Access to this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
ARTICLE
Measuring museum sustainability in China: a DSR
model-driven approach to empower sustainable
development goals (SDGs)
Siyi Wang 1, Liying Yu2& Yuan Rong2✉
In the past few years, sustainable development has undoubtedly become an essential per-
spective for museums. Museums have been committed to raising social awareness around
ecological conservation and cultural diversity through various exhibitions, education and
research projects, and public engagement. However, the concepts, approaches, and practises
of “sustainability”differ across nations and regions, and there is a lack of sufficient quanti-
tative research on sustainable development by and within museums. This article aims to
establish an evaluation framework and evaluation approach for museum sustainability in
China. Its framework is initially based on the DSR model, in which “D”delineates seven deeds
of museum visitors, “S”characterizes the status of sustainable practises within museums,
and “R”involves presenting sustainability strategies pertinent to Chinese museums by
integrating Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A fuzzy QFD model is then used to
develop an evaluation approach for analyzing the Zhejiang Natural History Museum
(ZNHM)’s sustainable development strategies, using data from surveys and in-depth inter-
views. As a result of this study, significant opportunities for deepening sustainable practises
were identified for ZNHM, which include updating the collection system, enhancing pro-
fessionalism in exhibitions and educational projects, and securing funding policies. ZNHM’s
sustainability efforts prioritize enhancing social awareness, and internal reforms related to
social value, governance, and professional capabilities. With these foundations in place,
international cooperation among museums may be the next step towards a sustainable
future.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z OPEN
1Department of Archaeology and Museology, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China. 2School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China.
✉email: rongyuanry@163.com
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 1
1234567890():,;
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Introduction
In September 2015, the United Nations Sustainable Develop-
ment Summit was attended by 193 member states who
unanimously endorsed the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development,”establishing 17 main Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs)
1
and 169 specific targets aimed at global sustain-
ability. The SDGs address key areas such as quality education,
sustainable cities, environmental protection, economic growth,
sustainable consumption and production, peace, inclusive societies,
gender equality, and food security, highlighting the pivotal role of
culture in advancing sustainable development. UNESCO promotes
this strategic role of culture through cultural heritage and the
creative industries, with museums exemplifying cultural entities
that both drive and facilitate economic, social, and environmental
sustainability. In 2022, the International Council of Museums
(ICOM) introduced “sustainability”as a new attribute in its defi-
nition of “museum.”Ever since International Museum Day 2015
which was celebrated around the theme of Museums for a Sus-
tainable Society,“sustainability”has been increasingly viewed as a
key feature by the international museum community.
Sustainable development might provide a conceptual reference
point that could help to reframe the role and potential of
museums (Worts, 1998), such as the social value of museums
(An, 2021; Brown, 2019; Cerquetti and Montella, 2021; Hansson
and Öhman, 2021; Liu, 2021; Loach et al. 2017). Museums are
addressing climate change through museums’management
policies (McGhie, 2020), collections (Gustafsson and Ijla, 2016),
exhibitions, and educational activities (Hebda, 2007; Henry and
Carter, 2021; Sutton, 2020) while implementing measures for
resilience, adaptability, and disaster preparedness. Through
energy-efficient practises, museums also aim for carbon neutrality
or net-zero greenhouse gas emissions (Balocco and Marmonti,
2012; Morgan and Macdonald, 2020; Sharif-Askari and Abu-
Hijleh, 2018). The COVID-19 pandemic, moreover, has acceler-
ated museums’adoption of digital technologies, allowing them to
reach wider audiences, reduce physical consumption, and
enhance accessibility while maintaining educational and cultural
engagement (Ahmed et al. 2020; Hamdy and Nagib, 2022; Rivero
et al. 2020). Diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (Gili-
berto and Labadi, 2022), as well as community engagement
(Málaga and Brown, 2019) are topics that museums are
increasingly concerned with as part of their sustainability initia-
tives. Museums serve as catalysts for heritage and cultural tour-
ism, digital cultural industries, and other aspects of the creative
sector (Gustafsson and Ijla, 2017). Sustainability in museums is,
therefore, critical to ensuring environmental responsibility, pre-
serving cultural heritage, educating the public, promoting social
equity, sustaining economic viability, inspiring positive change,
and making them important cultural institutions.
SDGs in museum sustainability. The complex nexus between
SDGs and museum practises is documented in various studies
(Cerquetti and Montella, 2021; Faheem and Abduraheem, 2021;
Hansson and Öhman, 2021; McGhie, 2019; Rivero et al. 2020). A
great deal of effort is being put into forming partnerships and
collaborations with other institutions, universities, and commu-
nities to share knowledge, resources, and best practises for
achieving SDGs (McGhie, 2019), such as improving the quality of
life (SDGs 1/2/3/6), ensuring the sustainability of human society
(SDGs 7/9/11/12/17), ensuring inclusion and equity (SDGs 4/5/8/
10/16), and focusing on climate and ecology (SDGs 13/14/15).
Institutions like the Network of European Museum Organisations
(NEMO) and International Council on Monuments and Sites
(ICOMOS) have curated reports delineating museum-related
SDG targets for museum practises. Prominent museums such as
the National Museum of Australia, TATE, and the National
Museum of Singapore have published their own Sustainability
Action Plans guided by the SDGs. Nevertheless, there has been a
growing need to establish a sustainability framework to guide
museums wishing to align their practises with the SDGs. For
instance, the Italian National Museum System (NMS) employs
sustainable development indicators as evaluation criteria for
museums (Cerquetti and Montella, 2021). Drawing from a
visitor-centered museum sustainability framework (Di Pietro
et al. 2014), experts have examined different factors that affect
sustainability within institutions, including environmental, social,
economic and cultural (Ásványi et al. 2021; Pop and Borza, 2015).
They have also argued that sustainable practises within museums
encourage continuous support from the government, donors,
stakeholders, and others (Pop et al. 2018,2019).
Museum sustainability and regional differences. The new
definition of “museum”, adopted by ICOM in 2022 and for the
first time including the term “sustainability”as a key attribute, is
seen as critical to ensuring environmental and ecological
responsibility, preserving cultural heritage, educating the public,
promoting social equity, sustaining economic viability, inspiring
positive change, and ensuring that museums remain relevant as
cultural institutions. However, the inclusion of the term “sus-
tainability”in the new museum definition also represents the
“greatest common divisor”within the international community,
with significant national variations in how institutions under-
stand and implement sustainability principles. As Brown (2019)
suggests, “think global, act local”has become an important ability
for museums. While over a decade ago museum sustainability was
believed to be a function of appropriate entrepreneurial strategy
(Durel, 2009; Merriman, 2008; Schaltegger and Wagner, 2011),
“cultural sustainability”has recently gained traction as a fourth
aspect of museum sustainability (Arenas and Medina, 2021;
Pencarelli et al. 2016; Pop et al. 2019; Stylianou-Lambert et al.
2014). In the aftermath of the pandemic, museums worldwide are
facing significant challenges, not only due to a lack of funding but
also in terms of meeting sustainable development goals (Choi and
Kim, 2021; Grincheva, 2023). Thus, sustainable priorities and
aspirations vary greatly between countries and cultures. One
museum may prioritize “saving money”while another may
“rescue creative interactions”(Arenas and Medina, 2021, p. 114).
Considering these national and regional differences in attitudes
and practises around sustainability, in China, museums are pri-
marily state-owned and, thus, differ from “sustainopreneurship”
(Howaldt et al. 2012, p. 187) in their approach to sustainability.
According to the National Cultural Heritage Administration,
there were 6833 Chinese museums in 2024, 91 percent of which
offered free admission, and attracted 1.29 billion visitors. It is
undeniable that visitors have a considerable influence on shaping
the direction of museums in China. In the wider context of
sustainable development in China
2
, museums have been adopting
a variety of practises, yet challenges remain. These include limited
understanding and dissemination of sustainability concepts
among museum professionals; a lack of mission awareness within
museums; insufficient professionalism among staff; inadequate
attention to special populations such as disabled visitors; uneven
development across different types of museums in various
regions; a need for innovation in both external frameworks and
internal management; and a critical need for increased social
engagement. Thus, the principles of sustainability relate to two
core aspects: (1) building deep, long-term relationships with a
wide range of visitors; and (2) responding to changing political,
social, environmental, and economic contexts, and having a clear
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
2HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 |https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
long-term purpose that reflects society’s expectations (Di Pietro
et al. 2014, p. 5746).
Evaluating museum sustainability. Despite the clearly deepening
ties between the broader field of sustainable development, museums
and cultural institutions, previous studies have mainly focused on
defining museum-based sustainable development and illustrating
the need to incorporate sustainable approaches into museum
practises. However, the effectiveness of such approaches is still
under active discussion and assessment, and it is important to
evaluate the sustainable impact of museums both qualitatively and
quantitatively. Evaluating a museum involves assessing whether a
museum is fulfillingitsstatedkeyfunctionsandcontributingto
society (Drochter, 2015; Reussner, 2003;Weil,2007). For example,
the SERVQUAL and HISTOQUAL models
3
have been used to
evaluate visitor service quality in museums (Benjawan et al. 2018;
Daskalaki et al. 2020;KowalskaandOstręga, 2020;Markovicetal.
2013). Evaluating museums is moreover often tied to their rela-
tionships with urban development, culture, education, or science
and technology (Benito et al. 2014; Lak et al. 2019; Zhang et al.
2017). As museums become more inclusive in terms of knowledge
and innovation, museum professionals, are turning their attention
to the external environment and the social impact of their institu-
tions(Azmatetal.2018; Loach et al. 2017). For example, the impact
of museums’on sustainable tourism is a topic of particular interest
(Ghoochani et al. 2020; Navarro et al. 2019;Neupane,2016).
Therefore, the alignment of the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals with the museum sector, the unique and
common characteristics of museum sustainability, methods to
assess sustainability in museums, and the development of a
sustainable evaluation framework for museums in China are
explored. The academic research questions of this article can be
summarized as follows:
(1) How does a museum define its sustainability strategy in
accordance with the 17 SDGs and the 169 sub-goals in
Transforming Our World: 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development?
