What we heard: 2022-2023 consultations on the renewal of the Canadian Museum Policy

This publication is available upon request in alternative formats.

On this page

• Introduction
• Rationale to renew the Canadian Museum Policy
• What are heritage institutions?
• Sector overview
• Consultations
  • At a glance
  • Key themes
  • Summary of participants
  • Summary of consultations
• Moving forward
• Appendices
  • Appendix 1: Breakdown of participants
  • Appendix 2: List of virtual roundtables participants

List of figures

• Figure 1. Distribution of heritage institutions in Canada
• Figure 2. Number of heritage institutions by operating revenue
• Figure 3. The importance governments should place on heritage institutions
• Figure 4. Top three priorities for heritage institutions
• Figure 5. Top three suggestions on Government of Canada support to heritage institutions

List of tables

• Table 1. Summary of participants per consultation engagement

Alternate format

Renewal of the Canadian Museum Policy. What we heard report: 2022-2023 consultations [PDF version - 630 KB]

Introduction

The first national museum policy was developed in 1972 to strengthen the role of museums and to provide direction as to where the government should focus its program funding. The policy intended to decentralize and democratize the museum sector. The policy was last updated in 1990 and introduced new goals and directions for the heritage sector. Changes included focusing on the preservation of artifacts and collections, providing Canadians with access to heritage and enhancing excellence in museum activities.

At the National Culture Summit: The Future of Arts, Culture and Heritage in Canada in May 2022, the Honourable Pablo Rodriguez, Minister of Canadian Heritage, announced that Canadian Heritage would begin working on renewing the Canadian Museum Policy.

The renewal will take into account the information received following a consultation exercise running from October 2022 to June 2023. The consultations involved the general public, Indigenous partners, heritage sector stakeholders, advocacy organizations, provincial and territorial representatives, and federal institutions and organizations. A renewed Museum Policy will set out aspirations for Canada’s heritage institutions of the future and have an impact on how we protect and access our heritage.

Rationale to renew the Canadian Museum Policy

Since the 1990 policy there have been important societal shifts, including the need to advance reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, addressing issues of equity, diversity and inclusion, and the ongoing digital transformation of the heritage sector. The 1990 policy also does not address the different needs of small, medium and large institutions and the different roles each may fulfil within their communities.

In 2018, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage reported that current Canadian Heritage programs are insufficient to meet sector needs. In Moving Forward—Towards a Stronger Canadian Museum Sector (PDF format), the Standing Committee observed that the sector lacked financial stability, capacity to address and engage in reconciliation, diversity and inclusion, and digital transformation, and the ability to care for growing museum collections and make them accessible to Canadians.

In June 2022, the Standing Committee reinforced its call upon Canadian Heritage to renew the national museum policy. Its report, Arts, Culture, Heritage, and Sport Sector Recovery From The Impact Of Covid-19 (PDF format), underscored the need to support both pandemic recovery and the long-term sustainability of the heritage sector.

The renewal presents an opportunity to align the new museum policy with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) to advance reconciliation. It can also provide cover to modernize existing programs and services, and to explore potential new ones to meet the needs of the sector and Canadians.

What are heritage institutions?

For the purpose of the policy, heritage institutions are organizations that meet the following elements:

• not-for-profit organizations;
• accessible to the public;
• functions include research, collecting, organizing, conserving, interpreting, and exhibiting;
• collecting areas include intangible and tangible cultural and natural heritage;
• operate and communicate ethically with participating communities; and
• provide varied experiences for education, enjoyment, reflection, and knowledge sharing.

Heritage institutions can include museums, archives, art museums, Indigenous cultural centres, historic sites, and zoos and botanical gardens that hold historical collections.

Heritage institutions governed by the federal Museums Act are not subject to the policy, although Canada’s national museums interact with and have a leadership role in supporting the heritage sector.

Sector overview

There are approximately 2,700 not-for-profit museums and other heritage institutions across Canada. According to the Government of Canada Survey of Heritage Institutions (GCSHI): 2021 report, heritage institutions received 16.9 million physical visits in 2020, a decrease of nearly 79% from pre-pandemic levels, and 161 million online visits overall. There were approximately 815,000 student visits to heritage institutions and approximately 530,900 research requests in 2020. Temporary closures due to public health measures during the pandemic meant lower visitation numbers, revenues, and programming activities during 2020.

