The ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums: Background and objectives

Understanding the nature of the cultural and natural heritage is fundamental to museums and therefore to the ICOM Code. As humanity’s inheritance, cultural property is no ordinary property. Furthermore, there are few enterprises where thekey resource for success is not expendable – in the case of museums, the collection. Indeed, there is a perpetual internal tension in museums between the preservation and utilisation of this central resource; and a certain paradox at the heart of a museum’s mission deepens when the maintenance and enhancement of the collection is also a key measure of success. An institution with such complex public responsibilities needs to be permanent, well-founded, resourced and managed, and to pursue a clear sense of purpose and direction. The heading to this first section of the ICOM Code sets the scene on the primary and enduring purpose of museums. Changing philosophies in museum management also influenced this section. Some resulted from the adoption of new management theories, while others arose through association with other professions – for example, education, libraries, leisure and tourism. In addition, social change had seen an increase and diversification in museum stakeholders, each with varying perceptions and expectations of the museum. These included the governing body, donors, the communities served (visitor and non-visitor alike), the subject disciplines, ‘Friends’ and other cognate bodies, partner providers, sponsors, retail organisations and other interests. These had increased the expectations of museums and their services with varying values influencing the contributions these parties made to, or drew from, the museum. The care and interpretation of the cultural heritage places the museum in a special position of public trust. However, in some cases the funding of this public trust had become increasingly dependent on the private or commercial sectors, or a combination of private and public sectors. Corporate sponsorship had tended to replace private patronage in financial support for museums; however, sponsorship is a two-way process – essentially an exchange of specified services rather than untied support. Meanwhile, museums cannot be viewed simply in terms of input/ output devices, and it is crucial to the social mission and public trust of museums that their resources do not figure as expendable items in their financial accounts. Taking stock of all these changes, the ICOM Code needed to make clear that museums have increased in complexity as multi-purpose institutions, and this raised new ethical issues to address in museum management.