DCMS Request for views on the Cultural Protection Fund
Arts Council England response
23rd February 2016
Arts Council England is the national development agency for the arts, museums and libraries in England. Our remit for ‘the arts’ includes a wide range of visual and performing art forms, music, dance, theatre and literature. We have funding responsibilities for regional museums, and a development role across libraries and the wider museums sector. We hold a range of specific responsibilities that support the cultural sector in securing important objects for the nation and sustaining, preserving, advocating and enabling access to collections held in museums, archives, libraries and other heritage bodies. This includes our role in delivering museum standards[1], development support for collections[2] and our statutory cultural property responsibilities on behalf of DCMS and the Secretary of State, such as export controls, support for the Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art, Acceptance in Lieu and Cultural Gifts Schemes and Government Indemnity and National Security Advice[3].
We also manage, on behalf of the DCMS and the UK the subscription and relationship with ICCROM (TheInternational Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property)[4], along with colleagues at Historic England - with its emphasis on the moveable and built heritage respectively.
We recognise that colleagues from across many sectors will bring more technical and field expertise to the specific responses to this consultation. However, our responsibilities mean that we share a clear interest in advocating for and supporting the importance of the moveable and built heritage cultural heritage and its long term contribution to communities and countries, including our own. We welcome this opportunity to support the investment that has been identified by the Government in support of international cultural property protection.
We particularly welcome the implicit understanding that connects protection of heritage, culture and a connection with place with long-term sustainable social and economic development and cohesion.
It is an important time to stand by the importance of cultural property protection and the values and tolerance it enshrines, and we will be happy to support the Government’s initiatives in any way we practically can.
Q1: Do you agree or disagree with the proposed overall approach to the
Cultural Protection Fund as outlined in Section 1?
We agree with the overall approach to the Cultural Protection Fund.
Q1a: Please provide any comments to explain your answer to Q1.
The focus on protecting and rebuilding cultural heritage and creating opportunities for economic development must be the right ones at a headline level.
In particular the need to be able to act at scale and coordinate efforts and strategies with other organisations across the world seems key to success.
It is important that all grants respond to an overall strategy with appropriate criteria – without pressure to spend it at speed due to time or other constraints.
Q2: Do you agree or disagree with the principles of the Fund?
We agree with the overall approach to the Cultural Protection Fund.
Q2a: Please provide any comments to explain your answer to Q2.
We are particularly supportive of the principle of complementarity with other international heritage protection programmes, something which was reinforced at the 2015 ICCROM General Assembly in Rome.
Balancing immediate action with the development of longer term strategies and developing preparedness, where access is not possible, would seem important.
Q3: Table 1 provides a list of potential projects under each of the Fund
outcomes. Is there anything that we have not considered?
Other stakeholders will be better placed to identify specific projects that may have been missed but the broad categories of projects seem well-considered. International cooperation in developing effective and usable joint databases of stolen, damaged and destroyed cultural property would be welcome but we recognise that this is a challenge. In the absence of such, dialogue with other agencies and organisations becomes all the more important.
Q4: Please tell us about any examples of existing successful cultural
heritage protection
N/A
Q5: Should there be a minimum and maximum value for grant awards?
Rather than set arbitrary maximum or minimum grant award amounts we suggest that the maximum grant level should reflect the scale of previous effective examples of existing cultural heritage protection initiatives and the purpose of the fund. In this sense, a high maximum award is unlikely to curtail ambition or impact. Considering that this is a four year fund, the British Council should monitor the performance and delivery of funded organisations and ensure that smaller organisations delivering excellent and far-reaching work can also be accommodated.
Q5a: If yes to Q5, what would you recommend the minimum grant award
to be (in £)?
See 6 below.
Q5b: If yes to Q5, what would you recommend the maximum grant award
to be (in £)?
See 6 below.
Q6: Please provide any additional comments on question 5.