Figure 1. Distribution of heritage institutions in Canada – text version

Province/territory	Distribution of heritage institutions
Yukon	1.2%
Northwest Territories	0.7%
British Columbia	13.1%
Alberta	10.4%
Saskatchewan	8.8%
Nunavut	0.4%
Manitoba	7.2%
Ontario	25.9%
Quebec	14.5%
New Brunswick	3.9%
Newfoundland and Labrador	5.2%
Prince Edward Island	1.5%
Nova Scotia	7.1%

Figure 1 displays the distribution of heritage institutions per province and territories in Canada. Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia have a high number of heritage institutions, while Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut present the lowest percentage of heritage institutions per province and territory. About 40% of all heritage institutions are in rural areas (communities with a population of less than 10,000). Source: GCSHI: 2021.

According to the 2021 GCSHI report, the Canadian heritage sector is composed of:

• Museums – 1,536 (57%)
• Historic Sites – 434 (16%)
• Archives – 329 (12%)
• Art Museums – 277 (11%)
• Zoos and Botanical Gardens – 111 (4%)

Figure 2. Number of heritage institutions by operating revenue – text version

Operating revenue	Number of heritage institutions
Under $40K	974
$40K-$99K	551
$100K-$499K	689
$500K-$999K	220
Over $1M	246

Figure 2 presents the number of heritage institutions by operating revenue as per GCSHI 2021 data. The graph shows that 974 heritage institutions have an operating revenue of $40,000 or less, and 57% of all heritage institutions have an annual revenue of less than $100,000. Less than 10% of the institutions have an operational budget of $1 million and over. The majority of these institutions do not receive funding from the federal government.

Pre-COVID, heritage institutions generated over $2.6 billion in annual revenues and provided more than 37,200 Canadian jobs. Heritage institutions received assistance from over 114,000 volunteers who contributed approximately 6 million hours each year, the equivalent of 2,885 full-time positions.

Consultations

At a glance

The Department of Canadian Heritage embarked on a series of national consultations and discussions to gather the views of the Canadian public, Indigenous partners – modern treaty holders, Indigenous heritage organizations, leaders, experts and national Indigenous organizations, heritage sector stakeholders – museums, archives, art galleries, historic sites, zoos, botanical gardens, and provincial and territorial partners.

Consultations took place between October 2022 and June 2023, reaching out to all provinces and territories. Participation was encouraged through multiple streams, including online surveys, virtual roundtables, direct outreach to target groups, and a general email address to receive written submissions. Input received from participants was generally consistent and focused on five key themes.

Key themes

The five key themes discussed throughout the consultation engagements were:

• the role of heritage institutions in society;
• financial sustainability and resilience;
• advancing reconciliation with First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples;
• embracing equity, diversity and inclusion; and
• preservation and access as core functions.

Other important themes identified prior to, and during, the consultation engagements include digital transformation, environmental sustainability, heritage institutions’ colonial legacy and decolonization. All these themes are interwoven and cut across the five key themes. During the consultation process, stakeholders generally agreed that these themes are critical elements of a renewed museum policy.

Summary of participants

The Department received over 3,000 inputs from participants across Canada throughout the consultation process. The table below presents a breakdown of participants by type of engagement, period of consultations and overall number of participants per engagement.

Summary of consultations

Public consultation survey

The purpose of the online public survey was to capture Canadians’ views and expectations on current and emerging priorities of the heritage sector, which includes museums, art museums, Indigenous cultural centres, archives, historic sites, science centres, zoos, and botanical gardens. Seventy-six percent of the respondents were citizens and 24% were responding on behalf of a Canadian organization.

“Heritage institutions are vital to Canada, this includes national, provincial and local institutions. Even seemingly specialized institutions, pertaining to one ethnic group, occupation or activity are important to adding to our wealth of knowledge and understanding about each other as Canadians.”

Among the 26 questions included in the survey, participants were asked to rate the importance governments in Canada should place on Canadian heritage institutions. As presented in Figure 3 below, 85% of all respondents answered that governments should place “a great deal of importance” on heritage institutions, while 13% said that governments should place “moderate importance”. The percentage of participants who answered “A great deal of importance” was higher for participant organizations (91%) than for private citizens (83%).

