money and the result will be a secured facility. But what do we do when we talk about preserving memory, education, symbolic layers? It is an elusive notion.
Research is only just beginning. It seems, however, that some indirect measures are possible. Let us take a look at places of former Nazi Germany concentration camps and extermination centres. These are authentic spaces. Authenticity must be preserved, which of course is expensive but provides for effective education. It seems that conservation projects may be combined with educational projects. To investigate how the preservation of authenticity affects the effectiveness of education, one may try to find a common denominator. We cannot provide a simple mathematical formula today, and therefore interdisciplinary research must be conducted. There are financial flows, and where they exist, there must also be a measure. If we find it, it will have a practical effect - donors will easily take decisions to support if they can see tangible results, and memorial sites will find it easier to obtain these funds.
You speak of the search for good practices. Where do you see such practices today in the world, that deserve focus? Where do you see activities that deserve attention?
One need not look far - I have just completed a series of pilot studies at the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation and the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum. I consider the co-operation of these two institutions as a ground-breaking case study of good practices. It is about their unique organisational, managerial and fundraising approach to securing the conservation of authenticity from the financial perspective. What we have here is a Perpetual Capital, which is a certain financial “perpetuum mobile”, with full transparency towards donors and a controlling strategy implemented through an International Committee and a Financial Committee. Another good practice is that 100% of the funds transferred by the donor goes to the capital because the Foundation’s operational activities are financed from dividends. It is a phenomenon. I think it is also a practice that makes a considerable impression on donors. As a rule, organisations allocate part of the donation to operational functioning. Another unique aspect is the co-operation model between the Foundation and the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum, which cares for the authenticity of the memorial site. Such a relationship does not exist, at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, for example, which is not the same kind of place. It borrows and collects authentic objects. There, we will be able to analyse other good practices related to the sphere of social commitment, for example, in the analysis of contemporary conflicts etc. I am only mentioning examples of good practices. I will present a more comprehensive and systematic picture in a book about the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation, which I am currently writing.
The field of research is fascinating. However, I can imagine that some people may have
about memorial sites, the words “management”, “finance” “and economy” do not quite fit. Are you not worried that this may be a mental barrier difficult to overcome?
In the beginning, I was afraid of controversies and conflicts between the order of the economic research and that of the memory of dreadful crimes. Therefore, I, first of all, consulted with the leaders of memorial sites and academic circles. When I start talking about numbers and explaining that the financial resources are required to secure the huge social values, by presenting specific amounts, then this controversy diminishes immediately. I think these fears stem from the fact that the economic aspect of the preservation of the relics of crimes against humanity is a new subject, so far managed almost exclusively by the humanities and social sciences. Due to its innovativeness, it raises certain controversies - however, associating figures with the social mission raises understanding. It is very simple - memorial sites serve as a warning to us all, so that such crimes may never occur again. However, for this warning to be audible and legible, these sites must be preserved, and to preserve them, financial resources are necessary. This cause-and-effect thinking convinces people. We must understand that valuable things are expensive. Authenticity is one thing, but we still have education, multimedia etc. The world is moving forward, and this cannot be done in an ascetic form because it will not reach people, in particular, the youth. We, therefore, need modern technologies, which are not cheap. The talks resulted in cooperation and substantive patronage of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation and the Stutthof Museum in Sztutowo. So far, the comments are very positive.
This interest is demonstrated by the fact that such an important university as the University of Social Sciences and Humanities establishes an institution dedicated to the study of the economics of memorial sites.
Yes, I hope to interest a significant number of researchers and practitioners to the issue of the economics of memorial sites. The Research Centre for Economics of Memorial Sites also has an integrative value in relation to other sciences. More and more researchers from various disciplines deal with memory, which is why we want to create an integration platform for the scientific community. Everyone can contribute their bit, and the social value of memorial sites is worth such cooperation. I am delighted that people want to participate in this project.
RESEARCH CENTER FOR ECONOMICS OF MEMORIAL SITES
SWPS University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Head of the Department: dr hab. Adam Szpaderski, Prof. SWPS University
ul. Chodakowska 19/31, 03-815 Warszawa
e-mail: [email protected], www.swps.pl