During the last two years, over fourteen different countries from Europe have visited the Isle of Man with a view to implementing its model for heritage promotion.

Manx National Heritage, the Island’s statutory heritage agency, has won a European Museum of the Year award and has won the British Museum of the Year Award twice - no organisation has won the award twice before in the competition’s twentyfive-year history.

Most recently, Manx National Heritage has been presented with the Island’s “International Ambassador of the Year” award, in recognition of the international attraction which it has created for the Manx cultural identity.

Why is it that a small island, 570 square kilometres in area, positioned between England and Ireland, can have such an impact on the new approach to cultural promotion in Europe?

The answer is the pioneering way in which Manx National Heritage has redefined the traditional boundaries of the “museum” operation, both geographically and also in terms of its position and role within the community which it serves.

For Manx National Heritage , the whole of the historic landscape is the setting for the museum’s activities. This means that the professional staff cannot “hide” within the confines of a particular museum building but must take the museum message out into the community in a much more proactive way than has usually been the case in British museums.

The significance of this approach is that the heritage argument has to link much more dynamically with the local community and economy and, most importantly, the message and value of the Museum’s role has to be presented on the community’s terms, not on the curator’s.

Essentially, this means that an argument has to be made to establish the museum/heritage service as something which is central, rather than peripheral to society. Consequently, the battle for success is played out on a wider political and social platform and the stakes are much higher.

The issues involve resolving the tensions between culture, tourism and the needs of the local community and economy in a way which provides mutual benefit and willing partnerships .


THE POLITICS OF HERITAGE

As a number of the new nations of Europe emerge from traumatic times and renew the process of evaluating their culture and identity within an expanding European context, two ingredients are increasingly recognised as key foundations for the future.

A sound economy is obviously essential, and, while responding to the unity of a European identity, the unique asset which heritage and culture represents for any nation or region is a fundamental basis for social stability and pride.

It is therefore not surprising that, when these two elements are considered together, the prospect of focusing their respective benefits through the eye of “cultural tourism” becomes an aspiration at both the political as well as the cultural level.

A simple example of this, taken from the various European Union programmes for culture and heritage, is the Interreg II initiative.

THE INTERREG II INCENTIVE is based upon the recognition, at a political level, of the following facts:

- The “border regions” of Europe make up c. 15% of the European Community territory and represents c 10% of its population

- GNP is generally lower in the border regions and the unemployment rate is higher

- There is a need to develop cross-border co-operation with areas which may face difficulty due to economic and social isolation

- Particular emphasis should be place on co-operation in the fields of culture and education and the development of tourism.

Therefore, although heritage agencies can benefit greatly from this initiative, we should be in no doubt that this is a political and economic remit.

For many in what could broadly be called the “arts and museum community of professionals”, such a remit may be considered anathema to the pure essence of culture within the community.

However, the emergence of museums, culture and heritage on the European political, economic and social agenda over the last few years is, in my view, not something to be afraid of. For how long have heritage professionals complained at having to beg for crumbs from the tables of the economic elite?

Perhaps we are near to a breakthrough whereby the funding of our work will become central to a European strategy for social and economic well-being; moving away from the periphery of affairs in a way which will enhance rather than diminish the essence of cultural achievement in our communities.

However, this will not happen without a considerable change in perception of what we in the cultural sector do (usually at the tax-payer’s expense), the boundaries of our involvement and its relevance to the community which is paying for it.