Achieving Environmental Sustainability in Preventive Conservation Practice: Learning from the National Portrait Gallery, Australia
This paper was included in issue 71 of the Australasian Registrar Committee Journal.
National Portrait Gallery, Canberra. photo: Author
Fixed walls in collection spaces reduce construction waste. photo: Author
Fixed walls in collection spaces reduce construction waste. photo: Author
Automated blind systems filter sunlight levels in unison with external conditions. photo: Author
Divided gallery spaces enable environmental zoning. photo: Author
Intimate gallery space decreases temperature and relative humidity fluctuations. photo: Author
Solar power generates the building's hot water. photo: Author
‘There is no denying that a measure of sustainability must now be incorporated into our conservation endeavors… We must become aware of our contribution to pollution and waste, and implement more sustainable practices’.[1]
‘Governments and communities worldwide are working to integrate sustainability into decision-making at all levels’.[2] As institutions tasked with maintaining collections in perpetuity, sustainability can be considered fundamental to the mission of museums and galleries.[3] Yet, as David Martin points out in Benefits of going green (2006); it is inconsistent and unethical for museums to provide ongoing care for their collections without also minimising the impact of their activities on the environment.[4] This report seeks to investigate environmentally sustainable collection care with reference to a national collecting institution. Environmental sustainability has been described as the ‘largest shared category of daily sustainability for museums to discuss as a field’.[5] This paper contributes to this ongoing discussion by considering the National Portrait Gallery Australia’s measures to increase and maintain environmentally sustainable preventive conservation practices in line with accepted benchmarks and guidelines. Designed with environmental sustainability as a fundamental premise, the institution presents a valuable case from which we can learn.[6]
Sustainability and museums
The United Nations Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) defines sustainable development as meeting ‘the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’.[7] This report also emphasizes the necessarily inter-dependant relationship between ecological, economical and social aspects of sustainability.[8] [9] Caring for public collections in perpetuity, inextricably links sustainability to museums and galleries; ‘their mission and purpose – to serve the past, present and future by communicating and caring for collections – is absolutely part of world sustainability…’[10]
Environmental sustainability and museums
Though each aspect of sustainable development is significant in creating a positive, long-term path to sustainability, ‘caring about the environment is a natural extension of museum’s primary role of stewardship of their collections’.[11] This is particularly relevant to the field of preventive conservation as stable temperatures, relative humidity, and lighting systems can result in ‘energy-hungry buildings’.[12] A ‘potential conflict [arises] between the way we approach the internal museum environment and the health of the global environment’.[13] In this way, it is inconsistent to preserve elements of the natural and artificial environment using practices and materials potentially harmful to the global environment.[14]
Further to this, global climate change will bring future challenges to collection care.[15] ‘In addition to disasters such as cyclones and hurricanes… challenges will come from worse heat, worse humidity and fluctuations between the extremes’.[16] In seeking to care for collections, we must consider how unsustainable practices might also affect our collections in the future. Preserving collections using practices harmful to the environment will directly contribute to adverse future conditions for current collections. Environmentally sustainable preventive conservation practices can thus be considered within museums and galleries fundamental interest.
Environmentally sustainable preventive conservation practices at the National Portrait Gallery
The National Portrait Gallery (NPG) in Canberra is Australia’s youngest national cultural institution.[17] Though the notion of a portrait gallery for Australia began to take shape in 1988, a dedicated building to house its diverse collection was opened in 2008.[18] The 14,000m building by architect firm Johnson Pilton Walker provides exhibition space for approximately 500 works, including approximately 22% of the collection over the course of a year.[19] Comprising four centuries, nine major media categories, and 2,402 individual artworks, the institution’s collection ‘reflects the breath and complexity of Australian history and society’.[20]
In highlighting the environmental sustainability of current preventive conservation practice at the NPG, reference is made to industry-accepted benchmarks in collection care, as documented by Megan de Silva and Jane Henderson in Sustainability in conservation practice (2011).[21] The environmentally sustainable ‘benchmarks act as a tool to allow current levels of performance to be measured’ and can be immediately introduced by institutions.[22] The measures encompass the following key areas: Compliance with regulations, targets and best practice; Waste management; Sustainable procurement; Energy management and use of other natural resources; Pollution management; Staff involvement; Visitor involvement and communication; and Review of the success of sustainability efforts.[23] The NPG’s institutional policies and practices will be considered in line with these indicators in an effort to profile practical, measurable, and successful ways to increase and maintain environmental sustainability in preventive conservation practice.