(2) To achieve sustainable development, what indicators should
be focused on from the perspective of the visitors and the
museum’s development?
(3) What evaluation framework can be established to address
stakeholders’needs for museum sustainability and translate
these needs into museum sustainability strategies?
(4) What kind of evaluation method should be designed for the
museum sustainable development evaluation framework?
In light of these developments worldwide, it is crucial to establish
an effective measurement system for the sustainability of museums
in China. This article accordingly aims to assess museum
sustainability both qualitatively and quantitatively. It is structured
into five sections to develop an evaluation framework for museum
sustainability in China. The second section introduces the DSR
model, establishing three qualitative indicators for museum sustain-
ability: needs (D), state (S), and response (R). The third section
employs the FF-PSI-SWARA-MARCOS method-based QFD model
to construct a quantitative mathematical evaluation framework using
the aforementioned indicators. The FF-PSI-SWARA model deter-
mines the importance of D and S indicators, while the FF-MARCOS
approach prioritizes sustainability strategies R. The fourth section
validates the model’s practicality through empirical research,
focusingontheZhejiangNaturalHistoryMuseum(ZNHM)case
study. Methods such as questionnaires, in-depth interviews, focus
group discussions, expert scoring, and fuzzy decision analysis
confirm the model’s effectiveness. The discussion section analyzes
the model’s construction and its contributions to the museums in
China, addressing the study’s limitations. The article concludes with
empirical findings and sustainable development strategies and
priorities for museums based on the evaluation framework.
Evaluation indicators for museum sustainability based on
DSR model
The pressure-state-response (PSR) framework is commonly uti-
lized by academic researchers when determining how well an
institution is fulfilling sustainability objectives (Markovska-
Simoska et al. 2013). This model was initially used by the gov-
ernment as a method of analyzing economic, budgetary, and
environmental issues (Rapport and Friend, 1979) through the
lens of the “cause-effect-response”concept. In the 1990s, the PSR
model was further developed by the OECD and UNEP (OECD,
2003). This improved model, called DSR, follows the logic of
“driving force-state-response”, in which the “D”(driving force)
represents the factors (i.e., human behaviors, processes, and
lifestyles) that impact sustainability, the “S”represents the “State,”
referring to the current status of sustainability initiatives and
benchmarks, while “R”stands for “Response,”denoting strategies
for sustainability. The DSR model is widely used in fields relating
to economics, society, and culture, including the museum sector.
TheDSRmodelisalsoapplicabletomuseumsinChinaforthree
main reasons. First, the sustainability needs of Chinese museums
stem from the requirement to better meet visitors’needs, thereby
gaining positive reputation and promoting healthy operations. This
necessitates a deeper understanding of visitors’expectations, repre-
sented by the “D”for needs drivers in the DSR model. Second, due
to significant regional variations in the sustainability practises of
museums in China, there are diverse motivations and goals for
sustainable development. This requires an assessment of the current
state of museum sustainability, where “S”in the DSR model
represents the state analysis, prompting different actions for differ-
ent states. Third, the varying degrees and directions of sustainable
development require Chinese museums to adopt distinct strategies
and prioritize differently, hence “R”in the DSR model stands for
response strategies. The DSR model considers the connections
between different factors to promote sustainable development
within museums and assess the quality of such development.
Understanding the needs of visitors (Driving Force) can help
museums address challenges related to collections, exhibitions,
educational activities, and public services (State). By incorporating
the SDGs into their sustainability strategies (Response), museums
can establish a positive “Driving Force-State-Response”cycle of
sustainable development (Fig. 1).
Driving force indicators—the needs of visitors.Accordingto
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, visitor experience in the museum can
be divided into seven types of needs (Fig. 2). In this regard, phy-
sical comfort (Convenient and safe facilities, D1) is an indis-
pensable part of museums’service to the public: one aim being to
satisfy visitors’physiological and safety needs. Visitors tend to view
their experience as a whole one, comprising exhibitions, educa-
tional activities, shops, restaurants, restrooms, and staff friendliness
(Quality offerings, D2; Diversified services, D3; Positive interac-
tions, D4), which relate to social and esteem needs. Meanwhile, the
museum’s collections and exhibits, which tell stories and reveal
knowledge behind them(Attractive exhibitions and education
events, D5; Abundance and diversity of collections, D6), can satisfy
visitors’“intellectual leisure”needs as well as gradually fulfill their
cognitive and esthetic needs during their visit. Meanwhile, muse-
ums are adopting digital methods to enhance visitors’creativity
(Innovative environment, D7), respond to their motivation to
explore their self-value and satisfy their need for self-actualization.
By meeting these criteria, museums can create a more conducive
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 3
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
setting for fulfiling Maslow’sfinal requirement, “transcendence,”
which involves achieving a state of “flow”.
Drawing on the aforementioned concepts and a literature
review on the needs of museum visitors, this article aims to
identify the indicators that museums should take into account
when determining their driving forces. By bringing together
professional practises in museums in several key categories, the
following indicators (Table 1) can be identified:
Fig. 1 The DSR model framework for museum-based sustainable development. This figure outlines the key factors influencing the needs of visitors (D,
Driving forces) and the state of a museum (S, State) that lead to various sustainability strategies (R, Responses).
Fig. 2 Links between Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory and museum visitors’needs. This figure applies Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to the context of
museum visitor experiences. It illustrates how museums fulfill various needs, starting from basic physiological needs with convenient and safe facilities
(D1) to safety needs, belonging and love needs through diversified services and positive interactions (D3 and D4), esteem needs with quality offerings
(D2), cognitive and aesthetic needs with attractive exhibitions and the abundance and diversity of collections (D5 and D6), and finally self-actualization
through an innovative environment (D7).
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
4HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
State indicators—the status of sustainable practises within
museums. A museum’s state is shaped by its underlying driving
force/forces, and vice versa. We have defined indicators of
museum sustainability based on the Museum Grading Evaluation
Method and Museum Operation Evaluation Standards
4
set by the
National Cultural Heritage Administration in 2019. These indi-
cators include aspects of “standard management”(including
organizational management, collection management, public
management, and safety management), “service output”
(including scientific research, exhibition, education, and cultural
communication), and “social evaluation”(including visitor feed-
back and social impact). To gather data related to these practises,
we conducted in-depth interviews with 21 senior staff from var-
ious positions at the ZNHM (see Appendix 1 for details) and then
identified six state indicators from the interviews: exhibition and
education services, collection system, scientific research, organi-
zational management, cooperation and reciprocity, and funding
policies (Table 2).
Table 1 Visitor-centered driving force indicators.
Driving Force Indicators Visitors’needs Sources
Convenient and safe facilities
(D1)
Safe environment for visitors, i.e., adequate security staff at the
venue; the museum is located in an area with adequate public
security, etc.
Han and Hyun (2017)
A full range of conveniences is available, i.e., luggage storage,
museum interpreter rentals, adequate rest areas, etc.
Huo and Miller (2007) and Daskalaki et al.
(2020)
Accessibility facilities, i.e., wheelchair access, barrier-free lifts,
barrier-free restrooms, etc.
Rentschler and Gilmore (2002)
Quality Offerings (D2) A broad range of cultural creative products, i.e., creative souvenirs,
publications, replicas of cultural artefacts, etc.
Larkin (2016), Chaney et al. (2018), Sobocińska
(2019) and Cheng et al. (2024)
A new and unique museum restaurant is available Albuquerque and Delgado (2015)
Provision of high-quality online works, i.e., online exhibitions,
educational programs, workshops, NFT (Non-Fungible Token)
products, etc.
Papadamou et al. (2010), Literat (2017), Ennes
and Lee (2021) and Zollinger and DiCindio
(2021)
Reasonable prices, i.e., affordable, and flexible prices for temporary
exhibitions, educational programmes, cultural products, etc.
Tsai and Lin (2018)
Diversified services (D3) Communication with visitors in a timely manner, i.e., interaction via
social media platforms, accurate and timely in-gallery information,
such as opening hours, temporary exhibitions, educational activities,
etc.
Markovic et al. (2013), Manna and Palumbo
(2018) and Valtysson et al. (2021)
Provide professional museum-guided tours on a regular basis Edwards (2007) and Samis and Michaelson
(2017)
Offer general and specialty appraisals and art consulting services Sutter et al. (2016) and Bertacchini et al. (2018)
Friendly and professional museum staff Maher et al. (2011), Camarero et al. (2019) and
Dragouni and McCarthy (2021)
Positive interactions (D4) Excellent reputation Swarbrooke (2015) and Kershaw et al. (2018)
Adapt quickly to public opinion and keep up with current hot topics Barnes and McPherson (2019) and Zbuchea and
Bira (2020)
Offer assistance to disadvantaged individuals and groups, i.e.,
provide employment and educational opportunities by curating
exhibitions and educational activities that are relevant, accessible
and encourage participation
Stylianou-Lambert et al. (2014), Azmat et al.
(2018), Bonner (2019) and Zollinger (2021)
Coordination and communication with the local community, i.e.,
organizing regular exhibitions and events in the community,
classroom, etc.
Long (2013), Sutter et al. (2016) and Kadoyama
(2018)
Closely tied to urban tourism, i.e., serving as a “gateway to
understanding urban life”, etc.
Dong (2008), Plaza and Haarich (2013) and
Mendoza and Talavera (2017)
Attractive exhibitions and
education events (D5)
Professional expertise, i.e., innovative collection interpretation,
curation, and communication practises, etc.
Stylianou-Lambert et al. (2014) and Villaespesa
and Murphy (2021)
Original exhibitions of high quality, i.e., detailed and interesting
narratives, innovative and advanced modes of presentation, etc.
Sutter (2008), Villeneuve (2013) and
Jurčišinová et al. (2021)
Enhancement of educational activities, i.e., the creation and
implementation of educational programmes at various levels and for
diverse groups, etc.
Abacıand Kamaraj (2009), Wang and Chiou
(2018), Hansson and Öhman (2021) and Prottas
(2021)
Abundance and Diversity of
the Collections (D6)
Collections of high-quality items that are well preserved and
displayed, i.e., highlights of the collections, advanced conservation
equipment, etc.
