Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Navarrete dutch policy-iccpr2012


Published on

Presentation for the Cultural Policy International 2012 meeting (BCN): historic review on cultural policy for digital heritage in the Netherlands

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Navarrete dutch policy-iccpr2012

  1. 1. VII International Conference on Cultural Policy Research ICCPR 2012Universitat Ramon Llull, BarcelonaJuly 9th 2012Dutch Policy for DigitizationTrilce Navarrete
  2. 2. Dutch policy for digitization  Introduction: digitizing heritage collections   Dutch museums and policy system  Historic revision of policy and results   Subsidy schemes and regulations   Impact on museum institutions  From vision to action   Achieving efficiency   Future challenges  Conclusions Dutch policy for Digitization 2 Trilce Navarrete
  3. 3. The Netherlands Minister of Education, Culture and Science Since 1989, museums are part of Cultural Heritage department and of the Directorate Culture and Media managed by the Ministry of State Secretary Education, Culture and Science (OCW). of Culture Previously, museums were managed by Director General Cultural Heritage -Wellbeing, Health and Culture (1982-1994), Culture and Inspectorate -Culture, Recreation and Social Work (1965-1982), Media -Education, Arts and Science (1952-1965). There is no museum law but there is a Cultural Heritage Arts Media, Letters and Libraries Cultural Heritage Preservation Act (1985). The Cultural Heritage Inspectorate ensures its implementation. Government Museums Service for National Archive Cultural HeritageIntroduction Dutch policy for Digitization 3 Trilce Navarrete
  4. 4. Type of income source and average of income out of total The Netherlands Ticket sales 22% Local government subsidy 52% There are 810 museums (ICOM definition). Sponsoring 12% Other 21% Museums can be divided in Source Percentage - National museums Private grant 21% - Municipal museums - Local museums and Provincial subsidy 24% - Private museums. National subsidy 51% Museums are autonomous: -  Staff is not a civil servant 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 -  The government owns (part of) the collections -  The government (may) own the building -  The government provides regular subsidy -  Museums can apply for government grantsIntroduction Dutch policy for Digitization 4 Trilce Navarrete
  5. 5. Policy milestones The Ministry of Culture publishes a policy on museums every 4 years (linked to the subsidy period) since late 1980s. Additional thematic policy paper may also be published . Other ministries may have an impact on digitization of heritage (Economic Affairs, Internal Affairs). 1986-1988 Application of IT in 1994 ★ 1969 government Electronic 1980 1999 ★ 2007-1014 Subsidy for Superhighway 2009-2011 AMI Digital 2004-2008 Images for digitization 1988 CATCH Plus Delta CATCH the Future Fishing Museum museum Automation 1977 ★ 1990 ★ 2001-2004 2008-2010 New Delta Plan Digital Delta Plan 1921 2006-2008 Innovation of Museum 1987-1991 Reorganization Digitization Cultural Policy PC Museum ★ 1994 2003and management with a Policy Expression Metamorfoze eCulture1921 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010Historic review Dutch policy for Digitization 5 Trilce Navarrete
  6. 6. Project, policy and outcome Automation of From policy AMI advice: Museum Object Registration to document renew museum; Automation to improve efficiency; Museum Towards a New Centralized guiding infrastructure; Identified Information Museum Policy benefits. (1980) Museum Information Museums adopted computers: services in Automation + PC government 1987 = 4%; 1988 = 7%; 1989 = 14%; 1990 = 25% Museum Project (Internal Affairs) Total SMA grants = 85, total PCMP grants = 124 ★ Delta Plan for 1988 Audit National ranking of museum collections: A, B, C, D. the Preservation Office Report on Basic registration standard established. of Cultural state of National Heritage Collections Registration quality linked to national subsidy. Institution to Delta Plan subsidy was extended 1995-2000. Mondriaan manage grants: 1994-present: funding R&D projects (e.g.MusIP). Foundation Delta Plan, eCulture 2001 peak: 40% of grants amount to digitization.Historic review Dutch policy for Digitization 6 Trilce Navarrete
  7. 7. Project, policy and outcome 1994 Digital Heritage seen as part of the Dutch Electronic information society. 6 ministry superhighway collaboration DEN to guide R&D mixing heritage and science ★ Digital Delta Initiated by Priority: digital access to cultural heritage. Internal Affairs Plan (2001-2004) Digital heritage part of the information society. Response to Advice: ICT to be integrated in production, eCulture national ICT distribution, presentation, preservation and (re) agenda (2003) utilization of culture. 2006-2008: Information plan before Digitizing with Profess. Digital implementation. a Policy work process Evaluation to take place later this year.Historic review Dutch policy for Digitization 7 Trilce Navarrete
