Postboks 6050 Langnes, N-9037 Tromsø / 77 64 40 00 / postmottak@uit.no / uit.no

Tromsø Museum - Universitetsmuseet

Arkivref: 2016/1696 IBA004

Dato: 13.04.2016

Sak M 10/16

SAK M 10/16 Til: Museumsstyret Møtedato: 28. april 2016

Orienteringssaker

1. Status byggesaken 2. HUMEVAL: Norsk Forskningsråds evaluering av all humanistisk forskning i Norge.

Seksjon for kulturvitenskaps egnevaluering i forbindelse med dette. 3. Rapport til Norsk Kulturråd: Museums- og arkivstatistikk (ABM-statistikk) 2015 og

rapport til Riksarkivet: Arkivstatistikk 2015 4. Orientering om Seksjon for naturvitenskaps samlinger jf. styrets uttrykte ønske i møte 16.

februar. 5. Oppdatert årsplan 2016 for Tromsø Museum – Universitetsmuseet

Marit Anne Hauan museumsdirektør –

Inger Kaisa Bækø konstituert kontorsjef –

Postboks 6050 Langnes, N-9037 Tromsø / 77 64 40 00 / postmottak@uit.no / uit.no

Tromsø Museum - Universitetsmuseet

Arkivref: 2016/1696/IBA004

Dato: 13.04.2016

ORIENTERINGSSAK 2

HUMEVAL: Norsk Forskningsråds evaluering av all humanistisk forskning i Norge

Norsk forskningsråd (NFR) arbeider med å evaluere all humanistisk forskning i Norge. Seksjon for kulturvitenskap faller inn under denne evalueringen, og er i den forbindelse bedt om å lage en egenevaluering vedrørende seksjonens forskning på bestilling fra NFR.

Seksjonens bidrag ligger vedlagt.

Marit Anne Hauan museumsdirektør –

Inger Kaisa Bækø konstituert kontorsjef –

1

Tromsø University Museum – UiT The Arctic University of Norway

5 Archaeology, History and Cultural Studies

Vedlegg til Orienteringssak 2:Seksjon for kulturvitenskaps egenevaluering til HUMEVAL

2

List of Contents

1. THE RESEARCH INSTITUTION ..................................................................................... 3

1.1. Organisation & strategy .......................................................................................................................... 3

1.2. Resources & infrastructure ..................................................................................................................... 7

1.3. Gender balance, mobility and career paths ........................................................................................... 9

1.4 Interplay of research and teaching ....................................................................................................... 11

2. AREA OF RESEARCH ................................................................................................. 14

2.1. Staffing strategy and staff development ............................................................................................... 14

2.2. Scientific quality ..................................................................................................................................... 15

2.3. Societal relevance ................................................................................................................................... 17

2.4. Other information .................................................................................................................................. 17

Names of the case study documents ................................................................................................................... 18

Form Y – Additional publications submitted to the panel............................................................................... 18

3

1. The Research Institution

1.1. Organisation & strategy

The Department of Cultural Sciences (Seksjon for kulturvitenskap – hereafter SKU) is an

organizational unit within Tromsø University Museum (Tromsø Museum –

Universitetsmuseet – hereafter TMU) which in turn is a unit within UiT - The Arctic

University of Norway (hereafter UiT). Therefore some of the strategic documents and

guidelines for the department are related to such strategies and documents at a higher

organisational level during the evaluation.

TMU is the oldest scientific institution in Northern Norway. It was established in 1872 and

became part of UiT in 1976. TMU was reorganized in 2007 when the research disciplines

were grouped in the two main units, the SKU and Department of Natural Sciences (hereafter

SNA). The Polar Museum, led by a separate Museum Director, was incorporated into TMU in

2010 as a part of the Department of Cultural Sciences. The main responsibilities of the

museum are research and research communication, development and conservation of

scientific collections, dissemination, heritage management and education. The museum is

responsible for increasing knowledge of The High North, pursuing documentation and

preservation of the natural history and cultural history of The High North, communicating

knowledge to the general public, and facilitating the dissemination of knowledge related to

heritage management.

TMU is organized as a unit under the University Board at UiT. The Museum Board is the

highest organisational unit at TMU and has the primary responsibility for museum activities.

The museum is led by the Museum Director and the leader group includes the Museum

Director, the head of SKU, the head of SNA and the Administrative Leader. Under the

Museum Director, there are three units: Staff / Joint Services including Administration,

Exhibition and General Public and Research Communication, SKU (including the Polar

Museum) and SNA (including Tromsø Arctic-Alpine Botanic Garden).

UiT and TMU have been engaged in the process of planning a new museum facility over a

considerable period of time. One of the main benefits will be to bring together all the existing

museum facilities, currently spread between five locations, into a single facility location. One

example of the drawbacks of the current situation is the placement of the conservation lab in a

separate facility some distance from the collections. As part of the Strategy Plan of TMU for

2014-2020 accompanied by specific measures presented in the Strategy Plan 2014 (Strategi

for Tromsø Museum – Universitetsmuseet 2014-2020 and Tiltak til strategiplan for Tromsø

Museum Universitetsmuseet 2014 – hereafter Strategy Plan 2014-2020), the museum will

develop a plan strategy for optimizing conditions and facilities for research at the new

museum and produce a plan for professional implementation of relocating the scientific

collections. Two alternatives for a new museum building have been debated, the UiT Campus

and downtown Tromsø. In January 2016 a decision was made at the national level by the

current political administration that the new museum was to be built in downtown Tromsø.

The Head of Department administrates academic and non-academic activity at SKU. The

Head of Department is the spokesperson for the department with overall responsibility for

developing and implementing research, communication, and collection activities. The

departmental academic staff are organised into the following disciplines: archaeology,

4

anthropology, fisheries science, geography, history, museology, religion studies and

ethnomusicology.

The department includes teams and work groups related to core activities at the organisation:

Team for Archives, Team for Scientific Collections, Team for Conservation and Team for

Cultural Heritage Management. These teams are cross-disciplinary and involve both

academic and non-academic staff working closely together to insure and maximize quality

control for the activities in which they are engaged. These groups also coordinate their

activities with the Team for Research Communication, which is part of the Joint Services.

In line with the Strategy Plan 2014-2020, a restructuring of dissemination and communication

at TMU was initiated in 2014 in which these activities were delegated to two teams: Team for

Research Communication and Team for the General Public. As of August 2015, TMU had a

position as Leader of the Research Communication Team. This was done to strengthen and

insure the quality of research communication since it is a core task grounded in the Strategy

Plan 2014-2020 which states that research is the foundation for all activity at TMU. The

establishment of a Team for Research Communication was implemented as part of Joint

Services at TMU. The leader for the research communication team coordinates activities

related to research communication including the publications service, visual communication

and graphic design service, and educational service. The guiding vision of communication

strategy is to be a central and innovative actor in the dissemination of research and research

communication in The High North. The main aim is to professionalise and quality assure all

communication, and communicate the perspectives, methods, results and effect of research

and management. The new Communication Strategy Plan for 2016-2020 will be revised

biannually. The Team for Research Communication will be a central asset and important tool

at the disposal of researchers in sharing their research and enhancing the visibility of research,

archives and collections at TMU.

The institution’s strategic plan for the next years is presented in the Strategy Plan 2014-2020.

TMU’s strategic plan is directly linked to the Strategic Plan for UiT 2014-2020. UiT will help

promote economic, cultural and social development in the north through building knowledge

and human capital. TMU’s priorities are as follows:

- Research is the foundation for all activity at the museum.

- Scientific collections are a cornerstone of the museum.

- Research communication and dissemination are critically important components

of TMU’s responsibilities to the general public, research and management.

- Archaeological heritage management is a legally mandated responsibility for TMU.

- Employees have always been the foremost resource at TMU.

According to the strategy plan, TMU will prioritize themes related to society, climate and the

environment of the North emphasizing Sámi culture, biosystematics and museology. TMU

aims to strengthen basic research and increase interdisciplinary research. TMU aims further to

strengthen international research activity. SKU policies for future priorities are to be in line

with the Strategy Plan 2014-2020. The strategy plan is discussed according to annual action

plans to quality assure the follow-up of the strategy plan.

The Strategy Plan 2014-2020 aims to strengthen basic research and increase the level of

interdisciplinary research. Furthermore, TMU is to strengthen their international activities.

5

One of the clear incentives to facilitate international research cooperation has been travel

grants for researchers on research leave / sabbatical.

TMU encourages researchers to participate in research groups where international research

cooperation and collaboration across faculty divisions is central. TMU will, as part of their

measures accompanying the Strategy Plan 2014-2020, motivate researchers to engage in

international research cooperation. The institution will continue to encourage researchers to

apply for international projects and joint research applications. Researchers at SKU are

participating in international projects like the ERC project Arctic Domus, situated at the

University of Aberdeen, and the Nordforsk (NRC) projects Rangifer Domus (concluded 2014)

and Yoik i motion between tradition and modernity, managed from SKU also involving the

University of Umeå and the University of Oulu.

When it comes to the scientific collections, the measures in the strategy plan state that TMU

will develop further national and international cooperation for collections management. In

line with these measures TMU will, as part of the Strategy Plan 2014-2020, expand research

cooperation with the other university museums in Norway (Bergen, Oslo, Stavanger,

Trondheim). The university museums have established cooperation for both research and

collections: MUSIT (Management of Collections Databases at the University Museums in

Norway) with the web portal UNIMUS (http://www.unimus.no/). The UNIMUS system

includes the following databases: the Photo Database, Database for Archaeological Artefacts,

Database for Ethnographic Objects and the Database for Numismatics. TMU participated in

the joint Topographical Archives database, but was not chosen as a platform after the trial

period. In addition, the Intrasis program has been introduced and applied as a common tool

for data collection related to archaeological fieldwork by all university museums in Norway.

In conjunction with legally mandated archaeological heritage management responsibility

administrated by the Directorate for Cultural Heritage, the cultural heritage management

institutions within TMU’s administrative area (Northern Norway north of Rana Municipality)

actively cooperate with one another. These include the Sámi Parliament, Nordland County

Council, Troms County Council, Finnmark County Council and the World Heritage Rock Art

Centre, Alta Museum.

TMU encourages cooperation across faculty divisions. This can be seen in the supervision of

PhD students at other UiT faculties, teaching at other faculties, and cross-disciplinary research

cooperation with other faculties and research institutions. One examples of such cooperation

is the RCN financed “Millstone” project in cooperation with geologists from the Geological

Survey of Norway. SKU provide board members in a number of regional museums. SKU

further actively supports a long standing tradition of cooperation with non-academic partners

(private, public or 'third' sector). This is part of dissemination and research communication

that has a central role in the Strategy Plan 2014-2020. These partners range from the large

Tromsø International Film Festival, International Commission for Visual Anthropology and

Sjøsamisk Kompetansesenter, to numerous regional and local partners and small community

groups (e.g. Spildra Grendelag, Forså Vel).

As part of the Strategy Plan 2014-2020, TMU is to encourage knowledge of, and engagement

within, the EU Horizon 2020 Program among researchers at the museum. The implementation

has been through information meetings and orientations at TMU and UiT.

6

SWOT analysis

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

Organisation

-Longest continuous running research

institution in Northern Norway

founded in 1872 with a long tradition

of scientific collecting, namely the

Cultural – and Natural Heritage of the

High North

-Positive and long standing reputation

in the external community

-Amalgamation of smaller

departments into Department of

Cultural Sciences (2007)

-Implementation of teams assigned to

core activities of the department

-Administrative area borders three

countries of the Barents-region

-Increased focus on research

communication

-Departmental facilities are

located at five different sites in

Tromsø

-Sensitive to fluctuations of

statistics (e.g. CHRIStin data)

owing to the small number of

researchers

Organisation

Resources

-Extensive world-class Collections of

the Cultural Heritage of the High

North

-Complete overview of collections

-High level of qualifications and

expertise in both academic and non-

academic positions

-Publisher of the largest popular

science journals in Norway; Ottar

-One of the largest Library collections

in the World of literature on the High

North

-Equipment needed to improve

the research infrastructure (x-ray

machine)

-Fluctuations in external Funding

-Limited specialized resources

regarding conservation other

complementary activities Resources

Research

-Multi- and interdisciplinary research

-Research bridging the Nature /

Culture Divide

-Cross faculty cooperation nationally

and internationally

-Researchers involved in teaching at

diverse academic departments

nationally and internationally

-Extensive cooperation with non-

academic partners including museums,

cultural festivals and community

groups

-Engagement with the general public

in research processes

- Wide variety of research based

activities aimed for the general public

-Too many disciplines

represented in the department

staff

-Few publications in top ranked

international journals

-Extensive reliance on temporary

positions may lead to loss of

academic knowledge Research

7

Organisation

-Consolidate presence as the leading

collections-based research institution

in the High North

-New museum building co-locating all

museum facilities

-Increased societal significance as the

Tromsø region experiences rapid

growth

-Actively include researchers in the

making and revision of strategy

documents

-Privatization of parts of the

mandated heritage management

-Reorganization of the national

administrative cultural heritage

management areas

-Possible reorganization due to

the new museum facilities

downtown Tromsø

Organisation

Resources

-Ramp up external funding

-Increase staff by external funding

-Recruitment opportunities to

strategically replace retiring staff

-Announced wish by government

representatives to downsize the

collections

-Fluctuations in external

financing

-Possible decision to not post

vacancies after retirements

Resources

Research

-Greater engagement in everyday

socio-political and cultural discussions

via popular media

-Potential for co-authoring research

could be strengthened

-Increased international cooperation in

the High North

-More extensive research on the

scientific collections

-International exchange and research

mobility

-Engaging in commissioned research

-Commissioned research by

private research institutes and

cultural heritage management

institutions

-Pre-eminence of publication

points whilst other kinds of

research based activities are

undervalued in evaluation

statistics

-Cuts to University Budget may

lead to reduced museum funding

Research

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

1.2. Resources & infrastructure

An overview of resources of the institution is enclosed in the attached fact sheet.

TMU has a substantial number of archives, databases and collections. The Museum Library

includes one of the largest collections in the World on literature on the High North. The

archives and scientific collections have always been central to the activities at the museum

and constitute a cornerstone for museum activity, including research, at TMU as stated in the

priorities in the Strategy plan 2014-2020. A comprehensive overview of the collections at

TMU was undertaken as part of the REVITA Plan (Revitalisering av samlingene. Revita-plan

for Tromsø Museum 2007-2016) in 2007, and revised to include the Polar Museum collections

after its incorporation into TMU in 2010 and in April 2011 when additional archives and

collections were included. The evaluation of collections and archives has not been

comprehensive and a complete description of all existing databases, archives, laboratories and

scientific collections is still lacking. Such an evaluation is scheduled as part of the annual

activity plan as of 2016. Broadly, the collections can be divided into six main collections:

8

- Archaeological collections: 297,734 catalogue numbers

- Sámi ethnographic collections: 4,450 catalogue numbers

- Recent cultural history collections: 6,772 catalogue numbers

- Polar history collections (Polar Museum): 2,797 catalogue numbers

- Northern Norwegian Folk Music Archive: 13,758 catalogue numbers

- Photo archive: 356,162 catalogue numbers

TMU also holds a large collection of Church art (665 catalogue numbers), a numismatic

collection (3,650 catalogue numbers) and a traditional seal hunting vessel MS Polstjerna.

TMU has one of the World’s largest Library collection on the High North and UiT has a

comprehensive open access database – the High North Research Documents with a searchable

website http://highnorth.uit.no/) developed and maintained by The University Library at UiT.

The largest research infrastructure investment the latter years have been the national MUSIT

cooperation by the University museums where they cooperate on research and collections.

MUSIT (museum IT) is a collaborative initiative aimed at managing and disseminating

digitised museum collections. The initiative is funded by the universities of Bergen, Oslo,

Stavanger, Tromsø and Trondheim and their affiliated museums. The MUSIT cooperation

includes the following databases: the Photo Database, Database for Archaeological Artefacts,

Database for Ethnographic Objects, and the Database for Numismatics. All the MUSIT

databases have searchable web portals (http://www.unimus.no/).

The approximately 1.5 million objects and associated archives at TMU constitute a unique

and irreplaceable resource documenting the natural and cultural heritage of The High North.

As part of the Strategy Plan 2014-2020, continuous work with the collections and archives

holds a central position. As stated in the strategy plan for the collections at SKU from 2011-

2015, the collections at TMU are the foundation for dissemination and research. The

archaeological collections are an exception as acquisition is dictated by legal requirements.

The majority of the archaeological artefacts in the collections have been obtained through

mandated cultural heritage management activity including large archaeological excavations

for which the museum is required to curate all recovered material. The different archives /

collections all have plans for future acquisition strategies. The photo archive has also

experienced steady growth while the other archives and collections reflect much more modest

research based acquisition that is expected to continue at this level in the future.

As of 2012, the allocation of two permanent positions responsible for the archives, collections

and coordination of databases is a major investment in the research infrastructure. Another

investment is the prioritization of archives and collections by requiring the involvement of

tenured research staff with the collections. In addition, PhD students and postdoctoral fellows

at the museum work with the collections as part of their mandatory duties. A number of

students (BA- and MA level) have been employed to work with the scientific collections.

Another investment in research infrastructure has been the REVITA Project carried out as part

of the revitalization of university museum collections initiated by the Official Norwegian

Reports: Kunnskap for fellesskapet. This report from 2006 is the first directly addressing the

university museums in Norway and pointed out that the foundation for museum activities is in

the management of the collections and that the collections constitute the point of departure for

research and communication. The REVITA Project at TMU aimed for a complete overview

of the collections through registration and digitalization to improve the facilities for the

9

collections, quality-assure investments in documentation, conservation and preservation of the

collections, and make accessible most of the collections for research and the general public.

As part of the Long Term Plan for 2008-2012 and Long Term Plan for 2012-2013 at TMU, a

central measure was to increase conservation competence and personnel to strengthen the

priority of the scientific collections. This has been further developed and continued in the

Strategy Plan 2014-2020. Adding to this, TMU seeks to develop conservation activities and

collections activities as themes for dissemination, education and research communication.

The conservation department was reorganized in 2011 making one of the two conservators the

Leader for the Cultural Historical Laboratory. A conservator vacancy was filled in 2012 by a

permanent position. A temporary conservator position has been financed for several years by

externally financed archaeological cultural heritage management projects and TMU. The most

prevalent cooperation between the Cultural Historical Laboratory and researchers at TMU

involves metal and textiles conservation. The Cultural Historical Laboratory is central in the

management of the scientific collections, exhibitions and research communication as well as

designing the facilities for a new Tromsø Museum in downtown Tromsø.

The Cultural Historical Laboratory has prioritized the acquisition of an x-ray machine for

digital x-rays of artefacts. SKU is setting aside money for this purchase which is planned in

2017. This will aid documentation, conservation and research, especially of metal artefacts,

but also including a range of other museum objects.

