Mapping Museums: The history and geography of the UK independent sector 1960-2020
Lead Research Organisation:
Birkbeck, University of London
Department Name: History of Art
Abstract
Summary:
This inter-disciplinary project aims at mapping and analysing the emergence, character, and development of the UK independent museums sector from 1960-2020.
Between 1970 and 1989, approximately 1300 new museums opened in the UK. The vast majority of these new venues were independent, were founded by community and special interest groups, and individual collectors, and they differed from public-sector museums to such an extent that that they were judged to have 'revolutionized' the sector. There are now some 1600 independent museums in the UK, but despite the extraordinary boom in their numbers we know very little about them. Regional and national funding bodies and museums associations collect data on independent museums, but it is not cross referenced and is limited to their specific remits and areas of interest. They do not keep records on when museums opened and if they close, small museums often fall from view entirely, and the information that is available cannot be mapped or easily searched.
In the first phase of the research we will collate and supplement existing information to establish a dataset of all UK museums from 1960-2020 and, in turn, build a database that is searchable according to factors including location, date of foundation, subject matter, size, type of museums, and combinations of these attributes. This information will be mapped visually and will be freely available in open source format on a project website to be hosted by the Bishopsgate Institute. In the second phase of the research we will use the database to identify patterns in the emergence, development and closure of independent museums and then seek to account for those trends (or anomalies) through the use of further visualisations, a focus group with Arts Council England staff, historical research, and an extensive series of interviews with staff in museums.
This research will provide the first authoritative database of independent museums in the UK, and the first history of their recent development. It is important for academics in museum studies, arts management, cultural studies, and cultural and social history in that it will:
1. Provide a nuanced historical overview of the independent museum sector.
2. Provide a detailed analysis of a period of massive expansion and change within the museum sector.
3. Identify subjects that were or are of local or national concern.
4. Bring orthodox histories of the UK museum boom into question.
5. Demonstrate the scale and variety of the small independent museum sector, and hence of non-professional cultural production.
6. Generate resources for future researchers.
The research will also have benefits for arts funders and policy-makers, and for staff in independent and public-sector museums in that it will:
1. Inform our understanding of the factors that underpin the emergence and closure of independent museums.
2.Track correlations between independent museums' emergence and specific funding streams.
3. Reveal regional differences across the museum sector.
4. Provide a solid knowledge base about their sector and thereby improve capacity for evidence-based advocacy and decision-making.
We also anticipate the research being of interest to a general public in that it will:
1. Produce an oral history archive that can be used by amateur historians.
2. Raise awareness of volunteer-run organisations.
3. Offer volunteer-run museums an overview of their sector.
This inter-disciplinary project aims at mapping and analysing the emergence, character, and development of the UK independent museums sector from 1960-2020.
Between 1970 and 1989, approximately 1300 new museums opened in the UK. The vast majority of these new venues were independent, were founded by community and special interest groups, and individual collectors, and they differed from public-sector museums to such an extent that that they were judged to have 'revolutionized' the sector. There are now some 1600 independent museums in the UK, but despite the extraordinary boom in their numbers we know very little about them. Regional and national funding bodies and museums associations collect data on independent museums, but it is not cross referenced and is limited to their specific remits and areas of interest. They do not keep records on when museums opened and if they close, small museums often fall from view entirely, and the information that is available cannot be mapped or easily searched.
In the first phase of the research we will collate and supplement existing information to establish a dataset of all UK museums from 1960-2020 and, in turn, build a database that is searchable according to factors including location, date of foundation, subject matter, size, type of museums, and combinations of these attributes. This information will be mapped visually and will be freely available in open source format on a project website to be hosted by the Bishopsgate Institute. In the second phase of the research we will use the database to identify patterns in the emergence, development and closure of independent museums and then seek to account for those trends (or anomalies) through the use of further visualisations, a focus group with Arts Council England staff, historical research, and an extensive series of interviews with staff in museums.
This research will provide the first authoritative database of independent museums in the UK, and the first history of their recent development. It is important for academics in museum studies, arts management, cultural studies, and cultural and social history in that it will:
1. Provide a nuanced historical overview of the independent museum sector.
2. Provide a detailed analysis of a period of massive expansion and change within the museum sector.
3. Identify subjects that were or are of local or national concern.
4. Bring orthodox histories of the UK museum boom into question.
5. Demonstrate the scale and variety of the small independent museum sector, and hence of non-professional cultural production.
6. Generate resources for future researchers.
The research will also have benefits for arts funders and policy-makers, and for staff in independent and public-sector museums in that it will:
1. Inform our understanding of the factors that underpin the emergence and closure of independent museums.
2.Track correlations between independent museums' emergence and specific funding streams.
3. Reveal regional differences across the museum sector.
4. Provide a solid knowledge base about their sector and thereby improve capacity for evidence-based advocacy and decision-making.
We also anticipate the research being of interest to a general public in that it will:
1. Produce an oral history archive that can be used by amateur historians.
2. Raise awareness of volunteer-run organisations.
3. Offer volunteer-run museums an overview of their sector.
Planned Impact
Economic recession and recent cuts to funding have presented serious challenges to museums and galleries in the UK. In 2014 more than half the museums surveyed by the Museums Association reported that their income had fallen and that they had cut staff. In this context, it is vital to have a long view of the history and sustainability of museums. The overview provided by this research would inform museum professionals and funders about changes over a sixty year period in the independent museum sector and their historical correlation to location, employment, transport networks, land-prices, tourism, different types of funding, and the presence of public-sector museums.