Compliance with regulations, targets and best practice
This benchmark in sustainable collection care observes ‘efforts toward environmental sustainability should be pursued within the remits of relevant organisational, national, and international regulations’ and in addition, practices should be regularly revised ‘to remain abreast of developments’.[24] Current preventive conservation practices at the NPG are informed by Commonwealth legislation, regulations, and policies, in addition to industry standards, and professional and ethical guidelines.[25] The institution complies with relevant national and state environmental legislation including National Environment Protection Council (NEPC) Act 1994, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Dangerous Goods Act 1984, amoung others, and various Government policy and treaty obligations including National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (1992), Sustainable Energy Policy (2011), Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1975), and State water restrictions. Further to this, the institution complies with the National Greenhouse Strategy (1998) and the National Environment Protection Measures (Implementation) Act 1998.[26]
In some cases, policy compliance necessitates energy target and audit reporting. Further to this however, the NPG takes autonomous steps to set and review measurable environmental objectives and action plans annually, employing comprehensive systems to collate and review findings.[27] This information is set out within the institution’s thorough Environmental Management Plan. The publicly available document evaluates environmental risk and impact, objectives and targets, applicable commonwealth legislation and policies, and staff training needs. This approach is informed by ISO 14001:2004 Environmental Management Systems and Guidance Notes; a detailed document assisting organisations to improve environmental performance and achieve intended outcomes.[28]
Waste management
Key to sustained waste reduction, the NPG employs an institutional ‘philosophy of rethink, reduce, reuse, repair, recycle’.[29] Waste management best practice necessitates a waste audit to produce reduction targets; a guideline also referenced in Museums and Sustainability: Guidelines for policy and practice in museums and galleries (2002).[30] The NPG’s Corporate Plan 2015-2019 meets best practice in documenting increased yearly targets to reduce waste.[31] In 2016-17, 60% of waste is aimed to be recycled, increasing by a percentage point each financial year thereafter.[32] ‘The volume of waste broken into the percentage of recycled materials enables comparable assessments to be undertaken each year and also to determine where improvements can be made’.[33] In this way waste volume assessments and increased reduction targets are incorporated into policy and planning procedure. Commonwealth initiatives including the National Packaging Covenant; which aims to minimize ‘the environmental impact of packaging waste throughout the lifecycle of the product by closing the recycling loop, [and] developing viable and sustainable recycling collection systems’ informs environmental management plans at the institution, amoung other policies and guidelines.[34] Best practice in waste management is also achieved by using printers set to print duplex and black and white sheets by default, and recycling 100% of paper and cardboard utilised within the building.[35] Working within the parameters of the divided collection display spaces also reduces waste; walls are fixed and exhibitions are tailored to the configuration of the rooms.[36] Temporary exhibitions utilise movable walls, which are stored and reused; reducing construction waste associated with erecting and disposing walls or dividers.[37] The institution also makes a public commitment to ‘focus on waste minimisation by measuring, monitoring and reporting resource use, recycling and efficiency strategies in procurement and capital works’.[38]
Sustainable procurement
Sustainable procurement involves consultants, contractors and suppliers to enable a comprehensive approach to environmental sustainability.[39] This approach is noted in the NPG’s Environmental Management Policy: ‘[we work] closely with employees, contractors, suppliers, clients and other stakeholders to continually monitor and refine work practices and activities to set and achieve agreed environmental objectives and targets’.[40] Where possible, choosing recycled products and systems with low life-cycle impact can actively reduce future waste and maintenance, while also increasing potential efficiency. In this way the institution makes use of 50% recycled paper in office operations, and environmentally friendly chemicals.[41]
Future-proofing considerations including product lifespan, future availability, and ongoing maintenance informed the NPG’s decision to replace halogen lighting systems with energy saving LED track lighting ‘to gain further energy efficiency and reduce the frequency of maintenance and lamp replacement’.[42] This measure alone saw an 8% decrease in the institution’s energy usage.[43] Long service life systems Carel Humisonic and Humifog humidifiers maintain stable conditions within collection storage and exhibition spaces.[44] These systems require minimal ongoing maintenance and offer extensive running time on parts; key considerations in sustainable preventive conservation procurement.[45]
Energy management and use of other natural resources
While a relatively large number of works from the institution’s collection are on display at any one time, the NPG also participates in an active incoming loan program. In these circumstances, contractual loan documentation stipulates specific BMS temperature and humidity ranges.[46] The NPG meets these requirements while also reducing energy and resource use.