The large cultural heritage archives and collections from the The High North at TMU are an

attractive resource for researchers both within and outside Norway contributing to world class

research. The research infrastructure facilitates at TMU support such research collaboration.

The planned new museum building will be a massive investment in research infrastructure for

all the activities at TMU. This building will facilitate and improve the research infrastructure

by co-locating the majority of the activities at the museum. The co-location of the archives,

collections and the culture historical laboratory has been a goal for many years and would aid

in the logistics at the museum making it more cost-effective. The investment in a new

museum will also contribute to new and upgraded equipment and improvement in the quality

of the facilities that will position TMU as the preeminent collections-based research institute

in the High North as well as a resource for international researchers and diverse publics alike.

1.3. Gender balance, mobility and career paths

A Gender Equality Plan was made by TMU for the period 2011-2015. The aim of the plan

was to increase the number of women in permanent academic positions to 40%. A status

report from 2010 found that TMU had 36% women and 64% men in academic positions while

the total work force at TMU consisted of 49% women and 51% men. The plan did not

separate between cultural scientists and natural scientist. As part of Strategy Plan for 2014-

2020, TMU seeks to achieve full gender balance.

There are presently 12 cultural scientists in permanent academic positions at SKU. Of the 12,

seven are women (58%) and five are men (42%). There are 4 professors, three women (75%)

and one man (25%), six associate professors, four women (67%) and two men (33%), and two

male researchers.

10

UiT has had a mentor programme for female scientific staff since 2000 initiated as one of the

measures taken to increase the number of women qualified as professors. This mentor

programme has been prioritized by TMU and included in the strategy plans. Two of the

associate professors at TMU have benefitted from this programme and qualified for

professorship. The UiT programme included funding for additional sabbatical periods of six

months for the female researchers. As of 2013 the programme was terminated by UiT.

There is a long tradition of recruiting researchers from other institutions nationally and

internationally to cooperate with researchers at TMU. The research infrastructure, including

the library at TMU and in particular the large cultural heritage collections of The High North,

makes researchers and TMU attractive research partners. This is evident in the cooperation

between researchers across national boundaries and part of the Strategy Plan 2014-2020,

where TMU will strengthen its international activity in research and collections management.

As part of the long-term strategy in research focusing on museology, a Professor II position in

Museology (up to 20%) was created at TMU from 01.09.2013-31.12.2016. The professor

recruited holds a professorship at the Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages,

Faculty of Humanities at the University of Oslo.

All tenured academic staff are given the opportunity for mobility as part of their sabbatical /

research leave. The institution also provides financial support to increase the mobility of

researchers. All PhD students and postdoctoral fellows are encouraged to spend time at

research institutions abroad with financing provided by RCN or the Humanistic Faculty at

UiT. The financing also accommodates family members. The postdoctoral fellow is currently

visiting the Museum of Anthropology, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada.

PhD students have spent, or plan to spend, time at institutions abroad (e.g. Aarhus University

and the University of Copenhagen, Denmark and Cambridge University, UK).

UiT endorsed the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the

Recruitment of Researchers (hereafter - Charter and Code) in 2010, and has been

working actively to follow up this endorsement and prepare for implementation. UiT’s first

two-year Plan of Action was formulated in 2012 and updated in 2014. As part of UiT, TMU

and thereby SKU follow the implementation of the Charter and Code as described in the Plan

of action for the implementation of Charter and Code at UiT The Arctic University of Norway

2014-2015. The plan for the period 2014-2015 continues to focus on the following four main

areas (with a continued focus stated in the Strategic Plan for UiT 2014-2020):

- Management: Further develop good management practices at all levels at UiT.

- Professional and collegial follow-up: Ensure the researchers a good scope to carry out their

research, teaching, supervision, development and dissemination.

- Cooperation in the organisation: Strengthen the researchers’ influence, participation and

involvement through preparing for good internal communication, flow of information and

interaction.

- Recruitment: Strengthen UiT’s recruitment work through focus on strategic measures,

efficiency improvement measures and skills development.

In conformity with the HR Strategy for Researchers, the plan of action for Charter and Code

has been decided for a period of two years. Following this period, the plan shall undergo

internal evaluation and revision. An external evaluation shall take place every four years. In

11

connection with the internal and external review and revision, UiT will map whether the goals

for measures/activities in the plan of action have been achieved.

1.4 Interplay of research and teaching

The institution offers no study programmes.

The TMU archives and collections are actively utilized by national and international students

at both the BA and MA levels. The majority of PhD students utilize the museum archives and

collections in their research at different levels. PhD students and postdoctoral fellows have

also contributed to the TMU research infrastructure. One example is cataloguing of the large

Vaino Tanner Archive by a postdoctoral fellow at SKU.

Several of the PhD students at TMU have presented their research through museum exhibition

in keeping with the strategy plan which states that all museum activities shall be research-

based. Some of these have been travelling exhibitions communicating results of research at

TMU. The exhibition “The Man in the Bog” (2015) displaying early medieval textiles was

produced by a PhD student in the close cooperation with academic staff at SKU as part of

research communication at TMU.

As part of mandated archaeological heritage management activity, students take part in the

archaeological excavations, write reports, catalogue finds, and input documentation data in

the databases. The number of students taking part in archaeological heritage management

projects was previously more prevalent but has declined significantly in more recent years

with the majority of field archaeologists having completed an MA.

The institution has open research seminar lectures where both external and internal

researchers participate. Researchers and PhD students at TMU teach a variety of courses at

UiT and other institutions as part of optimizing the interplay of teaching and research at the

institution at the BA and MA level.

- Department of Music and Drama, Faculty of Fine Arts, UiT

- Department of Archaeology and Social Anthropology, Faculty of Humanities,

Social Sciences and Education, UiT

- Department of History and Religion Studies, Faculty of Humanities,

Social Sciences and Education, UiT

- Department of Archaeology, History, Cultural Studies and Religion, University of Bergen

- Department of Anthropology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany

The research undertaken at TMU is of considerable relevance to other departments within UiT

and institutions outside the university. However, the current financial organizational structure

at UiT in which individual departments and institutes must pay for the use of lecturers from

other institutional units within the university represents a major obstacle to the internal

exchange of lecturers at UiT.

Additionally, TMU has not been given the right to conduct student examinations although it

has petitioned to obtain this right. Most of the researchers at SKU do take part in the

examination of students at other institutions both national and internationally. Academic staff

have the right to serve as primary supervisors for PhD students at the institution and several

researchers co-supervise PhD students at other institutions. Researchers also supervise MA

students at UiT and other institutions both nationally and internationally.

12

13

Table 1: R&D expenditures and sources of funding (1000 NOK)

Type of expenditures 2013 2014 2015

Research personnel (salaries including social costs) 1285332 2039742 2229892

Other personnel (salaries including social costs) 112285 250906 131992

Other running costs 161230 370286 1368610

Total expenditures 1558847 2660935 3730494

Types of funding

Core funding from the Norwegian government 1736760 1016325 1340024

External funding from RCN 780000 1789000 2689981

External funding from other public Norwegian sources 132545 612656

External funding from other private Norwegian sources 490845

External funding from the EU

External funding from other international public sources

External funding from other international private sources

External funding as % of total expenditures 50 % 72 % 102 %

Table 2: Number of PhD-graduates

2013 2014 2015 Total

PhD graduated: M F M F M F M F

Panel 1

Panel 2

Panel 3

Panel 4

Panel 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Panel 6

Panel 7

Panel 8

Total PhD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

14

2. Area of research

2.1. Staffing strategy and staff development

According to the institutions long-term plan (2008-2012 and 2012-2013) the fields of

taxonomy/biosystematics in the natural sciences and museology in the cultural sciences were

prioritized for recruitment of PhD students, Postdoctoral fellows and permanent positions. In

the Strategy Plan 2014-2020 the research priority for recruitment is to increase the research

portfolio at the Polar Museum through a PhD student position and external research projects.

Tenured academic staff at SKU not holding a PhD have been offered research leave as a

means of obtaining the necessary level of competence for an associate professorship.

The recent recruiting of a postdoctoral fellow in museology follows the research strategy of

three consecutive long-term plans (2008-2012, 2012-2013 and 2014-2020) and is financed by

the RCN. Four PhD students have been recruited in the past five years, two in museology and

two in archaeology. All of the PhD students are financed by UiT / TMU.

Two of the permanent academic positions were filled in 2015 following vacancies from

retirement. Both individuals were recruited from UiT. The postdoctoral fellow was also

recruited from UiT. Of the four PhD students, two are from UiT, one is from the University of

Oslo, and one has an MA from Leicester, England and an MBA from Vienna, Austria. The

vast majority of the recruitment at SKU over the past decade has been from TMU or UiT.

The 12 current scientific staff include five position categories; Professor (1013), Associate

Professor (1010 and 1011) and Researcher (1108 and 1109). Amongst the professors and

associate professors the norm is that 50% of the time is devoted to research, research-related

activities and research administration while 50% of the time is devoted to the collections,

dissemination / communication and cultural heritage management. One of the researcher

positions (1108) is completely devoted to cultural heritage management, while the other has

the same 50/50 division as the associate professors. All researchers may use up to 10% of

their time for teaching.

There are mechanisms for strategic redistribution of tasks within cultural heritage

management where academic researchers in archaeology cooperate with the cultural heritage

management group together with the non-academic staff. When researchers have research

leave / sabbatical, the other researchers share the tasks and assignments of the researcher in

question. The researcher position (1109) with cultural heritage management responsibility is

an exception as the hiring of an addition part-time employee is required to take on

management tasks. The current head of department is also a professor in archaeology within

the department requiring other researchers to share the relevant tasks of this researcher during

tenure as head of department.

The postdoctoral fellows and PhD students are required to use 25% of their time performing

duties determined by the institution. Thus a four year PhD student position includes one year

of duties for the institution. The assigned duties relate to the core activities of the institution

and are often related to the scientific collections and / or research communication.

TMU follows the UiT guidelines and policy for research leave/sabbatical for tenured staff. To

apply for research leave/sabbatical (up to one year) the applicant must have publication results

equivalent to an average of 0.5 or more publication points annually (points are given for

research publications in the Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers

15

registered in CRIStin (Current Research Information System in Norway)). Applicants with a

50/50 division of research and other tasks can apply for a one year research leave after four

years tenure at UiT. Applicants with a 70/30 division of tasks are required to have an annual

average of 0.33% publication points after six years tenure to apply, while researchers with

less than 50% time for research can apply for research leave if they have two publication

points or more after four years tenure.

2.2. Scientific quality

The department disciplines have a more nuanced multidisciplinary scientific description than

the academic fields defined by the National Academic Councils. The disciplines include

archaeology, anthropology, fisheries science, geography, history, museology, religion studies

and ethnomusicology. The interdisciplinary scope of the cultural scientists at SKU contributes

to key research themes within the department. A comprehensive overview of research

activities can be found in CRIStin. The following list highlights main fields of research but

cannot be considered a comprehensive overview of the research activities at the department:

Sámi culture and history: Research on Sámi and indigenous issues in the sub-arctic area is

one of the core commitments at SKU and the section represents the largest research group at

UIT regarding these topics. The different theoretical approaches reflects disciplines cultural

studies, geography, social anthropology, archaeology and musicology. Current research topics

include Sámi ethno-history, domestication processes in a multi-species perspective, pastoral

resource management, Indigenous religion, heritage discourses, tourism, and traditional music

(yoik) in an ethno-political frame. Parts of the research generate from participation in

international projects (NFR, ECR, NordForsk) and co-operation with Sámi Allaskuvla in

Kautokeino.

Museology: Reinforcing the inter-disciplinary cooperation and mutual understanding between

different fields of expertise constituting the museum’s ontology has been of central

importance to museology at TMU over the past decade. The RCN funded national research

network MusViT involved tenured academic staff from the natural and cultural sciences and

PhD students. Three main areas are explored as episteme: museum expertise; communication,

mediation, and critical heritage discourses; and materiality and enactment. The commitment

to the museum network initiated an internal interdisciplinary research cluster. The

museological scope resulted in an increased focus on dissemination.

Archaeology: Archaeological research including all time periods in Northern Norway from

the Stone Age to recent historic period. The active utilization of museum collections and

integration of results from cultural heritage management projects into ongoing research is a

priority. Incorporating a Sámi perspective is of central importance in research from relevant

periods. The NRC funded national research network “Forskning i Felleskap” (FiF) involved

academic staff and PhD students. Academic staff are involved in the SARG research group

which studies northern hunter-gatherer temporal and spatial demographic fluctuations and

associated mobility patterns from 9500 to 0 BC. Data includes settlement sites, artefacts, and

reports from extensive development-led excavations and rock art. Maritime archaeology is

also a central component of the research profile. Working across disciplines is crucial to

archaeological research, which makes archaeology one of the research themes where there is a

strong integration of the natural and cultural sciences.

16

Polar Cultural Heritage: As the Polar regions are moving to the centre of global

consciousness, there are a growing interest in the history of the Arctic and Antarctic. A

knowledge-based understanding of the history and nature of the Polar regions is necessary in

order to understand their potential and vulnerability. Moreover, there has been little emphasis

on gender in these research fields. The research focus on polar cultural heritage holds a strict

focus on gender in the Arctic with the recently formed research network Circumpolar Gender

(funded by NCR) led from the Polar Museum. This network includes studies on gender,

masculinity, polar history, museology, tourism, hunting and interdisciplinary.

Human animal relations: Several research projects explore the multiple engagements

between animals and humans. Through experience both parties shape each other’s behaviour

by developing agencies and affordances. ”Domestication” thus becomes a reciprocal concept,

as exemplified through studies of the relationships between horses and humans and reindeer

and humans. This biosocial perspective is also underlying studies of prehistoric rock carvings

visualizing meetings between humans and wild animals. Research on multispecies

ethnography on horses, exemplify a concern in SKU’s emphasis on museology; how museum

expertise should seek new ways to explore and rethink natural and cultural categories for

analysis.

In the Strategy Plan for 2008-2012 and 2012-2013, museology with a focus on knowledge

within dissemination / communication and museum studies from a Sámi and multicultural

perspective. The Strategy Plan 2014-2020 prioritizes research within society, climate and

environment in the North with an emphasis on Sámi culture and museology.

TMU has contributed to the international research community in several fields within the last

5-10 years. Within musicology, at a Nordic level, it is argued that the traditional Sámi yoik is

well structured with several musical motives and is not, as previously argued, music without

clear structures (Graff). At a wider international level archaeologists have been involved in

rock art research around the world (in particular, Central Asia Russia, South Africa) and

contributed to establish the institution as one of the leading research environments in Europe

involved in research resulting in several rock art sites being inscribed on the UNESCO World

Heritage List (Helskog). Furthermore, establishing tephrochronology as an absolute dating

method for archaeological site contexts and related paleo environmental contexts (Wickler);

contributed to a new understanding of First Millennium sites in Northern Norway with

implications for European research on Medieval political organization (Storli); questioned the

link between prehistoric pottery production and early farming (Skandfer); demonstrating the

importance of indigenous ethics and local knowledge at the cost of ethnographic analogies

(Skandfer, Wickler). Cultural scientists have conducted prizewinning research focusing the

migrant children entering Europe in years 2000 represents substantial contributions to

understanding their transcultural experience that in the current political situation of Europe is

highly relevant (Ragazzi). Research related to Sámi society have generated new insight into

pastoral issues like domestication, customary law, common property and traditional

knowledge (Bjørklund). Within neoshamanism, a focus on the mechanisms of contemporary

shamanism in rethinking the relationship between the religious and the secular world presents

spiritual quests in some very surprising and innovative forms. The research shows the myriad

of ways late modern shamanism is becoming more vital and personally significant to people,

communities, and economics in Nordic countries (Fonneland). The submitted article

(Maurstad et al. 2013 in form Y) is an original and innovative contribution to the animals and

17

society literature. It answers the literature’s call to focus the more nuanced aspects of how

human society has been and continues to be structured through its intersection with non-

human animals. As a multispecies ethnography on horses, it also exemplifies a concern in

SKU’s emphasis on museology; how museum expertise should seek new ways to explore and

rethink natural and cultural categories for analysis (Maurstad).

According to the institution’s long-term plans (2008-2012 and 2012-2013), the aim is to

increase the number of publications per researcher to a minimum of one publication point

annually. Using publication points registered in CRIStin, a sum of NOK 10,000 per

publication point is added to the research funds of individual academic staff as an incentive to

increase the number of qualifying scientific publications. This practice has been continued as

part of Strategy Plan 2014-2020.

The primary objective for TMU’s Communication Strategy Plan 2016-2020 is to present up-

to-date research in The High North. This entails strategic research communication on northern

natural and cultural heritage, presenting and enhancing the visibility of research projects in an

innovative manner and actively contributing to society in The High North. The Team for

Research Communication is a clear priority for aiding researchers in research communication

and increasing the visibility of research, archives and collections at TMU.

According to the Strategy Plan 2014-2020, TMU aims to increase the level of external

funding to 20% by 2020. Money to support funding applications to the RCN and EU was set

aside as part of the Strategy Plan 2012-2013.

Mandated cultural heritage management activity generates substantial financial support for

TMU. The annual archaeological excavations produce a substantial number of artefacts that

are added to the museum collections. This material has potential for further research and

research communication and is discussed in the strategy document Professional Plan for

Archaeology at TMU.

2.3. Societal relevance

The institution will attach two case studies to give examples of how research produced at the

institution within this area has had an impact on society at large; Alta and Sápmi.

2.4. Other information

Supervising PhD students involved in artistic research. Co-supervisor for a musician at The

Department of Music, Dance and Drama, Faculty of Fine Arts, UiT. This is connected to

academic research and expertise on musicology at the institution. Co-supervision of a PhD

student at The Academy of Contemporary Art and Creative Writing, Faculty of Fine Arts,

UiT, related to visual anthropology expertise and research at the institution.

Member of the Research Network for Studies on the Curatorial comprising scholars from

several Scandinavian universities (among them Aarhus, Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm,

Tromsø) exploring curatorial practices within universities and university museums. Financed

by the Danish Council for Independent Research, administrated by Department of Arts and

Curatorial Studies at Copenhagen University, Denmark.

Leader of the research group “Contact Zones: Critical Cultural Heritage, Artistic Practice

and Anthropology”administrated by SKU, comprising scholars from Institute of Cultural

Anthropology and Development Sociology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences,

18

Leiden University, Netherlands, Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages

(IKOS), Faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo, Museum of Cultural History, University

of Oslo, Ethnologisches Museum, Humboldt Forum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin,

Department of Political and Social Sciences, Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology,

Freie Universität, Berlin, National Museums of World Culture, Stockholm and SKU.

The evaluation template seems to be more oriented towards the departments involved in

teaching.

Names of the case study documents:

HUMEVAL 5 Tromsø University Museum case Alta

HUMEVAL 5 Tromsø University Museum case Sápmi

Form Y – Additional publications submitted to the panel

Publications to be submitted

Filename

Maurstad, Anita, Dona Davis and Sarah Cowles. 2013.

