Dear colleagues
If I understood right, the change from RO to RA enables committees to
promote easier integration beyond the UNESCO official regions
constraints, so perhaps the word Regional is the problem.
For instance, following an idea born in Paris 2006 Advisory Committee
Meeting, the Portuguese speaking national committees met in Vienna and
discussed future collaboration, starting with a consensual version of
the Code of Ethics, but foreseeing a more dynamic and productive
interaction. We considered the fact that East Timor, Mozambique and
St. Tomé and Prince do not have ICOM national committees and that our
recent efforts to contact ICOM Angola failed. In addition, there are
thriving Portuguese speaking communities in different countries and we
may enhance information and expertise sharing, and even exhibition
exchanges among these communities if we join forces, perhaps in an
institutional way.
We are not proposing a RA now, nor I have the mandate to this, but we
could in the future. This does not prevent ICOM-BR from being an
active member of ICOM LAC and/or to develop other partnerships. In
fact, we had a very nice meeting of Latin American and Caribbean ICOM
national committees with ICOM US and ICOM Canada, although this was a
very initial, though interesting contact. Also, Brazil recently hosted
a pre-meeting of Latin American, Caribbean and Iberic countries
(Andorra, Portugal and Spain) Ministers of Culture (or similar,
depending on the taxonomy adopted by different parties), attended by
different countries government officials, that happened to be ICOM
members of these countries. The seminar resulted in the proposal of
declaring 2008 the Iberic Year of Museums, to be officially announced
by the Presidents or Prime Ministers in their next reunion in
November, under the auspices of OEI (Ibero-American States
Organization).
The move from RO to RA should helps us to pursue the strategic
objectives for 2008-2010, in special numbers 1 and 2.
Carlos Roberto F. Brandão
Presidente ICOM-BR (2006-2009)(http://www.icom.org.br/)
fone/fax: 55-11-22732086
Museu de Zoologia da USP (http://www.mz.usp.br)
Av. Nazaré 481
São Paulo SP, Brasil 04263-000
fone: 55-11-61658138, 61600222
[log in to unmask]
Citando Inkyung Chang <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> Within ICOM-ASPAC the member countries do not have any confusion about where
> to belong. Only concerns are Pacific region is not well represented in
> ASPAC, since there are very few national committees from that specific
> area. Nevertherless, PIMA is very active and it is an affiliated
> organization in ICOM. I understand ICOM-Russia do not join the activities
> in ASPAC which should be respected as indicated in the model rule of RO.
> And also if we follow the definition of the regions of UNESCO(if I remember
> correctly) USA belongs to Europe even though it is located at the
> north-eastern part of the Pacific.
>
> Since RO has been already changed to Regional Alliences, we can focus more
> on collaboration with specific goals within the region(or sub-regions if
> needed) than deviding fine lines between the States based on geographical
> boundaries.
> As Prof. Boylan mentioned that these boundaries are not only based on
> geographical areas, but also on cultural and historical contexts.
>
>
> Inkyung Chang
> Chairperson/ICOM-ASPAC
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9/7/07, Perkko Mariliina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> I'm for one and only ICOM Europe and no other organizations in this small
>> area with many members. We should stand together.
>>
>> Mariliina Perkko
>> former Chair of the ICOM Costume Committee
>> member still
>>
>>
>> -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
>> Lähettäjä: International Council of Museums Discussion List [mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]] Puolesta Patrick Boylan
>> Lähetetty: 5. syyskuuta 2007 21:26
>> Vastaanottaja: [log in to unmask]
>> Aihe: Re: ICOM Regionalisation
>>
>>
>> Dear Mario, and subsequent contributors to this discussion,
>>
>> There are many different and often overlapping regional groupings around
>> the worlds, not least in Europe and adjacent areas.
>>
>> The European Union has a very effective Mediterranean Heritage programme,
>> but this itself overlaps with its ROSTE programme for south-eastern Europe
>> excluding Greece, Turkey and Cyprus - i.e. mainly the Balkan states),
>> which is run out of the EU's Venice office. (I'm on the advisory boards
>> for both.)
>>
>> An ICOM Mediterranean would also overlap with ICOM Arab, which broadly
>> covers MENA Region (= Middle East and North Africa) of the United Nations
>> and the World Bank. However, ICOM Arab in turn overlaps with both
>> ICOM-ASPAC and AFRICOM! There have also been debates for many years about
>> the exact limits of ICOM-ASPAC, since both Russia and the USA are very
>> obviously Pacific countries - as at today's summit in Sydney.
>>
>> Perhaps the biggest question mark - and main debate - ought be over the
>> idea of ICOM Europe? Is it realistic to have a Regional Organisation (now
>> "Alliance") which aims to cover the interests of almost three-quarters of
>> all current ICOM members, or should there be a move towards some rational
>> subdivision of Europe on geographical (or perhaps even on cultural or
>> language) lines?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Boylan
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
>> archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
>> archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
>>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
> archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
|