Aiding sustainability efforts, the institution produces an Environmental Management Plan. This document tables ‘the organisation’s activities, products or services that have or can have environmental impact’.[47] This impact and associated risk is evaluated using a comprehensive FILE formula; informed by ISO risk assessment guidelines.[48] The approach considers Frequency, Importance, Legal relevance or requirement, and Environmental impact.[49] This information assesses a ‘total risk score’, enabling identification of high-risk activities and comparison. Use of natural resources, electricity, gas, water for heating and cooling, lighting, and the HVAC system is registered as the most significant environmental aspect relevant to preventive conservation and presents the opportunity for the greatest impact.[50] The institution takes steps to actively reduce this by employing energy-efficient systems and renewable technologies where possible.
Temperature and relative humidity in gallery and storage spaces maintain 20˚C +/- 2˚C and 50% +/- 5% respectively through the use of an efficient and reliable HVAC system.[51] Humisonic and Humifog humidifiers enable significantly reduced energy use. When compared with steam humidifiers, Humisonic technology uses 7% of the energy required with similar output, while Humifog humidifiers use just 1%.[52] Carel Humisonic humidifiers maintain stable conditions within the institution’s collection storage areas.[53] These closed spaces require low humidification; an ideal environment for the system’s most efficient operation.[54] The system’s ‘ultrasonic vibrations create ‘cold steam’ which is added to the air stream within HVAC ducts and distributed within a space to increase humidity’.[55] This technology simultaneously cools the room, providing further energy-saving measures.[56] Exhibition spaces are supported by efficient Carel Humifog systems; capable of maintaining humidity in open and publicly accessible environments. Double-glazing and automated blind systems decrease heat gains in summer; yet retain warmth in winter, contributing to stable temperatures.[57] The automated shade system filters light levels in unison with external conditions; making use of natural conditions when favourable.[58]
Acknowledged as an effective efficiency method, environmental zoning is also implemented at the NPG.[59] Areas of the building requiring stringent conditions are sealed and isolated, reducing energy consumption and risk associated with unstable conditions.[60] Gallery spaces are divided into smaller rooms, decreasing temperature and relative humidity fluctuations experienced by large, open spaces.
Designed as an ‘envelope’, the NPG’s concrete building structure assists to maintain stable climate conditions.[61] Located underneath the building, the collection storage makes use of thermal mass and insulation barriers to retain temperature and reduce energy consumption.[62] This site houses all collection material, eliminating the requirement for offsite storage and the associated energy and transport consumption this would entail.[63]
Utilising daylighting in administration areas, LED track lighting in gallery spaces, and lighting controlled by occupancy sensors in collection storage areas has enabled significant further energy savings for the institution.[64]
Solar panels are also utilised to generate hot water throughout the building, while two rainwater tanks, capable of storing 120,000 litres supply amenities.[65] With reference to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 the institution’s Annual Report 14/15 states an ongoing commitment to monitor the use of resources used in preventive conservation practices; ‘The significant use of water, gas and electricity due to these requirements is closely monitored to ensure that the use of non-renewable resources is minimised wherever possible’.[66]
Pollution management
Pollution is actively avoided in line with waste reduction and resource consumption at the institution; ‘the Gallery maintains a strong commitment to reducing its environmental footprint. Through waste minimisation strategies and the reduction of utilities use, the NPG continues to lessen its impact on the environment’.[67] De Silva and Henderson note reduction in the use of hazardous products in pollution management best practice. Carel Humifog humidifying systems employed by the NPG operate with the use of water as opposed to chemical biocides; actively avoiding pollution of this kind.[68] In line with the Sustainable Procurement benchmark, environmentally friendly chemicals are also made use of where possible.[69]
Staff involvement
In Teamwork for preventive conservation (2004), Neale Putt and Sarah Slade advocate a multi-disciplinary approach to preventive conservation.[70] Likewise, environmental sustainable practices in preventive conservation must reach beyond the conservator, registrar, or facility manager. Instead involving all museum staff, ‘they require the awareness and involvement of everyone in the museum’.[71] Isolated environmental sustainability in an institutional setting is both difficult to achieve and reduced in impact. Museums Australia also highlights the importance of workforce education in realising environmental sustainability, outlining its role in relation to decision-making, activities, policies, and operations and functions.[72]
In this way, the NPGA implements environmental management training for all staff and identifies specific responsibilities and associated training for particular positions.[73] Positions responsible for the environmental management system and those performing tasks with significant FILE risk are identified and provided with relevant training.[74] Training plans for these positions is ‘prepared on a yearly basis to fill the gap between the existing competencies and training needs’.[75] Furthermore, awareness and competency assessment demonstrates participant training outcomes.[76]