Figure 3. The importance governments should place on heritage institutions – text version

Importance	Percentage of respondents
A great deal of importance	85%
Moderate importance	13%
Not much importance	1%
No importance at all	0.5%
Don’t know	0.2%

The breakdown of private citizens who selected “A great deal of importance” was as follows:

• Men (85%) vs Women (82%) vs Non-binary (87%)
• Rural (80%) vs Urban (85%)
• Indigenous (79%) vs Non-Indigenous (83%)
• Racialized (78%) vs Non-racialized (84%)

Figure 4. Top three priorities for heritage institutions – text version

• Make efforts to communicate stories from different perspectives, including involving Indigenous and equity deserving communities: 74%
• Increase opportunities for community participation (in programming, in exhibition planning, etc.): 55%
• Allow more opportunities for free of charge entrance: 42%

Participants had the opportunity to select the top three priorities for heritage institutions in Canada. As presented in Figure 4, 74% of respondents identified “Make efforts to communicate stories from different perspectives, including involving Indigenous and equity deserving communities” as their top priority. The second and third priorities were “Increase opportunities for community participation” and “Allow more opportunities for free of charge entrance”.

“Heritage institutions play a very influential role in affecting the culture and discourse of people across Canada and should therefore reflect the history and diversity of all people who live on this land. Being exposed to diverse ways of knowing and ways of living, as well as being open about both the collaborative and destructive aspects of our history, is huge when it comes to starting conversations and breaking down barriers.”

Figure 5. Top three suggestions on Government of Canada support to heritage institutions – text version

• Provide direct financial support: 76%
• Provide funding to protect and maintain heritage buildings and spaces: 52%
• Provide employment opportunities for students and young Canadians to work in the section: 34%

Participants were asked to select the top three suggestions on federal government support to heritage institutions. As indicated in Figure 5, 76% of the respondents indicated “Provide direct financial support” as their top suggestion, followed by “Provide funding to protect and maintain heritage buildings and spaces” (52%), and “Provide employment opportunities for students and young Canadians to work in the sector” (34%).

According to the survey results, 86% of the respondents visited a heritage institution website or accessed digital content provided by an institution in the past 12 months. Eighty-one percent indicated accessing heritage institutions’ website to prepare for a physical visit, 58% to conduct research and 54% to access a virtual exhibit.

“Heritage institutions are a form of public education and a pillar of community support. They are meant to be an inclusive and accessible space for all wanting to learn, and have fun doing it. Heritage institutions are the backbone of arts and culture, and are research repositories rather than memory repositories now.”

The top three motivations for attending heritage institutions in-person were: “Interest in specific themes” (81.6%), followed by “Learning something new” (75%) and “Supporting museums and other heritage institutions” (69%). Demographically, the motivation for “Supporting museums and other heritage institutions” was stronger for those who were 65+ (77%), non-racialized (72%), and women (71%) than the overall population (69%).

When it came to frequency of visits, 50% of respondents visited heritage institutions more than five times a year. Sixty-two percent of those who identified as 2SLGBTQ+ or gender non-binary have visited heritage institutions more than five times a year compared to the Canadian average of 58%. Canadians living in non-urban areas visited heritage institutions more often (53%) than Canadians living in urban areas (48%). Racialized Canadians were the least likely to visit a heritage institution five times a year (40%), while 3% of racialized Canadians never visit.

Participants rated “Educational space” as the most important function of heritage institutions in their community (79%) followed by “Tourist attraction” (52%) and “Memory repository” (47%). The second and third functions differed in order between private citizens and organization respondents: private citizens considered heritage institutions to be a “Memory repository” before “Tourist attraction” whereas heritage institutions saw themselves in reverse.

“Small museums need to be acknowledged. They are wonderful local connections to communities. The bigger museums are fine, but the smaller museums are, in my experience, true gems. These need support.”

Finally, participants rated their level of agreement on different topics: 63% of the participants strongly agree that they feel welcomed when visiting a heritage institution; 64% strongly agree that heritage institutions are trusted sources of information; and 60% strongly agree that heritage institutions should do more to engage with Indigenous and equity deserving communities to ensure that stories are told from multiple perspectives. Respondents strongly agree (65%) that heritage institutions play an important role in bringing people together.