Co-being and intra-action in horse–human relationships: a

multi-species ethnography of be(com)ing human and

be(com)ing horse. In Social Anthropology/Anthropologie

Sociale (2013) 21, 3 pp. 322–335

HUMEVAL 5

Tromsø University

Museum Maurstad

et al 2013

19

Date

18. March. 2016

…………………………………………….

Signatures

Inger Kaisa Bækø

Contact person for the evaluation

Inger Storli

for Marit Anne Hauan

Head of the institution (faculty or independent research institute)

1

Impact case study

Institution: Universitetsmuseet i Tromsø – UiT Norges Arktiske Universitet

Panel number: 5 Archaeology, History and Cultural Studies

Case number or short name: Alta

Name of impact case: World Heritage Rock Art

Summary of the impact

The rock art in Alta became a UNESCO World Heritage site in December 1985. Alta

Museum was built to manage the World Heritage Sites and the county history. The rock art

and the museum has become a major tourist attraction and a part of the identity of Alta as

well as the nation.

Advising management of rock art sites in the Russian Republic of Karelia, Uzbekistan and

Azerbaijan. Sarmishsay in Uzbekistan is now on the national UNESCO tentative list and

Gobustan in Azerbaijan was included in the World Heritage List in 2007. All are part of

local and national identity.

Description of the research underpinning the impact

Knut Helskog (professor emeritus) at Tromsø Museum (TMU) conducted fieldwork and

research underpinning the inclusion of the rock art in Alta in the UNESCO World Heritage

List (Helskog 1983, 1984, 1985a, b). The research included documentation, analysis,

publication / presentation to an academic and general audience from 1974 to the present.

The national interest in the rock art was immediate and the international interest increased

with publications and seminars during a stipend (1981 – 1983) from The Norwegian

Research Council (NRC), and a visiting scholar position at the University of Cambridge,

UK (1984).

Due to the spectacular rock art, research and popular presentations, local interest and

tourism, as well as local and national political interest, the Municipality of Alta decided in

1982 to locate a new Alta Museum within the rock art area. The inclusion of the rock art in

the UNESCO World Heritage List in December 1985 increased the reality of the plan. The

Ministry of Environment in cooperation with the Alta Municipality and Finnmark county

municipality bought the main area to gain complete administrative control. Based on the

documentation and research walkways were built to create a sustainable presentation of a

representative selection of the rock art.

Guidebooks were written and translated to 12 languages. The new Alta Museum was

inaugurated in 1991 and in 1993 became the European Museum of the Year.

Helskog continued his research and was TMU / UiTs representative in all matters

concerning Alta Museum until spring of 2015, advocating the significance of research,

sustainable presentation of the rock art and an academic competent staff. The museum staff

is both the managers of the rock art and the county history. TMU had a significant role in

this development.

Based on the Alta experience Helskog was from 1997-2010 engaged by the Norwegian

Directorate for Cultural Heritage (RA) as an advisor in a team to develop management

plans and sustainable presentation for rock art sites in The Russian Republic of Karelia,

2

with Nadezhda Lobanova (Russian Academy of Science) and with Anne-Sophie Hygen

(RA) in Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan. Documentation and conservation was improved, the

construction of walkways increased sustainability and guides have made the rock art more

available. The number of visitors increased significantly at all sites. Sarmishsay in

Uzbekistan is on the national UNESCO tentative list and Gobustan in Azerbaijan was

included in the World Heritage List in 2007. Both are symbols of national identity.

Details of the impact

The rock art, which by many locals Alta was regarded as preventing community

development, has become an asset and placed Alta on the exclusive map of World Heritage

Sites. The research has indirectly led to increased tourism and directly to the location,

building and growth of Alta Museum as a World Heritage Centre and county museum. The

rock art is the major tourist attraction related to cultural heritage in Finnmark. From

approximately 2000 visitors to the main area with rock art in the late 1970’s to 74.622 in

1995 and 53.366 in 2015. The rock at is now a part of the identity of Alta as well as the

nation.

To make the rock art globally known TMU / UiT and Alta Museum organized The Alta

Conference on Rock Art in 1994, 1998 and 2015 with participants from most continents.

Networks were created and a NRC / South African National Research Foundation (NRF)

financed a 3-year Rock Art project between UiT and the University of Witwatersrand in

South Africa (2003 – 2006). The project included World Heritage rock art sites and a South

African Conference on Rock Art in Kimberley (2006). All proceedings are published

except 2015 that is in progress. Research on understanding, managing, presenting and

conserving the rock art in Alta was presented at numerous international conferences. The

rock art in Alta had a central part in two PhD dissertations in 2008 at University of

Toulouse, France and 2010 at UiT, and five MA degrees (3 at UiT, University of Toulouse,

France and University of Witwatersrand in South Africa).

The Interreg project Rock Art in Northern Europe (RANE 2002 - 2005) network aimed to

explore and develop methods for conserving, documenting and presenting rock art

including expertise from the Nordic countries. RA financed the work in Alta. In essence,

the research, projects and networks created strengthened the management of the cultural

heritage in Alta.

The engagement in Central Asia created a strong network of curators and archaeologists

from all of the Central Asian countries, plus Azerbaijan, Russia and Norway. The project /

workshops were financed by the RA, and the aim became to develop a common database

for Central Asian rock art (CARAD), and share and develop expertise in conservation and

sustainable presentation. It was the first time the culture heritage organizations of the

Central Asian countries worked together to develop expertise related to the management of

rock art.

References to the research (scientific publications)

References are listed chronologically to better show the time interval of the impact.

Bølviken, Erik; Helskog, Ericka; Helskog, Knut; Holm-Olsen, Inger Marie; Solheim, Leiv;

Bertelsen, Reidar. 1982. Correspondence analysis: an alternative to principal components.

World archaeology;Volume 14.(1) p.41-60

3

Helskog, Knut 1983. Helleristninger i et tidsperspektiv, en geologisk og mulitvariabel

anlyse. I: Folk og ressurser i nord. Tapir Akademisk Forlag 1983 ISBN 82-519-0559-1. p

47-60

Helskog, Knut 1984. Helleristningene i Alta. En presentasjon og en analyse av

menneskefigurene. Viking 1984; Volume 4, p 5-41

Helskog, Knut 1985a. Boats and Meanings. A study of change and continuity in the Alta

fjord, arctic Norway, from 4200 - 500 years BC. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology,

Volume 4. p. 177-205

Helskog, Knut 1985b. Helleristningene i Alta - kilder om levekår i forhistorien? Heimen

1985; Volum 4. p.193-201

Helskog, Knut 1987. Alta Petroglyphs/Petroglyphs d'Alta. In Monuments & sites: Norway:

a cultural heritage = Norvège: un patrimoine culturel. Universitetsforlaget ISBN 82-00-

18475-7. p. 275-283

Helskog, Knut 1987. Selective Depictions. A study of 3700 years old rock carvings from

arctic Norway and their relationship to the sami drums. In Hodder, I.: Archaeology as Long

Term History. Cambridge University Press p .17-30. ISBN 0-521-32923-X

Helskog, Knut 1988. Archaeopolitics and Responsibilities. The case of a UNESCO World

Heritage Site in Arctic Norway. Antiquity, Volume 62. p.541-547

Helskog, Knut 1988. Helleristningene i Alta i et Fennoskandisk perspektiv. Kronologi og

symbolisme. Iskos 1988; Volume 7. p.67-76

Helskog, Knut 1988.Helleristningene i Alta. Spor etter ritualer og dagligliv i Finnmarks

forhistorie. Alta: Knut Helskog 1988 (ISBN 82-991709-0-7) 135 p.

Helskog, Knut 1989. Naturalisme og skjematisme i nordnorske helleristninger. In:

Framskritt for fortida i nord. I Povl Simonsens fotefar. Tromsø: Universitetet i Tromsø-

Tromsø Museum 1989 ISBN 82-7142-009-7. p.87-104

Helskog, Knut 1990. Sjamaner, endring og kontinuitet. Relasjoner mellom helleristninger

og samfunn med utgangspunkt i helleristningene i Alta. In: Hällristningar - forskning och

tolkning, p.30-36. ISBN 951-95435-7-0.

Helskog, Knut 1991. The word of art and the art of words. Comment on C. Tilley: Material

culture and text: The art of ambiguity. Antiquity, Volum 65. p.992-994

Helskog, Knut 1993. Fra tvangstrøyer til 90-åras pluralisme i helleristningsforskning. In:

Nordic Tag. Report from the third Nordic Tag conference 1990 p .70-75. ISBN

8290273576.

Helskog, Knut 1993. Petroglyphs and the Public. The Alta case. In: Arkeologiske skrifter

fra Universitetet i Bergen 11. Universitetet i Bergen, p.101-107

Helskog, Knut 1994. Comments on Andres Hesjedal. The HUnters Rock Art in Northern

Norway. Problems of Chronology and Interpretation. Norwegian Archaeological Review,

vol 1, 20-23

Helskog, Knut 1995. Maleness and femaleness in the sky and the underworld - and in

between. In K.Helskog & B.Olsen (eds): Perceiving rock art: social and political

perspectives. Oslo: Novus forlag. The Institute for Comparative Research in Human

Culture p.247-262

4

Helskog, Knut 1995. The rock carvings in Alta. A presentation. BCSP: Bollettino Del

Centro Camuno Di Studi Preistorici,;Volume 28. p.43-56

Helskog, Knut; Olsen, Bjørnar. 1995. Introduction. In: Perceiving Rock Art: Social and

Political Perspectives. Novus Forlag. ISBN 8270993387

Helskog, Knut; Olsen, Bjørnar (eds) 1995. Perceiving Rock Art: Social and Political

Perspectives. Novus Forlag (ISBN 8270993387)

Helskog, Knut 1997. La conexión costera. La percepción del paisaje y los grabados

rupestres en el norte de Europa. I: Los motivos de fauna y armas enlos grabados

prehistóricos del continente europeo. Spain: Vigo: Asociación arqueológica viguesa, p .31-

52

Helskog, Knut 1999. The Shore connectiion. Cognitive landscape and communication with

rock carvings i northernmost Europe. Norwegian Archaeological Review, Volume 32.(2)

p.73-94

Helskog, Knut 2000. Changing rock carvings - changing societies?. Adoranten 2000 s.5-16

Helskog, Knut 2000. The Alta Rock Carvings. International Newsletter on Rock Art

Bradley, Richard; Chippindale, Christopher; Helskog, Knut 2001.Post-Palaeolithic Europe.

In Witley, D.: Handbook of rock Art Research, p . 482-529. Alta Mira Press. ISBN 0-7425-

0256-2

Helskog, Knut 2001. Comments on Kalle Sognnes: When rock art comes into being: on the

recognition and acceptance of new discoveries. Rock Art Research 2001 s.84-85

Helskog, Knut 2001. Introduction. In: Theoretical Perspectives in Rock Art Research. 2001

ISBN 82-7099-338-7. s.9-20

Helskog, Knut 2001. Sledi, povestvovania i landchaft i naskalnom severa iskustve. I:

Arkeologi, p .64-88. In: puti ili arkeologia. St.Petersburg: Izdateltsvo St.Petersburg.

filosovkovo obshestva, vol 2

Helskog, Knut (ed). 2001. Theoretical Perspectives in Rock Art Research. Novus forlag.

Berg, Bjørn. 2003. Bergkunst på Amtmannsnes II. Spor etter sjamanisme? Master Thesis;

UiT.

Helskog, Knut 2003. Seeking answers (Out of the caves). Cambridge Archaeological

Journal, Volume 13.(2), p.269-271

Helskog, Knut 2003. The rock carvings at Kåfjord. International Newsletter on Rock Art

2003 (37) p.12-17

Konstantellos, Wendy. 2003. Style and symbolism: the rock carvings in Alta, northern

Norway. Unpublished MA dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand.

Vourc’h, Marie. 2003. L’art rupestre du fjord d’Alta (Finnmark, Norwège) Représentations

et modelès socio-culturels préhistoriques. Mémoires de la mâitrise en Préhistorie.

Université Toulouse-Le Mirail.

Helskog, Knut 2004. Landscapes in rock-art: rock-carving and ritual in the old European

north. In Chippindale, C; Nash, G.: The Figured Landscapes of Rock-Art. Looking at Pictures

in Place, 265 – 288. Cambridge University Press 2004 ISBN 0521818796.

5

Helskog, Knut; Høgtun, Ernst. 2004. Recording landscapes in rock carvings and the art of

drawing. In Prehistoric Pictures as Archaeological Source, p 21 - 31. Tanumshede, Sweden:

Tanums Hellristningsmuseum (ISBN 91-85952-89-3) 8 s. GOTARC Series C(50)

Vourc’h, Marie. 2004. Les gravures rupestres du nord de la Scandinavie du Neolithic à

l’âge du Fer. Préhistoire, art et societés 59: 117-126. Tarascon-sur Ariège.

Vourc’h, Marie. 2004. L’art rupestre du nord de la Scandinavie. Les gravures d’Alta, du

Trøndelaget de Nämforsen. Mémoire de D.E.A.(MA). ( Also in English) Université de

Toulouse II-Le Mirail.

Helskog, Knut 2005. Depiction of reindeer corrals. Hunting, domestication or both. In

Devlet, E.: World of Rock Art, p 344-351. Russian Academy of Sciences 2005 ISBN

5943750347.

Gjerde, Jan Magne. 2006. The location of rock pictures is an interpretive element.

Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter Nordisk 2006;Volum 3. s. 197-209

Hykkerud, Martin. 2006. The Rock Paintings of Williston: an interpretative study of rock

art, rituals and the landscape in which they are created. Master Thesis, UiT.

Smith, Benjamin; Helskog, Knut 2007. Project 34: The Rock Art project. In: South Africa -

Norway. Program on research cooperation, 96 sider. Oslo: Norges forskningsråd

Arntzen, Mari Sofi Strifeldt. 2007. Bilder på stein. En studie av helleristninger på

flyttblokker i Vest-Finnmark og Nord-Troms. MA Thesis, UiT.

Gjerde, Jan Magne. 2008. Boats of the North. In: Kanozero Petrogliphs. Rock history of

Kanozero: 50 centuries,10 years from the opening day. Kirovsk, Russland: Murmansk

Oblast, Kirovsk Rayon, 2008 s. 58-63 (also in Russian)

Helskog, Knut 2008. Rock art and identities. Large scale differences in the rock art among

north European prehistoric hunter- fisher-gather populations beween 4500 - 2000 BC. In:

Kanozero Petrogliphs. Rock history of Kanozero: 50 centuries,10 years from the opening

day,p.86-90. Kirovsk, Russland: Murmansk Oblast, Kirovsk Rayon, (also in Russian)

Helskog, Knut; Hygen, Anne-Sophie; Lobanova, Nadezhda. 2008. Protection and

Presentation of Rock Art in the Republic of Karelia, the Russian Federation. In: The

Norwegian-Russian cultural heritage co-operation. Oslo: Riksantikvaren ISBN 978-82-

7574-046-3. p .94-108

Vourc’h, Marie. 2008. L’artrupestre préhistorique du nord de la Scandinavie: Methode –

Themes - Structures. Doctorate de L’université de Toulouse.

Gjerde, Jan Magne. 2010. Rock art and landscapes: studies of Stone Age rock art from

northern Fennoscandia. PhD, UiT.

Gjerde, Jan Magne. 2010. "Cracking" Landscapes: New documentation - new knowledge?.

I: Goldhahn (ed.) Changing Pictures: Rock Art Traditions and Visions in the Northernmost

Europe. Oxbow Books 2010 ISBN 978-1-84217-405-0. s. 170-185

Helskog, Knut 2010. From the tyranny of the figures to the interrelationship between

myths, rock art and their surfaces. In Blundel, G; Chippendale, C. Smith, B.: Seeing and

Knowing, p.169-188. Wits University Press. 2010 ISBN 9781868145133

6

Helskog, Knut 2010. Interpreting Bear Imagery in the Spirit of Gutorm Gjessing. In C.

Westerdahl : A Circumpolar Reappraisal : The Legacy of Gutorm Gjessing (1906-1979),

p .123-132. Archaeopress, ISBN 9781407306964.

Gjerde, Jan Magne. 2011. Ei reise i Barentsregionens bergkunst - "litt spreidd småplukk". I

(red.) Lødøen, Trond, Stuedal, Helle V., og Søborg, Hans Chr. BERGKUNST.

Verdensarvsenter for bergkunst – Alta Museums skriftserie nr 1, s. 16-30

Helskog, Knut 2011. Northern boats through 5000 years. In: Rock Art in Modern society,

p.19-23. Volumes 1-2. Kemerovo: Siberian Association of Prehistoric Art Researchers.

2011 ISBN 978-5-202-01025-5.

Helskog, Knut 2011. Reindeer corrals 4700-4200 BC: Myth or reality? Quaternary

International 2011; Volume 238, p.25-34

Helskog, Knut 2011. Scanning Rock Art, The Ultimate Documentation? In: Rock Art in

Modern society, p.141-143. Volumes 1-2. Kemerovo: Siberian Association of Prehistoric

Art Researchers. ISBN 978-5-202-01025-5.

Helskog, Knut; Hygen, Anne-Sophie. 2011. Forvaltning og tilrettelegging av bergkunst i

Eurasia sett i lys av erfaringer i Alta og Østfold. BERGKUNST; Volume 1.(1), p.78-89

Helskog, Knut; Indrelid, Svein. 2011. Humans and reindeer. Quaternary International

2011; Volume 238, p.1-3.

Helskog, Knut 2012. Ancient Depictions of Reindeer Enclosures and their Environment.

Fennoscandia Archaeologica, volume 29, p.27-52

Helskog, Knut 2012. Bears and Meanings among Hunter-fisher-gatherers in Northern

Fennoscandia 9000 - 2500 BC. Cambridge Archaeological Journal; Volume 22.(2) p.209-

236

Helskog, Knut 2012. Helleristninger av båter og ressursutnyttelse i Europas nordlige

ytterkant. In: Agrarsamfundenes ekspansion i nord. København: Nationalmuseet. ISBN

978-87-7602-196-2. p.221-232

Helskog, Knut 2012. The routine of documentation. In: Working with Rock Art. In B.

Smith, K. Helskog, D. Morris (eds), Recording, presenting and understanding rock art

using indigenous knowledge. Wits University Press. ISBN 978-1-86814-545-4. p.95-108

Smith, Benjamin; Helskog, Knut; Morris, David. 2012. Foreword. In B. Smith, K. Helskog,

D. Morris (eds): Working with Rock Art. Recording, presenting and understanding rock art

using indigenous knowledge. Wits University Press. ISBN 978-1-86814-545-4. p.xi-xii

Smith, Benjamin; Helskog, Knut; Morris, David (eds). 2012. Working with Rock Art. In B.

