sou · GXB315d2 · 2010-01-01 00:00:00 — The Chief Executives of each museum also have their annual performance appraisals reviewed by the Minister, and a personal letter is received from the Minister, which constitutes a further form of overarching political governance, as does the governments appointment of the members of the boards of museums. 2.2Control through statutes, agreements and standards The exercise of statutory control over the work of state-owned museums varies, unsurprisingly, among the countries visited by the Museums Coordinator. In most countries – as in – muse- ums are run the same way as the rest of central government. Some countries however have instead chosen different ways of exercising control of museums with the objective of safeguarding the opera- tions from potentially inappropriate political influence. The inquirys review also reveals that some countries have cho- sen to create explicit rules for the responsibility of state-owned museums towards the rest of the museums sector. has an equivalent in its responsible museums, but evaluations indicate 1 The Museums Act of 1990, Section 27. that the fact that these museums lack a clear task has led to their having limited impact on inter-museum collaboration.2 Some countries have chosen to legislate on criteria applying to museums that are not state-run but which wish to receive central government funding. Although the Swedish government provides grants to regional museums and other museums, has no corresponding statutory framework. The extent of regulatory control of activities at state-owned museums, or museums whose main funding is from central government, varies among the countries we have visited. In , the government adopts instructions stating the purpose of the activities of national museums that operate as government agencies, as well as annual appropriation directions and any separate assignments with more specific information. National museums operating as foundations are in principle regulated in the same way as museums operated as government agencies. The difference is that the overall purposes of foundations are stated in a foundations charter, and not in a government ordinance containing instructions. Many countries, including , , and the UK, have statutory frameworks setting out the basic mission statement of their state-owned museums. The , how- ever, has no such regulation, as a result of that countrys museum reform. Agreements can supplement regulation and improve clarity In some countries, basic financial frameworks and statutory regu- lation governing the focus of activities of state-owned museums is supplemented by multiyear agreements between the government and the museums specifying more delimited tasks. The multiyear agreements generally deal with operational and financial issues of a more overarching nature. The UK and are two countries that apply this sort of multiyear agreement. 2 : Ansvarsmuseer: En utvärdering av ansvarsmuseirollen vid sex statliga museer. Where formal agreements exist, there has been an attempt to create multiyear cycles of agreement, something which allows more in-depth follow-up and evaluation than is possible with the one- year limit that most Swedish museums have to work with. In the UK, government support is based on formalised agree- ments running over a period of 3 years. The agreements are simi- larly structured for all institutions in receipt of government subsi- dies, regardless of their size. In the agreements, the Governments priorities are combined with those of the museum, and clear demands for expected development are set out. The strategic plan- ning of each museum is an important point of departure for the dialogue with the government ministry, which in this case is , Media and Sports (DCMS). The details of the agreement are agreed in negotiations for each institution between the museums management, the chairman of the Board and the ministry. The documents are made public and are followed up in annual development dialogues between ministry civil servants and museum officials. In a number of the other countries we visited, museums and their principals also arrive at longer-term agreements lasting for four or five years, and the museums negotiating partner is either the government ministry, as in and the , or the central government agency, as in . In the , however, agreements only cover budget issues and not issues that touch on the content of the activities. The and : emphasis on independence In a number of countries, the principle of arms length, a meta- phor used to describe museums autonomy in decision-making about their orientation, and their independence from political influence, is a key factor. In the , for example, muse- ums that used to be state-owned have in recent years been con- verted into private foundations whose orientation is dictated by their charters rather than by the government. The autonomy of museums in relation to government has then increased, even though the state still owns the museums assets and exercises supervision over them. It is also the main of the activities. In , too, the autonomy of museums has been emphasised by the conversion of the five state-owned national museums operating a total of eight separate museums into crown corporations enjoying a relatively large degree of independence. The basic focus of the activities is regulated in statute3 however and the museums are largely funded by central government grants. Responsibility of national museums towards the rest of the museum sector has a Museum Act4 which states, among other things, that state-owned museums are to cooperate with other Danish museums in their fields of responsibility. The same applies to the State Art Museums in Finland.5 In and , state-owned museums have taken ini- tiatives that aim to boost cooperation between museums in their own specialist field. For example, the State Art Museums in initiated an inventory of the countrys art collections in collaboration with local museums. In , the has initiated the formation of a network of natural history museums around the country, and the and the cooperate with a number of Canadian museums on the design of exhibitions and exhibition catalogues. The national museums subsidize these collaborations by absorbing the major portion of costs. Legislative criteria for government subsidies to state-subsidised museums Besides statutory regulation of the work of state-owned museums, and both have laws defining the conditions applying to museums that wish to receive government subsidies but do not have the government as their principal. Under the Danish Museum Act, local authority-owned and pri- vately-owned museums or museums owned by voluntary associa- tions may be eligible for government subsidies. 