France. In September 1994, a conference on reserves, organized by the Museum of Arts and Crafts, marked the beginning of a long reflection. This conference accompanied the museum’s outsourced reserves project in Seine-Saint-Denis, the first project of this kind for a national museum, still cited as an example today because of its dimensions (8,000 square meters). The deputy director of the Louvre Conservation Center (CCL) in Liévin, Marie-Lys Marguerite, describes these reserves opened in 1994 as “one of the models for all outsourced reserves” (the CCL is 19,000 square meters, including 9,500 in reserves). In 2014, a report from the Cultural Affairs Commission of the National Assembly studied the situation of French museums by writing a long chapter in the reserves, a sign that the subject had become critical. Finally in 2024, the International Council of Museums (Icom) devoted a report and an international conference to museum reserves, with the observation that “the situation of the reserves is evaluated quite unfavorably by the majority of the museums questioned, in particular (…) the lack of space and the lack of equipment”. After remaining in the shadows for several decades, the issue of museum reserves is therefore becoming central. Because the reserves are not simple secure storage spaces, and since the law of January 2002 on museums, they are an integral part of the scientific and cultural project of the establishments. At the Museum of the Saint-Roch hospice in Issoudun where the second storage building has just been inaugurated, director Patrice Moreau specifies that “the reserves project was included in the PSC in 2019”.
Not enough space to accommodate new works
Among the problems raised by museum directors, the lack of space comes up regularly and this is one of the main arguments of the 2014 parliamentary report and that of Icom. The 2014 report highlights the constant growth of collections through acquisitions and the inalienability which prevents works from being transferred or sold. Added to this are sometimes large donations, as in Issoudun where Patrice Moreau points out“a donation of monumental sculptures” which could not integrate the first saturated reserves. Alexandre Estaquet-Legrand, director of Mudo, Oise museum (Beauvais), indicates a similar risk linked to a large donation of ceramics in terms of the number of pieces. However, it would be simplistic to look at the reserves only from this angle, because they also contribute to the conservation missions of museums, as well as to the obligatory ten-year review. It is not uncommon for the subject of reserves to resurface during major renovation work, during a collections project, or even both. Robert Blaizeau, director of the Réunion des musées métropolitains (RMN) of Rouen, explains that “ the work at the Beauvoisine museum led to the moving of the collections and a reshuffling of the reserves” associated with a conservation center project. Another problem is the scattering of reserves in several places: the Louvre before the CCL stored its collections in sixty-seven reserves distributed within the Louvre itself and several warehouses in the Paris region. Many museums are faced with the problem of renting private reserves, mainly also located in Île-de-France: the three Rouen museums concerned by the Beauvoisine center (500,000 pieces) currently have several outsourced reserves “ including one in the Paris region”, according to Robert Blaizeau. In the 2000s, the National Museum of Modern Art rented reserves in the north of Paris for 2 million euros annually, a cost highlighted by the 2014 report. The conservation conditions for works or objects can also be poor, particularly in historic monuments where the building imposes constraints. At the Château de Blois, the Museum of Fine Arts has reserves on site, some of which are not suitable: the director Bastien Lopez explains that the furniture is “stored on the top floor of the François I wing, without elevator”. The Mudo, which has had external reserves since 2015-2016, previously stored works under the attic of the Saint-Pierre wing of the episcopal palace, a part of the museum that Alexandre Estaquet-Legrand describes as “real thermal sieve”.
Pooling reserves, a common sense solution
The numerous reserve expansion projects reveal two strong trends: outsourcing and pooling. The 2014 report advocated both, while conceding that not all museums were equal in financial and logistical terms. Pooling has many advantages, particularly financial: in France, 82% of museums are managed by a local authority, and bringing together the collections of local museums and conservation activities in the same place seems rational. This is the choice of Marseille, Nancy, Reims, Rouen, Tours, Strasbourg and Rennes in recent years, like most cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants. Note that in Hauts-de-France where there are dozens of museums, the pooling of reserves remains rare for reasons of management of supervisory authorities (a study by the DRAC Hauts-de-France on the pooling of reserves, initiated in parallel with the CCL announcement, remained a dead letter). Some urban communities and departments have also chosen pooling, such as Quimper for the museums of Finistère in 2013, and the Department of Nord for the museums of four municipalities of La Porte du Hainaut in 2024. The case of national museums is different, because until now they chose to build their own reserves (Louvre, Mucem, Arts et Métiers). A recent exception to note: the Center Pompidou and the Musée national Picasso Paris joined forces to build reserves in Massy, included in a conservation center with cultural programming. Other museums are adapting, freeing up space within their establishments or building small outsourced reserves (Musée du Pays de Cocagne in Lavaur).
Reserves of the Blois Museum.
© F. Christophe
The financial question remains central in these projects which can reach several million euros: are elected officials aware of the importance of financing reserves? In Rouen, where the reserves and the conservation center will cost 7 million euros, Robert Blaizeau reports no opposition from local elected officials, “even if a museum reserves project does not bring immediate political visibility”. Same support in Issoudun, where Patrice Moreau notes that“the city supports the museum and gives it the means to preserve the collections”. In Massy, on the other hand, the Center Pompidou project arouses criticism from the municipal opposition, which questions the financing: the City will contribute 21 million euros out of 69 million, while the building will belong to the State. The financial cost sometimes leads communities to delay these projects for several years, with consequences on the works in reserve or inconsistencies with museum policy (reserves of the Troyes museums).
One way to make reserves profitable in the eyes of elected officials is to open them to visitors, but this comes up against security requirements in buildings. The situation may vary depending on whether the reserves are located in a new building (Reims) or in an old converted warehouse (Strasbourg museums). From its conception, the Mucem planned a 950 square meter room within the reserves to exhibit selections of works. Marie-Charlotte Calafat, scientific director and director of collections, recalls that “any visitor can request to consult works in reserve in the reading room”, like the functioning of libraries and archives. This opening to the public implies “special arrangements, adapted circulation spaces, as well as a presentation of objects in open boxes”. The CCL of the Louvre is not open to visits except during European Heritage Days, on the grounds that the nearby Louvre-Lens opens its reserves to visitors.
Reserves generally remain confined places, because the atmosphere must be controlled (hygrometry, dust, mold, light, pests). Most reserves are organized by materials and dimensions, with works made of organic materials and monumental works being by nature more complicated to preserve. At the CCL, the deputy director specifies that the reserve of large format paintings “ was designed to accommodate the largest canvas kept in the museum, Interior of Westminster Abbey in Londonby Alaux » (66 meters by 19, stored rolled). In comparison, mineralogy or lapidary collections are simpler to preserve despite the number of pieces, because they do not require a controlled climate.
The issue of shelving
The curators’ thoughts also concern the furniture in the reserves and the type of shelving: Marie-Lys Marguerite specifies that the electrically moved shelves (compactus) limit vibrations as much as possible, because their installation was integrated into the construction packages with the floor slabs. Patrice Moreau explains having ordered for the Saint-Roch Hospice Museum “extractable picture grids measuring three by four meters specifically for large formats in the first reserves of the museum”. Robert Blaizeau, for his part, cites the need to carry out a soil load-bearing study for very heavy loads (more than 900 kilograms per square meter). Finally, all the establishment directors underline the issue of packaging areas and transit areas, which take up space while facilitating handling in a context of increasing temporary exhibitions. However, not all the works and objects in reserve are intended to be exhibited, and the reserves also preserve objects for their scientific interest: museum reserves must therefore be organized to maintain a balance between conservation, study and valorization.
