Digital Heritage Value and Impact Assembly
Ideating, creating, and evaluating value chains
An assembly is a group of members of an organization who meet periodically to make decisions about a specific area or scope of the organization.
Assemblies hold meetings, some are private and some are open. If they are open, it is possible to participate in them (for example: attending if the capacity allows it, adding points to the agenda, or commenting on the proposals and decisions taken by this organ).
Examples: A general assembly (which meets once a year to define the organisation's main lines of action as well as its executive bodies by vote), an equality advisory council (which meets every two months to make proposals on how to improve gender relations in the organisation), an evaluation commission (which meets every month to monitor a process) or a guarantee body (which collects incidents, abuses or proposals to improve decision-making procedures) are all examples of assemblies.
This assembly aims to engage in the creation of a conceptual model; a model that would show how the so-called digital cultural resources are applied in products, services and other type of initiatives that – when used, consumed or simply applied – have a positive impact on our societies. Specifically, we aim to describe how value is created in value chains realized by entities and/or communities that make use of digital cultural resources.
To begin we are looking for cases of initiatives (such as apps, digital exhibitions, games, educational services, communities, practices or other untangibles, etc.), in which digital cultural resources are applied in new products, services or initiatives that generate positive social, economic or cultural impact. The resources that form the basis for these initiatives should be digital cultural heritage held by Cultural Heritage Institutions, such as museums, archives or libraries. Cases can concern reuse by any type of actor: commercial, non-governmental or public; an organisation or an individual.
We are providing two versions of the survey. The first one should be used for cases from the Culture 2.0 regime, where some entity (public institution, private firm, an NGO) is reusing digital cultural heritage in a product or service. The second one should be used for cases from the Culture 3.0 regime, where digital cultural heritage resources are re-used by bottom-up communities of practice and informal initiatives.
We are grateful for your work and support in providing information about these case studies of reuse. We hope to collect valuable information about value chains of digital cultural heritage. This evidence will form basis for policy recommendations that we will prepare in the next stage of the project.
If you have any questions, you can contact our research team by writing to Jan Strycharz, the lead investigator for this study.