Smith, K. Helskog, D. Morris (eds) Recording, presenting and understanding rock art using

indigenous knowledge. Wits University Press (ISBN 978-1- 86814-545-4) 312 p.

Helskog, Knut2013. Samtaler med maktene. En historie om verdensarven i Alta. Tromsø

Museum - universitetsmuseet (ISBN 9788271420611) 240 p.

Vourc’h, Marie. 2013. L’artrupestre préhistorique du nord de la Scandinavie. Eraul 135.

Liège: Université de Liège.

Berge, Lars Jølle. 2014. Helleristningene i Alta som Virkemidler ved Utveksling av

Informasjon. En Analyse av Helleristningene i Alta med et Fokus på Utviklingen av den

Lokale Tradisjonen. MA Thesis. UiT.

7

Helskog, Knut 2014. Communicating with the World of beings. The World Heritage Rock

Art Sites in Alta, Arctic Norway. Oxbow Books 2014 (ISBN 9781782974116) 240 p.

Helskog, Knut 2014. Petroglyphs of Boats as evidence of contact between the Caspian Sea

and Scandinavia. In V. Roggen (ed): Thor Heyerdahl's Search for Odin: Ancient Links

between Azerbaijan and Scandinavia, p .202-219? Novus Forlag.ISBN 978-82-7099-738-1

Helskog, Knut 2014. Preservation and Collateral Damage. In: Conservation and

Management of the World's Petroglyph Sites p.17-28. USA: Hollym International Corp.

ISBN 978-1-56591-410-0.

References to sources to corroborate the claims made about the impact

References are listed chronologically to better show the time interval of the impact.

The World Heritage Work in Central Asia is presented separately in the end if this section.

The Alta Rock Art UNESCO documents are found at : http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/352/

- Helskog was a member in developing the first exhibitions at Alta Museum as well as

writing guides to the rock art. The first guide, Helleristningene i Hjemmeluft/Jiepmaluokta,

was written at the end of the 1970’s and thereafter renewed several times. They are

translated into 12 languages. (e.g. Helskog, Knut 2005. Helleristningene i Hjemmeluft /

Jiepmaluokta. A guide).

- The presentation of the unique characters of the Alta Rock Art was written by K. Helskog

in 1985 at Tromsø Museum. The application was written by Riksantikvaren, The

Directorate for Cultural Heritage in Norway

- Helskog was an active part in all the different committees regarding the development of

Alta Museum and the rock art areas including the first permanent exhibition. He was a

member of the governing board until 2015.

- Helskog also worked (1982 – 83) interactive with the architect firm Atelier 2 in planning

and laying out the walkway system to present the rock art to the public.

- Helskog has over the last 30 years featured in numerous media presentations (TV and

Radio), including in a Swedish television production on rock art in Scandinavia.

Helskog, Knut 1985. Bjørnejakt og ritualer for 6200 - 3700 år siden. Ottar (156), 7-11

Helskog, Knut 1986. Karhunmetsasys - ja - ritualit - 6200 - 3700 vuotta sitten. Sirius (9)

s.11-15

Helskog, Knut 1987. Helleristningene i Jiebmaluokta. Bevaring, formidling og reiseliv.

Museumsnytt; Volume 2. s.35-38

Helskog, Knut 1994. Helleristningene i Alta. I: Fire norske kulturskatter. ISBN 82-7172-

008-2. p.16-18

Helskog, Knut 2001. Ånderne fra Alta. In: På sporet af mennesket -Dawn of the Human

Spirit, p .58-63. København, Moesgård, Odense: Nationalmuseet, Moesgård Museum,

Odense Bys Museer ISBN 87-988395-0-0.

8

Lobanova, N. 2002. Report. Preservation of Karelian Petroglyphs within the Joint

Norwegian-Karelian Project 1998-2001. State Center for the Protection and Management of

Historical and Cultural Monuments. Ministry of Culture, Republic of Karelia.

Lobanova, N. 2002. Report. Project: Preservation of Karelian Petroglyphs (Translated from

Russian by Vera Nesterova, Karelian Research Centre. 62 pages.

Helskog, Knut 2004. The Rock Art North of the Arctic Circle. In: Archaeology in North

Norway. Tromsø: Tromsø Universoty Museum. ISBN 82-7142-035-6.

Helskog, Knut, Hygen, Anne-Sophie. 2007. Protection and Presentation of Rock Art Sites

in the Republic of Karelia, The Russian Federation. Tromsø University Museum/

Riksantikvaren – Direktorate for Cultural Heritage. 31 p.

Helskog, Knut; Hygen, Anne-Sophie; Lobanova, Nadezhda. 2008. Protection and

Presentation of Rock Art in the Republic of Karelia, the Russian Federation. In: The

Norwegian-Russian cultural heritage co-operation. Oslo: Riksantikvaren ISBN 978-82-

7574-046-3. p .94-108

Helskog, Knut 2008. Protection and Presentation of Rock Art Sites in the Republic of

Karelia, the Russian Federation. Project-work 21-26.10. Report. Tromsø: Tromsø Museum,

Universitetsmuseet / Directorate for Cultural Heritage. 2008 17 p.

Helskog, Knut 2008. Protection and Presentation of Rock Art Sites in the Republic of

Karelia, the Russian Federation. Project-work 29.05-02 - 06.2008. Report. Tromsø

Museum, Universitetsmuseet / Directorate for Cultural Heritage. 11 p.

Gjerde, Jan Magne. 2011. Bergunst og Landskap. Historier i berg frå steinalderen /

Landscapes of Rock Art. Storied Rocks of the Stone Age. Travelling exhibition at Tromsø

Museum

Helskog, Knut 2013. Ski og truger i fennoskandisk bergkunst. Ottar 2013 (268) p.13-21

Helskog, Knut 2014. Outstanding universal value, sustainable development and collateral

damage. "International Seminar for the Inscription of Bangudae and Cheonjeon-ri

Petroglyphs on the UNESCO World Heritage List."; 2014-01-16 – In South Korea

Hykkerud, Martin. 2015. Interview of Martin Hykkerud at Alta Museum in connection with

30 years since the rock art in Alta was inscribed in the UNESCO World Heritage list:

https://radio.nrk.no/serie/distriktsprogram-finnmark/DKFI01024215/04-12-2015

Helberg, B. H. 2002-2015: Rapport vedrørende sikring av bergkunst i Nord-Norge 2015.

TMU Top ark, Bergkunstarkivet. (Annual reports on the maintenance work at the rock sites

in Northern Norway, including the World Heritage site in Alta).

Gobustan in Azerbaijan:

The Documents for including Gobustan in Azerbaijan on UNESC World Heritage List is

found at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1076.

Anne-Sophie Hygen (Directorate for Cultural Heritage in Norway and K. Helskog (Tromsø

Museum) wrote a Management Plan of Action as an addition which was included in the

application for World Heritage Status.

Hygen, Anne-Sophie; Helskog, Knut 2006. Advisory mission to Gobustan. Gobustan Rock

Art Cultural Landscape. The republic of Azerbaijan. Oslo: Riksantikvaren 2006 42 s.

9

Sarmishsay in Uzbekistan:

Sarmishsay in Uzbekistan is included in Tentative List Uzbekistan:

http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5307/

Khujanazarov, M., Toderich, K. 2005. Studies, presentation and sustainable management of

the Cultural and Natural Heritage of Sarmishsay, Navoi region, Republic of Uzbekistan.

Samarkand.

Khujanazarov, M., Toderich, K. & Reutova, M. 2005. Studies, presentation and sustainable

management of the Cultural and Natural Heritage of Sarmishsay, Navoi region, Republic of

Uzbekistan. Samarkand.

Khujanazarov, M., Toderich, K. & Reutova, M. 2007. Report 2006. Studies, presentation

and sustainable management of the Cultural and Natural Heritage of Sarmishsay, Navoi

region, Republic of Uzbekistan. Samarkand.

Khujanazarov, M., Toderich, K. & Reutova, M. 2009. Studies, presentation and sustainable

management of the Cultural and Natural Heritage of Sarmishsay, Navoi region, Republic of

Uzbekistan. Samarkand.

Reutova, M. 2009. Petroglyphs in Sarmishsay. The methodical recommendations for

conservation. Samarkand: International Institute for Central Asian Studies and Institute of

Achaeology, Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences.

Hygen, Anne Sophie & Helskog, Knut 2009. The Sarmishsay Petroglyph Site. Seventh

Mission to Sarmishsay April/May 2009. Oslo: Riksantikvaren. Directorate for Cultural

Heritage 2009 21 p.

Khujanazarov, M., Reutova, M. & Toderich, K. 2010. Management Plan for the

Archaeological and natural landscape of Sarmishsay. Academy of Science of the Republic

of Uzbekistan, Institute of Archaelogy. Tashkent: Ministry of Culture and Sport of the

Republic of Uzbekistan. State Committee for Nature protection of the Republic of

Uzbekistan. Tashkent. (English edition).

Hygen, Anne Sophie 2010. The Uzbek-Norwegian Sarmishsay Project 2002 – 2010. The

Sarmishsay Petroglyph Site. Navoi region, Nowbahor District, The Republic of Uzbekistan.

Oslo: The Directorate for Cultural Heritage. (Note: Includes references to 8 reports from

the year 2002 – 2010. All reports are also in Russian.)

External references

Hans Christian Søborg Curator at the World Heritage Rock Art Centre - Alta Museum,

Altaveien 19, N-9518 Alta, Norway haso@altamuseum.no, +47 95 73 77 78

Ulf Bertilsson Fil.dr/Dr. Researcher and Director at Swedish Rock Art Research Archives,

Institutionen för Historiska studier, University of Gothenburg, Box 200, 405 30 Göteborg,

Sweden, ulf@shfa.se, +46 (0)709-817881

Richard Bradley Emeritus Professor at Department of Archaeology, University of

Reading, England, r.j.bradley@reading.ac.uk

David S. Whitley (Ph.D., RPA), Director, ASM Affiliates, Tehachapi, California, USA,

dwhitley@asmaffiliates.com

Nadezhda Lobanova (Phd) Archaeologist at Russian Academy of Sciences Petrozavodsk,

Russia, hopelob@yandex.ru, +79 214525316

10

Malahat Faradjeva (PhD), Director of Qala State Historical Ethnographic Reserve, Qala

village,Sulh str, Khazar district, Azerbaijan, Baku, malahat@mail.ru

Benjamin Smith (Professor) Associate Dean (International), Faculty of Arts, Professor of

World Rock Art, Centre for Rock Art Research + Management, School of Social Sciences,

University of Western Australia, Archaeology, M257, UWA, 35 Stirling Highway,

Crawley, 6009, WA, Australia, benjamin.smith@uwa.edu.au , +61 864882097

Geoffrey Blundell (PhD) School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies,

University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, 1 Jan Smuts Avenue, Braamfontein 2000,

Johannesburg, South Africa, Geoffrey.Blundell@wits.ac.za , +27 0117174702

1

Impact case study

Institution: Tromsø University Museum – UiT The Arctic University of Tromsø

Panel number: 5 Archaeology, History and Cultural Studies

Case number or short name: Sápmi

Name of impact case: “Sápmi – Becoming a Nation – The Emergence of a Sámi National

Community”

Summary of the impact

The project highlights Sámi struggle after WWII as the development of a modern

indigenous movement, a matter neglected by museums, schoolbooks, and largely unknown

to the general public. It provides a corrective to conventional approaches and museum

practice representing Sámi and indigenous peoples as “exotic”, addressing the view of Sámi

people equivalent to reindeer herding, “wilderness” and the past. This was achieved by the

making of a permanent exhibition, a catalogue, websites, publications, courses and

educational activities. The project is an innovative landmark mediating aspects of the Sámi

addressing museum representation with a focus on Sámi modernity, identity and

ethnopolitics.

Description of the research underpinning the impact

The background for this project is the emergence of a cultural and political awakening and

mobilization among the Sámi indigenous minority of Norway after WWII, accelerated by

the claims for recognition of Sámi territorial rights in the so-called “Alta-affair” (1978-

1982) over the government´s decision for a hydro-electric development project in a

traditional Sámi area. A virtual revolution in Sámi-Norwegian affairs ensued with the

establishment of the Sámi legislation and the Sámi Parliament (1988-89). The staff of the

Sámi department at TMU (I. Bjørklund, T. Brantenberg, J. A. Kalstad, D. Storm, including

H. Eidheim as a visiting professor (1996-2000) launched in 1996 a plan for a new Sámi

exhibition, replacing or supplementing the museum´s ethnographic exhibition “The Sámi

Culture” from 1973 as a response to the ongoing public debate on Sámi issues at local and

national levels. Staff members had for years been involved in research and advocacy on

Sámi and indigenous matters regarding ethnic assimilation (Eidheim 1971), Sámi ethno-

history (Bjørklund 1985, Storm 1993), pastoral resource management and impact studies

(Bjørklund&Brantenberg 1981, Brantenberg 1985, 1999, Bjørklund 1990, 1999) and Sámi

ethno politics (Eidheim 1997). Three important dimensions surfaced from this research:

The consequences of the Norwegian policy of ethnic assimilation, the different impacts

confronting Sámi resource management and the Sámi efforts to develop an indigenous

movement. The challenge however, was to mediate this research to the general public.

The exhibition project started in 1997 and was recommended by the Sami Parliament. The

exhibition project received funding from the NRC (Norwegian Reseach Council) as the first

NRC-funded museum exhibition project. Additional funding was granted by the Ministry of

Municipal and Regional Government, the Ministry of Church, Education and Research, the

Sámi Education Council and UiT). The exhibition was opened in 2000 by the president of

the Sámi Parliament at the time, Sven Roald Nystø.

As an alternative to a travelling version, work on a website based on the exhibition started

in 2004 with funding from the Education Division of the Sámi Parliament, the Ministry of

Education and Research, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Directors of Education in

Nordland, Troms and Finnmark, Troms County Council, the Sámi Political Department in

2

the Ministry of Municipalities, and UiT with the aim of providing an educational resource

on Sámi ethnopolitics to Sámi, Norwegian and foreign users. Similar versions in Sámi and

Norwegian language was opened 2006, the English in 2007.

Details of the impact

Visitors’ comments have been selected from 2001. Virtually all were positive; many

underline their minority or indigenous backgrounds, adding empathic comments, as well as

making comparisons to indigenous struggles elsewhere and critical comments to other

museum representations. A study of the visitors’ responses was part of a MA in museology

at University of Brighton, England (Kjellberg 2006). In this study 62% stated Sápmi was

better than other exhibitions and 67% said they had learned something new.

Visitor data from 2000-2008 shows: of the 385 groups of students (primary, secondary and

university level), 182 groups (4.496 students) visited Sápmi. About 600 pupils, students,

teachers and others have annually been taught in Sápmi. Since 2000, departments of the

Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education have included Sápmi in their

teaching where students also have compared the two Sámi exhibitions. Teachers and the

museum educational service stated that exhibition have acted as an ideal alternative

“classroom” where displays enables discussion on sensitive and difficult issues like Sámi

identity and ethnic difference.

Website statistics from 2006 to the present (statcounter.com) show an annual average of

1.947 views (peak in 2008 with 5.053). Totals for same period: 14.674 first time visitors,

16.592 unique visits, 25.308 views, and 1.918 returning visits. The majority of visitors are

from Scandinavia and Europe, while numerous visitors represents a worldwide interest.

Feedback from teachers in the use of the web site in 2006 were very positive, some

emphasising its significance in terms of the scarcity of teaching material.

In 2014 TMU in cooperation with Northern Norway Art Museum opened the exhibition and

published two volumes “Sámi Stories” at Scandinavian House in New York continued in

Anchorage (2015) as part of the celebration of the 200 years anniversary of Norway's

constitution (Hauan 2014).The new role of the museum as a participant in public discourse

was followed up with another special issue of the journal Ottar (2013) in response to a

heated debate on the relevance of Sámi language and Sámi ancestry in the Tromsø region.

Same year, the museum launched the exhibition “Who Came First?” as an argument in the

same debate on Sámi and Norse ancestry in terms of archaeological evidence. The same

theme was brought up in the exhibition – “The Man in the Bog” (2015) – based on a burial

find from ca 1000 AD illustrating the possible complexity of Sámi-Norse relation in

medieval times in Northern Norway.

References to the research (scientific publications)

References are listed chronologically to better show the time interval of the impact.

Brantenberg, Terje 2000: “Sápmi (Sámi Homeland) – the making of a nation: the building

of a new ethnopolitical exhibit at the University of Norway”, in: Cultura Polaris, no 6, vol.

4.

Olsen, Bjørnar 2000. “Bilder fra fortida. Representasjoner av samisk kultur i samiske

museer in: Nordisk Museologi (2000, no. 2). ISSN 1103-8152. P. 12-30.

Mathisen, R. Stein 2001: “Hvem forteller hva om “det samiske”? Utstillingen Sápmi – en

nasjon blir til på Tromsø Museum. In: Tradisjon, 2-00/1-01, p. 37-42.

3

Eidheim, Harald, Bjørklund, Ivar and Brantenberg, Terje 2002: “Museene, publikum og

antropologien: et formidlingsprosjekt ved Tromsø museum”. Norsk Antropologisk

Tidsskrift , no. 3, vol. 13 (2002), p. 124-136

Keil, Julia Christina 2003. Die Präsentation samischer Kultur und Geschichte in

nordnorwegischen Museen : Magisterarbeit Skandinavistik, Humboldt-Universität zu

Berlin, 113 pages.

Keil, Julia Christina 2004: “From Cabinets of Curiosity to Counter-Culture Sami

Museums: 350 Years of Presentation of Sami Culture”, in: Jurij Kusmenko: The Sámi and

Scandinavians – Aspects of 2000 Years of Contact. Hamburg (2004), p. 141-153.

Mathisen, R. Stein 2004: “Representasjoner av kulturell forskjell”, in: Tidsskrift for

Kulturforskning, no. 3, vol. 3.

Koch, Karola 2006: “Das Tromsø Museum. Representation im Wandel. “Die Kultur der

Samen” und “Sápmi - Eine Nation entsteht”, Institut für Europeische Ethnologie,

Humboldt Universität, Berlin. 26 pages.

Kjellsberg, Torunn (2006): “Objects of signification. An analysis of four Sami exhibitions

in Norway. Unpubl. MA thesis in History of Design and Material Culture, University of

Brighton.

Ragazzi, Rossella 2008: “The Meaning in the making: Sapmi Becoming a Nation exhibition

at Tromsø University Museum. Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 2008;

Volum 30. ISSN 1650-3686. P 99-120.

Durand, Carine Ayélé 2010. Anthropology in a Glass Case: Indigeneity, Collaboration and

Artistic Practice in Museums. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag, 188 pages. ISBN 978-3.639-

28695-3.

Olsen, Kjell 2010. Identities, Ethnicity and Borderzones. Stamsund, Orkana Akademiske.

243 pages.