3Museums Act 1990, c. 3, M-13 and : An Act to amend the Museums Act, LS- 4LBK nr 1505 af 14/12/2006 Gældende (Museum Act) Date of publication: 22-12- 5 Act 658/2000. terms for providing subsidies to non-state-run museums include quality requirements for the museum's core activity as well as for the museums financial situation, management and cooperation with other museums.6 Museums that meet the requirements may apply to to be government approved. Status as a govern- ment-approved museum can be revoked if the museum at some point ceases to meet the legal requirements. This means that the government subsidy will be withdrawn. annually reviews activities at ten or so state-subsidised museums to consider whether they should keep their government subsidies. According to the Danish , the Danish Minister of Culture is able to control the activities of museums subsequent to the strengthening of these powers through the Museum Act. The Act gives the Government greater scope to control what museum activities it wishes to support in the country. The Finnish Museums Act7 defines what is to be regarded as a professional museum and thereby entitled to apply for a govern- ment subsidy. In 2008, the Finnish Government allocated subsidies to 133 non-state-owned professional museums. To receive a government subsidy, the museum must be owned by a municipality, a private association or a foundation, the activity must have a solid financial basis and it must be non-profit. The museum must have a museum director responsible for operations and primarily employed in that capacity, and sufficient qualified museum personnel. The collections must be made available to visitors. According to the , however, museums are not guaranteed a subsidy even if they meet the requirements, because there is a limited budget. There is currently a list of several museums waiting to receive subsidies for which they are qualified. It is felt however that the Act helps make clear to the museum sector what might be expected of museums that are state-subsidised. 6LBK nr 1505 af 14/12/2006 Gældende (Museum Act) Date of publication: 22-12- 2006, . 7Museums Act /729, 2.2.2Accepted standards as a condition for funding An alternative, or supplement, to statutory regulation in some countries is an accreditation programme for museums. The aim of the accreditation programme is to try to achieve a minimum accep- table standard for the entire museum sector, thus achieving greater professionalism. Even though accreditation is voluntary, it is sometimes an eligi- bility requirement for some types of funding. This leads to accredi- tation becoming standard for museums that want to apply for funding from different sources that require applicants to be accre- dited. The , the UK and the provide examples of this. Accreditation in the UK and US The UK government agency Museums, Libraries and Archives (MLA) has developed an accreditation scheme that sets nationally agreed standards for museums in the UK.8 In order to become accredited, museums must fulfil clear basic requirements on how they care for and document their collections, how they are governed and managed, and on the information and services they offer to their users. An assessment of each application is carried out to ensure that it is complete and that all associated evidence has been received. The museum must demonstrate that it continues to meet the requirements of the Scheme by submitting an accreditation return to the assessing organisation every two years or as required by MLA. MLA representatives state that the accreditation provides a benchmark for grant-making organisations, sponsors and donors. The scheme has been endorsed by a wide range of organisations including , Media and Sports, the local government associations, and the . This means that museums that wish to apply for funds from these organisations must be accredited. In the , the national museums association AAM is respon- sible for the museums accreditation programme.9 The objective of 8Museums, Libraries and Archives (MLA): The Accreditation Scheme for Museums in the . 9http:///museumresources/accred/about.cfm the American accreditation programme is roughly the same as that of the British one. According to the AAM, accreditation is often a powerful argument when museums are applying for funds from various sources. Standards for specific subject fields Apart from accreditation schemes, there are a number of best practice systems that contain recommendations for how to achieve optimal results in specific fields. Spectrum is an example of a standard for collection management. Spectrum has been developed by the UK Collections Trust10 and is embedded in the MLA's Accreditation Scheme as part of its minimum documentation requirement for UK museums. In this way, it has become accepted, and in some ways a standard. The standard is not just used in the UK, it has also spread to other countries including the and Belgium.11 2.3Governance through central administrative agencies for museums In most countries visited by the Museums Coordinator, govern- ment administrative agencies or operative parts of the Ministry in question take responsibility for strategic analysis, expert support for the museum sector and coordination and control of the museum sector as a whole. There is no Swedish equivalent to this type of function, which works across the board, actively and sys- tematically to put museum policy into practice. 