The project has already garnered commitments and strong interest from arts policy-makers, funders, professional associations, and archives. Arts Council England (ACE) and the Association of Independent Museums (AIM) have and will contribute data to the project. ACE have invited the project team to attend meetings of the Museum Development Network which involves museums development managers from England and Wales. They will both input into the research process and be a conduit for disseminating research findings. AIM is actively assisting in the dissemination of research findings via its magazine, conference, and online publications. Both AIM and ACE will assist in recruiting participants for the project's evaluation event. The Bishopsgate Institute will be archiving our interview-based material, hosting an archive launch event as part of their annual programme, and hosting the website.
More specifically, the beneficiaries will be:
1. Policy makers and funders. Some, but by no means all, independent museums are eligible for arts funding. Historically, they have also received funding from other sources e.g. EU Objective One. In providing an evidence-based analysis of patterns of opening and closure of museums and of links to arts and other funding streams, this research would enhance the effectiveness of policy makers and funders including ACE, CyMAL: Museums Libraries Archives Wales, Northern Ireland Museums Council, and Museums Galleries Scotland.
2. The Association of Independent Museums. AIM is a national charitable organisation that supports and advocates on behalf of independent museums and galleries. This research would provide a detailed evidence-based historical overview of their sector, and improve their ability to advocate on behalf of independent museums, thereby improving the health of that sector.
3. Independent museums would benefit from the research on several counts. Developing the knowledge base of AIM would help the independent museums that the organisation represents. The project website and publication will directly provide staff at independent venues with a solid knowledge base about their sector, which has the potential to improve their decision making capacities. In addition, the research will enhance public awareness of independent museums across the UK. This will potentially impact upon visitor numbers, particularly of the smaller venues that do not feature on websites such as Culture 24, thereby improving their sustainability.
4. Bishopsgate Institute. The project will add to their holdings by greatly developing the Micromuseums Archive, and it will contribute to their annual events programme.
5. General public. By drastically improving the knowledge base of arts funders, policy-makers, and local authorities, this research has the potential to improve the services that they offer, and therefore the quality of visitors' experience. More specifically, independent museums rely heavily on volunteer labour; some are run entirely by volunteers. This project will raise awareness of volunteer run museums and offer volunteers an overview of that sector. The project will also make research materials available to amateur historians, thereby increasing their opportunities for cultural engagement.
The project has already garnered commitments and strong interest from arts policy-makers, funders, professional associations, and archives. Arts Council England (ACE) and the Association of Independent Museums (AIM) have and will contribute data to the project. ACE have invited the project team to attend meetings of the Museum Development Network which involves museums development managers from England and Wales. They will both input into the research process and be a conduit for disseminating research findings. AIM is actively assisting in the dissemination of research findings via its magazine, conference, and online publications. Both AIM and ACE will assist in recruiting participants for the project's evaluation event. The Bishopsgate Institute will be archiving our interview-based material, hosting an archive launch event as part of their annual programme, and hosting the website.
More specifically, the beneficiaries will be:
1. Policy makers and funders. Some, but by no means all, independent museums are eligible for arts funding. Historically, they have also received funding from other sources e.g. EU Objective One. In providing an evidence-based analysis of patterns of opening and closure of museums and of links to arts and other funding streams, this research would enhance the effectiveness of policy makers and funders including ACE, CyMAL: Museums Libraries Archives Wales, Northern Ireland Museums Council, and Museums Galleries Scotland.
2. The Association of Independent Museums. AIM is a national charitable organisation that supports and advocates on behalf of independent museums and galleries. This research would provide a detailed evidence-based historical overview of their sector, and improve their ability to advocate on behalf of independent museums, thereby improving the health of that sector.
3. Independent museums would benefit from the research on several counts. Developing the knowledge base of AIM would help the independent museums that the organisation represents. The project website and publication will directly provide staff at independent venues with a solid knowledge base about their sector, which has the potential to improve their decision making capacities. In addition, the research will enhance public awareness of independent museums across the UK. This will potentially impact upon visitor numbers, particularly of the smaller venues that do not feature on websites such as Culture 24, thereby improving their sustainability.
4. Bishopsgate Institute. The project will add to their holdings by greatly developing the Micromuseums Archive, and it will contribute to their annual events programme.
5. General public. By drastically improving the knowledge base of arts funders, policy-makers, and local authorities, this research has the potential to improve the services that they offer, and therefore the quality of visitors' experience. More specifically, independent museums rely heavily on volunteer labour; some are run entirely by volunteers. This project will raise awareness of volunteer run museums and offer volunteers an overview of that sector. The project will also make research materials available to amateur historians, thereby increasing their opportunities for cultural engagement.