Murphy and Villaespesa (2020) and Loddo et al.
(2021)
Up-to-date and widely accessible collections database, i.e.,
collections’detailed information and high-resolution images are
available on the museum’sof
ficial website, etc.
Borowiecki and Navarrete (2016) and Lawan and
Yusuf (2021)
Innovative Environment (D7) Green and low-carbon initiatives, i.e., reduce the embodied energy
in the building, use renewable energy resources, etc.
Lambert and Henderson (2011), Brophy and
Wylie (2013) and Faheem and Abduraheem
(2021)
Involvement in a high degree of digitalization, i.e., support for
intelligent interpretation, as well as using AR, VR, and other display
interaction methods, etc.
Pop and Borza (2016), Preuss (2016) and
Navarrete (2020)
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 5
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Response indicators—museum sustainability strategies.
Essentially, the museum’s response aims to meet the needs of
visitors, as well as to improve the state of museum sustain-
ability in accordance with the 17 SDGs and the 169 sub-goals in
Transforming Our World: 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Devel-
opment. Ten relevant indicators were identified from the sub-
goals, derived through a systematic review of literature and
discussions among museum experts. In this article, the
museum sustainability strategies (R - Response in the DSR
model) are analyzed through the lens of social awareness,
cooperative support, and internal reform
5
,whicharesynthe-
sized from the specific content of ten identified indicators
(Fig. 3and Table 3
6
).
Measuring “social awareness”. Measuring aspects of social
awareness as part of an assessment of museum-based sustainable
development requires considering two aspects of museum prac-
tises: spreading knowledge about environmental protection (R1)
and advocating for education on sustainable development (R2).
Museums have the power to spread knowledge about protecting
the environment and preserving ecosystems through their col-
lections, exhibitions, and educational activities. This helps them
respond better to natural disasters such as climate change,
extreme weather and floods (SDG 2.4). To improve the profes-
sional skills of museum staff and volunteers in these areas,
museums include topics such as climate change and environ-
mental protection in their practises (SDG 13.3). Museums create
educational activities that align with their mission which ensures
visitors can acquire the necessary knowledge for implementing
their own sustainable practises. These activities include education
on topics of sustainable development, promoting a healthy life-
style, upholding human rights, achieving gender equality, fos-
tering a culture of peace and nonviolence, promoting global
citizenship and respecting cultural diversity (SDG 4.7). Museums
aim to be inclusive, welcoming visitors of all ages, genders, abil-
ities, races, ethnicities, religions, economic backgrounds, and any
other differences. This creates a friendly and enthusiastic envir-
onment for all (SDG 10.2).
Table 2 The six state indicators.
State indicators Interpretation of indicators
Professionalism of exhibition and education services S1
The developing situation of exhibitions, education, and public services
Optimizing collection system S2
Information about the quantity, type, and digitization of collections, as well as collection
conservation measures
Intensity of scientific research S3
The status of scientific researchers, scientific research facilities and scientific research
achievements
Standardization of organizational management S4
Overview of organizational structure, management planning, and operating model
Extensiveness of cooperation and reciprocity (S5) Cooperation with other museums, cultural institutions, research institutes and social forces
Support of funding policies S6
The status of government subsidies, foundations, and social capital investments in museums
Fig. 3 Response indicators for museum sustainability strategies. This figure illustrates the contributions of various sustainability strategies (R1 to R10) to
different SDGs. These strategies (R, Responses) can be categorized into three aspects: social awareness, cooperative support, and internal reforms.
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
6HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Table 3 The ten response indicators.
Museum sustainability strategies (R) Corresponding SDGs Interpretation of indicators
Social awareness R1 Spreading knowledge about
environmental protection
SDG 2.4 Promote ecological conservation knowledge and facilitate
ecosystem maintenance via museum collections,
exhibitions, and educational activities;
Strengthen museums’capabilities in addressing climate
change, extreme weather, flooding, and other disasters.
SDG
13.3
Enhance museums’educational efforts and awareness-
raising on environmental themes such as climate change
within their museum practises and improve the capabilities
and competencies of museums and their staff.
R2 Advocating for education on
sustainable development
SDG 4.7 Museums conduct education activities aligned with their
themes and missions, ensuring visitors gain knowledge and
skills for sustainable development from museum collections,
exhibitions, and educational programs, encompassing
education for sustainable development, sustainable living
styles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of peace
and non-violent cultures, global citizenship awareness,
respect for cultural diversity, and the contribution of culture
to sustainable development.
SDG
10.2
Museums should enhance inclusivity, promoting
engagement and accessibility for diverse visitors regardless
of age, gender, disabilities, race, ethnicity, religion,
economic status, or other distinctions.
Cooperative
support
R3 Enhancing collaboration with social
forces
SDG
17.17
Museums should foster social engagement in their
development, encouraging and promoting effective public-
private and civil society partnerships.
SDG
16.7
Museums should incorporate the views and suggestions of
various stakeholders in decision-making to ensure that their
operations are responsive to public opinion, inclusive of all
parties, and characterized by participation and
representation.
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 7
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Table 3 (continued)
Museum sustainability strategies (R) Corresponding SDGs Interpretation of indicators
R4 Improving cooperation between
different institutions
SDG 2.5 Museums should strengthen inter-institutional collaboration
to jointly undertake research projects such as managing
diverse seed and plant banks and promote the utilization
and co-construction of genetic resources and related
traditional knowledge.
R5 Integrating local tourism and
development
SDG 8.9 Policymaking and implementation should be geared towards
integrating museums with local tourism industries, creating
employment opportunities, promoting indigenous culture,
and driving regional revitalization.
R6 Strengthening international
cooperation
SDG
17.9
Museums ought to enhance international exchange and
sharing.
Internal reforms R7 Improving the recycling of
resources
SDG 6.4 Substantially improve water efficiency within museum
buildings, ensuring sustainable water use and effective
recycling.
SDG 7.2 Significantly increase the proportion of renewable energy
utilized in museum buildings.
R8 Enhancing sustainable professional
capabilities related to heritage
SDG
11.4
Museums should further endeavor to collect, protect,
preserve, research, interpret, exhibit, and disseminate
cultural and natural heritage.
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
8HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Table 3 (continued)
Museum sustainability strategies (R) Corresponding SDGs Interpretation of indicators
R9 Promoting social value through
public sphere governance
SDG
11.7
Museums should provide safe, accessible, and eco-friendly
public spaces for all visitors, with particular attention to
women, children, the elderly, and individuals with
disabilities.
SDG 5.5 The employment environment within museums should
ensure equality, enabling female museum professionals to
participate in all museum practises fully and effectively and
to have opportunities for decision-making leadership at all
levels.
SDG 3.4 Through their collections and therapeutic activities,
museums promote mental health and well-being.
R10 Optimizing the museum’s planning
and management system for
sustainability
SDG
12.6
Museums should incorporate sustainable development into
their mission, vision, collection policies, and strategic plans.
SDG
15.9
Museums should integrate the values of ecosystems and
biodiversity into their collection policies and strategic plans.
SDG
16.6
Implement an efficient, accountable, and transparent
management system across all levels of museum
administration.
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 9
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Measuring “cooperative support”. Fostering cooperative support
for museum-based sustainable development involves four key
factors: enhancing collaboration with social forces (R3),
improving cooperation between different institutions (R4), inte-
grating local tourism and development (R5), and strengthening
international cooperation (R6). Museums actively encourage and
facilitate effective partnerships with the public and private sectors
to involve social forces in museum professional practises (SDG
17.17). To ensure that museum practises are responsive to public
opinion and inclusive of all stakeholders, museums seek input
and suggestions from various parties when making decisions
(SDG 16.7). Museums promote interinstitutional collaboration by
engaging in joint research projects such as seed and plant banks,
and by promoting the use, construction, and sharing of genetic
resources (SDG 2.5). Museums prioritize international exchanges
and sharing (SDG 17.9), develop and implement policies that
foster integration with local tourism, generate employment
opportunities, and revitalize local communities (SDG 8.9).
Measuring “Internal reforms”. Museums need to undergo internal
reforms to address key aspects of sustainability including
improving the recycling of resources (R7), enhancing sustainable
professional capabilities related to heritage (R8), promoting social
value through public sphere governance (R9), and optimizing
institutional planning and management systems to align with
sustainability goals (R10). It is important to significantly increase
the use of renewable energy in museum buildings, improve water
efficiency, ensure sustainable water use (SDG 6.4), and implement
effective recycling measures (SDG 7.2). Museums make efforts to
collect, preserve, research, interpret, display, and communicate
cultural and natural heritage (SDG 11.4). They also provide safe,
accessible, and environmentally friendly public spaces for all
visitors, with a focus on the needs of women, children, the elderly,
and those with disabilities (SDG 11.7). Creating an equal
employment environment is crucial to ensure the full participation
of female professionals in the museum’s affairs, including
decision-making and leadership at all levels (SDG 5.5). Museums
also help promote mental health and well-being through their
collections and activities (SDG 3.4). Sustainable development
should be integrated into museums’missions, collection policies,
and development plans (SDG 12.6) while considering the values of
protecting ecosystems and biodiversity (SDG 15.9) through
environmentally responsible and transparent practises (SDG 16.6).
Evaluation approach for museum sustainability: a fuzzy
QFD model
QFD serves as a systematic methodology that transforms custo-
mer requirements into service features and is broadly utilized in
social and management science evaluations, delivering robust
theoretical backing for practical evaluation challenges. The
essence of QFD lies in adopting the customer’s viewpoint to
identify their needs, translating these into technical attributes,
and formulating a scientifically sound and reasonable plan to
satisfy these requirements. The evaluation of museum sustain-
ability can be seen as a systematic process that considers the
needs of visitors and the status of sustainable practises within
museums, establishes the relationship between such requirements
(from visitors/museum) and museum’s sustainability strategies,
and determines the optimal strategies for the museum.