Modern treaty holders

Consultations with modern treaty holders indicate that heritage institutions are keepers of memory and hold the knowledge of ancestors.

“[We] see museums as a place to hold the knowledge of the ancestors and keep it for younger and future generations. Especially with the high rate at which we are losing Elders, these are important places for future generations to be able to learn their traditional ways and how their ancestors survived, providing them the tools they need to be successful and strong like two people. This is especially true for in-community museums.”

According to participants, heritage institutions and the policy should help to:

• Acknowledge colonial past and share diverse stories with diverse audiences.
• Engage First Nations and Inuit in the telling of their stories and provide staff with appropriate training for this work.
• Incorporate Indigenous languages in exhibitions through both written and oral forms.
• Support community-based access to belongings and community-driven Indigenous cultural programming.
• Create digital access to belongings, though this is not a replacement for in-person and in-community access.
• Create accessible inventories of Indigenous belongings held in collections.
• Create room for First Nations and Inuit to determine how belonging are stewarded, stored, and cared for by Canadian museums.
• Provide support for repatriation (financial, legislative, policy frameworks) as well as other stewardship options such as collaborative management agreements.
• Ensure policies align with UNDRIP.

Participants noted that funding is needed to support all their activities, in particular the hiring of permanent staff, training and capacity building, repatriation, digitization projects, infrastructure and operating costs.

“Government of Canada needs to acknowledge the significance of museums in society, including the role they play as keepers of memory and as interpreters of the multiple and collective identities of Canadians.”

Indigenous engagement

The Department contracted Archipel Research & Consulting, an Indigenous-led firm, to lead a series of engagements focused on hearing from Indigenous partners. The consultant's report highlighted the input received from First Nations, Inuit and Métis led heritage organizations and experts. The feedback received aligns with what was heard from modern treaty holders and went further:

• Museums can connect/reconnect Indigenous people with their communities, ancestors and histories, as well as bridge understanding between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. Museums and heritage centres are important sites of knowledge transfer.
• First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples are diverse and need to be meaningfully involved in all aspects of museum work and in the telling of their own diverse stories. Museums can also play a role in revitalizing Indigenous languages, ceremony and cultural practices.
• Indigenous access, ownership and control of belongings is important and must be supported. This can include digital access, repatriation, stewardship agreements, as well financial support for travel to visit collections and host them in community. Support for repatriation (policy, legislation, funding) is urgent. The museum policy must align with the rights outlined in UNDRIP.

“[When people think] we’ve checked a box on our list [by hiring an Indigenous staff] and we’re good to go, [they] are not really understanding that this person brings a whole community, a whole family into this, and that if they’re going to do this properly, be in relationship, it’s much more in-depth than just the one hire. It’s about looking at this intergenerationally and looking at some of the ways that we are repairing some of the atrocities of the past.”

More information about the Indigenous engagement is available at: “Towards the Renewal of Canada’s Museum Policy” Presentation by Archipel Research & Consulting, July 26 2023.

Stakeholder survey

The online stakeholder survey aimed to gather the views of Canadian heritage institutions on current and emerging priorities for the institutions and the sector. The survey received a total of 792 responses from small, medium, and large institutions, including archives, museums, art museums, cultural centres and historic sites.

Stakeholders responded that the overall top priorities for heritage sector over the next 5-10 years are financial sustainability, infrastructure and collections management. The top four key challenges identified by the respondents were: administrative burden to apply for funding, the deteriorating infrastructure, attracting visitors, and finding and retaining staff.

Further results from the stakeholder survey are available at Highlights of Museum Policy Stakeholder Survey.

Virtual roundtables – stakeholders

Eight virtual roundtables were held between February and May 2023, engaging over 100 participants from the heritage sector. Organized by regions and groups, the roundtables included the participation of heritage institutions, museums and archives associations, and academic and independent researchers. During the roundtables, stakeholders identified the following:

• Heritage institutions have multiple roles in the communities they serve and support.
• They are trusted sources of information that can educate, inform, and entertain.
• They serve diverse communities across Canada and are integral to the communities they are in.
• Heritage institutions can be community hubs, Indigenous cultural centres, virtual/digital spaces, traditional museums, research centres and more.
• They collaborate with and foster partnerships between communities, other organizations, and the sector.
• They house, preserve and promote tangible and intangible cultural heritage by disseminating information about the past and present while helping to create a better future.

