Museum closure in the UK 2000-2025
Lead Research Organisation:
Birkbeck, University of London
Department Name: History of Art
Abstract
This trans-disciplinary project will establish the first dataset to focus on museum closure, analyse the distribution of museums that close, investigate flows of objects and knowledge in the wake of closure, and develop new concepts of the museum's life cycle.
Museum closure is common. Our previous AHRC-funded research, 'Mapping Museums', showed that over 850 museums closed in the UK between 1960-2020, that is, 20% of the total number, with the majority closing after the millennium. The combined effects of austerity measures, the pandemic, and the cost of living crisis, make it likely that many more museums will close. Yet despite the frequency with which museums close, we know very little about where it occurs, if it predominates in places with high social deprivation, or in rural or urban areas. Nor do we know what happens to collections when museums close, or if closure is always to be regretted.
Importantly, not all closures are equal. A local council may decide to amalgamate several museums to form one consolidated organisation, or replace an outdated institution with a landmark building. In such instances services may be improved. Alternatively, they may close the museum but continue to use the collection for outreach events or as a resource for offsite exhibitions, or they may have no option but to mothball artefacts, putting them into deep storage. Other museum collections may be broken up with some objects being returned to original donors, some being scrapped, and others sold, although we do not know which kinds of collections stay in public circulation and which disappear. For example, if artworks are relocated while rural history collections are scrapped.
Museums are defined as permanent institutions that are intended to preserve collections for posterity. Their closure is usually understood in terms of failure, yet at present it is impossible to assess whether that is the case. In this project we investigate the actual circumstances of closure and re-examine the dominant narratives of loss.
Our research will be of use to students and academics in museum and heritage studies and public history in that it will:
-Present the first sustained analysis of closure within the museum sector: how it differs according to the museums' location, governance, size, subject matter, or accreditation status, and combinations thereof.
-Challenge orthodoxies about the permanence of museums.
-Document new forms of temporary, out-reach and pop up museums.
-Develop ideas of the museums' life cycle
-Provide large-scale, quantitative empirical evidence on museum closures as open data for re-use by future researchers.
-Visualise complex data in ways that are accessible to humanities scholars.
This research is also important for museum associations, policy-makers, funding bodies, consultants, and practitioners. Given the likelihood of rising closure rates, it is vital to understand the potential impact of closure and how it can be mitigated. Accordingly, this project will:
-Provide up-to-date information on museum closure.
-Identify differences in closure and in how collections are disposed of according to location and context thereby highlighting the (in)equitable distribution of resources.
-Identify differences in collections dispersal according to subject matter thereby highlighting objects and associated histories that are at risk of being lost.
-Improve understanding of the legacy of closure on recipient institutions.
-Support strategic thinking with respect to museum closure.
Museum closure is common. Our previous AHRC-funded research, 'Mapping Museums', showed that over 850 museums closed in the UK between 1960-2020, that is, 20% of the total number, with the majority closing after the millennium. The combined effects of austerity measures, the pandemic, and the cost of living crisis, make it likely that many more museums will close. Yet despite the frequency with which museums close, we know very little about where it occurs, if it predominates in places with high social deprivation, or in rural or urban areas. Nor do we know what happens to collections when museums close, or if closure is always to be regretted.
Importantly, not all closures are equal. A local council may decide to amalgamate several museums to form one consolidated organisation, or replace an outdated institution with a landmark building. In such instances services may be improved. Alternatively, they may close the museum but continue to use the collection for outreach events or as a resource for offsite exhibitions, or they may have no option but to mothball artefacts, putting them into deep storage. Other museum collections may be broken up with some objects being returned to original donors, some being scrapped, and others sold, although we do not know which kinds of collections stay in public circulation and which disappear. For example, if artworks are relocated while rural history collections are scrapped.
Museums are defined as permanent institutions that are intended to preserve collections for posterity. Their closure is usually understood in terms of failure, yet at present it is impossible to assess whether that is the case. In this project we investigate the actual circumstances of closure and re-examine the dominant narratives of loss.
Our research will be of use to students and academics in museum and heritage studies and public history in that it will:
-Present the first sustained analysis of closure within the museum sector: how it differs according to the museums' location, governance, size, subject matter, or accreditation status, and combinations thereof.
-Challenge orthodoxies about the permanence of museums.
-Document new forms of temporary, out-reach and pop up museums.
-Develop ideas of the museums' life cycle
-Provide large-scale, quantitative empirical evidence on museum closures as open data for re-use by future researchers.
-Visualise complex data in ways that are accessible to humanities scholars.
This research is also important for museum associations, policy-makers, funding bodies, consultants, and practitioners. Given the likelihood of rising closure rates, it is vital to understand the potential impact of closure and how it can be mitigated. Accordingly, this project will:
-Provide up-to-date information on museum closure.