10The Collections Trust is funded in by the Museums, Libraries and , in by the and in by CyMAL. 11For more details see 2.3.1Museum agencies tasked with analysis, development and grant allocation In , ABM-utvikling is the central government agency for archives, libraries and museums. The Affairs is the government ministry responsible for museum issues. The focus of the work of ABM-utvikling is on investigation, reform and development, and its interest is in the museum sector as a whole. specifically, ABM-utvikling works to produce briefing materials for the Governments budget work for the museums and briefing materials such as evaluations, follow-ups and analyses on behalf of the Ministry. The agency also allocates pro- ject funding to networks working with various types of issues, as well as to individual museums. ABM-utvikling also works actively to get small museums to combine in to larger units so that they can become more professional. The term national museums has in been displaced by state-subsidised museums. These cooperate with ABM-utvikling but at the same time also usually remain directly in touch with the Ministry on issues involving governance and budget. In , is the central administrative body for museum issues and cultural heritage. At Government level, museums policy is the responsibility of the . The has its own department at . functions as the governments staff organ for museum issues. These activities are the responsibility of the Section for Museum Development unit. Among other things, the unit pro- vides the Ministry with analyses and conducts development pro- jects. The Development unit has produced a self-assessment tool to help museums identify their own needs. It also co-ordinates peer- review external evaluation activities that interested museums can participate in. Further, the unit out museum-related develop- ment projects and monitoring activities. The Development unit of also distributes grants and subsidies to museums, in accordance with the Museums Act. Some operative issues that are given particular priority by the political leadership are however directly managed by the . Among other things, the Ministry allo- cates some grants to museum projects for digitalisation, IT and the construction and maintenance of museum premises. In , the () is responsible for museum and cultural heritage issues. KUAS assignment includes providing the with follow-ups and evaluations of various aspects of the activities of Danish museums. The agency is also responsible for the distri- bution and follow-up of subsidies to state-subsidised museums which have qualified under the Danish Museum Act for govern- ment subsidies and are thus government approved. KUAS is also in the work to develop standards and methodology support for the management of museum collections, in fields such as digitalisation and storage conditions. KUAS also works actively to get smaller museums around the country to com- bine into bigger units with the aim of boosting professionalism and efficiency. Major national state-owned museums cooperate exten- sively among themselves and with KUAS on various practical issues such as conservation and care of artefacts. The Museums, Libraries and in the UK In the UK, the Museums, Libraries and () is the central administrative agency for museums issues, and answers to , Media and Sports (DCMS) which is the government ministry responsible. The MLA out strategic analyses and also allocates project funds for various purposes to the museums and to different specialist networks. Furthermore, the MLA administers government funding for regional museums in a special measure known as Renaissance in the Regions. Apart from these tasks, the MLA works actively to boost professionalism at museums, among other things by designing and managing accreditation systems and publishing pamphlets about the role and task of museums in society. 2.3.2Netherlands: division of responsibility for museums Extensive museum reform took place in the in the 1990s in which state-owned museums were converted into private foundations. The objective of the reform was to reinforce the prin- ciple of arms length between the formerly state-owned museums and the political leadership. The collections managed by the foun- dations are, however, still owned by the government, which also provides most of the funding to the museums. Three institutions have been tasked by the tion, Culture and Science with responsibility for the governments undertakings towards the museums: works on internal activity development at museums, and designs and arranges courses in collaboration with the museum sector. grants funds to different projects after application by museums and other cultural institutions, regardless of the institutions principal. The State Inspectorate for Cultural Heritage, which is formally a section within the Ministry, is responsible for supervising the management of state-owned collections, which through 30-year agreements are managed by the foundations that used to be state-owned museums. The Inspectorate also supervises the national museums under the responsibility of the ministries of Defence, Finance and Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. In total the Inspectorate supervises 50 museums. 2.3.3Canada: ministry with coordinating and operative responsibility has no independent coordinating museums agency. It does however have a large Ministry, tage, which is responsible for museum issues and other matters. Besides its task of controlling and coordinating museums pol- icy, the ministry also has operative sections. One such section, the Canadian (), works with coordination and operative support for museums use of IT in the management of its collections and communication. Another sec- tion at the Ministry is () which has the task of promoting the proper care and preservation of moveable cultural heritage and to advance the practice, science and technology of conservation. 