Kalsås, Vidar Fagerheim 2011: “Minoritetar på utstilling: Framstillinga av samane og

romanifolket sin historie på museumsutstillingar”. Master Thesis in History, University of

Bergen. 110 pages.

Eidheim, Harald, Bjørklund, Ivar and Brantenberg, Terje 2012: “Negotiating with the

Public - Ethnographic Museums and Ethnopolitics”, in website: Museum & Society, School

of Museum Studies, University of Leicester, vol. 10, no. 2, (July 2012), p. 95-120. ISSN

1479-8360.

Mathisen, Silje Opdahl 2014: “Etnisitetens Estetikk. Visuelle Fortellinger og

Forhandlinger i Samiske Museumsutstillinger”, PhD thesis, University of Oslo. 303 pages.

Brantenberg, Terje 2014: “Politics of Belonging – the Sámi Movement”, in: Hauan, Marit

(ed.): Sámi Stories. Art and Identity of an Arctic People, Tromsø University Museum,

Orkana Akademisk, p. 37-55.

Hauan, Marit (ed.) 2014: Sámi Stories. Art and Identity of an Arctic People. Tromsø

University Museum, Orkana Akademisk, 108 pages.

Kalsås, Vidar Fagerheim 2015: “Minority history in museums. Between ethnopolitics and

museology”, in: Nordisk Museologi (2015), no.2, special issue: “Rethinking Sami Culture

in Museums”, p. 33-48.

4

Mathisen, Silje Opdahl 2015: “Etnisitetens estetikk. Visuelle fortellinger og forhandlinger i

samiske museumsutstillinger”, in: Tidsskrift for Kulturforskning (2015), p. 70-75.

References to sources to corroborate the claims made about the impact

References are listed chronologically to better show the time interval of the impact.

Brantenberg, Terje 1999: “Sámi Homeland – The Making of a Nation. Building a New

Exhibition at the University Museum of Tromsø, in: Arctic Studies Center Newsletter,

Smithsonian Institution, no. 7, p. 15-17.

Bjørklund, Ivar 2000: Sápmi – Becoming a Nation. The emergence of a Sami national

community. Tromsø University Museum. 49 pages (exhibition catalogue published in Sami,

Norwegian, English, German and Japanese versions).

Eidheim, Harald and Storm, Dikka (eds) 2000: En nasjon blir til, Ottar, no. 4/232, Tromsø

University Museum, 66 pages.

Gustavsen, John 2000. “Sápmi - en problematisk utstilling”, review in: Kulturnytt, vol. 22,

no. 4 (2000).

Jull, Peter 2000. “”Sápmi – Becoming a Nation” (Book Review), Indigenous Law Bulletin,

University of Queenland.

Olsen, Bjørnar 2000. “Becoming visible: Museums and the Reproduction of Saami Cultural

Identity in Northern Scandinavia”. In: European Network of ethnographical and social

history museums (NET), Proceedings of the 3rd general conference. Ljublana: Ethnographic

Museum, ISBN 961-90452-7-0. P. 217-232.

Olsen, Bjørnar. “Sápmi - en nasjon blir til?”, review in: Museumsnytt (2000) (5/6). ISSN

0027-4186. P. 20-23.

Olsen, Bjørnar 2000. “Bilder fra fortida. Representasjoner av samisk kultur i samiske

museer”, in Norsk Museumsutvikling (2000), ISSN 1501-0309, p. 29-42.

Schancke, Kjersti and Gerd Johanne Valen 2000:“Samisk kulturkamp på museum” (Sami

battle of culture in museum), review in Hammarn, no. 6, vol. 7, 2000, p. 17-18

Berg, Bård A. 2004. “Forestillingen om en samisk nasjon. (The Image of a Sami nation) in:

Bård A. Berg og Einar Niemi (eds): “Fortidsforestillinger. Bruk og misbruk av nordnorsk

historie, Speculum Boreale; no. 4 (2002), Institutt for historie, Universitetet i Tromsø, p.

103-114.

Muotka, Silje 2007. Interview in the newspaper Altaposten about charges towards the

Union of Norwegian Sámi (NSR) of which she was president. Rejecting the critique, she

referred to the Sápmi-exhibition as a source for some of the information that is available on

Sami issues (Altaposten 22.10.07).

Brantenberg, Terje 2007: “Museet og publikum – Hva har vi lært fra formidlingsprosjektet

“Sápmi – en nasjon blir til?”. Paper presented at the Annual Anthropological Conference,

4th May 2007, Tromsø. Unpubl. manus., 8 pages.

Brantenberg, Terje and Storm, Dikka 2013. Tromsø-området. Samisk-norsk møteplass.

Ottar 295 - 2013

5

Kalsås, Vidar Fagerheim 2014: “Exhibiting an emerging nation: the representation of Sami

history in the exhibition Sápmi – Becoming a Nation at Tromsø Museum”, paper presented

at the conference “Rethinking Sàmi Cultures in Museums”, University of Oslo (nov. 2014).

External references:

Aile Keskitalo, president of the Sami Parliament, Sámediggi - Sametinget

Ávjovárgeaidnu 50 9730 Karasjok/Kárášjohka, Norway aili.keskitalo@samediggi.no

+47 97129305

David Andersen, professor. Dept. of Anthropology, School of Social Sciences, University

of Aberdeen, david.anderson@abdn.ac.uk, +44(0) 1224 272 772.

Asta Mitkijá Balto, dosent emerita, Fárpenjárga 46, 9730 Kárášjohka, +47 95148556

marehanieida.amb@gmail.com

Carine Ayélé Durand, chief curator, the Ethnographic Museum of Geneve,

carine.durand@ville-ge.ch, +41(0) 22418 45 84.

Kjell O. K. Olsen, professor. Department of Tourism and Northern Studies, Faculty of

Finnmark, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037 Tromsø, Norway,

kjell.o.olsen@uit.no, +47 784 50436.

Henry Reynolds, honorary research professor, University of Tasmania.

henry.reynolds@utas.edu.au

Einar Niemi, professor emeritus. Department of History and Religious Studies, UiT The

Arctic University of Norway, 9037 Tromsø, Norway einar.niemi@uit.no , +47 77644357

Co-being and intra-action in horse–human relationships: a multi-species

ethnography of be(com)ing human andbe(com)ing horse

A multi-species perspective identifies and offers ethnographic insight into a variety of everyday, practicalexperiences and the roles they may play in shaping human–horse relationships. Analysis of narrative data from60 open-ended interviews with a wide variety of riders in Norway and the Midwestern USA identifies threecentral themes of co-being. These are expressed, felt and voiced as embodied moments of mutuality, engage-ments of two agentive individuals and as a kind of anthropo-zoo-genetic practice, where species domesticateeach other through being together. Co-being as intra-acting describes how horse and human meet and changeas a result of their meeting.

Key words multispecies ethnography, horse–human relationships, companion species, mutual becoming,natureculture

I n t r o duc t i o n

When riders talk about their relationships with horses, a shared sense of co-being andbecoming between horse and rider emerges in their narratives. For example, Bella, anexperienced dressage rider, formulates it this way: ‘I actually feel part of the animal,reacting to his body and my body. It's that connection that you start craving. Once youhave it, you need more. It's almost an addiction’ (interview Bella 2011). Another riderstates she rides: ‘mainly for the feeling for when you and your horse are in sync and ev-erything that is communicated is fluid and it just, everything works out like, like you'reone, you know?’ (interview Rebecca 2011). These quotes are drawn from a study onhorse–human relationships with a wide variety of US Midwestern and northNorwegian horse people, who participate in different equestrian sports and ride withina variety of local settings. Expanding on the growing, but still fairly scarce ethnographicliterature on ethnographies of horse–human relationships, this relationship may beexplored as a co-creation of behaviour (Birke et al. 2004) with complexmodes of attentionand attachment, involving somatic modes of attention (Csordas 1994, 2002), as well ascognition and affect (Despret 2004). Horses are soul mates, but also body mates to manyhumans, and the relationship is one that affects and defines both parties.

A recently renewed interest in multi-species ethnography has been recognised andreinvigorated as a significant area of theoretical and methodological innovation insociocultural anthropology (Hamilton and Placas 2011; Kirksey and Helmreich 2010).Multi-species ethnographers seek newways to explore and understand the complex kindsof relationships that humans form with other animals. These ethnographies allow for a

Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale (2013) 21, 3 322–335. © 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.322doi:10.1111/1469-8676.12029

ANITA MAURSTAD, DONA DAVIS AND SARAH COWLES

radical rethinking of natural and cultural categories for analysis. Writing extensively aboutthe relationship with human and other animals, Haraway contends that we are companionspecies, participants in on-going processes of ‘becoming with’ (2003: 16) each other innaturalcultural practices. The concept ‘natureculture’ denotes a shift in thinking inWesterncultural tradition from viewing nature and culture in opposition to each other to seeingthem as mutually interactive. Rethinking naturalcultural categories new analytical conceptsare called for, and putting Barad's term ‘intra-acting’ to use (Barad 2007: 33) focuses atten-tion to explicating how naturalcultural practices matter to human and horse being, co-beingand well-being. According to Barad every ontological unit is a phenomenon, becomingthrough actions and events taking place in contexts where objects are entangled withhumans and various othermeasuring agencies. Thus, the concept ‘intra-acting’ speaks betterfor focusing on how parties meet and change as a result from their meeting, as opposed to‘interacting’, which refers to partiesmeeting and leaving each other unchanged.While Baradrefers to electrons and quantum physics, the term can be successfully applied to activitiesthat engage humans and other animals, as Haraway (2003: 17) does, to stress that ‘partnersdo not precede their relating’. Companion species are becoming together, and riders, aspartners to the horse and vice versa, are relational categories arising from engagements ina range of intra-acting practices that form both riders and their horses. Also Birke et al.(2004) use Barad's concept of intra-action in analysing human and animal becoming asmaterial and discursive products that are produced and reproduced in specific contexts.

Previously, we have used these performative perspectives in analysing how horse andhuman are paired together, defined, distinguished and identified by the environments theywork within (Davis et al. 2013). Here we pursue this analytical focus in discussing morepractices that engage horses and humans; practices or intra-activities that shed light onhow horse and human are relational categories becoming through their engagements. Thestudy is based on narrative data collected in over 60 interviews in an open-ended interviewformat, grounding riders' own reflections of how they relationally portray and enact them-selves and horses. Riders participate in a range of equestrian activities: Gaited horse riding,endurance, eventing, dressage riders and hunter-jumpers.1 Interviewees were recruited at avariety of venues. In addition to competition events and clinics, we have interviewed ridersin their homes, at local barns and riding facilities.We have also recruited participants amongour common-interest friendship groups. Interviewees were approached by personal con-tact, by phone or face-to-face. All interviews were recorded and later transcribed.2 Bothmen and women were interviewed, with ages ranging from 20 to 70 years old. The authors

1Dressage riders perform a series of prescribedmovements, including gait transitions in a fenced arena.Highlyvalued is the appearance of an effort-free riderwith a horsewillingly performing the requestedmovements. Ineventing, horse and rider perform with stamina and toughness in three disciplines: dressage, show-jumpingand cross country, the latter being the segment that defines the sport. The cross-country course consists ofsolidly built fences looking like natural objects that appear in the countryside, which is also the arena thatthe tests are performedwithin. Endurance riding is long-distance trekking over diverse terrains. Enduring dis-tance, terrain andweather is what defines both horse and rider. Gaited riding is a particular sport for Icelandichorses and their riders. In addition to the walk, trot and canter, the Icelandic horse also does toelt and pace.Rhythm, cadence, speed and action are what define the praised horse-and-rider pairs. Hunter-jumpers jumpfences in an enclosed arena.

2Anticipating that our data would bubble from the ground up and reflect culture in talk (Quinn 2005),we have all asked the same general questions. They are: (1) Why do you ride? (2) Tell me about yourlife as a rider. (3) How does this relate to the kind of person you are? (4) How does riding relate toother aspects of your life? and (5) How is your experience the same or different from the experiencesof other people? Transcribed interviews are from 5 to 20 pages long, single-spaced. Data were collectedfrom summer 2011 to spring 2012.

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 323

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

of this article are similarly different in age, geography and sport, as our informants. We alsokeep horses and have done so for a number of years, affording us an insider knowledge andfamiliarity with the field (Brandt 2004).

Multispecies ethnography is, to an even larger extent than other ethnographies, facedwith the problem of representation. No horses were interviewed in our study; it is theirhumans that speak on their behalf. The common-sense experiential worlds revealed ininformants' narratives, however, in what Quinn (2005: 2) calls ‘culture in talk’, showhow dualisms of nature–culture, control–mutuality and object–subject are transgressedand rejected as radical separations in kind. When speaking about observations,experiences and daily practices, riders reveal a variety of practices with horses that offernew insights into naturalcultural becoming as a kind of intra-active practice and process.The local environments that riders belong to are small. In order to not jeopardiseanonymity, we have chosen to leave out contextual information about who theinterviewees are. Still, valid multispecies ethnographic data come through in the narrativesand will be thoroughly referred to in the following text. Riders chose their own fictionalnames, which are used within these quotes. Dates for interviews are in parentheses.

Demonstrating the intra-activities that engage and entangle horses and humans,three points of relational co-being are highlighted. The first point details what riderssay about co-being as being in sync, as intercorporeal moments of mutuality. Thisincludes riders' reflections on deeply felt intercorporeal moments of mutuality or co-being between species, moments where two bodies become in sync with each other(Argent 2012; Evans and Franklin 2010). Second is an examination of co-being as akind of engagement between two agentive individuals. Examples, here, includesituations of being with the horse, handling one's own body in engagements, and meet-ing the horse as subject and individual. Riders elaborate on several situations wherehorse and human meet as subjects, even as self-aware partners. This is a theme thatBirke (2009) says is lacking in human–animal studies. Action and response, depictionsof episodes or situations where human and horse appear to entangle as agentiveindividuals, as subjects, rather than subject and object, are central to portrayals ofhow communication takes place in the formation of horse–human relationships.Finally, a third point addresses issues of co-being as becoming horse and human;how learning and adapting to being with each other is a form of co-shaping andco-domesticating each other.

The performativity focus that grounds our analysis will also summarise ourfindings – horses and humans are co-beings, becoming in the practices they are engagedin, practices where sensations and emotions, as well as attention, cognition and affect,are crucial ingredients and need to be better understood. Given the rich variety of typesof riders and horses in this project, this article contributes to the emerging field ofmulti-species ethnography (Kirksey and Helmreich 2010) by eliciting taken-for-granted notions of both the nature and the sociality of human and horse, as wellas exploring, articulating and challenging taken-for-granted categories that informwho we are and how we perform across the nature–culture divide.

Co - be i ng as bod i e s be i ng i n s ync

Describing her relationship with a dog named Ms. Cayenne Pepper, Haraway (2003)provides a deeply textured account of the practices involved as she and her dog

324 ANITA MAURSTAD ET AL .

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

participate in canine agility sports. This is a sport where dog and human perform cer-tain exercises and are judged by criteria such as accuracy and speed. It is a sport thatrequires good communication between the two species. Between human and dog,Haraway offers that love is often part of the equation, but she also states that the lovethat bonds Haraway and Ms. Pepper is not an innocent, unconditional love, but a‘naturalcultural practice that has redone us molecule by molecule’ (2003: 228), andthese training practices consist of lots of physical and mental work – for both species.The dog is trained, but the practices put high demands on the human, too. Harawaymust be physically fit to follow the dog through the exercises, but more important,she must be mentally open and available to the dog, making herself comprehensibleby seeing and trusting Cayenne. Training is about figuring out the other; trainingtherefore constitutes practices where the parties engaged become comprehensible toeach other.

Our informants do not participate in horse agility, but they do a lot of work incontact zones similar to those referred to by Haraway (2003). These are naturalculturalpractices where mental and bodily performances matter in the species communication.Riders seem to think and act in naturalcultural terms. Aurora, who speaks about herpractices aimed at becoming comprehensible to the horse, focuses the need tounderstand this particular horse, both its nature and its socio-cultural experiences:‘I understood that this horse has had some experiences, which no one knowsabout. And I have realized that he is a horse you do not shout at, one you behavecalmly around, and he has probably experienced that with me as positive’(interview Aurora 2011).

The mental understanding that Aurora expresses has its body component. Auroraadds and explains that behaving calmly is for instance about not waving with her arms.She talks about herself as having a nature that is somewhat whimsical, something shecontrols when being around the horse: ‘I think he bonded and thought that “I can trusther.” That is how I felt he saw me as, I did not wave with my arms’ (interview Aurora2011). Controlling arms are small bodily gestures, but as we will see more in thefollowing, they are important gestures in order to become a good partner to the horse.Emerita, while talking about riding, refers to other naturalcultural practices that engagerider and horse bodies:

Riding is, if I am to sit and ride a horse I want to do it in the right way so that I donot destroy the horse.… You are to train it so that it can last a whole life with meon his back. … This is why we are sitting straight, head resting on the body; weare not leaning to the side and doing those silly things, we try to make it easy forthe horse to carry us – so that we do not destroy it. (interview Emerita 2011)

In addition to these physical aspects, Emerita says that training involves mentalwork. The horse needs to be relaxed, to find his balance with the rider before exercisesare rehearsed, she says. Training must be performed with attention and care involvingbody and mind: ‘When I decide to do a thing I first think it, then I start to dosomething with my body, and then I must let the horse have a chance to get it intohis brain. Not rush, be patient, give him a chance to get it, to solve that task’ (interviewEmerita 2011).

These explanations about particular horse–human relationships indicate howcontrol of the body is viewed as essential to intelligible communication between horse

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 325

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

and human. Riding is a practice where horse and human bodies communicate through aset of cues and signs. Emerita describes some of it – sitting straight, head resting on thebody, being balanced and Aurora refers to behaving calmly, exemplified by controllingarm movements. Brandt (2004) analyses this communication as learning a ‘thirdlanguage’ and says that horse and human are co-creating this language. Horses arepartners that ‘communicate their subjectivity to their human partners’ throughoutthe process of establishing the language (2004: 307). The concept ‘partner’ begs furthercomment, since many would object that, first, it is the human who has decided that thelanguage shall be spoken in the first place and, second, the one who decides whatsignals and signs to speak with. The signals are based on ethological ideas about whatis natural to the horse, but they need to be learned; they are new material-semioticpractices (Birke et al. 2004). And they do not work unless the horse is cooperating.Brandt's concept of partner explains the need for bodily responses between the twospecies. Neither one can have a communication without the other responding. Bodyweight and position on horse, and slight pressures from reins and legs are basic toolsto signal a rider's wish. Iterative training is needed for the human to learn how to signalcorrectly to the horse and when both horse and human are well trained they attend tothe feel of each other and respond appropriately. Evans and Franklin (2010: 180)ascribe the feeling of being in sync to practices of embodied rhythmic work; horseand rider practices are rhythmic harmonisations ‘which takes them beyond theirindividual selves’.

