① Why open collections? Museums give access to collections. Access gives memory, joy and awe + generates value. ② What is value? Socio-cultural process to understand position of good. Technology redefines values (assets). ③ Why Wikipedia? Highly visible, sustainable, collection of knowledge, living archive. Common mission: provide access to all human knowledge. ④ Why generate future value indicators? Access and re-use, not income, as key impact indicator. From anecdotal cases to transparent, systematic evidence.

1. Access as generator of value:
museum collec)ons in Wikipedia
Trilce Navarrete
Sharing is Caring – Brussels – 20 June 2017

2. ① Why open collec)ons?
Museums give access to collec)ons.
Access gives memory, joy and awe + generates value.
② What is value?
Socio-cultural process to understand posi)on of good.
Technology redefines values (assets).
③ Why Wikipedia?
Highly visible, sustainable, collec)on of knowledge, living archive.
Common mission: provide access to all human knowledge.
④ Why generate future value indicators?
Access and re-use, not income, as key impact indicator.
From anecdotal cases to transparent, systema)c evidence.

3. Why open collec)ons?
• Museums collect and preserve collec)ons to
give access to present and future genera)ons.
1
File:Jan Brueghel I & Peter Paul Rubens - Sight (Museo del Prado).jpg

4. Why open collec)ons?
• Access collec)ons = history / joy / awe
1
Quai Branly Museum (2017) Picasso Primi)f

5. Why open collec)ons?
• Access collec)ons = s)mulate new discoveries
1
File:Avion III Art et Me)ers.jpg

6. Why open collec)ons?
• Only ±6% of collec)ons are accessible, due to
limita)ons of exhibi)on walls, geo and )me.
1
File:Visual storage at V&A - 1 - S)erch.jpg

7. Why open collec)ons?
• Only I of 3 adults visit museums while nearly
everybody views TV/radio and has Internet
1
hdps://www.google.com/culturalins)tute/beta/project/fashion-art

8. Why open collec)ons?
• Digital technology can provide access beyond
museum objects.
• Museums can get closer to people.
1
File:Brooklyn Museum - Cool Picture View of Mt. Fuji - Utagawa Hiroshige (Ando).jpg

9. What is value?
• Value is shaped by social networks and
conven)ons, hence changes in )me.
2
File:Cooper's Hawk on Edwin Blashfield mural in the Library of Congress.jpg

10. What is value?
• There are several (co-exis)ng) value scales,
with non exchangeable rates.
Economic value
Moral value
Aesthe)c value
2
File:Quen)n Massys 001.jpg

11. What is value?
• Cultural value can comprise
Aesthe)c value,
Authen)city value,
Availability value,
Heritage value,
Historic value,
Social value,
Spiritual value, and
Symbolic value.
(Frey, 1998, Throsby, 2001)
2
File:West-zijde toren - Veghel - 20239979 - RCE.jpg

12. What is value?
• Informa)on is at the heart of all valua)on
processes.
2
File:Jan van Eyck - Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Wife (detail) - WGA7695.jpg

13. What is value?
• We knew that. That is why museums have
libraries, archives, and informa)on systems.
2
File:Bibliothek im Rijksmuseum Amsterdam.jpg

14. What is value?
• Digital technology can facilitate the access and
(re)use of informa)on from museums.
2
Wiki Loves Art: user generated image

15. Why Wikipedia?
• Wikipedia, launched in 2001, con)nues to grow.
• 15.5 billion views / mo Wikimedia.
• 15.5 million views / mo Wikipedia.
• 42.3 million pages.
• 5.5 million ar)cles in English.
• 300 languages.
• Rank 5 in Alexa.
• Older than many websites…
3

16. Why Wikipedia?
• Wikipedia is the backbone of content online
3
20

17. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can be reposi)oned in new contexts.
3
Symbolic value
3

18. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can be reposi)oned in new contexts.
3
Spiritual value

19. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can be reposi)oned in new contexts.
3
Historic value
13
1

20. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can be reposi)oned in new contexts.
3
Aesthe)c value
13 2

21. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can be reposi)oned in new contexts.
3
Informa)on value
260

22. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can reach new audiences.
Change in accessibility: onsite (100yrs) and online (5yrs).
– Onsite peak: 300,000 visitors
– Average per year: 94,500 visitors
– Online Wikipedia peak: 18 million clicks
– Average per year: 1.7 million clicks
– (Average clicks per year on the NMWC website: 600,000)
3
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
Number of visitors
0
5
10
15
20
Number of views in
millions