  8. 8. Project, policy and outcome ★ Images for €154 million. 2007-2014 the Future Emergency preservation of AV. Development of best practice. 18 projects. CATCH 2004-2011 R&D heritage and IT collaboration. ★ Emergency preservation of paper Metamorfoze 1997-now collections. Development of best practice. Support to advisory 1969-now VISDOC, MARDOC, IMC, SIMIN, DEN. organizationsHistoric review Dutch policy for Digitization 8 Trilce Navarrete
  9. 9. Operational impact Impact on museum institutions can be seen in: •  Choice of software > linked to discount arrangements. •  Use of standards > by using the preferred software. •  Object valuation system. •  Preference of application of technology (websites / infrastructure). •  Balance between core activities: collect, preserve, communicate, exhibit, research. • Increased professionalism: (digital) registration, information plan (sustainability), measure of online use (web stats), access, accountability (budget post).Historic review Dutch policy for Digitization 9 Trilce Navarrete
  10. 10. Apparent trends Identified (recurrent) issues: •  Subsidy to build up the infrastructure has long term effect / long term benefits. Project base grants can support R&D –but it must be part of greater vision to add to infrastructure. •  Subsidy to showcase results are important but represent ‘the cherry on top of the ice cream’. •  Process is not linear. All the learning moments are necessary to advance. •  Dissemination of knowledge remains an issue: how to avoid ‘reinventing the wheel’?Historic review Dutch policy for Digitization 10 Trilce Navarrete
  11. 11. From vision to action How can government subsidy increase efficiency? There are a number of changing variables: including quality and quantity Changes in: Influence: (1)  Technology (A)  Who has access (inside/outside) (2) Work process (B)  What is accessed (partial information) (people and information) (C)  How to access it (touch screen/iPhone) (3) Use of technology (D)  What context for access (use/reuse)Achieving efficiency Dutch policy for Digitization 11 Trilce Navarrete
  12. 12. From vision to action How can government subsidy increase efficiency? Devising the best tools/mechanisms (i.e. grants, subsidy schemes) requires continuous reinvention to best respond to the changing landscape. Channeling resources to achieve a goal is one thing; sharing the lessons learnt is another. Adoption of digital technology depends on knowledge. And use of resources is not fully understood: not all digital activities are accounted for, a harmonized reporting methodology is yet to be applied, museums have different needs (digital divide).on-line accessdocumentation Reported level of digitization in digitization museums (2007) automation registration Dutch policy for Digitization 12 Trilce Navarrete 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
  13. 13. From vision to action Levels of awareness of adopting computers in the work process: •  1980s: Attention to selection of technology (digital/paper). •  1990s: Mass adoption of digital environment (registration of collections). •  2001: Discussion of quality vs. quantity, certain objects favored (2D objects) •  2007: Adoption of standards, inclusion of digital post in general budget, online visits. •  2009: Sustainability, born digital and archeological data (3D / 4D). •  2012: Harmonization of work practice, open data. Framework to account for born digitals and (re)use still ongoing.Achieving efficiency Dutch policy for Digitization 13 Trilce Navarrete
  14. 14. NUMERIC results (2008): Dutch museums average yearly expenditure on digital activities € 792,918 or 5% of annual budgetAchieving efficiency Dutch policy for Digitization 14 Trilce Navarrete
  15. 15. From vision to action Institutions struggle to balance:Challenge Dutch policy for Digitization 15 Trilce Navarrete
  16. 16. The future and the challenges Our adoption of digital technologies continues, we are just starting ! Evidence base policy making requires data: new frameworks for data gathering and analysis are being developed (ex. Enumerate). Institutions are harmonizing information reporting of activities and resources. Performance indicators require to develop an elaborated measure of access (not only clicks and time spent but measure re-use!). The new measure is use and reuse ! The Dutch government supports digital heritage as part of the information economy: the new challenge is to support repositioning heritage content in an open data context.The future Dutch policy for Digitization 16 Trilce Navarrete
  17. 17. Conclusions We have already invested much in acquiring, preserving, researching and digitizing the objects (all input). The greater the use the greater the benefit (ROI).Conclusions Dutch policy for Digitization 17 Trilce Navarrete
  18. 18. Thank you ! Questions ? T.Navarrete@uva.nlThe end Dutch policy for Digitization 18 Trilce Navarrete