them some general questions. The results turned out to be kaleidoscopic, but not useless.55 As we saw in the historical survey multilateral international archival co-operation, in particular that on a global scale, is a recent phenomenon. Only in a few (mainly European) instances there were already international relations in operation in the 19th century, based on common traditions and structures. For this kind of co-operation an international body like ICA or its predecessors had no significance. The same applies also to many kinds of bilateral contacts which are being maintained and developed by archivists in neighbouring countries all over the world and appear to involve a growing number of archivists. These activities include not only joint meetings and the establishing of study groups, but also the exchange of personnel, joint training programmes and the production of finding-aids and publications of sources of mutual interest, etc. As a result, only a small minority of countries have international contacts only through ICA. Nevertheless, ICA is for approximately 50% of the respon dents the most important framework for their foreign relations. The general appreciation of the significance of international contacts and co-operation is, not surprisingly, higher in developing countries than in Europe. Despite the almost unanimous recognition of the positive impact of international archival co-operation on theory and practice of archives and records administration, a majority of the respondents is more or less disappointed in the results. The reasons are many and diverse: complaints are voiced about the lack of adequate advance information about opportunities and activities which are being organised, about the neglect of differences in development levels, about language and terminological difficulties and political conflicts. A striking element I consider to be the reproach of some respondents that "international" still seems to be identical with "European". There is an apparent annoyance caused by what is being perceived as the continuing dominance of a few particu lar cultures, be it perhaps only because English and French still are the main languages in international contacts. Obviously many colleagues can not see that in international relations language is only a tool for communication, the hand ling of which many of us have to learn deliberately having been educated in another linguistic environment. Trying to express oneself in a foreign language is therefore not identical with submission to the primacy of an alien culture. Nevertheless, a general feeling that entire cultures are being undervalued, neglected or even discriminated against is apparent, and influences the apprecia tion of international relations in a negative way. Not mentioned as one of the causes of disappointment, but psychologically the most important one is the fact that people simply tend to have to high-flown expectations of the benefits international co-operation can bring. This applies to young countries as well as to older ones. Archivists in the Third World were often mistaken in thinking that their worthy colleagues from the old world, who evidently had achieved so much and therefore were thought to be influential people, could substantially help them in setting up archives systems, furnishing equipment, even building new accommodation.56 Archivists in the industrialised countries, underestimating the problems and overestimating their own possibilities seem to have thought that the intro duction of Western archival civilisation was within reach. Others, taking part in international meetings, simply screw too high their demands as to the quality of papers and discussions. Colleagues who have reached a certain level of excellence in some specialism feel annoyed when obliged to attend speeches which are too general or superficial, sit out boring debates on procedural questions, and see themselves deprived of the possibility to discuss the issues which are really important to them. This last remark brings me to the divergent opinions about the significance of congresses and CITRAs. Among my respondents there are colleagues who see these global meetings without restriction as the most important contributions to the development of the profession. Others think these meetings have become outdated, too big, too formal, and, in fact, superfluous. The critics of the ICA congresses stress the importance of European conferences like those which were heldin 1985, 1989, 1993, and 1994, especially the KVAN-congress in Maastricht 1991 with its offer of parallel meetings on a variety of issues. Some respondents draw attention to the fact that the follow-up of hundreds of recommendations and resolutions is not provided for or even being monitored. As a consequence they are frequently no more than a shot in the dark leaving the whole meticulous procedure of formulating balanced state ments as a mere game, imitating international politics. A related problem, the lack of evaluation of activities, affects even those projects which are unanimously looked at as real achievements of the inter national archival community, such as the Guides to the Sources of Nations and the RAMP studies. I doubt whether anyone has an insight into the distribution and use of ICA publications, but it is felt with some anxiety that reality might fail to correspond with the intentions. As far as the Guides are concerned it has already been pointed out that even in the countries of the target group the pro ducts of this project were sometimes fully unknown and nowhere available!57 Into the results of the Records and Archives Management Programme (RAMP) an inquiry has been carried out by Michael Roper recently.58 There is an evident want of better procedures for the distribution of the proceedings of special conferences and seminars. In general ICA publications DE PROFESSIE 551 wish to thank the colleagues of the following institutions and associations who took the trouble to answer my questionnaire: Australian Archives, Osterreichisches Staatsarchiv, Archivo Nacional de Cuba, State Archives of Cyprus, Rigsarkivet Denmark, Public Library of Dominica, National Archives of Finland, Landeshauptarchiv Koblenz, Landesarchiwerwaltung Thüringen, Archives Nationales Haïti, National Archives of Japan, Latvijas Republikas Valsts Arhivu, General Directorate of the Lithuanian Archives, Arsip National Indonesia, Archivo General de la Nación Mexico, National Archives New Zealand, Riksarkivet Norway, Archivo General de la Nación Peru, Naczelna Dyrekcja Archiwów Panstwowych Poland, Rosarkhiv Russia, Direction des Archives du Sénégal, National Archives Singapore, Arhiv Republike Slovenije, Department of National Archives Sri Lanka, Riksarkivet Sweden, State Archives Turkey, National Archives United Arabic Emirates, Public Record Office of Northern Ireland, Archives of Yugoslavia, 174 JAN VAN DEN BROEK FROM BRUSSELS TO BEIJING Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Archive und Bibliotheken in der Evangelischen Kirche, Japan Society of Archives Institutions, Landelijke Kring van Gemeente- en Streekarchivarissen the Netherlands, Arhivsko Drustvo Slovenije, Asociación Espanola de Archiveros, Bibliotecarios, Museólogos y Documentalistas, Norwegian Association of Archivists. 56 See e.g. Joshua C. Enwere, "Archival Europe and the archival world", Janus 2 (1992), p. 334: "Could it be that many European countries do not regard ICA as a worthy agency to execute international assistance?" 57 Franz, "Mikrofilmprogramm", p. 10. 58 Michael Roper, with the assistance of Carol Couture, Impact evaluation of the Records and Archives Management Programme (RAMP) of the General Information Programme (PGI) (Paris, 1993). 175

Periodiekviewer Koninklijke Vereniging van Archivarissen

Jaarboeken Stichting Archiefpublicaties | 1999 | | pagina 89