23. Why Wikipedia?
• Collec)ons can reach new audiences.
Change in object mobility: onsite exhibits and online ar)cles.
– Onsite use of collec)on (100 years): 10% of objects.
– Onsite peak (frequency): 10 exhibits.
– Online use of collec)on (5 years): 12% objects (of 1% of collec)on).
– Online peak (frequency): 135 ar)cles (May 2015).
3
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2010 March
August
October
December
April
June
August
October
December
September
November
2013 January
March
May
July
September
November
2014 January
March
May
July
September
November
2015 January
March
May
Number of ar)cles
English Wikipedia Indonesian Wikipedia German Wikipedia
Dutch Wikipedia French Wikipedia Spanish Wikipedia
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
2010 March
August
October
December
April
June
August
October
December
September
November
2013 January
March
May
July
September
November
2014 January
March
May
July
September
November
2015 January
March
May
Number of views (in thousands)
English Wikipedia Indonesian Wikipedia German Wikipedia
Dutch Wikipedia French Wikipedia Spanish Wikipedia Including traveling exhibits

24. Why Wikipedia?
• Online is complementary of onsite.
Preference onsite for 3D and online for 2D:
– Objects photographed in context (e.g. tool in use).
Onsite, object view increases with:
– Time (when accoun)ng for 3D).
Online, object view increases with:
– Time.
– Quality of ar)cle (= greater number of images).
– Diversity of images (related to quality).
– English version, followed by Indonesian and Dutch.
– Topic (geography).
3
Navarrete and Borowiecki 2016 Cultural Trends

25. Why Wikipedia?
• Online, all objects are created equal (or not?).
Dataset: 28,613 pain)ngs in 160,174 Wikipedia ar)cles (2015)
Method:
- Using Wikidata (all pain)ngs: N=117,000, with image/ date/
keyword: N=64,700)
- Wikipedia API (complement data with author/ descrip)on)
- Iden)fy those with an ar)cle: N=28,613
- Compared to Art Newspaper most viewed museums
- Ranked by online popularity
3
Superstar artworks from superstar museums

26. Why Wikipedia? 3
Onsite ranking
2014
Institution City Country
Onsite
visitors
Online
ranking
1 Musée du Louvre Paris France 9260000 8
2 British Museum London
United
Kingdom 6695213 7
3 National Gallery London
United
Kingdom 6416724 13
4 Metropolitan Museum of Art New York United States 6162147 2
5 Vatican Museum Rome Italy 5891332 1
6 Tate London
United
Kingdom 5785427 5
7 National Palace Museum Taipei Taiwan 5402325 17
8 National Gallery of Art Washington United States 3892459 9
9 National Museum of Korea Seoul South Korea 3536677 23
10 Musée d’Orsay Paris France 3440000 12
11 Centre Pompidou Paris France 3450000 14
12
National Folk Museum of
Korea Seul South Korea 3271017 21
13 State Hermitage Museum St. Petersburg Russia 3247956 15
14 Victoria and Albert Museum London
United
Kingdom 3180450 6
15 Museum of Modern Art New York United States 3018266 4
16 Museo Reina Sofía Madrid Spain 2673745 18
17 Museo del Prado Madrid Spain 2536844 10
18 Somerset House London
United
Kingdom 2463201 20
19 Rijksmuseum Amsterdam
The
Netherlands 2450000 11
20
Centro Cultural Banco do
Brasil Rio de Janeiro Brazil 2399832 22
21 The National Art Center Tokyo Tokyo Japan 2384415 19
22 National Portrait Gallery London
United
Kingdom 2062502 16
23 National Gallery of Victoria Melbourne Australia 2035033 24
24 Shanghai Museum Shanghai China 2000977 26
25 MuCEM Marseilles France 1996154 25
26 Galleria degli Uffizi Florence Italy 1651210 3
Onsite vs online ranking

27. Why Wikipedia? 3
Navarrete (forthcoming)
TATE
5 Louvre
Uffizi
Uffizi
Uffizi
Louvre
3 Louvre
Louvre
Prado
Prado
Na)onal
Gallery
of Art
US
1 Louvre
Na)onal
Gallery UK
2
4

