| Homepage > The Work of the Assembly > Committees > Culture, Arts and Leisure > Reports > Review into the Impact and Value of Museums in Northern Ireland | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Committee for Culture, Arts and LeisureReview into the
|
Method |
Description |
Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-benefit analysis | Identifies and analyses impacts in monetary terms and establishes whether benefits outweigh costs. | More often used as a decision-making tool than to demonstrate impacts after the event. |
| Multiplier analysis | Demonstrates the Gross Value Added (GVA) impacts on the local and wider economy. | Effective at illustrating ‘trickle down’ effects, but fails to capture broad range of social, cultural and educational benefits. |
| Contingent valuation | Asks users to place a value on the service offered. | Indicates value of a service, rather than just the economic impact. Difficulties in defining non-users, and in defining value ranges. |
| Social return on investment (SROI) | Combines multiplier analysis and contingent valuation to indicate both impact and value. | Offers flexibility in providing a range of indicators; can be used to monitor changes in impact of a museum through time. |
64. While there are advantages and disadvantages to each of these approaches, the National Museums Council informed the Committee that there was a general preference for the use of multiplier analysis methodologies across the museum sector[33].
65. In 2010, the Association of Independent Museums created an economic value toolkit which sets out a method to estimate the economic impact museums may have on their local economy, via a multiplier analysis. In oral evidence, NMNI referred to the possibility of developing an economic toolkit using this methodology for the museum sector in NI[34].
66. Research commissioned to inform this view found that that the SROI model (see table above) has been favoured in England, and a number of case studies exist which demonstrate how it can be used. This combines multiplier analysis and contingent valuation to indicate both impact and value[35].
67. Generally there was widespread agreement that much progress had been made in relation to the methodologies for measuring the economic value and impact of museums that have relevance to the museum sector in Northern Ireland. However the MLA report asserted that an important distinction should be made between economic impact and economic value[36].
Consultation with the sector indicated that economic impact and value methodologies must consider more than the income, expenditure and employment impacts of the services and must take into account wider social and economic impacts[37].
68. DCAL also cautioned against expressing the value of museums in just economic terms. This, they stated, undervalued other important aspects of museums. In oral evidence, DCAL explained that its planned economic and social research programme will measure the wider economic benefit and will also explore a number of approaches to the value of participation. It will look at the continued valuation approaches (see table above) and the subjective well-being analysis or ‘happiness indicator’[38].
69. It was evident that little research had been undertaken regarding the social benefits of museums on a consistent basis across the sector in Northern Ireland. A research paper states:
Little research has been undertaken regarding the social benefits of museums in Northern Ireland, despite the importance of the sector nationally and internationally, evidenced throughout. Unlike the sports and arts sectors, museums benefit from having a clear ‘customer base’, and the impact of the sector should be easier to facilitate. Although the literature base illustrates that wider studies tend to place more emphasis on the economic rather than the social benefits of the sector, an effective social evaluation tool could be developed and rolled out on a consistent basis across Northern Ireland’s museum sector[39].
70. Throughout the review, the Committee was made aware of the notable variety of measurement of approaches and challenges when measuring the social impacts of the museum sector. One researcher had identified twenty social impact measurement methods, while another study suggested upwards of thirty[40].
71. Despite the various studies referred to above, it is clear that there are a number of methodological issues associated with assessing the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland.
72. The Committee was informed that the NIMC research programme had identified a lack of robust and consistent data collection across the local museum sector in Northern Ireland which was making it difficult to provide evidence of the impact of the sector as a whole[41]. This view was supported by DCAL.[42] In written evidence, the NIMC stated:
A common opinion of commentators on museums’ impact is the prerequisite need for specific, robust data, collected over time, applied to an appropriate methodology, with a pre-agreed objective in mind. The current capacity of the sector in Northern Ireland to do this is weak. As NIMC’s Marketing Northern Ireland’s Museums (2009) study highlighted, there is little by way of a common or standardised approach to the collection of even the basic data in our museums and this would need to be rectified in order that the ubiquitous impacts could be properly assessed.
73. In written evidence, NMNI said it recognised the importance to government, stakeholders and funders of tracking social and economic impact, especially given the prevailing economic situation and the austerity measures to come. However it highlighted the fact that:
The sector currently lacks a universal model which can consistently demonstrate outcomes across museums. Whilst the introduction of such a model would be welcome, and potential examples exist, the cost of implementation would require careful consideration[43].
74. The benefits of a universal model were not wholly favoured by the Heritage Lottery Fund and the NIMC.
75. The NIMC, in written evidence, referred to the difficulties of a ‘one size fits all’ approach given the diversity of the museum sector. They said:
This diversity in their location, governance, funding base and the focus of their collections is a fundamental strength of the sector. It does however preclude any ‘one size fits all’ methodology for assessing impacts, and quite subtle approaches are required in order to achieve an understanding of impacts that stand somewhere between high-level assessments (that may not be particularly informative locally) and discrete, site specific assessments (from which comparative or collective conclusions are difficult to draw)[44].
76. Heritage Lottery qualified their comments by saying:
There has been progress on and more agreement around methodologies for the different types of benefits that museums deliver. For example...there is a need to get some sort of agreement on the methodologies used and the ways of measuring different social and economic benefits.
77. In oral evidence, the University of Ulster pointed to well established models outside of Northern Ireland to measure economic and social value of museums:
one could say there are gaps in Northern Ireland and that we need to sit down and do similar work. It would be a matter of bringing people together to undertake that work[45].
78. There was much interest in a UK wide group known as ALMA UK (Archive, Libraries and Museum Alliance), of which the Northern Ireland Museums Council is a member. It is consulting with key stakeholders as to the potential of adopting a standardised approach to data collection to assess impact across the sector, at both the devolved nation level and UK-wide. However, in terms of who should take the lead, it was not clear who that should be if an exercise of this nature was undertaken.
79. The need to measure cultural benefits was referred to during the course of the Review. In written evidence NMNI stated:
“If we do develop a model, rather than simply looking at the economic and social benefits, we might also include, the cultural benefits of museum activities[46].
80. NIMC supported this view stating
The primacy of measuring the economic and social impacts, perhaps since the mid-1990’s, has gone hand in hand with the culture of accountability through targets and qualitative performance measurement. The intrinsic value of culture, particularly as represented by museums, has been seen to lack currency against this background. It is to the sector’s credit that it has sought to and succeeded in making a difference in social and economic terms. This has been enabled by the flexibility of programming, the commitment of staff and the underlying spirit of what museums are about. Notably that has not seen an appropriate quid pro quo, through which cultural impacts are sought from those publicly funded bodies concerned directly with social and economic development. A clear and more comprehensive picture of museums’ contribution may be had through an assessment of their cultural, social and economic impact[47].
81. Museums Galleries Scotland however pointed to the difficulties in measuring cultural impact and said:
It is not always easy to define and measure the question of value in relation to culture. Certain aspects of social and economic impact can be more easily measured than other. For example, it can be difficult to measure long term impact, especially where a range of initiatives may be contributing to social changes[48].
82. On the basis of the evidence presented, the Committee makes the following recommendations:
83. We recommend that DCAL consider the development of an economic toolkit, using a similar methodology as that used by the Association of Independent Museums, as part of its planned economic and social research programme.
84. We recommend that the lack of research regarding the social benefits of museums on a consistent basis is addressed in DCAL’s economic and social research programme, and that a social evaluation tool is developed in consultation with the museums sector.
85. We recommend that the Department, local authorities and the museum sector use independent research on the impact and value of museums carried out by academics and experts to avoid duplication and additional costs.
86. We recommend that more research is carried out into the cultural value and impact of museums resulting in an effective evaluation tool being developed which can ultimately incorporate the economic, social and cultural impacts of the museum sector.
87. As the previous chapters indicated, there are numerous studies that demonstrate the wider economic and social benefits of museums and support the argument that the museum sector provides value for money across a number of areas including cultural tourism, the economy, education and life-learning and health. It was evident to the Committee that there was a substantial amount of data that could be applied to demonstrate value for money across government.
88. Given that many of the benefits extend beyond the remit of culture, arts and leisure, the Committee agreed that information about the social and economic impact of museums could be used to assess value for money across government.
89. As the University of Ulster stated:
Far too often we miss a trick when it comes to the potential of culture and arts for generating economic revenue, rather than just something that people engage as a pastime and on which they spend a little bit of their pocket money. There is a far greater potential there that is not being fully exploited.[49]
90. The intention to assess value for money was welcomed by a number of contributors to the review. For example,
The Northern Ireland Museums Council welcomes and supports the Committee’s intention to review of the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland. By their very nature museums operate in the public interest and do so, in the main, with support from the public purse. It is essential therefore that the full range of impacts and their contribution to Northern Ireland’s economy and society is more fully recognised. NIMC is of the view that the Committee’s inquiry has the potential to fully reveal the extent of the sector’s wide-ranging contributions, to show that the sector represents extremely good value for money, and is worthy of significant further investment[50].
91. Furthermore research carried out by the NIMC was referred to as an example of research that had demonstrated how the NIMC had achieved the aims of the Programme for Government and value for money.[51]
92. In terms of making the case that the museums provide value for money, the HLF informed the Committee that it had invested nearly £30million in museums in Northern Ireland[52]. In demonstrating economic impact and value for money, HLF state that the tourism aspect of economic impact is only one argument for public investment in museums and in culture. There is also the supply chain of sector related activites to the museums sector including the supply of the raw material for the creative cultural industries.
93. In written evidence, NMNI supported this point with reference to how cultural infrastructure has had a direct impact on the local construction industry. The £28.8 million, invested by NMNI on flagship projects has supported construction industry jobs, benefitted local suppliers and encouraged the procurement of locally sourced goods. They stated, by
Using a social impact model it is possible to establish the economic benefit to the construction industry in terms of direct jobs, indirect and induced jobs. The same applies to the procurement of goods and service so that the overall effects of this investment are hugely significant for Northern Ireland. There is also benefit to the economy through PAYE and Corporation Tax returns of local people and companies.
94. HLF also stated that, for every £1 million it spends in a region’s tourism, revenues worth
£4 million are generated. In support of this, NMNI stated that HLF’s grant of £4.7m to the Ulster Museum would be worth £19.7m to the local economy over 10 years[53].
95. The University of Ulster referred to research by Natural History Museum which mirrored these findings. The research found that for every £1 of government grant to museums, the benefit to the local economy is quadrupled.[54]
96. In terms of investment, NIMC stressed that while evidence suggests that economic and social benefits do invariably accrue from what museums do, the economic and social benefits are directly proportionate to the levels of investment in the primary functions of museums; i.e.
the ability to collect, preserve, display and interpret their collections for the edification, inspiration and enjoyment of the public[55].
97. From the evidence gathered during the course of the review, it was evident to the Committee that there is a substantial amount of data that could be applied to demonstrate value for money across government. However this is not withstanding the difficulties referred to in Chapter 4 on assessing the economic and social value of museums.
98. It became clear to the Committee, that while there are numerous studies demonstrating the economic and social value of museums, there is a lack of understanding and acknowledgement about the economic value of museums by the general public in Northern Ireland. With reference to the museum sector, the University of Ulster stated that some sectors are aware of the importance of museums but that there is a need for joined up thinking or collaboration, as this is how value for money is best achieved[56].
99. In terms of assessing economic and social impact and value for money, tensions can arise. In written evidence, the NIMC drew the Committee’s attention to the direct conflicts between economic and social impacts. By way of example, they stated, the issue of admission charge versus the access dilemma faced by some museums, particularly those in the voluntary sector who rely upon ticket income to sustain their operations. Reference was made to the debate around the abolition of entry charges at the national museums in England, Scotland and Wales where free entry saw increased visitor service costs which were not wholly covered by compensation from government for lost income.
100. The NIMC also referred to other obvious tensions including,
the role museums often undertake as custodians of a building of significant heritage value versus physical access requirements and ‘value for money’ cost of running the institution, or balancing access to the collections with the a priori preservation responsibility.
101. According to NIMC, another notable issue was that associated with definitions and how this can pose problems between policy makers and the museum sector. There was a need for[57]:
clarity in definitions, approach and the mutual understanding amongst those with particular interest in the impacts of museums. The goals of ‘community cohesion’ and ‘social inclusion’ for instance, while variously defined, continue to be perceived as somewhat nebulous and a recent study points to a gap in understanding between the policymakers responsible for developing the rationale for government investment and the sector professionals who develop and deliver the programmes that generate social impact.[58]
102. Public Service Agreements and measuring the value of Museums
In written evidence, DCAL informed the Committee that it uses Public Service Agreements (PSAs) to demonstrate the value of museums, at a high level, across government in Northern Ireland. PSAs also measure the performance of National Museums and set the organisation strategic goals[59].
103. Proposed PSA in relation to rebalancing the economy
DCAL informed the Committee that the current PSA relating to visitor numbers in part demonstrates the economic value of National Museums. However, under consideration is whether a more focused PSA showing the value of National Museums to Northern Ireland’s cultural tourist product could be developed. The proposed PSA target would be in addition to a more general attendance target and would measure the number of out of state visitors to museums.
104. Proposed PSA in relation to the social value of museums to formal education
The current target relating to providing educational visits demonstrates the social value of museums in supporting the formal education sector. However, according to DCAL, the proposed PSA would focus attention on the benefits to education of enriching learning through engagement with collections in museums[60].
105. DCAL stated:
This would reinforce the goal in the draft Museums Policy that every child in Northern Ireland has the opportunity to a visit a museum as part of a curriculum based activity.
106. During the course of the review, references were made to the contribution that the museum sector makes to the STEM (Science, Technology Engineering and Maths) subjects. For example, NMNI referred to its learning programmes that support the STEM agenda[61]. However in oral evidence, NMNI explained that they have not reached the stage of measuring that yet, but are developing a programme[62].
107. Maximising Resources through Strategic Partnerships
NMNI stated it was aware of the importance of delivering strategic partnerships and this was reflected in the recent development of a Directorate of Learning and Partnership. NMNI stated that there was increasing recognition within government policy of the necessity to share resources and develop partnerships with mutually advantageous objectives. Within DCAL, the Learning Strategy has, as one of its central tenets, the aim of developing partnerships within the DCAL family and further afield[63].
108. NMNI informed the Committee that it had a philosophy of working in partnership with a range of sectors and industries including tourism, education, the creative industries, business, community and voluntary organisations to name but a few. Some of its current partners included the Workers Education Association, Queen’s Festival, Age NI and the Polish Community, reflecting a complete spectrum of objectives[64].
109. The need for greater collaboration within the museum sector was stressed by the University of Ulster and Heritage Lottery Fund, which it was argued, would help demonstrate the value for money case. HLF called for a greater degree of cooperation in any research programmes between local and national museums. NMNI agreed that there needed to be coherence across the sector and greater partnership working between NMNI and NIMC[65].
110. In terms of linkages with other Government Departments, it would appear that there are linkages which exist with DETI in relation to measuring the contribution that cultural tourism makes to the economy. For example:
Tourism Strategy for Northern Ireland to 2020 has significant references to the important role cultural tourism contributes to the overall tourism strategy and how DCAL can contribute to this[66].
111. The Draft Government STEM Strategy (August 2010) also acknowledges that museums, ‘support and enhance the delivery of the curriculum and provide STEM experiences and insights that inspire and add value and sees museums as having a key role in implementing the strategy’.[67]
112. However, it is not clear if linkages exist with other government departments in relation to the wider economic and social impact and value of the museum sector to the economy.
113. A point which emerged in discussion during the University of Ulster submission was that examining and demonstrating the economic and social value of museums could usefully be an Executive-wide commitment, with evidence considered, and programmes designed, by a number of different departments and bodies[68]. A similar point was made during the oral evidence session with DCAL officials[69].
114. On the basis of the evidence presented, the Committee makes the following recommendations:
115. We recommend that DCAL’s new PSAs include targets to measure the contribution of the STEM subjects to the museum sector.
116. We recommend a greater degree of co-operation between NIMC and NMNI on research programmes.
117. In light of budgetary constraints of the 2011-2015 period, we recommend that the Executive commit to examining, across departments the economic and social value of museums with evidence considered, and programmes designed, that fully maximise the social and economic contribution of the museum sector to the economy.
118. There is a significant body of research on the economic and social impact of museums. As was clear from the evidence, over the last decade, a large amount of work has taken place to form and test appropriate, flexible and effective methodologies to indicate the impact and value of museums. The following is a brief review of the work undertaken in recent years by each of the regions of the UK, and Ireland.
119. England
In England, the lead museums body is currently the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA).
120. In a written submission, the Committee was informed of the MLA’s research programme. MLA has been a contributor to a joint research programme led by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, also involving Arts Council England, English Heritage and Sport England, with the aim of strengthening understanding of how best to deliver high quality cultural (and sporting) opportunities to widest audience[70].
121. In 2010, this jointed research programme produced a report which drew together analyses of the factors which drive engagement in culture and sport. It also produced an extensive database of over 5,000 studies on culture and sport engagement. MLA claims that this database is the single most comprehensive database of its kind in the world[71].
122. MLA has also produced a report that builds on the work published by CASE. Measuring the value of culture: The report to DCMS, assesses the different approaches to generating the value associated with engagement in culture and sport. This analyses both a range of economic valuation approaches, and also a set of emerging ‘well-being-based’ techniques. The report makes a number of recommendations, including action by DCMS to create clear guidance on how to use economic valuation (rather than economic impact) techniques of the kind already used across central government, and that the department should develop closer links with academics working in the area of cultural economics so that good practice continues to be followed.
123. In terms of museum-specific studies, MLA has produced a number of studies in recent years examining the relationship between museums and health benefits, cultural diversity, and volunteering[72].
124. The Committee was informed that since 2005, there has been a concerted effort to develop sound methodologies and an evidence base so that the value and impact of museums can be measured, compared and demonstrated[73].
125. In 2008, MLA produced some detailed guidance on the range of approaches available to measure economic impact. This concluded that though multiplier analysis and cost benefit analysis have their uses, a Social Return on Investment (SROI) model, combining an expression of user preferences with multiplier analysis, is the most beneficial. This technique is more challenging but a number of museums in England have now used the SROI methodology to indicate their social and economic value[74].
126. Various categories of social impact have been defined, and case studies exist to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. A case study from Tyne and Wear Museums illustrates the importance of defining the desired social impact, and the methodology to be used in assessing the outcome, at an early stage in any new project or programme[75].
127. It would appear that no similar work has been carried out within the museum sector in Northern Ireland on the SROI methodology.
128. Other forms of value and impact were also summarised briefly for the Committee, including cultural heritage tourism, educational and cultural factors. While it was established that a methodology for educational impact is now well-established, measuring cultural impact is in its infancy and will require further development before empirical measures can be applied in practice[76].
129. Aside from work conducted by the MLA, the Association of Independent Museums produced an economic impact paper in 2010, including an economic value ‘toolkit’ which sets out a straightforward method by which museums can estimate the impact they may have on their local economy.[77] The toolkit sets out the calculations to be used to quantify (i) tourism impacts (ii) employment impacts and (iii) the impacts of spend on goods and services. In just six pages, the relevant definitions, formulae and necessary economic assumptions are laid out in a way which is designed to allow independent museums to ‘accurately and quickly generate the data that is needed to estimate economic impacts’.[78]
130. In written evidence NIMC referred to this economic toolkit as a possible model to measure economic value within the Northern Ireland.
131. The lead museums body in Wales; CyMAL is a division of the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG). In written evidence, the Committee was informed of the CyMAL’s museums’ strategy which was produced in June 2010 - “A Museums Strategy for Wales 2010 – 2015".
132. The strategy identifies three themes which relate specifically to the issue of social and economic impact and value:
133. In 2007 CyMAL published Spotlight on Museums which gathered information from the 160 organisations in Wales that hold collections and display them to the public. 106 organisations responded providing economic data such as budgets, staff levels and volunteer input. The Committee was informed that is exercise will be repeated in 2011 and 2015 providing comparisons and trends across the timeframe[79].
134. The framework underpinned organisational development that led to service improvement. It also served to measure outcomes and document the impact of a museums work. A research paper highlighted that the benefit of this framework, rolled out across the sector, was that all museums, libraries and archives operated a uniform approach which provided an opportunity to quantify the social value of museums[80].
135. The majority of work on this issue carried out in Scotland has been conducted by Museums Galleries Scotland (MGS). According to MGS:
25 million people visit each year, and that £800 million is contributed to the Scottish economy[81].
136. MGS has carried out a number of relevant studies in recent years, including the impact of museums and galleries to Scottish tourism, and the impacts on their local communities[82].
137. MGS is the lead partner in ALMA-UK (Archives, Libraries and Museums UK), which is currently conducting an ‘Economic Impact’ project as a result of a ‘realisation that there is a proliferation of studies in this area, with a variety of methodologies and that there was the need to step back and take stock of the methods and their applicability’[83].
138. The Committee was informed that the purpose of this project is firstly to analyse economic impact methodologies for archives, libraries and museums and support organisations from the sector, and secondly to create a series of potential toolkits that could be used by the sector.
139. As part of the research, ALMA UK is seeking to consult with key stakeholders as to the potential of adopting a standardised approach to data collection, at both the devolved and national level and UK-wide[84].
140. A report will derive from the first phase, and this is expected to be published in February 2011. The pilot studies which will make up phase two of the project will take place in various parts of the UK, and will include Northern Ireland[85].
141. The Heritage Council is the lead museums body in the Republic of Ireland. No museums-specific study has been carried out recently, though there are a number of related studies which have examined the economic contribution of the arts, and of local authority heritage provision.
142. In 2007, a study was published which examined the value of heritage in Ireland, including both natural and built heritage, but also museums[86]. The study involved a survey of 1008 adults from 100 randomly selected points throughout the Republic of Ireland. Some key conclusions which stand out from the research are that over 90% of people think it is very or fairly important to protect heritage, and there is a strong desire for penalties for those who damage heritage. A contingent valuation technique was used, which indicated a value for heritage protection across the whole Irish population of €89.54 million[87].
143. In 2010, an economic evaluation of the County Heritage Plan (CHP) was published. CHP is managed by the Heritage Council, and provides a framework through which funding and support for heritage protection is promoted at the county level. The report concluded that CHP supported 1,085 jobs, which when a multiplier effect is applied is estimated to be 1,315 full-time equivalent jobs. The net wage injection into the economy is estimated at €30.1 million, and the contribution to the Exchequer is estimated at €5.3 million. The expenditure of €30.1 million in net wages resulted in an estimated total income effect of €45.1 million in the economy over the period from 2004 to 2008. In terms of spending on secondary services, including advertising, printing, graphic design, hotel facilities and catering services, €565,377 was spent between 2004 and 2008, which with a multiplier effect suggests a total expenditure impact of €848,065[88].
144. In terms of the contribution made by heritage to cultural tourism, Tourism Ireland indicate that in 2009, around 3,045,000 overseas visitors to Ireland engaged in historical/ cultural visits, and 46% of total overseas visitors carried out historical/ cultural visits while in the country. Overseas visitors to Ireland generated revenues of €3.1 billion[89].
145. The Heritage Council stated that it had an ongoing and positive relationship with the Northern Ireland Museums Council and in particular has partnered NIMC in the running of the All Island Museum of the Year Awards. However it would not appear that this extends to joint collaboration on any type of economic and social impact of the museum sector on an all-island basis.
146. On the basis of the evidence presented, the Committee makes the following recommendations:
147. We recommend that the Department identify examples of good practice in measuring the economic and social impact of museums, and applies this to improving the assessment of the social and economic value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland.
148. We recommend that the Museum Sector in Northern Ireland continues to be represented by the Museums Council on the ALMA project and that the specific research needs of the museum sector, and any pilot projects which may be undertaken, are given adequate support through the course of the project.
[1] Appendix 3
[2] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 2010. Staffing and Employment Trends within Northern Ireland’s Museums:
[3] Appendix 3
[4] HLF, Investing in Success, March 2010
[5] Appendix 3
[6] Appendix 2
[7] Appendix 3
[8] Appendix 3
[9] Appendix 3
[10] Appendix 2
[11] Appendix 3
[12] Appendix 4
[13] Appendix 4
[14] Assembly Research Paper, Appendix 4.
[15] Appendix 4
[16] Appendix 4
[17] Report on the Committee’s Inquiry into the Funding of the Arts in Northern Ireland, November 2009
[18] Appendix 4
[19] Appendix 4
[20] Appendix 3
[21] Appendix 2
[22] Appendix 4
[23] Appendix 3
[24] Appendix 3
[25] Appendix 3
[26] Appendix 3
[27] Appendix 3
[28] Ibid
[29] Appendix 3
[30] Appendix 3
[31] Appendix 3
[32] Appendix 4
[33] Appendix 3
[34] Appendix 2
[35] Appendix 4
[36] Jura consultants. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives: pp41.
[37] Appendix 3
[38] Appendix 2
[39] Appendix 4
[40] Appendix 3
[41] Appendix 3
[42] Appendix 3
[43] Appendix 3
[44] Appendix 3
[45] Appendix 2
[46] Appendix 3
[47] Appendix 3
[48] Appendix 3
[49] Appendix 2
[50] Appendix 3
[51] Appendix 2
[52] Appendix 2
[53] Appendix 2
[54] Appendix 2
[55] Appendix 3
[56] Appendix 3
[57] Appendix 3
[58] Appendix 3
[59] Appendix 3
[60] Appendix 3
[61] Appendix 2
[62] Appendix 2
[63] Appendix 3
[64] Appendix 3
[65] Appendix 2
[66] Appendix 3
[67] Appendix 3
[68] Appendix 2
[69] Appendix 2
[70] Appendix 3
[71] Appendix 3
[72] Appendix 4
[73] Appendix 4
[74] Appendix 4
[75] Appendix 4
[76] Appendix 4
[77] Appendix 4
[78] Appendix 4
[79] Appendix 3
[80] Appendix 4
[81] Appendix 3
[82] Appendix 4
[83] Appendix 3
[84] Appendix 3
[85] Appendix 4
[86] Appendix 3
[87] Appendix 4
[88] Ibid
[89] Ibid
Chapter 4 - Assessing how information about the social and economic impact
of Museums could be used to assess value for money across government.
Chapter 4 - Assessing how information about the social and economic impact
of Museums could be used to assess value for money across government.
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr Raymond McCartney MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Apologies: Lord Browne MLA
Mr Billy Leonard MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
In attendance: Ms Lucia Wilson (Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
Ms Alice McKelvey (Assistant Legal Advisor)
10.47a.m The meeting opened in closed session.
Agreed: The Committee agreed to undertake an inquiry on the economic and cultural potential of the museum sector in NI.
Mr Barry McElduff
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
2 December 2010
[EXTRACT]
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne MLA
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr Billy Leonard MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
Mr Raymond McCartney MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Apologies: None
In attendance: Mrs Cathie White (Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
10.04 a.m The meeting opened.
The Committee discussed the timeline for the Committee’s new inquiry into museums.
Agreed: The Committee agreed to defer a decision on the Terms of Reference until next week’s meeting.
Agreed: The Committee agreed that they would carry out a focused compact review on the value and impact of Museums and that there was no need to issue a public notice.
Agreed: The Committee agreed to request Research and Library Service to provide a suggested list of consultees.
Mr Barry McElduff
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
09 December 2010
[EXTRACT]
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne MLA
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr Billy Leonard MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
Mr Raymond McCartney MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Apologies: Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
In attendance: Ms Lucia Wilson (Clerk)
Ms Sian Woodward (Bill Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
Dr Dan Hull (Research Officer)
10.34 a.m The meeting opened.
Dr Dan Hull briefed the Committee on the impact and value of museums.
Agreed: The Committee agreed to the Terms of Reference for the review.
Agreed: The Committee agreed the title of the review as, ‘Review into the Value and Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland’.
Agreed: The Committee agreed the list of consultees for the Review.
Agreed: The Committee agreed the draft press release for the Review.
Mr Barry McElduff
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
09 December 2010
[EXTRACT]
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne MLA
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Mr Pat Sheehan MLA
Apologies: Mr Billy Leonard MLA
In attendance: Ms Lucia Wilson (Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
10.21am The meeting opened.
The Committee considered the briefing paper from the University of Ulster.
11.50 a.m The following representatives joined the meeting.
11.50 a.m Mr McCarthy joined the meeting.
Dr Elizabeth Crooke - Senior Lecturer, Museum and Heritage Studies
Prof. Pól Ó Dochartaigh – Dean of the Faculty of Arts
The representatives provided evidence to the Committee Review into the Value and Impact of Museums.
A question and answer session followed.
12.12 p.m Mr McClarty left the meeting.
12.13 p.m Mr Humphrey left the meeting.
12.16 p.m Mr Burns left the meeting.
12.24 p.m Mr Burns rejoined the meeting
12.24 p.m The representatives left the meeting.
The Committee considered the briefing paper from the Northern Ireland Museum Council.
12.24 p.m The following representative joined the meeting.
Chris Bailey, Director
The representative provided evidence to the Committee Review into the value and impact of museums.
A question and answer session followed.
12.31 p.m Mr Hilditch left the meeting.
12.45 p.m The representative left the meeting.
Mr Barry McElduff, MLA
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
10 February 2011
[EXTRACT]
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne MLA
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Mr Pat Sheehan MLA
Apologies: Mr Billy Leonard MLA
In attendance: Ms Lucia Wilson (Clerk)
Ms Sian Woodward (Bill Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
10.35am The meeting opened in closed session.
10.50am The meeting moved into opened session.
The Committee considered the Assembly Research paper.
Dr Dan Hull briefed the Committee on the Impact and Value of Museums.
11.24am Mr Burns joined the meeting.
11.35am Mr Burns left the meeting.
A question and answer session followed.
The Committee considered the briefing paper from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
11.37am The following officials joined the meeting.
Alastair Hughes, Head of Museums and Libraries Branch – DCAL
David Polley, DCAL Official
Patrick Neeson, Principal Economist – DCAL
The officials provided evidence to the Committee Review into the value and impact of museums.
A question and answer session followed.
11.52am Mr Burns rejoined the meeting.
12.05pm The officials left the meeting.
12.05pm Lord Browne left the meeting.
The Committee considered the briefing paper from the Heritage Lottery Fund.
12.05pm The following representatives joined the meeting.
Paul Mullan, Head of Heritage Lottery Fund Northern Ireland
Gareth Meer, Research Manager – Heritage Lottery Fund
The representatives provided evidence to the Committee Review into the Value and Impact of Museums.
A question and answer session followed.
12.23pm Mr Humphrey left the meeting.
12.26pm Mr Burns left the meeting.
12.26pm Mr McClarty left the meeting.
12.27pm Mr Humphrey rejoined the meeting.
12.34pm Mr Sheehan left the meeting.
12.36pm The Deputy Chairperson left the meeting.
12.37pm Mr Sheehan rejoined the meeting.
12.39pm The representatives left the meeting.
The Committee considered the briefing paper from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
12.39pm The following representatives joined the meeting.
12.39pm The Deputy Chairperson rejoined the meeting.
Paddy Gilmore, Director of Learning & Partnership – NMNI
Dr Jim McGreevy, Director of Collections and Interpretations – NMNI
Gillian McLean, Director of Marketing Communications & Trading - NMNI
The representatives provided evidence to the Committee Review into the value and impact of museums.