In the first year it may be prudent to focus on investing in existing international projects to amplify their impact with larger grants and use the year to identify gaps in support and build the appropriate grant process to support delivering against those. Delivering a structured and differentiated grants process for an April 2016 launch might present a logistical challenge.
We understand that a commissioning model is not possible with these funds, therefore the above approach would allow space to tailor the funding criterion and focus on areas of identified need to fill the gaps.
Given the nature of the work one should consider quite generous limits, with reasonable and proportionate reporting and monitoring as appropriate to the funding levels and activity.
The fund needs to be managed so that that there is space to accommodate a range of grant levels, for example, a really specific immediately responsive £50k project without direct competition with a large longer-term strategic £5M project.
Q7: In your experience what are the most effective ways of monitoring
and evaluating the success of projects, especially outcomes which
may be harder to capture?
N/A
Q8: Do you support our overall approach to the Cultural Protection Fund
as outlined in Section 2.1?
Yes, we support the overall approach to the Cultural Protection Fund.
Q8a: Please provide any further comments to support your answer to
question 8.
Complementarity has been identified as a key requirement of the Fund and we would support this. Working through the British Council, drawing in support from external expertise where required seems like the sensible approach.
The overall approach to the application process seems right and we would support the proposed realism in terms of the timeframes for applicants turning around applications between April and June 2016. As acknowledged, this will likely require projects that are either already established or in development, and perhaps these timeframes may benefit from slight adjustment to help delivery of the grants.
Clearly specific expert assessments from a wide pool of experts will be required to support British Council officers in assessing projects to inform recommendations to any decision-making body.
Q9: Which regions or ODAeligible countries do you think grant funding
should be targeted towards and would have the most benefit in the first year of the Fund’s operation?
The MENA (Middle East and North Africa) focus seems right as a priority, though perhaps given the international nature of the fund there should be flexibility to apply some funds to other areas of emergency that arise. We understand that the funding is specifically available to activity related to current or potential conflict zones and not areas hit by environmental disasters, but would welcome future initiatives that allow support in other areas where cultural devastation follow disasters.
As we have already suggested, it might be most pragmatic to focus the first year on investing in and learning from the existing programmes of the major international agencies, museums, universities and other organisations. This will then help shape the focus of subsequent years more strategically.
Q10: Which regions or ODAeligible countries do you think grant funding
should be targeted towards and would have the most benefit in the subsequent years of the Fund’s operation?
Based on current knowledge it is perhaps difficult to say that the focus should move away from the MENA countries in the next 4 years. However, some provision should be made to respond to any change of circumstances and new situations that arise (See also 8).
Q11: What are your views on the feasibility of working in potentially
dangerous areas? Please include any advice on how the Fund could
support interventions in these scenarios and examples of previous
initiatives.
This is not our area of knowledge. We understand from the recent workshops that the British Council are well networked at a local level even in areas of high current risk and conflict, and clearly these connections will be crucial.
Q12: Which issues relating to gender should we be aware of? Please
make reference to any specific examples that you would like us to
consider?
The workshops made it clear that there is a strong concern to be culturally and context sensitive in any interventions.
Q12a: How could this be monitored?
N/A
Q13: Are there any other specific requirements or conditions that should
be applied to programmes applying for grant funding which you think we should be aware of? Please make reference to any specific examples that you would like us to consider.
We think that applicants should be required to demonstrate an awareness of other work that is happening in their area of interest and how their proposed activity might relate to, complement or add to it. Clearly strong evidence of track record and organisation and individual resilience will be key at times as well as a demonstration of sensitivity to and knowledge of the cultural and social context applicants are proposing to work in.
For more information please contact:
Nicole McNeilly
Officer, Policy and Research
1
[1] http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/what-we-do/supporting-museums/accreditation-scheme/
[2] http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/what-we-do/supporting-museums/designation-scheme
[3] http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/what-we-do/supporting-museums/cultural-property/
[4] http://www.iccrom.org/