Last month, the National Museum Directors’ Conference launched its report on the international work of museums.
The report is a bit on the light side, but perhaps that’s OK because it turns out that the document is not a full-blooded analysis of museums’ international activity, but an advocacy paper aimed at politicians and funders.
Its basic gist is that museums do a lot of varied international work, have formed lots of interesting partnerships, and that international work is good for the economy, tourism and cultural diplomacy.
The purpose of the report became clear when, at the launch, Tate director Nick Serota implored the minister for culture Ed Vaizey to work with other government departments to reinstate the funding for the World Collections programme.
This £3m three-year programme finished last year when it ran out of money. Its aim was to develop two-way partnerships with institutions in Asia and Africa.
Neil MacGregor, director of the British Museum, headed the consortium of the British Museum, British Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, Natural History Museum, Tate and Royal Botanic Gardens that delivered the programme.
Some good work was undoubtedly done, although there seems to have been a heavy emphasis on curatorial expertise and collections-based knowledge. And the skills-sharing element seems to have been mostly one-way traffic – that is that the rest of the world learns from the UK.
New money for international work seems unlikely, but if any is found, an understanding of what is already taking place would be useful to ensure a coordinated approach that is not just concentrated in the hands of a few London-based nationals.
Many museums do international work based on equitable, mutual, respectful and sustainable exchanges. Perhaps this could be the model for future work.
Sharon Heal, editor, Museums Journal
sharon@museumsassociation.org
www.twitter.com/sharonheal
There will be sessions at the Museums Association conference exploring international work
The report is a bit on the light side, but perhaps that’s OK because it turns out that the document is not a full-blooded analysis of museums’ international activity, but an advocacy paper aimed at politicians and funders.
Its basic gist is that museums do a lot of varied international work, have formed lots of interesting partnerships, and that international work is good for the economy, tourism and cultural diplomacy.
The purpose of the report became clear when, at the launch, Tate director Nick Serota implored the minister for culture Ed Vaizey to work with other government departments to reinstate the funding for the World Collections programme.
This £3m three-year programme finished last year when it ran out of money. Its aim was to develop two-way partnerships with institutions in Asia and Africa.
Neil MacGregor, director of the British Museum, headed the consortium of the British Museum, British Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, Natural History Museum, Tate and Royal Botanic Gardens that delivered the programme.
Some good work was undoubtedly done, although there seems to have been a heavy emphasis on curatorial expertise and collections-based knowledge. And the skills-sharing element seems to have been mostly one-way traffic – that is that the rest of the world learns from the UK.
New money for international work seems unlikely, but if any is found, an understanding of what is already taking place would be useful to ensure a coordinated approach that is not just concentrated in the hands of a few London-based nationals.
Many museums do international work based on equitable, mutual, respectful and sustainable exchanges. Perhaps this could be the model for future work.
Sharon Heal, editor, Museums Journal
sharon@museumsassociation.org
www.twitter.com/sharonheal
There will be sessions at the Museums Association conference exploring international work