A museum sustainability evaluation approach is described based
on QFD and the characteristics of museum sustainability evalua-
tion issues. The QFD model is utilized to analyze the needs of
visitors and the status of sustainable practises within museums (D
and S), and then shift them into the museum’ssustainability
strategies (R). Hence, QFD can be regarded as a multiple-criteria
decision-making problem through considering the criteria (D and
S), and alternative (sustainability strategies R). Furthermore, the
evaluation process has high uncertainty because of the complexity
of the evaluation environment. D and S also involve uncertainty
and vagueness owing to the inherent ambiguity and uncertainty of
visitors’cognition ability. A QFD model is characterized by fuz-
ziness because of the uncertainty of evaluating subject preferences.
Accordingly, this article establishes a museum sustainability eva-
luation approach by combining QFD model, FF set (Senapati and
Yager, 2020), SWARA (Keršuliene et al. 2010), PSI (Maniya and
Bhatt, 2010), MARCOS (Stevićet al. 2020) for evaluating sus-
tainability strategies in museums (Fig. 4). The FF set will be used to
effectively overcome the fuzziness and uncertainty of expert eva-
luation. The FF-PSI-SWARA signifies the comprehensive weight
determination method of criteria, in which FF-SWARA and FF-
PSI methods are used for estimating the subjective and objective
weight of D and S indicators. The FF-MARCOS method is utilized
to ascertain the prioritization of R indicators. A detailed descrip-
tion of the propositions and steps can be found in Appendix 3.
Empirical analysis and results: evaluating sustainable
development at the ZNHM
This study developed a framework for evaluating the sustainable
development of Chinese museums based on the DSR model, and
constructed the evaluation approach employing the QFD model.
In this section, we select a Chinese museum as an evaluation
object for sustainable development to verify the operability of the
proposed evaluation framework and method. In the museum
sustainable evaluation, we mainly focus on three tasks: (1) To
Fig. 4 Flowchart of the sustainable development evaluation for the
museum. This figure presents the theoretical approach and methodology
for evaluating the sustainability of Chinese museums. It first outlines the
construction of evaluation indicators using the DSR model, incorporating
synthetic weights identified by the FF-PSI-SWARA-MARCOS method and
QFD model. It then details the evaluation process, including visitor and
expert questionnaires, and the integration method to develop the evaluation
matrix in the empirical analysis of ZNHM’s sustainable development.
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
10 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
obtain corresponding questionnaires based on the evaluation
framework; (2) To use the FF-SWARA-PSI method to calculate
the weights of the D and S indicators based on the results of the
questionnaire survey; (3) To use the FF-MARCOS method to
obtain the importance ranking of sustainability strategies. The
evaluation results obtained from the proposed evaluation
approach can provide support and guidance for promoting the
sustainable development of the museum.
Zhejiang Natural History Museum (ZNHM) was established
in 1929 and aims at improving the public’s scientific, cultural,
and eco-environmental literacy. It is a natural history museum
incorporating collection research, popular science education,
and cultural exchange. ZNHM has two branches in Hangzhou
and Anji. The Hangzhou branch opened in July 2009, covering
20 acres with 26,000 square meters of building space. There are
five permanent and four temporary exhibitions. Anji’sbranch
opened in December 2018 on 333 acres with 61,000 square
meters of construction space. There are six main exhibition
galleries: geology, ecology, Behring collection, ocean, dinosaur,
and natural art. ZNHM is a national first-grade museum and
one of the pioneers in exploring sustainable development
practises in China. It has its own sustainability action plan and
is among the few domestic museums that incorporate sustain-
ability as part of their core mission. At the same time, ZNHM is
an innovator in museum sustainable development practises and
its strategies are representative of the Chinese museum com-
munity (Table 4).
A case study examining sustainable development at ZNHM
was conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed FF-
PSI-SWARA-MARCOS methodology. The evaluation committee
comprises museum professionals including museological experts,
museum staff, and researchers. We (the researchers) designed
three questionnaires (see Appendix 2 for details) and obtained
769 responses on visitors’needs (D), 45 responses on ZNHM’s
sustainability status (S), and six responses on the museum’s
sustainability strategies (R). According to the proposed FF-PSI-
SWARA method, the importance ratings for visitor needs and
sustainability status are determined based on data drawn from
769 and 45 questionnaires
7
, respectively. Considering the com-
plexity of the decision environment and the uncertainty of expert
cognition, six experts evaluated the correlation between sustain-
ability strategies (R) and indicators (D and S) with the ten-level
linguistic scale. The proposed FF-PSI-SWARA-MARCOS based
QFD model was applied to rank the importance of sustainability
strategies (see Appendix 3 for details).
Further, we also execute a brief comparison analysis to validate
the effectiveness and feasibility of the model. The compared
methods include FF-WSM method, FF-WPM method, FF-
WASPAS method and FF-ARAS method. The results and rank-
ings of sustainability strategies are displayed in Table 5. From the
comparison outcomes, we can observe that the ranking of sus-
tainability strategies attained using the proposed QFD model is
consist with the existing methods, which validates the validity of
the presented QFD model.
In summary, we used the DSR model to evaluate museum
sustainability strategies (R) for optimizing visitor needs (D) and
enhancing sustainable museum practises (S). Based on the 769
visitor questionnaires we gathered and by using the FF-PSI-
SWARA approach to analyzing it, we have ranked and expressed
the importance of driving forces for museum-based sustainable
development through the formula D3D7D2D4
D6D1D5(Table 6). In this ranking model, diversified ser-
vices, therefore, become the most significant driving force. An in-
depth interview with 21 museum staff (see Appendix 1 for details)
and questionnaires were sent to 45 museum professionals to
assess sustainability levels at the ZNHM, with its ranking of
importance expressed as S2S1S6S4S5S3(Table 6).
Thus, priority should be given to optimizing collection systems.
We propose a total of ten strategic measures for museums to
apply, falling under three main categories: social awareness,
cooperative support, and internal reforms, which are evaluated
using a QFD model. Six experts, including museum scholars,
museum curators, and government officials responsible for
museum administration, completed long questionnaires to
examine the relationship between strategy(R), visitor needs(D),
and state (S). The ranking of sustainability strategies is expressed
as R1R2R9R8R10 R6R4R3R7R5
(Table 6). Concretely, this suggests that museums should make
social awareness their primary focus in implementing a sustain-
able development strategy, while giving priority to promoting
social values through public governance, professional capabilities,
and operational excellence in internal reforms.
Discussion
Museums have a close relationship with sustainable development.
On one hand, museums are instrumental in advancing the
achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with
museum practises supporting these goals (Cameron, 2022).
Conversely, museum development also necessitates the SDGs,
which offer a vision and action framework for museums’pro-
gress. Many aspects of the SDGs align with the inherent qualities
of museums, thus, scholars internationally have introduced
museum practises that aid in advancing the Sustainable Devel-
opment Goals (SDGs) (McGhie, Harrison and Sterling, 2022;
McGhie, 2019), however, in the Chinese context, research and
practise linking museum sustainability with the SDGs are nearly
absent. Therefore, this article proposes strategies for museum
sustainability aligned with the SDGs, specifically the “R”indica-
tors within the DSR model. Beyond the “R”indicators, it also
focuses internally on museum sustainability, addressing how to
meet visitor needs (“D”indicators) and improve current practises
(“S”indicators). By incorporating the DSR model into museum
sustainability research, this article breaks away from the tradi-
tional paradigm that often focuses on a single aspect or factor,
introducing an innovative evaluation framework to the museum
field.
Research on museum sustainability has predominantly been
qualitative or case-study based, with few quantitative studies. This
paper connects the needs of visitors, the status of sustainable
practises within museums, and museum sustainability strategies
through the DSR model. It introduces an evaluation approach
based on QFD, aiming to integrate perspectives from various
stakeholders (such as museum visitors, staff, managers, and
academic experts) to determine the importance and priority of
museum sustainability strategies. In addition, considering the
complexity of the evaluation procedure and the uncertainty of the
cognitive capability of the evaluation experts, Fermatean fuzzy set
is utilized to more accurately represent the vague and uncertain
evaluation information of the experts, thereby making the eva-
luation results more scientific and reasonable. In summary, this
article offers a systematic approach and pathway for advancing
research on sustainable development in Chinese museums from
qualitative to quantitative analysis.
This research’s significance is twofold, with the initial aspect
being that the DSR-based evaluation framework addresses both
external and internal elements of museum sustainability. Exter-
nally, the linkage between museums and sustainable development
signifies the museums’mission commitment, aligning with the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This alignment repre-
sents the orientation and practical meaning of the “R”in DSR,
emphasizing the integration of SDGs to propose museum sus-
tainability strategies; Internally, the capacity of museums to fulfill
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 11
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Table 4 The sustainable practises conducted in ZNHM.
Aspects Detail practises Roles Related SDGs
Scientific
research
ZNHM focuses on the conservation of rare species and
biodiversity, encompassing the artificial attraction and restoration
of the Thalasseus bernsteini (中华凤头燕鸥), protection of the
critically endangered Hynobius amjiensis (安吉小鲵), monitoring
of the Oroanassa magnifica (海南鳽) population dynamics, and
research on conservation genetics and adaptive evolution.
Additionally, it conducts surveys and monitoring of the wild flora
and fauna in the Baishan-Zu region. A total of 57 research
projects have been initiated, significantly contributing to the
preservation of rare species and the advancement of ecological
civilization.
Lead the way SDG 11.4: Protect the Worlds Cultural and
Natural Heritage
SDG 15.5: Protect Biodiversity and Natural
Habitats
ZNHM researches paleontology, focusing on topics such as life
evolution, fish, dinosaurs, and dinosaur eggs. Zhejiang Province,
located in southeastern China, is one of the richest regions in
dinosaur fossils. ZNHM is one of the museums with the largest
collection of dinosaur and dinosaur egg fossils from Zhejiang. It
leads or collaborates in research projects using its own
collections and those from various county and city museums in
Zhejiang. The Jinyunpelta sinensis (中国缙云甲龙) is the earliest
known ankylosaur with a tail club, while the Jinyun thick-shelled
egg (缙云厚盔蛋) represents the earliest discovered bird egg
fossil. Additionally, Zhejiang has seen the first discovery of
deinonychosaur dinosaur footprint fossils. A total of 13 related
research projects have been conducted.
