ICOM-L Archives

International Council of Museums Discussion List

ICOM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Per Rekdal <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
ICOM Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:07:27 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (90 lines)
Several have on the ICOM-L remarked that participation in ICOM is
restricted by the fact that not all members are supported by their
institution, and that being member of a board in an international committee
or the Advisory or the Executive - indeed being able to attend the
conferences or just paying the ICOM membership fee - is totally dependent
on their ability to pay with their own money.

It goes without saying that the effects are that
a) only those that are su pported by their institutions or have a solid
personal economy can seek positions within ICOM,
b) the closer you live to Paris, the easier it is economically to take on
positions in ICOM,
c) the wealthier your museum is, the more likely it is to support you
participation,
d) the wealthier your country is, the easier it is - both personally and
institutionally to find resources for ICOM participation, and indeed - if
your country is poor you may find it hard even to pay the annual ICOM
membership fee, which may amount to a month's wage or more.

Ok, so what can ICOM do about this situation?

1) ICOM can set aside part of it's money for a fund that may - upon
application - give travel grants for office-holders not receiving support
from their institutions. Such an arrangement will quickly be misused by
museums finding out that they need not support their employee's ICOM
activity, since ICOM will. Evaluating applications is time-consuming and
therefore costly for ICOM.

2) ICOM can set aside part of it's money for a fund that may - upon
application - give travel grants for office-holders living far away from
Paris or from the venue of the conference of an international committee.
Say they support those that pay more than FF 4.000 for a return ticket.
Such an arrangement is based on more objective criteria than no.1, but
again: Evaluating applications is time-consuming and therefore costly for
ICOM.

3) ICOM can set aside part of it's money for a fund that may - upon
application - give travel grants for office-holders living in countries
that meet international criteria for poorness. Such an arrangement is also
based on more objective criteria than no.1, but again: Evaluating
applications is time-consuming and therefore costly for ICOM.

4) ICOM can as a general rule set the membership fee lower for members in
all countries that meet international criteria for poorness. This will
reduce ICOM's income, but possibly be compensated by a higher number of
members. But: each new member generates considerable expences for ICOM.

All of the above possibilities would tie up considerable parts of ICOM's
money and increase bureaucratic work, which again would probably reduce
ICOM's ability to support the international committees. As we know, one of
the major complaints regarding the distribution of ICOM's money is that too
little is distributed to the international committees.

Let us assume that the answer to this again must be a rationalisation of
ICOM's administration (like distributing ICOM News electronically to all
with internet connection, etc, etc.), or a rationalisation of ICOM's formal
procedures (like reducing the number of meetings of the Advisory and the
Executive), or rules for international committees not allowing them to
indulge in unnecessarily costly practices for the members (like having two
yearly board meetings instead of one), or ICOM's income must increase (as
has been pointed out, much of ICOM's income is however tied to spesific
projects, like AFRICOM, and it will be very hard for ICOM to find donors
that will support regular expences). None of these possible answers will
necessarily greatly improve the economic situation, but may help in many
small ways.

My point is simply:

- what we want is contradictory
- therefore we must be constructive in our critisism (bring forth ideas,
good, semi-good, bad ones!)
- we may have to make choises that will improve some fields, but not at all
help others.



Per B. Rekdal
Museumsleder/Museum Director
Universitetets etnografiske museum
Frederiksgate 2, N-0164 Oslo, Norway

Tel. -47 - 22 85 99 64
Fax -47 - 22 85 99 60
E-mail: [log in to unmask]


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Change ICOM-L subscription options and search the archives at:
   http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2