12.48pm Mr Hilditch left the meeting.
A question and answer session followed.
Mr Humphrey declared an interest as he is a councilor on Belfast City Council.
12.59pm Mr Humphrey left the meeting.
1.02pm The representatives left the meeting.
The Committee noted the tabled written evidence from stakeholders in relation to the Review into the Impact and Value of Museums.
1.07pm The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
17 February 2011
[EXTRACT]
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne MLA
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Mr Pat Sheehan MLA
Apologies: Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr Billy Leonard MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
In attendance: Ms Lucia Wilson (Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
12.55 pm The meeting opened
1.40 pm The meeting moved into closed session
The Committee noted the Clerk’s memo.
The Committee considered the draft report.
1.50 p.m The Chairperson adjourned the meeting
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
10 March 2011
[EXTRACT]
Present: Mr Barry McElduff MLA (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan MLA (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne MLA
Mr Thomas Burns MLA
Mr Kieran McCarthy MLA
Mr David McClarty MLA
Mr Ken Robinson MLA
Mr Pat Sheehan MLA
Apologies: Mr David Hilditch MLA
Mr William Humphrey MLA
Mr Billy Leonard MLA
In attendance: Ms Lucia Wilson (Clerk)
Miss Emma Patton (Assistant Clerk)
Mr Jonathan Lamont (Clerical Supervisor)
Mr Chris Baird (Clerical Officer)
10.33 a.m The meeting opened in closed session
10.40 a.m The meeting moved into open session
11.44 a.m The meeting moved into closed session
The Committee noted the Clerk’s memo.
The Committee considered the draft report of the Review into the Impact and Value of Museums in Northern Ireland
The Committee agreed the front cover.
The Committee agreed the Membership and Powers.
The Committee agreed the Table of Contents.
The Committee agreed the Executive Summary.
The Committee agreed the List of recommendations.
The Committee agreed the Introduction - paragraphs 1 to 9 of the report.
The Committee agreed Chapter 1 - paragraphs 10 to 26 of the report.
The Committee agreed Chapter 2 - paragraphs 27 to 58 of the report.
The Committee agreed Chapter 3 - paragraphs 59 of 83 the report.
The Committee agreed Chapter 4 - paragraphs 84 to 113 of the report.
The Committee agreed Chapter 5 – paragraphs 114 to 143 of the report.
The Committee agreed the list of abbreviations.
Question put and agreed:
‘That the Report be the fifth report of the Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee to the Assembly’
The Committee agreed that the draft report should go to print.
The Committee agreed the wording of the motion.
12.02 p.m The Chairperson adjourned the meeting
Chairperson, Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
[EXTRACT]
Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Barry McElduff (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan (Deputy Chairperson)
Lord Browne
Mr David Hilditch
Mr William Humphrey
Mr Kieran McCarthy
Mr David McClarty
Mr Ken Robinson
Mr Pat Sheehan
Witnesses:
Dr Elizabeth Crooke |
University of Ulster |
|
Mr Chris Bailey |
Northern Ireland Museums Council |
The Chairperson (Mr McElduff): With us today from the University of Ulster are Dr Elizabeth Crooke, senior lecturer in museum and heritage studies, and Professor Pól Ó Dochartaigh, dean of the faculty of arts. You are both very welcome. Thank you for coming. I invite you to make an opening statement.
Professor Pól Ó Dochartaigh (University of Ulster): Elizabeth will make most of the comments. At the end, I will give a bit of context as regards the university and the faculty.
Dr Elizabeth Crooke (University of Ulster): I thank the Committee for inviting us to speak to you today. We are delighted to speak on this subject, because, for us, Northern Ireland’s museums sector is very important. In my written submission I responded to the four areas that you outlined and considered the social and economic value of museums. I looked at how that might be monitored; the methods for measuring social and economic value; how we might assess value for money; and, indeed, the very concept of economic and social value.
I am sure that you share my awareness of the importance of museums: as employers; their significance in attracting international visitors; their role in regeneration; the spending power of those who use museums; the spending power of museums themselves; and the importance of museums and their collections for Northern Ireland’s creative industries. Research has been done into the social, economic and cultural value of museums, much of it in the UK museums sector. I recommend that you consult those reports.
One interesting report, which was published last year for the Natural History Museum in London, broke down specifically how it calculated economic value. It looked at the institution’s economic turnover. For example, it may cost £83 million to run the Natural History Museum. The report looked at the spending power of visitors to the museum and added that to the turnover factor. It then used a multiplier effect to find out how much money a museum with a budget of £50 million, for example, brings into the economy after its trade with local business and so on has been factored in. It used a multiplier effect to expand the figure. The 2010 study used a report from the Office for National Statistics to calculate how much money museum visitors spend.
The report took guidance from a Treasury report that recommended a multiplier effect; the figures were not just made up. There is longevity to the research into this factor. The report showed that for every £1 of government grant to museums the benefit to the local economy is quadrupled. It is useful to bear that in mind.
However, the wider social impacts of museums are slightly more difficult to quantify: the pleasure of a museum visit, of knowing that museums are there, the importance for lifelong learning and for social and community groups, community cohesion, and for civic pride. It is more difficult to assign figures to those factors, and that is where research is always of benefit. Those figures must be borne in mind. We need to look at the importance of diversity when taking account of social and economic value. Research into the diversity of what museums can bring to the community and into value for money across government is important.
The final area is seeking good practice. Again, the issue is about nurturing what we have here. For example, we have two Masters degree programmes in museum studies at the University of Ulster, the aim of which is to foster good practice and to maintain contact with the sector. We have worked closely with the Heritage Council in developing museum studies programmes to enhance good practice.
Like universities, museums are places of lifelong learning. We want to nurture in Northern Ireland a love of learning for the benefit that it brings to the economy. Expanding that in whatever way we can is our motivation, and expanding the idea of partnership and collaboration is extremely good value for money when it means people working together.
Professor Ó Dochartaigh: I would simply add to that by stressing, inevitably, the importance of museums in the educational environment for us and for the wider promotion of heritage. Too often there is an impression that unless a subject falls into the sciences — the STEM subjects — it has no economic relevance. The opposite is true in the realm of museums, heritage and culture; there is tremendous benefit.
The university sees its engagement with museums on the two MA courses as part of a wider engagement with heritage, which has included, in recent years, the Institute of Ulster Scots Studies based on the Magee campus and the Academy for Irish Cultural Heritages. As the outside funding for those is coming to an end, they are merging into a centre for Irish and Scottish studies. A validated online MA for Irish and Scottish studies will come online next January.
We collaborate with the Ulster Historical Foundation on a course on tracing your Ulster ancestors, which brought 25 Americans — and their spending power — here in June 2010. That programme is bringing another 40 people, so far, here for a week this June. That is part of a wider engagement in education, higher education and the university, alongside museums and heritage. That engagement is extremely important; there is tremendous potential for Northern Ireland to exploit it in educational, social and economic terms.
Mr Humphrey: I listened carefully to what you said about the value for money that museums provide, not least through education, particularly for our young people. I have two questions. My concern with museums in Northern Ireland, particularly the Ulster Museum, is that many of the artefacts on display can be seen anywhere in the world. People come here to see indigenous and recent cultures, whether Irish Gaelic, Ulster Scots, orange or whatever. More of that needs to be put on display rather than artefacts that can be seen anywhere around the world. Secondly, I know that it is policy across the UK for museums to be free. Given the current economic climate, can that be sustained? If it cannot be and a charge is put on entry to establishments such as the Ulster Museum, what will be the effect?
Dr Crooke: First, I will answer the question about collections and what motivates people to go to museums and what people want to see in a museum. Visitors to Northern Ireland go to more than one museum. National Museums Northern Ireland contains a range of museums, including the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, which has a collection that is very much based on local history, local artefacts and local collections. The Ulster Museum does have a fair bit that is unique to Northern Ireland in its applied art collections and history galleries. Therefore, there is a uniquely Northern Irish story being told by the Ulster Museum.
There are collections that one could say are not local to Northern Ireland, but I have had that conversation with curators in the Ulster Museum on, for example, the applied art collection. They say that having a collection of international relevance and significance is important, because it means that somebody such as me can go and learn about the excellence and high standards in, for example, glass making or ceramics. I may not be looking at a piece of Belleek pottery from County Fermanagh, but, if I am an artist, I could be looking at a piece of pottery that will inspire me to become a global artist of global significance. There is a diversity of collections of local importance and international importance, which is important for museums.
Mr Humphrey: There is an excellent facility at the Ulster American Folk Park in Omagh. However, given that Belfast is the tourism and transportation hub, many people who come to Northern Ireland will travel through Belfast. Many people who are here only for a short time will not get to Omagh. We need to be reaching out to cultural tourists, who make up 50% of tourists and travel the world to investigate genealogical issues and family history and to go back to see the old homestead.
The diaspora in America and Canada is huge, whether they are Irish Catholic or Ulster Presbyterian. I would like to see things on display in museums that tell Americans who come here — they come in huge numbers, not least when the cruise ships dock — that Ulster has provided 17 Presidents, that the Great Seal of the United States was designed by an Ulster Scot and that the Declaration of Independence was printed by an Ulster Scot. That is not being done, but it is hugely important. That may be done in Omagh, but it should also be done elsewhere.
Those are the sorts of things that set us apart and that we can use as an example of the uniqueness that is Northern Ireland and of a story that cannot be told anywhere else.
Professor Ó Dochartaigh: The point about genealogy is a fair one. However, we are running a course with the Ulster Historical Foundation for people who are tracing their genealogy, and it is not just about going to museums but about going to places such as the Public Records Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI) and all sorts of other archives, such as the headquarters of the Presbyterian Church, to trace ancestry. People who are tracing their roots do not expect to find everything in a museum, and we should not be aiming to provide everything in our museums.
The other point is that museums are not just for cultural tourism but are an educational resource for our schoolchildren. The content should not just be about their place in Northern Ireland, Ireland or the UK.
Mr Humphrey: Yes, but schoolchildren will not go to PRONI or to Church House. That is my point. I am aware of the work that the Ulster Historical Foundation is doing; William Roulston designed the Presbyterian Historical Society’s website. The issue is about educating our own people as well.
Professor Ó Dochartaigh: Sure, but educating them about the wider world, not just Northern Ireland. There is a balance to be struck.
The Chairperson: To bring the conversation back to the specific terms of reference of the review, William, I remind you that Omagh is also in this jurisdiction. That is not contrary to anybody’s definition.
Mr K Robinson: Was that a political statement?
The Chairperson: It was, actually. I am happy to stand over it.
Mr Humphrey: I welcome your statement.
The Chairperson: I want to focus on a couple of questions that we need developed for our mission in the review. You referred to the range of work that is being undertaken by museums, which is matched by considerable diversity in the method used to ascertain their value. In view of that, is there a need for agreement among academics, the museum sector and DCAL on the economic and social benefits? How should they be measured? I think, Professor, that you used the word “tremendous". The question for both you and Elizabeth is: how can they be measured? Is that possible? Is there a lack of robust and consistent data and, if so, what steps need to be taken to address those gaps and get up-to-date intelligence across the sector to inform future policy and strategy? Is that hampered by a lack of data?
Dr Crooke: The economic and social value of museums has been measured outside Northern Ireland for other museums, and there are certainly well-established models that could be used here. The reports are quite open about the research methods used. It would be a matter of going through them and finding out what the criteria were, how they were measured, what figures were collected, and how they justified that multiplier effect. There are quite clear models that can be used.
Some of the reports were compiled by academics from the London School of Economics (LSE). They have carried out a range of research, as have other bodies, such as the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA). A lot of work has been done in that area, so there certainly are models out there that can be consulted. It is just a matter of having a group of capable, interested people sitting down with the reports and working out the formulae — to put it crudely — that we could use in Northern Ireland.
Those are the things that are easy enough to quantify. There are things that are more qualitative and difficult to quantify, such as civic pride or how a visit to an exhibition or participation in a workshop can change people’s attitudes to one another or to history. It is more difficult to put a figure on that, but the information has certainly been gathered in comparable projects across the water. There will be some gaps in knowledge. A lot of that research is mostly based in England, so one could say that there are gaps here in Northern Ireland and that we need to sit down and do similar work. It would be a matter of bringing people together to undertake that.
The Chairperson: Is there a will to undertake that exercise? Is there a passion for it?
Dr Crooke: There certainly is; absolutely. We know what the museum sector will come out with: it will come out in support of museums. We certainly hope so. There is absolutely no hesitance to do that sort of work. It is a matter of bringing together the people to do it. Research has some costs.
The Chairperson: Who should take the lead?
Dr Crooke: You could turn to the University of Ulster.
The Chairperson: Well said. You are well trained.
Mr K Robinson: Elizabeth, you mentioned the change of attitudes. I am trying to balance two things. You want to give people the opportunity to see fine art and lift them to a greater level, you want to change attitudes and educate people, and so on. We are a bunch of philistines here. We are looking at an economic situation in which we have to get the maximum return that we possibly can from any investment that we make.
William mentioned the cruise ships. How do we strike a balance between doing all those fine and worthy things that you are suggesting and actually getting some of the American dollars, the pounds and euros into our hands so that we get a return on our investment? There has been a massive investment in museums, both at central level and local government level. How do we get the return? We are sitting as local councillors looking at the cost of all those things, looking at the rates creeping up and looking at an election on the horizon. We are very hard-headed. We want the museum and we want it to do all those things, but how do we get the balance between doing that and what we need the museums sector to do?
Dr Crooke: It is always a difficult argument. When people have that overview of the entire economy and of everywhere that money can be spent, they have to sit down and work out what return they are looking for. That is the macro level of decisions that have to be made. When one comes right down to the micro level of looking at museums and tourism, there are means of trying to assess the value of an American visitor to Belfast — to Northern Ireland — and how much they are drawn by the fact that we have really good museums. Would they have come anyway, even without the museums? Those are all research questions on which work has to be done in order to get definite answers.
Mr K Robinson: Is there evidence to show that other places have deliberately gone out and almost put the package — perhaps not as an easily identifiable package — out into the ether so that, when folk come here, they go to PRONI because they were always going to research the ancestors, but they also know there is a cracking museum up the road. There may even be another one in Omagh, I believe.
The Chairperson: It is very significant.
Dr Crooke: It is a matter of having that joined-up thinking, and different Departments must work together so that the museums, PRONI —
Mr K Robinson: Sorry to interrupt you. Is there any evidence out there already of where other places have done that consciously? For instance, Royal Armouries moved to the north of England. It did so consciously because London was swamped, there was space up there and there were social and economic benefits. Is there any research out there that looks at that?
Dr Crooke: I recommend the Natural History Museum reports. One was published in 2010 and another in 2003. They looked at the economic and social value of the Natural History Museum and tried to work out the value of the museum to the last penny, how much of a draw it is for visitors and how much those visitors spend. Is it possible to justify the number of museums in London, given that there are so many? It is very important for those individual institutions to have that argument fully formed. There is research out there that makes that case.
Mr O’Loan: Thank you for your excellent paper and for the pointers on where we might look for evidence on the matter. Can you tell us a bit about your MA courses to which your paper refers? Why did you see a need for those? How long have they been established? What numbers participate in them? Where are those students heading in career terms?
Dr Crooke: The original museum studies programme was established about 10 years ago with the Academy for Irish Cultural Heritages. When it was formed, one of its roles, as well as the research, was the training programmes. We were very aware that there was no similar programme in museum studies on the island of Ireland. I did a museum studies course when I left university, but I went to England to do it. There was an awareness that we did not have that exact type of museum studies training on the island of Ireland. The programme is there, and it is not just a matter of training people how to hang a painting or how to look after the museum stores. The training prepares people to critique and evaluate the museum as an institution and to study the full meaning and impact of museums and of heritage.
The course has gone from strength to strength, and, as I said, it has been running for 10 years. In the early years, we recruited about eight students, whereas this year we have 20 students. The students on the course are a mixture of recent graduates in their early twenties who have degrees in geography, archaeology, history or fine art. Other students have worked for perhaps five years in another sector and want to go back to their original discipline. They might have studied history but worked in insurance ever since. Some of our other students actually work in the museum sector and want to upskill. They want the opportunity to take some time out from the office and think about what is important about museums and museum visitors. That is the profile of the students on the programme.
Every year, students come up on the train from Dublin to do the course. We have around three students from Dublin and a couple of students from the border counties. Therefore, we have a mixture of Northern Irish and Southern students. When the course finishes, some go back to Dublin, some go across the water and some stay. Some go on to do PhD research, and a good number go into the museum sector. I have great alumni of contacts in museums across Northern Ireland. That is very useful.
The Chairperson: You could work for the marketing team. Richard Barnett should be told about that.
Dr Crooke: Alongside that, we have the distance-learning programme. That developed when the Heritage Council in the South of Ireland introduced its museum standards programme. It advertised in the newspapers asking for a third-level institution to come to it to provide the skills and training to meet the skills necessary for that programme. We, along with other universities in the South of Ireland, pitched up and made a case for it to come to the University of Ulster and let us develop the programme. We got through, so, along with the Heritage Council, we developed the distance-learning programme. We now have around 20 students, with students in England, a student in Germany and a student in America. However, most are Irish-based students, and the Heritage Council pays their fees for the programme.
Mr O’Loan: I am very interested in, and aware of, the social and educational aspects and benefits of museums, but I am more interested in highlighting the economic side in the report, because I think that it is not sufficiently recognised and availed of. Do you agree with that perspective?
Dr Crooke: It depends whom you are asking. Some people are very aware of the economic value of museums and have a full grasp of that, but if you are asking whether the Northern Ireland population at large realise the economic value of museums, some people may not appreciate the full economic value. There is a case for the economic impact of museums to be made more public.
Mr O’Loan: To follow that up, in our departmental system here, the economy sits far away from this Committee. There are a number of Departments with responsibility for economic issues and tourism, particularly the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI). Do you feel that, on the issue of the economic impact of museums, policy and — very importantly — funding strategies are adequately thought through and joined up?
Dr Crooke: There have been a lot of changes in the museum sector recently and a lot of changes in the National Museums Northern Ireland group. It has lost a lot of staff over the years through redundancy. There has certainly been a big drop in the number of staff, and that organisation would argue that it has that issue to deal with. However, as far as I am concerned, for the future, it is a matter of understanding what the budget is. One does not get everything that one wishes for all of the time, so it is a matter of being sensible with what one has got.
Mr O’Loan: I will put the question in a different way. When you are teaching students and researching, I am sure that you look at documentation coming from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. Do you even explore what DETI and the different tourism bodies are saying that might affect museums? Do you find that they are picking it up at all?
Dr Crooke: Some of the sectors are aware of the importance of museums, but it is always a case of having partnerships across the different sectors so that they can come together to make best use of the funds that are available. It is often through joined-up thinking or collaboration that the best value can be achieved for the money that is spent.
Professor Ó Dochartaigh: The wider point to be made is that, often when we talk about economic benefits and so on, there is a narrow focus on the idea that, from a higher-education perspective, the STEM subjects are going to be the economic drivers. Far too often, we miss a trick when it comes to the potential of culture and arts for generating economic revenue, rather than just being something in which people engage as a pastime and on which they spend a little bit of their pocket money. There is a far greater potential there that is not fully exploited. With the STEM agenda — the STEM bluff, as I call it, frankly — we are missing a big trick. I would welcome any moves towards remedying that on the political side.
Lord Browne: Thank you for that very detailed paper. I have to declare an interest, and I will do a bit of self-advertising. I am a trustee of the Somme Heritage Centre at Conlig. If we were to implement all the suggestions that I have heard, I think that we would be very successful. At Conlig, we have the educational value. For schools, we have two or three days, which are totally oversubscribed, from both communities. We also have the heritage element. However, we are obviously in difficulties with the economic climate.
How will you get the museums to address the problems that you identify in your paper? How do we implement the proposals? You can produce papers, but you then have to convince trustees and other people that this is the way in which to improve the structure and standards of our museums.
Dr Crooke: Some of the smaller museums should go down the marketing and tourism route. There can be small museums in local communities that, although much loved and well visited, do not demonstrate a revenue stream. It is a matter of having a close connection with tourism and other institutions, branding, getting known and getting the bus tours in. That is the extra step that museums have to take to up their profile.
Professor Ó Dochartaigh: You mentioned the education days at the Somme Heritage Centre. I have given lectures at Conlig on those sixth-form days for history students. That is a classic example of a museum enhancing its profile through engagement with education. Students can go to the Somme Heritage Centre to hear lectures on topics that may have nothing to do with Northern Ireland or Ulster and not even necessarily much to do with World War I. For example, I gave a lecture on the rise of Nazism, which, although linked to World War I, does not have an obviously immediate connection.
Students can go there and hear those sorts of lectures, but they will also get a tour through the reconstructed trenches, and so on. I have taken the tour myself. They get access to a specific museum resource in Northern Ireland through a partnership with education. I suspect that, otherwise, a lot of those sixth formers would never even see Conlig. The potential for museums to exploit, benefit and enhance their profile through links with education is underdeveloped. However, the Somme Heritage Centre is an example of one that is doing well in that regard.
The Chairperson: How is the value for money of public funding for museums currently measured? How are those measures used to assess success, or otherwise, against the targets set by the Programme for Government? Those are technical questions, but I ask them in the context of our review.
Dr Crooke: I recommend turning to the work of the Northern Ireland Museums Council. It has done research into how it has achieved the aims of the Programme for Government and its value for money. The Museums Council is an example of an institution that has looked very closely at museums across Northern Ireland, whether they be independent museums, private collections, private museums, and so on.
The Chairperson: A representative from the Museums Council is about to join us. If members have no further questions, I will thank Professor Pól Ó Dochartaigh and Dr Elizabeth Crooke from the University of Ulster for helping us.
Our final witness is Chris Bailey from the Northern Ireland Museums Council. Good afternoon, Chris. Thanks for coming. It is over to you to make an opening statement on the value and impact of museums in the context of our review. Perhaps you will also remind us of your remit and title.
Mr Chris Bailey (Northern Ireland Museums Council): Good afternoon. I am the director of the Northern Ireland Museums Council.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to come along and respond to your review. We submitted written evidence, and I presume that that has been circulated to Committee members.
On its inception 17 years ago, the Northern Ireland Museums Council was charged with supporting local museums, as opposed to national museums, and with improving their standards of collections care and their services to the public. To that end, we offer grant assistance, we provide training and we give guidance, advice and information, not only to the sector but to the general public.
We also provide specialist support to government, particularly DCAL, we assist with the acquisition and development of collections, and we undertake research for the support of policy and strategic development. We have done that throughout the tenor of the organisation. We also manage the UK-wide museum accreditation scheme in Northern Ireland. At the moment, 38 local museums are accredited.
I want to make four points. First, the Northern Ireland Museums Council welcomes the intent of the review, because it is an important step in giving further recognition to the contribution of the sector to the betterment of society and the economy in Northern Ireland. My council has done some basic research into the benefits that accrue from that investment, and I have listed the relevant studies in the written evidence.
Of particular note are the estimated contribution to the local economy and the obvious potential across the sector to advance education and learning, which has yet to be fully unlocked. Although museums have obvious financial and learning impacts, they play a part in a much wider range of other benefits. Those benefits include being a fundamental resource for the creative industries; generating civic pride in towns and cities across Northern Ireland; being the home of societal memory; being a place to explore cultural identities and build community relations; assisting with the development of our image abroad; enhancing well-being through, for example, volunteering, reminiscence projects or programmes that foster mutual understanding; and often serving as orientation points for both residents and tourists alike.
That breadth of impacts is matched by a similar diversity in the vocabulary and language of what might be called the impact industry. The range of methodologies used for assessing the economic and social impacts is notable. It seems that there is such a range of understandings, definitions and approaches that measuring impact is becoming both nuanced and complex. Certainly, from our experience, there is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to measuring such impacts.
My penultimate point is that, although economic and social benefits flow invariably and inevitably from what museums do, such benefits depend on the capacity of museums to undertake their principal raison d’être; namely, to collect, preserve, display and interpret their collections for the edification, inspiration and enjoyment of the public. I suggest that the economic and social benefits that we all aspire to are proportionate to the levels of investment that is made in those primary functions. It is difficult to provide, obviously, stimulating learning experiences, for example, with a narrow collection that is not well cared for or exhibited properly.
Finally, I want to stress to the Committee that we need to be cognisant of the inherent value of cultural impacts alongside that of social and economic impacts. Together, they create a virtuous triangle. Without the first, we are left with a two-legged stool.
The Chairperson: Paragraph 5.4 of your submission refers to direct conflicts between economic and social impacts. Can they be reconciled or should they be measured separately?
Mr Bailey: On occasion, if you are seeking to gain economic benefits and wish to enhance the money that museums can bring in through, for example, entry charges, that can be in juxtaposition to any social dynamic that you wanted to develop, for example, creating greater access. The two are not necessarily always in opposition, and a balance point must be found depending on the scale of the museum and the community that it works with.
Lord Browne: You said that it was difficult to measure the success of museums’ social and economic impact. However, your submission states that there is a preference for the use of the multiplier analysis methodologies across the museums sector. Why would you recommend that and do you think that its indications are important?
Mr Bailey: The Northern Ireland Museums Council is involved in a partnership with its counterparts in Scotland, Wales and England, and, at the moment, we are embroiled in an analysis of the economic impacts and trying to create a toolkit so that museums can do such work for themselves. There are four basic economic impact methodologies, and our research to date suggests that the multiplier analysis, which captures the location and scale of expenditure associated with procurement, employment and visitor-related experience, gives a much clearer picture for museums. For libraries you might do a contingent valuation of return on investment.
Mr McCarthy: Northern Ireland has taken part in the measurement of the value of museums. Are we developing our own strategies, and is there good practice elsewhere on these islands that we could use? What lessons can be learnt from examples of good practice elsewhere to improve the social and economic impact of museums in Northern Ireland?
Mr Bailey: There are very good examples of where museums have embarked on and attempted to measure their impact across the wonderfully diverse area of social impacts, including economic impacts. Elsewhere, and I have listed a few of the studies in my submission, the important element is that there have been studies that have tried to look at the veracity and strength of the process by which those impacts are measured. We are involved in some of those studies; I mentioned the ALMA-UK study. The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council has developed the inspiring learning for all standard, which is a good method by which the qualitative aspects of the learning offer can be quantified and thus be given greater substance in terms of what has been seen to be the hard social impact.
Mr O’Loan: Thank you for your submission. I take as a given the huge social and educational contribution that museums make. My interest is in the economic contribution, which has not been analysed adequately or focused on. Has there been much measurement of the economic benefit of Northern Ireland’s local and niche museums? Given their size and niche market, would there be an issue of capacity surrounding such measurements?
Mr Bailey: I will make three points in answering your question. First; yes, we have done work. Our earliest work dates from about 2003, when, through partnership with the Heritage Lottery fund, we commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers to do an analysis of the economic impact of museums in Northern Ireland. That found that there was a slight impact but nothing substantial. Again, that used the multiplier analysis.
The large return comes through the unlocking of tourism spend. Using the same methodologies as PricewaterhouseCoopers, we have marked that on occasion down through the years. I will give you three snippets of information showing the overlap between museums and the economic impact of tourism.
In 2003, the Northern Ireland Tourist Board — this is based on its figures — estimated that about 9% of visitors to Northern Ireland’s museums were from out of state and that they spent about £24·2 million. By 2005, 28% of out-of-state visitors went to a museum during their time in Northern Ireland, and museums assisted in unlocking their spend of £37·8 million. By 2009, the figure had remained virtually the same — about 28% of out-of-state visitors went to a museum — but their spend had risen to £48·7 million. That gives you an indication of the significant part that museums play in the tourism offer to out-of-state visitors in particular.
Mr O’Loan: That leads me nicely to my next question. You referred to museums’ contribution to tourism. When the museum sector looks at government here, it obviously has a strong link to DCAL’s policy and funding streams. Do you engage in the same way with DETI? Is DETI alert to museums’ contribution to tourism and to furthering DETI’s objectives?
Mr Bailey: I must admit that our association or linkage with DETI is not there. Our tendency is to let the Departments work one to one; our linkage is more directly with the Northern Ireland Tourist Board and with the development units in local councils.
Mr O’Loan: What is the quality of your engagement with the Tourist Board?
Mr Bailey: It recently employed a person whose job is to assess and develop the cultural product across Northern Ireland, and we try to ensure, through our liaison with the Tourist Board, that it is aware of what museums are up to.
Mr O’Loan: You refer to museums as a resource for the creative industries. Can you amplify on that point? What exactly does that mean and what value comes from it?
Mr Bailey: I cannot give you a financial value, but I will make a general and a particular point about creative industries. The general point is that when people engaged in fine and applied arts look for inspiration, influence or answers, they normally find it in the work of artists and craftsmen of the past. They come across such work directly in museums. The particular point is about fashion and textiles students from the University of Ulster using and having first-hand experience of the costumes in the Springhill collection.
The Chairperson: The University of Ulster said that the following questions might be more appropriately asked of you, Chris. Can I have a big drum roll, please?
Mr Bailey: I will try my best to answer them.
The Chairperson: How is the value for money of public funding for museums measured? How are those measures used to assess the success or otherwise of the targets set by the Programme for Government?
Mr Bailey: I see what you mean: they are big questions. We undertake specific pieces of research, including a quinquennial review of the sector, so we are starting to build quite an intelligence base to inform the likes of the nascent museums policy. It also informs our strategy and, I hope, DCAL’s work. Our work cascades back into the Programme for Government, in that we respond at ground level to the emphases of the Department’s strategic plan. Our difficulty is that there are serious weaknesses: we could make a more robust case if we had the capacity to do so. That is down to, on the one hand, resources and, on the other, to how we collect data and the sort of data that we collect. Emerging from our analysis of the learning in, and the marketing of, local museums is the need for greater standardisation in the type of information and data that are captured. At the moment, we have a fragmentary approach. It is nobody’s fault. However, we need to rectify it so that we can demonstrate, economically and socially, how museums support the Programme for Government.
The Chairperson: How has the economic value of museums changed in the past five years, and is it likely to change in the spending review period up to 2015? Who should take the lead?
Mr Bailey: In answer to the first part of your question, in 2003, as a result of our work with PricewaterhouseCoopers, we estimated the museums sector’s value at about £17·2 million. At that point, there were about 540 full-time equivalent jobs in the sector. When we looked at the figures three or four years later, we did not find a great deal of change. In our last quinquennial review of staffing and employment trends in the sector we saw a reduction in the number of full-time posts. We estimate that there has probably been no expansion in the amount of revenue funding available to or going into the sector. However, capital has been set aside. In the past decade, we have seen immense investment in the capital infrastructure of museums. I would like to think that the Northern Ireland Museums Council’s work contributed to that. We are focused on gathering robust, sound intelligence on the sector, and we would like to continue doing so.
The Chairperson: We will leave it at that for now. As ever, Chris, thank you very much for your contribution. You have been a friend to the Committee.
Mr Bailey: It has been my pleasure. Thank you very much.
Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Barry McElduff (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Thomas Burns
Mr David Hilditch
Mr William Humphrey
Mr Kieran McCarthy
Mr David McClarty
Mr Ken Robinson
Mr Pat Sheehan
Witnesses:
Mr Gareth Maeer |
Heritage Lottery Fund |
|
Mr Paul Mullan |
Heritage Lottery Fund Northern Ireland |
1. The Chairperson (Mr McElduff): I invite the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) officials to come to the table. I advise members that one of the witnesses has flown in from London this morning. We are grateful that Gareth Maeer made such an effort at short notice. We appreciate it.
2. Mr Gareth Maeer (Heritage Lottery Fund): I am pleased to be here; it is better than being stacked over the Isle of Man.
3. The Chairperson: I know. The Committee looks forward to a good thorough engagement. Paul Mullan, the head of the Heritage Lottery Fund here, will make an introductory statement.
4. Mr Paul Mullan (Heritage Lottery Fund Northern Ireland): I am head of the Heritage Lottery Fund in Northern Ireland. Gareth is our research manager from London. I will make some introductory comments and then Gareth will talk, probably in a little more detail, about some of the harder, factual aspects of research in this area.
5. The Heritage Lottery Fund has invested nearly £30 million in museums in Northern Ireland through the regional network and National Museums Northern Ireland. We believe that museums are fundamental to any society’s understanding of itself, its past and its future. Therefore, there is a strong intrinsic value to museums that, we feel, is fundamentally important. Museums help us to understand the past and to know ourselves, and they can help citizens’ quality of life tremendously for the reasons that I mentioned as well as encouraging self-esteem. Those are, I suppose, subjective elements. It is good that a lot more research is going on across the water and some is happening here. Gareth will talk about the harder edged research and the economic and social value elements in more detail.
6. Mr Maeer: I am head of research at HLF. I have been there since 2004. Before that, I was in a similar role at British Waterways. So I have about 10 years’ experience of seeing how this has developed in the cultural sector, at least in England. I will say a little bit about how that now looks, looking back as it were.
7. The cultural sector, including museums, did well out of the Westminster spending reviews in the 2000s under new Labour. But with that came more of an emphasis on showing the impact and on evidence gathering. I do not think that I am giving away any secrets by saying that the way this was done was not entirely logical. The money came first, and then there was a recognition that, if there was going to be money, there needed to be targets to go with it, and then, having set some targets, the Government needed some way of collecting data to show whether those targets had been met. They got there in the end, although not necessarily in the right order.
8. What came out of that was the big Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) ‘Taking Part’ survey. It was a household survey. People in the sample could be phoned up at any time and asked how much they participated in defined cultural activities, including museums, doing — rather than watching — sport, arts and heritage. That gave a breakdown — geographically and by type — of participants. In parallel with that, although it was never part of any targets, more effort was put in on behalf of museums and other organisations in the cultural sector to try to get to grips with and say something about the social and economic impacts of their activities. There has been progress, and I will come back to that in a moment.
9. But before that, by way of laying down a marker, I will say that, the use of targets was never entirely willingly accepted by the sector, because it was always recognised that the sort of impacts Paul described were never going to be fully captured. There were things to do with cultural value that were never going to be picked up, however well we may be able to do economic and social benefit assessment. In the end, the sector felt that public policy should be to support the culture that people value. That was the justification for it.
10. Where are we? Interesting work has been done by individual organisations, such as HLF, and by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. The DCMS culture and sport evidence (CASE) programme was referred to earlier. First, we now know how to measure the economic impact of heritage-based tourism leisure. We know how to measure the overall scale of economic activity that is based on heritage and museums in a geographic area. A lot of studies of that kind have been done. A year or so ago, we carried out a big study that covered the whole of the UK. Separate studies have been done in Scotland and in Wales, and one is planned for Northern Ireland.
11. But the tourism aspect is only one of the economic arguments for public investment in museums and in culture. Paul talked about the quality-of-life argument that exists. The evidence on that is harder to gather. It is being tested to death, really, because there are questions about whether those places that have had big cultural investments will do well as we come out of recession.
12. The other interesting aspect of research on economic impact is the idea of the role of museums and cultural institutions as part of the supply chain for those sectors and parts of the economy that we want to grow and are likely to grow in the future. So that includes the idea that some cultural organisations supply the raw material for creative cultural industries, and even the idea that some sectors and companies that are involved in scientific innovation rely on the collections management that lots of people in the museums sector do so well. I know that that is an idea that has interested the Arts Council in the Republic of Ireland.
13. The economic research has tended to be done first, but the social research has made a lot of progress in catching up recently. There is a lot more standardisation in the way that data is collected on visits and visitors’ activities in the running of museums. Measurement of the impacts or benefits of learning is also widely accepted in the museum sector now, and it uses what are called learning outcomes. Those are a way of being able to recognise how the activities that are run in museums affect and develop individuals.
14. There is also work that has been referred to — derogatorily at times — as happiness studies. It involves research on well-being, and the work that DCMS has done on that is interesting. At HLF, we have done work that is, in a way, more interesting in that it has involved original fieldwork, and we have had some promising results. That is interesting and important because it has been more difficult for the cultural and museum sectors to make links between their work and well-being or health in quite the same way that the sports sector has been able to do in the past. There is probably more work to be done on that, and that will continue. The DCMS is putting its argument in government and to the Treasury in those terms, rather than in terms of the economic impact.
15. It is harder to measure the wider community impact, but we are beginning to get more case-study evidence on that. From our research, we think that inter-generational work comes through strongly from Heritage Lottery Fund projects, and that is an area of heritage work that is particularly strong. Research on cross-community impacts is, inevitably, based on case studies at this stage as well. There will be a lot more of that to get one’s teeth into and to work up into case studies.
16. To sum up: on social impact, well-being will continue to be the focus of concentration for the Department in England. The other thing that will not go away is the ‘Taking Part’ participation survey, and you might want to think about whether that is something to join.
17. The Chairperson: OK. Thank you. Would a universal model of measurement be beneficial in relation to the social and economic value of museums? Evidence so far tells us that there is great diversity in the methods used to ascertain that value. Is there a need for agreement on that among academics, the museum sector and Departments?
18. Mr Maeer: That depends on what you mean. If you mean a universal model or coming up with a single methodology for saying what the value of museums is, I do not think so. However, there has been progress on and more agreement around methodologies for the different types of benefits that museums deliver. For example, widespread agreement has been reached among economists about how to work out the economic impacts of the tourism and visitor economy. There are a lot of studies on that, so there is a way of reality checking any new results. There is a need to get some sort of agreement on the methodologies used and the ways of measuring different social and economic benefits. That has certainly been done on the economic side. Measuring the learning benefits of projects and activities, which I talked about, is coming along as well, and there is a lot more agreement among researchers about recognising that type of thing. So, progress is being made on that.
19. The Chairperson: How has the economic value of museums changed in the past five years?
20. Mr Maeer: Are you asking whether they are having the same economic impact as was the case five years ago? I do not know.
21. Mr Mullan: I can comment on that. There is a better appreciation of the broader economic benefits that museums can bring. We have genuinely seen connections being built. No doubt the representatives from National Museums will be able to talk about the connections with tourism, the Tourist Board and bodies in the broader sense. I think that awareness has been developed, and things are moving along in a more linked up way than in the past.
22. Mr Maeer: I agree with that. There is recognition of the profile of museum and heritage-based tourism that did not exist five years ago, even among some of those responsible for making economic development money available. Tourism was not always seen as the most effective way of using that money. However, in the past couple of years, the tourism sector has become more confident, partly because of the research work that has shown that some of the economic contributions and associated impacts are greater than was widely recognised. The HLF work that I referred to was important, and that has been used a lot.
23. Mr McClarty: Thank you to Paul and Gareth for their presentation and to Gareth for his efforts to get here this morning. Welcome to the mainland.
24. The Chairperson: Did you come from Tory Island? [Laughter.]
25. Mr McClarty: Do you believe that there is sufficient acknowledgement of the value and impact of museums? If not, how could it be improved?
26. Mr Mullan: In the Northern Ireland sense, I think not. We can do so much more to recognise the true value of the role that museums can play in society. A lot of that will come from people, such as the members here, recognising and championing that value. Again, it is a bit like the connection between museums and tourism that has only really been built up over the past number of years. We are starting to move in the right direction because the benefits of cultural institutions can be more clearly seen. However, that has to be backed up by investment and economic support. The fact that opportunities such as tourism are being developed will hopefully be acknowledged by those people who argue that there has to be an obvious economic benefit to investing in something. Hopefully, more will be done even on that narrowest argument.
27. Mr Humphrey: Thank you both very much for the presentation. I welcome the thrust of protecting heritage. As we have lost so much of our built heritage in Northern Ireland, and given the rich tapestry that is our industrial heritage, investment in that area is vital, and I welcome it.
28. Earlier, we were discussing a potential project in the local Jewish community that aims to establish a museum and interpretive centre in Belfast. What is your organisation’s policy as regards organisations that have a religious ethos or church-based projects?
29. Mr Mullan: We can fund any organisation that comes to us with a good and sensible proposition. We do not exclude. There are certain religious groups that will not come to the Heritage Lottery Fund because they do not like the lottery. But, in very broad terms, we can fund any religious-type project, providing it is outward-looking and not inward-looking. One of the key tests to success in applications to us is that there are broader benefits to be achieved from an investment. If a community was looking at something simply for itself, that would probably not be enough. We would challenge them to tell their story on a wider basis, and if they can do that, they are certainly fundable.
30. Mr McCarthy: Can you give the Committee any case study example where a positive social impact has been made as a result of Heritage Lottery funding to museums in Northern Ireland?
31. Mr Mullan: It depends what you mean by museums. One of the most positive heritage projects that I can think of is the Diamond war memorial in Derry. Prior to investment in that project with the local community, it had been seen as highly contested space. From a republican and nationalist perspective, it had been seen as something that had nothing to do with them. However, the research project that local community people engaged in, working with the museum bodies, identified that 47% of those commemorated on the war memorial were actually from a Catholic/nationalist tradition. The project allowed the nationalists in that area to recognise that they had a role to play in a much bigger story. There was a nationalist role in the Great War, in particular.
32. Since the investment in that project and the carrying out of that work, there have been no attacks on the war memorial. It has been opened up. On Remembrance Sunday, we have seen representatives from both communities going to the commemoration there. In fact, we have seen the Union Jack and the tricolour both being walked into the event on that day. Heritage, in its broadest sense, can achieve an awful lot through a better factual understanding of the past. That is where the role of the national and regional museums is so fundamental.
33. We have the decade of anniversaries coming up. We have the Ulster Covenant of 1912 and a whole range of different anniversaries that are incredibly controversial. A more objective understanding of our past will tell us stories that may challenge. For example, the fact that King Billy’s win at the Battle of the Boyne was celebrated by the Pope in Rome is something that can confound us.
34. The Chairperson: It did not go down well in Carrickmore. [Laughter.]
35. Mr Mullan: Back in 1989, at the time of the 300th anniversary, National Museums ran an exhibition called ‘Kings in Conflict’, which put that story in a European context. The more we draw out the true facts and the things that did happen, the more we can throw away the myths and legends that do not help us to create a shared society in Northern Ireland today.
36. Mr McCarthy: That is a very good answer to my question. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
37. Mr O’Loan: Thank you for your presentation. Even if you were not talking about this issue, it is very good to have you here talking about what you do. It might seem embarrassing and almost rude to say it, but those of us who look at the various lottery funds, including the Heritage Lottery Fund, tend to think of them just as dispersers of cash, and we do not give much thought to the fact that they think about what they do. They have a research base and a policy analysis, and it is good to get that insight.
38. Can you say anything about comparability of regions as you look around England, Scotland, Wales and us? Do you see profound differences? We are a small, cohesive region with 1·75 million people, which is quite different from England and very different from London, as I remarked at an earlier session. In scale and size, we are also different from Scotland and even Wales. Does that lead to a different approach to how you fund here?
39. Mr Mullan: No, it does not. Our approach is that we will fund the heritage that matters to people. Therefore, it will differ in Scotland, Wales and different parts of England. What matters to people in Northern Ireland will be the applications that come to us and how they are prepared to look at that. Our mechanisms give us the freedom to flex towards particular local needs and interests. For example, many of my colleagues in England are gearing up for the 100th anniversary of the start of the First World War. We are working on a small project with the Community Relations Council to look at how to deal with the various anniversaries that we have in Northern Ireland. The hope is that, out of that, a set of principles will be developed that will enable us to fund projects that are fundable as such, and we will be having a conference on 21 March to that end.
40. Mr O’Loan: Do you put in funding primarily on the capital side, or what do you actually do here?
41. Mr Mullan: It is very broad. It can be capital. We have invested about £140 million in Northern Ireland over the past 16 years. However, it is not all capital. The Diamond war memorial project that I referred to was simply to give people the time and resources to do research into a particular project. It really depends on what is needed and whether the project that has been suggested can meet our criteria. I do not know the exact figures, but the capital overall has probably been more than 50% or 60%, but there is still a substantial sum that does not relate to capital. We are investing in the building up of museum skills through a £1 million bursary that National Museums Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Museums Council have been drawing down on. We are funding a number of apprenticeships through that.
42. Mr Maeer: Even in a capital project, you have to do activity as well.
43. Mr Mullan: That is a very good point.
44. Mr Maeer: Even if it is a capital project, it has activities going with it, which is different from when we started.
45. Mr Mullan: Any project that meets our criteria has to answer a conservation need, a learning need and a participation need. The participation bit is creating broader audiences and drawing them in to the project that has been funded.
46. Mr O’Loan: Finally, how do you read the quality of relationships with the various partners involved with you in Northern Ireland?
47. Mr Mullan: It is great that we have institutions such as the Northern Ireland Museums Council and that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) is working with them. I think that there should be a closer relationship between National Museums and the Northern Ireland Museums Council. It is good to see that, for example, the training skills project that I mentioned is a joint project. However, there needs to be a strategic view and a vision for museums in Northern Ireland that goes beyond existing museums policy. It needs to ask, “What are the stories that we want to tell?" and then to tell those stories in a mixture of national and regional museums. There is a lot more joined-up working that can be done, and there is certainly a willingness among them all to do that.
48. Mr O’Loan: I suggest that the Department should have a significant role in that strategic lead.
49. Mr Mullan: We view the museums policy that was developed as being quite limited. It could have provided a much more overarching vision.
50. Mr O’Loan: Is that the one that is currently out for consultation and about to be finalised?
51. Mr Mullan: That is right. That is what we have fed back.
52. Mr K Robinson: Thank you, Chairperson, for confirming that Carrickmore was never at the centre of European affairs. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for coming along this morning, particularly Gareth for making the effort of coming from London. Lest you think that we know nothing about museums here: I am disappointed that my colleague beside me missed the opportunity to mention the boy from Killyleagh, who you would know as Sir Hans Sloane. The British Museum was started with his first collection. So, we have a long-standing interest in museums in this part of the country.
53. I note from the briefing that you reckon that every £1 million that you invest can lead to an increase in tourism revenue of about £4·2 million. That is quite a significant figure. Most people go from £1 invested to about £1·50, but you are going from £1 to £4. If that is the sort of return that you think you can generate, particularly in areas that need regeneration, I have a suggestion for you. In Belfast, we have one of the oldest warships afloat, HMS Caroline, survivor of the Battle of Britain. I believe that she is the second oldest commissioned warship in the world and the oldest floating commissioned warship in the Royal Navy — I believe that HMS Victory is grounded at Portsmouth at the moment. We tend to think in terms of buildings and the sort of projects that Paul has outlined. Is there an opportunity to think outside the box and to look at maritime and aviation projects as well?
54. Mr Mullan: We funded the Canberra being brought across and developed at the Ulster Aviation Society’s museum complex. Whatever the future holds for HMS Caroline, I have no doubt that HLF money will be involved at some stage, whether at Portsmouth or Belfast.
55. Mr K Robinson: Of course, you could save the transport costs, could you not?
56. Mr Mullan: It is totally up to somebody taking the responsibility and putting together a project. That has yet to emerge.
57. Mr K Robinson: Do you stand over the return on investment of £1 to £4?
58. Mr Maeer: We put those together with maritime, industrial and transport heritage. That is a big part of our funding. Probably 15% of what we have done in money terms since we were set up has gone into that type of heritage. We have funded lots of those sorts of projects in the past.
59. In asking about the £1 to £4, are you asking how we do that?
60. Mr K Robinson: I am asking whether you stand over that sort of return. It seems to be a very positive return.
61. Mr Maeer: It is. That figure comes from our research. When I started at HLF, I set up a research strategy around the programmes that we fund. We need feedback on where our money has gone and the difference that it has made. It is very business-focussed research in that regard. We started that in 2004-05. There are lots of different aspects to it, but one is some economic impact studies. We did those for five or six years running, and we put in a new sample each year. Something different about the way in which we have gone about doing research is that we use a random sample. Therefore, if we get good results, we can be very confident about them.
62. We have built up about 90 projects for which we have done economic impact assessments. We are not necessarily looking at the £30,000 grants; the completed projects that we look at start from £250,000 to £500,000 and above that. There are standard ways of doing such research, and it is widely accepted. We look at the funding we put into those projects and at the additional money that is brought into a local area as a result of that capital injection — money that has resulted in an attraction that was not there before or an attraction being in a much better condition. Expecting that to continue for some years, we take a 10-year time horizon. That is where the figure of £1 to £4 comes from.
63. Mr K Robinson: I am sure that Paul was in the room when we discussed some of the further questions that arose out of previous presentations, but I am not sure whether Gareth was. You are probably aware that the Committee is not thinking in silos; we are trying to think beyond our brief for culture, arts and leisure into the potential for generating money through tourism and other aspects. Critical mass was mentioned earlier. We have looked at the arts, and we have invested quite a bit into arts per se. You are investing in the heritage side of things. Do you have any suggestions for how we might look perhaps more energetically at bringing together those two aspects to create that critical mass here in Northern Ireland?
64. Mr Mullan: That can be done in a number of ways. It is about everybody in Northern Ireland, Ireland and the UK having a better understanding of what those places are and valuing them. It is about encouraging and, as National Museums does, giving many good reasons for people to visit and to come back. It is about creating programmes that are refreshed and captivating. It will take an awful lot of work, but it is certainly about not seeing our museums as dry and dusty places.
65. Wearing another hat, I am one of the trustees of the old museum building in Belfast, which was, in effect, the first museum in Northern Ireland. By the late nineteenth century, it was so boring that nobody went into it. However, the Ulster Museum, which is so fresh and dynamic, came out of that. Its visitor numbers are phenomenal — over 660,000 in the first year. It is about investment, but it is also about making things interesting for people.
66. The Chairperson: I thank Paul Mullan and Gareth Maeer for coming along today. Gareth, you mentioned a booklet. We will obviously want a copy of that.
67. Mr Maeer: I have two copies here, which I will leave.
68. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation. Good luck with your onward travels.
Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Barry McElduff (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Burns
Lord Browne
Mr David Hilditch
Mr William Humphrey
Mr Kieran McCarthy
Mr David McClarty
Mr Ken Robinson
Mr Pat Sheehan
Witnesses:
Mr Alastair Hughes |
Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure |
69. The Chairperson (Mr McElduff): I invite Alastair Hughes, head of museums and libraries in the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) to introduce his team and make an opening statement, after which we will ask questions. Alastair, David and Patrick, you are welcome, and thank you for coming.
70. Mr Alastair Hughes (Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure): Thank you for your invitation to brief the Committee. I am head of museums and libraries branch. David Polley, from my branch, is one of the team working on the museums policy. Patrick Neeson is the departmental economist and is head of the economics branch.
71. We have already submitted a written briefing on the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland, which covers, at the Committee’s request, an update on the current research into the social and economic value of museums and an examination of the relationship between the value of museums and the museums policy. The Department is very aware of the important and valuable contribution that museums make in Northern Ireland economically, socially and culturally. Even at a basic level, the sector employs hundreds of people, provides major tourist attractions and is a vital support to formal and informal education.
72. I will put into context the background of what DCAL does in the sector. There are 42 accredited museums in Northern Ireland. DCAL has a limited and quite specific role in the sector. It provides funding and undertakes policy and advocacy for the sector in central government. Funding is primarily statutory rather than discretionary. DCAL is the main funder of the work of National Museums Northern Ireland (NMNI), and the Committee will hear from our colleagues soon. The Committee will be aware that NMNI runs four museums, which are at Cultra, Omagh, Armagh and Stranmillis. The Department also supports the Armagh Observatory and Planetarium and W5. Obviously, those sites have a particular value in supporting the science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) subjects that are taught in schools.
73. In addition to the four NMNI museums, there are 38 other museums in Northern Ireland, including council-run local museums, National Trust properties, independent museums and regimental museums. Although DCAL provides some direct financial support for other smaller organisations such as the Somme Heritage Centre and the Centre for Migration Studies, the main interface with the wider sector is through the Northern Ireland Museums Council (NIMC). DCAL provides funding to the NIMC, which provides support services in local museums and grants to registered museums.
74. In our written submission, we sketched out the value and impact that the museums sector has in Northern Ireland. Without prioritising, I will outline those briefly. First, museums are vital for tourism. They are a key driver of the Northern Ireland economy; 10% of all visitors to Northern Ireland visit a museum, and 28% of museum visitors are from out of state. Northern Ireland museums welcome in excess of 1·5 million visitors each year; and nearly 1,000 people work across the sector. Those are impressive figures. NMNI runs four of the top 10 visitor attractions in Northern Ireland.
75. Secondly, the sector makes a contribution to education and lifelong learning. Museums enhance delivery of the curriculum by providing inspirational learning experiences. Last year, for example, NMNI alone had over 100,000 people in educational programmes. Thirdly, museums are part of the overall process of helping position Northern Ireland as a forward-looking and progressive place to which people will want to visit and live and as a place for investment with a rich past and a positive future. One businessman is claimed to have said that his company came because of the incentives and stayed because of the people.
76. Fourthly, museums promote and enable creativity. Their artefacts, collections and programmes help develop new creative content, services and experiences. Of course, prosperous economies are characterised by a strong creative sector, and, across the globe, creative industries are recognised for their potential for high growth and wealth creation. Last, but not least, good museums make an important contribution to a shared and better future for all, based on equality, diversity, interdependence and mutual respect. Our museums reflect and promote understanding of the history, culture and people here. They can be catalysts for bringing communities together to explore the complexities of history and culture. Museums make an impact on a number of priority areas for government.
77. We will now review briefly how we have taken forward work to spread awareness of the impact of our museums: first, it is through planned work to create a research and evidence base; secondly, it is through our work on the museums policy, and, thirdly, it is through high-level departmental targets, particularly public service agreements, which are given the highest level of Executive priority. My colleague Patrick will provide an update on current research into the social and economic value of museums.
78. Mr Patrick Neeson (Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure): The Department’s role is to gather evidence on some of the impacts that have just been talked about. The research falls into two main types: first, the gathering and analysis of statistical evidence on the number of people who visit museums and their characteristics; and, secondly, the gathering of research evidence from our own sources and others on the impact of museums.
79. DCAL has commissioned a series of modules in the continuous household survey and the young persons behaviour and attitudes survey on museums in Northern Ireland. That information is collected and published as a series of research bulletins. The data collected focuses on the types of people who attend museums. Some follow-up questions are asked about satisfaction with visits and what would make a person more likely to visit a museum.
80. As the Committee is aware, a report, which was known as VALCAL, was commissioned by the Department in 2007 on the social and economic value of libraries, museums, and so on. That report was useful in bringing together much of the research evidence at the time, and it highlighted some of the possible impacts. The Department is aware of other research carried out elsewhere. For example, the libraries, museums and archives sector across the UK is conducting research into the economic impact of the three sectors. The museums sector in Northern Ireland in represented by the NIMC. That research aims to answer three key questions: first, what economic evidence should be collected; secondly, how should economic data be collected; and thirdly; how should the data be used to prove the economic impact of any organisation?
81. The Department has also engaged with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) on the research that it has undertaken. The DCMS is taking forward research known as the culture and sport evidence (CASE) programme, which looks at the drivers, impact and values of engagement in culture, arts and sports. The programme incorporates a significant degree of research activity. One output from CASE is a database that brings together all of the available research in the field from around the world. That provides a wealth of evidence that the Department can draw on to help informed decision making.
82. One brief point that the Committee should note is that we should be cautious of some of the economic benefits that are often quoted in studies, and I am talking not only about research in this sector. For several reasons, studies that attempt to estimate the economic benefit to a region from a particular sector or from particular investment can sometimes overstate the true scale of that benefit.
83. DCAL is taking forward its own economic and social research programme. It began by carrying out a review to identify gaps in available data to assess areas where further analysis or research could be carried out. On museums, the review found that there were gaps in relation to the economy, health and education but that data was available on social inclusion. The Department plans to carry out work to look at the impact that structured education programmes provided by culture and sport providers have on those who take part, while the research on museums will look at gender differences and engagement with the sector.
84. To measure the wider economic benefit, the programme will explore a number of different approaches to attempting to capture the value of participation. Those include the continued valuation approaches that the researcher mentioned earlier, and another approach known as subjective well-being analysis. It will also look at the impact of factors such as household income in participation. I am happy to provide the Committee with more detail on that. I will now hand over to David Polley, who will outline how that work has impacted on the development of policy.
85. Mr David Polley (Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure): I will take the Committee through how the value and impact of museums is being incorporated into the museums policy. At one level, the policy works as an advocacy document to set out the value of the museums sector, but the real point of the policy is to increase the impact and value of our museums to society here. For instance, the draft policy states that we must ensure that museums are recognised as valuable contributors to tourism and economic development. Specifically, in the section on developing audiences, there is more exploration of the economic value of museums to tourism. A priority area, education and learning, seeks to strengthen the reputation and capacity of our museums to support the formal and informal education sectors.
86. The Minister plans to present the final version of the policy to the Committee next week, and that will take into account the responses to the consultation process, the discussion with the Committee of two weeks ago and the initial work of this review. I cannot steal the Minister’s thunder, but one issue to emerge was that the final document should contain a more explicit description of the value that the museums sector provides.
87. I will now address a specific issue. In November, the Assembly’s Research and Library Service briefing note suggested that a more systematic and continuous evaluation of the impact of the museums sector should be carried out. More comprehensive and robust statistical information will always be useful in demonstrating the value achieved from public expenditure. There is a particular issue about demonstrating the value of the local museums sector, due to a lack of robust data, and the NIMC might have raised that with the Committee. That area of museums policy proposes a target, which is to gather up-to-date intelligence on the sector in support of policy implementation and strategy development, with the intention of including gathering data from the entire museums sector to help to demonstrate the impact and value. That information can inform the museums policy work as we move forward into the operational phase and as more detailed strategic work is taken on. It will also allow government to measure the impact of the interventions that have been made.
88. The final area to highlight is how the Department’s public service agreements help to emphasise the value of museums at the highest level in government in Northern Ireland. There are currently three public service agreements that are relevant to museums. The first is to increase the total number of national museums visitors, the second is to increase the proportion of national museums collections that are accessible via the Internet and the third is on the number of organised educational visits to national museums. The PSA target on visitor numbers demonstrates, in part, the economic value of national museums, which provide four of Northern Ireland’s top 10 visitor attractions. The target on providing educational visits demonstrates the social value of museums in supporting the formal education sector.
89. As the Committee might know, we are currently coming up with new targets for the next Budget phase. Those are under development, and we are not sure yet whether the Executive will use detailed PSAs as they have done before. DCAL is considering two possible targets for the museums sector. The first might be around increasing the number of out-of-state visitors to museums. That would be in addition to a more general attendance target, and attention would be focused on the economic benefits of the museums sector to the cultural tourism product. That will require co-ordination with the tourism bodies, the Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) and Tourism Ireland. A second target might be to have a certain number of organised learning visits and experiences at our museums. Again, that would reinforce the goal in the draft museums policy that every child in Northern Ireland should have the opportunity to visit a museum as part of a curriculum-based activity. I hand back to Alastair to conclude.
90. Mr Hughes: I hope that the Committee finds our presentation and written submission useful in taking forward its review on the impact and value of museums. We look forward to seeing the final report and to going through it in detail. One main area in which we can take forward any recommended work is during the follow-up to the museums policy.
91. Mr O’Loan: Thank you for your written presentation, which was very good, and for your oral submission just now. Overall, I am impressed by your handle on the issue, and there is a significant degree of common mind on these things. I am particularly interested in the economic significance of museums, and it is on that issue that I will question you. You state that 10% of visitors here go to a museum and that 28% of museums visitors are out-of-state visitors. As you said, those are very impressive figures, and they show the importance of the museums sector to the economy.
92. You talked about the relationship with tourism, and I will ask about that. When we start thinking about economics and tourism, we think of the potential role of other Departments, including DETI, and other bodies related to tourism such as the NITB and Tourism Ireland. Should we be thinking about any other Departments, and how good is the joined-up approach between DCAL and other relevant Departments and bodies?
93. Mr Hughes: My feeling is that NMNI has developed strong links with many of those other organisations and is constantly looking towards ventures, partnerships and arrangements with them. In a sense, we seek to share some of their expertise in this area. At departmental level, there are good connections with other Departments; so, in a sense, this is about a teamwork approach to relationship building and not purely a relationship with a Department or an arm’s-length body.
94. Mr O’Loan: You have the strategic lead, particularly on resource issues, Executive budgets and so on. It is you and your fellow Departments that will make the running on those matters.
95. Mr Hughes: Absolutely; and we work closely and have good links with other Departments. I am glad to see the NITB’s submission to the Committee. There is always more that can be done, and we want to refine those links. There are partnership arrangements and agreements underway with NMNI on funding. I have no doubt that we will have to look at other better working methodologies.
96. Mr O’Loan: Significant museum ventures that were hoped to happen over the next four-year period have not received the capital allocation to allow them to go ahead. The Ulster American Folk Park is one, and there is at least one other significant one. Does that cause you concern?
97. Mr Hughes: DCAL’s capital budget across the arm’s-length bodies is a cause for concern. We would like to do more. Personally, I do not have any control over the allocations; that is decided at ministerial and senior management team level, but we would like more investment in libraries, museums, arts and sport.
98. Mr O’Loan: There is an important point around a critical mass of museums, and, given the construction of NMNI and the local museums associated with the NIMC, there is thinking around that. To me, it is very important that we see them as a totality and that local people, particularly visitors, get a feeling that there is a rich museum environment. I tie that in with the arts sector so that outside visitors know that there is a rich cultural environment here. Is that high in the Department’s thinking?
99. Mr Hughes: I would be surprised if it were not. That is going wider than my remit of the museums and libraries branch.
100. Mr Neeson: If a tourist were asked why they came to Northern Ireland, they might not be able to answer that question. More than likely, the reason would be to visit family and friends. Do they come here because we have the Ulster Museum or other museums, because we have an opera house or because of other arts sectors? It is hard to say; but, when they come here, those will be part of the attraction. It is clear that museums, and a strong museums and arts sector, add to the attraction of why tourists come to Northern Ireland, why they come back and why they suggest to other people that they come here.
101. Mr O’Loan: I was more than a little disappointed by the first response to my question, because we are talking about and looking for a joined-up approach across Departments and public bodies. I find it surprising that a prompt is required to say that there needs to be joined-up thinking and a connection between the arts sector and the major facilities associated with it and the museums sector.