Publications
Ballatore A
(2022)
A geography of UK museums
in Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
Candlin F
(2019)
Understanding and managing patchy data in the UK museum sector
in Museum Management and Curatorship
Candlin F
(2023)
The UK museum boom: continuity and change 1960-2019
in Cultural Trends
Candlin F
(2019)
The missing museums: accreditation, surveys, and an alternative account of the UK museum sector
in Cultural Trends
Candlin F
(2020)
What is a Museum? A new approach
in Museum and Society
Candlin Fiona
(2022)
Stories from Small Museums
Candlin, Fiona
(2020)
Mapping Museums 1960-2020: A report on the data
Poulovassilis A
(2019)
Creating a Knowledge Base to Research the History of UK Museums through Rapid Application Development
in Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage
| Title | The Plastic Phoenix |
| Description | A short film about the Bakelite Museum in Somerset. Made by the Derek Jarman Lab in collaboration with Fiona Candlin, it focuses on the closure of the museum (18mins) |
| Type Of Art | Film/Video/Animation |
| Year Produced | 2020 |
| Impact | The film focuses on a common but rarely documented occurrence, namely the closure of museums, and it drew attention to the personal costs involved |
| URL | https://vimeo.com/375988349 |
| Description | The Mapping Museums project collected data on over 4,000 museums that were open in the period between 1960 and 2020. This is the first time that such a dataset has been compiled. Analysing that data has enabled us to track change over the decades in question and to better understand the make up of the UK museum sector as it currently stands. Given the richness of the UK museum sector, those findings are detailed and complex. However, headline findings can be summarised as follows: • Between 1960 and 2017, there was a massive boom in the number of museums in the UK. The sector has more than tripled, increasing from 1,043 to 3,289 museums. • The total number of museums in the UK increased each year from 1960 until 2015. There were 55 years of growth in the museum sector. • In 2016 the number of museums in the UK contracted for the first time since 1960. • The most rapid period of museum growth was during the 1970s. The least growth has been seen during the 2010s. • There is significant variation in growth and closure depending on location and on governance. The different nations and the English regions have different degrees and timescales of growth, as do independent versus local authority museums. Growth • There has been growth in all areas of the museum sector, but expansion was mainly driven by the foundation of independent museums. Independent museums now make up at least 71.5% of the total UK sector. • Growth in the number of local authority museums slowed in the early 1990s and halted in 1997. Their numbers began to decline in 2001. • The majority of the museums that opened since 1960 are small (defined as having fewer than 10,000 annual visits). Small museums make up 56% of the sector. Small, independent museums make up at least 47% of the sector. • Since 1960, new subject matter has emerged, principally in the independent sector, and marginal subjects have become well established. There have been significant increases in the number of local history and transport museums. Distribution • England has the largest number of museums at 2,468, followed by Scotland with 495, Wales with 204, and Northern Ireland with 87. • Scotland has the highest density of museums in relation to population at 9.1 per 100,000 residents, followed by Wales with 6.5 per 100,000 residents. Northern Ireland and England have a lower density of museums at 4.6 and 4.4 per 100,000 residents respectively. • In England, Scotland, and Wales, the number of museums is declining. By contrast, the number of museums in Northern Ireland continues to grow. • In England, the South East region had the most museums in 1960, and the North East had the least. That remains the case. • In England, the South West has the highest density of museums at 7.5 museums per 100,000 residents, followed by the East of England with 5.3 and the South East, also with 5.3. London has the lowest density of museums per 100,000 residents at 2.5. Closure • 758 museums have closed, which is 18.7% of the total number of museums open since 1960. The assumption that museums survive and that they keep collections for posterity is misplaced. 21.7% of local authority museums that have been open since 1960 have closed, compared to 17.1% of independent museums. Within the category of independent museums, not for profit museums (i.e. those run on a charitable basis but excluding the large heritage organisations) have a percentage closure of 8.5%. • Small museums are the most likely to close. • There are substantial disparities in closure rates according to museum accreditation status. 2.0% of accredited museums that have been open since 1960 have closed as opposed to 25% of unaccredited museums. Recognising that the museums boom was primarily propelled by the growth in small independent museums, that had been founded by community and special interest groups, the Mapping Museums team conducted detailed interview-based research to find out how and why so many people had decided to open their own museums. Our findings on this subject were complex and nuanced and varied according to the museums' subject matter. However, they can be broadly summarised as follows: It is hard to overstate how close some of these founding groups were, how long they worked together, and the degree to which the museums were a collective endeavour There were multiple reasons why founders wanted to open museums. Individuals and groups may each have had several key motivations, none of them mutually exclusive: • The preservation of specific types of objects e.g. vehicles. • The preservation of artefacts not because they were important in themselves so much as for their capacity to embody a person, place, or way of life. • To make good the gaps in museum coverage and to provide space for things had no obvious home: e.g. wooden, horse-drawn narrow boats and shipwrecks fall into this category. Here the concern was for the historical record. • To provide the town with an amenity. • Wish to attract visitors to the area • To remember the past and support bereaved families, especially but not exclusively in museums of war and conflict. We also found that there was no single explanation for the museums boom. It had multiple underpinning factors including but not limited to the industrialisation of farming, the reorganisation of local authority borders, the nationalisation of the railway and bus services and their subsequent modernisation, the denationalisation of industry and utilities, the breakdown of traditional industrial and rural communities, the growth in road haulage, greater car ownership and the rise of commuting, increases in domestic tourism and in-migration, the end of the Second World War and the downsizing of the Armed Forces, the re-organisation of the regiments, and technological advancement. Some of these factors are diametrically opposed - in some respects the growth of museums was tied to investment in technology and in others a lack of investment in technology, and likewise the boom was linked to both nationalisation and privatisation. Wealth, health, the welfare state, and stable employment also played a part in the micromuseums boom, as did peace. Despite the heterogeneity of circumstances that enabled the foundation of museums, and the range of subjects they covered, we detected three points of commonalty: 1. Micromuseums tended to focus on particular histories and not on over-arching categories, even when their names may suggest otherwise. They generally bear witness to an interest in the local and the specific, rather than the so-called universal. 2. The foundation of new micromuseums was motivated by some kind of change. What that change was and how museums were construed as a response to change varied, but nonetheless the new wave of small independent museums were a means of managing considerable social and economic upheaval. 3. Museums helped to maintain or establish community. Our findings also showed that the micromuseums boom can be attributed to ordinary people's engagement in history-making, and not to professional historians or people with specialised training. These museums were not made by or for an elite. There are, however, some substantial caveats to this account. While people from across the social strata worked together in pursuit of a common interest and teenagers were given opportunities that would more usually be outside their orbit, micromuseums were far less mixed in terms of gender. And the new museums were even more segregated in terms of the founders' ethnicities. The micromuseums boom was generally of White engagement in White histories. Lastly, micromuseums, even ostensibly DIY micromuseums, were usually supported by established institutions, and so tend to follow normative categories. They can be unofficial entities, but they can equally be a manifestation of existing interests. The notion of micromuseums as necessarily part of an unofficial history, or as being ad-hoc, amateur, or do-it-yourself, can obscure the considerable institutional support and the social networks that often underwrote their foundation. |
| Exploitation Route | Over the last three years we have been in close contact with the national bodies with responsibility for museums. These are: Arts Council England (ACE), department of Digital, Culture Media and Sport (DCMS), Museums Archives Libraries Division (MALD) Wales, Museums Galleries Scotland (MGS), and Northern Ireland Museums Council (NIMC); the Museums Development Network (MDN) which funds and supports museums in the English regions; and with the Association of Independent Museums (AIM). They have already told us that the Mapping Museums data, dataset and report will be useful to them in the following ways. Lobbying for funding • MDN officers will be able to make comparisons between their regions and other areas with a view to lobbying for greater financial support from ACE, their local authorities and Heritage Lottery Fund. • MDN officers will be able to better represent the museums in their area to tourist boards, local authorities and county heritage forums, with a view to gaining funding. • Museums Association staff will be able use the figures on closure to make a case for supporting local authority museums in areas where there have been cuts. Targeting training and support • AIM will have a more complete picture of the independent museum sector, be able to approach non-members with a view to joining and hence benefit from the association's training opportunities, grants and information infrastructure. • All organisations will have a better grasp of the profile of museums in their constituencies, and of who runs them, and could better target training opportunities for small, developing, or economically vulnerable museums. (The team have already assisted MALD with their enquiry about the make-up of the museum sector in Wales). • ACE, MGS, MALD, and NIMC will better understand subject coverage and hence be able to identify areas that may require particular support or funding (e.g. museums relating to disabled, ethnic minority, and LGBTQ communities, which are all comparatively rare). Strategy • ACE and MGS accreditation teams will be able to review the success of the Accreditation scheme with respect to the sustainability of accredited museums. • ACE, MGS, MALD, and NIMC will be able consider the disparities in museum distribution within their areas and make plans to support museums in 'cold spots'. • Having access to data on closure will enable consultants to make better informed decisions about the viability of proposed museums (and indeed the team have already assisted museum consultants with their enquiries). |
| Sectors | Culture, Heritage, Museums and Collections |
| URL | http://blogs.bbk.ac.uk/mapping-museums/ |
| Description | Between March 2020, when the website was launched, and the end of December 2020, the website received over 135,000 individual hits. In addition, the database received over 7,000 targeted hits, and the report was downloaded 790 times. The blog averaged 1,300 hits per month. We have been in touch with users who needed information before the database was published, have asked for additional information or to clarify information. They include academics, journalists, museum consultants, museum curators, and staff in the national organisations responsible for museums. The following give some indication of the way in which our research is being used. Visit England: a complete list of museums currently open in the UK to inform their annual report. This represents a contribution to official statistics. National Museum Directors Council: data on all the local authority museums in the UK for internal use. Museums, Archives, Libraries, Division Wales: A complete list of all the museums in Wales. They only had information on accredited museums and hence could not make an assessment about the overall scale or range of the Welsh sector. Association of Independent Museums and Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport: Both organisations drew on our research to inform an application to Treasury for emergency funding. Emma Chaplin, director of AIM reported that our data was key to making an authoritative case and had helped secure generous support for the sector. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2020 |
| Sector | Leisure Activities, including Sports, Recreation and Tourism,Culture, Heritage, Museums and Collections |
| Impact Types | Cultural,Economic,Policy & public services |
| Description | Arts Council England data collection steering group |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
| Impact | There are acknowledged problems with data collection in the museum sector. The Mendoza review of 2018 specified that data collection needed to be reviewed and in response ACE established a steering committee. Fiona Candlin and Alex Poulovassilis were invited to join and between 2019-2020 advised on possible formats for publishing data and data collection, both broadly in terms of process and details concerning what information should be collected. New processes for data collection are now being implemented. |
| Description | Data supplied to Visits to Visitor Attractions report |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Impact | Katie Vosper, author of the report wrote: Using this research we were able to identify a number of museums that we were unaware had closed, and to add others that had opened. Using your source to keep our database as up to date as possible is invaluable to us for this research (which counts as an official statistic), as it enables us to ensure as many attractions as possible are given the opportunity to respond and helps us to form a more accurate picture of the sector. |
| URL | https://www.visitbritain.org/annual-survey-visits-visitor-attractions-latest-results |
| Description | Used to bid for emergency funding |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Implementation circular/rapid advice/letter to e.g. Ministry of Health |
| Impact | During the COVID crisis Lisa Ollerhead (Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport) and Emma Chaplin (Director, Association of Independent Museums) led on the bid to gain emergency support from government for museums and galleries. This resulted in the Cultural recovery grants. Chaplin stated that the Mapping Museums data, and particularly the information on independent museums, allowed her to make authoritative statements about the size and diversity of the sector and was instrumental in gaining generous emergency funding. |
| Description | provided data to Arts Council England as part of their funding review |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Implementation circular/rapid advice/letter to e.g. Ministry of Health |
| Impact | Arts Council England were fully informed about the numbers and distribution of museums, and to make strategic decisions as to the introduction of a new funding stream. |
| Description | Birkbeck Impact Seed Fund (awarded to increase impact of the research through developing new Add Data and Edit Data facilities) |
| Amount | £3,270 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Birkbeck, University of London |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 06/2020 |
| End | 10/2020 |
| Description | Birkbeck School of Business, Economics and Informatics Impact funding (grant awarded to ensure that the MM database and website are sufficiently robust to support large-scale use) |
| Amount | £20,145 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Birkbeck, University of London |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 12/2019 |
| End | 08/2020 |
| Description | COVID 19 Grant Extension Allocation Birkbeck College |
| Amount | £236,786 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | EP/V521139/1 |
| Organisation | Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) |
| Sector | Public |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 06/2020 |
| End | 09/2021 |
| Description | School of Arts small research grants |
| Amount | £750 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Birkbeck, University of London |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 12/2017 |
| End | 12/2017 |
| Description | UK Museums during the COVID-19 crisis: Assessing risk, closure, and resilience. |
| Amount | £190,140 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | AH/V015028/1 |
| Organisation | Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC) |
| Sector | Public |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 01/2021 |
| End | 07/2022 |
| Title | Data Files for the Mapping Museums Report, March 2020 |
| Description | This archive is part of Mapping Museums project (mappingmuseums.org). The Mapping Museums research project began in October 2016 and will conclude in September 2020. It is based at Birkbeck, University of London and is funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. The project focuses on growth and change in the UK museum sector from 1960 to 2020 and it has four main outputs: - A database containing information on over 4,000 museums. This data can be browsed, searched, and visualised through a web application, and is free to use under the terms of the Creative Commons (BY) license. - A website that houses the database and web application, and additional resources linked to the project. These include a glossary, detailed information on research methods, transcripts of interviews with museum founders, films and podcasts, and links to the project publications. - A series of academic articles addressing research methods and findings. - A monograph that draws on data, interviews with museum founders, and historical research, to analyse how and why so many new museums were established in the late twentieth century. Publication is planned for 2021. Report reference: Fiona Candlin, Jamie Larkin, Andrea Ballatore, Alexandra Poulovassilis (2020) Mapping Museums 1960-2020: A report on the data. London: Birkbeck, University of London. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2020 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | The database is having an impact, the database archive is for future use |
| URL | http://researchdata.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/54 |
| Title | The Mapping Museums Web application |
| Description | The Mapping Museums Web application is the software application through which the Mapping Museums database is accessed by end-users. It is accessible from https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/aboutapp The software is open source (available for free use under the GNU General Public License) and can be downloaded from https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/software |
| Type Of Material | Computer model/algorithm |
| Year Produced | 2020 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | See impact arising from the grant as whole |
| URL | https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/software |
| Title | The Mapping Museums database |
| Description | The Mapping Museums database comprises a novel new schema (implemented in RDFS) and data about over 4000 UK museums that have been in existence since 1960 (implemented using RDF). It is accessible from https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/aboutapp The schema and data are free to use under the terms of the Creative Commons (BY) license and can be downloaded in the form of an RDF/XML file from https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/data We collected data from over 15 primary data sources, and incrementally built up the database schema so as to encompass some 50 museum attributes, including subject matter, location, size, governance status, accreditation status, year of opening/closing, and geodemographic context. Individual museums' entries were validated and completed in consultation with museums staff, tourist boards and local history societies, by phone, email and twitter. We also held a series of face-to-face data validation exercises with all nine regional branches of the UK Museum Development Network, during which the data was examined line-by-line. After the first stage of data collection, we had complete coverage of most attributes apart from visitor numbers, governance, opening date and closing date: specifically, we had governance information for 92% of museums, year of opening for 88% of museums, year of closing for 68% of museums that were known to have closed, and visitor numbers for 67% of museums. For the missing governance data, we created a sub-category of Unknown governance. For missing opening/closing dates, we recorded an interval of the form [earliest possible year of opening, latest possible year of opening], and implemented within the Web Application modal logic and interval-based temporal operators to reason with these date intervals. For visitor numbers, we decided to gross visitor numbers into a new museum Size attribute, with categories of Huge (1M+ visitors per year), Large (50,000-1M), Medium (10,000-50,000) and Small (0-10,000), as well as a sub-category Unknown. For the 33% of museums that hand unknown visitor numbers we developed a machine learning model for estimating their size from their other attributes, reaching 86% classification accuracy (with p <.001) and leaving only 1.6% of museums with Unknown size. In order to support geographical analysis of the museums data, we extended our data with the Administrative Area hierarchy of the ONS's Postcode Lookup Dataset, as well as with Deprivation Index and Geodemographic Group data associated with these administrative areas. A major part of the Mapping Museums database schema is a new Subject Matter taxonomy. Existing taxonomies did not fully encompass the popular "non-academic" subject areas that are the focus of some newer independent museums. Therefore, while taking careful note of historic and existing taxonomies, the project team developed a new classification for museums' subject matter comprising 21 top-level categories and 108 sub-categories. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2020 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | See impact arising from the grant as a whole |