-Identify differences in closure and in how collections are disposed of according to location and context thereby highlighting the (in)equitable distribution of resources.
-Identify differences in collections dispersal according to subject matter thereby highlighting objects and associated histories that are at risk of being lost.
-Improve understanding of the legacy of closure on recipient institutions.
-Support strategic thinking with respect to museum closure.
| Description | We have identified museum closures according to governance, size, subject matter, and accreditation. We have also analysed reasons for closure, and how those differ with respect to governance. Patterns of closure: The total number of national, university, independent, and private museums has increased since 2000, with openings outpacing closures, considerably so in the category of independent museums. Conversely, 142 local authority museums have closed, while 72 have opened. Local authority museums closed in the highest numbers of closures in 2011 and 2016, when 14 and 9 museums closed. Significant numbers of small museums have closed. These have been offset by larger numbers of new, small museums. No huge museums opened or closed. The number of medium sized museums fell. This figure is linked to the decreasing numbers of local authority museums, which generally attract medium or large audiences. Having large numbers of visitors is no guarantee against closure. 27 large museums that attracted 50,000+ visitors per annum closed. These included the Way We Were at Wigan Pier, the Mappin Art Gallery, Walsall Museum, and Snibston Discovery Centre. The largest number of closures were among local history museums - 84 closed in the period between 2000-25. However, that category also saw the most growth. 52 arts museums closed, 51 of war and conflict, and 49 of transport. Again, these categories also saw more openings than closures. Conversely, utilities museums closed than opened, and their overall number dropped as they did for museum of food and drink, and communication. The largest decrease was in the category of rural industry. Thirteen closed, that is, 10% of their total number. There are roughly equal numbers of accredited and unaccredited museums in the UK. In both cases the number of openings exceeded the number of closures. However, considerably more unaccredited museums opened and closed during this period. This statistic needs some qualification. Museums may not gain accreditation immediately, or even soon after opening, and equally they often lose it prior to closing. The states of opening and closure tend to coincide with the absence of accreditation. However, it may also point to a higher degree of churn among museums that have not been able or have chosen not to apply for accreditation. Reasons for closure: Finances, a category that included covered funding cuts and rising costs was cited as the most common reason for closure across the sector. The loss of premises was a recurrent issue; buildings were sold or repurposed or the museum lost its lease and was unable to find alternative accommodation. Museums had problems with their buildings, citing deterioration, lack of access, poor facilities as reasons for closure. Five museums were burned down, one in an arson attack. The most common reason for private museums to close were life events, more specifically because owners decided to retire and close the museum, or they died without having made provision for the ongoing maintenance of the museum. Finance was the second most common reason for closure with 22 private museums being unable to meet their running costs. Independent museums, gave finances as the main reason for closure, more specifically citing costs. Loss of premises was the second key factor, with sites being redeveloped or leaseholds expiring. Local authority museums also cited finances as being the key reason for closure, except in their case that primarily related to funding cuts rather than to running costs, which were mentioned less often. Both independent and local authority museums cited strategic reasons for closure. Fourteen museums closed because a replacement was planned. Seventeen closed as part of an amalgamation process wherein two or more joined together to form a third entity. |
| Exploitation Route | Yes, it already has been. Colleagues at the Department of Digital Media and Sport asked for a summary of findings to be shared with staff with responsibility for museums. Likewise, colleagues at Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government have shared our findings with the English Civic Museums Network. |
| Sectors | Culture Heritage Museums and Collections |
| Description | Our advisory board includes senior staff from Arts Council England; Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport, and the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government. They have all asked for summaries of findings to share with their teams. Although it is too soon to say what specific impact the research may have, it is already informing day to day policy work. We have been updating and maintaining our original Mapping Museums database as part of the Museum Closure research. This continues to be used by multiple individuals, groups, and agencies, perhaps most significantly by the Office of National Statistics who drew on our data to publish a dataset and interactive map on Local Authority Museums. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2024 |
| Sector | Culture, Heritage, Museums and Collections |
| Impact Types | Cultural Policy & public services |
| Description | Provided data for Office of National Statistics |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| URL | https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/datasets/numberofmuseumsacrosslocalaut... |
| Description | Association of Independent Museums Advisory Board on museum land management |
| 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 | The Association of Independent Museums are reviewing museum's use of land - which ranges from small outdoor spaces to large estates - with a view to responding to climate change / generating income / substainability / improving visitor experience. They are generating a tool kit for museums, policy guidelines, and establishing a community of practice. Fiona Candlin was invited to be part of that board, specifically to advise on methodology. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
| Description | Irish Museums Conference 2024 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Keynote lecture on all the Mapping Museums data and findings for an audience of museum professionals at their annual conference. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |