Blog

Today’s post is by Sarah S. Brophy, LEED – AP O&M and co-author of The Green Museum.

The Green Museum Movement seems to have found a place of rest partway to the goal.  Much like dieters who make good progress at the beginning only to find they reach a point where previous efforts just aren’t enough to make a difference, it seems greening museums has reached a plateau.

At the beginning of the Recession I thought this evolution from Green 1.0 to Green 4.0 would follow a relatively smooth progression:

• Green 1.0 – Folks Paving The Way
• Green 2.0  – A Few More Taking on Green Practices
• Green 3.0 – Integrated Green Practice Takes Root
• Green 4.0 – Green is Normal

During Green 1.0, major museums took early risks and helped move the field into the green arena. They tried new technologies, new ways of thinking, and sometimes they paid premium costs that helped foster adoption of green materials and technologies by other museums.  Those 1.0 pioneers were primarily working on new buildings, additions or renovations.

In 2.0, many new and old museums made strides in practices like green food services, energy efficiency, waste management (reduction, recycling, and composting). They began chanting the mantra of green as the responsibility of charitable, educational organizations, to reduce their footprint on the community and to teach good community practice.  The National Museum of Natural History is great example, as is The National Building Museum.  Zoos are good at this. And most science centers and children’s museums do this well. I even just saw a bit about the Missouri Historical Society and its equipment recycling program, and I’ve heard that the Minnesota Historical Society is ratcheting up the commitment institution-wide. But that leaves a whole lot of museums – particularly the small and mid-sized ones – far behind in green practice.

I had naively thought the Recession would help us make the leap to 3.0 because museums, yet again, would do more with less, and because American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) money would accelerate opportunities for green infrastructure improvements that would then reduce energy consumption and costs. I’ll tell you, though, the only museum where I’ve seen those “Recovery Act Funds at Work” signs out front is the National Arboretum. The renovations of the Administration Building and Visitor’s Center (including energy efficiency work) were ‘shovel ready’ when ARRA got going. I’ve heard of a few others receiving funds and launching major “shovel ready” projects as well, but for institutions without projects in motion when the Recession began, green has often stalled. Those which are particularly stressed struggle to find the capacity to take on new challenges and they have let Green go.

Of course I am disappointed, but greenies are optimists and so I see reasons for excitement:

Our own NEH lists “energy efficiency” and “re-commissioning” HVAC systems as funded activities for Sustaining Cultural Heritage Collections (November 16th deadline).

And Green has been edging its way into professional standards since 2008.  AAM’s PIC Green (Professional Interest Committee on Green) has been working with the AAM Accreditation Committee to help identify the field’s developing expectations for green practice in museums. AASLH’s StEPS program includes sustainable practices in its Historic Structures and Landscape Standards and in performance indicators for Management Standards.

So, I’d say the field has been stuck at 2.0 but is showing signs of a healthy self-awareness that recognizes the field must make these green changes for itself.

And just how will the field clear the plateau and move to 3.0?  I believe it must be through shared commitment.

For the field to develop momentum more quickly it will take groups of practitioners – no longer just the solo pioneers from 1.0, or the staff green teams of 2.0 – but green museum teams.   We’ve all heard of green teams inside museums, but it’s time to create green teams among museums – hey! collaborating – to solve this problem.  There is strength in numbers.  With more minds on the problem, the field can develop the internal capacity to green itself despite any perceived barriers.  Because Green is a team sport.

—–

Sarah Brophy is co-author of The Green Museum and co-Chair of AAM’s PIC Green.  She lives on the Eastern Shore of Maryland and is an independent consultant helping museums go green and get grants.   You can reach her at sarah@bmuse.net