In addition, participants expressed strong support for existing programs and services, including the Young Canada Works in Heritage Organizations, the Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) and the Canadian Heritage Information Network (CHIN).

“The museums of the future will become cultural spaces of convergence (knowledge, object, experience), of sharing and dialogues, lively and dynamic, attuned to the challenges of citizens. Open spaces and places of awareness, of study and reference. The educational role of museums will be most emphasized when the public searches for an understanding in a changing world.”

To empower heritage institutions to fulfill their roles, stakeholders indicated that a renewed policy should:

• Provide modern language that supports heritage institution’s mandates and objectives;
• Align with UNDRIP, and Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) and OLMC best practices;
• Provide operational/core funding for heritage institutions;
• Provide financial support and guidance for the care and management of tangible and intangible cultural heritage;
• Encourage partnerships/collaborations and leverage provincial networks (joint projects, artifact loans, travelling exhibitions for small organizations, creation of networks of information);
• Provide funding and resources for digitization projects;
• Support the development of shared virtual/digital platforms for cultural heritage;
• Encourage EDI through changes to funding, policies, governance structure, human resources, collections/collecting practices, exhibitions, programming;
• Diversify programs and funding through multi-year funding, flexible language requirements, reporting, and funding opportunities;
• Support training initiatives and the work of volunteers;
• Provide resources and guidance for green initiatives;
• Encourage support from the private sector (matching funds, endowments, and tax credits/benefits); and
• Modernize the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board (CCPERB) and the Cultural Property Export and Import Act (CPEIA).

“We all have a great number of resources for the sector, but we don’t have the capacity to put out those resources to a greater use.”

Stakeholders indicated that heritage institutions must remain relevant. Heritage institutions should be safe spaces for communities and professionals, promote diversity and inclusion, build meaningful relationships, support and advance reconciliation, break social isolation, be economic drivers, be sustainable, promote sustainability, and much more.

Written submissions

Provinces and Territories

Through Federal-Provincial-Territorial Culture and Heritage table meetings, the Department engaged with representatives from the provincial and territorial governments on their views of the heritage sector. During the meetings, it was identified that:

• Provinces and Territories have insufficient funding measures to support all heritage institutions within their jurisdictions.
• More investment into infrastructure is needed.
• There is a lack of support for rural/remote/Northern heritage institutions at all levels of government.
• A heavy reliance on volunteers by heritage institutions is creating a workforce gap that may not recover post pandemic.

Moving forward

The Department of Canadian Heritage thanks all participants for their contributions.

The feedback received and summarized in this report reflects what was communicated by the heritage sector through multiple engagement opportunities over several months. Through these engagements, participants reinforced the call for a new policy that better addresses the evolving needs of the heritage sector.

Canadians look to heritage institutions as places where diverse stories and perspectives can be heard and understood. As such, they expect governments to place significant importance on supporting these institutions. Several policy considerations have emerged from the consultations, which, through the following key areas, can help inform a new national museum policy.

• Sustainability
• Preservation, access and collections management
• Reconciliation
• Equity, diversity and inclusion

The Department is committed to working on a policy that takes into consideration these key findings. In doing so, the Department of Canadian Heritage acknowledges the critical role heritage institutions play in fostering dialogue, connecting people and promoting our heritage from coast to coast to coast.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Breakdown of participants

The breakdown of participants offers an overview of who participated in the consultation process. To ensure an inclusive process, the report assessed a range of factors such as the participation of large, medium and small institutions, urban and rural, as well as the participation of Indigenous partners, equity-deserving groups and official language minority communities.

Public Survey

The online public survey received 2,072 responses, of which 1,583 (76%) were from private citizens. The breakdown of the survey respondents was as follows:

• Approximately 18% of respondents were from a small town, rural or remote area.
• Approximately 4% of respondents identify as First Nations or Métis.
• Approximately 11% of respondents identify with a particular racialized group or visible minority. These included respondents from more than 18 ethnic origins, including many regions of Africa, Asia, Central and South America, and the Caribbean nations.
• 70% identified as a woman.
• 17% identify as part of the 2SLGBTQI+.
• 2.5% identified as non-binary.
• Approximately 15% identified as a person living with a disability.