The Annual Report 14/15 produced by the institution also notes participation in ‘meetings with other cultural institutions in relation to matters of common interest including joint procurement activities, methods for achieving savings in the use of water, gas and electricity and the sharing of critical information regarding changes in technology and efficiency trends’, acting to extend staff involvement beyond the institution and toward the wider sector.[77]
Public involvement and communication
The NPG’s Annual Report, easily accessed from the Gallery website, incorporates information on ‘Ecologically Sustainable Development and Environmental Performance’ at the institution, in addition to specific energy use and waste statistics. Detailed descriptions of measures to minimize impact on the environment are provided, enabling comparison. Furthermore, institutional plans and policies relating to Environmental Management are available to the public upon request.[78] Information relating to environmentally sustainable building design features can be found on the institution's webpage. As noted by de Silva and Henderson in Sustainability in conservation practice (2011), best practice in public involvement also includes communicating sustainability to staff, partners and contractors; a point observed with relation to Sustainable procurement and Staff involvement benchmarks.
Review of the success of sustainability efforts
‘As with all strategies, successes will be continued and maintained only if efforts towards sustainability are regularly reviewed and updated’.[79] In achieving this benchmark, the NPG ‘reviews the effectiveness of the environmental management system once a year and makes decisions on changes to environmental policy, the risk assessment procedure and environmental aspects, objectives and targets, action plans and other elements of the environmental management system’.[80] In line with best practice, targets for key areas should be incorporated into annual operational plans.[81] The NPG’s publically available Annual Report 14/15 documents activities with reference to the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.[82] This involves the brief documentation of activities integrating the three pillars of sustainability, activities that aim to promote conservation of the environment for the benefit of future generations, measures taken to minimise impact on the environment, and mechanisms for review.[83] An energy monitoring system enables the institution to record gas, water, and electricity use, and allows ‘ongoing review of all activities involving the use of resources and continued streamlining of their operation’.[84]
With reference to the overarching sustainability definition, this report has sought to provide a focused review of an institution’s approach to environmental sustainability in current preventive conservation practice. Practical and successful measures are needed to increase and maintain environmental sustainability. This report has looked to provide these with reference to benchmarks specific to conservation practices as noted by de Silva and Henderson in Sustainability in conservation practice (2011). Environmental sustainability is a natural extension of a museum's role to ‘create and maintain a protective environment for collections’.[85] It is inconsistent for museums and galleries to undertake this role in ways harmful to the broader environment. [86] Furthermore, ‘museums cannot claim to be serving the best interests of future generations if they have negative impacts on the environment’.[87] High energy and resource consumption are used in maintaining stable environmental conditions for collections. As a way to reduce this, the NPG utilises efficient, environmentally friendly humidifiers, LED and natural lighting systems, and solar hot water. Thermal mass, insulation, and zoning also assists to lower energy consumption. Compliance with regulations, targets and best practice; Waste and Pollution management; and Sustainable procurement were also considered in relation to practices and policies at the NPG, with successful measures outlined. In all cases, the institution achieved the basic environmental sustainability standard coupled with elements of good and best benchmarks. Measures included reducing waste through recycling and successfully increasing this annually, avoiding pollution by replacing hazardous products with environmentally friendly chemicals, and choosing recycled and low life-cycle impact products and systems. In addition, staff environmental management training, and awareness and competency assessment enables an institution-wide approach. Public involvement and communication, and Review of the success of sustainability efforts benchmarks are also positively represented in the institution’s policy and practice. Implementing annual review of the Environmental Management System, internal monitoring, and the documentation of environmentally sustainable practices in a publically available Annual Report facilitates a relevant and workable approach to environmental sustainability within the institution; a key measure employed by the NPG. Environmental sustainability requires an ongoing and sustained approach.[88] Emphasis must be placed on achieving and maintaining environmentally friendly practices, policies, and procedures to be of most benefit. With increasing awareness and knowledge of environmental sustainability, we will continue to see efficiency targets and requirements placed on public institutions.[89] Proactive measures can reduce the impact of this and enable institutions and collections to access multi-faceted benefits sooner.