| URL | https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/data |
| Description | Mapping Museums Oral History Archive at the Bishopsgate Institute |
| Organisation | Bishopsgate Institute |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | 60+ audio-recordings and transcripts with museum founders, along with images and descriptions of the museums in question. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Bishopsgate Institute Special Collections and Archives document the experiences of everyday people, and the extraordinary individuals and organisations who have strived for social, political, and cultural change. They invited the Mapping Museums research team to deposit our research at the archive and have created a dedicated Mapping Museums Oral History Archive. The archive is open to the general public and is also accessible online |
| Impact | An extensive oral history archive available in hard copy, recordings, and online |
| Start Year | 2020 |
| Title | The Mapping Museums Web application |
| Description | The Mapping Museums Web application is the software application through which the Mapping Museums database (containing data about over 4000 UK museums) is accessed by end-users. It is accessible from https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/aboutapp The Web application allows users to search, browse, or visualise the museums data. "Browse" allows users to explore the museums data in a structured way according to various categories. The information can be viewed as a list, on a map, or via the details of individual museums. "Search" allows users to choose their own search terms and to filter museums using any combination of categories. "Visualise" allows users to generate graphs showing numbers of museums, growth and closure patterns, and inter-relationships between pairs of categories. There is a Help section for each of Browse, Search and Visualise that gives more information. An online guide gives an introduction to using Browse, Search and Visualise, and a short video is also available showing how to use these facilities. The Web Application software is open source (available for free use under the GNU General Public License) and can be downloaded from https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/software |
| Type Of Technology | Webtool/Application |
| Year Produced | 2020 |
| Open Source License? | Yes |
| Impact | Please see the impacts arising from the project as a whole |
| URL | https://museweb.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/aboutapp |
| Description | Arts Council England: Steering committee on data |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Following the Mendoza Review 2018, and recommendations made in a commissioned report 'Mapping Museums data', by the agency DC Research, Arts Council England (ACE) formed a steering committee on data. The group meets bi-monthly and has the aim of reformulating the process whereby museum data is collected and used within England. Prof Fiona Candlin and Prof Alexandra Poulovassilis are invited and participating members. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | BBC Radio 3 broadcast: New Thinking on Museums |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A broadcast e.g. TV/radio/film/podcast (other than news/press) |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | A 45 minute broadcast on new thinking in museums. Fiona Candlin led with a 15 minute conversation about her interview-based research with museums founders and addressed the question of why so many people opened their own museums |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| URL | https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08v3fl5#:~:text=Fiona%20Candlin%20is%20Professor%20of,in%20the%20l... |
| Description | Keynote lecture at Association of Independent Museum Annual Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | The director of the Association of Independent Museums (AIM) invited Prof Fiona Candlin to present new findings on the independent museum sector to the annual conference. She outlined patterns of growth and closure among independent museums in the UK since 1960, which was new information for the group of practitioners. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Mapping Museums Archive Launch |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | An online seminar was held to mark the launch of the Mapping Museums Oral history archive at Bishopsgate Institute. Fiona Candlin introduced the event, Toby BUtler (Researcher on the project) chaired and we invited three people who had founded museums and whose interviews were included in the archive. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| URL | https://www.bishopsgate.org.uk/whats-on/activity/archive-launch-mapping-museums |
| Description | Mapping Museums Blog |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | The Mapping Museums blog contains 40+ blogs that cover initial findings and various aspects of research methods including building the database, collecting and validating data, classification interviewing, and analysis. It also includes 50+ short accounts of museums we researched in the course of data collection or interviewing. the blog has attracted consistent attention and has 190 subscribers including senior managers from all the major arts organisations including Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport; Arts Council England; National Heritage Lottery Fund; Museums, Galleries Scotland. It averages 1300 views per month. Blogs have been commented on and referenced at various professional events. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017,2018,2019,2020,2021 |
| URL | http://blogs.bbk.ac.uk/mapping-museums/ |
| Description | Meeting with Brest Dillon, consultants to Arts Council England |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Arts Council England are currently reviewing their processes for the collection and use of museum data. To this end they have commissioned Brest Dillon museum consultants, to prepare a report on current data collection. Dillon interviewed Prof Fiona Candlin for that report which was published as 'Museum Development Annual Data Survey Review' in 2020 |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Meetings with senior museum sector staff |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | A series of one-on-one and group meetings with staff in the national organisations with responsibility for museums. In all cases, we had detailed discussions about the data being gathered by the individual institutions and their needs with respect to possible data gathering and management. These engagement activities were specifically designed to improve the efficacy and eventual impact of our research. Claire Brown, lead on Museums Development Network (England and Wales) Emma Chaplin, Director of the Association for Independent Museums Isabel Churcher, Relationship Manager Museums Lauren Lucas, Adviser in the Department of Culture, Tourism and Sport, Local Government Association Lisa Ollerhead, Regional Museums lead, Department of Digital, Culture, and Sport Fiona Talbott Head of Museums Libraries Archives Policy at The National Lottery Heritage Fund Joe Traynor, Head of Museum Development at Museums, Galleries, Scotland Carol Whittaker, Museums, Development Advisor, Museums, Archives, Libraries Division, (Welsh Government). Isabel Wilson, Senior Manager, Museums (Development), at Arts Council England Arts Council England Research Unit: Civic Museums group. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021,2022 |