Riding, then, is about bodily sensations and what Csordas (2002: 7–8) calls ‘so-matic modes of attention’, defined as ‘culturally elaborated ways of attending to andwith one's body in surroundings that include the embodied presence of others’.Csordas refers to bodies as lived practices, as actors in the world; bodies have historiesand are as much cultural phenomena as they are biological (Csordas 1994: 4). Theseperspectives are relevant for analysing engagements that affect both horse and humanbodies. Riding is a situation where bodies are closely involved, and horses have sensi-tive bodies. As Hearne points out: ‘Every muscle twitch of the rider will be like a loudsymphony to the horse’ (1986: 108). Humans learn to play softer symphonies as theydevelop skills. They are balancing according to a feel of the other, the horse, attuningtheir bodies to sensations of the horse bodies. Action and response between the speciesbring about riding as a collaborative practice, where bodies become in sync. And syncis a product of intra-action in that both are changed through a process of training fromthe meeting between the two – literally flesh to flesh. Argent (2012) holds that horsesplay an important role here. They are social creatures with characteristics similar tohumans in that they form cooperative alliances. Furthermore, she discusses that it isnot only humans that value synchronised corporeal behaviour, but that horses, too,take pleasure from these intra-activities.

As such, horse–human communication crosses the species divide through somaticattunements and attentions that are partly about uncovering and discovering whatbodies do, and partly about taking control of them, creating and making sense of bodykinetics. The complexities in these practices are not clear to the human at first meetingwith the horse. Learning to communicate takes time. It starts with learning about thebasic cues about riding. Pressure from legs while sitting on the horse means moveforward, or to the side, dependently. Occupied with learning the basics, humans alsolearn about other bodily practices that matter to horses, for instance how horses alsoread humans on the ground. Communication takes place in all horse–human-related

326 ANITA MAURSTAD ET AL .

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

activities, not only in riding. Humans become more sensitive, gain a more advancedbody awareness of their non-verbal communication as their relationships with horsesunfold. This is also something riders elaborate on, like Urdur, who says it is a skillyou need to exercise: ‘it is a real demand on a sort of self-upbringing to succeed’(interview Urdur 2011).

During their lifetimes, then, most horses get better humans. Learning to communi-cate is a highly esteemed quality among the riders in our study. And, when skilled, thecharacter of mutually embedded practices can be experienced as real sensations, asexpressed by the riders quoted in the introduction. Moreover, Morgan describes whatshe calls an ‘a-ha’moment in her riding: ‘suddenly like, I wasn't there, she wasn't there;it was like we were working independently but we were just doing things as a unit’(interview Morgan 2011). With Morgan expressing a deeply felt sensation of mutualityas a sudden moment, another aspect of the horse–human communication can be noted.Even though riders reveal sensations of deeply embedded intercorporeal mutualities, inways that led Game (2001) to compare the pair to centaurs, our data show that the con-nections riders sense are also fleeting and partial. Riders are not centaurs in all theirhorse-related activities. The in-sync experiences are moments, highly appreciated whenexperienced, but they also tell of co-being as a connection that both joins and separates.It holds both mutual and partial connections. Similarly, when Urdur states that herreasons for riding are ‘the feelings of becoming one with the large animal in nature’(interview Urdur 2011), there is both mutuality and partiality in her sensations. Askedto elaborate on what ‘becoming one’ means, Urdur on the one hand reflects as a realcentaur, both on the physical and the mental part of riding. She says she ‘feels everymovement in the horse’, including sensing if the horse is scared, or feeling good. Onthe other, when she is assuring the horse that the moose and the birds are not scary,and are not there to eat horses, it is Urdur the human individual who is acting with ahorse that sees the environment differently to herself.

Co - be i n g as bod i e s be i ng sub j e c t s

Riders in this study see horses as subjects with minds and agency of their own(Irvine 2004; Bekoff 2002; Hearne 1986). They act upon both generic ideas abouthorses as being species with certain instincts, as for instance a flight reaction topotential danger, as well as horses with subject qualities (Birke 2008). As shownin the quotes from the interviews so far, riders deal with horses as he or she,rarely as it. Referring to horses by this third personal pronoun, informantselaborate on individual character, like Agnes does when she tells that all horsesare different; you must deal with them on an individual basis.

You have to know their behaviour, or their personality or how can I say it, orhow they are, before you. To some you can say ‘behave’ if they do not,and to others you cannot be other than calm. One of the horses can be veryagitated and one cannot say to her: ‘Hey, behave!’ She just gets worse.(interview Agnes 2011)

Agnes continues explaining that she has another horse that is the same, and yetanother horse that she ‘can talk to’. Concerning horses' different individualities,Chisum elaborates: ‘They all have different speeds, and physical and mental

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 327

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

development, just like people. You have to take this into account when you train them,cannot rush, must see every horse for what it is’ (interview Chisum 2011). Seeing andunderstanding this other – the horse – riders adapt and use their body language andmental attitude individually. We have already pointed to the use of body in engagingwith horses, but here we want to draw attention to the individualities that engage witheach other. Morgan explains by referring to a careful attendance to her body languagein individually adapted face-to-face intra-actions:

I've also learned that if a horse has a personality, then you learn to work with thatpersonality. You don't try to change the horse to work with your personality,because it's crazy. So I use the same when I deal with humans. You know, ifsomeone has an angry personality you don't do things to develop the angry per-sonality, you relate to them in ways that are going to be calm. You do that withhorses, if you have a nervous horse, you don't want to go in there all shaky andjittery and hyper, you want to go into their area kind of droopy and laid back(interview Morgan 2011)

Riders are reading the particular horse for character, and dealing with it on its ownterms. This relational engagement affects behaviour in ways that change over time, asone gets to know the individual. One learns about one's own actions; that is one'scommunicative skills and statements, as they become reflected in the other. Ola'sexperiences with horses were first of the generic kind: ‘In the beginning it was justthe riding, sputter through the forest on a horse, that was fun’ (interview Ola 2012).Ola speaks of the horse as subject and of himself as being in an intersubjectiverelationship with the horse. Thus, Ola and the horse are subjects sharing experiences,reading the other and shaping actions by the result of the reading: ‘It is to have thehorse, try to understand the horse, try to have the horse do what I think he shoulddo, and when that does not happen, well why does it not, and can try somethingdifferent’ (interview Ola 2012).

Ola is dealing with an individual, and is figuring the other out, and how to act withthis particular individual. Such sensations of the other also include perceiving if thehorse is having fun. Fefe is enjoying getting out in nature with the horse, particularlythat there are four strong legs that carry him there. He also thinks the horse enjoysthese trails: ‘Yes, we both enjoy it, we enjoy being out, we enjoy being in the forest,we enjoy being one with nature, and see and observe and listen, and we do that to-gether’ (interview Fefe 2012). In speaking of horses’ minds, riders may acknowledge,like Kane, that their intersubjective shared worlds are also partial. They have a senseof the horse as subject, but one they do not fully understand, and can acknowledge thatreading the other can be guesswork. Kane picks the tour depending on what he thinksthe horse will enjoy.

The horse is a big part of it, clearly. I choose the route, not for me but after thehorse, what I think the horse will find fun, a bit banal put, but let the horse in onthe adventure. … I believe that he wants to run, the horse likes to run, so I thinkit is also an adventure for the horse, when we are on tours. It may be an excusefor me, but I really believe that. There is a kind of accordance here, I mean Ican feel when the horse, not that he thrives, I think that is a wrong word, I knowmy natural science, right, and I know there are certain laws, but I am prettyoccupied with this what do the horse really feel. (interview Kane 2011)

328 ANITA MAURSTAD ET AL .

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

Perceiving of the other as an individual is instrumental in building these relation-ships. Irvine (2004: 119–20) compares human acting with their dogs and cats to thoseof human-to-human relations. She holds that good relationships, whether with peopleor with animals, arise as results from processes of interactional challenges and rewards.People may have good conversations with each other and find the relationship worthinvesting in and maintaining. Building relationships, be it with other humans oranimals, is an ability we find rewarding, meaning something for the experience ofselfhood. But Irvine also holds that there is much about good relationships that arepre-linguistic and pre-cognitive. Language is not a necessity for subjectivity, saysIrvine, pointing to the times we feel that we ‘click’ with other people. Thus far we havecommented on touch forms of kinetic communication between horse and rider, butthere is also something more. Riders in our study also talk about ‘clicks’ with horses.They say that they connect with a particular horse, without being able to describe itverbally. There are other sorts of communication, intuited but beyond language. LikeKatla, who finds that there are some horses she connects with, and others she does not:

I often meet horses that I have nothing in common with. … It is like when youmeet people, they are pretty insignificant. There is no, it is not a human thatyou want to sit down and talk with. You can very well sit and small-talk, I canvery well ride a horse, but it gives me nothing. And then you meet those individ-uals, exactly like with people, the tone is just there, I have some horses like that athome, … I have some horses who are just me and it, in a way. … It is almost aswhen you have a good friend, it is not so much about whether you go to themovies, or in the theatre, or take a walk in the forest or ride, it is not so muchabout what we do together, but that we have a good dialogue, a good relation to-gether. (interview Katla 2011)

And likewise, Katie says that bonds change with every horse. They are all different:‘It's sort of like relationships with people. It's different from person to person. When Iwas younger, I loved any horse. As I got older, I got maybe wiser. Some horses are justeasier to deal with and to love than other horses’ (interview Katie 2011). However,humans do engage with horses they do not click with. Black Bear speaks of the horseas misbehaving with her, not with her daughter. Hot Shoe Sue agrees.

Some are never going to interact well. Some people and horses are nevergoing to be a match. I guess it's the personality of the horse and the person-ality of the person. That you don't know where that comes from or whereit's going, but it's there with a horse and rider that have been there for awhile. (interview Hot Shoe Sue 2011)

A full list of situations that exemplify intersubjectivities in horse–human relation-ships will be very long. As Hearne (1986) pointed out, there is an odd discrepancybetween how behaviourists speak of horses in generic terms, as instinct-driven animals,while trainers always speak to he and she and personality and character. Hearne's pointis that trainers know the animals from engaging with them. And it is on the basis ofengagement that our informants speak. They talk from experiences that rise in face-to-face engagements, and, literally, also butt-to-back engagements, as the riders are

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 329

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

not only with their horses, but also on them, riding. And such engagements can affectthe parties cognitively, in ways Despret (2004: 131) holds as new articulations of ‘with-ness’, situations where species domesticate each other, and create new articulations ofboth speaking and being. She speaks of these engagements as anthropo-zoo-geneticpractices, and engaging in anthropo-zoo-genetic practices, ‘human-with-animal’, and‘animal-with-human’, respectively, are better categories to describe how beings alteror transform as a result of relating to each other. The hyphened ‘human-with’ and‘animal-with’ are distinguishing categories that open for seeing the ‘surprising andnuanced ways’ that animals might influence us, as Hayward (2010: 584) suggests.

Co - be i ng as spec i e s bounda r i e s

The previous sections have referred to situations where humans see horses' differentpersonalities and act with respect for or harmonious accommodation to these differ-ences. These notions bring up an additional theme, situations where riders fear thatthe horse will resist or take too much control. Rider Ernst Bernt can feel tempted, hesays, to let the horse canter when he feels she wants to, but he worries that in lettingthe horse have it her way, she might be picking up the canter in other situations, whenit might be dangerous for her to do so, and he might lose control. Other riders speak tothe same issue and these perspectives on the human–horse relationship show that thereare limits to the centaur themes. The hyphened ‘co-’ in ‘co-being’ connects but alsoseparates. In the preceding sections we have touched upon this issue by referring tohow moments of co-being may be fleeting and tenuous, experienced as mutual connec-tions, albeit partial, as between individuals. We have also pointed out that two agentsdo not always work together or for common purpose. There are limits to domestica-tions; horses do not always do what riders want them to. We will pursue this themefurther here and address situations where species boundaries matter.

Isis, like Ernst Bernt, is also preoccupied with issues of control. She tells of asituation where she was out riding for the first time with a horse when the horse haddecided that she would not cross a small creek, no way:

I stood half an hour, I tried to lure and dupe, I tried to threaten, I tried every-thing. I thought I cannot surrender. She must lose this fight, whatever time ittakes. […] And at the end it was just, well, I can go, and it was like all my fightwas worthless, she thought well, ok, we can go then. And then I thought, youare quite something, and we continued riding as if nothing had happened.She splashed into the next creek and had marshland on her feet, so theproblem was not that she was afraid of water. She was just trying me on.(interview Isis 2011)

Niki, on the other hand, lets the horse choose the way. Niki thinks she is better atit.

If we are walking along a stream bed, it is pretty shallow and rocky, usually I'llget off her and lead her and she'll kind of go where she thinks is the best pathand I don't try to push her in a direction she doesn't want to go. I trust herjudgment for her footing better than mine. (interview Niki 2011)

330 ANITA MAURSTAD ET AL .

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

In these examples, horse and human are figuring the other out. Humans see theirhorses as subjects, but they also act out of generic ideas about the horse (Birke 2008).These often include ideas about the necessity for humans to be in control versus horses,ideas that imply certain acts and behaviour on the human part. There are, for instance,as also our riders express, ideas that relate the human need for absolute control to thefact that the horse is a species with the size and strength to kill you, should it decideto do so.

These ideas about horse natureculture can be seen as theories and practices thatfunction to draw species boundaries. Practices vary among our informants as to wherethese boundaries are drawn. Practices also vary along dimensions as the individuality ofhorses and humans. From Barbara for instance, we learn that leadership issues arelinked, both to human personalities and horse individualities. Some horses need acertain type of leader, and people are different leader types:

I've always been the natural leader, which helps with my horse that just teachesme to be a better leader. The horse plays with my skills but it goes back and forth.Yet, I'm not very good at being a dictator which is the personality that somehorses need. I'm not as good with that sort of thing – saying this is where yourleft foot goes; this is where your right foot goes. I like them to figure it out. …My mother is the soft-hearted one that will care for them forever. So we knowthe ones that need sanctuary type care can go to her. (interview Barbara 2011)

Humans are leaders, says Barbara implicitly; she is a natural one, but some horsesmay need a stronger lead than she is willing to offer. In her natural leadership play isinvolved, on the horse's part as well as hers. There is a dialogue: ‘it goes back and forth’,she says.

Being a personality is, however, not quite sufficient for handling horses.Sometimes one must work at it, says Urdur: ‘If you are a person a bit indecisive, abit soft in decisions, one will have these things reflected in the horse, so one has tosharpen up, to become more aware of body language’ (interview Urdur 2011). Andhumans do that. They do control their own behaviour. Isis, who stood for half anhour to have her will with the horse, is controlling herself and disciplining the horse,yet she is also disciplining herself. She draws on patience. And she signals to the horsethat she is in charge. The horse must obey. In this there is also trust. The leadershipissue that informants refer to is also a reasoning around trust, as expressed by Agnes,who states that one must behave confidently towards the horse: ‘You are the leader,you have to take responsibility. You [said to the horse] can relax, I can fix this’(interview Agnes 2011).

So, there are intra-actions that keep species boundaries between subjects. Humansare supposed to be in control, disciplining the horse, but also disciplining the self. Ashas been discussed, body language is essential, and humans must convey that theyare on top of any dangerous situation through bodily signals. Brandt (2006) states thisas exceptional in horse–human relationships – the human ability to shift subjectivity incommunication with horses. Humans can let go of a feeling of stress and replace it witha feeling of mastering; they control bodies in times of stress. Hearne (1986) also stressesthat this is a human responsibility. Different animals speak different languages, andthey need to be understood on their own terms, says Hearne; this is the human respon-sibility, to understand the other species. But animals also have obligations. Rules for

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 331

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

behaviour exist between all species, whether human to other animals, or human tohuman, or even animal to animal. Obedience is an intrinsic part of the relationships thathumans and other animals engage in (Patton 2003).

Co - be i ng as becom i ng human and ho r s e

Multispecies perspectives have reinvigorated the ethnographic investigation. Engagingwith biotic materiality and process apprehended through everyday experiences,especially in the arenas of science and technology, a variety of biotic material has beenstudied. For examples, see the special issue of Cultural Anthropology (2010) in whichKirksey and Helmreich's introductory article references studies focusing on speciesof animals, plants, fungi, microbes, i.e. a range of species that humans are living with(Haraway 2003) but that have previously not been part of most ethnographic analyses.Horses, however, are well known for their participation in human lives. Moreover,cultural assumptions about why humans relate to horses are also widely held. It is lovethat binds the pairs. The card of love has been overplayed in the literature, saysSavvides (2011), shading the fact that there is much more to the horse–human relation-ship than love. A multispecies ethnographic perspective focusing on those who havelong-term daily and intimate or first-hand relations with this chosen species revealsthe finer nuances that build the relationships (Hayward 2010). Putting the conceptintra-acting to use and looking for effects of entanglements that matter (Kirksey andHelmreich 2010), this study has pointed out how the relationships between humanand horses are co-constructions of both parties. Parties intra-act, and as relations grow,horse and human, respectively, are changing, adapting and attuning to each other inorder to communicate well and engage in their activities in meaningful ways. Horse–human practices are intra-actions with effects.

There are effects on bodies. Riders' bodies perform differently in society than non-riders' bodies do. Communicating with horses, body kinetics change to create bodies thatare mindfully controlled in their talking. In addition to the obvious physical aspects, likegrowing new muscles in legs and butts and other parts of the body, riders learn to under-stand first that they have talking bodies, and later how to talk to horses through them.Through somatic attunements (Csordas 2002), communication develops in ways whereaction and response lead to understanding the other in more nuanced ways.

Horses are also affected in the engagements. Obviously, training is about growingphysical muscles in horses. Many riders speak to the necessity of actually changinghorses' physical bodies by strengthening their behinds, their back muscles, so that theycan carry people. But horses in the relationships with humans are more than animalscarrying people. They are parts of pairs and their mental well-being is something thathumans care for. In situations of ‘being with’, where human behaviour is confident,the shy horse changes into a more confident being.

This points out how communication is about more than body kinetics. It is aboutsensations and emotions and affect. It goes beyond verbal language. Bodies arematerially engaged in somatic attunements that are not always sensed consciously, atleast not easily expressed verbally. These nuanced ways that characterise the relation-ships between horse and human are important and sensed by riders, and even thoughit is difficult to use words to express pre-linguistic sensations, Katla's eloquentreflections about being with horses express some of this fairly well:

332 ANITA MAURSTAD ET AL .

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

Just that being together with the horses, it gives a kind of, I do not know what tosay, it is like when one was small, it was so good inside oneself if one had theteddy bear in the arm. I just have a very good feeling when I am together withthe horses. So going to the stable in the evening, feeding, mucking – they areso calm, the horses, they are so harmonious, they stand there chewing, they haveno stress, they are just themselves. I think being together. (interview Katla 2011)

Katla is gaining a deeply felt satisfaction from being with her horses. She is alsooffering something to them. By ‘being with’, Katla offers trust to her horses.Concerning a particular shy horse, she sees the effect. Being in the stable slowly butsurely changes the horse into becoming more confident. Both Katla and the horse arein a setting where new articulations of beings are created (Despret 2004). Human andhorse attune to each other, add new definitions to what being is.