This paper was originally written for the Australasian Registrar Committee Journal.
Thanks must be extended to the Australasian Registrar Committee for providing me the opportunity to further develop this line of research. Likewise, I am thankful to Bruce Howlett (NPG Registrar), Lawrence Fraser (NPG Building Manager), and Ruth Wilson (NPG Director Planning and Operations) for generously providing their time, information and data.
References
[1] American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works (2014) Publications and Resources: Sustainability. Available at: http://www.conservation-us.org/publications-resources/sustainability#.VVWbfylUT-k (Accessed 1 November 2015)
[2] Museums Australia (2002) Museums and Sustainability: Guidelines for policy and practice in museums and galleries. Available at: http://www.museumsaustralia.org.au/userfiles/file/policies/sustainability.pdf (Accessed 19 November 2015)
[3] Adams, E. (2010) Towards Sustainability Indicators for Museums in Australia. Published Masters thesis. University of Adelaide. See also
Hirzy, E. (2013) Museums, Environmental Sustainability and Our Future: A Call to Action from the Summit on Sustainability Standards in Museums 2013. Available at: http://www.aam-us.org/docs/defaultsource/professionalnetworks/picgreenwhitepaperfinal.pdf?sfvrsn=4 (Accessed 1 November 2015)
[4] Martin, D. (2006) ‘Benefits of going green’, Museum Practice 33, pp.46-47
[5] Hirzy (2013), p.3
[6] Carter, C. (2010) Property Council of Australia – National Portrait Gallery takes top ACT award. Available at: http://www.propertyoz.com.au/Article/NewsDetail.aspx?id=3484 (Accessed 9 November 2015)
[7] NGO Committee on Education (2015) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly: 42/187 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Available at: http://www.un-documents.net/a42r187.htm (Accessed 2 November 2015);
Birtley, M. (2006) ‘The Collections Council of Australia’ paper prepared for the 2006 Australian State of the Environment Committee, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/node/22540 (Accessed 2 November 2015)
[8] Adams (2010);
Link, T. (2006) ‘Models of Sustainability: Museums, Citizenship and Common Wealth’, Museums & Social Issues 1(2), pp.173-190;
Madan, R. (2011) Sustainable museums: Strategies for the 21st century. Edinburgh: MuseumsEtc
[9] In The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning Jon Hawkes provides a convincing argument for the inclusion of culture as an additional pillar of sustainability.
Hawkes, J. (2001) The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning. Melbourne: Common Ground Publishing
[10] Saunders, D. (2008) ‘Climate Change and Museum Collections’, Studies in Conservation 53(4), p.296. See also Adams (2010)
[11] Martin (2006), p.47
[12] Museums Association (2008) Sustainability and museums: Your chance to make a difference. Available at: http://www.museumsassociation.org/campaigns/sustainability/sustainability-report (Accessed 1 November 2015)
[13] Ibid.
[14] Martin (2006)
[15] Saunders (2008);
Cassar, M. and Pender R. (2011) ‘The impact of climate change on Cultural Heritage: evidence and response’, in Caple, C (ed.) Preventive Conservation in Museums. London: Routledge, pp.561-570
[16] Saunders (2008), p.291
[17] National Portrait Gallery (2015a) Gallery history: The National Portrait Gallery and its collection. Available at: http://www.portrait.gov.au/content/gallery-history/ (Accessed: 7 November 2015)
[18] Ibid.
[19] National Portrait Gallery (2015b) The design of the building: Architecture and construction. Available at: http://www.portrait.gov.au/content/the-building (Accessed 4 November 2015);
National Portrait Gallery (2014a) Annual Report 2013/14. Canberra: National Portrait Gallery, p.46;
Howlett, B. [Registrar, National Portrait Gallery] (2016a) Conversation with the author, 11 March
[20] National Portrait Gallery (2015a);
National Portrait Gallery (2015c) Annual Report 2014/15. Canberra: National Portrait Gallery
[21] de Silva, M. and Henderson, J. (2011) ‘Sustainability in conservation practice’, Journal of the Institute of Conservation 34(1), pp.5-15
[22] Ibid., p.8
[23] Ibid.