Lead the way SDG 11.4: Protect the Worlds Cultural and
Natural Heritage
SDG 17.17: Encourage Effective Partnerships
SDG 17.6: Knowledge Sharing and Cooperation
for Access to Science, Technology and
Innovation
ZNHM collaborates with China Jiliang University to establish the
Zhejiang Ecological Research Institute, jointly cultivating
postgraduate students, with an annual enrollment quota of 4–5
students.
Support others SDG 4.3: Equal Access to Affordable
Technical, Vocational and Higher Education
SDG 4.7: Education for Sustainable
Development and Global Citizenship
SDG 17.17: Encourage Effective Partnerships
Collections ZNHM, themed around “Nature and Humanity,”aims to enhance
the public’s scientific literacy in natural sciences and
environmental conservation awareness. Its mission is to foster
harmony between humans and nature. ZNHM is dedicated not
only to the protection and research of natural heritage and
biodiversity but also to organizing natural ecological exhibitions
and disseminating ecological culture. Its collections are
categorized into Life Sciences, Earth Sciences, Art, and Others.
The Life Sciences collections are classified by biological
taxonomy, while the Earth Sciences collections are organized by
natural regions and specific themes. ZNHM boasts a rich
collection of unique items, including dinosaur eggs, marine reptile
fossils, animal remains from cultural sites, marine life, and birds.
Notably, the collection of dinosaur eggs ranks first globally in
both quantity and variety, the bird sound collection is the second
largest in the world, and the freshwater and terrestrial mollusk
specimens account for over 40% of the world’s species, ranking
third in the world. Future plans include expanding the collection
to include astronomical artifacts.
Lead the way SDG 11.4: Protect the Worlds Cultural and
Natural Heritage
ZNHM has collaborated with the Institute of Botany, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, to establish a digital herbarium. Visitors
can access and query information and images of 20,215
specimens online, covering 3238 species of seed plants.
Support others SDG 15.6: Promote Access to Genetic
Resources and Fair Sharing of the Benefits
SDG 17.18: Enhance Availability of Reliable
Data
Education ZNHM has established the “Friends of the Museum Teachers”by
mobilizing representatives of natural science teachers from
primary and secondary schools and kindergartens to meet
educational needs. Collaborating with over 10 local universities,
the museum has formed research teams to conduct educational
research. It has also partnered with more than 150 primary and
secondary schools, offering tailored educational activities through
a menu-style service. The museum boasts several well-known
and socially recognized educational programs, including “Young
Interpreters”and “Global Natural History Day.”
Support others SDG 4.7: Education for Sustainable
Development and Global Citizenship
SDG 12.8: Promote Universal Understanding of
Sustainable Lifestyles
SDG 13.3: Build Knowledge and Capacity to
Meet Climate Change
SDG 17.17: Encourage Effective Partnerships
The Hangzhou and Anji branches of ZNHM are equipped with
dedicated educational institutions and facilities for youth
education. These branches have a science popularization
education team consisting of 68 members, 616 registered
Change
internally
SDG 12.8: Promote Universal Understanding of
Sustainable Lifestyles
SDG 13.3: Build Knowledge and Capacity to
Meet Climate Change
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
12 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Table 5 Ranking results obtained by different approaches.
Methods Ranking of sustainability strategies
FF-WSM method R1R2R9R8R10 R6R4R3R7R5
FF-WPM method R1R2R9R8R10 R6R4R3R7R5
FF-WASPAS method R1R2R7R3R5R6R8R9R4R10
FF-ARAS method R1R2R4R9R6R10 R3R7R8R5
Proposed method R1R2R9R8R10 R6R4R3R7R5
Table 4 (continued)
Aspects Detail practises Roles Related SDGs
volunteers, and 22 collaborative partner teams. They also
possess specialized educational spaces for conducting science
popularization activities.
Museum Park The Anji branch of ZNHM has embraced the concept of “garden”
to enhance the extensive outdoor park, actively venturing into the
realm of museum-as-scenic-spot development. It has established
an astronomical observatory and the Zhejiang Rare Plant Garden.
This garden serves as a hub that brings together the province’s
rare plant resources, methodically incorporating these precious
flora to develop a distinguished botanical garden for educational
purposes. In November 2020, the garden marked a milestone
with the arrival of three grafted offspring saplings of the Abies
beshanzuensis (百山祖冷杉), a species native to the Baishanzu
National Nature Reserve. Continuing this trend, in March 2021,
eleven rare and endangered plant species from the Zhejiang
Liangfeng National Nature Reserve and Zhejiang A&F University
were introduced to the garden. The garden currently boasts an
impressive collection of twelve rare and endangered plant
species. Among these are national first-level protected plants
such as the Abies beshanzuensis and the Parrotia subaequalis
(银缕梅). Also included are national second-level protected
plants like the Ulmus elongata (长序榆), Fagus hayatae (台湾水
青冈), and Carpinus tientaiensis (天台鹅耳枥). Furthermore, the
garden shelters provincial key protected plants such as the Litsea
auriculata (天目木姜子), Photinia magnoliifolia (玉兰叶石楠),
and the Corylus chinensis (华榛), all contributing to its status as
a sanctuary for botanical diversity.
Lead the way SDG 11.4: Protect the World’s Cultural and
Natural Heritage
SDG 11.7: Provide Access to Safe and Inclusive
Green and Public Spaces
The Anji branch of ZNHM features a green building with 100%
green roof coverage, utilizing large-scale solar collectors and
plants like Sedum lineare (佛甲草), which not only beautify the
roof but also significantly contribute to environmental protection
and energy conservation. The museum demonstrates strong
environmental awareness in energy management by employing
solar equipment for all-day hot water supply and screw-type
ground source heat pumps, effectively utilizing renewable energy
and reducing dependence on traditional energy sources. These
innovations and practises not only decrease energy consumption
but also reduce greenhouse gas emissions, positively contributing
to climate change mitigation and ecological conservation.
Additionally, the museum’s strategies in rainwater management
reflect its commitment to water resource conservation and
efficient use. By implementing a rainwater collection and reuse
system, the collected water is used for irrigation, road cleaning,
and replenishing water features, reducing reliance on tap water
and alleviating urban water scarcity issues.
Change
internally
SDG 6.3: Improve Water Quality, Wastewater
Treatment and Safe Reuse
SDG 6.6: Protect and Restore Water-Related
Ecosystems
SDG 7.2: Increase Global Percentage of
Renewable Energy
SDG 12.2: Sustainable Management and Use of
Natural Resources
Cultural
products
In conjunction with the special exhibition “Lucid Waters and Lush
Mountains are Invaluable Assets: The Practise of Ecological
Civilization Starting from Yucun,”ZNHM sells locally-sourced
bamboo fiber towels, bamboo products, and agricultural by-
products, promoting natural, environmentally friendly, and
healthy goods to stimulate local revitalization.
Support others SDG 8.9: Promote Beneficial and Sustainable
Tourism
SDG 17.17: Encourage Effective Partnerships
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 13
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
their mission is embodied in their sustainability, reflecting the
intrinsic motivation of museums. This represents the internal
perspective of the “D”and “S”in DSR, with museum sustain-
ability demonstrated through meeting visitors’needs internally
and enhancing and updating based on the museum’s internal
sustainable development status.
Meanwhile, quantitative research methods provide concrete
data support for the effects and impacts of museum sustain-
ability. It is well known that recognizing the significance and
value of museum sustainability does not imply immediate
achievement of sustainable development, as it is a spiral process
rather than a linear one. This has led to an internal debate
within museums between the “intrinsic”and “instrumental”
values of sustainability. Understanding museum sustainability
policies requires first grasping their purpose, especially as these
policies increasingly relate to social, economic, and political
outcomes. Cultural institutions and local cultural administra-
tions have been key proponents of policy “attachment”strate-
gies, where short-term tactics dominate by linking sustainability
to various local outcomes. Sustainable development policies
thus become instrumental in addressing a range of cultural,
economic, and social issues within museums (Belfiore and
Bennett, 2007;Gibson,2008;HadleyandGray,2017). These
instrumental policies require explicit evaluation systems to
determine their effectiveness. However, a mechanism to assess
the orientation and extent of museums’sustainable develop-
ment has not yet been established. Consequently, while gov-
ernments emphasize museums”sustainable development
responsibilities such as enhancing cultural participation and
local revitalization, they lack clear evaluations of the effects and
impact of such sustainability, which are crucial in short-term
strategies. Particularly for local museums in China operating on
government budgets, museum professionals need to not only
know how to promote sustainable development but also
demonstrate the capability of their practises to achieve the
desired outcomes. In summary, there is a lack of an evaluation
mechanism for sustainable outcomes in current museum sus-
tainability policies in China, limiting the breadth and depth of
sustainable development. Therefore, this article is distinct in its
quantitative approach to the sustainable development of Chi-
nese museums, proposing an evaluation framework and
approach based on the DSR model. It further validates the
proposed set of indicators and evaluation method through an
empirical study conducted at the Zhejiang Natural History
Museum, providing a reference for effective assessment of
sustainable development within the museums in China. Future
work will involve empirical researchonamorediverserangeof
museum types and expand the geographical scope of museums,
to enhance the practical testing of the evaluation framework.
Conclusion
As highlighted in the 2023 Museum International Day theme,
“Museums, Sustainability, and Wellbeing,”the value of museums
in sustainable development and their relationship with the SDGs
has been emphasized through various practises such as educa-
tional programmes, exhibitions, community activities, and
research. However, it is essential to acknowledge the considerable
variations in the meaning, patterns, and practises of sustainability
across different nations, regions and cultures. The Chinese
museum sector has gradually increased its focus on sustainability.
This has been particularly significant in the aftermath of the
pandemic, where measures such as offering free admission and
the extension of opening hours have become more widespread
among museums in China. This article thus outlined an evalua-
tion framework for museum sustainability suitable for Chinese
Table 6 The ranking list for “D”,“S”, and “R”indicators.