28. Why Wikipedia?
• Popularity translates and transforms online.
Availability of images online leads to reuse (not always legal).
New technology leads to change in consumer preference (favors 2D).
Preference for portraits to depict concept = iconic use of artworks.
Few 3D (due to technical limita)ons?).
Cultural (linguis)c) preference for pain)ngs as icons.
French and Portuguese edi)ons most likely to use artworks.
Informa)on available to all consumers.
Though reduced cost of discovery may lead to greater diffusion.
3
Superstar artworks from superstar museums

29. Why Wikipedia?
• Pain)ngs’ poten)al to illustrate ar)cles.
Dataset: 10,054 pain)ngs English Wikipedia ar)cles
Method:
- Wikidata ‘pain)ngs’ = 224,374
- With loca)on / date / creator = 89,637 (excluding doubles)
- With image = 27,501
- Wikipedia ar)cles = 10,054 (36% of images used in ar)cles)
3
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
Long tail of image use in ar)cles
10,054

30. Why Wikipedia?
• Overview of 10,055 ‘pain)ngs’ by year.
3
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
-900
997
1230
1301
1337
1375
1404
1428
1448
1468
1487
1506
1525
1544
1563
1582
1601
1620
1639
1658
1677
1696
1715
1734
1753
1772
1791
1810
1829
1848
1867
1886
1905
1924
1943
1962
1981
2000
Pain)ngs Images
The missing decade = copyright hole

31. Why Wikipedia?
• Exponen)al increase in views,
• New uses, new preferences, new discovery,
• Popular content source = accessible to all,
• Living archive = community of trust,
• Synergy = museums + collec)ons + users,
• Harmonized reports.
3
Why does it mader?

32. 5
13 1
9
14
2
3
11
12
8
19
15
16

33. Why generate future value indicators?
• Limited resources require decisions on what to
collect, preserve and make accessible, and how.
4
File:Hoge Raad van Helen Verhoeven.jpg Need heritage copyright excep)on

34. Why generate future value indicators? 4
Value based on number of visits
• Eurostat has developed experimental sta)s)cs
to reflect digital dimension.

35. Why generate future value indicators?
• Tracking page of heritage object is star)ng point
to understand further re-use.
4
542 daily views
71

36. Why generate future value indicators? 4
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
Facebook Twider YouTube Pinterest
Value based on popularity
• Social media appears to be the place to be.
• Plaxorms are private en))es with no mandate
to disclose sta)s)cs (including Google).

37. Why generate future value indicators?
• Tracking social media visibility complements
access to and use of content.
4
Curated exhibits about a topic
32

38. Why generate future value indicators? 4
Benchmarking
0
100000000
200000000
300000000
400000000
500000000
600000000
700000000
800000000
900000000
Gallica Bri)sh Library Rijksmuseum Europeana Smithsonian
Visibility of collec5ons in Wikipedia (2015)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
• Museums welcome comparable open metrics.
• Can we use common resources to safeguard
common heritage? We need common metrics.

39. Take home
① Museums = Memory, Joy and Awe for all !
② Access generates value (social process)
③ Trust is key = common future vision
④ Create relevant value metric (evidence based)

40. Thank you
• Lets create meaningful value metrics for our work
68

41. Borowiecki, Forbes and Fresa (eds.) (2016) Cultural Heritage in a Changing World. Springer.
Eurostat (2016) Cultural StaGsGcs.
Frey (1998) Superstar museums: An economic analysis. Journal of Cultural Economics, 22(2), 113–125.
Navarrete and Borowiecki (2016) “Change in access to heritage a|er digi)za)on: ethnographic
collec)ons in Wikipedia.” Cultural Trends.
Navarrete and Borowiecki (2016). “The long-tail of museum collec)ons: Ethnographic collec)ons onsite
and online.” Symposium proceedings InternaGonal Symposium on the Measurement of Digital
Cultural Products, HEC Montreal, Canada.
Navarrete and Owen (2011) “Museum Libraries: Collec)ons of Collec)ons.” Palabra Clave (La Plata).
October 2011, 1(1):12-20.
Rizzo and Mignosa (eds.) (2013) Handbook on the Economies of Cultural Heritage. Edward Elgar.
Throsby (2001) Economies and Culture. Cambridge.
Towse and Handke (eds.) (2013) Handbook of the Digital CreaGve Economy. Edward Elgar.
See more at: hdps://trilcenavarrete.com/publica)ons/
References