Stakeholder Survey

The online stakeholder survey was sent to 2,540 heritage institutions across Canada with a 31% response rate that included organizations from all regions of Canada. The breakdown of the 792 responding organizations indicated that:

• 5% were identified as having a focus on an equity-deserving group.
• Approximately 35% were from rural areas.
• Seven responses were from Indigenous-governed heritage institutions representing 23% of all Indigenous-governed heritage institutions surveyed.
• It is estimated that 5% to 10% of the 2,540 organizations surveyed have a mandate focused on equity-deserving groups, while a larger number have related collections or exhibitions.

Heritage stakeholder roundtables

Over one hundred stakeholders from all provinces and territories were invited to participate in the virtual roundtables, including post-roundtable engagement opportunities. The breakdown of participants for the virtual consultations shows that 28% of all participants were from equity-deserving and diverse communities, 10% were from other racialized communities, 10% of participants identified as First Nations, Inuit, and Métis, and 5% were from religions groups. Twenty-six representatives from various provincial and territorial museums associations, archival associations, and other umbrella organizations also participated in the roundtables.

Indigenous partners

During the engagement with Indigenous partners, a total of 39 participants and one national Indigenous organization participated in consultant-led Sharing Circles and interviews. Six responses from First Nations and Inuit governments, representing 16 out of 25 modern treaty holders, were received.

Indigenous organizations also participated through other consultation streams for heritage stakeholders and the public:

• Heritage stakeholder survey – Out of 2,540 organizations, about 30 were identified as Indigenous-led, and seven of those groups replied.
• Heritage stakeholder roundtables – Indigenous organizations represented 14% of invitees, and 9% of attendees.
• Online survey for Canadian public – Approximately 4% of respondents identified as First Nations or Métis.

Appendix 2: List of virtual roundtables participants

Archives associations and umbrella organizations

• Canadian Council of Archives - Conseil canadien des archives (CCA)
• Association of Canadian Archivists - Association canadienne des archivistes (ACA)
• Association of Canadian Map Libraries and Archives - Association des cartothèques et archives cartographiques du Canada (CARTO/ACMLA)
• Archives Association of Ontario (AAO)
• Archives Council of Nunavut (ACN)
• Archives Society of Alberta (ASA)
• Association of Newfoundland and Labrador Archives (ANLA)
• Council of Archives New Brunswick - Conseil des archives Nouveau-Brunswick (CANB)
• Council of Nova Scotia Archives
• Réseau des archives du Québec (RAQ)
• Saskatchewan Council for Archives and Archivists (SCAA)
• Yukon Council of Archives (YCA)

Museums associations and umbrella organizations

• Canadian Museums Association - L’association des musées canadien (CMA/AMC)
• Alberta Museums Association (AMA)
• Association Heritage New Brunswick - L’Association Musées Nouveau-Brunswick (AHNB/AMNB)
• Association of Manitoba Museums (AMM)
• Association of Nova Scotia Museums (ANSM)
• British Columbia Museums Association (BCMA)
• Canadian Art Museum Directors Organizations - l’Organisation des directeurs des musées d’art Canadiens (CAMDO/ODMAC)
• Canadian Association for Conservation of Cultural Property - Association canadienne pour la conservation et la restauration des biens culturels (CAC/ACCR)
• Canadian Association of Professional Conservators - Association canadienne des restaurateurs professionnels (CAPC/ACRP)
• Coalition of Museums for Climate Justice
• Community Museums Association of PEI (CMA-PEI)
• Indigenous Heritage Circle - Cercle du patrimoine autochtone (IHC/CPA)
• Inuit Heritage Trust (IHT)
• Museum Association of Newfoundland and Labrador (MANL)
• Museums Association of Saskatchewan (MAS)
• Museums Canada - Musées Canada
• National Trust for Canada - Fiducie nationale du Canada
• Ontario Museum Association - Association des musées de l’Ontario (OMA/AMO)
• Société des musées du Québec - The Museums of Québec (SMQ)
• Yukon Historical & Museums Association