“Driving
Force”
Indicators D3: Diversified
services
D7: Innovative
Environment
D2: Quality
Offerings
D4: Positive
interactions
D6: Abundance and
Diversity of the
Collections
D1: Convenient and
safe facilities
D5: Attractive
exhibitions and
education events
Rank (Weight) 1 (0.104) 2 (0.0884) 3 (0.0784) 4 (0.0673) 5 (0.0619) 6 (0.0541) 7 (0.0519)
“State”Indicators S2: Optimising
collection system
S1: Professionalism of exhibition
and education services
S6: Support of
funding policies
S4: Standardisation of
organisational management
S5: Extensiveness of
cooperation and reciprocity
S3: Intensity of
scientific research
Rank (Weight) 1 (0.1076) 2 (0.0841) 3 (0.0832) 4 (0.0791) 5 (0.0728) 6 (0.0673)
“Response”Indicators R1: Spreading
knowledge
about
environmental
protection
R2:
Advocating
for education
on
sustainable
development
R9:
Promoting
social value
through
public
sphere
governance
R8:
Enhancing
sustainable
professional
capabilities
related to
heritage
R10:
Optimising the
museum's
planning and
management
system for
sustainability
R6:
Strengthening
international
cooperation
R4:
Improving
cooperation
between
different
institutions
R3: Enhancing
collaboration
with social
forces
R7:
Improving
the
recycling of
resources
R5:
Integrating
local tourism
and
development
Rank
(Importance)
1 (2.5336) 2 (2.4572) 3 (2.2854) 4 (2.2427) 5 (2.2053) 6 (2.1954) 7 (2.1415) 8 (2.1009) 9 (2.0559) 10 (1.5232)
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
14 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
museums, facilitating museum professionals’efforts at taking
targeted actions.
In the framework of constructing indicators for sustainability
within China-based museums, the level of museum-based sus-
tainable development is strongly linked to visitors’needs (referred
to as the “Driving Force,”“D”). According to the ranking of seven
major needs of visitors (D3D7D2D4D6
D1D5), in the perception of visitors, a sustainably developed
museum should primarily offer a variety of services. And foster
an innovative environment and provide quality experiences. In
this regard, museums need to prioritize service-oriented initia-
tives. These may include online and in-person communication
platforms, guided tours, appreciation sessions, and information
services. Further innovations in creative products, sales models,
sustainable practises for in-museum consumption as well as
resource conservation and low-carbon initiatives are essential. In
parallel, the level of digitization should be enhanced. Taking the
Zhejiang Natural History Museum as a case study (S2S1
S6S4S5S3), the current status of sustainable practises
(referred to as the “State”,or“S”) indicates that Chinese museums
need to focus more on improving their collection systems, the
professionalism of the exhibitions and educational services, and
securing financial support for sustainable growth. In other words,
there is room for improvement in these areas in China, for
instance, quality and diversity of collections, conservation of
cultural heritage, and digitization. The enhancement of exhibi-
tions and educational services can result in museums engaging
social forces and collaborating with institutions to receive addi-
tional funding assistance. When looking at the SDGs that are
closely related to museums and the corresponding rankings
(R1R2R9R8R10 R6R4R3R7R5),
museums should begin their sustainability strategies (referred to
as the “Response”,or“R”) by promoting social awareness, fol-
lowed by implementing internal reforms that highlight their
social value and governance capabilities. As social awareness and
internal reforms progress, the next step would be to consider
international cooperation with museums.
In addition, the sustainable development practises and strategies
between various types of museums can vary significantly. In this
study, we specifically focussed on the natural history museum,
which places a stronger emphasis on spreading ecological awareness
and views environmental protection as one of its core missions.
Future research will examine Chinese museums’sustainability fra-
mework through the lens of a diverse range of museum types,
including historical and art museums. For the sustainable devel-
opment evaluation of other museums, due to the different actual
situations of museums, the weights of D and S indicators, and the
importance of R indicators are different. For example, if a certain
museum is selected as the evaluation object, the data obtained based
on the survey are different, so the evaluation results on the sus-
tainable development strategy are also different. Of course, the
proposed evaluation framework and methods should be improved
in practice. Furthermore, because of the dynamic nature of sus-
tainable development in museums. The D, S, and R indicators in
the evaluation framework will have dynamic changes and need to
be dynamically adjusted, which is also a research direction that we
will continue to focus on in the future.
Data availability
The datasets analyzed during the current study are available from
the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Received: 16 March 2024; Accepted: 8 July 2024;
Notes
1 The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are: SDG 1. No Poverty, SDG 2. Zero
Hunger, SDG 3. Good Health and Well-being, SDG 4. Quality Education, SDG 5.
Gender Equality, SDG 6. Clean Water and Sanitation, SDG 7. Affordable and Clean
Energy, SDG 8. Decent Work and Economic Growth, SDG 9. Industry, Innovation and
Infrastructure, SDG 10. Reduced Inequality, SDG 11. Sustainable Cities and
Communities, SDG 12. Responsible Consumption and Production, SDG 13. Climate
Action, SDG 14. Life Below Water, SDG 15. Life on Land, SDG 16. Peace and Justice
Strong Institutions, SDG 17. Partnerships to achieve the Goals.
2 China recognizes sustainable development as a core issue and has established
comprehensive strategies and active measures towards its achievement. The Fifteenth
CPC National Congress designated sustainable development as an essential strategy for
modernization, which was further emphasized in the Scientific Outlook on
Development introduced at the Sixteenth Congress. The Nineteenth Congress report’s
vision of innovative, coordinated, green, and open development encapsulates China’s
sustainable development strategy tailored to its unique context. In September 2015,
President Xi’s speech, entitled Towards a Mutually Beneficial Partnership for
Sustainable Development underscored China’s dedication to the UN 2030 Agenda.
The 2016 report entitled China’s National Plan on Implementation of the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development outlines achievements, experiences, opportunities,
challenges, guiding principles, implementation paths, and action plans for the 17
SDGs, serving as a guideline for China’s initiatives and a reference for other nations,
especially developing countries. Since 2017, China’s Progress Report on
Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has provided an
annual review of the country’s SDG efforts. In the realm of cultural heritage, the
government proactively explores sustainability. On May 17, 2013, the “Culture: Key to
Sustainable Development”international conference in Hangzhou, co-hosted with
UNESCO, resulted in the Hangzhou Declaration, which advocates for culture’s
significant role in sustainable development policies. Guided by the government, China
has introduced and continues to adopt innovative institutional and international
cooperations to facilitate the realization of the SDGs.
3 Both SERVQUAL and HISTOQUAL are models used in the field of marketing,
particularly for evaluating service quality. The SERVQUAL model was developed by
Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry in 1991. It is a multi-item scale used to measure
service quality by focusing on the gap between customer expectations and perceptions
of the service received. The HISTOQUAL model is specifically designed for evaluating
the quality of historical tours and guides. It was developed by Ryan and Martin in 1992
as an adaptation of the SERVQUAL model to the context of heritage tourism services.
4 The “Museum Grading Evaluation”by China’s National Cultural Heritage
Administration, comprising 15 articles, lays out specific requirements for assessment.
These include adhering to principles of fairness, justice and transparency, and
adopting a mechanism of “government guidance, social participation, and independent
operation”. The Administration is responsible for formulating evaluation methods and
standards, as well as for guiding the China Museums Association in assessing first,
second, and third-tier national museums. The assessment process encompasses
qualitative and quantitative analysis, site inspections and comprehensive reviews.
Outcomes are categorized into four grades: excellent, qualified, basically qualified, and
unqualified.Meanwhile, the “Museum Operation Evaluation Standards”issued
alongside the “Museum Grading Evaluation”comprise eight main categories, setting
forth the criteria and methods for the graded evaluation of museums. These standards
clarify a three-tiered evaluation framework, encompassing management norms, service
output and social evaluation. Evaluation methods include both qualitative and
quantitative assessments, supplemented by additional items under each tiered index.
Inspection points encompass various cultural and tourism-related indicators, such as
the museum’s annual public accessibility, implementation of free admission policies or
concessions for specific groups, the addition or renewal of visitor facilities dedicated to
rest and sanitation, cultural product sales, catering, and services for the elderly,
disabled visitors and infants. The “Museum+”strategy promotes interdisciplinary
collaboration with educational, scientific, and tourism institutions. Museums are also
assessed for the resources allocated to youth groups for educational activities themed
around patriotism, revolutionary heritage, Chinese traditional culture, ecological
civilization, national security, etc. Additionally, annual visitor numbers, temporary
exhibition attendance, international visitors, free admissions and controlled entries are
considered in the assessment”s weight and inspection points. More information on the
“Museum Grading and Evaluation Measures”can be found at: https://www.gov.cn/
zhengce/zhengceku/2020-03/26/content_5495770.htm [Accessed 9 May 2021].
5 The categorization into three parts primarily references Jasper Visser’s lecture at
NEMO’s European Museum Conference 2019 titled “Museums and the Sustainable
Development Goals”(7 November 2019). In this lecture, the roles of museums in
association with the SDGs are divided into three categories: Lead the way, Support
others, and Change internally. More information can be found at: https://www.ne-mo.
org/news-events/article/introduction-to-the-sustainable-development-goals-from-a-
museum-perspective [Accessed 23 May 2024].
6 This paper integrates the Toolkit developed by ICCROM and its corresponding cases
(https://ocm.iccrom.org/), along with expert interviews and the research team’s own
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 15
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
museum studies and professional experience, to selectively align with the SDGs
relevant to R indicators.
7 In this study, a questionnaire with 23 items was administered to 769 participants to
assess the reliability of the “D”indicators. The overall Cronbach’s alpha was high,
α=0.951, indicating that the items have a high internal consistency. Thus, the
questionnaire is deemed highly reliable for use in research. The result of KMO from
our study is 0.984, which represented that the dataset is acceptable at a reasonable
level. Hence, the data were correlated and have sampling adequacy. For the “S”
indicators, 45 participants completed a questionnaire covering 6 items. The overall
Cronbach’s alpha was high, α=0.915, indicating that the items have a high internal
consistency. The value of KMO statistics is 0.867, which represented that the dataset is
acceptable at a reasonable level. Hence, the data were correlated and had sampling
adequacy.