102. The Chairperson: If you do not mind my saying, there seem to be more answers in your questions than there are from the Department today.
103. Mr O’Loan: The other point is somewhat related. When we talk about encouraging business to come to Northern Ireland though foreign direct investment and so on, we often think about the things that attract people here. When discussing the business environment, we talk about corporation tax and such issues.
104. I happen to think that quality of life and the international image of what life is like here is an equally significant factor. This discussion is very much related to that. Is that in the thinking of DCAL and related Departments?
105. Mr Polley: Yes. That is covered in our submission. Stephen McGowan, who is working in the creative industries, has talked to the Committee before. When it comes to new industries and more creative industries, people with those skills will go to where they want to live and create value where they want to live. Therefore, cities that are good at attracting high-value-added creative industries are the sorts of liveable environments in which such people want to live. The culture and arts sector is extremely important in attracting people such as that.
106. Mr Hughes: I will quote the DCAL mission as to what we are about.
“to deliver economic growth and to enhance the quality of life in Northern Ireland by unlocking the full potential of the Culture, Arts and leisure sectors".
107. That is what we are aiming for. That is part of our contribution to the economy in Northern Ireland.
108. Mr O’Loan: I am thinking about executives of big firms in the United States and elsewhere who are thinking of coming here for perhaps a five-year placement, and whose staff would bring their children here and put them into schools. These issues are very much in their minds. For example, they may ask themselves whether this a place in which they would want to spend a significant part of their lifetime? It is very important that we think in those terms.
109. Mr Neeson: May I respond, Mr O’Loan, by saying that that is recognised in the Department. It is one of the esoteric reasons that corporate executives want to come here. Often, they will invest their company in an area in which they want to live, where they think that there would be a good quality of life for them and their children and where there are good cultural and other activities for them to enjoy.
110. Mr McCarthy: Thank you very much for your presentation.
111. Correct me if I am wrong, Alastair, but you said in your presentation that you want to see more investment in our library service. That is good news, because, at this moment, there is a consultation document on getting rid of a number of our libraries, to which this Committee is opposed. If you are saying that there is more investment; that is very welcome.
112. I want to get back to the museums sector and to good practice outside Northern Ireland. You referred in your presentation to developments across the water and the measurement of the value of museums. Are there any areas of good practice elsewhere in these islands that we could make use of? Do you have any international examples of good practice in that area?
113. Mr Neeson: I referred to two types of analysis that the Department is taking forward in its research programme, as the researcher referred to earlier. One is continued valuation or the willingness-to-pay approach, which is an internationally-accepted method that is used worldwide. Another approach that we are thinking about using is subjective well-being analysis, which is something that the DCMS has used. It is a fairly innovative approach. One way of looking at it is as a happiness index approach. Essentially, individuals are surveyed on how they feel about the quality of their life at present, and, in the same survey at the same time, they are asked how they participate and engage in things such as the arts, sports, leisure, museums and so on. We try to connect how well they feel about their individual state of mind at that time and how much they are engaging. The DCMS has used that fairly innovative approach and it is one that Treasury has touched on and taken note of. The DCMS has said that, in its dealings with Treasury to seek more funding, that it is something that Treasury has listened to. Those are two approaches that we are looking at.
114. Mr McCarthy: Will you give us a wee bit more information about the ALMA projects?
115. Mr Polley: Dr Hull talked about those. ALMA-UK is the Archives, Libraries and Museums Alliance. It used to be called the MLA-UK Joint Forum, and includes the museums, libraries and archives in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England. It has identified this as a key issue.
116. Interestingly, it is not just a case of working out a methodology to demonstrate the value of a particular institution. In effect, it is trying to develop a series of tools that any institution can use, but based around the questions; who does the body need to convince of its value, who are its stakeholders, and how can they be convinced? We do broad sectoral interventions at high-level or Northern Ireland level. However, this is for actual, particular local institutions, because their stakeholders are completely different; they will be local, both councils and funders. The first stage is nearing completion. I do not know what the NIMC told you about it last week. I am aware that we have talked to you about it, as has Dr Hull.
117. Mr McCarthy: OK. That is grand; thank you.
118. Mr Humphrey: Thank you all for your presentation. If I heard correctly, Alastair said there were 42 accredited museums in Northern Ireland. I will ask you just a couple of questions on that. First, how many of those 42 have no entry fee? Secondly, who accredits them?
119. Mr Hughes: I do not have the answer to your first question to hand, but I am happy to supply it to the Committee. Secondly, accreditation is done through the NIMC.
120. Mr Polley: The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council is the ultimate accrediting authority.
121. Mr Hughes: Yes; I am sorry. The NIMC is the body that assists in that process in Northern Ireland.
122. Mr Humphrey: Would it ensure that the context of what you were saying, the interpretation of a shared and better future and so on, is accurate and balanced?
123. Mr Polley: One has to go through a number of steps to get accreditation, and one linked step is the Museums Association’s code of ethics, which covers such issues. For instance, if a community or group is being represented in a museum then there needs to be consultation with that community to ensure that things are even and balanced. Such things are covered in that process, and this is something that is being taken forward in the context of the museums policy as well.
124. Mr Humphrey: Are you confident that it works?
125. Mr Polley: I know people in Northern Ireland have raised issues with it. That is why it is a live issue in the museums policy.
126. The Chairperson: Are there any plans on the part of the Department to update the PWC report of 2007, which assessed the social and economic value of libraries, museums, arts and sport? Secondly, why was a full economic impact study not carried out following that report?
127. Mr P Neeson: I will answer in a slightly different way by referring again to the economic and social research programme that the Department is taking forward. This is a new step for the Department as it has not previously had such a specific programme. It is starting in April 2011, and among the things it will look at are how economic impact is measured, and what those impacts are; so that is one way I would answer that question.
128. Mr Hughes: In relation to stage 2, we spoke with those involved at the time. The research was terminated at the end of phase 1 because it was concluded that available data would not support a robust model. The project steering group concluded that there was insufficient Northern Ireland data to construct a model that quantified the value of impact resulting from the Department’s investment in arts, libraries, museums and sport. It concluded that any model created would be reliant on a prohibitive number of assumptions, and that in itself would lead to it not being robust.
129. Mr Polley: Essentially, one would be spending money on something which would have so many assumptions in it that it would not convince anyone that we needed to convince, so it would not be good value for money.
130. The Chairperson: With that, I thank the officials who have come along today. Thank you for your evidence, which Hansard personnel have captured on our behalf.
Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Barry McElduff (Chairperson)
Mr Declan O’Loan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr David Hilditch
Mr William Humphrey
Mr Kieran McCarthy
Mr Ken Robinson
Mr Pat Sheehan
Witnesses:
Mr Paddy Gilmore |
National Museums Northern Ireland |
131. The Chairperson (Mr McElduff): Good afternoon, Paddy, Gillian and Jim. Thank you for coming along. I will hand over to you straight away, Paddy. Perhaps you will introduce the team.
132. Mr Paddy Gilmore (National Museums Northern Ireland): Absolutely. Thank you very much indeed, Chairperson. I am Paddy Gilmore, the director of learning and partnership with National Museums. Dr Jim McGreevy is the director of collections and interpretation, and Mrs Gillian McLean is the director of marketing, communications and trading.
133. We had the benefit of listening to the other presentations, but we have the disbenefit, if that is the correct term, of having a lot of the questions deflected to us. I hope that my two colleagues will be able to answer those along with me. We have very much looked at this, if you forgive us, through the prism of National Museums. Therefore, ours is probably more case study orientated than some of the previous presentations. It is pretty obvious by now that no single model exists across the sector, but there are numerous studies. As we have also established from this morning’s presentations, there seem to be difficulties with those studies. That said, National Museums very much recognises the imperative to demonstrate impact and value in the current economic climate, and we do that in a number of ways. I suggest at the outset, however, that if we do develop a model, rather than that simply looking at the economic and social benefits, we might also include, if at all possible, the cultural benefits of museum activities.
134. As I said, we use a lot of approaches and a range of methods when consulting users, gathering and analysing data and evaluating outcomes. The methods range from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) key performance indicators (KPIs), which Alastair mentioned this morning, to more specific internal methods. Within the DCAL KPIs that you are all familiar with are visitor numbers, and the out-of-state figures, for instance, are a key part of that. As was mentioned previously, up to November 2011, 28% of museum visitors, approximately 200,000 people, were from out of state. Last year, it was 32% of our visitors.
135. We undertake post-project evaluations of the money we spend. In fact, there is an intrinsic economic value built into that, because we are required by DCAL and the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) to carry out an economic appraisal for anything above £200,000. We obviously undertake a formative and a summative evaluation. We have market research programmes, and we are very central to the DCAL quality indicators. That is a methodology which has inbuilt value for money. We had a recent inspection that looked at the education work we do within the quality indicators, and it confirmed that we are within the strategic remit and are delivering on the strategic elements of the DCAL agenda.
136. The quality indicators, which have been brought together for use by a range of arm’s-length bodies, are quite a generic system. It is not the case that we have any problem with that, but we will mention ‘Inspiring Learning for All’, which was referred to earlier. We commend that the Committee investigate that model further. ‘Inspiring Learning for All’ has been developed specifically for the museum sector. It is based on core museological principles and has been tested and developed within museums. In fact, those core principles are intrinsically built into the draft museum policy for Northern Ireland. It is a comprehensive framework that:
“supports you to review and improve performance".
137. Mention has also been made of the generic social outcomes, which are another derivative of that particular model. Again, I think that they are very important, and something that the Committee may wish to look at. The generic social outcomes that are currently in the framework look at stronger and safer communities, strengthening public life, and health and well-being. Those are being developed further, and my understanding is that they can be developed to reflect the specific, local policy initiatives of the areas in which they are being put to use.
138. In relation to economic impact, our summary looks at one model, which is that of the Association of Independent Museums. We drew that model out because it has developed an economic toolkit — I think that someone referred to it earlier — which assesses the range of museums at different levels and across different regions. There is a flexibility that may be of use.
139. The three key elements that it looks at are the number of visitors the museum attracts, the significance of tourism to the local economy and the number of paid employees. If we put our figures into that, the number of visitors the museum attracts is 1 million over a year. We are in four of the top 10 visitor attractions. On the significance of tourism to the local economy, the draft tourism strategy for Northern Ireland to 2020 talks about 4·5 million visitors coming to Northern Ireland and £1 billion in earnings from tourism by 2020. On the number of paid employees, we have 432 employees. Using that model, National Museums contends that we make a significant impact on the local economy. The estimated value, using that model, in the UK is £610 million to £900 million, which underscores the point that there is no science in economic evaluations, certainly from my point of view.
140. The Committee might want to look at what we do in respect of generating revenue. Gillian’s directorate has a very strong commercial focus. Last year, 23% of our income — £2·33 million — was self-generated. This year, we are on target to make £2·7 million of self-generated income. Paul mentioned the Ulster Museum. I should draw your attention to the fact that we have spent £17·8 million on the Ulster Museum, but that money was drawn from 15 different sources, and a third of that income — around £6 million — was independently fund-raised. We have a range of fund-raising initiatives. For instance, we have a Big Lottery Fund grant of £1 million, and we are seeking additional EU funds over the next year or so.
141. I will turn to tourism. It was great to hear that Gareth stood over that figure of £4·2 million, because we quoted it as well. The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) has said that, for every £1 million it spends in a region, tourism revenues worth £4·2 million are brought into the local economy. HLF’s generous grant of £4·7 million to the Ulster Museum would be worth £19·7 million to the local economy over 10 years. In fact, the total figure of £17·8 million would be worth £74 million or £75 million over 10 years. Heritage is a major motivation behind the tourism experience. We are very much tied into developing the tourism experience as part of the overall proposition.
142. I mentioned that we had 200,000 out-of-state visitors across our sites. It is also important to note that, as Mr O’Loan mentioned, the quality of the infrastructure is hugely important. The fact that we won the Art Fund prize for the best permanent exhibition in the UK and are consistently in the top visitor attractions makes the point that we have a quality product that is a core element of the tourism proposition. At the Ulster American Folk Park this year, 22% of our visitors come from the Republic and 11% come from North America. We are developing further products across the sites that are designed to attract more people from the business tourism sector.
143. HLF’s research showed that there is a positive disproportionate effect in areas where there is a regeneration requirement. Over the past while, National Museums has invested £28·5 million in projects of what we contend to be national or international significance. All of those are designed to broaden the appeal of the sites and, critically, to attract more tourists. In fact, it could be argued that the content and the subject matter of our museums has a very direct connection with the global diaspora, the Titanic programme across NI sites being a particular example of that.
144. Members mentioned the importance of the role of cultural ambassador, as we have called it. We work very closely with government to promote and present a positive image of Northern Ireland, to create a resonance with the global diaspora and to demonstrate the richness of our heritage. Members will be aware of some examples of that in the work that we did with the Smithsonian Folklife Festival and the Rediscover Northern Ireland initiative right up until last September, when we were present at the ‘Experience Northern Ireland: Titanic and more’ exhibition in New York. We also have a key role to play in the Northern Ireland message abroad through Jim’s department, which organises loans to major venues around the world. One example of that is our Turner painting, which has travelled to the Prado, the Met in New York and the Tate.
145. We are very focused on making sure that the money we spend is reflective of Government economic policy. We are very aware of the significance of the knowledge economy for the future growth and prosperity of Northern Ireland. We are developing learning programmes that support the STEM agenda. We are also developing programmes that stimulate an interest in entrepreneurship and build on the historic local examples of people such as Harry Ferguson, John Crossley and Rex McCandless.
146. I will turn to the issue of social impact. Our social impact is measured, in our terms, and it is about extending engagement and building audiences. We have a very strong C2DE audience profile across the group. In the Ulster Museum specifically, that has changed from 23%, prior to the museum work, to 46% of the audience coming from those groups. We work with schools to provide a learning experience that complements and enhances teaching in the classroom. We help to improve educational attainment levels. Our programmes are about stimulating learning and firing the natural curiosity of children. We provide a learning experience for all our visitors through imaginative programming and exhibitions that meet the needs of a wide variety of learners with different learning styles. I would point, for example, to the new discovery areas in the Ulster Museum, which provide a hands-on environment that leads to family interaction and dwell times that are beyond those normally found in museums and galleries anywhere else.
147. We have a key role to play in civic engagement. Paul mentioned some of the work that we have done in the past. We willingly engage with challenging social and political issues, and our exhibitions have included ‘Icons of Identity’, ‘Conflict’ and the current Troubles exhibition. Critically, we are involved in partnerships and engagement with our local communities, such as the local Polish and Romanian communities. There are other ethnic minority and community partnerships that we could point to. In summary, it is our contention that National Museums play an important and often innovative role in promoting tourism, extending learning and educational opportunities, supporting people in communities in achieving their aspirations, building social cohesion, fostering civic engagement and pride, and stimulating creativity and imagination through engagement with our collections. We are very pleased to be here today, and we welcome the opportunity to discuss any models that could be applied across the sector consistently. We will take part in that debate if the opportunity arises.
148. The Chairperson: Do you work collaboratively with the Museums Council in assessing the social and economic impact and value of museums? You refer to the contribution that museums make to the STEM agenda: are you actively measuring the value and impact of that?
149. Mr Gilmore: First, the STEM agenda is new for us, but we contribute to STEM learning across our sites. We are conscious of the recent draft report on STEM subjects, which states that museums have an important role to play in stimulating curiosity and firing enthusiasm, and so on. We have not reached the stage of measuring that yet, because we are developing the programme. However, our sites offer huge opportunities to develop that form of learning and a new strand of science education. This is in its early stages, but we are aware of it and will measure in due course.
150. Dr Jim McGreevy (National Museums Northern Ireland): I will make a general comment on a specific issue. On several occasions this morning, colleagues from DCAL, and the Deputy Chairperson, referred to coherence across the sector. That is something that needs to be looked at more closely and worked on. Colleagues from DCAL have referred to the emerging museums policy; and partnerships that cut across a wide range of museums activities and opportunities for co-operation and collaboration are a key pillar within that policy. Those partnerships could be between National Museums and the Museums Council, and between National Museums and the museums that the Museums Council represents.
151. Mr Humphrey: Thank you for your presentation. The point has been made that Northern Ireland has a reputation and a problem with its perception nationally and internationally. One way that that could be addressed is through the development of our museums. I declare an interest as a member of Belfast City Council.
152. I have a particular interest in the diaspora as a way of reaching out to people and encouraging them to come to Northern Ireland. Therefore, I welcome the figures that you give about 22% of the Ulster-Scots community coming from the Republic and 11% from North America. By North America, I mean the United States and Canada, because we need to remember Canada at all stages because of the huge Ulster population there.
153. I reinforce the point that Declan made earlier: the need for joined-up collaboration and partnership across the tourism and hospitality sector is absolute, given that it is such a large and growing part of our economy. I think it is the largest industry in the Northern Ireland economy at this stage. Fifty per cent of tourists are cultural tourists and will come for specific reasons. Your attractions are, therefore, a key factor; the displays and exhibitions are hugely important.
154. To use the Ulster Museum at Stranmillis as an example; how have you worked with the NITB, the Belfast Visitor and Convention Bureau and Belfast parks, because Botanic Gardens are beside the museum, DCAL, DETI, and so on? Have you been able to work collaboratively on that particular site as regards tourism?
155. Mr Gilmore: I will make a general point. You mentioned Belfast City Council; and at this point in time, we are discussing the overall development of Botanic Gardens with the council. As you know, when the Ulster Museum was being developed, part of the issue was that it was sitting in the corner and people could not really see it. So, there has been much better integration with Botanic Gardens, which has worked to our advantage. It has also worked to the advantage of Belfast City Council and Belfast Festival, as the museum recently hosted an event that was a sell-out.
156. At the moment, I am in discussion with Belfast City Council about how we might use the tropical ravine to extend our education service. There is a nature discovery area overlooking the tropical ravine in Botanic Gardens, and it has been a long-time wish that we could extend our education provision to the tropical ravine. That work is in progress, subject to a funding application in which we are a partner.
157. Mrs Gillian McLean (National Museums Northern Ireland): We work closely with the NITB and Tourism Ireland to develop the tourism offering, and we include our sites in that. We have been working closely with the Belfast Visitor and Convention Bureau to secure the Ulster Museum and the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum specifically on itineraries for cruise ships over the next 12 to 18 months. We are trying to work with the NITB and the regional tourism partnerships on the issue that the east of Ireland is underdeveloped for tour operations. Ultimately, that impacts on tour operators’ itineraries to the Belfast-based sites. In 2010, we hosted the NITB meet-the-buyer workshop at the Ulster Museum. As a direct result of that, between May and October, over 1,000 visitors, specifically from one travel organisation, visited the Ulster Museum.
158. Mr K Robinson: You might want to ponder my question before Declan poses his multifaceted one. Although I have been to W5 for children’s parties, I do not know a great deal about that facility or grasped what it is all about. It seems to have a significant pull for visitors. Will you explain why they go there, what is provided there and why it has grown to be so popular?
159. Mr Gilmore: I am pleased to say that, in a general sense, the thought behind W5 originated at the Ulster Museum, where Sally Montgomery was head of education previously. The sciences collection at the Ulster Museum is based on natural science, and the idea was that another facility was needed for what might be called the hard sciences. W5, which stands for who, what, where, when and why, looks specifically at the hard sciences. It is very popular, and the STEM agenda is central to what is done there; W5 is totally focused on that. Because of that and because it is the only science centre in Northern Ireland, W5 gets strong visitor numbers.
160. Mr K Robinson: Are the visitors from the school age group?
161. Mr Gilmore: There are strong numbers from schools, but it also provides a family learning experience. Those who visit W5 form a good part of NMNI’s overall numbers. Our submission was about museums, and, as you know, W5 is part of the overall group.
162. Mr O’Loan: Do you feel that your contribution to, and impact on, tourism is recognised adequately in policy and resources?
163. Mrs McLean: It is obvious that we would appreciate greater investment in our sites. The Ulster Museum project has shown what a relatively modest level of capital investment has contributed to the overall Northern Ireland tourism economy. Specifically, 25% of the visitors to the Ulster Museum are out-of-state visitors. In the current financial year, up to the end of November, there have been over 110,000 out-of-state visitors to the Ulster Museum. As you are aware, we had submitted bids for the next CSR period for capital investment in the Ulster American Folk Park and the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum with the aim of developing sites of excellence to improve the local, national and international perception of Northern Ireland.
164. Mr O’Loan: I was going to come to that, so I will follow up on it now. Does the failure of those two projects damage you strategically?
165. Mrs McLean;
166. It will limit our ability to support Tourism Ireland and NITB’s drive to increase tourism to Northern Ireland.
167. As you are aware, the visitor centre at the Ulster American Folk Park was built in the 1970s to accommodate 30,000 visitors. There were 135,000 visitors to that site alone up to the end of January. Obviously, with the 2013 City of Culture, there was an opportunity for us to work more in partnership with those in Derry/Londonderry to support their general tourism offering. The Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, which houses the Titanic collections, also requires significant investment in a visitor centre to support the visitor offering in Northern Ireland.
168. Mr O’Loan: What sums of money were involved in those?
169. Mrs McLean: The Ulster American Folk Park bid was £15 million, which involved — I am not quite sure of the split — approximately £8 million for the visitor centre and remaining balance for the continued development of the new world site.
170. Mr O’Loan: Tourism Ireland promotes the island as a unit. Where does National Museums Northern Ireland fit in with the whole museums sector on the island? Do you think in those terms? What level of co-operation do you have with other major institutions so that there is a package presentation?
171. Mr Gilmore: In a general sense, our co-operation with museums across Northern Ireland is really good on a number of levels. However, for tourism, it is slightly different. Although we co-operate on collections, loans, research, learning, and so on, it is fair to say that it is probably not packaged in the same sort of way. So, we probably have more to do there.
172. Mrs McLean: Tourism Ireland tends to focus on specific projects. For example, in this financial year, one of its key projects is Titanic, and National Museums is a key contributor to that and to the development of Titanic Quarter and the SS Nomadic. We work in partnership with relevant bodies on specific projects where tourism partners are being built in.
173. The Chairperson: I thank Paddy, Dr Jim, and Gillian for coming along.
Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment
Museums and Galleries Scotland
Museums Libraries and Archives
National Museums Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland Museums Council
Office of the First and deputy First Minister
University of Ulster - Museums and Heritage Studies
From: Northern Ireland Tourist Board
Date: 20th January 2011
To: Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
Re: The Value and Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland
1. Museums are an important component of the tourism product and have the potential to grow in significance. The draft tourism strategy for Northern Ireland to 2020, aims to achieve a doubling of the income Northern Ireland earns from tourism to £1 billion by 2020 by:
2. Northern Ireland museums have a key role to play in achieving these targets and already contribute significantly to visitor numbers and providing reasons for tourists to visit Northern Ireland and/or things to do while they are here.
3. In 2009 there were 3.29 million overnight trips to/within Northern Ireland, of which 1.375m were domestic trips and 1.9m visitors from outside Northern Ireland. Of these, 1.57m were holidays, of which 504,000 were visitors and 1.07 million were domestic holidays.
4. The 2009 Visitor Attraction Survey estimated that in total there were around 990,000 visits to Museums/Art galleries in 2009 by Northern Ireland residents and visitors, both on overnight trips and day trips to Northern Ireland. It is estimated that 28% (or around 277,000) were made by those from outside of Northern Ireland (i.e. non-NI residents). These figures give a measure of the part museums play as part of the Northern Ireland visitor experience.
5. In addition, the 2009 Visitor Attitude Survey which surveyed our overnight leisure visitors (i.e. Northern Ireland residents and non-Northern Ireland residents on holiday), estimated that 39% visited a museum/art gallery which, grossed up to the total number of holidaymakers in 2009 equates to around 600,000 holiday and Northern Ireland-resident holidaymakers. This does not include Northern Ireland day-trippers.
6. Visitors to the recently refurbished Ulster Museum exceeded expectations reaching 500,000 within the first nine months of its opening.
7. Visitor research carried out by Tourism Ireland highlights the fact that culture and heritage is a key motivator for visiting the island of Ireland with sightseers and culture seekers accounting for six out of every ten holidaymakers. They represent a major opportunity for tourism growth and present an opportunity for the museum sector to work in partnership with tourism bodies to develop product in line with visitor’s interest.
8. The new brand values for the Northern Ireland tourism experience focus on ‘Uncovering Our Stories and Experience Our Awakening’ with the aim of providing more depth for the visitor and concentrating on real people and authenticity of experience. The museums are fundamental to delivering the new brand as they are curators of our ‘collective memory ‘ collating and saving our stories, relating them to artefacts and providing opportunities for visitors to hear and experience them.
9. The NITB marketing campaigns have given significant exposure to Northern Ireland Museums in particular the Ulster Museum and the Ulster American Folk Park. Both featured within the Autumn 2009 and Spring 2010 campaigns, as well as the Republic of Ireland gateway campaign carried out in the. In total museums received the value of £219,643.07 in terms of advertising value equivalency (AVE).
10. A breakdown of activity is attached (Appendix 1) and illustrates NITB’s commitment to the Museums as a key tourism product in the Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland markets.
11. NITB host information on all museums and events which have been provided to us by the product owner or their local tourism authority on www.discovernorthernireland.com. The site received more than 2.4 million visits in 2010 and offers participating product providers an effective platform to reach potential visitors.
12. Currently, NITB makes use of museums for media familiarisation (FAM) trips, hosting journalists from Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and through Tourism Ireland journalists from all over the world. Exhibitions and events are also frequently promoted on weekly events listings which are distributed to press and featured on discovernorthernireland.com.
13. In 2008 Business Tourism was worth £136m to the economy of Northern Ireland. Moving forward the conference facilities provided by National Museums Northern Ireland at The Ulster Museum, Ulster Folk & Transport Museum, Ulster American Folk Park and Cultra Manor will be of major importance to the growth of the Business Tourism sector.
14. A total of £1,879,439.70 has been invested through the Tourism Development Scheme (TDS) and Peace II in the last 5 years as follows:
| Scheme: | Date of Offer: | Project: | Promoter: | Total Cost: | Grant Offer: |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TDS 08-11 |
10/05/2007 | Reconstruction of Tennessee Plantation House | National Museums Northern Ireland (NMNI) | £300,000 |
£150,000 |
| TDS 05-08 |
18/08/2009 | Reconstruction of McAllister House | NMNI | £150,000 |
£75,000 |
| Peace II (4.2A) |
26/02/2004 | Marketing Plan 2004-06 | Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI) | £552,747 |
£414,560.25 |
| Peace II (4.2B) |
25/03/2004 | Rehabilitation of redundant interpretation at MAGNI (multiple sites) | MAGNI | £1,995,169 |
£945,657 |
| TDS 2005-08 |
01/02/2008 | Museum of Free Derry | Museum of Free Derry | £98,450.90 |
£49,225.45 |
| TDS 2005-08 |
19/02/2007 | Inniskillings Museum | Inniskillings Museum | £500,000 |
£194,997 |
| TDS 2005-08 |
17/07/2007 | Medieval Maguire’s | Fermanagh District Council | £100,000 |
£50,000 |
Total: |
£1,879,439.70 |
15. The Tourism Strategy for Northern Ireland to 2020 (TSNI) provides the framework for the way forward for tourism in Northern Ireland. The Strategy sets an ambitious target to grow tourism’s contribution to the Northern Ireland economy to £1 billion by 2020 i.e. double the current contribution made by tourism to the economy. To achieve this we need to provide things for visitors to see and do and Northern Ireland’s museums, and in particular their contribution to the cultural tourism product, will play an important part in helping to deliver the Strategy’s key objectives and targets.
16. Under TSNI the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) will play key role in promoting cultural tourism by investing and upgrading museums where possible. Other examples of priorities and actions in TSNI that cultural tourism (including museums) can contribute to include:
17. Tourism Ireland has identified culture as one of the core elements of Northern Ireland’s image overseas.
18. Tourism Ireland leverages the strengths and appeal of Northern Ireland’s culture to encourage more visitors to come to Northern Ireland. As visitor attractions, museums play an important role in telling the story of Northern Ireland and its cultural heritage to overseas visitors, differentiating Northern Ireland from the Republic of Ireland and from other parts of the United Kingdom. Tourism Ireland engages with the Northern Ireland Tourist Board in relation to their Cultural Tourism policies and with a variety of specialist organisations which promote Northern Ireland’s culture, including National Museums of Northern Ireland (NMNI).
19. The museums of Northern Ireland – for example, the Ulster Museum, the Ulster Folk & Transport Museum and the Ulster American Folk Park – feature in the promotional literature which is distributed by Tourism Ireland in 23 markets across the world (almost 3.3 million pieces of literature each year). They also feature on Tourism Ireland’s suite of 42 websites in 20 languages which attract almost 12 million unique visitors each year.
20. In addition, Tourism Ireland provides exposure overseas for museums through inclusion in itineraries for media and trade familiarisation visits, through promotion in trade, media and consumer e-zines in the markets and promotion at travel and lifestyle fairs and exhibitions overseas.
21. A recent example of Tourism Ireland’s activity to promote museums in Northern Ireland is:
22. The Northern Ireland Tourist Board works closely with the museum sector; they are a significant partner in Northern Ireland achieving the challenging tourism targets set for 2020. They will continue to develop this relationship in order to maximise opportunities which exist.
20th January 2011
Campaign: Autumn 2009 |
No of inserts / panels / airtime spots |
Gross Supplier Cost |
Creative |
|---|---|---|---|
| NI - Television* | |||
| UTV | 25 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £19,393.33 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| C4 | 96 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £16,100.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| GMTV | 17 spots (30 sec only) | £1,100.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| ROI - Television* | |||
| RTE 1 | 23 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £19,540.50 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Network 2 | 17 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £12,561.75 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| TV3 | 15 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £12,592.50 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Sky Media (Sky One, Sky Sports, Sky News) | 141 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £5,580.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| TG4 | 44 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £2,868.75 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| E4 | 52 spots (60 sec and 30 sec) | £3,580.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| * Featured within the 30 sec and 60 sec ‘Young Families’ edit | Total Spring 2010 AVE | £93,316.83 |
Campaign: Spring 2010 |
No of inserts / panels / airtime spots |
Gross Supplier Cost |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| NI - Outdoor | |||
| 48 sheets (1 of 3 creative) | 28 sites | £7,423.26 | Ulster Museums |
| Primesites (1 of 3 creative) | 26 sites | £1,560.00 | Ulster Museums |
| NI - Press | |||
| Belfast Telegraph | 3 inserts | £1,569.10 | Ulster Museums |
| Irish News | 1 insert | £3,076.32 | Ulster Museums |
| Daily Mirror | 1 insert | £640.80 | Ulster Museums |
| ROI - Outdoor | |||
| Commuter Cards (1 of 4 creative) | 244 panels | £1,432.80 | Ulster Museums |
| Metropanels (1 of 2 creative) | 10 sites | £3,449.25 | Ulster Museums |
| ROI - Press | |||
| Irish Times | 1 insert | £3,641.36 | Ulster Museums |
| Metro Herald | 1 insert | £757.35 | Ulster Museums |
| Total Spring 2010 AVE | £23,550.23 |
Campaign: Gateway 2010 |
No of inserts / panels / airtime spots |
Gross Supplier Cost |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| NI - Press | |||
| Belfast Telegraph | 2 inserts | £1,952.50 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Sunday Life | 1 insert | £337.80 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Irish News | 1 insert | £1,131.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| News Letter | 1 insert | £575.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Daily Mirror | 2 inserts | £875.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Sunday World (NI and ROI Edition) | 1 insert | £2,834.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| NI - Television* | |||
| UTV | 41 spots (30 sec only) | £11,983.33 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| C4 | 86 spots (30 sec only) | £16,100.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| GMTV | 16 spots (30 sec only) | £1,100.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| ROI - Press | |||
| Irish Independent | 1 insert | £4,779.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Irish Times | 1 insert | £3,371.63 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Irish Sunday Times | 1 insert | £4,050.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Irish Mail on Sunday | 1 insert | £1,890.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| ROI - Television* | |||
| RTE | 28 spots (30 sec only) | £18,133.50 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Network 2 | 31 spots (30 sec only) | £11,657.25 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| TV3 | 33 spots (30 sec only) | £8,400.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| Sky Media (Sky One, Sky Sports, Sky News), Nickleodeon and Discovery Channel | 760 spots (30 sec only) | £7,800.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| TG4 | 174 spots (30 sec only) | £2,646.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| E4 | 104 spots (30 sec only) | £3,160.00 | Ulster American Folk Park |
| * Featured within the 30 sec ‘Young Families’ edit | Total Gateway 2010 AVE | £102,776.01 | |
| Overall AVE | £219,643.07 |
MS/006
January 21, 2011
Ms. Lucia Wilson
Clerk
Committee of Culture, Arts and Leisure
Room 424
Parliament Buildings
Ballymiscaw
Stormont
Belfast BT4 3XX
Dear Ms Wilson,
I refer to your correspondence to the Chairman of the Heritage Council, Conor Newman and your invitation to Council to make comment on the review into The Value and Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland.
My comments below relate in particular to your indication of interest in exploring areas of good practice and the relationship between impact monitoring and policy/making funding as it applies to the Heritage Council of Ireland.
The Heritage Council is an independent advisory body to the Irish Government established under the Heritage Act (1995). Its primary responsibilities under the Act are to inter alia “…propose policies and priorities for the national heritage". This includes cultural and natural heritage. The Council has its Headquarters in Kilkenny and is a body corporate with capacity to sue and be sued in its own right. Its Chairman and members (currently 11) are appointed by the Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. It appoints its own staff including its Chief Executive and currently has 14 full time staff.
Since its establishment the Heritage Council has also established and supported a number of important aspects of “heritage infrastructure" including the National Biodiversity Data Centre, the Discovery Programme for Archaeological Research, the Heritage Officer Programme in association with Local Authorities, The Irish Landmark Trust and the Museums Standards Programme for Ireland. Council is also responsible for provision of grants through its schemes on Heritage Management, Heritage Research and Heritage Education and Outreach.
By 2008 the Council had grown to have an annual budget of circa €20m. By 2011 this has shrunk to approximately €8m.
Of most direct interest to your current exercise is the Heritage Council’s Museum Standards Programme. There are now 50 establishments participating in this programme a number of which have achieved full accreditation, a number of which have reached interim accreditation and a number of which are moving towards interim accreditation. The Programme represents the Heritage Council’s main commitment to collection care and the first of its kind in the RoI it sets out to improve all aspects of museum practice from governance to conservation to interpretation to accessibility. A voluntary programme it has attracted participation from across the cultural spectrum, is complemented by a full training programme with a targeted post graduate museum course delivered on Council’s behalf by the University of Ulster.
Full details are available at www.heritagecouncil.ie
The Standars Programme and its training element is further extended through the provision by Council of funding for 4 Conservation Interns per annum. These are currently assisting conservation work in the Chester Beatty Library, thet National Library, Old Library , Trinity College and the National Gallery.
The Heritage Council has had an ongoing and positive relationship with the Northern Ireland Museums Council and in particular has partnered NIMC in the running of the all island Museum of the Year Awards. The management and running of these awards for 2011 is again under consideration although the perilous condition of the Heritage Council finances is likely to preclude any contribution to the Awards in this current financial Year.
In light of the desire of your Committee to consider value for money aspects of support for our heritage and our heritage institutions you may also be interested in a 2007 report commissioned by the Heritage Council entitled Valuing Heritage and a 2010 report on the value of County Heritage Plans. This report demonstrated that between 2004-2008 the Heritage Council invested €6m in the implementation of these plans which in turn directly led to the creation of circa 1000 jobs in the sector, ranging from tradesmen to heritage professionals to support for small local businesses. The return to the exchequer for the Heritage Council investment was estimated by independent economist Jim Power at in excess of €30m.
Please excuse the brevity of this response at this time. Either myself directly or my colleagues will be pleased to assist further as your Committee feels appropriate
Yours sincerely,
Michael Starrett
Chief Executive.
Lucia Wilson
Clerk
Committee for Culture Arts and Leisure
Room 424
Parliament Buildings
Stormont
Belfast BT4 3XX
February 3, 2011
Dear Lucia,
I am writing in response to your letter of the 20th of January.
For the purposes of your enquiry I have attached links to a variety of documents. The list is quite comprehensive and so I hope you find some information of value to your enquiry. The material below is a mixture of Heritage Lottery Fund, Museums, Library and Archives Council (MLA) documents.
The linked document details HLF’s programme evaluation strategy which was agreed by our Trustees in 2008. This will give you a good overview as to our approach. Only some of the work that we do is with Museums so the strategy is quite broad ranging.
http://intranet/Secretariat/Papers/2008/Board/e._May_20/09_Guide_to_Programme_Evaluation.doc
The best on economic impact is this tourism report – this is the original research report on the UK-wide impact of our funding.
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/Heritage_Report_Final_2010.pdf
And this on HLF projects …
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/EconomicImpactofHLFprojects2010__mainreport_FINAL.pdf
Both reports detail the methodology used as well as results.
AIM have produced an economic impact toolkit for museums….
http://www.aim-museums.co.uk/images/uploads/original/final_toolkit_120710_cf.pdf
On economic valuation (different to impact) EFTEC did a review for us about five years ago, though it mainly talks about historic environment.
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/Valuingthehistoricenvironment_eftecFinal_Report.pdf
On social impact – the latest BOP report is good for a methodology on the big well being impacts for people heavily involved in heritage projects through volunteering….
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/Social_Impact_of_Volunteering_Yr_2_Final_Report_New_Format_Aug_10.pdf
The earlier Applejuice report takes a broader look at project participation, making particular use of the MLA Generic Learning Outcomes framework….
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/SP3format_SocImpactREPORTyr3FINAL.pdf
Again, methodologies are detailed as well as results.
Other things of use might be the review we do each year of non-HLF research in the heritage sector …
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/HLF_External_Research_Review_Nov_2010_FINAL.pdf
The following is material on Cultural Value and finding arguments that could be made for defining it. Demos were commissioned by us to do this work.
http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/ChallengeandChange_CulturalValue.pdf
The two links below are the general reports:
http://research.mla.gov.uk/evidence/view-publication.php?dm=nrm&pubid=951
http://research.mla.gov.uk/evidence/view-publication.php?dm=nrm&pubid=924
The general work on Renaissance that might be useful is:
http://research.mla.gov.uk/evidence/view-publication.php?dm=nrm&pubid=1150 (although this is focussing only on community engagement work)
And finally we found this on a specific service (Bolton) which demonstrates the economic value of museum/library/archive service.
http://research.mla.gov.uk/evidence/view-publication.php?dm=nrm&pubid=423
I hope this is helpful,
Regards,
Paul Mullan
The Value and Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland
Submission to the Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee by ALMA-UK
Archives Libraries Museums Alliance UK (ALMA-UK) is a voluntary cross-nation partnership, dedicated to enhancing the public value of archives, libraries and museums UK wide.
It is the only group that gathers the principal strategic bodies for archives, libraries and museums across all four home nations of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, in equal partnership and voice.
The Alliance provides a neutral forum for member organisations to exchange sector intelligence and experience and to add value to their strategic practice through cross-nation collaboration.
ALMA-UK is made up of eight member organisations:
Museums Galleries Scotland
Museums Galleries Scotland represent over 350 museums and galleries across Scotland. The sector welcomes 25 million visitors and contributes £800 million to the Scottish economy.
Museums Galleries Scotland (or MGS) is a membership organisation offering support to museums and galleries throughout Scotland.
We act as the representative for our sector, promoting its work to the public, stakeholders and the Scottish Government. This involves speaking on behalf of the sector and showing that museums and galleries are not only custodians of Scotland’s rich and diverse history, but also have a lot to contribute to modern society.
Our core work involves supporting the sector both through funding (as the main channel for Scottish Government funding) and through advice and training covering all areas of our members’ work.
I am the Head of Research and Standards at Museums Galleries Scotland. I am the project sponsor for the mapping economic impact project and have been asked to reply in this capacity. The working group for the project has representation from all the parties above. I welcome the opportunity to comment on the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure’s review on the value and impact of Museums in Northern Ireland.
1. To investigate what work is currently being conducted to monitor the social and economic value of museums in Northern Ireland.
We are not in a position to comment on what work is happening. Please see NIMC’s response.
2. To assess what level of understanding exists within the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure in Northern Ireland and the key museums bodies about the methods of measuring value and impact on a consistent, ongoing basis.
We are not in a position to comment on what work is happening. Please see NIMC’s response.
3. To investigate how information about the social and economic impact of museums could be used to assess value for money across government.
It is not always easy to define and measure the question of value in relation to culture. Certain aspects of social and economic impact can be more easily measured than other. For example, it can be difficult to measure long term impact, especially where a range of initiatives may be contributing to social changes. Please see NIMC’s response for more detail.
4. To seek areas of good practice within the museums sector outside of Northern Ireland, and make recommendations about how improvements could be made to the understanding of the social and economic value of museums within Northern Ireland.
ALMA-UK Economic Impact project came about because of the realisation that there is a proliferation of studies in this area, with a variety of methodologies and that there was the need to step back and take stock of the methods and their applicability.
Consultants ERS were appointed in September 2010 by ALMA-UK to:
In addition to desk based research, stakeholders were consulted, including museums in Northern Ireland.
This project is taking account of differences between sectors and nations. The first phase of ALMA-UK work is scoping existing methods being used to assess economic impact. It will recommend approaches most suitable for museums, libraries and archives sectors. This report will be completed in February 2011. We would be happy to submit this report to the committee on completion.
Phase 2 will pilot toolkits which capture information on economic impact for use across these three sectors and across the UK. We are looking to commission phase 2 shortly. Pilots will be undertaken in Northern Ireland.
Alison Turnbull
February 2011
1. The Museums Association represents and supports museums and people who work for them UK wide. It has over 6,000 members including institutions ranging from large national museums to small volunteer-run museums. Established over a century ago in 1889, the Museums Association is a charity and receives no regular government funding.
2. The Museums Association leads thinking on many issues in museums including improving the use of collections, sustainability and workforce development. It publishes Museums Journal, the sector’s main magazine, organises the UK’s major annual museums conference and prepares the sector’s Code of Ethics, which underpins the national accreditation scheme for museums.
3. The Museums Association welcomes this timely enquiry and would be pleased to assist the committee.
4. Museums and galleries have been transformed over the past 15 years. Buildings are refurbished, displays are refreshed and appeal to a wide range of visitors and there are lively programmes of events and exhibitions. This has been made possible through the skills, experience and talent of people who work for museums And organisations that support and advise them, such as the Northern Ireland Museums Council, and new sources of funding, particularly capital funding from the national lottery and, until recently, increased revenue support from local and central government.
5. There has been a steady increase in attendance at museums and galleries. Northern Ireland visitor attractions (of all types, including museums and galleries) saw visits increase by 8% in 2009. Northern Ireland Tourist Board, ‘Visitor Attractions Survey : Northern Ireland performance during 2009’
6. Museums and galleries generate economic benefits through areas such as jobs, tourism, inward investment and regeneration. Museums and galleries are a sound investment and well placed to help the UK recover from a recession that has profoundly changed the economic landscape. In 2006 a report examined the economic, creative and social impact of major UK museums and galleries. The economic benefit of the 22 organisations surveyed was estimated to be £1.5 billion per annum, taking into account turnover and visitor expenditure. The annual turnover of Britain’s major museums and galleries was said to exceed £900 million. Broadly speaking, £1 in every £1000 in the UK economy can be directly related to the museum and gallery sector. The major museums and galleries spend over £650 million a year. Travers, Tony; London School of Economics for National Museum Directors’ Conference, ‘Museums and Galleries in Britain: Economic, social and creative impacts’ (2006)
7 A key part of museums’ economic impact is their contribution to tourism, attracting millions of international and domestic visitors. They showcase the best of the nation’s history and culture to the widest possible audiences. A golden period of sustained investment has seen museums improve their visitor offer and attract ever-greater numbers of tourists through their doors. Through the money they spend these museum visitors deliver economic benefits to local economies. “Cultural and heritage attractions are very definitely a cornerstone of Britain’s tourism offer" VisitBritain, Foresight (Issue 56, June 2008), p.6: http://www.visitbritain.org/Images/Foresight_Issue_56_tcm139-167379.pdf
International visitors to the UK’s museums, galleries and built heritage spend £2.6 billion per year; UK day visitors spend £4.2 billion. Heritage Lottery Fund and VisitBritain, Investing in Success: Heritage and the UK Tourism Economy, 2010, p.9
8. Generally, increased attendances have been stimulated by a growing attention to audiences, capital investment in new buildings and displays, increased spending on programming and free admission at national museums.
9. The role of museums has changed over time and never more so than in the last 10–15 years. As well as their traditional role of collecting, preserving and sharing rich collections, museums now play an increasing role in supporting the development of communities. Museums can be a place to help shape community identity and bring different community groups together and a catalyst for regeneration through the provision of venues and civic spaces. Museums are using their unique collections and services to address social issues. They are striving to be places where all sections of the community can have a voice and be reflected in a museum’s collections and displays. Through volunteering programmes, internships, apprenticeships and work placements they are proving to be a valuable resource for the development of basic and specialist job skills. ‘Our museums have reach and resonance. By working with local partners museums engage communities with their cultural heritage right across the UK. Museums are spaces in which identities are understood, formed and shared. They provide a stimulating public space in which people can come together and be inspired.’ National Museum Directors Conference (NMDC), ‘ Museums Deliver’, (2010)
10. There have been many attempts to measure and quantify the impacts of museums using a variety of techniques, with varying degrees of success. Useful work can be found in the journal Cultural Trends and in other work by Sara Selwood. DCMS has been doing recent work in this area. See, for example, Measuring the Value of Culture, 2011 (http://www.culture.gov.uk/publications/7660.aspx) and the Culture and Sport Evidence Programme (http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/research_and_statistics/5698.aspx). The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council has been experimenting with work to assess Social Return on Investment. (http://www.mla.gov.uk/news_and_views/news/2009/June/SROI and http://www.mla.gov.uk/news_and_views/press_releases/2010/CE_in_hub_museums)
11. The UK has a successful mixed economy of funding for museums, in which self-generated income and private patronage are built on adequate levels of public funding. Most national and local authority museums do not charge for admission and get the majority of their income for running costs from public sources. Public museums operate successfully as free-to-use public services, enhancing what they are able to do by generating additional income from sources such as retail, catering and corporate hire. Income from these sources had probably been increasing until the recession, which had a particularly bad effect on sources such as venue hire. However, self-generated income rarely forms a significant part of a public museum’s general running costs.
12. There are also many successful ‘independent’ museums, registered charities that often (but not always) charge for admission and have a more diverse range of income sources. However, many independent museums receive some of their funding from local authorities. Many independent museums are reported as saying ‘it was a struggle to keep their organisations going’. Source: Business Models and Financial Instruments for the museums, libraries and archives sector: Review of the Literature and Survey Findings, MLA, 2008
13. A relatively small amount of museums’ expenditure is available for public-facing activities such as exhibitions, redisplays, education work, events and activities. This is because museums tend to have high fixed costs for the long-term preservation of often fragile and extensive collections. They require front-of-house and security staff so that they can open safely to the public. Many are also responsible for important listed buildings, which are expensive to operate and maintain.
14. These fixed costs are largely unavoidable, so cuts in funding have a disproportionate effect on the public services provide by museums. There is real fear of a return to the days of empty galleries with leaky roofs and dusty, tired displays.
15. Cuts may force some currently free museums to introduce admission charges. Typical experience is that the introduction of admission charges at a museum reduces audiences by around 40% ( link ), so reducing the museum’s benefits for the wider economy. This reduction in numbers usually increases the amount of public spending per visit, so reducing the efficiency of public spending. Since the introduction of universal free access to national museums in December 2001, visits to the nationals in England that used to charge for entrance have more than doubled, increasing by 128%. (http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/museums_and_galleries/3380.aspx ) Fewer resources to develop new audiences mean that audiences are likely to narrow and come from a smaller segment of society, threatening to make museums more elitist.
16. Museum staff are generally poorly paid for the expected levels of skills and knowledge; cuts are likely to exacerbate this. (Source Museums Association, Pay in Museums, 2004 and Museums Association, Salary Guidelines 2009)
17. Proposed increases in lottery funding for heritage are welcome. However, they will not compensate for reductions in funding elsewhere. Furthermore, the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) is having to consider supporting a higher proportion of project costs as far less partnership funding is now available from other sources (such as regional development agencies in England). This reduces the number of projects that HLF can support UK wide. Furthermore, the previous government reduced heritage-lottery funds, with the result that HLF no longer has the resources to support all the high-quality applications that it receives.
18. Generally HLF is regarded as an intelligent, successful funder. HLF’s requirement to include learning and participation in projects has increased the social impact of museums. We also welcome HLF’s growing encouragement for environmental sustainability.
19. Museums and galleries have always benefited from philanthropy, but this has been primarily for collecting or buildings. There is a long tradition of private collectors giving their collections to museums, and occasionally founding new museums or paying for extended buildings, but there is little tradition of contributing to endowments or paying for long-term running costs in other ways.
20. A small number of museums have recently raised extensive amounts from private sources for capital development but these have overwhelmingly been major museums in London, with some notable exceptions such as the Ashmolean in Oxford and Kelvingrove in Glasgow. Smaller museums, especially those outside London, appear to have relatively limited likelihood of raising large amounts of private money, even for buildings and collecting.
21. All types and sizes of museum regularly raise funds from charitable trusts (and the lottery) for capital developments, acquisitions and special programmes such as additional educational and community projects. However, only rarely do these sources contribute significantly to core running costs.
22. The nation’s museum collections form a significant public asset, thanks to the generosity of past generations. There are great collections, and great museums, throughout the UK. Museum do far more than simply acquire, preserve and display things; they use collections to create economic, social and cultural value. They engage with audiences of all ages and backgrounds, on- and off-site to bring inspiration, learning and enjoyment. Increased funding has enabled museums to improve the use and accessibility of collections, bringing them out of store and sharing them more widely, so that more people can see them in more places.
23. Over the past five years, the Museums Association has encouraged better use of collections. The seminal report Collections for the Future is being followed up with the Effective Collections programme to make better use of stored collections, funded by the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation.
24. Funding cuts will make it harder for museums to share their collections. Cuts risk setting back recent work to build national - regional museum partnerships, which give nationwide audiences improved access to national collections. Collections will be stuck in storage because museums will lend and borrow fewer things, so reducing opportunities for people to see nationally and regionally important collections near to where they live.
25. Funding Cuts are also likely to lead to the early retirement of curators with a specialist knowledge of collections. There is a risk that this knowledge will be lost to their museums. To partly address this risk, with funding from the Monument Trust, the Museums Association offered a small number of Monument Fellowships so that recently retired collections specialists can pass on their knowledge to successor staff and the wider museum sector. This time-consuming work needs careful planning and support if knowledge is not to be lost to the museum, to researchers and to wider audiences. Previous Monument Fellows include Brian Turner, Down County Museum and Helen Lanigan Wood, Fermanagh County Museum. The final round of fellowships has just been awarded and no more are planned.
26. In spring 2011 the Museums Association plans to publish guidance on sharing collections knowledge and we hope that museums will make use of this to preserve at least some of the knowledge and experience that would otherwise be lost if expert staff have to leave.
27. Some local authorities have transferred the management of their museums to charitable trusts, often leading to improved public services, and bringing other benefits such as increased income generation. However, experience varies and some museum trusts have had long-term financial problems. In August 2010, Sheffield Museums had to be ‘bailed out’ with increased funding from Sheffield City Council.
28. Joint services may have potential. Colchester and Ipswich recently started running a joint museum service. In some areas, such as Norfolk and Hampshire, there is a long tradition of county and district councils collaborating in service delivery to improve standards and gain economies of scale. Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums is a highly successful joint service.
29. The Museums Association investigated museums and sustainability in 2008. We suggested that after a highly successful period of growth, museums perhaps should consolidate their work and focus primarily on improving the quality of what they do rather than its quantity. Ambition had made many museums overstretched, often trying to do too much on limited resources and, as noted above, struggling with high fixed costs. We concluded that to improve their sustainability museums need to think more than a few years ahead. Although museums hold their collections ‘in perpetuity’, they rarely think hard about their long-term purpose.
30. Looking at environmental sustainability in particular, we concluded museums could do much to reduce their energy consumption, so reducing running costs as well as reducing carbon emissions. However, they need financial and expert support to become greener. Led by national museums in the UK, museums internationally are rethinking the ways they care for collections to take account of the need to reduce energy use.
31. When disposing of items from their collections, museums follow the Museums Association’s Code of Ethics. After extensive consultation, the Museums Association changed its rules on the sale of collections in 2007. The new rules permit financially motivated disposal of collections in certain exceptional circumstances. In particular, the income from the sale must not be for short-term reasons but has to provide sustainable long-term public benefit (such as contributing to an endowment) and the items being disposed of have to be outside the museum’s core collection. So far, only two museums have disposed of collections in this way: The Watts Gallery in Surrey and the Royal Cornwall Museum in Truro. Both of these are independent charitable trusts. It should be noted that legislation restricts the powers of disposal of some museums, particularly nationals.
32. Sale of collections is not likely to be a source of income for many museums. It is certainly not a solution to short-term funding difficulties and always risks damaging public trust in museums and deterring future donations of collections and other forms of philanthropy.
Contact Maurice Davies, Head of Policy and Communication,
Museums Association, 24 Calvin St, London E1 6NW. maurice@museumsassociation.org
The MLA is the government’s agency for museums, libraries and archives in England. Leading strategically we promote best practice to inspire innovative, integrated and sustainable services for all.
In this short submission, we thought it might be useful to highlight the up-to-date research work and thinking in this area that MLA is involved in England, in particular the work of CASE (the culture and sport evidence programme). CASE is a joint programme of strategic research lead by DCMS in collaboration with Arts Council England, English Heritage, the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council and Sport England.
CASE aims to strengthen understanding of how best to deliver high quality cultural (and sporting) opportunities to the widest audience, generating positive outcomes for society.
We aim here to highlight some of the most relevant findings of the programme, together with some other research pieces that help illustrate examples of good practice and current thinking in this complex area.
1. ‘CASE’: Drivers, Impact and Value of engagement in culture and sport (2010): This project covered new analysis looking at what drives engagement in culture and sport, marshalling the evidence on the impacts of engagement, and developing and deploying new ways of generating economic values for engagement. One example of many is a systematic review of the existing research on learning impacts for young people that can be found here: http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/research/CASE-systematic-review-July10.pdf
For a full list of resources, click here: http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/research_and_statistics/7275.aspx
2. ‘CASE’ database (2010): This is a database of research on culture and sport engagement. The database is the single most comprehensive source of research evidence in these areas in the world, and was constructed as part of the Drivers, Impact and Value project in the CASE programme: http://www.eppi.ioe.ac.uk/webdatabases/Intro.aspx?ID=19.
3. ‘Measuring the value of culture: a report to DCMS’ (2011) assesses different approaches to generating the value associated with engagement in culture and sport.; and builds on the work published by CASE in July 2010 on the Drivers, Impact and Value of engagement in culture and sport by bringing together established economic valuation approaches with emerging well-being-based techniques: http://www.culture.gov.uk/publications/7660.aspx.
4. MLA published a think piece on Social Return on Investment (SROI, 2010): SROI is one valuing approach that has been utilised more recently in museums and libraries: it combines a ‘story of change‘ with financial proxies for a numeric result for which there are now Cabinet office and SROI Network guidelines here: http://www.thesroinetwork.org/content/view/100/101/.
The MLA think piece is located here: http://research.mla.gov.uk/evidence/view-publication.php?dm=nrm&pubid=951
5. A series of SROI practice examples in England’s regional museums have been published here (2010)
6. ‘Economic Impact Methodologies for the museums, libraries and archives sector: What works and what doesn’t’ (2008) details guidance on how the sector can effectively demonstrate the economic contribution it creates: http://research.mla.gov.uk/evidence/view-publication.php?dm=nrm&pubid=924.
7. Good practice example from the Museum of East Anglian Life using the SROI technique. The analysis was completed over the last year by MB Associates supported by the New Economics Foundation. The report is available here
8. A guide to measuring Culture and Sport outcomes published by ‘Local Government Improvement and Development’ (2010): http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=21649171
This is a web resource that provides guidance for councils and their partners on how to create a local outcomes framework for culture and sport. This is designed to help measure and evidence the contribution culture and sport provision makes to local priorities and outcomes.
9. Association of Independent Museums (AIM) economic impact paper (2010), with the inclusion of an Economic Value toolkit can be found here: http://www.aim-museums.co.uk/pages/pg-18-aim-economic-impact-paper.
MLA January 2011
1. Executive Summary
2. Background
3. Methods of Measuring Value and Impact
Resources Employed to Measure Value and Impact
4, The Economic Impact of National Museums Activities
- Association of Independent Museums in the UK
- Heritage Lottery Fund
- Origin of Visitors to National Museums
- Business Tourism
- Fundraising
- STEM Agenda
- Celebrating Entrepreneurs
- Creative Industries
- Volunteering
5. The Social Impact of National Museums Northern Ireland’s Activities
6. Conclusion
Appendix 1 - Audience Development at the Ulster Museum
Appendix 2 - Visitor Numbers 2009/10
This report is a response by National Museums Northern Ireland (hereafter referred to as National Museums) to the Northern Ireland Assembly’s Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure’s Review into ‘the Value and Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland’. The report sets out the methods of measuring value and impact which are currently employed by National Museums. It concludes that there are numerous studies of the social and economic impact of museums and refers to recent work undertaken by the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) and the Association of Independent Museums (AIM).
Given that no one model exists for the sector as a whole, National Museums has taken the opportunity to draw attention to existing evidence of social and economic impact of its activities. This report reflects the range of measures that National Museums currently employs to enable it to makes assessments of the value and impact of our activities and programmes. To date the extent of our work in this area has been governed by the level of staff and financial resources available but we would be glad to explore with others the introduction of a model for the sector.
2.1 The National Museums Northern Ireland was established by The Museums (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 and comprises the constituent parts of the Ulster Museum, Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, Ulster American Folk Park and Armagh County Museum.
2.2 National Museums Northern Ireland is one of the province’s foremost cultural, educational and tourism destination. We aim to make a key contribution to the achievement of the goals set out in the Programme for Government, the priorities outlined in Building on Progress and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure’s Corporate Strategy by:
The organisation contributes to making Northern Ireland a more competitive region, to building equality and community cohesion and to providing better public services.
2.3 National Museums Northern Ireland is committed to playing an active and innovative role in promoting tourism, extending learning and supporting people and communities in achieving their aspirations for their own lives and for our society. Our corporate strategy is focused on extending engagement, investing in capital programmes and on developing and delivering as an organisation.
2.4 National Museums believes that museums make positive social and economic impacts and are a critical part of the infrastructure of the region. Much research and commentary supports this assertion:
‘The full impact in economic and social terms of cultural assets such as museums is vast, in terms of the range of resultant benefits generated’
(The Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland, PWC, June 2007).
2.5 Building on recent investments in the cultural infrastructure of Northern Ireland and the policy position for museums proposed in the current Draft Northern Ireland Museum Policy, it is essential, that the sector is able to identify and evaluate its social and economic impact. The benefits are summarised in the following statement:
“Museums make a major contribution to, and are a reflection of, economic and social regeneration, community confidence and health and well being. As such they help position Northern Ireland as forward looking and progressive, a place to visit and in which to live, a place for investment, a place that has a rich past and a positive future" Draft NI Museum Policy June 2010
Whilst recognising the financial and economic imperatives that necessitate the aims of this exercise, it should be stressed that many of the intrinsic benefits of museums do not lend themselves to quantifiable analysis.
3.1 National Museums recognises the importance to Government, stakeholders and funders of tracking social and economic impact, especially given the prevailing economic situation and the austerity measures to come. The sector currently lacks a universal model which can consistently demonstrate outcomes across museums. Whilst the introduction of such a model would be welcome, and potential examples exist, the cost of implementation would require careful consideration.
3.2 National Museums does, however, measure the value and impact of its work in a number of ways, which are detailed below, and which are designed to demonstrate value, improve quality and ensure the delivery of benefits from investment in capital and revenue programmes.
A set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to measure the overall performance of National Museums’ activities has been developed in association with DCAL. These have recently been reviewed and targets change annually to reflect business priorities and are a measure of the social and economic impact of our activities.
Post Project Evaluations are carried out on capital projects. A Benefits Management approach is taken, designed to demonstrate the social and economic benefits of the capital investments made. Of particular relevance in this regard is the forthcoming Post Project Evaluation of the Ulster Museum project.
Risk Potential Assessments (RPAs) are carried out on all capital projects which have a value of £500k or more. These RPAs are forwarded to the Centre for Excellence in the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) and a Gateway Review process is carried out on all projects which are deemed as medium or high risk. The purpose of the Gateway Review process is to ensure that National Museums’ capital projects provide value for money and deliver corporate objectives and associated benefits. The ‘Opening Up the Ulster Museum’ project has recently undergone a Gate 5 review, which confirms that the desired benefits are being achieved. These benefits are specifically focused on delivering positive social and economic impact.
Benchmarking with other national museums is undertaken on an ongoing basis to update professional practice and to compare the outcomes achieved by activities. This is a useful mechanism for assessing the delivery of social and economic outputs on a comparative basis.
National Museums carries out evaluation of exhibitions, events and programmes to ensure that they are of high quality, provide value for money and meet the needs of our audiences. Depending on resources, such evaluation may be undertaken internally or by external providers. It takes place not simply after exhibitions (summative evaluation) but can be used to test audience reaction before and during the exhibition development process (front-end and formative evaluation).
An extensive market research programme involving both quantitative and qualitative research allows National Museums to identify and respond to the needs of different audiences. Results of the market research programme are used to ensure that we deliver a broad array of exhibitions, programmes and facilities which provide maximum impact and offer value for money in line with the aspirations of our audiences.
We utilise the expertise of professional Market Research companies to provide hard empirical evidence that informs key decisions in relation to activities on all sites. Examples of such work are the recent research carried out at the Ulster Museum into the views of teachers on the formal education programme and a range of surveys into levels of visitor engagement and satisfactions across National Museum sites.
We aim to build durable relationships with our audiences and communities encouraging them to spend more time on our sites and visit them more often. Recent results from market research on the Ulster Museum since reopening confirm the value of this particular capital investment in broadening audiences and encouraging ongoing engagement whilst delivering value for money.
National Museums delivers its learning programmes within the context of the DCAL Learning Strategy, using the DCAL Quality Indicators to examine practice, which can include social and economic impact. The DCAL quality indicators are currently being used to support self-evaluation in National Museums.
The ‘Inspiring Learning for All’ framework is widely used in museums, libraries and archives in the United Kingdom, and it also informs our work. Its definition of Generic Learning Outcomes and Generic Social Outcomes is particularly useful. National Museums would suggest that the DCAL quality indicators could be further adapted to reflect the Inspiring Learning for all framework, and the self-directed learning that takes place in museums.
Designated staff in the Directorates of Marketing, Communication and Trading (Market Research and Planning Manager), Collections and Interpretation (Interpretation Manager) and Learning and Partnership (Education Officer) have responsibility for the assessment of impact research in their respective areas. Key to their work is ensuring that the collections and sites of National Museums are used and interpreted in ways which will enhance visitor understanding and enjoyment, are responsive to user and stakeholder needs and underpin efforts to broaden and deepen audiences.
Within the Marketing, Communications and Trading Directorate a budget of £30,000 was dedicated to audience and market research in 2010 -2011, to ensure that National Museums provides an external perspective on the value of its programmes. Within this budget specific work (both qualitative and quantitative) has been carried out to support the overall Post Project Evaluation of the Ulster Museum
An additional allowance has been made for the Ulster Museum Post-project Evaluation for a Gateway 5 review and external peer reviews.
Other research is conducted across sites and is usually project-based or undertaken within existing resources.
4.1 The museums sector is an important contributor to the economy and National Museums, as the main museums body in Northern Ireland, makes a significant impact on the regional economy. The overall economic effect comprises direct, indirect and induced effects (which are explained in further detail below).
Visitor numbers in 2009/10 were in excess of 845,000 and this year we expect to reach, for the first time ever, the landmark figure of 1,000,000 visitors. Across our sites we provide employment for 432 people. The multiplier effects of both these figures are therefore highly significant in a place of this size.
4.2 Our three major sites attract high levels of out-of-state visitors and deliver world class events which attract both international and local visitors. The current state of the economy and the growing significance of the “staycation", where local people choose to spend their vacation in the region, underlines the increasing importance and value of the local visitor market.
4.3 In supporting lifelong learning and formal education, National Museums contributes to the education and employability of the people of Northern Ireland. Commercial activities across sites are increasingly important and National Museums has a progressive approach to utilising its resources to maximise such opportunities.
Across the UK there have been a range of studies and reports dealing with the social and economic impact of museums. They employ a range of different techniques and place different emphasis on various aspects of museum activity. For the purposes of this report we draw attention to work recently undertaken by the Association of Independent Museums in the UK and a report by the Heritage Lottery Fund which includes Northern Ireland analysis.
The Association of Independent Museums in the UK, with support from MLA (Museums, Libraries and Archives Council) has recently commissioned research on the economic value of its sector:
“The Economic Value of the Independent Museum Sector", DC Research, June 2010
This research argues that the factors likely to influence the extent of the impact a museum is likely to have on its local or regional economy are, in order of importance:
The research proposes an economic value toolkit which reflects tourism impacts and employment impacts as well as impacts on goods and services. The economic impact model used is common in other studies and measures direct, indirect and induced effects. This suggests that direct employment in a museum supports further employment indirectly through supply chain effects and there is a further induced effect from the local spends of the income of those employed in the museum. Direct, indirect and induced impact on goods and services and the value of visitor spend are factored and the total impact on the economy can be estimated. In the case of the UK Independent Museums (that is museums other than National Museums and large Council-founded museums such as the Glasgow Museums, Manchester Museum and Birmingham Museums & Art Gallery) this is estimated to be at least in the order of £610 million per annum, and the researchers suggest this could be as much as £900 million.
In relation to the factors mentioned, National Museums attracts significant visitor numbers consistently (Appendix 3); its sites are key elements in the tourism proposition, engaging fully with destination marketing and tourism promotion activity; National Museums is a major employer within the region. On this basis and if such a model were to be employed the economic impact of National Museums would be calculated to be highly significant to the local economy.
Using the same economic impact model, the Heritage Lottery Fund has examined the economic contribution of the heritage tourism sector across the UK, which includes historic buildings, museums, parks and countryside. Northern Ireland is included in this report.
Heritage is a major motivation behind the tourism experience of both overseas and domestic visitors and HLF estimate it to be a £12.4 billion industry which directly supports 195,000 full time equivalent jobs. Visits to built heritage attractions and museums alone “make a contribution to the total output of the UK economy, as measured by GDP, of £7.4 billion per annum. Once multiplier effects are included, the number increases to a GDP of £20.66, supporting a total of 466,000 jobs"
(“Economic Impact of UK Heritage Tourism Economy" Oxford Economics for HLF, February 2010)
The HLF study also found that every £1million of HLF funding leads to an increase in tourism revenues for regional economies of £4.2 million over 10 years. Two years after a project is completed, projects will bring extra revenue into the regional economy which is equivalent to their HLF grant. Given the scale of HLF funding of the Ulster Museum- £4.7m, which is the largest HLF award ever made here – the potential impact on the Northern Ireland economy is immediately apparent.
HLF also suggest that there is often a disproportionate effect in areas where there is a regeneration requirement and that their investment helps places to diversify and develop more resilient economies - an important consideration in relation to National Museums’ capital development programme: “This is an important feature of the tourism sector - its impacts tend to be more significant in areas with a greater need of economic revitalisation".
(“Investing in Success, Heritage and the UK Tourism Economy" Heritage Lottery Fund and Visit Britain, March 2010)
4.5.1 National Museums are here to be explored and enjoyed and across four unique sites we care for and present inspirational and fascinating collections which attract up to one million visitors annually. Each museum has its own unique character and offers its own particular insight into arts, culture, history, traditions, science and the natural world. Individually our museums are important visitor attractions. Combined they represent a unique resource for Northern Ireland and form a critical part of the tourism proposition.
4.5.2 The Ulster Museum, Ulster Folk and Transport Museum and the Ulster American Folk Park consistently win awards that reflect their status as high quality tourist venues. In 2010 the Ulster Museum won the prestigious Art Fund Prize and this award brings with it national and international recognition for its recipients. The Ulster Museum also won ‘The Best Permanent Exhibition at the Museums and Heritage awards, beating off still competition from some of the United Kingdoms top museums. It is also currently competing for the prize of European Museum of the Year. Such accolades place our three major museums among the top ten visitor attractions in Northern Ireland and as such are a key element of the cultural infrastructure and heritage tourism product.
4.5.3 Origin of visitors to National Museums
Analysis of visitor origin demonstrates the international appeal of National Museums and their success in attracting visitors from across the globe. The economic importance of out of state visitors to Northern Ireland is apparent and it is known that those regarded as cultural tourists traditionally tend to stay longer and spend more in the areas which they visit. Heritage tourism in the UK is a £12.4 billion industry and National Museums and its collections are uniquely placed to exploit this market.
| Ulster Museum | Ulster Folk & Transport Museum | Ulster American Folk Park | Armagh County Museum | NMNI Group | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NI | 76.5% |
77.6% |
48.0% |
89.5% |
68.3% |
| ROI | 2.9% |
5.4% |
22.0% |
3.5% |
10.0% |
| GB | 8.9% |
9.4% |
9.5% |
1.8% |
8.9% |
| Europe | 5.5% |
2.4% |
6.0% |
0.0% |
4.3% |
| N America | 2.9% |
2.6% |
11.0% |
5.2% |
5.6% |
| Elsewhere | 5.2% |
2.6% |
2.0% |
0.0% |
2.9% |
In 2009/10 National Museums welcomed 845,831 visitors, with 32% of these from outside Northern Ireland. The Ulster American Folk Park, with its connection and relevance to a global Diaspora attracts a greater percentage of out-of-state visitors with 22% from the Republic of Ireland; 11% from North America; 9.5% from Great Britain and 2% from other overseas markets. Such figures are highly significant in an economic analysis of museums but, importantly, also reflect the ability of the sites to attract and grow tourist numbers.
4.5.4 National Museums supports the work of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board with direct links to several of their signature projects and integration with regional and national tourism promotion strategies. A Titanic exhibition is currently being developed at the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum which will open in May 2011 to coincide with centenary celebrations. National Museums also works with Tourism Ireland to maximise visitation to our sites and to the country.
Business Tourism is an important part of the tourism offering. Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) estimated the Business Tourism sector generated £136million for the local economy in 2008 and is an area targeted for significant growth. Research indicates that 40% of business tourists will revisit as a leisure tourist. Cities with a strong Business Tourism market such as Edinburgh and London all have a rich resource of unique and unusual venues a key requirement for business tourism. National Museums Northern Ireland has developed a strong venue hire offering at the Ulster Museum, Ulster Folk & Transport Museum and Ulster American Folk Park. The opening of Cultra Manor in June 2011 will strengthen the organisation’s venue hire offering. National Museums works closely with NITB to help develop Northern Ireland’s Business Tourism sector. Recent corporate clients include:
4.6.1 National Museums is increasingly focused on self-generating income and takes every opportunity to maximise revenue and resources to benefit our activities. The organisation has created a Directorate of Marketing, Communications and Trading and has put in place specialist staff with knowledge of commercial and revenue generating activity. Key income streams include retail, catering and venue hire and admissions.
4.6.2 In 2009/10 National Museums achieved 23% self-generated (non DCAL) income as a percentage of total operating income.
Total self-generated income across the group was £2.33 million, which included
We aim to increase our self-generated income to £2.7 million in 2010/11
4.6.3 Fundraising
Fundraising activity within National Museums has assisted us in levering additional independent funding from a range of sources. A third of the £17.8m required for the Ulster Museum redevelopment was raised from independent sources. Amongst these we secured £4.7 million from the Heritage Lottery Fund, the largest single amount ever paid to a project in Northern Ireland. We secured a substantial international donation which in its entirety paid for the George and Angela Moore Gallery of Applied Art in the Ulster Museum. In total funds were secured from 15 different sources for the Ulster Museum Project.
Over the years we have also achieved significant funding from independent sources to allow us to deliver programmes and projects across National Museums’ sites. Our relationship with the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) has allowed us to secure substantial funding for the Centre for Environmental Data and Recording (CEDAR). We have attracted £1m from the Big Lottery Fund for work with older people and European funding through Peace programmes has allowed us to undertake significant developments across our sites.
4.7.1 In recent years National Museums has invested £28.5 million in flagship projects of national and international significance. These include:
These investments have allowed the exploitation of our cultural assets in innovative and entrepreneurial way, contributing not only to the sustainability of the museums but also to wider economic regeneration of Northern Ireland.
It is widely recognised that investment in cultural infrastructure is part of the mix that creates quality of life and encourages firms to locate in specific regions.
4.7.2 The development of the cultural infrastructure has had a direct impact on the local construction industry. The £28.8 million has supported construction industry jobs, benefitted local suppliers and encouraged the procurement of locally sourced goods. Using a social impact model it is possible to establish the economic benefit to the construction industry in terms of direct jobs, indirect and induced jobs. The same applies to the procurement of goods and service so that the overall effects of this investment are hugely significant for Northern Ireland. There is also benefit to the economy through PAYE and Corporation Tax returns of local people and companies.
4.8.1 National Museums is acutely aware of the importance of delivering strategic partnerships and this is reflected in the recent development of a Directorate of Learning and Partnership. There is increasing recognition within government policy of the necessity to share resources and develop partnerships with mutually advantageous objectives. Within DCAL, the Learning Strategy has, as one of its central tenets the aim of developing partnerships within the DCAL family and further afield.
4.8.2 National Museums has developed a wide range of partnerships which enhance the delivery of business and corporate objectives attract resources and deliver mutually advantageous benefits. We have for a long time had a philosophy of working in partnership with a range of sectors and industries including tourism, education, the creative industries, business, community and voluntary organisations to name but a few. Some of our current partners such as the Workers Education Association, Queen’s Festival, Age NI and the Polish Community reflect a complete spectrum of objectives.
4.9.1 National Museums is a key part of the overall Northern Ireland ‘offering’ and we have worked closely with a range of government departments to help present the region internationally and enhance its reputation. Our role in Rediscover Northern Ireland and Smithsonian Folk Life Festival, Washington DC is a specific example.
4.9.2 We have sought to maximise the opportunities provided by the uniqueness of our heritage product and the popular appeal of our collections abroad. We launched our Art catalogue in Washington DC to co-incide with efforts made by the First and Deputy First Ministers to showcase and promote Northern Ireland in the important US market. Last year we created a special exhibition of painting for display in 10 Downing Street, showcasing the best of National Museums art to an audience of political and business leaders from across the globe
4.9.3 Many of our collections and artefacts create a resonance for the global Diaspora and this is again a unique part of our proposition. National Museums also helps to enhance the reputation of this place through ongoing international loans and travelling exhibition programmes. Closer to home our art has graced the walls of the Long Gallery at Stormont and is a useful reminder to guests there of the richness of our heritage. It is our view that regeneration has three elements – social, economic and cultural. We play an important role in helping deliver all these agendas, possibly best exemplified by the use of the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum as a venue for the US Investment Conference in May 2008.
4.9.4 The forthcoming ‘Cultural Olympiad’ provides another opportunity for National Museums to help promote Northern Ireland’s reputation abroad. The awarding of Cultural Olympiad Inspire Marks to ‘The Fighting Irishmen’ exhibition at the Ulster American Folk Park and the ‘Art of History’ exhibition at the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, underpin our role as cultural ambassadors for the region.
4.9.4 As previously mentioned, the highly prestigious awards won by the Ulster Museum not only reflect on this institution but on the importance attached by government to the creation and delivery of museums that reflect the richness and diversity of our unique cultural heritage.
“The educational and curatorial elements of museums can be seen as contributing to the ‘knowledge economy’ both within the private and public sectors, which is widely seen as an essential element in ensuring an area remains competitive and productive’. (PWC 2007: 56)
National Museums has identified growth areas in which we can make a contribution that aligns with government objectives: the STEM agenda, entrepreneurship and creative industries.
The Draft Government STEM Strategy (August 2010) acknowledges that museums, ‘support and enhance the delivery of the curriculum and provide STEM experiences and insights that inspire and add value’ and sees museums as having a key role in implementing the strategy’.
The Strategy has highlighted the role museums in particular have in developing interest in the STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). Through the active engagement of young people with collections to stimulate curiosity and provide inspiration, we aim to play a part in raising attainment levels in these subjects.
National Museums through W5 and Armagh Planetarium is currently developing a series of STEM workshops, one of which, “The Science of Titanic" links directly to our planned Titanic exhibition. Such partnership working helps in maximising resources, is a key component of current government agendas and allows us to deliver STEM subjects in engaging and innovative ways.
The need to develop the private sector in Northern Ireland and support growth and innovation within small firms has stimulated an interest in entrepreneurship. We are exploring, in partnership with Belfast Metropolitan College, how we might develop entrepreneurship education by showcasing the work of local entrepreneurs. Local historic examples can inspire young people and help focus them on the skill set required to be a successful entrepreneur.
Each of our sites and our collections are key resources which can be utilised by the complete spectrum of creative industries. Over the years our unique sites have been used as film locations and as a backdrop for theatre and drama productions. The major art collections held by National Museums have long been used as a creative resource by students and artists. Through artists in residence and workshop programmes we have shared this with a wider public. There is potential for developing this capacity to stimulate creativity through engagement with a range of collections across sites in such as way that it has a positive effect on the economy.
‘The operation of museums can provide employment opportunities alone. However the potential increase in education and contribution to the knowledge economy can help people gain employment when they may not have done so otherwise.’ ( PWC 2007: 56)
4.11.1 National Museums employs 430 people over its sites across a range of disciplines and as such can be regarded as a significant regional employer. The Ulster American Folk Park is a key employer west of the Bann and has become one of the larger employers in the Omagh area. It has a further economic impact on the local economy given its ability to attract further high value out of state visitors to engage both with its content and events. For instance, the growth in recent years of the Bluegrass Festival to an event of international status has demonstrable effects on the local hotel, accommodation and restaurant business for instance.
4.11.2 A new initiative developed by National Museums in partnership with the Northern Ireland Museums Council, Skills for the Future, has created 12 one - year bursaries across local and national museums to develop collections and conservation skills. This not only helps meet a skills gap but it offers development opportunities for young people wanting to enter the museum profession.
4.11.3 The reopening of the Ulster Museum led to the recruitment and training of new operations and visitor services staff as a direct result of that major capital investment. Further capital investment in museums has the potential to grow our business and create new jobs.
4.11.4 The indirect impact on labour market and employability due to increased educational attainment levels has been noted above. The Ulster Museum outreach programme during closure specifically targeted people under 26 with low academic attainment and a range of audience development initiatives have opened up educational opportunities for many who would not normally engage with museums.
National Museums is currently developing a new volunteer policy and procedures. A primary objective of the programme is social inclusion and it aims to include volunteers of all ages and abilities and from a wide range of backgrounds. Importantly however the volunteering programme opens up opportunities for learning and enhances employability by providing valuable skills-based experience in a museum environment.
The economic value of volunteering in the museum sector in Northern Ireland is yet to be fully developed. Research indicates that independent museums in the UK ‘benefit from the involvement of over 100,000 volunteers, contributing the equivalent of £108 million a year in value’ (Recruiting and retaining volunteers, AIM Focus Paper, 2009)
5.1 Museums are uniquely placed to deliver a range of societal benefits. National Museums has a long history of community engagement, of developing new audiences and of creating programmes, events, exhibitions and activities which stimulate the interest and engagement of thousands of people annually. The following section provides some examples of this work.
National Museums is focused on extending engagement and building audiences across all its sites. This has been particularly exemplified by work undertaken at the Ulster Museum in recent years. Full details are appended which shows that a combination of targeted marketing activity, outreach and the development of new and innovative programmes has led to a complete change in the composition of the audience upon the re-opening of the museum. (See appendix 1)
In the 2010 Calendar Year National Museums Northern Ireland attracted 1,084,280 visitors
In 2009/10 National Museums Northern Ireland attracted 845,831 visitors.
With some 100,000 school pupils visiting our four sites each year, National Museums makes a significant contribution to the formal education sector, providing programmes that support and complement the new Revised Curriculum for Northern Ireland as well as unique experiences which provide innovative and exciting learning for children. ‘International research demonstrates that the use of museums can lead to improved educational outcomes /attainment levels (in addition to promoting increased levels of literacy and information competence)’ (PWC 2007: 56)
5.3.1 Recent research for National Museums by Millward Brown (Dec 2010) with focus groups of teachers representing primary and secondary schools across Northern Ireland, has demonstrated that museum visits and learning programmes have a significant social impact on all young people and that this is particularly important for those who are disadvantaged or from lower socio-economic groups:
‘I was surprised how involved they were ... even the P7s who see themselves as hard nuts’.
‘its vocabulary stretching ……...the parents don’t talk with their children.’
Teachers see the capacity of the museum environment to stimulate learning as very important:
‘It fires the children’s natural curiosity.’
‘You can’t overestimate the power. It’s different to the humdrum of class.’
Developing literacy skills and inspiring engagement with learning are key benefits and this is particularly important for children with learning disabilities:
‘It’s the stimulation ..children with speech and language difficulties ask questions you’d never get in school.’
‘We’ve special needs children … in class they shut down, but in the museum they’re interacting.’
The report points out:
‘In some areas of social deprivation.. they got a tremendous amount out of their visit to the Ulster Museum due to the interactive and hands-on nature of the offering.’
Visitors come to museums both to be educated and to be entertained. Self-directed learning is a key part of the museum experience. This provides a unique opportunity for schools and other educational institutions and museums offer a popular range of programmes that support schools in delivering the Northern Ireland curriculum.
‘Museums help to support educational development among adults and children, thus consolidating learning as well as promoting independent learning.’ (PWC 2007: 56)
The offer to lifelong learners is continually being extended and programmes are designed to attract a much broader audience base. It is the view of National Museums that museums should offer a learning experience for all visitors and we should seek to provide this is in a manner which reflects the needs, requirements, learning styles and abilities of a very diverse audience base. This has a resultant impact on the breadth and diversity of the programme we offer and is reflected through innovative programming and partnerships.
From April to December 2010 lifelong learning programmes across National Museums’ sites attracted 52,000 lifelong learners. Examples of the Lifelong Learning programmes offered include:
A partnership project with Age NI, this £1million Big Lottery-funded project builds relationships with disadvantaged groups of older people through outreach and by creating opportunities for them to engage with our collections and sites.
Building on our awareness of the under- representation of older people in our audience profile, the Live and Learn programme is specifically designed to deliver social, health and economic benefits. The active engagement of older people impacts positively on their physical and mental health and, in turn, on health service expenditure.
Live and Learn helps create social capital, as a group leader reports: ‘Socially inactive members have become more confident and new friends made. This project has brought the group closer together, friendships made and new ideas generated for future classes.’
Social inclusion is another benefit. ‘It has allowed the tenants here to open their door to the community. As this is a supported housing unit for people with dementia it has also allowed them the chance to be an equal and valued member of the community. It has given our tenants each a sense of well-being’. Participants rediscover skills and confidence: ‘I enjoyed meeting new people, working together to produce an end product. We didn’t know we had it in us.’
In keeping with the aspiration to provide a learning experience for all our audience, the organisation has developed new and innovative galleries within the Ulster Museum. The new Discover Art, Discover Nature and Discover Science areas encourage hands-on learning and are highly popular elements. They have been designed to appeal to learners with varying abilities, ages and learning styles and they offer an accessible way of engaging with museum collections.
‘The children can see, touch, feel .. they’re sensory impaired so that’s very important. To create interest, something to enthuse, experiences they wouldn’t otherwise have ….. for deaf children, their imagination is constrained, they need experiences to talk about.’ Millward Brown Ulster, 2010
Market research with teachers provides evidence that the programmes they offer complement the Northern Ireland curriculum (Millward Brown Ulster, 2010).
Evaluation of the Discovery Areas conducted by University of Ulster students in spring 2010, found that the key motivation for visiting them was social. Some 65% of visitors to these areas were first-time visitors and dwell times were normally between 20 and 30 minutes in each area. The areas are highly valued for family interaction, hands-on experience and exploration.
National Museums is increasingly allocating time and resources to programmes which facilitate family learning. 100% of those interviewed by the University of Ulster students saw the discovery areas as ‘a good chance to do things with family or friends’ and said that they would recommend others to visit them.
Research for National Museums Northern Ireland by Perceptive Insight (2010) shows that the discovery areas play a key role in encouraging families to visit the Ulster Museum:
‘Parents welcome interactivity, which plays a vital role in the enjoyment of the trip. The Discovery areas help change attitudes to the museum in general. There’s no longer a sense of ‘don’t touch’ when visiting.’
For decades, our museums have been seen as neutral venues and we have delivered many Community Relations Programmes for schools and youth groups across our sites. A residential centre at the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, designed to facilitate cross-community work by paired schools, has played a key role in this work. The significance of this perspective has been that museums have been able to deliver programmes and deal with subjects that may not have been approachable in other contexts or environments.
The recent development of a Troubles Gallery in the Ulster Museum builds on earlier exhibitions such as ‘Conflict’ and ‘Icons of Identity’ in demonstrating a willingness to engage with challenging social and political issues. Dealing directly and specifically with Northern Ireland’s recent past, it also invites the public to comment on the approach and invites their views on how the exhibition should be developed.
Between reopening in October 2009 and July 2010, 533 visitors completed a gallery development questionnaire on the Troubles Gallery. Of these, 85% felt that the sensitivity with which the subject was handled was very or fairly good, and 75% rated the overall content of the exhibition as very or fairly good. Such figures indicate that this sensitive subject has been dealt with in a manner which many find acceptable in what is widely regarded as a neutral venue.
National Museums Northern Ireland works proactively to welcome ‘people of all ages, race, religion, gender and sexual orientation’. We have a long-standing record of work with ethnic communities and with more recent migrant communities such as the Romanian and Polish communities. The recent relationships developed with the Romanian community in particular, at a time of racist attacks, sent a valuable message about tolerance, acceptance and cohesion within our society.
For newcomers to Northern Ireland such a welcome can help them feel included in society whilst, for our indigenous population, events and exhibitions celebrating other cultures increase understanding of, and empathy with, other cultures. The relationship with the local Polish community which led to “Polska Week" activities on NMNI sites is one such example.
National Museums Northern Ireland generates significant amounts of data which can be used to support the assertion that museums generate significant social and economic benefits regionally, national and internationally. All of the methodologies employed provide information which guides and directs the organisation in the delivery of business and corporate objectives. It is readily available for inclusion in any further work to assess social and economic impact or value for money.
National Museums would be pleased to work with others to explore how a model which measures both the economic value and the social impact of our activities could be introduced for use across the sector.
In redeveloping the Ulster Museum, widening the audience profile was a key aim. Before the ‘Opening up the Ulster Museum’ project, audiences were identified as being predominantly from the following groups:
Groups identified as being under-represented in the audience profile were:
As well as the award-winning redevelopment of the Ulster Museum building and exhibitions, key elements of the strategy to widen audiences included an outreach programme during closure that targeted under-represented groups; events and marketing aimed at a wider demographic; increased opportunities for active engagement and the recruitment and training of new visitor services staff.
Since reopening in October 2009 visitor numbers have exceeded all expectations. The visitor profile has broadened considerably becoming more reflective of the Northern Ireland population as can be seen from exit surveys undertaken between October 2009 and March 2010.
As Northern Ireland’s population is 1.7 million people, it is clear that a significant proportion have visited the Ulster Museum and that C2DE visitors are engaging with our museums. That 42% are first time visitors shows that exciting and innovative museum programming can attract new visitors.
The success in changing the profile of Ulster Museum visitors shows how an audience development strategy can increase the social value of museums, opening their resources and learning opportunities to a wider audience.
| 2009-10 | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UFTM |
24542 |
16156 |
16033 |
21701 |
26053 |
10695 |
10340 |
5051 |
11424 |
5184 |
5929 |
10907 |
164015 |
W5 |
26192 |
17484 |
17834 |
25704 |
34859 |
7247 |
25402 |
12819 |
10359 |
13463 |
19916 |
16333 |
227612 |
UAFP |
17794 |
16911 |
16863 |
25056 |
25628 |
19252 |
12627 |
4187 |
5323 |
2538 |
4514 |
7329 |
158022 |
ACM |
1180 |
909 |
855 |
1206 |
1358 |
852 |
1418 |
1049 |
922 |
1138 |
1294 |
1111 |
13292 |
UM |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
55975 |
61279 |
35126 |
40535 |
48992 |
40983 |
282890 |
| Total | 69708 | 51460 | 51585 | 73667 | 87898 | 38046 | 105762 | 84385 | 63154 | 62858 | 80645 | 76663 | 845831 |
In 2009/10 National Museums Northern Ireland attracted 845,831 visitors
1.1 The Northern Ireland Museums Council (NIMC) was established in 1993, by Ministerial order, with the overall aim of supporting local museums across Northern Ireland in maintaining and improving their standards of collections care and public service. For policy and administrative purposes, the Council is classified as an executive non-departmental body and is an arm’s-length body of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
1.2 NIMC is constituted as a limited company (without share capital), has charitable status, and is managed by a Board comprising Ministerial nominees, representatives from District Councils, voluntary and independent museums, the Northern Ireland Museum Curators Group, the universities and National Museums Northern Ireland. Additional members of the Board are co-opted. Currently there are 15 Board members, who report to the Council’s membership at the Annual General Meeting and on other occasions. As a membership organisation, NIMC is responsive to the sector, providing leadership and advocacy in order to advance its interests.
1.3 The Council is the advocate and service provider for all non-National museums, especially the 38 local museums in Northern Ireland which meet the UK Museum Accreditation Scheme. It distributes grant aid for the care and preservation of collections, for enhancing public access to museum collections, and to enable museums to acquire artefacts. NIMC provides training for those working in the sector, manages museum standards, and provides advice and information. In addition, the Council develops guidelines on various aspects of museum practice, commissions sectoral research and gathers data for policy development. NIMC also contributes to and co-ordinates various national and regional projects. The Council is the conduit through which Government supports the local museum sector, and as such, it is accountable to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
1.4 NIMC executes a vital role in protecting the material and non-material heritage of Northern Ireland for this and future generations. It has played a fundamental role in devising the prospective Northern Ireland Museum Policy. Its current level of annual grant in aid from the Department is £279,000 (2010-11). Since 2003 NIMC has sought and secured just over £1.2 million of programme income through European and Lottery sources, in addition to the funding from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. Further information on the Councils activities may be found at www.nimc.co.uk
2.1 The Northern Ireland Museums Council welcomes and supports the Committee’s intention to review of the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland. By their very nature museums operate in the public interest and do so, in the main, with support from the public purse. It is essential therefore that the full range of impacts and their contribution to Northern Ireland’s economy and society is more fully recognised. NIMC is of the view that the Committee’s inquiry has the potential to fully reveal the extent of the sector’s wide-ranging contributions, to show that the sector represents extremely good value for money, and is worthy of significant further investment.
2.2 The structure of this written submission to the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure broadly follows the four areas given in the terms of reference issued by the Committee, namely: to set out the work undertaken by NIMC, as a key museum body, in relation to the social and economic value of museums; to provide our understanding of the issues around measuring value and impact; to comment on how such impacts could be used to assess value for money across government; and, finally, to highlight some of the ‘good practice’ of which the Northern Ireland Museums Council is aware.
3.1 Over the last twenty years there have been myriad studies which have examined the economic and social benefits of museums locally, nationally and internationally. Of specific relevance to the museum sector in Northern Ireland are those commissioned across the Anglophone countries, particularly the United Kingdom, over the last decade or so. Some of these are highlighted in section 6 of this document.
3.2 Generally such studies have considered economic impact to be calculated using a variety of data, including: museums’ turnover (including core support, trading activities and entry charges); the leverage of other financial resources (such as sponsorship, grants and donations); sustaining direct and indirect employment (with some studies considering the impact of staff expenditure within the local economy); the influence of capital programmes on local regeneration; the impact of visitor spend within the museums and more widely; and the contribution of museums in attracting and causing spending by tourists, both domestic and ‘out of state’.
3.3 There is one on-going study which is mapping the methodologies used to identify the economic contribution of museums (together with archives and libraries)[1]. This has highlighted that the wide range of approaches may be broadly categorised under four headings – Multiplier Analysis, Contingent Valuation, Return on Investment and Economic Valuation through Cost-benefit Analysis. While there are advantages and disadvantages to each of these approaches, there is a general preference for the use of Multiplier Analysis methodologies across the museum sector.
3.4 When it comes to the social impacts of museums there is a notable variety of measurement approaches, the value of each being dependent upon the focus or desired outcome of the particular study, and the discipline or area which is thought to have a social impact. A cursory examination of the principle studies available suggests that the social impacts of museums include their contributions to:
3.5 The process of establishing the value of the social benefits that accrue from such activities has received increasing attention over the last twenty years. The variety of social activity, as indicated in the range of work undertaken by museums, is matched by considerable diversity in the methods used to ascertain their value. One researcher, Karen Maas, has identified twenty social impact measurement methods[2], while another study suggests upwards of thirty[3].