Atlantic Provinces

• Archives & Special Collections, University of New Brunswick
• Confederation Centre of the Arts
• Fredericton Region Museum
• Kings Landing Living History Museum
• Mi’kmawey Debert Cultural Centre
• Musée acadien de l'Université de Moncton
• New Brunswick Museum
• North Atlantic Aviation Museum
• Nova Scotia Museum
• The Rooms
• Torbay History House & Museum

Ontario

• Aga Khan Museum
• Amherstburg Freedom Museum
• Canadian Hispanic-Latin American Virtual Museum
• Centre franco-ontarien de folklore
• Fort William Historical Park
• London Children's Museum
• Museum of Ontario Archaeology
• Neuberger Holocaust Education Centre/Toronto Holocaust Museum
• Niagara Parks Commission
• Peel Art Gallery, Museum and Archives
• Red Lake Regional Heritage Centre
• Textile Museum of Canada
• The ArQuives: Canada’s LGBTQ2+ Archives
• Toronto Zoo
• Woodland Cultural Centre

Québec

• Cosmodome Space Centre
• Écomusée du fier monde
• Espace pour la vie
• La Pulperie de Chicoutimi
• Montreal Holocaust Museum
• Musée d'art de Joliette
• Musée de la mémoire vivante
• Montreal Museum of Fine Arts
• Musée du Bas-Saint-Laurent
• Musée du Monastère des Augustines
• Musée du ski des Laurentides
• Musée McCord Stewart
• Pointe-à-Callière, Montreal Museum of Archaeology and History

Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Northwest Territories

• Canadian Fossil Discovery Centre
• Le Musée de Saint-Boniface Museum
• Manitoba Children’s Museum
• Manitoba Museum
• Moose Jaw Museum & Art Gallery
• Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre
• Remai Modern
• Royal Saskatchewan Museum
• Saskatchewan African Canadian Heritage Museum
• Saskatchewan Science Centre
• Société historique de la Saskatchewan

Alberta, British Columbia and Yukon

• Art Gallery of Grande Prairie
• Barrhead Centennial Museum
• Beaty Biodiversity Museum
• Canada’s Sports Hall of Fame
• Cortes Island Museum & Archives Society
• Glenbow Museum
• Kelowna Art Gallery
• MacBride Museum
• Nikkei National Museum & Cultural Centre
• Sikh Heritage Museum of Canada
• Société d'histoire francophone du Yukon
• Sunshine Coast Museum & Archives
• TELUS World of Science
• The Exploration Place
• Transgender Archives, University of Victoria
• Yukon Arts Centre

Academic and independent researchers, and other heritage professionals

• Catherine Bell – Professor Emerita, University of Alberta; Ariel F. Sallows Chair of Human Rights, University of Saskatchewan (2022-2023); Board of Directors, Indigenous Heritage Circle
• Crystal Willie – Founding Partner at Hatlie Group
• Devon Hardy – Program Director CG Tools Canada at Centre for Sustainable Practice in the Arts
• Dominique Fontaine – Curator and Founding Director, aPOSteRIORI
• Douglas Worts – Culture & Sustainability Specialist, WorldViews Consulting
• Keith Thor Carlson – Canada Research Chair and Director of the Peace and Reconciliation Centre, University of the Fraser Valley
• Emmanuel Château-Dutier – Professeur en muséologie numérique, Université de Montréal
• Gail Lord – President and Co-Founder, Lord Cultural Resources
• Heather Igloliorte – Co-Director, Indigenous Futures Research Centre and Associate Professor, Concordia University
• Lucy Bell – Indigenous Haida museologist and repatriation expert. Participant and contributor on the Haida Repatriation Committee at Simon Fraser University
• Richard Lindo – Director & Treasurer, Canadian Federation of Friends of Museums
• Robin Inglis – Chair, Canadian Museum Association Fellows
• Sam Cronk – CEO and Digital Curator, Inclusiv Heritage; Director, Canadian Museums Association
• Sandra Morton Weizman – Museum & Heritage Consultant
• Sharon Nyangweso – Founder and CEO, QuakeLab Inc.
• Tricia Logan – Interim Academic Director, Indian Residential School History and Dialogue Centre, University of British Columbia

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, 2023
Catalogue No. CH44-183/2023E-PDF
ISSN: 978-0-660-68754-4