Appendix
The relevant supporting materials (including the list of interviewees,
interview outlines, questionnaires, the theory of Fermatean fuzzy set,
methodology and computational results) can be consulted at the
following link: https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aua4yTnLwBN-gY1GOCZ0Dj_
ALiaSSw?e=fFFSSl.
References
AbacıO, Kamaraj I (2009) Museums as an educational medium: an imple-
mentation model. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 1(1):1337–1341
Ahmed ZA, Qaed F, Almurbati N (2020) Enhancing museums’sustainability
through digitalization. In: Proceedings of the second international sustain-
ability and resilience conference: technology and innovation in building
designs (51154). IEEE, Sakheer, Bahrain, pp 1–4
Albuquerque MHF, Delgado MJBL (2015) Sustainable museographies—the
museum shops. Procedia Manuf 3:6414–6420
An L (2021) 融入可持续发展目标:博物馆“重塑”的一个重要努力方向[Inte-
grating into the sustainable development goal: an important direction of the
museum’s“reimagining”]. Southeast Cult. 2:10–15
Arenas JLG, Medina MFZ (2021) Re-imagining museums in a pandemic: new
governance for a living, open and sustainable museum. Mus. Int
73(3–4):108–119
Ásványi K, Fehér Z, Jászberényi M (2021) The criteria framework for sustainable
museum development. Tour. South East Eur. 6:39–51
Azmat F, Ferdous A, Rentschler R, Winston E (2018) Arts-based initiatives in
museums: creating value for sustainable development. J. Bus. Res 85:386–395
Balocco C, Marmonti E (2012) Energy and sustainability in museums. The plant
refurbishment of the medieval building of Palagio Di Parte Guelfa in Flor-
ence. Open J Energy Effic. 1(3):31–47
Barnes P, McPherson G (2019) Co-creating, co-producing and connecting:
museum practice today. Curator Mus J. 62(2):257–267
Belfiore E, Bennett O (2007) Rethinking the social impacts of the arts. Int J Cult
Policy 13(2):135–151
Benito B, Solana-Ibañez J, Enguix MDRM (2014) Efficiency in the provision of
public municipal cultural facilities. Lex Localis J Local Self Gov 12(2):163–191
Benjawan K, Thoongsuwan A, Pavapanunkul S (2018) Innovation management
model of world heritage city museum on historical park for creative tourism
in the lower part of Northern Thailand. PSAKU Int J Interdiscip Res
7(1):110–120
Bertacchini EE, Nogare CD, Scuderi R (2018) Ownership, organization structure
and public service provision: the case of museums. J Cult Econ 42(4):619–643
Bonner T (2019) Networking museums, older people, and communities: unco-
vering and sustaining strengths in aging. Innov Aging 3(Supplement_1):S362
Borowiecki KJ, Navarrete T (2016) Digitization of heritage collections as indicator
of innovation. Econ Innov N Technol 26(3):227–246
Brophy SS, Wylie E (2013) The Green museum. A primer on environmental
practise. Altamira Press, Lanham
Brown K (2019) Museums and local development: an introduction to museums,
sustainability and well-being. Mus. Int 71(3-4):1–13
Camarero C, Garrido MJ, Vicente E, Redondo M (2019) Relationship marketing in
museums: influence of managers and mode of governance. Public Manag
Rev. 21(10):1369–1396
Cameron F (2022) Revisioning agenda 2030 and the sustainable development goals:
museums and the promotion of diverse habitability practices for planetary
futures. In: Proceedings of the UMAC-NATHIST-ICME-ICR 2022 joint
annual conference “The Power of museums: sustainability”. ICOM UMAC-
NATHIST-ICME-ICR, 86
Cerquetti M, Montella M (2021) Meeting sustainable development goals (SDGs) in
museum evaluation systems. The case of the Italian national museum system
(NMS). Sinerg Ital J Manag 39(1):125–147
Chaney D, Pulh M, Mencarelli R (2018) When the arts inspire businesses: muse-
ums as a heritage redefinition tool of brands. J Bus Res 85:452–458
Cheng H, Sun X, Xie J, Liu BJ, Xia L, Luo SJ, Tian X, Qiu X, Li W, Li Y (2024)
Constructing and validating the museum product creativity measurement
(MPCM): dimensions for creativity assessment of souvenir products in
Chinese urban historical museums. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11:280
Choi B, Kim J (2021) Changes and challenges in museum management after the
COVID-19 pandemic. J Open Innov Technol Mark Complex 7(2):148
Daskalaki VV, Voutsa MC, Boutsouki C, Hatzithomas L (2020) Service quality,
visitor satisfaction and future behavior in the museum sector. J Tour Herit
Serv Mark 6(1):3–8
Di Pietro L, Mugion RG, Renzi MF, Toni M (2014) An audience-centric approach
for museums sustainability. Sustainability 6(9):5745–5762
Dong Y (2008) The role of natural history museums in the promotion of sus-
tainable development. Mus Int 60(1–2):20–28
Dragouni M, McCarthy D (2021) Museums as supportive workplaces: an empirical
enquiry in the UK museum workforce. Mus Manag Curatorsh 36(5):485–503
Drochter R (2015) Measuring success in university museums: a case study at the
Jurica Suchy nature museum. Northern Illinois University, Illinois
Durel JW (2009) Entrepreneurship in historical organizations. Hist N 64(2):20–25
Edwards D (2007) Corporate social responsibility of large urban museums: the
contribution of volunteer programs. Tour Rev Int 11(2):167–174
Ennes M, Lee IN (2021) Distance learning in museums: a review of the literature.
Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn 22(3):162–187
Faheem F, Abduraheem K (2021) Energy management in museums: a new
approach to implementing the sustainable development goals. IAR J Eng
Technol 2(1):46–49
Ghoochani OM, Ghanian M, Khosravipour B, Crotts JC (2020) Sustainable tourism
development performance in the wetland areas: a proposed composite index.
Tour Rev 75(5):745–764
Gibson L (2008) In defense of instrumentality. Cult Trends 17:247–257
Giliberto F, Labadi S (2022) Harnessing cultural heritage for sustainable develop-
ment: an analysis of three internationally funded projects in MENA coun-
tries. Int J Herit Stud 28(2):133–146
Grincheva N (2023) City museums in the age of datafication: could museums be
meaningful sites of data practice in smart cities? Mus. Manag Curatorsh
38(4):367–393
Gustafsson C, Ijla A (2016) Museums: an incubator for sustainable social devel-
opment and environmental protection. Int J Dev Sustain 5(9):446–462
Gustafsson C, Ijla A (2017) Museums—a catalyst for sustainable economic
development in Sweden. Int J Innov Dev Policy Stud 5(2):1–14
Hadley S, Gray C (2017) Hyperinstrumentalism and cultural policy: means to an
end or an end to meaning? Cult Trends 26:95–106
Hamdy A, Nagib S (2022) Virtual touring exhibition position in sustainable
development strategy: applied to Egyptian dark stories. Int J Adv Stud World
Archaeol 5(1):58–82
Han H, Hyun SS (2017) Key factors maximizing art museum visitors’satisfaction,
commitment, and post-purchase intentions. Asia Pac J Tour Res
22(8):834–849
Hansson P, Öhman J (2021) Museum education and sustainable development: a
public pedagogy. Eur Educ Res J 21(3):469–483
Hebda RJ (2007) Museums, climate change and sustainability. Mus Manag Cur-
atorsh 22(4):329–336
Henry C, Carter K (2021) Communicating climate change content in small and
mid-sized museums: challenges and opportunities. J Mus Educ 46(3):321–333
Howaldt J, Hochgerner J, Franz HW (2012) Challenge social innovation: potentials
for business, social entrepreneurship, welfare and civil society. Springer,
Berlin
Huo Y, Miller D (2007) Satisfaction measurement of small tourism sector
(museum): Samoa. Asia Pac J Tour Res 12(2):103–117
Jurčišinová K, Wilders ML, Visser J (2021) The future of blockbuster exhibitions
after the COVID-19 crisis: the case of the Dutch museum sector. Mus Int
73(3-4):20–31
Kadoyama M (2018) Museums involving communities: authentic connections.
Routledge, New York
Kershaw A, Bridson K, Parris MA (2018) The muse with a wandering eye: the
influence of public value on coproduction in museums. Int J Cult Policy
26(3):344–364
Keršuliene V, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z (2010) Selection of rational dispute reso-
lution method by applying new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis
(Swara). J Bus Econ Manag 11(2):243–258
Kowalska N, Ostręga A (2020) Using SERVQUAL method to assess tourist service
quality by the example of the Silesian museum established on the post-
mining area. Land 9(9):333
Lak A, Gheitasi M, Timothy DJ (2019) Urban regeneration through heritage
tourism: cultural policies and strategic management. J Tour Cult Change
18(4):386–403
Lambert S, Henderson J (2011) The carbon footprint of museum loans: a pilot
study at Amgueddfa Cymru—national museum wales. Mus. Manag Cur-
atorsh 26(3):209–235
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
16 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Larkin J (2016) All museums will become department stores’: the development and
implications of retailing at museums and heritage sites. Archaeol Int
19(1):109–121
Lawan S, Yusuf UL (2021) Digital documentation of museum collections for sus-
tainable development. J Soc Sci Adv 2(3):85–91
Literat I (2017) Facilitating creative participation and collaboration in online
spaces: the impact of social and technological factors in enabling sustainable
engagement. Digit Creat 28(2):73–88
Liu S (2021) 2021年国际博物馆日“恢复与重塑”主题的外部解读——兼谈博物
馆践行可持续发展理念的国际趋势和中国方向[Interpretation of the
theme “recover and reimagine”for 2021 international museum day: discus-
sion on the international trend and China”s approach to sustainable devel-
opment in museums]. Palace Mus J 6:4–10+107
Loach K, Rowley J, Griffiths J (2017) Cultural sustainability as a strategy for the
survival of museums and libraries. Int J Cult Policy 23(2):186–198
Loddo M, Rosetti I, McGhie H, Pedersoli JL (2021) Empowering collections-based
organizations to participate in agenda 2030: the “our collections matter
toolkit”. Sustainability 13(24):13964
Long S (2013) Practicing civic engagement: making your museum into a com-
munity living room. J Mus Educ 38(2):141–153
Maher J, Clark J, Motley D (2011) Measuring museum service quality in rela-
tionship to visitor membership: the case of a children”s museum. Int J Arts
Manag 13:29–42
Málaga LR, Brown K (2019) Museums as tools for sustainable community devel-
opment: four archaeological museums in Northern Peru. Mus Int 71(3-
4):60–75
Maniya K, Bhatt MG (2010) A selection of material using a novel type decision-
making method: preference selection index method. Mater Des
31(4):1785–1789
Manna R, Palumbo R (2018) What makes a museum attractive to young people?
