Museums : Not Just Visiting Spaces but a Driving Force for the Use of Advanced S & T in the Restoration of Artworks

The conservation and restoration of artworks are included in the industries considered as creative or cultural industries (de-Miguel-Molina et al 2013). The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sports (DCMS) (2009), defined creative industries as “those industries that are based on individual creativity, skill and talent, and which have the potential to create wealth and jobs through developing intellectual property”.


Introduction
The conservation and restoration of artworks are included in the industries considered as creative or cultural industries (de-Miguel-Molina et al 2013).The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sports (DCMS) (2009), defined creative industries as "those industries that are based on individual creativity, skill and talent, and which have the potential to create wealth and jobs through developing intellectual property".In terms of the arts and cultures sector, Bakhshi and Throsby (2010) discussed the lack of studies on innovation, which has been ignored in studies conducted about creative industries.Although there are good studies about the use of science in the restoration of specific artworks (Casadio et al. 2010 in this subsector of creative industries is scarce.This paper tries to cover this gap.
In short, our paper's goal is to examine cooperation between museums and other institutions in the restoration and conservation of artworks.To reach this objective, we have put forward two questions with reference to cooperation in this activity: RQ1: Are museums in European countries important participants in cooperation with other institutions?RQ2: Does a pattern in the cooperation between museums and other institutions exist?
Data were taken from the bibliometric analysis of scientific co-authored papers searched in Elsevier's Scopus database.The final number of articles was 1,656.These data were cleaned through the VantagePoint software.
Important conclusions are inferred from the results.The first is that the participation of European countries for the application of science and technology in conservation and restoration of artworks is evidenced.The second is that, although many museums write papers by their own, when they co-author papers with other institutions, the latter are mainly located in their own country.These institutions are, mainly, research institutes and other museums.Results also illustrate that museums look for institutions that have different types of knowledge bases: symbolic (arts), analytical (physics and chemistry) and synthetic (engineering).

The Use of S&T in the Conservation and Restoration of Artworks
Lazzeretti (2012) has analysed the importance of cooperation between different institutions in the development of laser technology for restoring artworks.She explains how cooperation is mainly between local institutions, which can produce the development of a cluster, like the restoration cluster in Firenze (Italy).However, literature about cooperation in arts activities in an innovation framework, like the scheme explained in the Oslo Manual (2005), is scarce.
The main problem in analysing activities like conservation and restoration is that there are no data in the innovation surveys that some countries elaborate.In the subsector covered in this paper, data for patents would be collected from national surveys if they were available, but it is not the case.One solution is the use of bibliometric approach to cover this gap, and especially scientific articles.

Data
The data used to measure collaboration are scientific co-authored papers.For bibliometric analysis, we searched keywords "paint*" AND "restoration" OR "conservation" in Elsevier's Scopus database.We obtained publications in international journals about the restoration and conservation of painting artworks.The final number of articles was 1,656.These data were imported to VantagePoint software, which was used to clean up the institutions involved in restoration and conservation, and elaborate matrixes of coauthorship among museums, restoration institutes and universities.Matrixes were elaborated depending on papers: museums with other museums, museums with restoration and conservation institutes, museums with university physics and chemistry departments, and museums with university engineering and Information Technologies departments.
The number of institutions analysed was 222: 94 museums from 26 countries, 41 conservation and restoration institutes, 49 university physics and chemistry departments and 38 university engineering and Information Technologies university departments.

Methodology
For bibliometric analysis, we used Elsevier's Scopus database and the data were cleaned and prepared using three softwares: VantagePoint, WordStat and QDMiner.Matrixes were elaborated depending on: a) papers that were written by the museums or b) papers that were coauthored between a museum and: other museums (symbolic knowledge), restoration and conservation institutes (symbolic), physics and chemistry departments in universities (analytical), or engineering and Information Technologies departments in universities (synthetic).Moreover, institutions were defined depending on their geographical location: Europe, USA & Canada, Central & South America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania.A total of 94 museums were analysed, 26 of which were located in the United States, 53 in Europe, 7 in Asia, 3 in Africa, 2 in Central & South America and 2 in Oceania.
Networks of 2-mode were represented by means of UCINET6 and NETDRAW software.Centralisation degree for affiliation matrixes was calculated in order to determine which institutions coauthored more papers with museums.

Results
In this section, we answer the two research questions posed at the start of this paper: RQ1: Are museums in European countries important participants in cooperation with other institutions?RQ2: Does a pattern in the cooperation between museums and other institutions exist?
In terms of the first research question, we focus on countries and the importance they have in the science of conservation and restoration of artwork.For this purpose, we elaborate a 1-mode matrix where columns and rows are each country, included in the same order.We have used the number of papers in which every country appears as attributes.Therefore, we represent, in Figure 1  In order to analyse in detail the countries that cooperate more in conservation and restoration, we need to eliminate those that do not cooperate.In this case, we eliminate the nodes that appear in the left side in Figure 1: Israel, Iran, Macedonia, Slovakia, Belarus, Chile, Croatia, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.Once we had eliminated these nodes, we used social network analysis (SNA) to calculate the centrality degree, which calculated how many nodes are connected.Table 1 indicates that Italy is the country with the highest degree of cooperation in papers.The second country in order of appearance is the United Kingdom and the third is the United States.Column "Nrm Degree" indicates that each one of these three countries has more than 10% of the total connections of the network.The second objective of this paper is to detect whether there is a pattern in the cooperation between museums and other institutions.Also, the paper looks into which type of knowledge base the museums look for when they are going to undertake the conservation or restoration of any artwork that they are not able to do or they do not have the knowledge needed to do it.For this purpose, we prepare a 2mode network, where the rows are the museums and the columns are the institutions that cooperate with museums.We have differentiated between institutions depending on where they are located, in the same country than the museum or abroad.
Firstly, we represent the entire network in Figure 2.This figure shows that museums write an important part of the papers alone.Moreover, there is no cooperation with institutions located in the left side of the Figure 2 (See Appendix for the meaning of codes).Because the main objective of this paper is to analyse cooperation, we eliminate both institutions that do not cooperate with museums and museums that write papers alone.______________________________________________________________________________________________________________   Papers about the use of science and technology in the restoration and conservation of artworks tend to focus on the different applications of the spectroscopy, like gas chromatographymass spectrometry.Other important groups of papers cover the use of the electron microscopy and the X-ray diffraction.The use of such advanced techniques explains why museums need to cooperate with other institutions.

Conclusion
This paper focuses on analysing the cooperation between museums and other institutions in the use of science and technology when they are going to restore any artwork.The literature about cooperation in creative activities is scarce, especially in relation to the use of advanced science and technology.Lazzaretti's (2012) analysis of the restoration cluster in Firenze, Italy, is circumscribed to laser technology.
Our paper analyses the activity of restoration and cooperation in artworks in a global approach, so we are able to differentiate if networks are national or global, and which countries are more important in cooperation.
Data were obtained through a bibliometric analysis of papers' co-authorship, which gives a wide quantity of data about cooperation in restoration.Then, we have applied network analysis to represent cooperation.
Results indicate that European countries are important participants in the cooperation with both other European and abroad countries.Moreover, there is a pattern in the cooperation between museums and other institutions.Museums tend to cooperate with research institutes and with other museums located in their own countries.Finally, there are important collaborations with university departments of physics, chemistry and engineering.This The arts, heritage and recreation sectors come under the European classifications NACEs 90, 91, 92 and 93.NACEs 90 and 91 are also part of the Knowledge Intensive Services (KIS) industries, which are those related to the knowledge-based economy (de-Miguel-Molina et al. 2012; Windrum & Tomlinson, 1999; Aslesen & Isaksen, 2007a; Bishop, 2008; Strambach, 2008).
, Cotte et al. 2010, Doménech-Carbó ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________ Blanca de-Miguel-Molina, María de-Miguel-Molina and José Albors-Garrigós (2014), Journal of Administrative Sciences and Technology, DOI: 10.5171/2014.539873 , co-authorship between countries, and the size of the nodes represents how important is every country.The figure shows that Italy and the United States are the most important countries.Also, the United Kingdom and Spain are between the most important participants in explaining how to use science and technology in conservation and restoration.______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________ Blanca de-Miguel-Molina, María de-Miguel-Molina and José Albors-Garrigós (2014), Journal of Administrative Sciences and Technology, DOI: 10.5171/2014.539873

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: Ranking of countries in co-authorship of papers about conservation and restoration of artworks.Source: compiled by authors based on the Scopus database Blanca de-Miguel-Molina, María de-Miguel-Molina and José Albors-Garrigós (2014), Journal of Administrative Sciences and Technology, DOI: 10.5171/2014.539873

Figure 2 :Figure 3 :
Figure 2: Museums and their cooperation with other institutions Source: compiled by authors based on the Scopus database Journal of Administrative Sciences and Technology ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________ Blanca de-Miguel-Molina, María de-Miguel-Molina and José Albors-Garrigós (2014), Journal of Administrative Sciences and Technology, DOI: 10.5171/2014.539873implies that museums look for analytical and synthetic knowledge out of the museum when they need to apply advanced science and technology in restoration.______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________ Blanca de-Miguel-Molina, María de-Miguel-Molina and José Albors-Garrigós (2014), Journal of Administrative Sciences and Technology, DOI: 10.5171/2014.539873

Table 1 : Centrality measure: degree
An interesting result is shown in Table2, where we incorporate the co-membership matrix resulted from cliques.We only include, in the table, the most important countries.Results indicate the number of cliques in which every country in the diagonal participate, and the rest of cells represent in how many cliques there are coincidences between countries.For example, the United Kingdom coincides with Italy in 14 cliques; Italy and Germany are jointly in 15 cliques, and Spain and Italy concur in 12 cliques.It is evident that countries cooperated in a high rank with Italy and the United Kingdom.