2.3.4USA: internal coordination at the Because the has a federal system, most museum policy is run at state and local level. is an exception to this. About of the budget of the , which con- sists of 19 museums, 9 research centres and the National Zoo, con- sists of federal funds. As a trust, the enjoys great independence and receives its funding directly from Congress. How this money is allocated among the various operations is a matter for . Management issues recommendations and guidelines to attempt to bring about greater uniformity in collection management, stor- age and digitalisation among the different museums of the . Standardised systems for financial control and invoices are also available for use by the different parts of the organisation. Apart from the grant to the , Congress also grants a limited amount of federal project funding to the other US muse- ums. This is distributed and monitored by the federal (). 2.3.5Coordinating functions almost everywhere – except in In summary, then, this overview shows that most countries in the comparison differ from in that the government ministry responsible has central administrative agencies or extensive coordi- nating operative functions for museum issues. A general task for the central museum authorities is to provide the government with briefing materials and analyses ahead of deci- sions involving museum policy. The analyses may concern state- owned museums only, or the countrys entire museum sector. Another general task for which the museum authorities are often responsible is the distribution and follow-up of project funding granted to state-owned and/or state-subsidised museums. A num- ber of the museum authorities also work actively on development and quality issues that are important to the museum sector in each country. In the , however, responsibility for the vari- ous tasks is distributed among the different actors, and in the there is in principle no coordinating museum authority, even though coordination does take place within the federally-funded . 2.4Governing museums through base funding In all countries visited by the Museum Coordinator, money is allo- cated via the government budget to fund state-owned national museums or equivalent. In most countries, the government also allocates funding to promote activities at non-state-owned museums. In almost all cases, the budgetary framework granted by the govern- ment is the main source of income for national museums. This also applies to the , where many museums that used to be national museums have been converted into private trusts, and the , where Congress determines the grant to the . In many cases, the studied countries have coordinating museum agencies that function as the ministrys organ for analysis and operative museum issues. Despite this, the national museums try to a great degree to communicate directly with their principal, i.e. the ministry, not least in budget issues. 2.4.2Government subsidies to non-state-owned museums Apart from financing National museums (or equivalent), some governments provide subsidies to other, non-state-owned, muse- ums. Subsidies are funding that need not be used for specific pro- jects, but is instead intended for ongoing operations within the museum, run by the museums managers. In , the Riksdag grants about million (app- roximately million) a year in subsidies to regional museums and some major municipal museums. There is no systematic evaluation or assessment of the outcome of subsidies. too, the government provides extensive subsidies to non-state-run museums. The directly decides on subsidies to over 100 non-state-owned museums cited by name in the governments budget. also lacks systematic evaluation of previous subsidies ahead of decisions to grant new funding. In 133 non-state-owned museums currently receive government subsidies for the execution of national or regional tasks defined in the Museums Act of 2006. According to the Act, the approved museums have to negotiate targets for their national or regional tasks and the aims and measures to be taken in order to reach the targets with . The agreements are made on a four-year basis. There are no direct fol- low-up tied to the subsidies. In , the situation is different from the other Nordic countries. There, non-state-owned museums, if they meet the requirements of the Danish Museum Act and are backed by a deci- sion by the (), can qualify for government subsidies by becoming state-approved museums.12 KUAS checks, on an ongoing basis, whether the state-approved museums comply with the requirements of the law. If KUAS decides that the museum no longer meets the legal requirements, government subsidies are withdrawn. In many countries, the activities of museums are governed using incentives that encourage the institutions to work with certain issues or solve particular problems. In most cases, incentives are used to supplement other types of governance. The exception here is , which has abstained from a Museums Act and an accreditation system, and which today runs its museums almost exclusively on the basis of incentives. This is unusual, however. Direct financial support can be further backed up by operative measures implemented by central agencies. These measures might include surveys, conferences or evaluations. It might also involve not just managing, but actively leading, projects, and coordinating major schemes. Allocation of resources to such work varies between different countries, and this, in our view, clearly affects the outcome of political control. We can see that those countries that have a strong central agency which strategically pushes the government agenda are those that have been most successful in reaching their objectives.