That riders change, that humans-with-horses are different from humans-without,is clearly expressed by many riders when they speak of how they use their new skillsin engaging with other humans. Niki has grown a better understanding of ‘being ableto understand people even if it's not verbal’ (interview Niki 2011). And Barbara statesthat horse experience translates into the kind of person she is in several ways. She has tobe centred inside, confident, assertive, fair and ‘all that translates into humanrelationships’ (interview Barbara 2011). She has become ‘more open to feeling,emotions, relationships now’. It is a real transition that riders learn more about beinghuman, through being with horses, and Ajay sums it up: ‘because you see thingsthrough a horse's eyes I think it just changes your view on the whole world’ (interviewAjay 2011).

This notion of trust springs from the narratives as an intrinsic part of the relation-ship and seems to be a prerequisite for intra-acting well (Wipper 2000). Between horseand human, mutuality and trust are constituent elements, but moreover, trust must beestablished again and again, and constantly be cared for. Every new relationshipbetween horse and human is a new meeting between species, where trust and rules ofconduct must be established.

Looking at domestication and trust this way can explicate why humans deal withhorses as individuals, while also talking of them generically as a different species. Thisis a thing that puzzles Birke (2008), who sees a contrast in people speaking in emotionaltones about their relationships with individual horses, giving them nearly humancharacteristics, but also speaking about them in generic terms as having a specificnature. Our respondents do so too, and we like to suggest that this is a result of thedomesticating practices that the two species are involved in, practices where affectand trust arise in the face-to-face interactions, as Despret (2004) also discusses. Individ-uality matters. Horses are a different species, with species characteristics. Getting toknow one, through intra-activities, individual characteristics come forth, and so toodo evaluations of individualities. Humans-with-horses compare engagements withtheir horses to engagements with humans, but this does not mean that horses are seenas human. This is not the point. They are seen as individuals, subjects that matter andare dealt with relationally as beings with identities.

Co-being in engagements, both horse and human learn new definitions of beingand it should be stressed that, although their communication is built upon cues thatthe species understand, it is also about establishing something all new. It is a genuinenaturalcultural exchange, a domesticating practice where horses' natureculture meets

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 333

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

with humans' natureculture, and the negotiated outcome, the new naturalcultural prac-tices, work within frames of mutuality and trust. Horses control their natureculture.They speak differently through their bodies with humans than with other horses.Horses learn, for instance, that they should not bite the human. Horses use bites, orthe threat of biting, when engaging with each other. They are, however, trained notto do that when intra-acting with humans. Getting in contact with humans, they learnto intra-act with other species, and they can put their new skills to use. Horses can havehumans trust them, and follow their lead. As we have seen, they may suggest pickingup a canter or choose the routes on tour. Humans too are learning from meeting withhorses about their responsibilities versus this other species. They should not wave toomuch with their arms but be in a naturalculturally fixed control of body when talkingto a horse. The more skilled the species are at being horse-with-human and human-with-horse, the better chance there is for understanding. Along with Despret (2004),we can say that the species intra-acting create a horse-with-human that is different froma horse in the wild, and a human-with-horse that is different from a human withoutone. There are generic aspects that matter; intra-acting with a horse is different fromintra-acting with a dog. But the with-ness with a particular horse leads to a co-creationof new beings, new articulations of being human as well as horse.

In summary, multispecies ethnography studies throw light on fine and importantnuances in interspecies relating. If not disentangling all entanglements, this study hasat least sorted out some of the strings. Riders have explored and spoken of their ownexperiential and practical worlds, and valid multispecies ethnographic data have comethrough in all narratives and found relatively easy expression there. Moreover, ridersmay vary as to how much they bond with their horses, what kind of sport they identifywith, and how much of a leader they see themselves as versus horses, but concerningelements such as learning and practising a naturalcultural language where body andmind are intra-acting with effects, the elements that riders speak of seem to cut crosssports and geography; they seem intrinsic to being with horses.

Acknow l edgemen t s

Sarah Cowles received a 2011 University Discover Student Research Grant from theUniversity of South Dakota for her part of this research project.

Anita MaurstadDepartment of Cultural Sciences, Tromsø MuseumUniversity of TromsøTromsø, N-9037NorwayAnita.Maurstad@uit.no

Dona Davis and Sarah CowlesDepartment of Anthropology and SociologyUniversity of South DakotaVermillion, SD 57069USAddavis@usd.edu; Sarah.Cowles@usd.edu

334 ANITA MAURSTAD ET AL .

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

ReferencesArgent, G. 2012. Toward a privileging of the nonverbal: communication, corporal synchrony, and

transcendence in humans and horses, in J. A. Smith and R. A. Mitchell (eds.), Experiencing animalminds: an anthology of animal–human encounters, 111–28. New York: Columbia UniversityPress.

Barad, K. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter andmeaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Bekoff, M. 2002. Minding animals: awareness, emotions and heart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Birke, L. 2008. ‘Talking about horses: control and freedom in the world of natural horsemanship’,

Society and Animals 16: 107–26.Birke, L. 2009. Interwoven lives: understanding human/animal connections, in T. Holmberg (ed.),

investigating human/animal relations in science, culture and work, 18–33. Uppsala: UppsalaUniversitet, Centrum för genusvetenskap.

Birke, L., M. Bryld and N. Lykke 2004. ‘Animal performances. An exploration of intersections betweenfeminist science studies and studies of human/animal relationships’, Feminist Theory 5: 167–83.

Brandt, K. 2004. ‘A language of their own: an interactionist approach to human–horse communication’,Society and Animals 12(4): 299–316.

Brandt, K. 2006. Intelligent bodies: embodied subjectivity human–horse communication, in D. Waskuland P. Vannini (eds.), Body/embodiment. Symbolic interaction and the sociology of the body,141–53. Farnham: Ashgate.

Csordas, T. J. 1994. Introduction: the body as representation and being-in-the-world, in T. Csordas(ed.), Embodiment and experience. The existential ground of culture and self, 1–27. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Csordas, T. J. 2002. Body/meaning/healing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Cultural Anthropology. 2010. Special issue on Multispecies Ethnography 25(4): 545–687.Davis, D., A. Maurstad and S. Cowles 2013. ‘“Riding up forested mountain sides, in wide open

spaces, and with walls”: developing an ecology of horse–human relationships’, Humanimalia4(2): 54–83.

Despret, V. 2004. ‘The body we care for: figures of anthropo-zoo-genesis’, Body & Society 10(2–3):111–34.

Evans, R. and A. Franklin 2010. Equine beats: unique rhythms (and floating harmony) of horses andriders, in T. Edenser (ed.), Geographies of rhythm: nature, place, mobilities and bodies, 173–85.Farnham: Ashgate.

Game, A. 2001. ‘Riding: embodying the centaur’, Body and Society 7(4): 1–12.Hamilton, J. and A. Placas 2011. ‘Anthropology becoming…? The sociocultural year in review’,

American Anthropologist 113(2): 246–61.Haraway, D. 2003. A companion species manifesto: dogs, people, and significant other-ness. Chicago,

IL: Prickly Paradigm.Hayward, E. 2010. ‘Fingereyes: impressions of cup corals’, Cultural Anthropology 25(4): 577–99.Hearne, V. 1986 [2007]. Adam's task: calling animals by name. New York: Skyhorse Publishing.Irvine, L. 2004. If you tame me. Understanding our connection with animals. Philadelphia, PA: Temple

University Press.

Kirksey, S. E. and S. Helmreich 2010. ‘The emergence of multispecies ethnography’, CulturalAnthropology 25(4): 545–76.

Patton, P. 2003. Language, power, and the training of horses, in C. Wolfe (ed.), Zoontologies. The`question of the animal, 83–101. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Quinn, N. 2005. Finding culture in talk: a collection of methods. New York: Palgrave.Savvides, N. 2011. ‘“Loving-knowing” women and horses: symbolic connections, real life conflicts and

“natural horsemanship”’, Humanimalia 3(1): 60–77.Wipper, A. 2000. ‘The partnership: the horse–rider relationship in eventing’, Symbolic Interaction 23(1):

47–70.

CO-BE ING AND INTRA -ACTION IN HORSE–HUMAN RELAT IONSHIPS 335

© 2013 European Association of Social Anthropologists.

Adresseinformasjon

Institusjonens

Navn Tromsø Museum - Universitetsmuseet

Besøksadresse

Lars Thørings veg 10

9006 Tromsø

Postadresse

UiT Norges arktiske universitet, Tromsø Museum - Universitetsmuseet

Postboks 6050 Langnes

9037 Tromsø

Telefon, faks, e-post og URL

Telefonnummer 776 45 001

77 64 50 00

77 64 55 20

Telefonnummer

Faks

E-post postmottak@tmu.uit.no

Kontaktperson

Kontaktperson Inger Kaisa Bækø

776 45 016

inger.k.bako@uit.no

Telefonnummer

E-post

Utskrift fra ABM-statistikk 2015

Statistikkskjema for museum

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 1 av 1

Orienteringssak 3 - ABM- og arkivstatistikk 2015

Samlingenes størrelse

Gjenstander, bygninger, fotografier og anlegg

Antall gjenstander, bygninger, fotografier og anlegg pr. 31.12

Kunsthistoriske gjenstander 665 055

Kulturhistoriske gjenstander 14019 064

Arkeologiske gjenstander 301384 266

Naturhistoriske gjenstander 755349 073

Fotografier 365162 080

Flytende farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) 0 313

Farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) som ligger på land 16 314

Kulturhistoriske bygninger 4 048

- av dette, antall oppmålte bygninger 4 049

Andre bygninger 8 228

Teknisk-industrielle anlegg 0 331

Kulturlandskap 0 332

Hageanlegg 1 333

Areal

Totalt areal pr. 31.12

Bygningsmassen totalt (bruttoareal på grunnflate kvm.) 12198 229

Kulturlandskap (dekar) 0 334

Hageanlegg (dekar) 18 335

Levende samlinger

Samlinger av levende planter og dyr pr. 31.12

Har museet levende samlinger? Ja 403

Antall levende planter 4900 336

Antall levende dyr 0 337

Arkiv og kildesamlinger pr. 31.12

Har museet arkivmateriale/kildesamlinger? (se bort fra eget saksarkiv) Ja 089

Museets planer

Har museet vedtatte planer for hele museet,

- innsamling? Ja 163

- registrering/katalogisering? Ja 165

- bevaring? Ja 176

- sikring? Ja 178

Lenke (URL) til plan for innsamling 390

Lenke (URL) til plan for registrering/katalogisering 391

Lenke (URL) til plan for bevaring 392

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 2 av 1

Side 3: Tilvekst, avhending og utvekslingstiltak

Tilvekst

Antall totalt i samsvar med plan

Kunsthistoriske gjenstander 056 059

Kulturhistoriske gjenstander 139 065 139 068

Arkeologiske gjenstander 2617 267 2617 268

Naturhistoriske gjenstander 53311 074 53311 075

Fotografier 10701 081 10701 084

Farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) 338 339

Kulturhistoriske bygninger 050 340

Datering av tilvekst

Antall objekter datert 1900-1945 1946-

Kunsthistoriske gjenstander 057 058

Kulturhistoriske gjenstander 066 067

Fotografier 082 083

Kulturhistoriske bygninger 051 052

Farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) 341 342

Avhending

Antall avhendet totalt

Kunsthistoriske gjenstander 343

Kulturhistoriske gjenstander 344

Arkeologiske gjenstander 345

Naturhistoriske gjenstander 346

Fotografier 347

Farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) 348

Kulturhistoriske bygninger 349

Utvekslingstiltak

Antall gjenstander lånt ut til andre museer 2 319

Antall gjenstander deponert hos andre museer 320

Antall gjenstander lånt ut til andre institusjoner enn museer 321

Antall fotografier lånt ut til andre museer 322

Antall fotografier lånt ut til andre institusjoner enn museer 323

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 3 av 1

Side 4: Dokumentasjon og bevaringTilfredsstillende registreringer, digitalisering og tilgjengeliggjøring på internett med digital representasjon pr. 31.12.

Antall registrert digitalisert tilgjengeligjort

Kunsthistoriske gjenstander 655 303 655 297 655 306

Kulturhistoriske gjenstander 13964 304 13964 298 13964 307

Arkeologiske gjenstander 273945 309 273946 299 151730 311

Naturhistoriske gjenstander 519822 310 519822 300 519822 312

Fotografier 136175 305 136175 301 129849 308

Farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) 16 350 351 352

Kulturhistoriske bygninger 4 353 354 355

Teknisk-industrielle anlegg 356 357 358

Kulturlandskap 359 360 361

Hageanlegg 362 363 364

Oppbevaringsforhold

Prosentvis del av samlingene pr31.12 som oppbevares underforhold som er:

svært gode tilfredsstillende ikketilfredsstillende

dårlige

Kunsthistoriske gjenstander 365 366 100 367 368

Kulturhistoriske gjenstander 369 2 370 97 371 1 372

Arkeologiske gjenstander 373 5 374 95 375 376

Naturhistoriske gjenstander 377 6 378 70 379 23 380

Fotografier 95 381 5 382 383 384

Farkoster (båter/fartøy/skip) 385 70 386 30 387 388

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 4 av 1

Side 5: Formidling - besøk

Åpningstider

Var museet åpent for publikum? Ja 098

Hvor mange dager var museet åpent totalt? 360 104

Inngangsbillett/adgangspenger

Var det gratis adgang for alle besøkende i museets åpningstider? Nei 110

Hvis Nei, fyll ut priser (evt. gjennomsnittspriser hvis det er ulike priser for ulike sesonger eller steder):

Pris på ordinær voksenbillett (NOK): 60 112

Pris på ordinær barnebillett (NOK): 30 113

Hadde museet ordninger som gir gratis adgang i sesonger og/eller enkeltdager? Ja 114

Var det gratis adgang for grunnskoleelever hele året? Ja 273

Var det gratis adgang for elever i videregående skoler hele året? Ja 274

Antall besøk i museet

Antall enkeltbesøk voksne 102457 116

Antall enkeltbesøk barn og unge 13539 117

Enkeltbesøk totalt 115996

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, voksne 26213 119

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, barn og unge 8324 120

Gruppebesøk totalt 34537

Besøk totalt 150533

Antall besøk med billett/inngangspenger 79372 123

Tellingene baserte seg på:

Billettsalg Ja 124

Automatisk registrering (telleapparat eller elektronisk registrering) Ja 125

Manuell registrering Ja 275

Anslag Ja 127

Har institusjonen egen registrering av besøkende etter språk eller nasjonalitet? Nei 128

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 5 av 1

Side 6: Formidling - planer, utstillinger, arrangement og hjemmesider

Formidlingsplaner

Har museet vedtatte planer for hele museet, som dekker:

- formidling? Ja 276

- formidlingstiltak spesielt rettet mot barn og unge? Ja 167

Lenke (URL) til formidlingsplan 397

Lenke (URL) til plan for formidlingstiltak rettet mot barn og unge? 398

Kulturhistoriske bygninger

totalt nyåpnet

Antall kulturhistoriske bygninger åpne for publikum 3 0130 224

Utstillinger

Antall totalt nyåpnet

Basisutstillinger 12 0131 132

Temporære utstillinger 12 12133 134

Egenproduserte vandreutstillinger i drift 15 1135 136

Antall utstillinger totalt 39

Antall arrangementer (gjelder ikke utstillinger)

Antall åpne møter, foredrag, seminarer o.l. 141 230

Antall konserter 1 231

Antall oppsettinger (skuespill, teater) 0 232

Antall framføringer (skuespill, teater) 0 233

Museets hjemmesider

Antall besøk på hjemmesidene 100356 141

Pedagogisk virksomhet

Antall barn og unge som har deltatt i organisert undervisning eller særskilte tiltak 5945 150

- av disse, antall barn i grunnskole og vgs som deltok i tiltak knyttet til "Den kulturelle 3074 151

Har museet internettbaserte pedagogiske opplegg for barn og unge? Nei 285

Formidling på andre språk

Tilbyr museet formidling på engelsk? Ja 404

Tilbyr museet formidling på tysk? Ja 405

Tilbyr museet formidling på andre språk? Spesifisering.

Omvisning i utstillingene kan også tilbys på samisk, spansk og italiensk.