3.6 Selecting a suitable, robust and appropriate method for measurement of the social impact of their myriad activities is but one issue for museums and those commissioned to undertake such work. Other associated issues are explored in Section 5 below.
4.1 The Northern Ireland Museums Council continues to undertake research across the museum sector by way of ensuring that its activities are underpinned by sound intelligence, and that government policy and the plans of the museums’ governing bodies are well-informed.
4.2 Recent NIMC studies having a bearing upon the economic and social impact of museums include:
4.3 NIMC undertook an update of the economic impact review in 2006. Further salient information is to be found within the NIMC quinquenial survey of the museum sector in Northern Ireland - Mapping Trends in Northern Ireland’s Museums – undertaken in 2002 and 2007.
4.4 The Northern Ireland Museum Policy (currently in draft) stresses the need for clarification on what and how museums, collectively and individually, contribute to local and central government objectives. It also highlights the critical necessity for up-to-date intelligence across the sector by way of informing future policy and strategy development.
4.5 The Northern Ireland Museums Council has committed to continue its research activities in support of the sector within its 2011-15 Corporate Plan, and more particularly will focus upon further research into the economic and social impacts of museums during 2011-12 on the back of the results anticipated from the commissioned study cited at paragraph 3.3 above.
5.1 It is understandable that government would wish to assess value for money across the activities which are supported with public money. However, there is a range of particular issues which need to be taken into account when investigating the social and economic impact of museums. The following is an indicative selection of such issues rather than exhaustive tabulation.
5.2 Currently there are 42 museums in Northern Ireland which meet the Museum Accreditation Standard. Of these four receive support directly from government through the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure, 20 operate under the aegis of local councils, and the other 18 are voluntary or independently run. They are situated across Northern Ireland and each has a distinct collecting policy. This diversity in their location, governance, funding base and the focus of their collections is a fundamental strength of the sector. It does however preclude any ‘one size fits all’ methodology for assessing impacts, and quite subtle approaches are required in order to achieve an understanding of impacts that stand somewhere between high-level assessments (that may not be particularly informative locally) and discrete, site specific assessments (from which comparative or collective conclusions are difficult to draw).
5.3 The collections focus, combined with the strong skill sets of staff, the resources available and the priorities of their governing body, mean that museums do not consistently work across all of the areas of potential social impact. Some will have specialist education personnel and thus will focus on learning, others may have a remit to work with a particular community, and yet others may undertake particular projects or programmes as and when the opportunity and funding become available. Such fluctuations complicate the establishment of baselines or the assessment of progress over time across the sector.
5.4 It must be recognised that there can be direct conflicts between economic and social impacts. This is apparent in the admission charge versus access dilemma faced by some museums, particularly those in the voluntary sector who rely upon ticket income to sustain their operations. However, it was writ large in the debate around the abolition of entry charges at the national museums in England, Scotland and Wales where free entry saw increased visitor service costs which were not wholly covered by compensation from government for lost income. See here.
Other obvious tensions include the role museums often undertake as custodians of a building of significant heritage value versus physical access requirements and ‘value for money’ cost of running the institution, or balancing access to the collections with the a priori preservation responsibility.
5.5 Another notable issue concerns clarity in definitions, approach and the mutual understanding amongst those with particular interest in the impacts of museums. The goals of ‘community cohesion’ and ‘social inclusion’, for instance, while variously defined continue to be perceived as somewhat nebulous, and a recent study points to a gap in understanding between the policymakers responsible for developing the rationale for government investment and the sector professionals who develop and deliver the programmes that generate social impact.[4]
5.6 An intriguing facet of the impact of museums concerns the use and non-use by individuals. Social impact is more often than not considered as collective. Nevertheless, the transformational impact of a museum so often comes through an individual’s engagement with objects in a collection, or with a particularly inspiring museum staff member. Allied to this is the contingent value of museums, often for non-users, which is summed up in one study with the following quote, “I’m glad its there, and that I want to know it will still be there if and when I choose to use it in the future."
5.7 A common opinion of commentators on museums’ impact is the prerequisite need for specific, robust data, collected over time, applied to an appropriate methodology, with a pre-agreed objective in mind. The current capacity of the sector in Northern Ireland to do this is weak. As NIMC’s Marketing Northern Ireland’s Museums (2009) study highlighted, there is little by way of a common or standardised approach to the collection of even the basic data in our museums and this would need to be rectified in order that the ubiquitous impacts could be properly assessed.
5.8 The available evidence suggests that economic and social benefits do invariably accrue from what it is that museums do. But they only come through their capacity to collect, preserve, display and interpret their collections for the edification, inspiration and enjoyment of the public. Thus all economic and social benefits are directly proportionate to the levels of investment in these primary functions.
5.9 The primacy of measuring the economic and social impacts, perhaps since the mid-1990’s, has gone hand in hand with the culture of accountability through targets and qualitative performance measurement. The intrinsic value of culture, particularly as represented by museums, has been seen to lack currency against this background. It is to the sector’s credit that it has sought to and succeeded in making a difference in social and economic terms. This has been enabled by the flexibility of programming, the commitment of staff and the underlying spirit of what museums are about. Notably that has not seen an appropriate quid pro quo, through which ‘cultural impacts’ are sought from those publicly funded bodies concerned directly with social and economic development. A clear and more comprehensive picture of museums’ contribution may be had through an assessment of their cultural, social and economic impact.
6.1 As indicated within the text of the previous sections, there is a significant corpus of research on the economic and social impact of museums. Among the most relevant and notable are:
6.2 The Museums Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) in England, has placed case studies on notable practice on the impact of museums on its web site and has published a series of documents including:
6.3 In a similar fashion, Museums Galleries Scotland has presented its associated research through its web site, including:
6.4 And other notable, related texts produced for museum bodies in the UK include:
[1] NIMC is a partner in the Archives, Libraries, and Museums Alliance UK (ALMAUK), which has commissioned a study into the possibility of devising toolkits for ascertaining economic impact across the sectors. This is due to be completed mid-2011
[2]Maas, K: Social Impact Measurement: Towards a Guideline for Managers. (2008)
[3] Wood, C and Leighton, D: Measuring Social Value (2010)
http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Measuring_social_value_-_web.pdf?1278410043 p23.
[4] MLA Council: New Directions in Social Policy – Developing the Evidence Base for Museums, Libraries and Archives in England (2005)
http://www.mla.gov.uk/what/publications/~/media/Files/pdf/2005/ndsp_developing_evidence.ashx
Name: Dr Elizabeth Crooke, Senior Lecturer Museum and Heritage Studies at the University of Ulster
Address: MA010, Faculty of Arts, Magee campus, Londonderry BT48 7JL
Email: em.crooke@ulster.ac.uk
1. It has been established by national and international research that museums are of immense social and economic value to society.
2. Social and economic value is indicated by the diverse importance people place on museums as invaluable resources, for instance:
3. Also of importance are those social and economic benefits that are much more difficult to measure.
4. University of Ulster offers two Masters programmes in museum studies both of which aim to explore and foster best practice in the sector. There is potential to expand this learning provision to provide credited short courses and training programmes to foster good practice in the areas of social and economic value.
1.1 It has been established by national and international research that museums are of immense social and economic value to society. DCMS reports, for instance, published in the past decade have confirmed the importance of museums as a creative context for social change, regeneration and bringing communities together.[1] This research provides a basis for ongoing work in Northern Ireland.
1.2 External review and validation of our museum services, such as through the Accreditation Scheme, and evidenced by various prizes, indicate that best practice is maintained by the sector.
1.3 Independent research undertaken by research students and academics at the University of Ulster contributes to our understanding of the value and impact of museums in the region. I recommend that DCAL take account of such research, use it to inform future work, and support further research in this area.
1.31 Research students at Ulster are working in the areas of digitization and museums, museum and heritage studies, material culture studies, art and design.
1.32 Academics at Ulster are working in museum studies and related fields. Local initiatives are referred to and evaluated in their published work.
1.3.2.1 Museums and Community (Routledge 2007) provided a critique of the community concept in relation to museum. The example of Northern Ireland was considered alongside initiatives in UK, North America and South Africa. Specifically Northern Ireland museums were reviewed in relation to community relations, cultural diversity and community movements.
1.3.2.2 Flight of the Earls (Guildhall Press 2010), edited by University of Ulster lecturer Eamonn O’Ciardha, has many articles that refer to the educational/research resources of various museums in Northern Ireland. This is evidence that museums are an essential resource for high-calibre work and their collections a means to advance our knowledge of the field
2.1 Museums are an important resource for the people of Northern Ireland and our visitors. Invaluable as places for us to conduct our leisure time, museums are also social spaces where we can interact with friends and family. Museums capture aspects of our cultural identity and are archives of our material culture. They are also important and inspirational resources for teachers, researchers and the creative industries.
2.2 The diversity of areas in which museums have economic and social impact needs to be acknowledged:
2.3 Also of importance are those social and economic benefits that are much more difficult to measure. This will include the positive contributions to local identity, civic pride and engagement that creates a more cohesive society. The benefits to mental health as well the opportunities for social engagement with friends and family provided by a visit to a museum must also be accounted for. The provision of museums and the arts makes for a happier and healthier society.
2.4 Our local museums provide permanent and temporary exhibitions that enhance our resource base available to visitors to the region. The museums also provide life-long learning opportunities, such as events and workshops, which provide a sustainable resource that enhances the quality of life for the people of Northern Ireland. The impact of these events is measured and evaluated by the museums themselves, as a means to improve their services to the public. In many cases these are internal evaluations, using standards of best practice in this area. At other times museums will engage in external review.
2.4.1 In 2008 Mid-Antrim Museums Service evaluated its Community History Programme. Independent evaluators gathered responses from participants who stated that the programme contributed to civic pride and community cohesion.[2]
3.1 The service provided by Northern Ireland Museums Council supports the maintenance of the highest standards of collections care, museums management and visitor facilities. The concentration of these skills within NIMC is excellent value for money. NIMC have published some of the most significant research on the sector. For instance Learning Within Museums in Northern Ireland (2009) and Learning and Access (2009).
3.2 We should have absolute confidence in the value of our museums. Research commissioned by National Museum Directors’ Conference (NMDC) and Museums, Libraries and Archives Council has found that:
3.2.1 Volunteering in Local Museums in Northern Ireland (2010), published by Northern Ireland Museums Council, is a record of the contribution of individuals to the success of the sector. Their input, an example of the civic community (or ‘big society’), is an indication of the social and culture value placed on these museums by communities and the reciprocal benefits experienced.
4.1 DCAL should consult the numerous reviews on the social and economic impact of the arts and museums. In a sense this case is well-established and it would not be good value for money to exactly repeat such research by asking identical questions. Instead, the nuances and nature of Northern Ireland would ask for research tailored to the region. I would contend that in Northern Ireland, because of the very nature of its history and economy, the benefit of museums may be even greater than elsewhere.
4.2 University of Ulster offers two Masters programmes in museum studies both of which aim to explore and foster best practice in the sector. Running for almost ten years now, over 140 graduates from these programmes are seeking a career in the sector. Currently 40+ students are studying museum practice at the University of Ulster. This indicates a massive commitment from our young people to the museum, heritage and arts sectors.
4.2.1 MA Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies, based on the Belfast campus (York Street). This course has been running since 2002.
4.2.2 MA Museum Practice and Management is a distance learning programme and it was developed in conjunction with the Heritage Council (Kilkenny). This programme was developed to support the Museum Standards Programme, Ireland.
4.3 There is potential to expand this learning provision to provide credited short courses and training programmes to foster good practice in the areas of social and economic value.
Elizabeth Crooke
University of Ulster
21 January 2011
[1] Department of Culture, Media and Sport (2004) Culture at the Heart of Regeneration, London, DCMS; (2004) Bringing Communities Together through Sport and Culture DCMS; (2000) Centres for Social Change, London, DCMS.
[2] Mid-Antrim Museums Service (2008) Evaluation of the Community History Programme
[3] NMDC (2006) Museums and Galleries in Britain: Economic, Creative and Social impacts; Travers and Glaister (2004) Valuing Museums: Impact and Innovation among National Museums (NMDC)
Lucia Wilson
Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure
Room 424
Parliament Buildings
Ballymiscaw
Stormont
BELFAST
BT4 3XX
21 January 2011
Dear Ms Wilson
Thank you for your letter of 14 December. A response is attached as requested. Please do contact me if any clarification is required or you need further details.
Yours sincerely,
Lesley-Anne Kerr
Head of Museums Development
1.1 CyMAL: Museums Archives and Libraries Wales (CyMAL) is a Division of the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG). It was established in 2004 to:
1.2 In 2007, responsibility for the sponsorship of Amgueddfa Cymru – National Museum Wales and the National Library for Wales was transferred to CyMAL.
2.1 There are approximately 160 organisations in Wales that hold collections and display them to the public and could therefore be called museums. At September, 2010, 89 had met the UK Standard for museums, Accreditation.
2.2 16 of the 22 local authorities in Wales run a total of 40 museums and most local authority museum and heritage officers support independent museums within the authority.
2.3 Independent museums are generally run by voluntary trusts and charities, including the National Trust, regimental and university museums. Around 46% receive no financial support from the local authority. Some have to levy an entrance charge to fund their revenue costs.
2.4 Nationally, Amgueddfa Cymru – National Museum Wales (ACNMW) collects on behalf of Wales, making collections and services available at the seven national museums across Wales: National Museum Cardiff, St Fagans: National History Museum, National Waterfront Museum in Swansea, National Wool Museum in Carmarthenshire, National Roman Legionary Museum in Caerleon and the National Slate Museum in Llanberis.
3.1 In June 2010, the Minister for Heritage, Alun Ffred Jones AM, launched the first museums strategy for Wales.
3.2 A Museums Strategy for Wales 2010-2015 identifies the following themes:
Museums for everyone
Museums will contribute to living communities, promote the values of a fair and just society and provide lifelong learning opportunities for all.
A collection for the nation
Museums will hold, care for and continue to develop collections for the nation which represent our rich and diverse culture.
Working effectively
Museums will manage their sites, operations, collections, and people effectively to provide services for citizens that are relevant, robust and sustainable.
3.3 The strategy is supported by a detailed action plan. The strategy is available at http://wales.gov.uk/topics/cultureandsport/museumsarchiveslibraries/cymal/museums/strategy/?lang=en
3.4 The strategy has proved invaluable in energising and focusing the sector in Wales.
4.1 CyMAL is currently a partner in a project led by Museums Galleries Scotland on behalf of ALMA-UK. The study includes recommendations for the development of a toolkit for UK museums to enable them to gather economic data. Also included is an analysis of studies already carried out. The lead official at Museums Galleries Scotland is Alison Turnbull alisont@museumsgalleriesscotland.org.uk
4.2 In 2007, CyMAL published Spotlight on Museums, a data gathering exercise that requested information on a wide range of issues from museums across Wales. 106 organisations responded. The information gathered was used in the development of A Museums Strategy for Wales. The information included economic data such as budgets, staff employed and volunteer input. The exercise will be repeated in 2011 (and again in 2015) allowing comparisons to be made and trends identified.
4.3 CyMAL supports the use of the Inspiring Learning for All framework (IlfA), developed in 2004 by the Museums Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) in evaluating the impact of museum programmes.
4.4 We encourage the use of IlfA Generic Learning Outcomes and Generic Social Outcomes as part of the evaluation framework within applications for grant aid. In support of the sector, we have produced resources explaining and providing advice on how to use them and on participative techniques. These are currently available in hard copy format. Information on the use of IlfA in Wales is available at http://library.wales.org/inspiring-learning/about-inspiring-learning/
4.5 CyMAL would welcome any opportunity to work across borders on developing a consistent approach to measuring social and economic impacts.
Lesley-Anne Kerr
Head of Museums Development
CyMAL: Museums Archives and Libraries Wales
Welsh Assembly Government
Paper 000/00 30 November 2010 NIAR 622-10
This paper provides some preliminary information on the feasibility of
assessing the value and impact of museums, in the light of a potential inquiry
on this topic by the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure.
Paper 000/00 30 November 2010
A previous museums inquiry in 2008 was conducted with the following terms of reference:
1. To consider the impact on museums in Northern Ireland resulting from a lack of a formal Departmental policy on museums over a number of years
2. To examine/consider the Departmental guidelines currently used in place of a formal policy
3. To examine levels of public and private sector investment in museums in Northern Ireland and to compare with other UK regions and the Republic of Ireland and to assess how the associated impacts on individuals, communities and the economy are measured and analysed
4. To draw on research and evidence on best practice on policy for museums which results in building a joined-up museum sector that will, over the long-term, deliver real benefit to individuals, communities and the economy and the associated outcomes
5. To seek input from the museums sector and stakeholders to establish views on a way forward for museums in Northern Ireland
6. To report to the Assembly making recommendations to the Department and/ or others.
Point three in these terms of reference describes an intention ‘to assess how the associated impacts on individuals, communities and the economy are measured and analysed’.
Indeed, this issue was alluded to during the 2008 inquiry by the Northern Ireland Museums Council, and is subsequently referred to in the subsequent Committee report as follows:
‘With no formal policy in place, Government have few reference points by which they can determine the value of their investment in museums or its impact on social, cultural or economic development. With no vision for the development of the sector, and no strategic framework through which the potential of the collective effort of the sector might be unlocked, are we not bereft of a route map?’[1]
Throughout the inquiry, some discussion of this issue took place. For example, the Mid-Antrim Museums Service commented on the importance of understanding the social value of museums, and the role to be played by a policy in guiding such an understanding[2].
The Northern Ireland Museums Council commented on a number of occasions that it is important to understand whether museums are delivering the best value for money[3].
However, throughout the inquiry, discussion of the need to assess the social and economic value of museums was limited, instead focusing more on the role of museums, their activities, and their need for resources, support and strategic direction.
Indeed, in the recommendations which emerged from the inquiry, the issue of assessing the social and economic value and impact of museums is not explicitly referred to. Instead, the recommendations covered issues such as the need to produce a museums policy, accreditation, education, collections acquisition and management, RPA and local government, strategic leadership and management within the sector, partnership, and linkages with other government departments and policies.
In the draft policy produced by DCAL and opened for public consultation between July and September 2010[4], references are made to the importance of assessing the value and impact of museums obliquely but not explicitly. For example, in ‘Section 3: Values, Standards and Legislation’, it states that,
‘Museums should play a full part in contributing to the social, cultural and economic development of Northern Ireland, particularly as they are, in the main, sustained through the public purse.’
However, the significance of measuring or understanding the contribution of museums to social, cultural and economic development is not explicitly referred to. Similarly, within ‘Section 5: Developing Audiences’, the draft policy states that,
‘While Northern Ireland’s museums have intrinsic and significant ‘economic value’, their full potential in contributing to the development of tourism in Northern Ireland has yet to be fully unlocked.’
It could be argued that this economic value needs to be fully and continuously assessed so that a clear understanding is provided, in order for the appropriate strategies and funding to be deployed. Finally, in ‘Section 8: Infrastructure, Investment and Resources’, goal IIR6 states the intention to:
‘…maintain up-to-date intelligence on the sector in support of the development of policy and strategy.’
It may be that the details of any intelligence gathering (such as the types of information to be gathered and the methodology) will emerge as part of the key actions that flow from the museums policy in due course. However, this is not explicitly stated in the draft policy.
The Communities and Culture Committee of the National Assembly for Wales is currently conducting an inquiry into the accessibility of the arts and cultural activities. As part of this inquiry, the committee will be examining the ‘impact of the Welsh Government’s investment in museums, libraries and archives in the context of providing access to cultural activities’[5]. Indeed, the Cymal document, A Museums Strategy for Wales, states an intention to ‘carry out a study to identify the economic impact of museums’[6].
The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport conducts research on a continuous basis as part of its Culture and Sport Evidence Programme (CASE). The programme has recently published a report called Understanding the Value of Engagement in Culture and Sport, which focuses on the recent history of attempts to derive economic values for cultural engagement and an analysis of subjective well-being[7]. It also aims to establish methodologies for the economic assessment of culture, including museums, in a fashion which produces statistically significant data which may be compared with, for example, health and employment. There would be merit in consulting further with the CASE team.
In 2008, the Department for Culture, Arts and Leisure commissioned Price Waterhouse Coopers, in collaboration with the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, to examine a model for understanding the social and economic value of public libraries, museums, arts and sport in Northern Ireland[8]. This established the following key figures[9]:
A number of potential social benefits are highlighted in the Price Waterhouse Coopers report, including those associated with tourism, education, health, regeneration, and social inclusion. However, in spite of these recommendations, it is not clear to what extent information about the economic and social value of museums is collected and analysed on a ‘consistent basis’ by DCAL, the key museum bodies in Northern Ireland, or the museums themselves. Although the Continuous Household Survey exercise provided some information on how individuals experience museums in Northern Ireland[11], more in-depth qualitative assessments, explanations of the deeper social role of museums, and analysis of their economic contribution, appear not to be available.
Given the potential usefulness and importance of assessing the social and economic value of museums, and also the apparent lack of ongoing information gathering at present, there may be merit in establishing a committee inquiry which addresses the following issues (see overleaf):
1. To investigate what work is currently being conducted to monitor the social and economic value of museums in Northern Ireland
2. To assess what level of understanding exists within DCAL and the key museums bodies about the methods of measuring value and impact on a consistent, ongoing basis
3. To investigate how information about the social and economic impact of museums could be used to assess value for money across government
4. To seek areas of good practice within the museums sector outside of Northern Ireland, such as those followed by Cymal, the Heritage Council in Ireland and elsewhere, and make recommendations about how improvements could be made to the understanding of the social and economic value of museums within Northern Ireland.
Given the timescale for the inquiry, and the relatively technical nature of the topic, it is suggested that a focused list of consultees be considered. This could include:
| Contact | Relevance |
| DCAL staff | Update on current research into social and economic value of museums; examine relationship between the value of museums and the museums policy. |
| National Museums Northern Ireland | Gauge level of engagement with this kind of work, and assess potential level of resources required to monitor on an ongoing basis. |
| Northern Ireland Museums Council | As above. |
| Cymal: Museums, Libraries and Archives Wales Welsh Assembly Government Rhodfa Padarn Aberystwyth Ceredigion SY23 3UR Wales |
Discover areas of good practice which may be transferable to Northern Ireland. Examine the relationship between impact monitoring and policy-making/funding. |
| Heritage Council Ireland Church Lane Kilkenny Ireland |
As above. |
| Museums, Libraries and Archives Council, England Grosvenor House 14 Bennetts Hill Birmingham B2 5RS |
As above. |
[1] Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure. 2008. Report on the Committee’s Inquiry into the Development of a Museums Policy for Northern Ireland: http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/culture/2007mandate/reports/report07_08_09r.htm Accessed 29.11.10: oral evidence provided by the Northern Ireland Museums Council, 16.10.08.
[2] Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure. 2008. Report on the Committee’s Inquiry into the Development of a Museums Policy for Northern Ireland: http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/culture/2007mandate/reports/report07_08_09r.htm Accessed 29.11.10: oral evidence provided by the Mid-Antrim Museums Service, 25.9.10.
[3] Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure. 2008. Report on the Committee’s Inquiry into the Development of a Museums Policy for Northern Ireland: http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/culture/2007mandate/reports/report07_08_09r.htm Accessed 29.11.10: oral evidence provided by the Northern Ireland Museums Council, 29.5.08 and 16.9.10.
[4] Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. 24.7.10. ‘Museums policy for Northern Ireland: Consultation document’.
[5] National Assembly for Wales website. ‘Communities and Culture Committee: Inquiry into the accessibility of arts and cultural activities in Wales’: http://bit.ly/gAps97 Accessed 26.11.10.
[6]Cymal: Museums, Libraries and Archives Wales. A Museums Strategy for Wales. Welsh Assembly Government: p46.
[7]Department for Culture, Media and Sport. 2010. Understanding the Value of Engagement in Culture and Sport. Culture and Sport Evidence Programme.
[8] DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model.
[9]DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model: pvii.
[10]DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model: pviii.
[11] Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. 2010. Experience of Museums in Northern Ireland: Findings from the Continuous Household Survey 2008/09.
Paper 23/11 7 February 2011 NIAR 23-11
NIAR 23-11
This paper sets out a summary of recent attempts to assess the impact and
value of museums across the UK and Ireland. Both economic and social impacts
are considered, and the methodologies adopted by such assessments are discussed.
Two case studies are used to highlight how economic and social impacts can be
assessed in practice, and the lessons learned from each exercise are described.
This paper sets out a summary of recent attempts to assess the impact and value of museums across the UK and Ireland. Both economic and social impacts are considered, and the methodologies adopted by such assessments are discussed. Two case studies are used to highlight how economic and social impacts can be assessed in practice, and the lessons learned from each exercise.
The last concerted attempt to calculate the economic impact of museums in Northern Ireland took place in 2003. A DCAL-commissioned study in 2008 then attempted to construct a model by which the social and economic value of public libraries, museums, arts and sport in Northern Ireland could be understood. However, this model was never progressed. This contrasts with the situation elsewhere. Since at least 2005, museums bodies in England and Scotland have sought to establish a consistent methodology by which to measure and demonstrate both the economic and the social value of museums.
The key techniques discussed have included:
| Method | Description | Assessment |
| Cost-benefit analysis | Identifies and analyses impacts in monetary terms and establishes whether benefits outweigh costs. | More often used as a decision-making tool than to demonstrate impacts after the event. |
| Multiplier analysis | Demonstrates the Gross Value Added (GVA) impacts on the local and wider economy. | Effective at illustrating ‘trickle down’ effects, but fails to capture broad range of social, cultural and educational benefits. |
| Contingent valuation | Asks users to place a value on the service offered. | Indicates value of a service, rather than just the economic impact. Difficulties in defining non-users, and in defining value ranges. |
| Social return on investment (SROI) | Combines multiplier analysis and contingent valuation to indicate both impact and value. | Offers flexibility in providing a range of indicators; can be used to monitor changes in impact of a museum through time. |
The SROI model has been favoured in England, and a number of case studies exist which demonstrate how it can be used. In 2010, the Association of Independent Museums created an economic value toolkit which sets out a method to estimate the economic impact museums may have on their local economy, via a multiplier analysis.
Measuring the social value of museums is more challenging, but significant advances have been made in this field in recent years. Various categories of social impact have been defined, and case studies exist to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
A case study from Tyne and Wear Museums illustrates the importance of defining the desired social impact, and the methodology to be used in assessing the outcome, at an early stage in any new project or programme.
Other forms of value and impact are also summarised briefly, including cultural heritage tourism, educational and cultural factors. It is concluded that although a methodology for educational impact is now well-established, measuring cultural impact is in its infancy and will require further development before empirical measures can be applied in practice.
Key Points
Executive Summary
1 Work conducted so far
(a) Northern Ireland
(b) England
(c) Wales
(d) Scotland
(e) Republic of Ireland
2 Emerging methodologies
(a) Economic value and impacts
(b) Social value and impacts
(c) Cultural heritage tourism
(d) Educational impacts
(e) Cultural impacts
Annexe 1: Case study – Assessing economic value at Bolton’s museum, library and archive services
Annexe 2: Case study – Assessing social impact at Tyne & Wear Museums
There is a growing recognition in the museums sector that both demonstrating and monitoring the economic impact of their existence is necessary in a time of intense pressure on public funding. To a degree, there is also an awareness of the advantages of demonstrating the social value of museums. Almost ten years ago, one analyst concluded that,
A signal weakness of the museums sector has been its inability to provide data to support the claims made about it…many of the statistics we have on museums are incomplete or inaccurate[1].
Furthermore, there were frustrations that any data collected was done so in a way which did not allow for consistent comparability from region to region:
The data that exist tend to quantify what can be quantified, rather than providing answers to questions that need addressing. There are no dedicated, fully reliable, comprehensive year-on-year data. There is little comparability between existing data, which have been gathered in different ways, use different reporting periods, so they cannot be aggregated[2].
However, over the last decade, a large amount of work has taken place to form and test appropriate, flexible and effective methodologies to indicate the impact and value of museums. The following is a brief review of the work undertaken in recent years by each of the regions of the UK, and Ireland.
The only tailor-made review of the economic impact of museums in Northern Ireland was conducted in 2003 by Price Waterhouse Coopers, commissioned by the Heritage Lottery Fund and with guidance from Northern Ireland Museums Council.[3] This review sought to illustrate the contribution museums make to the economic life of Northern Ireland, but also to develop an understanding in the sector of the importance of demonstrating this contribution. The methodology adopted was essentially a multiplier analysis which calculated not only the revenue generated directly by the museum in terms of entrance fees, food and drink, but also the wider effects of direct and indirect employment. The study also involved consultation with key stakeholders, and the resulting report presented both figures for the economic impact of the whole sector, and three specific case studies: the Ulster American Folk Park, the Lisburn Museum and Linen Centre, and Downpatrick Railway Museum. In terms of the economic impact of the sector, the following is a summary of the key figures:
In terms of assessing the full economic impact of museums consistently in the future, it was concluded that data would have to be collected on such factors as:
It was also concluded that in addition to the 38 Accredited museums, a further 400 organisations existed at the time which could be considered museums[4], and that ‘it is impossible to accurately estimate the full impact of the total museum sector without further in-depth, primary research’[5].
The next major piece of research was carried out in 2008, again by Price Waterhouse Coopers, in collaboration with the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency.[6] This research was intended to examine a model for understanding the social and economic value of public libraries, museums, arts and sport in Northern Ireland[7]. The study reproduced some headline economic figures for museums from the 2003 HLF report[8], and also highlighted a number of potential social benefits, including those associated with tourism, education, health, regeneration, and social inclusion.[9] However, two key recommendations highlighted the need for further research to be carried out:
The second stage of the study was intended to populate the model developed during stage one. However, in spite of the conclusion in the stage one report that ‘sufficient data is available in which to examine the economic benefits across each of the business areas’, it was later decided that in fact the available data for economic modelling was not sufficient, that too many assumptions would have to be made from pre-existing studies, and that only the area of libraries would be suitable for economic modelling to take place[10].
It would seem that no major assessment of the economic and social impact of museums has been carried out since this attempt, meaning that there has been no concerted study since 2003.
In 2010, DCAL published results from the Continuous Household Survey conducted in 2008/09[11]. On the basis of 3,414 respondents to the survey, the following conclusions were reached:
Meanwhile, the Northern Ireland Museums Council (NIMC), as the body responsible for supporting local, non-national museums across Northern Ireland, has continued to undertake a variety of research which has relevance for the social and economic impact of museums, including the state of volunteering in local museums[12], staffing and employment trends[13], marketing Northern Ireland’s museums[14], and the nature of learning opportunities in museums[15].
Finally, NIMC has pointed out some of the difficulties of obtaining specific, robust data, collected over time, applied to an appropriate methodology, with a pre-agreed objective in mind for Northern Ireland, and that the current capacity of the sector in Northern Ireland to do this is weak[16]. As NIMC’s Marketing Northern Ireland’s Museums (2009) study highlighted, there is little by way of a common or standardised approach to the collection of even the basic data for Northern Ireland’s museums and this would need to be rectified in order for the ubiquitous impacts to be properly assessed.
In England, the lead museums body is currently the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA – soon to be abolished and its functions subsumed within Arts Council England). MLA has been a contributor to a joint research programme led by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, also involving Arts Council England, English Heritage and Sport England, with the aim of strengthening understanding of how best to deliver high quality cultural (and sporting) opportunities. In 2010, the CASE programme produced a report which drew together analyses of the factors which drive engagement in culture and sport[17]. CASE has also produced an extensive database of over 5,000 studies on culture and sport engagement[18].
In 2011, David O’Brien from Leeds Metropolitan University produced a report entitled Measuring the value of culture: a report to DCMS, assessing the different approaches to generating the value associated with engagement in culture and sport. This analyses both a range of economic valuation approaches, and also a set of emerging ‘well-being-based’ techniques. The report makes a number of recommendations, including action by DCMS to create clear guidance on how to use economic valuation (rather than economic impact) techniques of the kind already used across central government, and that the department should develop closer links with academics working in the area of cultural economics so that good practice continues to be followed.
A web resource exists which provides guidance for councils and their partners on how to create a ‘local outcomes framework’ for culture and sport. The resource is designed to help measure and show evidence of the contribution which culture and sport provision makes to local priorities and outcomes[19].
In terms of museum-specific studies, MLA has produced a number of studies in recent years examining the relationship between museums and health benefits[20], cultural diversity[21], and volunteering[22]. Since 2005, there has been a concerted effort to develop sound methodologies and an evidence base so that the value and impact of museums can be measured, compared and demonstrated[23]. In 2008, MLA produced some detailed guidance on the range of approaches available to measure economic impact[24]. This concluded that though multiplier analysis and cost benefit analysis have their uses, a Social Return on Investment (SROI) model, combining an expression of user preferences with multiplier analysis, is the most beneficial. This technique is described in greater detail in section 2, below. A number of museums in England have now used the SROI methodology to indicate their social and economic value[25].
Aside from work conducted by the MLA, the Association of Independent Museums produced an economic impact paper in 2010, including an economic value ‘toolkit’ which sets out a straightforward method by which museums can estimate the impact they may have on their local economy.[26] The toolkit sets out the calculations to be used to quantify (i) tourism impacts (ii) employment impacts and (iii) the impacts of spend on goods and services. In just six pages, the relevant definitions, formulae and necessary economic assumptions are laid out in a way which is designed to allow independent museums to ‘accurately and quickly generate the data that is needed to estimate economic impacts’.[27]
The lead museums body in Wales is CyMAL: Museums Archives and Libraries Wales (CyMAL), a Division of the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG). It was established in 2004 to provide policy advice on local museums, archives and libraries, develop policy, and provide development advice and support.
There are 160 organisations in Wales that hold collections and display them to the public and could therefore be called museums. By September 2010, 89 had met the UK standard for museums, Accreditation.
CyMAL’s museums strategy, A Museums Strategy for Wales 2010-2015, was launched in June 2010. This strategy identifies three themes which relate specifically to the issue of social and economic impact and value:
The strategy is also supported by a detailed action plan[28].
In 2007, CyMAL published Spotlight on Museums[29], a data gathering exercise that requested information on a wide range of issues from museums across Wales. 106 organisations responded, including economic data such as budgets, staff employed and volunteer input. The exercise will be repeated in 2011 (and again in 2015) allowing comparisons to be made and trends identified. The 2007 report states that there are 89 Accredited museums, attracting a total of 3,143,632 visits, with national museums attracting 44% of this total.
The majority of work on this issue carried out in Scotland has been conducted by Museums Galleries Scotland (MGS), a membership organisation offering support to museums and galleries throughout Scotland. Throughout the 350 museums and galleries which MGS represent, it is estimated that 25 million people visit each year, and that £800 million is contributed to the Scottish economy.
MGS has carried out a number of relevant studies in recent years, including the impact of museums and galleries to Scottish tourism[30], and the impacts on their local communities[31]. This latter study includes a number of case studies which examine the impact of re-development, employment and work experience, community volunteering, community regeneration, and community engagement.
MGS is the lead partner in ALMA-UK (Archives, Libraries and Museums UK), which is currently conducting an ‘Economic Impact’ project as a result of a ‘realisation that there is a proliferation of studies in this area, with a variety of methodologies and that there was the need to step back and take stock of the methods and their applicability’[32]. The purpose of this project is firstly to analyse economic impact methodologies for archives, libraries and museums and support organisations from the sector, and secondly to create a series of potential toolkits that could be used by the sector. A report will derive from the first phase, and this is expected to be published in February 2011. The pilot studies which will make up phase two of the project will take place in various parts of the UK, and will include Northern Ireland.
The Heritage Council is the lead museums body in the Republic of Ireland. No museums-specific study has been carried out here recently[33], though there are a number of related studies which have examined the economic contribution of the arts, and of local authority heritage provision.
In 2007, a study was published which examined the value of heritage in Ireland, including both natural and built heritage, but also museums[34]. The study involved a survey of 1008 adults from 100 randomly selected points throughout the Republic of Ireland. Some key conclusions which stand out from the research are that over 90% of people think it is very or fairly important to protect heritage, and there is a strong desire for penalties for those who damage heritage. Of those who expressed an interest in heritage, 68% cited ‘personal health’ as a key motivator. Other benefits highlighted by respondents include ‘keeping in touch with the past for future generations’, ‘preserving our identity/cultural traditions’, and ‘pride in our own country/nationality’[35]. When asked what forms of heritage protection tax revenue should be spent on, the greatest proportion of respondents said the restoration of canals and rivers (29.4%) and the safeguarding and improving coastal landscapes (22.3%). The least popular allocation of funding was towards museums to include better exhibitions and visitor facilities (1.7%). A contingent valuation technique was used (see Section 2 of this paper for more details on this), which indicated a value for heritage protection across the whole Irish population of €89.54 million.
In 2010, an economic evaluation of the County Heritage Plan (CHP) was published. CHP is managed by the Heritage Council, and provides a framework through which funding and support for heritage protection is promoted at the county level. The programme produces publications, training sessions and seminars, allocates funds to community projects, and conducts surveys of various components of heritage. The report concluded that CHP supported 1,085 jobs, which when a multiplier effect is applied is estimated to be 1,315 full-time equivalent jobs. The net wage injection into the economy is estimated at €30.1 million, and the contribution to the Exchequer is estimated at €5.3 million. The expenditure of €30.1 million in net wages resulted in an estimated total income effect of €45.1 million in the economy over the period from 2004 to 2008. In terms of spending on secondary services, including advertising, printing, graphic design, hotel facilities and catering services, €565,377 was spent between 2004 and 2008, which with a multiplier effect suggests a total expenditure impact of €848,065.
In terms of the contribution made by heritage to cultural tourism, Tourism Ireland indicate that in 2009, around 3,045,000 overseas visitors to Ireland engaged in historical/ cultural visits, and 46% of total overseas visitors carried out historical/ cultural visits while in the country[36]. Overseas visitors to Ireland generated revenues of €3.1 billion.
The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council of England (MLA) conducted an extensive consultation exercise in 2008, resulting in a report which evaluates the various methodologies available and assesses the preferences of both the sector and stakeholders[37]. The report concluded that of the various economic appraisal techniques available, the following have the most relevance for museums:
| Method | Description | Assessment |
| Cost-benefit analysis | This technique identifies and analyses impacts in monetary terms and seeks to establish whether the benefits of an investment outweigh the costs. | Cost-benefit analysis tends to be used across the public and private sector to evaluate expenditure decisions. However, it is more often used as part of a decision-making process than to demonstrate impacts after the event. |
| Multiplier analysis | This demonstrates the Gross Value Added (GVA) impacts on the local and wider economy. Such impacts would include both direct effects, including the employment of staff, and indirect effects, including people employed by business which supply goods and services to the museum and the consumption expenditure of those employed by or through the museum. The technique derives from the tourism sector, and is applied also to the natural and built environment, arts and culture and sport. | Multipliers are effective at illustrating the ‘trickle down’ effects of a museum’s economy, though there are difficulties in that setting multiplier values and visitor expenditure is subjective. Multipliers also fail to capture the broad range of social, cultural and educational benefits |
| Method | Description | Assessment |
| Contingent valuation | This methodology uses a ‘stated preference’ model to ask users (and non-users) to place a value on the service offered. Users are asked to indicate value through (a) their Willingness to Pay (WTP) for a service which is in fact free, or (b) their Willingness To Accept (WTA) the loss of a service in the form of compensation. The technique is used frequently in the health sector, environment and transport. | Contingent valuation indicates the value of a service, rather than the straightforward economic impact. It produces a monetary indicator for values which are not in themselves economic. There are difficulties in defining and including non-users to obtain a balanced picture, and in defining the value ranges which users may select from when asked. |
| Social return on investment (SROI) | This technique combines multiplier analysis and contingent valuation to indicate both impact and value, and including a range of financial, economic and social indicators. SROI was used in the USA to assess the state library sector. | SROI offers flexibility in that it provides a range of indicators, and can be used to monitor changes in the impact of a museum through time. |
The report asserts that an important distinction should be made between economic impact and economic value[38].
Consultation with the sector indicated that economic impact and value methodologies must consider more than the income, expenditure and employment impacts of the services and must take into account wider social and economic impacts.
Impact can be thought of as such factors as museum turnover (including core support, trading activities and entry charges), the leverage of other financial resources (such as sponsorship, grants and donations), sustaining direct and indirect employment (with some studies considering the impact of staff expenditure within the local economy), the influence of capital programmes on local regeneration, the impact of visitor spend within the museums and more widely, and the contribution of museums in attracting and causing spending by tourists, both domestic and ‘out of state’[39]. One example of a recent study which adopted an economic impact model is the Natural History Museum, which used multiplier analysis to conclude that their direct expenditure is £83.3 million per year, their ancillary spending is in the range of £169m to £175m, and that through a multiplier value of 1.5, their overall economic impact is between £253m and £262m[40].
Such an approach contrasts with economic value, which is an expression of the wider economic significance of the museum held both by those who use the museum, and the value placed in its existence by those within its ‘catchment’ by those who do not use it.
The overall conclusion of the 2008 MLA report is that the method used will depend on the intended outcome; while the multiplier approach is appropriate when the economic impact is being assessed, the SROI model is preferred if economic value is to be measured[41]. Furthermore, SROI will give some indication of the social impacts of a service.
However, it is also pointed out that standardising some of the definitions used and the ways in which data are captured is important, both in establishing a baseline for a single institution or service which can then be measured against by subsequent studies, and in comparing several different services across a region. While sectors such as library (through the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) and archives (through the Public Service Quality Group) have developed standardised approaches to data capture, museums currently do not. Categories of information which are important to analyse in a consistent manner would include:
A number of museums, libraries and archives services across England have now produced economic value studies using an SROI analysis[42].
The UK Government Cabinet Office has commissioned guidelines for how to apply SROI techniques to create a numeric result to express both social and economic value[43].
Annexe 1 sets out a case study from Bolton’s museum, library and archive services which, in 2005, published an economic valuation using a contingent valuation methodology. The steps followed by the museum’s consultants are described. In summary, the study concluded that the Bolton population valued their museums, libraries and archives at £10.4 million. Relative to the £6.5 million of public funding it receives, these services generate 1.6 times the value of their funding. In other words, for every £1 spent on the service, £1.60 in value is generated. The survey also enabled the three services to be ranked, with libraries the most valued at £5.6 million, followed by museums at £4.5 million and then archives at £0.28 million.
There is a considerable variety of methods identified to record social impact. Karen Maas has identified twenty social impact measurement methods[44], while another study suggests upwards of thirty[45].
As highlighted above, a Social Return on Investment (SROI) analysis, incorporating contingent variation, will provide a degree of social value indication. There are also a range of qualitative techniques which will provide further indications of social value and impact.
Among the first attempts to classify the benefits to be gained from cultural services in general were made in the 1990s by Charles Landry[46] and François Matarasso[47]. Matarasso in particular defined 50 impacts, grouped under six key headings, as follows:
Building on these definitions, attempts have been made more recently to create empirical measures of social impact categories, though the number of case studies is relatively low – certainly somewhat lower than for economic impact studies[48].
More specific to museums, the MLA has defined a set of ‘Generic Social Outcomes’ to help organisations to measure and provide evidence of the wider benefits of their work[49]. These are structured around specific government policy areas (deriving from the previous government), including:
A series of resources are provided to offer guidance in how to capture evidence for each of these broad outcome themes[50].
The Northern Ireland Museums Council has identified six distinct contributions to social impact, including:
One approach, adopted by Museums Galleries Scotland, was used in 2008 to assess the various strengths of a museum’s community role[51]. A tool was applied which uses a 1 to 5 ranking to assess how those who engage with a museum (including tourists, those whose cultural heritage the museum protects and interprets, and those who have specialist knowledge in the subject matter) perceive it. The following criteria were used:
This tool also allows for measurements to be compared and monitored over an extended period of time.
In summary, the Tyne and Wear/Bristol study sought to assess the social impact of various museum programmes. A series of focus groups and questionnaires were conducted, staff were interviewed, and audience data was examined. The report produced a logic model to guide future attempts to assess the social impact.
Some key lessons were learned from this exercise, including the importance of defining what social impacts are sought during the planning stages of a new museum programme. It is commented that too often an imprecise definition of social impact is used, and that there is at times a narrow equation between positive social impact, and serving audiences from lower socio-economic groups, potentially ignoring other meaningful impacts. The report concludes that museums should define the target populations for which a social impact is sought, and to work with these populations over sustained periods of time in order to achieve that outcome. At the same time, the kinds of evidence that will be needed to test the level of impact should be thought about, and a data collection strategy designed. Finally, it is concluded that a ‘feedback loop’ should be established so that one programme’s social impact assessment informs the planning and execution of future projects.
However, there are a range of wider potential social impacts of museums for which no measure, indicator or survey currently exists. However, some parallels can be drawn with the film industry, which offers a range of benefits which are of value to society[52]. Such impacts could include the following factors:
Museums may also play a role in promoting and maintaining community relations. The draft DCAL Museums Policy for Northern Ireland states in the ministerial statement that[53],
Collaborations between museums and communities provide a vital role in understanding our shared history, heritage and culture as we move forward into the 21st century and museums can and do play an important role to address issues of social inclusion and social cohesion.
The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) in England has acknowledged the role which the museum sector can play in contributing to communities, including[54],
One aspect of these social contributions, the creation of safe and trusted spaces, is addressed in the draft Cohesion, Sharing and Integration (CSI) document, which states an intention to create[55],
Further on in the CSI document, the specific role of museums is described, and their social role broadened to include activities[56]:
…the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is developing a policy for museums that will likely aim to ensure that museums are seen as safe places for everyone to explore and participate in diverse types of community activity.
The contribution which museums make to tourism, and especially cultural tourism, has been the subject of a number of studies, the most recent of which was commissioned by the Heritage Lottery Fund in 2009 and carried out by Oxford Economics[57]. This research shows that the UK heritage-based tourism economy is bigger than any previous analyses had indicated. Museums make a significant contribution to UK tourism, with eight of the top 10 UK visitor attractions in 2008 being museums and galleries.
The research concluded that the size of the heritage-tourism sector, by expenditure, is in excess of £12.4 billion a year, £7.3 billion of which is based on built heritage and the museums sector (the remaining £5.1 billion being natural heritage). This means that heritage tourism makes a contribution to the total output of the UK economy (in terms of GDP) of £7.4 billion per year. The report claims that this is a bigger contribution than that of many other sectors of the economy, including advertising, ?lm, and the car industry. This scale of activity supports an estimated 195,000 full-time-equivalent jobs. Once economic ‘multiplier’ effects are included, the GDP contribution of heritage tourism rises to £20.6 billion a year, supporting a around 466,000 jobs. 60% of heritage tourists are UK residents.
In Northern Ireland specifically, the 2009 Tourism Ireland report shows that 157,300 visitors (or 11% of the total for the island of Ireland) engaged in ‘cultural/ historical’ activities[58]. This compares with 3,045,000 (or 46%) for the Republic of Ireland. The Northern Ireland figure for cultural/ historical visits accounts for 36% of total Northern Ireland visitors, whereas the Republic of Ireland figure accounts for 51% of its own total.
The most widely used framework for assessing and improving the education and learning impact of museums is the Inspiring Learning for All framework (IlfA), developed in 2004 by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA). This defines a set of five Generic Learning Outcomes (GLO), as follows[59]:
IlfA provides guidance for recording and analysing both qualitative and quantitative data. A range of organisations have now used this framework to carry out assessments of their own learning impact, including National Museums Liverpool, the BBC, English Heritage, and the Tate Gallery in London.
CASE has conducted a systematic review of studies examining the learning impacts of culture and sport for young people[60]. This review concludes that there is ‘promising evidence’ that attendance at a museum, gallery and/or heritage site may improve students’ attitudes towards school as well as their self-confidence in their learning abilities. Two studies reviewed by the CASE team suggest that academic attainment increased in pupils who had made museums visits[61].
However, the review also notes that there have been, to date, very few high quality studies of the impact of museums on learning outcomes, and that any general conclusions in this regard must be limited.
A number of more specific educational assessments of museums have been carried out, such as a report commissioned by a range of science museums in England which examined how they could contribute to secondary school science teaching[62].
In a recent essay, the museums analyst Sara Selwood outlines some of the difficulties of describing the differences that museum collections and exhibitions can make to individuals and communities beyond the social and economic – in other words, ‘how they affect their understanding of the world and how people respond to their museum experiences’[63].
A survey of the 28 national museums revealed a number of common motivations of cultural impact held by the museums themselves, including:
From the point of view of museum audiences, Selwood summarises a number of common responses to museum programmes, including,
There are a number of challenges in measuring and demonstrating cultural value, and few studies have been attempted. A key issue would seem to be the fact that culture is regarded as intrinsic rather than instrumental – that is, culture can carry its own perceived value, without necessarily being the means or agent for a further purpose which may manifest itself in a measureable fashion. Another challenge in measuring the cultural value of museums is in designing a generic, transferable framework for something like culture, which may be regarded by some as being of value precisely because it is inherently unique and specific.
However, in spite of these challenges, the Northern Ireland Museums Council highlights the importance of assessing the social, economic and cultural value of museums in order to gain a comprehensive picture of their overall impact:
The primacy of measuring the economic and social impacts, perhaps since the mid-1990s, has gone hand in hand with the culture of accountability through targets and qualitative performance measurement. The intrinsic value of culture, particularly as represented by museums, has been seen to lack currency against this background. It is to the sector’s credit that it has sought to and succeeded in making a difference in social and economic terms. This has been enabled by the flexibility of programming, the commitment of staff and the underlying spirit of what museums are about. Notably that has not seen an appropriate quid pro quo, through which ‘cultural impacts’ are sought from those publicly funded bodies concerned directly with social and economic development. A clear and more comprehensive picture of museums’ contribution may be had through an assessment of their cultural, social and economic impact.[64]
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council commissioned Jura Consultants in 2005 to undertake an economic valuation of Bolton’s museum, library and archive services[65]. The purpose of the exercise was[66]:
…raising the profile of museums, libraries and archives with key decision-makers by demonstrating the value of the sector to the local economy in a way which is robust and tangible.
The methodology used a contingent valuation model, employing face-to-face questionnaires to survey 325 Bolton residents including both users and non-users of the services. The questionnaires consisted of 50 questions, and focused on topics such as an initial user profile (age, gender, ethnic group, household income and education level), the level of use of services, frequency of use, time spent and financial spend, travel cost to reach services, the importance of different elements of the services, use of alternatives, and finally Willingness to Pay (WTP)/Willingness to Accept (WTA) questions. Examples of WTP and WTA questions include the following[67]:
Imagine that all Bolton residents were issued with Museum passes allowing year round access to all Bolton museums. What is the minimum amount you would accept each month to give up your Museum pass?
To help respondents to form a value for the service, a series of ‘prompts’ were adopted. One such prompt was the current cost per month per Council Tax payer of each of the services. For example, libraries cost around £3 per month, museums cost £1 and archives £0.50. Respondents were asked[68]:
Would it be fair to say that you would be willing to pay, for example, £1 a month to support the continuation of museums in Bolton?
The results were presented in a way which allowed for a breakdown of separate museum library and archive values. These results were then ‘grossed-up’ in the following manner:
This produced the result that the Bolton population valued the service at £10.4 million. Relative to the £6.5 million of public funding it receives, Bolton’s museums, libraries and archives generate 1.6 times the value of its funding. In other words, for every £1 spent on the service, £1.60 in value is generated. The survey also enabled the three services to be ranked, with libraries the most valued at £5.6 million, followed by museums at £4.5 million and then archives at £0.28 million.
Five focus groups were also conducted with local groups to test further the WTP and WTA values, as well as to interrogate other aspects of the questionnaires. Moreover, the focus groups helped ‘pick up the community and social benefits which the survey does not necessarily take account of’[69].
Following the Bolton example, Jura Consultants advise that a study programme of a similar nature should take around 13 weeks to complete. The costs of such an exercise were not made clear in publications.
In 2004 Tyne and Wear Museums (TWM) commissioned an investigation into the social impact of its programmes, and asked for recommendations to help maximise such impacts in the future. The following year, Bristol’s Museums joined the project.
The following is a summary of the tasks undertaken as part of the review:
This case study concludes that three key challenges remain in assessing the social impacts of a museum:
The project team made a number of recommendations in response to these challenges, including the importance of defining what social impacts are sought during the planning stages of a new museum programme. It is commented that too often an imprecise definition of social impact is used, and that there is at times a narrow equation between positive social impact, and serving audiences from lower socio-economic groups, potentially ignoring other meaningful impacts.
The report concludes that museums should define the target populations for which a social impact is sought, and to work with these populations over sustained periods of time in order to achieve that outcome. At the same time, the kinds of evidence that will be needed to test the level of impact should be thought about, and a data collection strategy designed. Finally, it is concluded that a ‘feedback loop’ should be established so that one programme’s social impact assessment informs the planning and execution of future projects.
[1] Selwood, S. 2002. What difference do museums make? Producing evidence on the impact of museums. Critical Quarterly. 44 (4): p68.
[2] Selwood, S. 2002. What difference do museums make? Producing evidence on the impact of museums. Critical Quarterly. 44 (4): p69; see also the points raised in Johnson, P & Thomas, B. 2000. The Economic Impact of Museums: A critique. University of Durham Business School.
[3] Price Waterhouse Coopers. 2003. An Initial Review of the Economic Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland: Final Report. Heritage Lottery Fund.
[4] NISRA. 2000. ‘Omnibus survey’, in DCAL Local Museum and Heritage Review, March 2001.
[5] Price Waterhouse Coopers. 2003. An Initial Review of the Economic Impact of Museums in Northern Ireland: Final Report. Heritage Lottery Fund: p31.
[6] DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model.
[7] DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model.
[8] DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model: pvii.
[9] DCAL, NISRA & PriceWaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Social and Economic Value of Public Libraries, Museums, Arts and Sport in Northern Ireland Phase I: Designing a Model: pviii.
[10] Assembly Research and Library Services. February 2008. ‘Research paper: Economic modeling of value impacts of DCAL investment’.
[11] Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. 2010. Experience of Museums in Northern Ireland: Findings from the Continuous Household Survey 2008/09.
[12] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 2010. Volunteering in Local Museums in Northern Ireland.
[13] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 2010. Staffing and Employment Trends within Northern Ireland’s Museums.
[14] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 2009. Marketing Northern Ireland’s Museums.
[15] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 2008. Learning within Museums in Northern Ireland.
[16] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 3.2.11. Written submission to the Culture, Arts and leisure Committee: Inquiry into the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland.
[17] ‘CASE’: Drivers, Impact and Value of engagement in culture and sport (2010)
[18] http://www.eppi.ioe.ac.uk/webdatabases/Intro.aspx?ID=19
[19] Local Government Improvement and Development. 2010. ‘A guide to measuring Culture and Sport outcomes’: http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=21649171 Accessed 7.2.11.
[20] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. 2004. Health Policy for Museums, Libraries and Archives.
[21] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. 2004. New Directions in Social Policy –Cultural Diversity for Museums, Libraries and Archives.
[22] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. 2006. Volunteering in Museums Libraries and Archives.
[23] For example, Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. 2005. New Directions in Social Policy – Developing the Evidence Base for Museums, Libraries and Archives in England; 2006. Museums and Galleries in Britain: Economic, Social and Creative Impacts.
[24] Jura consultants. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives.
[25] For example, the Museum of East Anglian Life: http://nia1.me/5j; there is also a list of SROI examples from England’s regional museums
[26] Association of Independent Museums. 2010. The Economic Value of the Independent Museums Sector.
[27] Association of Independent Museums. 2010. The Economic Value of the Independent Museums Sector: p29.
[28] CyMAL. 2010. A Museums Strategy for Wales: http://nia1.me/5i Accessed 4.2.11.
[29] CyMAL. 2007. Spotlight on Museums. Welsh Assembly Government.
[30] Museums Galleries Scotland. 2005. Realising the True Impact: Report on the impact of museums and galleries to Scottish Tourism.
[31] Graham, M. 2008. 2008. Impacts on Communities. Museums Galleries Scotland.
[32] ALMA-UK. 3.2.11. Written submission to the Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee: Review into the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland.
[33] Conversation with Beatrice Kelly, Head of Policy & Research, Heritage Council, Ireland. 31.1.11.
[34] Keith Simpson and Associates, Lansdowne Market Research, Optimize Consultants, & the Heritage Council. 2007. Valuing Heritage in Ireland. Heritage Council.
[35] Keith Simpson and Associates, Lansdowne Market Research, Optimize Consultants, & the Heritage Council. 2007. Valuing Heritage in Ireland. Heritage Council: p11.
[36] Tourism Ireland. 2010. Facts & Figures 2009: Island of Ireland Overseas Visitors: http://nia1.me/2g Accessed 7.2.11.
[37] Jura consultants. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives: pp16–17.
[38] Jura consultants. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives: pp41.
[39] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 3.2.11. Written submission to the Culture, Arts and leisure Committee: Inquiry into the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland.
[40] Travers, T & Brown, R. 2010. Treasurehouse and Powerhouse 2010: A report for the Natural History Museum. Natural History Museum and London School of Economics.
[41] Jura consultants. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives: pp42.
[42] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA). 2009. ‘Capturing outcomes from Regional Museum Hubs’ community engagement activities’: http://nia1.me/53 Accessed 2.2.11.
[43] The SROI Network. 2011. ‘The guide to SROI’: http://www.thesroinetwork.org/content/view/100/101 Accessed 7.2.11.
[44] Maas, K: Social Impact Measurement: Towards a Guideline for Managers. (2008)
[45] Wood, C and Leighton, D: Measuring Social Value (2010)
http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Measuring_social_value_-_web.pdf?1278410043 p23.
[46] Landry, C et al. 1993. The Social Impact of the Arts: A Discussion Document. Comedia.
[47] Matarasso, F. 1997. Use or Ornament? The Social Impact of Participation in the Arts. Comedia.
[48] Examples include: Bryson, J, Usherwood, B & Streatfield, D. 2002. South West Archives and Libraries Social Impact Audit; Centre for Sport and Leisure at Leeds Metropolitan University. 2002. Count Me In: The Dimensions of Social Inclusion through Culture and Sport; Research Centre for Museums and Galleries. 2002. A Catalyst for Change: The Social Impact of the Open Museum; Research Centre for Museums and Galleries. 2000. Museums and Social Inclusion: The GLLAM Report, October 2000; Department for Culture, Media and Sport. 2004. DCMS Evidence Toolkit.
[49] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. 2008. ‘Generic social outcomes’: http://nia1.me/5p Accessed 7.2.11.
[50] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. 2008. ‘How can you capture the impact that you are having?’: http://nia1.me/5o Accessed 7.2.11.
[51] Graham, M 2008. 2008. Impacts on Communities. Museums Galleries Scotland: pp56-8.
[52] See, for example: Oxford Economics. 2007. The Economic Impact of the UK Film Industry, and Jura consultants. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives: pp26–7.
[53] Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. 24.7.10. ‘Museums policy for Northern Ireland: Consultation document’: pp11-12.
[54] Jura Consulting. 2008. Economic Impact Methodologies for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Sector: What works and what doesn’t. Museums, Libraries and Archives: p9.
[55] OFMdFM. 26.7.10. Programme for Cohesion, Sharing and Integration: Consultation Document: p11.
[56] OFMdFM. 26.7.10. Programme for Cohesion, Sharing and Integration: Consultation Document: p38.
[57] Heritage Lottery Fund & Oxford Economics. 2010. Investing in Success: Heritage and the UK Tourism Economy.
[58] Tourism Ireland. 2010. Facts & Figures 2009: Island of Ireland Overseas Visitors: http://nia1.me/2g Accessed 7.2.11.
[59] Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. ‘Inspiring learning: an improvement framework for museums, libraries and archives’: http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk Accessed 4.2.11.
[60] CASE: The Culture and Sport Evidence Programme. 2010. Understanding the Impact of Engagement in Culture and Sport: A systematic review of the learning impacts for young people: pp55-61.
[61] The two studies cited are Watson, S, Dodd, J & Jones, C. 2007. The Impact of Museum Visits on the Attainment of Secondary Pupils in the East of England : 2006-2007. Leicester: Research Centre for Museums and Galleries; and West, H. 2008. ‘A study of the impact of using the TASC wheel on children’s involvement in their own learning’. Gifted Education International 24(2-3): 297 - 304.
[62] Collins, S & Lee, A. 2006. How Can Natural History Museums Support Secondary Science Teaching and Learning: A consultative study. Natural History Museum, Oxford University Museum of Natural History, The Manchester Museum, Tyne & Wear Museums, and King’s College London.
[63] Selwood, S. 2010. Making a Difference: The cultural impact of museums. An essay for the National Museum Director’s Conference.
[64] Northern Ireland Museums Council. 3.2.11. Written submission to the Culture, Arts and leisure Committee: Inquiry into the value and impact of museums in Northern Ireland.
[65] Jura Consultants. 2005. Bolton’s Museum, Library and Archives Services: An Economic Valuation. Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council and MLA North West.
[66] Jura Consultants. 2005. Bolton’s Museum, Library and Archives Services: An Economic Valuation. Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council and MLA North West: pi.
[67] Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council and MLA North West. 2005. Bolton’s Museum, Library and Archive Services: An economic valuation toolkit: Appendix A: User and non-user questionnaire.
[68] Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council and MLA North West. 2005. Bolton’s Museum, Library and Archive Services: An economic valuation toolkit: Appendix A: User and non-user questionnaire.
[69] Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council and MLA North West. 2005. Bolton’s Museum, Library and Archive Services: An economic valuation toolkit: p5.
Research and Library Service briefings are compiled for the benefit of MLA’s and their support staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of these papers with Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. We do, however, welcome written evidence that relate to our papers and these should be sent to the Research & Library Service, Northern Ireland Assembly,
Room 139, Parliament Buildings, Belfast BT4 3XX or e-mailed to RLS@niassembly.gov.uk
