be struck and conservators can help to make sure that we use rather than consume the finite resource that is our cultural heritage.
Simon Cane is chairman of trustees at the Institute of Conservation