| Description | Museums Showoff |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Museums Showoff is 'an open mic night featuring curators, conservators, librarians, collectors, trustees, security people, retail folk, educators, funders, explainers, visitors, academics, archivists and everyone else associated with museums, libraries, archives and collections'. It takes place on a bi-monthly basis. Speakers are allowed to speak for 9 minutes apiece on their project, idea, exhibition or similar. Fiona Candlin was invited to speak on the Mapping Museums project and did so, thereby raising awareness of the project within the professional sector. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Presentation to Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Presented data and methods to the museums group at Department of Digital Media and Sport. Group included museums lead and senior policy advisors. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| Description | Presentation to the Association of Independent Museums annual conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | The Mapping Museums project is collecting data on all museums in the UK between 1960 and 2020 but is specifically concerned with the emergence and development of independent museums. The then director of the Association for Independent Museums (AIM) invited us to present at the 2017 conference, which is attended by curators and other museum professionals. Presenting on the project had two significant outcomes. It led to an invitation to meet with the Accreditation team at Arts Council England (see the separate entry), and on seeing the data we had collected several delegates recommended that we work with the Museums Development Network to fine-tune our data. We did so, and that work is detailed in a separate entry. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Presentation to the Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | The lead on museum policy at the Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport invited us to present work in progress to their department. This meeting helped us judge sector requirements when preparing the Mapping Museums report on data, and alerted the department to the forthcoming publication of the Mapping Museums website, database and report. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Presentation to the Museums Development Network |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Presentation of the Mapping Museums website and dataset to the regional leads of the Museum Development Network (MDN), the professional body that delivers support to museums in England and Wales. The meeting was useful in that it helped guide us with respect to writing the Mapping Museums report on data - we could write to the needs to the MDN, and in alerting the MDN to the project. They were particularly interested in the regional portraits of the museum sector. We also received requests for further information e.g. the lead for MDN Wales requested and we supplied statistics on Welsh museums that we not available from her group or the Welsh government. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Presentation to the Museums Organisations group |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Arts Council England convene a regular meeting of the leads of museums organisations. these include the National Lottery Heritage Fund (NHLF), Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport (DCMS); Museums Association; Association of Independent Museums; Arts Fund; Collections Trust. We were invited to present our work in progress to the group. This meeting helped us judge sector requirements when preparing the Mapping Museums report on data, and resulted in invitations to present bespoke seminars to NHLF and DCMS. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Refining and developing data with the UK Museums Development Network |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | It is widely acknowledged that the UK museums sector does not excel at generating or archiving data. All the national bodies for museums - Arts Council England, Museums Archives Libraries Division in Wales, Museums Galleries Scotland, and Northern Ireland Museums Council - keep lists of the museums in their countries, but their concern is with current practice and with those museums that can be funded. That means they concentrate on accredited museums, so there is no or little record of small or grass roots museums, and that once a museum closes, it drops out the data. In consequence, the data is selective and it does not record change. To make matters more difficult, the national bodies all collect slightly different information in different formats, so it cannot easily be shared or compared, and much of the material collected in the 1970s and 1980s has been lost. In order to construct a dataset of all the museums that have been open in the UK between 1960 and 2020 the Mapping Museums team have had to compile numerous sources, and undertake considerable research to track down information that was lost or was never recorded in official surveys. Even so, there is a limit to how much information can be unearthed online or from an archive, and some particulars are especially hard to find or verify. Thus, we asked the Museum Development Network for their assistance. The Museum Development Network consists of twelve groups, one apiece in Northern Ireland, Wales, and Scotland, and one in each of the nine regions of England. Although the groups function slightly differently, they all support museums in their areas, advise on the accreditation process, and provide relevant information to Arts Council England and other national organisations. They also allocate their own grants, run projects, and help improve services and their members' skills. In doing so, the museum development officers quickly acquire a fine-grained knowledge of their local museums. With the support of Claire Browne, the network chair, we arranged to visit staff in each of the twelve regions. On each occasion, the Museum Development Network staff scrutinised the data we had collected on their area, and made appropriate corrections and additions. They also helped us test run the new model of classification that we have devised for the project. Holding the meetings served to further refine our data, and it also had benefits for the museum development network. Many of the officers said that they rarely got an opportunity to discuss the museums in their region, and that it was useful to do so. Almost everyone commented that the Mapping Museums team had identified numerous museums that they had never encountered, and that our data would inform their work, particularly with respect to unaccredited museums. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Round table discussions with staff responsible for museum accreditation at Arts Council England and Museums Galleries Scotland |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | In compiling a dataset of all museums that have been open in the UK between 1960 and 2020, the Mapping Museums team have had to consider multiple questions of definition. These include: how have museums been officially defined within the chosen time period, what is included and excluded by those definitions, what are the ethics of those inclusions and exclusions, and how could museums be defined in a way that acknowledges diversity of practice. In July 2017, Annette French, Museums Accreditation Manager at Arts Council England (ACE) invited the team to meet with the Accreditation Review Team and other colleagues at ACE to discuss our research on museum definitions and the processes we use in defining museums. (Accreditation is the process whereby museums are judged to have reached professional standards. It requires museums to have met the criteria set by the Museums Association definition of 1998. Only accredited museums are eligible for ACE funding so the definition has implications for which venues can be funded). I was asked to send the Accreditation team my writing on the topic, and have done so. After our initial conversation, Annette and I decided to make our discussion of museums more public and staged a formal round-table discussion at the conference 'Defining a Museum', which was jointly organised by the International Council for Museums and St Andrews University in December 2017. At this event, we were joined by Jennifer Youngson, Quality Assurance Manager for Museums Galleries Scotland to consider the difficulties we all encountered in defining a museum and the consequences of particular definitions for smaller museums. The audience consisted of a mix of museum professionals and academics. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Series of blogs |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
| Results and Impact | A series of blogs 40+ aimed at staff working in organisations with responsibility for museums including Arts Council England, Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Museums, Galleries Scotland. The blogs cover initial findings and various aspects of research methods including building the database, collecting and validating data, classification interviewing, and analysis. The blog site also includes 50+ short accounts of museums we researched in the course of data collection or interviewing. The blog has attracted consistent attention and has 190 subscribers including senior managers from all the major arts organisations including Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport; Arts Council England; National Heritage Lottery Fund; Museums, Galleries Scotland. It averages 1300 views per month. Blogs have been commented on and referenced at various professional events, they raised awareness of the research in specialist communities, highlighted issues of definition, and changed perceptions of the museum sector, particularly with respect to numbers of small museums in the UK. 2017 Not knowing about Museums 2017 Problems with the data 2017 Getting started: compiling the data 2017 Interdisciplinarity 2017 The Smallest museum in the UK? 2017 One Year on: The Principal Investigator's view 2017 Picking the brains of the Museums Development Network 2017 Defining museums 2017 Surveying museums: What's in and what's out 2018 Galleries without collections: In or out of surveys 2018: Upload 2018: The Bakelite Museum on film 2018 Mapping Museums: preliminary results on museum closure 2018 Unknown opening dates -Historic houses 2018 Unknown opening dates: Museums 2018: Historic buildings: In or out of the Survey? 2018 Modelling patchy data 2018 Two years On: An update 2018: Missing, massaged and just wrong: the problem with visitor numbers 2018: How big is that museum 2019 Mapping Museum database: New developments 2019 An Arts Scholar learns about administrative geography and datasets 2019 On the road with mapping Museums 2019 Subjects that matter 2019 Finding museum founders 2020 New Publications 2020 The Mapping Museum database and website is now live 2020 Why did so many ordinary people open their own museums? 2020 The Mapping Museums campervan tour: a catalogue of mechanical collapse 2020 Being there 2020 A week in the Life 2021 Mapping Museums is DEad: Long live Mapping Museums |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017,2018,2019,2020,2021 |
| URL | http://blogs.bbk.ac.uk/mapping-museums/ |
| Description | Stories from Small Museums |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | We held a book launch to mark the publication of the Mapping Museums monograph Stories From Museums, purposefully targeting people who worked in museums. Andrea Ballatore introduced the book, placing it in the context of the Mapping Museums project as a whole and lead author Prof Fiona Candlin gave a reading and took questions. Attendees included staff from museums where we had conducted interviews e.g. Ingrow Loco in Yorkshire, staff from sector support organisations, including Army Museums Ogibly Trust, from the Arts Council, and from major museums _ including the new director of the Imperial War Museum. The final data presented in Stories From Small Museums also drew on the Museums in the Pandemic Research, and invitations were extended to staff in the museums and associations that we had worked with for both awards |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | The Plastic Phoenix film shown as part of Birkbeck Arts Week |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Birkbeck Arts Week is an annual event and showcases academic research and projects for a general public. The Plastic Phoenix was shown online and was accompanied with a blog written by the Derek Jarman Lab who made the film with Fiona Candlin, about the process. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| URL | https://vimeo.com/375988349 |
| Description | The UK Museums Boom (and what happened next) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | A presentation of data and findings deriving from both the Mapping Museums and the Museums in the Pandemic Award. The event was chaired and introduced by Isabel Wilson, Regional Museums Manager for Arts Council England. Fiona Candlin gave a 45 minute lecture on how the constitution of the UK museum sector had changed since 1960, concluding with a commentary on museums during and after the pandemic. Lisa Ollerhead, Director, Association of Independent Museums gave a response and spoke on the value of the research for the sector. There was then a Q&A. The event was very well attended with around 90 participants. Attendees included the editor of the Museums Journal, the Head of Policy for National Heritage Lottery Fund, and staff from organisations including Visit England, Arts Trust, and Army Museums Ogibly Trust, from numerous different museums, several museums consultants, as well as academics working in the field. The event was the first full presentation of data and findings from both research projects and was extremely well received. It raised awareness of the research within our key public constituencies, prompted several offers of help with respect to keeping the database live, and invitations for further meetings and discussion (most notably with the National Heritage Lottery Fund), |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |