Museum accreditation is a process in which an independent organization or institution assesses and confirms that a museum meets specific standards and quality criteria. It is an important tool in the museum sector that allows for the elevation of standards, ensuring professionalism, and building public trust. There are various museum accreditation systems worldwide, and each country or region may have its own procedures and criteria. The most well-known museum accreditation systems include the British solution (UK Accreditation Scheme) and the American one (Accreditation and Excellence Programs), both confirming the high level of quality of accredited museums based on standards in museum management, collection management, educational program implementation, audience research, and other aspects of museum operations.

Solutions that can be classified as quality-related standardization activities in the field of museum management have been implemented for years in other countries or regions. These include, for example, the museum accreditation program in the Canadian province of Alberta (Museum Accreditation Recognized Museum Program) and the Australian program (Museum Accreditation Program). Some programs in this area take the form of an awarded quality mark, such as the Museum Quality Mark in Austria (Österreichisches Museumsgütesiegel) or the Museums of France (Musée de France).

It's worth noting that each accreditation system has its unique criteria and standards, but in most cases, they are based on fundamental principles of museum management, collection care, education, and audience engagement. Accreditation is typically valid for a specific period, after which the museum must undergo a reevaluation process to maintain that status.

The process of certifying museums, which involves confirmation by an independent organization or institution that a museum meets specific quality standards or achieves goals according to specified requirements, can be observed in current standardization or accreditation solutions. It serves various purposes and is a crucial tool that helps museums elevate professional standards and build public trust. Among the benefits of museum certification, key considerations include confirming a high level of museum professionalism, promotional aspects, and developmental potential. Additionally, important elements may involve access to additional funds, such as public grants for certified museums or support from private entities interested in collaborating with a certified museum. Certification can be voluntary or required by relevant authorities or industry organizations. It may be conducted by various entities, including industry associations, regional authorities, cultural institutes, or international organizations. The ultimate benefits and significance of certification depend on the specific context and standards defined by the certifying organization.

Furthermore, there are publications addressing the process of parameterization and quantification of museum activities, often understood in the form of studies on museum effectiveness. For example, parameterization in the field of higher education was a kind of assessment of institutional potential using numerical data, intended to facilitate comparative analyses that highlight the best academic units. In the course of the study, no analogous system was identified regarding the functioning of museums.

In the study, I also paid attention to the process of evaluating museum activities because this approach often underlies various systems. The evaluative approach is a significant management tool that allows for a better understanding of the effectiveness of museum activities, identification of strengths, and the implementation of corrective or developmental actions. It also encompasses the essence of organizational improvement by adapting museum activities to the changing needs and expectations of local communities or broader visitor groups.

The starting point of this study is the acknowledgment that there is no ideal standardization process for all museums. It is crucial to remember that accreditation/standardization is not solely a program for validating institutions; these processes serve broader societal goals through education, information exchange, and continuous improvement.

Methodology
The aim of this paper is to explore quality-related standardization activities of cultural institutions based on the example of museum accreditation systems. I look in particular how and to what extent the different adaptations to museum accreditation confront existing public museum policies in different European countries. I also ask in what manner the implemented measures affect the museum activity evaluation in the respective countries.
In the study, I utilized the method of analyzing existing data, examining the websites of museum management entities in various countries, reports on the evaluation and standardization of museums. An important part of the research involved reviewing scientific literature on museum evaluation, the formal assessment of museum institutions as well as in-depth interviews with expoerts managing these programmes in the selected countries. The study formulated the following research questions: What standardization and/or accreditation mechanisms operate in the field of museums in the discussed countries? Is there a connection between existing standardization and/or accreditation systems and museum funding?
It's important to note that the methodology involves a comprehensive approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative elements to gain insights into the standardization and accreditation landscape in the museum sector across different countries.
I view museum accreditation systems as public policy initiatives aimed at promoting and upholding quality standards in museum operation. Models for assessing the activities of museums have been divided into the following categories: accreditation and development, evaluative, and monitoring. Therefore, the analysis focuses on the implementation of museum accreditation programmes in 4 countries including The Netherlands, Finland, Danemark and Great Britain. These countries represent a cross-section of European countries showing a diverse picture of the development of accreditation schemes.

This analysis is based on official accreditation policy documents from the regional and country level in selected countires. For each country, a policy mapping was done. The first stage consists of a country-specific mapping in the field of (1) general public policy measures and initiatives that included and affected the museum sector, (2) accreditation schemes specifically targeting the museum sector in selected countries. This first-stage mapping also includes a general mapping of museum public policy principles in these countries, including the structure and management of public museum organisations, public funding between levels of government, the relation to the EU cultural policy. The second stage of mapping is an analytical mapping, where country-focused analyses are formulated. They form an important part of the basis for the discussion of the article.

The main challenge during the study was the significant dispersion of data and terminological ambiguity. The formal assessment of institutions takes different forms in individual countries, exhibiting distinct characteristics that are related to diverse models of managing and financing museum institutions. Within the realm of formal evaluation, processes of normalizing museum activities, as well as standardization and accreditation, may be included. These processes aim to build trust in standardized or certified products and services, as well as accredited entities, serving as tools for objectifying the quality of products, services, competencies, or institutions.