Museum Management and Curatorship

Vol. 23, No. 1, March 2008, 23
41

Appropriate museology in theory and practice

Christina F. Kreps+

Director of Museum Studies and the Museum of Anthropology, University of Denver, Colorado,
USA
(Received 21 August 2007; final form 7 November 2007)

Appropriate museology is an approach to museum development and training that

adapts museum practices and strategies for cultural heritage preservation to local
cultural contexts and socioeconomic conditions. It is a bottom-up, community-
based approach that combines local knowledge and resources with those of
professional museum work to better meet the needs and interests of a particular
museum and its community. Appropriate museology advocates the exploration
and use of indigenous museological traditions where suitable. Using the Museum
Pusaka Nias in Genung Sitoli, North Sumatra, Indonesia, as a case study, this
article examines the theoretical foundations and practical applications of
appropriate museology. The aim is to stimulate critical thinking on the transfer
and cross-cultural application of standard, professional museum models and
methods.
Keywords: Indigenous museology; museums and community; museums and social
responsibility; appropriate technology; international development; disaster relief
and recovery; Indonesia

Introduction
What follows is an argument for appropriate museology, which is defined as an effort
to refashion professional museum practices and technologies to better fit local
cultural contexts and socioeconomic conditions. This paper is based on research
conducted on museum development and training in Indonesia for nearly 20 years,
with a focus on how the principles and methods of appropriate museology are being
applied at the Museum Pusaka Nias (Nias Heritage Museum), located in the town of
Genung Sitoli on the island of Nias, North Sumatra, Indonesia.
I first visited the Museum Pusaka Nias in July 2002 as a consultant to the Ford
Foundation in Jakarta, which had been funding projects at the museum for several
years. My job was to evaluate the museum’s progress and make recommendations to
the staff for its future development. I returned to Nias in July 2003 with two students
enrolled in the University of Denver’s (DU) Department of Anthropology Museum
Studies Program, which I direct. The purpose of our visit was to engage in a
collaborative training exercise with museum staff, as part of the newly created
University of Denver/Indonesia Exchange Program in Museum Training. The
objectives of the program were to provide on-site training to local museums in
Indonesia and give participants the opportunity to share knowledge and experiences

* Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0964-7775 Print/1872-9185 online

# 2008 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09647770701865345
http://www.informaworld.com
24 C.F. Kreps

in the spirit of cross-cultural exchange. A guiding principle of the program was that
approaches to museum development and professional training should be made
appropriate to local settings.
In this article, I describe the training exercise in Nias in July 2003, in addition to
other components of the DU/Indonesia Exchange Program, as an example of
appropriate museology in practice. My intention is to stimulate critical thinking on
the transfer and cross-cultural application of standard, professional museum
methods through a discussion of the theoretical foundations and practical
applications of appropriate museology. I am especially concerned with the relevance
of appropriate museology for museums with limited material resources and training
opportunities for staff, in locales where both museum staff and the general public are
largely unfamiliar with the museum. I also describe events that have occurred at the
Museum Pusaka Nias since 2005 and that have had a dramatic effect on its
operations, as well as on Nias in general. These events further underscore the value
of appropriate museology.

At the center of disaster

The island of Nias is situated approximately 100 miles off the northwest coast of
Sumatra in the Indian Ocean. This is the region that drew international attention in
late December 2004, when a tsunami devastated coastal communities throughout the
area. Because Nias is located near the epicenter of the earthquake that caused the
tsunami, the island received comparatively little damage and suffered fewer fatalities
than other areas. However, on 28 March 2005, Nias was hit by an earthquake
measuring 8.7 on the Richter scale. Earthquakes are not unfamiliar to the people of
Nias, as the island sits in one of the most seismically active areas of the world. Due to
regularly occurring earthquakes, Nias is nick-named the ‘dancing island’.
The quake and its aftershocks killed nearly 1000 people and destroyed much of
the island’s infrastructure, including roads, bridges, government and commercial
buildings, as well as some 50,000 homes. At the museum, 12 glass display cases were
shattered and more than 110 artifacts were seriously damaged or destroyed. Three
buildings used for storage and housing staff collapsed, and a 200-meter long wall
surrounding the museum compound also came down (Hämmerle, personal commu-
nication, August 2007).
Since the earthquake, the museum has been rebuilding with financial assistance
from a number of organizations, including the Cultural Emergency Response sector
of the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development based in the Netherlands,
and the Catholic Mission of Aachen, Germany and Capuchin Order, in addition to
private donors. This aid is allowing the museum to rebuild and advance its efforts to
safeguard Nias cultural heritage in both its tangible and intangible forms.

Museum development and training in Indonesia

The University of Denver/Indonesia Exchange Program was an outgrowth of both
my first visit to the Museum Pusaka Nias in 2002, and the research I have been
conducting on museum development in Indonesia since 1989 (see Kreps 1994, 1997,
2002, 2003a). It grew out of a concern for what I saw as largely ineffective
approaches to museum development and training. Up until 1998, museum
 Museum Management and Curatorship 25

development in Indonesia had been carried out in a top-down fashion, meaning that
it had been primarily the responsibility of government officials, elites, and
international experts. The Directorate of Museums (Direktorat Permuseuman) was
the primary government agency responsible for overseeing the development of
museums, both public and private, from 1975 until 1999. It functioned under the
auspices of the Department of Education and Culture, until it was dissolved and
became part of the newly formed Directorate General for History and Archaeology
in the Department of Culture and Tourism in 2001. The Directorate provided
technical assistance to museums through training programs for museum staff, often
in collaboration with museum professionals from Europe, the United States,
Australia, and Japan. It also produced instructional handbooks on how to perform
museum tasks based on internationally recognized, professional museum practices
and standards, established by bodies such as the International Council of Museums
of which the Directorate had been a member since 1970.
Despite these programmatic efforts and the many resources that have gone into
museum development in Indonesia over the decades, for the most part, museum
workers (especially those working in museums outside metropolitan areas) remain
poorly trained, and collections poorly cared for and poorly managed. Multiple
factors contribute to this situation, which is at least partly a consequence of the top-
down, expert and outsider-driven approaches to museum development and training
described above. It can also be seen as a result of the direct transfer of museum
models, technologies, and practices developed in cultural and socioeconomic
contexts dramatically different from those in which most Indonesian museums exist.
For instance, over the years, I have observed training programs run by national
and international museum experts in various aspects of collections care and
management, such as registration, documentation, and conservation. Although
these workshops were intended to provide museum workers with the training that
would help them better care for and preserve collections, this training generally did
not match the trainees’ level of preparation or the resources available at their
museums. It is important to note that most Indonesian museum workers, either those
working in government-funded or private museums, come to their positions with
little or no professional museum training (see Kreps 1994). Hence, they acquire their
training through their day-to-day work in a museum. Furthermore, Indonesian
museums, like museums elsewhere, tend to be inadequately funded and operate with
limited material resources. Regular access to professional quality museum materials
and equipment is also a problem, especially for museums in remote areas.
This approach to training not only pays little attention to how standard,
professional museum practices fit particular museum settings, it also does not allow
much room for exploring how local people may have their own curatorial traditions.
Such traditions deserve recognition and preservation in their own right, since they
are part of people’s tangible and intangible cultural heritage and contribute to world
cultural diversity. As I have previously maintained (see Kreps 2003a), many societies
have long had their own curatorial methods, as well as models of museums that can
be drawn on and integrated into contemporary museum development and training.
Recognition and use of traditional curatorial methods should not compromise
the integrity or value of standard, professional museum practices. Rather, traditional
methods can be combined with professional practices to maximize choices on how to
26 C.F. Kreps

better and most appropriately curate those cultural resources communities choose to
pass on to future generations.

Appropriate museology
Appropriate museology is an approach to museum development and training that
adapts museum practices and strategies for cultural heritage preservation to local
cultural contexts and socioeconomic conditions. Ideally, it is a bottom-up,
community-based approach that combines local knowledge and resources with
those of professional museum work to better meet the needs and interests of a
particular museum and its community. Appropriate museology also suggests that
indigenous museological traditions should be explored and integrated into museum
operations where suitable. These may include indigenous models of museums,
curatorial methods, and concepts of cultural heritage preservation. Indigenous
models of museums may be found in vernacular architectural forms, structures or
spaces for the collection, storage, display, and the protection of valued goods and
materials. Curatorial methods may be seen as any activity, behavior, or body of
practices and knowledge related to the care, use, treatment, interpretation, display,
and conservation of cultural property. Concepts of heritage preservation can be
interpreted as conceptual frameworks that support the transmission of culture
through time.
Indigenous models of museums and curatorial methods may be easily recognized
in some cultures
for example, in Pacific Islander meeting houses or New Guinea
haus tambaran (see Mead 1983; Simpson 1996; Stanley 2007). In other cultures, it
may be necessary to look for evidence of museological behavior lodged in larger
cultural formations, such as in religious beliefs and practices; social organization and
structure (especially kinship systems and ancestor worship); artistic traditions and
aesthetic systems, and knowledge related to people’s relationships and adaptations to
their natural environment. Indigenous museological traditions are examples of both
tangible and intangible forms of cultural heritage that in themselves can be a means
of preserving cultural heritage (see Kreps 2005).
The idea of appropriate museology is inspired by concepts and movements in the
field of international development, specifically ‘participatory’ approaches to devel-
opment and ‘appropriate technology’. Both are commensurate with a larger
movement to recognize the cultural dimensions of development, or rather, how
cultural factors influence development projects and, in many cases, contribute to
their success or failure (see Rao and Walton 2004; UNESCO 1995; World Bank
1996).

Culture and development

When development became a formal field of study and official government policy in
post-colonial ‘developing nations’ in the 1950s, development was primarily defined
in material and economic terms. Cultural variables and the human dimensions of
development were largely left out of development equations. However, after several
decades of development experiments, both theorists and practitioners began to
realize that development could not be simply measured by, or reduced to, economic
variables. Rather, development was a profoundly cultural matter since it affects
 Museum Management and Curatorship 27

people’s whole way of life. Because ignorance of cultural factors often led to the
failure of development projects, culture increasingly came to be viewed as a driving
force behind development. Today, it has become widely accepted in development
circles that, in order for development efforts to be sustainable in the long run, they
must take local people’s values, traditions, knowledge, and resources into account.
One of the dominant features of early development models was the outright
transfer of Western models of development to so-called developing areas, including
the transfer of technology and scientific know-how. Along with this came the
transfer of Western values and institutions. However, this style of development
worked to undermine other cultures’ technologies, knowledge systems, and institu-
tions, as well as their values and sense of identity. More recent culture-based and
culturally sensitive approaches to development acknowledge that external models,
technologies, and experiences cannot be successfully integrated into another context
through mere adoption or reproduction. Instead, they need to be reinterpreted or
reinvented through the lens of each society’s own cultural identity and value system
(see UNESCO 1996).

Participatory approaches and appropriate technology

Participatory approaches to development emerged in the 1970s in response to the
limitations posed by top-down, macro-level approaches which, in many cases, were
recognized as ineffective and not in keeping with local needs and interests.
Advocated by non-governmental and ‘grassroots’ organizations, the idea of
participation was a bottom-up, people-centered approach that ideally involved the
intended beneficiaries (or stakeholders) in all phases of a project, especially in the
decision-making process. Evidence shows that when local people have greater say in,
or control over, a project they have a greater stake in its outcome and sustainability.
Participatory approaches are a means of empowering people to take control of their
own course of development. Participation is also a way of making seemingly alien
institutions, technologies or practices more compatible with local circumstances. It is
based on democratic principles aimed at bridging the gaps between outside
professionals and local community members, suggesting that the knowledge and
skills of local people hold value along with that of experts.
Culture and community-based approaches to development often promote the use
of appropriate technology’, which is defined as:
any object, process, ideas or practices that enhances human fulfillment through
satisfaction of human needs. A technology is deemed appropriate when it is compatible
with local, cultural and economic conditions . . . and utilizes locally available material
and energy resources with tools and processes maintained and operationally controlled
by the local population . . . Technology is considered ‘appropriate’ to the extent that it is
consistent with the cultural, social, economic, and political institutions of the society in
which it is used. (Hazeltine 200, 3
4)
Appropriate technology may combine people’s indigenous skills with modern
knowledge to upgrade indigenous skills (Rahman 1993, 20). Central to the idea of
appropriate technology is that ‘technology must match both the user and the need in
complexity and scale’ (Hazeltine and Bull 1999, 3). Appropriate technology is by
definition small-scale, and its use is intended to foster self-reliance and responsibility
28 C.F. Kreps

because those directly involved control it. The founding of the appropriate
technology movement is often attributed to the British economist, E.F. Schumacher,
who was highly critical of orthodox, Western economic development models and
thinking. Schumacher asserted that such models neglected the human impact of
change and proposed more ‘humanistic’ change strategies (Ryan and Vivekananda
1993, 24). The idea and practice of appropriate technology also has its critics. Some
describe it as sentimental, conservative, paternalistic, and a form of neo-colonialism.
Further, appropriate technology denies poor people in developing countries access to
modern technology and high quality products (Burkey 1993, 197).
Although participation and appropriate technology are strategies that have been
created for use predominantly in rural development projects, such as in heath care
provisioning, education, agriculture, and natural resource management, they are also
applicable to museum development and training initiatives. As I have learned in my
work in Indonesia over the years, museums that do not actively recruit the
participation of community members (apart from museum staff members) in the
overall workings of the museum only fulfill their missions to a limited degree, and are
unsustainable without outside assistance.

The new museology movement

Appropriate museology is in keeping with several movements in museology that
parallel those in international development. Of particular importance is the ‘new
museology’ movement that began in the 1960s. According to proponents of the new
museology, the old museology was too preoccupied with museum methods and
techniques and did not address the social role of museums. The ‘new museum’ was to
be people-centered, action-oriented, and devoted to social change and development.
The movement was concerned, fundamentally, with the democratization of museums
and museum practices. It stressed the importance of community participation in
all aspects of museum operations. Similar to advocates of participatory approaches
to development, new museologists sought to bring professionals (‘experts’) and
community members together through collaborative work (see Davis 2005;
MacDonald 2006; Stam 2005; Vergo 1989).
Rene Rivard (1984, 84), a noted new museologist, has promoted the idea of
‘people’s museography’, defined as ‘a body of techniques and practices applied by a
population to the conservation and enhancement, in a museum or otherwise, of the
collective heritage of the community or territory’. This approach places people
and their relationship to objects in the forefront of curatorial work, and suggests
that there is no single set of curatorial practices that is universally applicable or
appropriate. Instead, curatorial work is constantly being redefined as part of ongoing
social processes and interactions, and is relative to specific cultural contexts (see
Kreps 2003b).

Intangible cultural heritage

Appropriate museology’s emphasis on the importance of both tangible and
intangible forms of cultural heritage, such as indigenous museological traditions,
is in step with recent developments in international cultural policy and action, such
as the passage of the UNESCO Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible
 Museum Management and Curatorship 29

cultural heritage in 2003. The Convention recognizes the centrality of intangible

cultural heritage to cultural continuity and identity, and the preservation of global
cultural diversity. As inscribed in the Convention, Article 2, paragraph 1, intangible
cultural heritage is ‘the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills
as
well as instruments, objects, artifacts and cultural spaces associated therewith
that
communities, groups and in some cases individuals recognize as part of their cultural
heritage’. The domains of intangible cultural heritage covered by the Convention
include languages, oral literature, performing arts, particular bodies of knowledge,
and narratives in all their diverse forms. The Convention calls for greater research
on, and documentation of, intangible cultural heritage, which can be an important
element of community-based, appropriate museology. Indeed, the Convention
stresses how community members and the ‘culture bearers’ themselves should take
the lead and be responsible for identifying and documenting intangible cultural
heritage, as well as carrying out measures to protect it.

University of Denver/Indonesia exchange program in museum training

The University of Denver/Indonesia Exchange Program in Museum Training had
two components. The first, funded by a grant from the Ford Foundation, consisted
of on-site training in Indonesia for DU and Indonesian participants. The second
involved training in museum studies and anthropology at the University of Denver
for Indonesian participants. One of the goals of the program was to give both DU
and Indonesian participants the opportunity to experience museum work in cultural
and national settings unlike their own. Another goal was to show participants and
our sponsors that what may seem appropriate in one context may not be in another.
The DU participants in the program were Catherine Fitzgerald and Heather
Ahlstrom Coldwell. Both were second-year graduate students in the DU Department
of Anthropology Museum Studies Program, and had had at least one year of
training in various aspects of museum work. In this article, I only describe our work
at the Museum Pusaka Nias, although we also carried out a project at the Kobus
Centre in Sintang, West Kalimantan (Indonesian Borneo). The Museum Pusaka
Nias and the Kobus Centre were selected as participants in the exchange program
based on my previous visits to each site in 2002.
The Indonesian participants who came to DU for training were Nata’alui Duha,
Vice Director of the Museum Pusaka Nias, and Novia Sagita from the Kobus Centre
in Sintang. Nata’alui Duha was in residence at DU from September to December
2004, and Novia Sagita was in residence for the entire 2004
05 academic year.
Nata’alui Duha was familiar with museum work, since he had been working at the
museum since 1995. He had also undertaken some formal museological training in
Jakarta. Novia Sagita was a newcomer to the museum field, but had extensive
experience working on community development projects and with the Kobus
Centre’s women’s weaving cooperative. Their work at DU was supported by
fellowships from the Asian Cultural Council in New York City.
At DU, Nata’alui Duha and Novia Sagita followed formal courses in museum
studies and anthropology, while receiving hands-on training in the University of
Denver Museum of Anthropology under the guidance of Ms Brooke Rohde, Curator
of Collections, and myself. Their training and course of study were tailored to their
particular needs and interests, in addition to those of their home institutions. In
30 C.F. Kreps

keeping with the philosophy behind appropriate museology, we tried to ‘match both
the user and the need in complexity and scale. (Hazeltine and Bull 1999, 3).

Appropriate museology at the Museum Pusaka Nias

The Museum Pusaka Nias was founded by Father Johannes Hämmerle, a German
Catholic missionary who has been working on the island for nearly 40 years. Since
the 1970s, Father Hämmerle has been conducting research and publishing on the
island’s history and culture, in addition to collecting examples of Nias material
culture. In 1990, Father Hämmerle received permission from his order, Friars Minor
Capuchin, to proceed with his plans to create a museum. The museum now functions
under the auspices of a private foundation, Yayasan Pusaka Nias, and has been
supported by private donations and grants from international governmental and
non-governmental agencies and foundations. The mission of the museum is to foster
awareness and appreciation of the island’s natural and cultural history; to serve as a
study, research, and recreation center; to promote the education and socioeconomic
development of local people, and to aid the regional government in tourism
development (Figure 1).
Nias has long been known for its outstanding art and monumental architecture.
According to Feldman (1994, 43), ‘the islanders produced some of the most
spectacular examples of architecture, stone work, wooden sculpture, gold work and
costumes seen anywhere in the [Indonesian] archipelago’ (see also Taylor and
Aragon 1991; Volkenkundig Museum Nusantara, Delft 1990; Waterson 1990). Nias
art and artifacts have been ardently collected since the 1800s and can now be found
in museums and private collections throughout the world. The appetite for Nias

Figure 1. Museum Pusaka Nias staff. July 2003. Photograph by Heather Ahlstrom Coldwell.
 Museum Management and Curatorship 31

material was so voracious that by the 1970s little was left on the island (see Feldman
1994). Father Hämmerle began his own collecting and created the Museum Pusaka
Nias in an effort to preserve what remained.
When Ms. Fitzgerald, Ms Coldwell and I arrived in Genung Sitoli, our first task
was to meet with museum staff members and discuss their needs and what they
would like to accomplish during our visit. Based on our discussions, we collectively
decided to concentrate on two main areas of concern: collection care and manage-
ment, and exhibitions.
The museum’s collection of some 6000 objects consists mostly of ethnographic
materials, including baskets, textiles, jewelry, ritual and ceremonial regalia;
weaponry, farming equipment, wooden and stone sculptures; pottery and ceramics.
The museum also has a very impressive collection of finely crafted models of
traditional houses representing vernacular architecture.
A small portion of the collection was on display, while the rest remained in
storage in several rooms located in the various buildings on the museum grounds.
None of the rooms or display areas had adequate means of climate control to
counteract the damaging effects of exposure to high levels of light, heat and
humidity. The storage rooms were cramped and had little shelving, so many objects
were stored on the floor or piled one on top of the other. Since we were only going to
be in Nias for 10 days, we did not have time to help rearrange the entire collection
and upgrade all the storage facilities. Consequently, we decided to concentrate on the
collections that had already been moved to one of the exhibit halls, which was in the
process of being converted into a temporary storage room (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Storage unit in Museum Pusaka Nias. July 2003. Photograph by Heather Ahlstrom
Coldwell.
32 C.F. Kreps

The exhibit halls were completed the previous year and, although they were
designed for exhibition purposes by a Swiss architect and mimicked elements of Nias
vernacular architecture, they were not designed with the protection of collections in
mind. Glass windows had been installed for security purposes and to protect the
interior from strong sea winds. While necessary and attractive, the windows allowed
excessive light to enter, which contributed to the generation of heat. Gaps between
the walls and the ceiling provided much needed ventilation, but also easy access for
birds, rodents, and other pests. With these conditions in mind, we decided to
concentrate on instructing the staff in the basic principles of preventive conservation,
and demonstrating how they could be applied to the storage and display of objects.
The museum does have a rudimentary conservation laboratory and a few staff
members had some background knowledge of conservation. However, these staff
members also told me that they did not feel they had had adequate training and
knowledge to use the available chemicals and equipment appropriately. Thus, these
resources were of little value to the staff.
I began our instruction with a lecture on preventive conservation principles and
measures, and why these are important for the long-term safeguarding of collections.
I explained that preventive conservation is intended to prevent the need for remedial
conservation, understood as the process of halting the deterioration of an object and
stabilizing its condition using specialist conservation techniques (Ambrose and Paine
2005, 190
1). Remedial conservation had been the focus of previous conservation
training at the museum. While extremely valuable and necessary under certain
conditions, remedial conservation can be a highly technical and costly undertaking
that requires the skills of professionally trained conservators, as well as expensive
materials and equipment. In contrast, I emphasized that preventive conservation is
largely a matter of becoming familiar with the basic techniques of object handling,
reducing various types of stress placed on objects, and ameliorating deleterious
environmental conditions, all of which do not necessarily require highly professional,
technical skills or expensive equipment.
Following the lecture, we toured storage units and exhibits with the staff to
identify problem areas. Our next step was to go to the local market to purchase
supplies for a hands-on demonstration of how to apply the principles and methods
of preventive conservation. At the market we purchased:
. Nylon fishing line to replace the metal wire the staff was using to hang objects
in exhibits
. Mosquito netting to cover shelving units and protect objects from bird and
rodent droppings, dust, and other debris
. Linoleum to cover wooden shelves so they could be cleaned more easily
. Cotton cloth and batting to make object forms and mounts
. Plastic tubing for object rests to decrease abrasion on surfaces
. Velcro to attach materials to one another and to avoid the use of glue and
nails
. Cotton swabs and soft bristled paint brushes to safely clean objects