399

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 6 av 1

Side 7: Forskning, utvikling og nettverksarbeid

Publikasjoner

Antall større publikasjoner 0 234

Antall forskningspublikasjoner med fagfellevurdering 57 324

Antall andre forskningspublikasjoner 329

Kompetanse

Antall ansatte med doktorgrad 22 325

Antall ansatte med autorisasjon som konservator NMF (Norges museumsforbund) 0 326

Antall ansatte med autorisasjon som førstekonservator NMF (Norges museumsforbund) 0 330

Forskning

Deltakelse i formalisert FoU-samarbeid - antall prosjekter 23 328

Har museet vedtatt forskningsplan som gjelder hele museet? Ja 161

Lenke (URL) til forskningsplan 401

Faglige museumsnettverk

Hvor mange nasjonale museumsnettverk er museet tilknyttet? 3 175

Deltakelse i prosjekter i regi av nasjonale museumsnettverk, antall prosjekter 3 327

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 7 av 1

Side 8: Administrasjon og organisasjon

Selskapsform

Hvilken selskapsform hadde museet? Velg ett alternativ fra listen. Statlig virksomhet 302

Årsverk Årsverk kvinner Årsverk menn

Faste stillinger 36,35 286 24,39 287

Midlertidig engasjerte (ikke på arbeidsmarkedstiltak) 5,9 288 4,5 289

Engasjerte gjennom arbeidsmarkedstiltak 0 290 0,2 291

Lærlinger 0 292 0 293

Årsverk totalt fordelt på kvinner og menn 42,25 29,09

Antall lønnede årsverk fordelt etter Årsverk kvinner Årsverk menn

Daglig leder 1 246 0 247

Kunst-, kultur- og naturfaglig personale 38,75 248 28,09 249

Administrativt personale 1,8 250 1,8 251

Teknisk personale null 252 1 253

Årsverk etter type stilling fordelt på kvinner og menn 41,55 30,89

Frivillige/ubetalte årsverk

Anslått antall frivillige/ubetalte årsverk (kvinner og menn) 0 157

Antall personer

Antall fast ansatte personer totalt 74 240

Styresammensetning Antall kvinner Antall menn

Styreleder 0 254 1 255

Styremedlemmer 3 256 5 257

Varamedlemmer 2 258 3 259

Universell utforming

Er museets lokaler tilrettelagt for mennesker med nedsatt funksjonsevne? Ja 315

Er museets formidling tilrettelagt for mennesker med nedsatt funksjonsevne? Ja 316

Følger museets hjemmeside WAI-standarden? (Hvis museet ikke har hjemmeside, svar nei.) Nei 282

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 8 av 1

Økonomi

Driftsinntekter

Egeninntekter Regnskap 31.12

Billettinntekter 2995 184

Varer og tjenester (her også inntekter fra museumsbutikk og kafé) 8015 241

Sponsorinntekter 0 406

Gaver 105 407

Andre egeninntekter (oppdragsvirksomhet, utleie av lokaler m.m.) 4360 186

Ordinært offentlig driftstilskudd fra: Regnskap 31.12

Staten 58052 277

Fylkeskommunen 189

Kommunen 190

Andre offentlige tilskudd fra: Regnskap 31.12

Staten 6400 278

Fylkeskommunen 1010 279

Kommunen 280

Sum driftsinntekter 80937

Driftskostnader Regnskap 31.12

Varer og tjenester 4350 198

Lønnskostnader 46596 199

Pensjonskostnader 4913 200

Avskrivninger 401 201

Drift av lokaler 202

Vedlikehold av lokaler/bygg 29 203

Husleiekostnader 19313 204

Andre driftskostnader 7320 205

- Offentlige refusjoner 1555 244

Sum driftskostnader 81367

Finansposter Regnskap 31.12

Finansinntekter 1 208

Finanskostnader 6 209

Eiendeler (i hele 1000. 1000=1) Regnskap 31.12

Anleggsmidler totalt (immaterielle eiendeler, varige driftsmidler, finansielle driftsmidler) 2072 214

Omløpsmidler totalt (varer, fordringer, finansielle investeringer, bankinnskudd, kontanter) 2723 215

Egenkapital og gjeld (i hele 1000. 1000=1) Regnskap 31.12

Egenkapital totalt (innskutt egenkapital og opptjent egenkapital) 4769 217

Gjeld totalt (avsetninger til forpliktelser, investeringstilskudd og øremerkede prosjekttilskudd fra KKD ellerandre, langsiktig gjeld, kortsiktig gjeld)

19720 218

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 9 av 1

Avslutt innleveringen

Er statistikken ansett som avlevert? Ja 221

Kommentarfelt - Kommentar til side 3: TMU har ikke mulighet til å oppgi datering for tilvekstene i samlingene.- Kommentar til side 5 besøk per enhet: våre enheter har ikke egen billett for kategorien "Enkeltbillettbarn/unge". I rapporteringen går disse inn under grupper og enkeltbillett voksne.- TMUs planer for forskning, formidling/forskningskommunikasjon går inn under TMUs strategiplan2014-2020:https://uit.no/om/enhet/artikkel?p_document_id=442918&p_dimension_id=88179&men=28927

220

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 10 av 1

Besøksopplysninger for formidlingsarena 1

Navn og adresse

Navn på formidlingsarenaen Tromsø Museum 01

Adresse Lars Thøringsveg 10 02

Postnummer 9006 03

Poststed Tromsø 04

Åpningstider

Var museet åpent for publikum? Ja 05

Hvor mange dager var museet åpent totalt? 363 06

Inngangsbillett / adgangspengeråpningstider

Var det gratis adgang for alle besøkende i museets åpningstider? Nei 07

Pris på ordinær voksenbillett (NOK) 60.0 08

Pris på ordinær barnebillett (NOK) 30.0 09

Hadde museet ordninger som ga gratis adgang i sesonger/enkeltdager eller steder? Ja 10

Var det gratis adgang for grunnskoleelever hele året? Ja 11

Var det gratis adgang for elever i videregående skoler hele året? Ja 12

Antall besøk

Antall enkeltbesøk, voksne 24830 13

Antall enkeltbesøk, barn og unge 14

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, voksne 14655 15

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, barn og unge 5666 16

Antall besøk med billett/inngangspenger 25310 17

Hva baserte tellingene seg på (flere kryss er mulig):

Billettsalg Ja 18

Automatisk registrering (telleapparat eller elektronisk registrering) Ja 19

Manuell registrering Ja 20

Anslag Ja 21

Har institusjonen egen registrering av besøkende etter språk og nasjonalitet Nei 22

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 11 av 1

Besøksopplysninger for formidlingsarena 2

Navn og adresse

Navn på formidlingsarenaen Polarmuseet 01

Adresse Søndre Tollbodgate 11 02

Postnummer 9008 03

Poststed Tromsø 04

Åpningstider

Var museet åpent for publikum? Ja 05

Hvor mange dager var museet åpent totalt? 363 06

Inngangsbillett / adgangspengeråpningstider

Var det gratis adgang for alle besøkende i museets åpningstider? Nei 07

Pris på ordinær voksenbillett (NOK) 60.0 08

Pris på ordinær barnebillett (NOK) 30.0 09

Hadde museet ordninger som ga gratis adgang i sesonger/enkeltdager eller steder? Ja 10

Var det gratis adgang for grunnskoleelever hele året? Ja 11

Var det gratis adgang for elever i videregående skoler hele året? Ja 12

Antall besøk

Antall enkeltbesøk, voksne 43518 13

Antall enkeltbesøk, barn og unge 14

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, voksne 11439 15

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, barn og unge 1517 16

Antall besøk med billett/inngangspenger 49949 17

Hva baserte tellingene seg på (flere kryss er mulig):

Billettsalg Ja 18

Automatisk registrering (telleapparat eller elektronisk registrering) Ja 19

Manuell registrering Ja 20

Anslag Ja 21

Har institusjonen egen registrering av besøkende etter språk og nasjonalitet Nei 22

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 12 av 1

Besøksopplysninger for formidlingsarena 3

Navn og adresse

Navn på formidlingsarenaen MS Polstjerna 01

Adresse Hjalmar Johansens gate 10 02

Postnummer 9007 03

Poststed Tromsø 04

Åpningstider

Var museet åpent for publikum? Ja 05

Hvor mange dager var museet åpent totalt? 61 06

Inngangsbillett / adgangspengeråpningstider

Var det gratis adgang for alle besøkende i museets åpningstider? Nei 07

Pris på ordinær voksenbillett (NOK) 40.0 08

Pris på ordinær barnebillett (NOK) 20.0 09

Hadde museet ordninger som ga gratis adgang i sesonger/enkeltdager eller steder? Ja 10

Var det gratis adgang for grunnskoleelever hele året? Ja 11

Var det gratis adgang for elever i videregående skoler hele året? Ja 12

Antall besøk

Antall enkeltbesøk, voksne 7031 13

Antall enkeltbesøk, barn og unge 14

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, voksne 119 15

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, barn og unge 1051 16

Antall besøk med billett/inngangspenger 4113 17

Hva baserte tellingene seg på (flere kryss er mulig):

Billettsalg Ja 18

Automatisk registrering (telleapparat eller elektronisk registrering) Ja 19

Manuell registrering Ja 20

Anslag Ja 21

Har institusjonen egen registrering av besøkende etter språk og nasjonalitet Nei 22

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 13 av 1

Besøksopplysninger for formidlingsarena 4

Navn og adresse

Navn på formidlingsarenaen Tromsø Arktisk Alpine Botaniske Hage 01

Adresse Hansine Hanses veg 14 02

Postnummer 9019 03

Poststed Tromsø 04

Åpningstider

Var museet åpent for publikum? Ja 05

Hvor mange dager var museet åpent totalt? 365 06

Inngangsbillett / adgangspengeråpningstider

Var det gratis adgang for alle besøkende i museets åpningstider? Ja 07

Pris på ordinær voksenbillett (NOK) 0.0 08

Pris på ordinær barnebillett (NOK) 0.0 09

Hadde museet ordninger som ga gratis adgang i sesonger/enkeltdager eller steder? Ja 10

Var det gratis adgang for grunnskoleelever hele året? Ja 11

Var det gratis adgang for elever i videregående skoler hele året? Ja 12

Antall besøk

Antall enkeltbesøk, voksne 27078 13

Antall enkeltbesøk, barn og unge 13539 14

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, voksne 15

Antall besøk av personer i grupper, barn og unge 90 16

Antall besøk med billett/inngangspenger 17

Hva baserte tellingene seg på (flere kryss er mulig):

Billettsalg Nei 18

Automatisk registrering (telleapparat eller elektronisk registrering) Ja 19

Manuell registrering Nei 20

Anslag Ja 21

Har institusjonen egen registrering av besøkende etter språk og nasjonalitet Nei 22

Museumsstatistikk 2015 30. mars 2016 13:23:52 Side: 14 av 1

Postboks 6050 Langnes, N-9037 Tromsø / 77 64 40 00 / postmottak@uit.no / uit.no

Tromsø Museum - Universitetsmuseet

Arkivref: 2016/1696/IBA004

Dato: 13.04.2016

ORIENTERINGSSAK 4 Samlinger i tall – Seksjon for naturvitenskap I forbindelse med sak M 5/16 Årsrapport 2015 og Årsplan 2016 ved Tromsø Museum – Universitetsmuset ba museumsstyret om en mer detaljert oversikt over samlingene ved Seksjon for naturvitenskap. Her er seksjonens oversikt:

Totalt antall registrerte nr.

Antall nr. i database Antall nr. på web Restanse, estimert

2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 Zoologi 168 391 170 250 146 200 155 274 15 000 15 000 103 000 183 177* Botanikk 276 250 287 072 257 984 265 543 253 250 260 729 15 100 14 750 Geologi 62 000 62 500 28 589 29 590 0 0 66 000 37 600 Sum 511 541 519 822 437 673 450 407 268 250 275 729 181 000 235 527

*Merk: Jostein Kjærandsens store samling av soppmygg fra tidligere er ikke registrert i seksjonens database, men i hans egen base. Dette materialet er inkludert som en del av «Restanse». Utprøving av Musit-base pågår. Marit Anne Hauan museumsdirektør –

Inger Kaisa Bækø konstituert kontorsjef –

Årsplan 2016 Tromsø Museum – Universitetsmuseet lager hvert år en årsplan som består av tiltak for å nå målene som er nedfelt i vår strategi for 2014 – 2020. Forskning Horizon 2020 og EU midler

1) TMU skal sikre kjennskap blant alle våre forskere om Horizon 2020 og søknader om EU-midler. Det ble 26. januar 2016 avholdt møte med de vitenskapelig tilsatte der Avdeling for forskning og utviklingsarbeid ved UiT holdt er informasjonsforedrag om temaet, samt åpnet opp for spørsmål fra forskerne. Ansvarlig: Museumsdirektør/kontorsjef. Status: Gjennomført 26. januar 2016.

Prosjekter og søknader

2) Professor Inger Alsos’ FRIPRO Toppforsk-prosjekt Ecosystem change and species persistence over time: a genome-based approach (ECOGEN) har oppstart sommeren 2016. Ansvarlig: prosjektleder Alsos/Administrasjonen. Frist: våren 2016.

3) Førsteamanuensis Lena Aarekol arbeidermed en NFR-søknad om SAMKUL-midler til forskningsprosjektet CircumPolarGender. Ansvarlig: prosjektleder Lena Aarekol. Frist: Følge NFRs frister. Status: Søknad sendt.

4) Den samiske faggruppen ved Seksjon for kulturvitenskap arbeider med en NFR-søknad både

innen Program for samisk forskning II og FRIHUM. Ansvarlig: Prosjektgruppen. Frist: Følge NFRs frister. Status: Søknad sendt.

Disputaser

5) Dilli Rijal ved Seksjon for naturvitenskap disputerte om sin avhandling om Tromsøpalmen 15. januar 2016. Ansvarlig: Seksjon for naturvitenskap/Fakultet for biovitenskap, fiskeri og økonomi. Status: Gjennomført 15. januar 2016.

6) TMU er per i dag foreløpig ikke kjent med andre kommende disputaser.

Forsknings- og utstyrsmidler

7) Forsknings- og utstyrsmidler ble lyst ut 26. januar 2016, med søknadsfrist 15. februar 2016. Ledergruppa ved TMU må deretter vurdere søknaden og fordele midlene. Ansvarlig: Museumsdirektør/ledergruppe. Frist: 29. februar 2016. Status: Gjennomført.

FoU-termin

8) FoU-termin vil lyses ut i løpet av våren 2016. Ansvarlig: Museumsdirektør/kontorsjef. Frist: Skal behandles i museumsstyret 28. april 2016.

Nye stillinger

9) Seksjon for naturvitenskap vil løpet av våren 2016 få tilsatt ny stipendiat innen metabarcoding. Stipendiaten har takket ja til stillingen, og starter 1. mars 2016. Ansvarlig: Hovedveileder/Administrasjonen. Frist: 1. mars 2016. Status: Gjennomført.

10) Seksjon for kulturvitenskap har under behandling en stipendiatstilling innen steinalderarkeologi

med oppstart 1. juli 2016. Ansvarlig: Hovedveileder/Administrasjonen. Frist: 1. juli 2016. Status: Innstilt kandidat takker ja til stillinger og oppstart planlegges høsten 2016.

11) Det må ved Seksjon for naturvitenskap tilsettes i forskerstilling både innen forskerskolen ForBio og innen professor Alsos’ ECOGEN-prosjekt. Ansvarlig: Prosjektleder Alsos/Administrasjonen. Frist: 1. september 2016. Status: ForBio-stilling behandles i Universitetsstyrets stilsettingsutvalg. Oppnevning av bedømmelseskomite til EGOGEN-stilling 28. april 2016.

12) Det er ved Seksjon for kulturvitenskap ledig et engasjement som arkeolog innen Bergbevaringsprogrammet som finansieres av Riksantikvaren. Ansvarlig: Seksjonsleder/Administrasjonen. Frist: 1. juli 2016. Status: Bedømmelseskomite under arbeid.

13) Seksjonslederstillingene ved begge seksjoner må lyses ut og tilsettes i. Ansvarlig:

Museumsdirektøren. Frist: 1. august 2016. Status: Søkerlister under behandling/vurdering Samlingsarbeid

14) Fugleskinnsamlingen ved Seksjon for natur må flyttes til en midlertidig oppbevaringsplass i samarbeid med Avdeling for bygg og eiendom (BEA) ved UiT. Ansvarlig: Museumsdirektør/seksjonsleder. Frist: Våren 2016. Status: BEA purres vedrørende status for dette.

15) Fortsette arbeidet med registering av MS Polstjerna. Ansvarlig: Daglig leder Polarmuseet. Frist:

Årsslutt 2016.

16) Fortsette samarbeidet innen MUSIT ved begge seksjoner. Avvikle halvårlige oppfølgingsmøter av MUSIT-arbeidet. Ansvarlig: Museumsdirektør/seksjonsledere. Frist: Årsslutt 2016.

17) Fortsette arbeidet med å arkivere fotografiene i Herta Lampert-prosjektet. Finansiert av Svalbard miljøvernfond. Ansvarlig: Prosjektleder. Frist: vår 2016.

Forvaltning

18) Per i dag har TMU ennå ikke en oversikt over utgravningsprosjekter for feltsesongen 2016. Det søkes om prosjekt blant tiltakshaverne. Ansvarlig: Forvaltningsteamet.

Utstillinger

19) Nye utstillinger: • 6. mars 2016 åpnes utstillingen Fugletrekkets gåter ved Tromsø Museum. Ansvarlig: Leder

Publikumsteamet. Status: Under utstilling. • 8. mars 2016 åpnes utstillingen Tause kvinner – ukjente historier ved Tromsø Museum.

Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet. Status: Under utstilling.

• 7. april 2016 åpnes utstillingen North West Spitsbergen Past and Present ved Polarmuseet. Ansvarlig: Daglig leder Polarmuseet. Status: Under utstilling.

• Juni 2016 (eksakt dato ennå ikke fastsatt) åpnes utstillingen Solovki: Crusifixion and resurrection ved Tromsø Museum. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet

• 22. september 2016 åpnes utstillingen Makt og magi ved Tromsø Museum. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet

• Ultimo september åpnes utstilling basert Dilli Rijals doktoravhandling om Tromsøpalmen. Ansvarlig: Teamleder forskningskommunikasjon. Frist: september 2016. Status: Under produksjon.

• 20. november åpnes utstillingen Wildlife photographer of the year 2015. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet

20) Ferdigstille den nye basisutstillingen TellUs. Ansvarlig: Prosjektgruppen. Frist: 1. desember

2016.

21) Planlegge utstillingsprogram for høsten 2016 ved Tromsø Museum og Polarmuseet. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet/daglig leder Polarmuseet. Frist: innen høst 2016

Arrangement

22) Vårprogrammet for 2016 er klart – se vedlegg 5 for fullstendig vårprogram. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet. Status: Gjennomført.

23) Planlegge sommerprogrammet 2016. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet. Frist: sommeren 2016.

24) Planlegge høstprogram 2016. Ansvarlig: Leder Publikumsteamet. Frist: innen høst 2016.

Forskningskommunikasjon Ottar

25) Gi ut følgende utgaver av Ottar (titlene er foreløpig kun arbeidstitler); Med et øye på naturen, Det evige utopi? Gruvedrift på Svalbard, Blandingsnummer (foreløpig uten nærmere tittel), Tanavassdraget og Asymmetrisk naboskap. Ansvarlig: Ottar-redaksjonen. Frist: Årsslutt 2016. Status: Ottar Med et øye på naturen og Det evige utopi? Gruvedrift på Svalbard er utgitt.

26) Arbeide videre med eventuell digitalisering av Ottar, og arbeide med prosessen for å sikre

Ottars framtid. Ansvarlig: Ottar-redaksjonen. Frist: Årsslutt 2016. Kommunikasjonsstrategi

27) Ferdiggjøre en felles kommunikasjonsstrategi for TMU. Ansvarlig: Teamleder forskningskommunikasjon. Frist: Våren 2016. Status: Behandles i styret 28. april.

Nettsider

28) Videreutvikle og forbedre TMUs nettsider. Ansvarlig: Teamleder forskningskommunikasjon. Frist: Årsslutt 2016.

Skoletjenesten 29) Skoletjenesten planlegger å gjennomføre følgende undervisningsprogram:

1. Samekulturen 2. Mannen i myra (DKS) 3. Hvis dere finner oss (DKS) 4. Tøff som en gråsidemus 5. En vinter i fangsthytta (DKS) 6. Snowhow (DKS) 7. Kaivandring i ishavsbyen (DKS) 8. Yrende fugleliv 9. Arktisk-alpin Botanisk hage 10. I draugens rike 11. I oldemors urtehage 12. Feltskole for forskerspirer 13. Steinalderen 14. Et dykk i Darwins reisekiste 15. Polarheltenes læremestre 16. Makt og magi 17. Vikinger i nord (DKS) 18. Kvalfeber 19. Koselig mørketid?

Ansvarlig: Teamleder forskningskommunikasjon. Frist: Årsslutt 2016. HMS

30) HMS-årsplan for 2016 vil utarbeides sammen med bedriftshelsetjenesten HEMIS i løpet av februar 2016. Styret vil få denne til orientering i neste styremøte. Ansvarlig: Museumsdirektør/kontorsjef. Frist: Skal behandles i museumsstyret 28. april 2016. Status: Gjennomført.