[24] Ibid., p.8
[25] National Portrait Gallery (2013a) Collection Development Policy. Canberra: National Portrait Gallery;
National Portrait Gallery (2013b) Environmental Management Policy FMP005. Canberra: National Portrait Gallery;
[26] National Portrait Gallery (2014b) Plan-002 Environmental Management (EMP). Canberra: National Portrait Gallery
[27] Ibid.
[28] Australian Government (2009) ISO 14001:2004 Environmental Management Systems and Guidance Notes. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/sustainable-communities/government-sustainability/environmental-management/ems-tool (Accessed 7 November 2015)
[29] National Portrait Gallery (2013b), p.1
[30] Museums Australia (2002). See also de Silva and Henderson (2011)
[31] National Portrait Gallery (2015d) Corporate Plan 2015-19. Canberra: National Portrait Gallery
[32] Ibid.
[33] National Portrait Gallery (2015c), p.77
[34] National Portrait Gallery (2014b), p.11
[35] National Portrait Gallery (2015c)
[36] Howlett (2016a)
[37] Ibid.
[38] National Portrait Gallery (2015c), p.76
[39] de Silva and Henderson (2011)
[40] National Portrait Gallery (2013b)
[41] National Portrait Gallery (2015c)
[42] Howlett, B. [Registrar, National Portrait Gallery] (2016b) Email to the author, 11 January.
[43] Fraser, L. [Building Manager, National Portrait Gallery] (2016a) Conversation with author, 11 March.
[44] Fraser, L. [Building Manager, National Portrait Gallery] (2016b) Email to the author, 11 January.
[45] Stulz (2015) STULZ UltraSonic: Humidifying Systems. Hamburg: Stulz
[46] Cheung, A., McGeachie, B., Pedder, S., Quinn, S. and Riboust, P. (2008) Protecting Collections & Saving the Earth: A Balancing Act. Canberra: Cultural Management Development Program
[47] National Portrait Gallery (2014b), p.4
[48] National Portrait Gallery (2013b)
[49] National Portrait Gallery (2014b)
[50] National Portrait Gallery (2013b)
[51] Cheung, et al. (2008)
[52] Stulz (2015);
Carel Industries (2014) Humifog Multizone. Padova: Carel
[53] Fraser (2016b)
[54] Ibid.
[55] Ibid.
[56] Stulz (2015)
[57] Howlett (2016a)
[58] Ibid.
[59] Cassar, M. (2011) ‘Environmental Management: zonation, building management and environmental conditioning’, in Caple, C (ed.) Preventive Conservation in Museums. London: Routledge, pp.375-394; Howlett (2016a)
[60] Cheung, et al. (2008)
[61] Ibid.
[62] Ibid.; Fraser (2016a)
[63] National Portrait Gallery (2013c) Collection Development and Management Policy and Procedures: Collection Preservation and Conservation. Canberra: National Portrait Gallery; Howlett (2016a)
[64] Howlett (2016b)
[65] Cheung, et al. (2008)
[66] National Portrait Gallery (2015c), pg.75
[67] Ibid., pg.76; National Portrait Gallery (2013b)
[68] Carel Industries (2014)
[69] National Portrait Gallery (2015c)
[70] Putt, N. and Slade, S. (2004) Teamwork for preventive conservation. Rome: ICCROM International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property
[71] Ibid., p.1; Saunders (2008); Madan (2011)
[72] Museums Australia (2002)
[73] National Portrait Gallery (2014b)
[74] Ibid.
[75] Ibid., p.13
[76] Ibid.
[77] National Portrait Gallery (2015c), p.76
[78] National Portrait Gallery (2015e) Policies and Reports: Corporate Information. Available at: http://www.portrait.gov.au/content/policies/ (Accessed 7 November 2015)
[79] de Silva and Henderson (2011), p.13
[80] National Portrait Gallery (2014b), p. 27.
[81] de Silva and Henderson (2011)
[82] National Portrait Gallery (2015c)
[83] Ibid., p.76-77
[84] Ibid., p.77
[85] National Portrait Gallery (2013c), p.2.
[86] Martin (2006)
[87] Museums Association (2008)
[88] Museums Australia (2002)
[89] Museums Association (2008)
