23
22
WHY DO WE NEED TO
BRING OUR CULTURAL
HERITAGE ONLINE?
Digitization of the cultural heritage of Europe is being pushed forward
on many levels. Why is this a task for the whole of Europe and what
problems are associated with it? And to what extent is it far more than
a question of simply preserving the past?
Answers by
MAURICE LÉVY
Literally two years ago, I had the honour of working with
Elisabeth and Jacques De Decker on the thought-provoking
The New Renaissance report, which eventually proved instru-
mental in leading the on-going digitization debate in Europe
– in a decentralized fashion or through institutions as the
2020 Digital Agenda for Europe. The discussions, debates
and collaborations between Elisabeth, Jacques and myself
have been for me a high point of the project. We have built
a very good team spirit with each one bringing to the table
his/her personality, knowledge, culture and sense of the pub-
lic interest. I am very happy and proud to have been able to
work with Elisabeth and Jacques. Merci to them!
With a view to celebrate Elisabeth’s well-deserved Festschrift,
I reckoned that it could be about the right time for a mod-
est The New Renaissance redux contribution. Let’s recall
what is at stake: losing parts of our memories, our heritage,
and therefore ourselves, because these pieces of information
could no longer be consulted using spreading new technol-
ogies. It is about bridging the widening gap with coming
tech-educated generations. This is about legacy.
There is no better reward for any report than actually spur-
ring real changes. No need to say that I am delighted to
witness the progress of the main topics we discussed, towards
the overarching objective of a single European approach:
Europeana, copyright issues, orphan works, digitization
funding and public-private partnerships. As an illustration,
the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF) recently signed
two digitization partnerships – one regarding 70,000 French
old books published between 1470 and 1700, and another
about 200,000 records. Although not new – the collections’
digitization started some 15 years ago – this marks a steep
acceleration and the initiative does align with The New Re-
naissance report’s recommendation on public-private part-
nership agreements and associated funding.
Admittedly, there is further progress to be made on access
and funding. The aforementioned book partnership will only
grant immediate access to 3,500 books out of 70,000, the rest
being accessible in the BnF’s premises only during ten years.
This is in excess of the seven-year maximum preferential use
The New Renaissance report alluded to. Unfortunately, this
also relates to funding technicalities and difculties as, if pri-
vate funding for digitisation should be a complement to the
necessary public investments, the reality often difers. Hence,
part of the challenge remains.
Yet, despite funding hurdles and as the report highlighted, I
believe it is worth sticking to the rule of uncompromising the
core mission of cultural institutions i.e. access – that remains
and will remain the key word, especially when dealing with
public domain material. To do so, one can only encourage
national or regional funding on top of European funding,
such as the recent ICT Policy Support Programme.
Naturally, beyond the report, there is still an extra mile to go,
as it couldn’t encompass the whole scope of our European
heritage in the digital era. For instance regarding copyright
reforms when blogs and uploads blur traditional publishing
frontiers – but here again, progress is tangible: the European
Commission is actively reviewing and modernizing the EU
copyright framework, with decisions pending in 2014.
From a broader perspective, I am fully convinced that The
New Renaissance report can continue to serve as a relevant
milestone, considering that:
First, it is regularly updated – it cannot be set in stone once
and for all, at a time when user’s behaviour is changing so
quickly and sweepingly. Indeed, think about mobile, social
networks, sharing, user generated content. Our heritage goes
beyond traditional books, records or prints.
Second, it takes into account the people, not just artefacts
from the past. Luckily enough, European leaders have been
fexible on the topic. Last year, EU ministers picked their top
treasures on Europeana – from football boots to medieval
comics – and publicly told the story behind their choices. This
year, Europeana launched the “Europeana 1914-18” initiative,
to collect memories of the First World War. I believe that such
initiatives bode well for our digital heritage’s relevance.
Third, it advocates for technology-friendly solutions, such
as the Hack4Europe, a European hackathon that gathers
programmers and developers to crack open data applica-
tions that could strengthen re-use of Europeana’s data. In
my opinion, this is the best way to remain up-to-date vis-
a-vis latest digital innovations and to have results – this is
the motto of the European Succeed awards that identify the
technology-savvy digitization programmes based on efcien-
cy, scalability and sustainability.
Some believe that the whole digitization process is no less
than a gigantic defensive move – against time, against obso-
lescence, some even say against a future. I do agree that time
is of the essence and that Europe cannot aford missing the
train of competitiveness. But I frst and foremost see a mas-
sive opportunity: The necessary digitization of our heritage
should allow us to foster a complete European digital ecosys-
tem based on creativity, technological disruption and culture.
This would not turn our cultural heritage into a mean, merely
instrumental of a technological development – just the op-
posite. So why not cashing in on this tremendous heritage of
ours to spur knowledge and jobs creation in Europe?
It cannot solely be about archiving the past, it must be
about our heritage paving the way to our future. In my view,
this is why Google’s initiative in Europe can duly raise some
eyebrows: Not because of chauvinist reasons, not because
this would be a so-called outrage towards our culture, but
because we could miss this formidable technological lever
– just as formidable as our cultural heritage is. Let’s face
it: truth be told, this is not about Google; this is about us
grasping the opportunity to follow on from our European
predecessors. Most of them would not procrastinate any lon-
ger, in my humble view.
MAURICE LÉVY is chairman and CEO of the French advertising
and communications company Publicis. He, Elisabeth Niggemann
and the writer Jacques De Decker formed the „Committee of the
Wise“ set up by the European Commission, which presented its re-
port The New Renaissance in 2011 with recommendations on the digitisation of the
cultural heritage of Europe.
Digitization should allow
us to foster a complete
European digital ecosystem.