AVICOM Newsletter August 2026

On 25 June 2026, during its 41st Ordinary General Assembly, held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris as part of ICOM’s Annual Meetings and 80th-anniversary celebrations, ICOM officially adopted the revised ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums. The text was approved with 85.90% of the vote, following a long participatory process led by the ICOM Standing Committee on Ethics, which involved 114 National and International Committees, Regional Alliances and Affiliated Organisations.

The adoption of the revised Code marks a significant milestone for the international museum community. It updates the global ethical framework guiding museums and museum professionals, incorporates the principles of the Museum Definition adopted in 2022 and addresses some of the most pressing challenges of our time, including the climate crisis, the legacies of colonialism and the rapid development of digital technologies.

The Code explicitly recognises digital heritage as an integral part of museums’ responsibilities for safeguarding, research, documentation, conservation, interpretation and access. As Chair of AVICOM, I consider it particularly significant that the document calls on museums to use digital technologies consciously and responsibly, assessing not only the opportunities they offer but also their ethical, social and environmental implications.

Innovation does not simply mean adopting new tools. It also requires museums to assess their benefits, limitations and risks, protect data and collections, guarantee the reliability of information and prevent discrimination, manipulation and new forms of exclusion. Respect for intellectual property, privacy, community rights and data sovereignty must accompany every digitisation process and every application of artificial intelligence.

The Code also underlines the importance of accessibility, long-term digital preservation and the security of digital infrastructures. Documentation and databases must be protected against loss, damage and unauthorised access through appropriate security, data recovery and business continuity strategies. Cybersecurity has therefore become an essential component of collections care and of museums’ public responsibility.

In the coming months, ICOM will work on guidelines to support the interpretation and practical implementation of the Code’s principles. AVICOM will be pleased to contribute to this work in the areas most closely related to its mission, particularly the ethical and responsible use of artificial intelligence and generative technologies.

This commitment follows the direction set by Resolution No. 3, “Positioning Museums for an Equitable, Ethical, and Sustainable Digital Future through Technologies”, adopted by ICOM’s 40th General Assembly during the 2025 General Conference in Dubai. The Resolution was developed from proposals submitted by AVICOM, SUSTAIN, ICOM UAE and ICOM Iran. Among other actions, it recommends establishing an ICOM Working Group on Digital Ethics and Artificial Intelligence.

The proposed responsibilities of the Working Group include developing shared tools and guidance, evaluating the social, cultural and environmental impacts of technologies, and promoting accessible digital skills, particularly for museums and professionals working in under-resourced and marginalised contexts.

The responsible use of technologies, particularly generative artificial intelligence, is one of the central issues facing contemporary society. Museums are exploring the opportunities that AI offers for documentation, research, conservation, collections management, accessibility, education and communication. At the same time, they must address questions concerning bias and representation, misinformation, transparency, copyright, personal data protection, environmental impact and the potential loss of control over cultural content and knowledge.

These issues are particularly relevant to museums. Museums are institutions founded on public trust and have a responsibility to guarantee the authenticity, accuracy and contextualisation of the information they produce and share. A text, image, reconstruction or audiovisual resource generated through AI cannot be used without appropriate scholarly verification, clear disclosure of its origin and careful consideration of its possible effects on the people and communities represented. Human oversight must remain central to every decision-making process.

An essential international reference is the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, the first global framework dedicated to AI ethics. It is founded on respect for human rights and dignity, transparency, fairness, environmental sustainability and human oversight. The Recommendation provides an important foundation for the development of museum policies and professional practices.

The significance of these questions is also demonstrated by the Global Survey on the Use of AI in Museums, launched by UNESCO and ICOM in 2026 to collect data, practical examples and information about the training needs of museum professionals. Its results, expected by the end of 2026, will provide a global overview of emerging practices and contribute to the development of shared tools and guidance.

Europeana is also promoting reflection on the active role that cultural heritage institutions can play in developing artificial intelligence systems oriented towards the public interest. The paper “The Case for Public AI: Making it Happen with Cultural Heritage” proposes an AI ecosystem grounded in the values, knowledge and cultural diversity safeguarded by heritage institutions.

Museums should not be considered merely as providers of data for training AI systems. They should be recognised as active stakeholders capable of contributing to the quality, traceability, contextualisation and reliability of these systems, while protecting the rights associated with the reuse of digital cultural heritage.

NEMO – the Network of European Museum Organisations – has also placed artificial intelligence at the centre of its activities. The publication “AI in Museums” provides an overview of AI applications in museums and examines opportunities and critical issues related to collections databases, curatorial practices, visitor analytics, chatbots, automatic translation and content generation. NEMO’s contribution is particularly important in encouraging dialogue among institutions with widely differing sizes, expertise and resources.

Alongside international frameworks, some museums have begun to publish statements, guidelines and policies on the use of artificial intelligence. These experiences are still relatively limited, but they are particularly valuable because they demonstrate how general ethical principles can be translated into operational procedures.

The Smithsonian Institution’s Statement on the Use of Artificial Intelligence is one of the most significant examples. Its approach to AI is based on three principles: innovation, transparency and responsibility. The Smithsonian recognises the potential of these technologies for research, access and the enhancement of collections, while reaffirming the importance of human oversight, information protection and the verification of results.

The Amon Carter Museum of American Art has developed internal guidelines accompanied by AI literacy activities for its staff. This approach demonstrates that a policy should not simply consist of prohibitions. It should be a flexible instrument, regularly updated in response to technological developments and the institution’s evolving needs. The museum pays particular attention to content verification, privacy, copyright and professional responsibility.

Another example comes from the Logi Museums in Tampere, Finland, which have developed guidelines for the responsible integration of generative AI. The Logi Museums’ Ethical AI Guidelines focus particularly on preserving the authenticity of content and maintaining public trust. Their experience shows the importance of creating guidance tailored to specific museum functions, rather than simply applying general models developed for other sectors.

The AI Policy of Florence Arts and Museums in the United States takes a more restrictive approach, declaring that the organisation does not use generative AI for its texts, graphics or images. This position is also significant: each museum should be able to determine its own level of technological adoption transparently and consistently with its mission, resources and the expectations of its communities.

Although it is not a museum, Art Fund has published an AI Policy that provides a useful reference for the UK museum sector. The policy clearly distinguishes between permitted and prohibited uses, requires human verification of AI-generated outputs, prevents decisions from being delegated entirely to AI and prohibits entering sensitive information into unauthorised systems. It is a practical example of how an institutional policy can give staff clear and understandable guidance for their everyday work.

In Europe, the AI Act provides an essential framework for regulating these technologies and encouraging their transparent, safe and human-centred use. Of particular relevance is AI literacy: the ability not only to use AI tools, but also to understand how they work, recognise their limitations and risks, and critically evaluate their outputs.

For museums, AI literacy should become a permanent part of professional training and development. It must involve not only those responsible for digital infrastructure, but also directors, curators, documentation specialists, conservators, communication and education teams, designers, external collaborators and service providers. Everyone involved in producing and disseminating museum content must be able to understand when and how AI is being used.

For AVICOM, therefore, the revised Code is not a final destination but the beginning of a new journey. We are committed to supporting museums and professionals in applying its principles by encouraging international dialogue, sharing good practices and developing the necessary skills. The digital future of museums must be built responsibly, transparently and consciously, always placing people, communities, public trust and the safeguarding of cultural heritage at its centre.

Anna Maria Marras
Chair, ICOM AVICOM