During the past decade, the museum has undergone an interesting transition. Whereas the museum has traditionally, and some museums still are, concerned with the conservation of objects, the ‘post-museum’ (Hooper-Greenhill, 2007) prioritises construction of meaning and resources of learning through activities of display and interpretation. As pointed out by Hooper-Greenhill (2007), these interpretive processes can be described as the ‘curriculum’ of the museum. In the informal education space of the museum, learning has potential to be set in an immersive context of spectacle and materiality and to be bodily engaged and open-ended, individually directed and unpredictable (Hooper-Greenhill, 2007). The museum space thus has potential to embrace individuals that do not ‘fit in’ to the educational codes of conduct and practises of the formal schooling system. As museums gradually constitute their sites as organisations for public participation rather than institutions used to merely exhibit objects, involvement of external participants in exhibition development has become an increasingly accepted approach amongst museum professionals (Lynch 2011; Parry 2007; Peers and Brown 2003). In this paper, we review empirical studies concerning participatory exhibition development, with regards to methods, degrees of participation, rationales, obstacles, and facilitating factors.

Participatory exhibition development refers to actively involving individuals who are not part of the museum staff in different stages of exhibition development, such as narration and idea generation, object selection, exhibition space, and overall concepts and approaches (Davies 2010). Simon (2010) argued that participation in cultural institutions can help enhance the institution’s relevance and accessibility; support visitors in the personal meaning-making process while they visit the museum; as well as help inform and invigorate the design process, and the exhibitions and programs that meet the public. Simon (2010) further argued that participation can address public frustrations about museum visits, such as museums being personally irrelevant, difficult to interpret, exclusive, and unable to provide comfortable, creative, and social spaces in which people might express themselves. Lynch (2011) contended that involving external participants might be the only way for museums to create new reflective practices for programme and exhibition development to match their visitors’ interests and ideas.

In this paper, we present an analysis of seven empirically based papers and proceedings found through an extensive literature search. These studies provide an insight into and overview of the current practice and rationales for participatory exhibition development in museums, following an identified need for further research regarding why museums should involve external participants (Davies 2010). Based on this, we formulate directions for future practice, policy, and research for participatory exhibit development. We argue that fulfilling the participatory potential of curatorship in museums in turn may provide not only an engaging, socially inclusive, educational space, but also a process that sui generis is educational for both external participants and the professional staff.

Carmel, E., Whitaker, R. D., and George, J. F. 1993. ‘PD and joint application design: a transatlantic comparison." Communications of the ACM 36(6): 40–48. doi: 10.1145/153571.163265. Cornwall, A. and Gaventa, J. 2000. “From usersUsers and choosersChoosers to makersMakers and shapers repositioning participationShapers Repositioning Participation in social policy”, IDS Bulletin 31(5): 50–62. doi: 10.1111/j.1759-5436.2000.mp31004006.x. Davies, S. M. 2010. "The co-production of temporary museum exhibitions." Museum Management and Curatorship 25(3): 305–321. doi: 10.1080/09647775.2010.498988. Greenbaum, J. 1993. "PD a personal statement." Communications of the ACM 36(6): 47. doi: 10.1145/153571.214816. Hart, R. A. 1997. Children’s Participation: The Theory and Practice of Involving Young Citizens in Community Development and Environmental Care. London: Earthscan. Hooper-Greenhill, E. 2000. ”Changing values in the art museum: rethinking communication and learning”. International Journal of Heritage Studies 6(1): 9–31. doi: 10.1080/135272500363715. Hooper-Greenhill, E. 2007. Museums and Education: Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance (Third Edition). Routledge. Iversen, O. S. and Smith, R. C. 2012. Scandinavian Participatory Design – Dialogic Curation with Teenagers. Proceedings for IDC 2012. Bremen, Germany. Kujala, S. 2003. "User involvement: a review of the benefits and challenges." Behaviour & Information Technology 22(1): 1–16. doi: 10.1080/01449290301782. Lynch, B. T. 2011. "Custom-made reflective practice: can museums realise their capabilities in helping others realise theirs?" Museum Management and Curatorship 26(5): 441–458. doi: 10.1080/09647775.2011.621731. Mazzone, E., Read, J. C., and Beal, R. 2011. Towards a Framework of Co-design Sessions with Children. Proceedings of Human–Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2011 – 13th IFIP TC 13th International Conference. Lisbon, Portugal. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., and the PRISMA group. 2009. “Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement“ PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. Parry, R. 2007. Recoding the Museum: Digital Heritage and the Technologies of Change. London: Routledge. Peers, L. L. and Brown, A. K. 2003. Museums and source communities: A Routledge Reader. London: Routledge. Simon, N. 2010. The Participatory Museum, Santa Cruz, California: Museum 2.0. Taxén, G. 2004. Introducing Participatory Design in Museums. Proceedings of PDC. ACM, New York, USA.