We obtained cardboard tubes (used for rolling linoleum flooring) and Styrofoam
packing (in which electronics had been shipped) from shopkeepers at no cost. The
total cost of materials purchased was approximately US$30.
 Museum Management and Curatorship 33

Back at the museum, the students and I instructed the staff in how to properly
clean and handle objects using cotton swabs, soft bristle brushes, and a handheld
vacuum cleaner we had purchased in Jakarta for about US$25.We paid for the
vacuum cleaner out the project budget, but it was an expense that would not have
been prohibitive for the museum. We also showed staff members how to construct
mounts out of Styrofoam and cotton forms, and how to roll textiles on the
cardboard tubes to avoid creasing. Ideally, these materials should have been tested
for their potential deleterious, long-term effects on objects. However, in the absence
of archival quality materials, they were handy and inexpensive substitutes. Nata’alui
Duha told me a year later they had substituted the cardboard tubes with bamboo,
which is a material in abundance on the island. We then helped the staff cover
wooden shelves with linoleum and to arrange objects in both accessible and secure
positions.
The exercise was both instructive and empowering for museum staff members,
because it showed them that they were capable of doing the work themselves, and
that the materials and equipment they needed for preventive conservation were
relatively inexpensive (or free) and readily available. The success of the exercise was
clearly evident when the students and I returned from a three day trip to another part
of the island. While we were away, the staff refurbished an entire shelving unit
complete with skillfully crafted mounts for all the objects and mosquito netting to
protect objects from dust and falling debris. They had also covered the window
behind the unit to reduce light exposure and heat. One staff member in charge of
collections told me that, as a result of this exercise, she now felt more confident in her
job (Figure 3).
During our stay, we also discussed different approaches to exhibition design and
object display, including some of the ways in which the staff might incorporate local

Figure 3. Refurbished storage unit. July 2003. Photograph by Heather Ahlstrom.

34 C.F. Kreps

and traditional approaches. At the time, the museum was using display methods
typical of Western-style ethnographic museums. Objects were arranged typologically
or thematically in glass display cases, or on open platforms, to represent various
aspects of Nias traditional culture, such as pre-Christian and pre-Islamic religious
beliefs and practices; the means of making a living; rituals and ceremonies related to
the cycles of life, warfare, and personal adornment.
In addition to displaying and preserving its notable collection of the island’s
tangible cultural heritage, the museum also offered workshops on traditional arts
such as carving, dance, and music, in an effort to revitalize and preserve them. The
museum housed the only library on the island, which contained books, video
recordings, magazines and other materials on a wide range of topics. As part of the
museum’s stated mission, it also sponsored a number of activities intended to
promote the island’s socioeconomic development. For example, the museum
sponsored training programs for local students in business administration, English,
and tourism development. It also regularly published a newsletter that contained
useful information on topics like health care and hygiene, agricultural practices,
environmental conservation, and so on. This newsletter was distributed throughout
the island.
The Museum Pusaka Nias had relied almost exclusively on outside financial and
technical support, as well as on the efforts of Father Hämmerle and his dedicated
staff, for its existence. One of the main challenges to the staff at the time of our visit
was how to generate greater community participation in, and support for, the
museum. Staff members told me that many community members viewed the museum
primarily as a recreational outlet and tourist attraction, rather than as an
educational resource. Museum grounds were crowded on Sundays with people
who came to see the live animals on display, and to relax in its park like atmosphere
next to the sea. Father Hämmerle had intentionally created this kind of atmosphere
in an attempt to popularize the museum and make it attractive to local people. He
hoped that visitors would develop a deeper appreciation of the island’s natural and
cultural history in the process of enjoying themselves. Nata’alui Duha was keenly
aware of the ramifications that limited community participation had for the long-
term survival of the museum, and its effectiveness in carrying out its mission.
Therefore, he devoted some of his time at DU to researching community
participation in museums and museum-community relations.
The problem of limited community participation, or even interest in museums, is
not unique to the Museum Pusaka Nias, but is a perennial problem for museums
throughout Indonesia. When I first went to Indonesia in 1989 to begin my study of
museum development, staff members of the Directorate of Museums in Jakarta
informed me that Indonesians were ‘belum (not yet) museum minded’. They
attributed this lack of museum-mindedness to Indonesia’s status as a ‘developing’
and ‘modernizing’ nation, and the public’s ignorance of the museum and its
purposes. Hence, it was their job to educate the populace, including museum
workers, about the museum and its purposes.
While much has changed in Indonesia, and within the Indonesian museum
profession since 1989, museums still tend to not be well integrated into local
communities or of much interest to their members. Commenting on the status of
museums in Indonesian society in 2005, former Director-General of Culture, Edi
Sedyawati, states:
 Museum Management and Curatorship 35

We have a long way to go to overcome community prejudice regarding the value of

museums . . . Traditionally, museums have not played a major role in Indonesian society
and have not been seen as a major national resource. The community has a very low
level of expectations regarding the potential of museums to entertain or to educate. We
must work to change community perceptions of what a museum is. (Sedyawati 2003, 2)

In many cases, community members view the museum as a foreign institution created
by outside interests for the benefit of tourists, visiting dignitaries, government
officials, and researchers. Regular attendance on the part of local people is relatively
low, aside from students on obligatory school visits.
This pattern may be seen as yet another consequence of top-down, expert, and
outsider-driven approaches to museum development. As I discovered in my research
in Indonesia over the years, when museum models are imposed from above and from
outside the community, local people do not feel a sense of ownership in museums or
see the relevance of the institution to their own lives. Appropriate museology, with its
emphasis on bottom-up and participatory approaches to museum development, as
well as indigenous museology, can be a means of generating greater interest and
engagement in museums on the part of community members.

A blessing in disguise?
A report posted on the Museum Pusaka Nias website by Fabius Ndruru lists
activities that have taken place since 28 March 2005 (the date of the earthquake)
through December 2006 (Ndruru 2007). In addition to on-site activities related to
repairing damaged buildings, rehousing collections, and reinvigorating its educa-
tional programming, the museum’s staff has been working in village communities
across the island to help reconstruct traditional houses, Omo Hada, damaged by the
earthquake. According to Father Hämmerle, a local government official requested
the museum’s assistance in this effort, which was supported with aid from a number
of outside sources such as the United States Embassy in Jakarta, the Johanniter e.v.
Berlin, and the city governments of Münster and Konstanz, Germany (personal
communication, August 2007).
As noted earlier, Nias is well-known for its extraordinary traditional architecture
and megalithic monuments, which have been the subject of much scholarly attention
and one of the island’s main tourist attractions. Omo Hada are quintessential
features of Nias traditional culture since they are linked to nearly every aspect of
traditional life, including social organization and political structure, art and
aesthetics, religious beliefs and values, and technology. In former times, and today
to a certain degree, a man’s social standing and success were measured by his ability
to construct a fine house and give great feasts. The larger, more elaborate houses
were built by chiefs and noblemen, and megaliths erected in front of a house during
feasts symbolized the owner’s wealth and status. Customary law, or adat, was
established and implemented in the Omo Hada, and this is also where the village
council met. Although architectural styles and settlement patterns vary from the
north and south ends of the island, as well as from village to village, Omo Hada are
generally seen as the heart of a community. They are not mere dwellings, but the
source of great pride and cultural identity. But despite the high value Nias people
36 C.F. Kreps

place on their traditional architecture, Omo Hada have been on the wane as modern
concrete houses have become increasingly popular.
When I first visited Nias in 2002, I was taken to several villages to see different
styles of Omo Hada. On my tour, I learned that the reasons why fewer traditional
style houses are being built are largely economic. I was told that it is difficult for
families to adequately maintain the old houses in the traditional style, due to the
high cost and unavailability of building materials such as hardwoods and thatched
roofing. Ritual obligations add to the cost of constructing a house, as well. In
addition to sponsoring a feast upon its completion, the owner of the house is also
required to slaughter several pigs at each stage of its construction. Over and above
economic concerns is the fact that few craftsmen can still be found who possess the
knowledge and skills to build traditional style houses. Recent events, however, may
be reversing the decline of Omo Hada. Ironically, the earthquake that wrought so
much devastation has also brought renewed interest in a building technique that has
historically proven resilient to the island’s regular seismic shocks.
In a study conducted by the Vienna based Institute for Comparative Research in
Architecture (ICRA), the authors noted that while some 80% of concrete, modern
style houses were destroyed in the 2005 earthquake, comparatively few vernacular
houses were damaged. This is because, according to ICRA researchers, Nias
traditional architecture is an outstanding example of a building style (or appropriate
technology) highly adapted to specific environmental conditions. These houses are
usually located inland and away from coastal areas, and use locally available
materials like wood and vegetal fibers. Construction techniques have been developed
over the centuries to withstand the steady threat of seismic shocks, and a typical
house is elevated above the ground and supported by thick, criss-crossed stilts that
give when the earth moves. Architects from ICRA hope that the lessons learned from
the earthquake will be used to rebuild Nias but, first, more ‘research of the
indigenous building types has to be carried out in order to apply the findings to the
design of new forms, constructions and typologies’ (Gruber and Herbig 2006, 1).
Since the earthquake, Museum Pusaka Nias staff has been working with
individual families to help repair and restore their traditional style houses. On the
north end of the island in the Gomo area, the museum has helped rebuild two houses
and is currently supporting the reconstruction of three Laraga-style houses. Staff
members are also using the project as an opportunity to expand their educational
work. In one village, Sifaoro’ asi Gomo, staff convinced government and school
officials to make one house into a school/cultural center/museum, where school
children can learn about Nias culture and history (Hämmerle 2006). To some, this
may seem like a new function of Omo Hada, but to others, it is simply a continuation
of an old tradition. Omo Hada have long served as a repository for a community’s
history and culture, as well as space in which such knowledge is transmitted. In this
respect, Omo Hada can be viewed as an indigenous model of a museum that shows
evidence, especially in customs and rituals connected to the house, of museological
behavior.
Father Hämmerle, in a conference paper on Nias society, culture and the
importance of traditional houses, describes the tradition of osali, which is a Nias
word with multiple meanings. In one sense, he writes, osali refers to a throne or seat
from which a village counselor can ‘raise his voice’. But it also denotes the place in
the village where these seats are erected. Osali also stands for a great wooden chest
 Museum Management and Curatorship 37

where the village’s valuables and precious goods are stored. The osali is kept in the
chief’s house in front of a wall on which figures of the ancestors hang, constantly
reminding the household of the ancestors’ spiritual presence and powers. Hämmerle
maintains that there are strong beliefs associated with houses and their contents to
which some villagers still adhere. For example, he states that in some areas such as
the north end of the island, he has not been able to buy or acquire old houses or
artifacts found in them. Their owners refuse to part with these heirlooms for fear of
retribution from their ancestors (Hämmerle 2006).
Museologically speaking, such customs and beliefs have worked to protect and
preserve houses and their contents for generations and, taken as a whole, Omo Hada
and the tradition of osali can be seen as a Nias approach to cultural heritage
preservation in both tangible and intangible forms. It is important to bear in mind,
however, that not all traditions associated with the Omo Hada and osali are
considered worthy of preservation. Father Hämmerle, for one, adamantly dis-
courages the perpetuation of any tradition that promotes social inequality or creates
economic hardships for the people. While he is a strong proponent of restoring and
building traditional style houses, he discourages ‘wasting money for pigs and
expensive feasts’.
Here we are reminded that any approach to cultural heritage preservation
inherently involves choices. People have always had to make choices about what from
the past should be preserved for the future. At issue is the question of who decides
what gets preserved, why, and how. Perhaps, just as ICRA is advocating more
research on indigenous building styles, more research on Nias indigenous museology
can be done to develop museological ‘forms, constructions and typologies’ that draw
from the past, but are suited to contemporary values, needs, and purposes. Such
research might lead to further advances in Nias appropriate museology.

Appropriate museology as humanitarian cultural work

Ivan Karp and Corinne Kratz in the Introduction to the book, Museum frictions:
Public cultures/global transformations (2006), suggest that museums have become:
essential forms through which to make statements about history, identity, value and
place and to claim recognition. Reproduced, adapted, and transformed globally,
museums are not just a place or institution but have become a portable social technology
(emphasis added), or set of museological processes (emphasis added) through which such
statements and claims are represented, embodied, and debated. Whether they define
their scope as national, regional, or community-based, museum spaces can become
global theaters of real consequence. (Karp and Kratz 2006, 4)
Museum Pusaka Nias, from its inception, has been a space in which a wide range
of museological processes and agents have converged from local, national, and
international sources. But, in the aftermath of the tsunami and earthquake, it has
clearly become a ‘global theater of real consequence’. Currently, there are some 100
international foreign and domestic aid workers and organizations operating in Nias,
many of which are working through the museum. This influx of people and money is
not only benefiting the museum, but also the island in general, bringing an economic
boom that is accelerating development and modernization. In this light, Father
Hämmerle perceives the 2005 earthquake as a ‘blessing in disguise’ that ‘marks the
38 C.F. Kreps

beginning of a new modern time for Nias’ (2006, 12) In addition to new roads,
buildings, and humanitarian aid, the earthquake has brought modern technologies
and services with which come modern worldviews and values. Father Hämmerle sees
these changes as a positive influence on Nias society, especially for the youth who are
being exposed to new ideas, behaviors, and opportunities. Nevertheless, he also
worries about what will happen on the island in 2009 when the aid workers leave and
the money dries up. Will the people of Nias be able to sustain the momentum of
social and economic development created in the earthquake’s aftermath, or will they
have become too reliant on outside aid? What impact will so much change have on
the people’s way of life, or in other words, culture?
In September 2006, Nata’alui Duha participated in the international conference
‘Culture is a basic need: Responding to cultural emergencies’ in The Netherlands.
The conference was sponsored by the Cultural Emergency Response (CER) network
of the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development, based in The Hague. The
CER offers emergency relief (‘first aid’) for cultural heritages that have been
damaged or destroyed as a result of natural or human-made disasters, as well as
climate change. Its aim is to focus world attention on the value of cultural heritage
and the gravity of cultural emergencies, and to promote the belief that culture is an
essential element of humanitarian assistance.
The conference’s purpose was to draw attention to the importance of culture in
humanitarian relief, and address the impact of disasters on culture and identity.
Discussions centered on why culture must be seen as a basic human need and part of
humanitarian assistance. To many, it is not enough to just focus on saving lives. It is
also imperative to think about how lives become meaningful again in the aftermath
of a disaster. Because culture gives meaning to people’s lives and is critical to their
psychological well-being, it is also necessary to understand culture in the broadest
sense, beyond its tangible manifestations. As Jan Pronk (2006) declared in his
opening address, ‘Culture is more than matter. Culture is the spirit, soul, and mind
of a community. Destruction of that culture is an attack on life itself.’ Georg Frerks
(2006), Head of Disaster Studies at Wageninen University, also emphasized that
‘culture is more than tangible materials. It also encompasses the identity and human
dignity of the people in a disaster area. Good, effective aid requires that the workers
understand the culture, the standards and values, all the ways of the victim’s society’.
Appropriate museology is an approach to museum training and cultural heritage
preservation grounded in the principle that ‘culture is a basic need’, and any
museological practice is a profoundly cultural matter that cannot be divorced from a
specific cultural context. Good and effective training requires an understanding of
that context so that museological methods and technologies can be suited to it.
Appropriate museology is a humanist approach that makes people and their actual
cultural needs and circumstances the central reference point from which all work
proceeds.

Conclusion
The Museum Pusaka Nias’ assistance in restoring traditional houses is an example
of appropriate museology in action, and demonstrates how museums and cultural
work can contribute to humanitarian relief efforts. This project is but one of the
many contributions that the museum makes to its community, and how it helps meet
 Museum Management and Curatorship 39

people’s ‘basic human needs’. But even though the museum is clearly a valuable
resource on the island, its continued vitality and long-term survival are tenuous.
In September 2007, I heard from Father Hämmerle that the museum is no longer
receiving outside aid for restoring traditional houses or for rebuilding the museum. It
now relies solely on its internal budget to cover basic operating costs. It does receive
funding from the district government, but this is only enough to pay workers’
salaries. Consequently, the museum’s ability to continue to rebuild, much less expand
its activities, are limited. In his words, ‘a lot of people have come to consult and
praise our work, but nothing else’. Although the museum’s situation may be more
serious now than in the past, financial challenges are not new for the museum. As
noted earlier, since its inception the museum has depended heavily on outside
assistance, and its capacity to sustain itself without external support has been
questionable. This brings us back to the crucial issue of local interest in, and support
for, the museum.
According to Nata’alui Duha, the museum has yet to become what he and others
have envisioned. He says that many people come to the museum, but primarily for
recreational purposes. While this is part of the museum’s mission, he does not want it
simply to be a tourist destination or place where visitors come to picnic. Rather, his
dream is for the museum to be a ‘center of education and cultural inspiration’ for the
local people: ‘My concern is how to move and influence the mind and behavior of
visitors.’’ Looking into the future, he also worries about what will happen to the
museum when Father Hämmerle is no longer with them. In his view, the museum’s
‘lack of human resources’ is its biggest weakness (personal communication,
September 2007).
Visitors are a museum’s greatest ‘human resource’: without visitors, museums
have no reason to exist other than to be a storehouse for objects. Museum Pusaka
Nias does not necessarily need more visitors. As Nata’alui Duha says, many people
come to the museum. What it needs is the active participation of local community
members who are genuinely invested in the museum and value what it has to offer.
The museum formed a support group, Masyarakat Peduli Museum, in 2004, but so
far it has not been active because, in the words of Father Hämmerle, ‘people do not
yet understand it’ (personal communication, September 2007).
The Museum Pusaka Nias has made progress since 2003, despite the enormous
obstacles it has faced. For example, it now receives financial support from the local
government which it did not enjoy in the past. This support is, in essence, recognition
of the museum’s work and the valuable contributions it makes to Nias’ socio-
economic development. The museum also now has an impressive website that
literally connects it to the entire world. But perhaps this is the time for the museum
to focus inward and strengthen its local base of support, because this is what is more
likely to ensure its ultimate survival.

Acknowledgement
I am grateful to Father Johannes Hämmerle, Nata’alui Duha and all the staff of Museum
Pusaka Nias for their kind hospitality, and for giving me the opportunity to work with them
on this project. I am also indebted to all the DU students and staff of the Museum of
Anthropology who helped make the DU/Indonesian Exchange Program in Museum Training
a success. I am especially thankful to Philip Yampolsky of the Ford Foundation in Jakarta as
40 C.F. Kreps

well as Sarah Bradley of the Asian Cultural Council for facilitating the funding that made the
project possible. Many thanks also go to the anonymous reviewers of the article for their
helpful comments and to the journal’s editor, Dr Robert Janes, for ushering it through to
publication.

References
Ambrose, T., and C. Paine. 2006. Museum basics. London and New York: Routledge.
Burkey, S. 1993. People first: A guide to self -reliant, participatory rural development. London:
Zed Books.
Davis, P. 2005. Places, cultural ‘touchstones’, and the ecomuseum. In Heritage, museums, and
galleries. An introductory reader, ed. G. Corsane, 365
76. London: Routledge.
Feldman, J. 1994. The adaptation of indigenous forms to western taste: The case of Nias. In
Fragile traditions. Indonesian art in jeopardy, ed. P. Taylor, 43
57. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press.
Frerks, G. 2006. Positioning culture in humanitarian relief. Keynote lecture given at the
conference Culture is a basic need: Responding to cultural emergencies, 25
26 September,
Den Haag, The Netherlands.
Gruber, P. and U. Herbig. 2005. Research on environmental adaptation of traditional building
constructions and technologies in Nias. Vortag CIPA 2005 XX International Symposium
Proceedings, 26 September
1 October, Turin, Italy.
Hämmerle, J. 2006. Society and culture in Nias. Paper presented at the conference Traditional
Architecture and Art on Nias, 30
31 October, Museum for Ethnology, Vienna, Austria.
Hazeltine, B. 2003. Overview. In Field guide to appropriate technology, ed. B. Hazeltine and
C. Bull. London: Academic Press.
Hazeltine, B., and C. Bull. 1999. Appropriate technology. Tools, choices, and implications.
London: Academic Press.
Karp, I., and C. Kratz. 2006. Museum frictions. Public cultures/global transformations.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Kreps, C. 2005. Indigenous curation as intangible cultural heritage: Thoughts on the relevance
of the 2003 UNESCO Convention. Theorizing Cultural Heritage 1, no. 2: 3
8.
***. 2003a. Liberating culture: Cross-cultural perspectives on museums, curation, and
cultural heritage preservation. London: Routledge.
***. 2003b. Curatorship as social practice. Curator 46, no. 3: 311
23.
***. 2002. Environmental conservation and cultural action. Practicing Anthropology 24,
no. 2: 28
32.
***. 1997. Participatory approaches to museum development. Smithsonian Institution
Center for Museum Studies Bulletin 5, no. 3: 1
12.
***. 1994. On becoming museum-minded: A study of museum development and the
politics of culture in Indonesia, PhD diss., University of Oregon.
MacDonald, S., ed. 2006. Blackwell companion in museum studies. London: Blackwell.
Mead, S. 1983. Indigenous models of museums in Oceania. Museum 35, no. 139: 98
101.
Ndruru, F. 2007. Laporan kegiatan museum pusaka nias pasca bencana gempa gumi tgl. 28
Maret 2005 s/d Desember 2006 [Report on activities at the Museum Pusaka Nias from the
time of the earthquake March 28 to December 2006]. http://www.museum-nias.net.
(Accessed 20 June 2007).
Pronk, J. 2006. Wisdom, devotion, and modesty. Opening address of conference Culture is a
basic need: Responding to cultural emergencies conference, 25
26 September, Den Haag,
The Netherlands.
Rahman, A. 1993. People’s self development: Perspectives on participatory action research.
London: Zed Books.
Rivard, R. 1984. Opening up the museum. Unpublished work.
 Museum Management and Curatorship 41

Rao, V. and M. Wilson, eds. 2004. Culture and public action. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Sedyawati, E. 2003. In Celebrating Indonesia: Fifty years with the Ford Foundation 1953
2003.
New York: Ford Foundation.
Stam, D. 2005. The informed muse: The implications of ‘the new museology’ for museum
practice. In Heritage, museums, and galleries. An introductory reader, ed. G. Corsane, 54
70.
London: Routledge.
Simpson, M. 1996. Making representations. Museums in the post-colonial era. London:
Routledge.
Stanley, Nick, ed. 2007. The future of indigenous museums. Perspectives from the Southwest
Pacific. New York: Berghan Books.
Taylor, P., and L. Aragon. 1991. Beyond the Java Sea. Washington DC: Smithsonian
Institution National Museum of Natural History and Harry H. Abrams.
UNESCO. 2003. Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Passed by
the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization meetings in Paris, France, on 17 October 2003.
UNESCO 1996. Our creative diversity. The report of the world commission on culture and
development. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. 1995. The cultural dimensions of development. Towards a practical approach. Paris:
UNESCO.
Vergo, P. 1989. The new museology. London: Reaktion Books.
Volkenkundig Museum Nusantara. 1990. Nias tribal treasures. Delft, The Netherlands:
Volkenkundig Museum Nusantara.
Waterson, R. 1990. The living house. An anthropology of architecture in Southeast Asia.
London: Thames and Hudson.
World Bank. 1996. The World Bank participation sourcebook. Washington DC: The World
Bank.