Evidence from Italy. Int J Tour Res 20(4):508–517
Markovic S, Jankovic SR, KomšićJ (2013) Museum service quality measurement
using the HISTOQUAL model. In: Proceeding 2nd International scientific
conference tourism in South East Europe
Markovska-Simoska S, Pop-Jordanov J, Pop-Jordanova N, Markovska N (2013)
Organizational attention deficit as sustainability indicator: assessment and
management. Industrija 41:75–89
McGhie H (2019) Museums and the sustainable development goals: a how-to guide
for museums, galleries, the cultural sector and their partners. Curating
Tomorrow, UK
McGhie H (2020) Evolving climate change policy and museums. Mus. Manag
Curatorsh 35(6):653–662
McGhie H, Harrison R, Sterling C (2022) Museums and the Paris Agreement:
reimagining museums for climate action. In: Proceedings of the UMAC-
NATHIST-ICME-ICR 2022 joint annual Conference “The Power of muse-
ums: sustainability”. ICOM UMAC-NATHIST-ICME-ICR, 87
Mendoza HM, Talavera AS (2017) Museos y participación en destinos turísticos:
dinámicas de sostenibilidad. RITUR-Rev Iberoam Tur 7:137–166
Merriman N (2008) Museum collections and sustainability. Cult Trends 17(1):3–21
Morgan J, Macdonald S (2020) De-growing museum collections for new heritage
futures. Int J Herit Stud 26(1):56–70
Murphy O, Villaespesa E (2020) AI: a museum planning toolkit. Goldsmiths,
University of London, London
Navarrete T (2020) Digitization in museums. In: Bille T, Mignosa A, Towse R
(eds.) Teaching cultural economics. Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton,
pp 204–213
Navarro JLA, Martínez MEA, Jiménez JAM (2019) An approach to measuring
sustainable tourism at the local level in Europe. Curr Issues Tour
23(4):423–437
Neupane R (2016) Effects of sustainable tourism on sustainable community
development in coastal regions in the United Kingdom. Int J Soc Sci Manag
3(1):47–59
OECD (2003) OECD environmental indicators: development measurement and
use. OECD, Paris
Papadamou T, Gavrilakis C, Tsolakidis C, Liarakou G (2010) Education for sus-
tainable development through the use of the second life: the case of a virtual
museum for sharks. In: Lytras MD, Ordonez De Pablos P, Avison D, Sipior J,
Jin Q, Leal W, Uden L, Thomas M, Cervai S, Horner D (eds.) Technology
enhanced learning Quality of teaching and educational reform. Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 316–323
Pencarelli T, Cerquetti M, Splendiani S (2016) The sustainable management of
museums: an Italian perspective. Tour Hosp Manag 22(1):29–46
Plaza B, Haarich SN (2013) The Guggenheim museum Bilbao: between regional
embeddedness and global networking. Eur Plan Stud 23(8):1456–1475
Pop IL, Borza A (2015) Sustainable museums for sustainable development. Adv
Bus Relat Sci Res J 6(2):119–131
Pop IL, Borza A (2016) Technological innovations in museums as a source of
competitive advantage. In: Oprean C, Tîtu MA (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd
international scientific conference samro 2016: news, challenges and trends in
management of knowledge-based organizations. Editura Tehnică, Bucharest,
Romania, pp 398–405
Pop IL, Borza A, Buiga A, Ighian D, Toader R (2019) Achieving cultural sus-
tainability in museums: a step toward sustainable development. Sustainability
11(4):970
Pop IL, Hahn RF, Radulescu CM (2018) Sustainable development as a source of
competitive advantiage: an empirical research study in museums. UTMS J
Econ. 9(1):73–83
Preuss U (2016) Sustainable digitalization of cultural heritage—report on initiatives
and projects in Brandenburg, Germany. Sustainability 8(9):891
Prottas N (2021) Museum education in a time of crises. J Mus Educ 46(4):399–401
Rapport D, Friend A (1979) Towards a comprehensive framework for environ-
mental statistics: a stress-response approach. Projet d”etablissement d”un
systeme general d”information sur l”environnement au Canada. Minister of
Supply and Services, Canada
Rentschler R, Gilmore A (2002) Museums: discovering services marketing. Int J
Arts Manag 5(1):62–72
Reussner EM (2003) Strategic management for visitor-oriented museums. Int J
Cult Policy 9(1):95–108
Rivero P, Navarro-Neri I, García-Ceballos S, Aso B (2020) Spanish archaeological
museums during COVID-19 (2020): an edu-communicative analysis of their
activity on Twitter through the sustainable development goals. Sustainability
12(19):8224
Samis P, Michaelson M (2017) Creating the visitor-centered museum. Routledge,
New York
Schaltegger S, Wagner M (2011) Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability
innovation: categories and interactions. Bus Strategy Environ 20(4):222–237
Senapati T, Yager RR (2020) Fermatean fuzzy sets. J Ambient Intell Humaniz
Comput 11(2):663–674
Sharif-Askari H, Abu-Hijleh B (2018) Review of museums’indoor environment
conditions studies and guidelines and their impact on the museums’artifacts
and energy consumption. Build Environ 143:186–195
Sobocińska M (2019) The role of marketing in cultural institutions in the context of
assumptions of sustainable development concept—a polish case study. Sus-
tainability 11(11):3188
StevićŽ, Pamučar D, Puška A, Chatterjee P (2020) Sustainable supplier selection in
healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: measurement of alter-
natives and ranking according to COmpromise solution (MARCOS). Com-
put Ind Eng 140:106231
Stylianou-Lambert T, Boukas N, Christodoulou-Yerali M (2014) Museums and
cultural sustainability: stakeholders, forces, and cultural policies. Int J Cult
Policy 20(5):566–587
Sutter GC (2008) Promoting sustainability: audience and curatorial perspectives on
the human factor. Curator Mus J 51(2):187–202
Sutter GC, Sperlich T, Worts D, Rivard R, Teather L (2016) Fostering cultures of
sustainability through community-engaged museums: the history and re-
emergence of ecomuseums in Canada and the USA. Sustainability 8(12):1310
Sutton S (2020) The evolving responsibility of museum work in the time of climate
change. Mus Manag Curatorsh 35(6):618–635
Swarbrooke J (2015) Built attractions and sustainability. In: Hall CM, Gossling S,
Scott D (eds) The Routledge handbook of tourism and sustainability. Rou-
tledge, Abingdon, pp 356–364
Tsai PH, Lin CT (2018) How should national museums create competitive
advantage following changes in the global economic environment? Sustain-
ability 10(10):3749
Valtysson B, Nilsson SL, Pedersen CE (2021) Reaching out to be in reach. Museum
communication in the current museum zeitgeist. Nord Mus 31(1):8
Villaespesa E, Murphy O (2021) This is not an apple! Benefits and challenges of
applying computer vision to museum collections. Mus Manag Curatorsh
36(4):362–383
Villeneuve P (2013) Building museum sustainability through visitor-centered
exhibition practises. Int J Incl Mus 5(4):37–50
Wang YC, Chiou SC (2018) An analysis of the sustainable development of
environmental education provided by museums. Sustainability 10(11):4054
Weil SE (2007) Beyond big and awesome: outcome-based evaluation. In: Sandell R,
Janes RR (eds.) Museum management and marketing. Routledge, Abingdon,
pp 214–223
Worts D (1998) On museums, culture and sustainable development. In: Ferera L
(ed.) Museums and sustainable communities: Canadian perspectives. ICOM
Canada, Québec, pp 21–27
Zbuchea A, Bira M (2020) Does stakeholder management contribute to a muse-
um’s sustainable development? Manag Dyn Knowl Econ 8(1):95–107
Zhang H, Xu F, Lu L, Yu P (2017) The spatial agglomeration of museums, a case
study in London. J Herit Tour 12(2):172–190
Zollinger R (2021) Being for somebody: museum inclusion during COVID-19. Art
Educ 74(4):10–12
Zollinger R, DiCindio C (2021) Community ecology: museum education and the
digital divide during and after COVID-19. J Mus Educ 46(4):481–492
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z ARTICLE
HUMANITIES AND SOC IAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z 17
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Acknowledgements
We greatly appreciate the assistance provided by Zhejiang Natural History Museum. This
study includes valuable contributions from Hongming Yan, Guoying Lan, Laishun An,
Shouyong Pan, Mingbin Li, Yang Huang, Hanze Song.
Author contributions
Siyi Wang: Writing-original draft, Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization,
Supervision, Review & editing. Liying Yu: Methodology, Investigation, Validation,
Review & editing. Yuan Rong: Writing-original draft, Methodology, Investigation,
Validation, Review & editing.
Ethical approval
This research is conducted as part of the research program supported by the China
Center for International People-to-People Exchange, Ministry of Education. The study
has undergone examination and supervision by the Ethical Committee of Shanghai
University. It has been granted approval under the reference number 2023WHLY1034.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all participants before the data was collected. We
informed each participant of their rights, the purpose of the study, and to safeguard their
personal information.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Supplementary information The online version contains supplementary material
available at https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to Yuan Rong.
Reprints and permission information is available at http://www.nature.com/reprints
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License,
which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any
medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and
the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified
the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted
material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material
in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated
otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s
Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory reg-
ulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the
copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
© The Author(s) 2024
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
18 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024) 11:982 | https://doi.org /10.1057/s41599-024-03437-z
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com
