The International Council of Museums is preparing a double issue of Museum International dedicated to artificial intelligence in museums. It will be volume 79, numbers 315 and 316, and is scheduled for publication with Taylor & Francis/Routledge in December 2027. The call opened on 3 September 2026 and accepts proposals until 9 November.
This is not directed solely at university researchers. ICOM also invites museum practitioners, technologists, artists, and policymakers. This detail is significant: the issue seeks to examine what occurs when artificial intelligence enters cataloguing, collection management, conservation, exhibitions, education, visitor services, or the very organisation of museums. Professional experience and case studies have a place alongside academic research.
The call stems from a concern broader than the utility of a tool. Museums act as institutions of cultural authority and public trust. Automating a description, training a system with collections, or incorporating a conversational interface does not merely modify a task: it may change who classifies, what knowledge becomes visible, what errors are reproduced, and to whom the institution is accountable.
Themes sought
The list proposed by ICOM is broad and not exhaustive. It includes:
- Automated cataloguing, documentation, provenance work, and collection management.
- Public databases that integrate collections from different institutions;
- generative artificial intelligence in the development and interpretation of exhibitions.
- Museum education, visitor guides, chatbots, and conversational interfaces.
- Visitor experience, digital participation, accessibility, and inclusion.
- Digital preservation, long-term management, and conservation science.
- Algorithmic bias, representation, and the decolonisation of digital collections.
- Copyright, intellectual property, and the provenance of AI-generated content.
- Environmental sustainability and computational costs.
- Indigenous, community, or sacred knowledge incorporated into AI systems.
- Collaboration between humans and AI systems in curatorship or artistic creation.
- Transparency, accountability, and institutional policies.
- Case studies on the implementation of AI in museums and cultural institutions.
It is not necessary to cover several of these issues. A focused proposal often allows for a better question. It can start, for example, from a specific exhibition, an institutional policy, a documentation problem, a trial with visitors, or a decision regarding images and rights.
Submission requirements
The first submission is not the full article. Authors must send a self-contained abstract of between 250 and 300 words, excluding selected references, in a Word document. The Spanish version of the call describes this as ‘approximately 300 words’, while the English version specifies the 250–300-word range. It must not contain images or footnotes.
The document must contain:
- The proposed title.
- The name of the author.
- A brief indication of their professional background.
- Up to five keywords.
- A selection of the main references.
The abstract must also set out seven elements, although it is not mandatory to present them under these exact headings:
- Introduction: the subject and its context.
- Research question or critical issue: the problem being studied and the gap it intends to address.
- Contribution: what new perspective the proposal offers.
- Methodology: how the problem has been investigated or will be addressed.
- Conclusion: what result has been obtained or what the analysis allows one to argue.
- Selected references: only the main sources.
- Keywords: a maximum of five.
The call uses the word innovation, but does not demand a grandiose promise of novelty. It suffices to identify with precision what the text contributes: an undocumented case, a comparison, usage data, a critical reading, a methodology, or the evaluation of an institutional practice.
How to prepare the abstract
There is no room in 300 words for a general introduction to artificial intelligence. Begin with the specific problem. One possible structure is as follows:
- 40–50 words: context and problem;
- 40–50 words: question and gap justifying the article;
- 50–60 words: case, materials, or methodology;
- 70–90 words: main finding or argument;
- 30–40 words: relevance for other museums, practitioners, or policy.
References and keywords are submitted separately. The distribution is indicative: it serves to prevent the context from occupying all the space and leaving unexplained what was done, what was found, or why it matters.
A solid abstract should allow these questions to be answered without resorting to the future article:
- What case or practice is being examined?
- What is the specific problem?
- What materials or data have been used?
- What does the article contribute that has not already been stated?
- What conclusion can be supported?
- Why should it interest the international museum community?
If the proposal stems from professional experience, it is advisable to separate description and assessment. It is not enough to state that a tool was useful, innovative, or problematic. One must explain what task it performed, with what data, under what supervision, what criteria allowed it to be evaluated, and what limitations emerged.
Writing from practice
The call for papers presents an opportunity to document decisions that rarely reach journals: how automatically generated descriptions are reviewed, how sensitive terms in a catalogue are managed, how visitors are informed, who is held accountable for incorrect attribution, which rights permit the use of an image, or what additional workload is placed upon staff when a supposedly automatic tool is introduced.
Experiences that did not conclude successfully are also welcome. A cancelled project, an abandoned trial, or a policy that necessitated the withdrawal of a feature can offer more insight than a promotional presentation. It is essential that the case is described with sufficient data, that its limitations are visible, and that institutional communication is not conflated with evaluation.
For artists and curators, potential angles include the authorship of works created with generative systems, the use of collections for training, transparency within the gallery, the conservation of pieces dependent on external models and services, or the relationship between automation and cultural labour. For researchers and institutional leaders, topics may include governance, bias, historical accuracy, accessibility, sustainability, and public trust.
The guide Artificial intelligence in exhibitions and institutions gathers part of the practical and legal framework that may assist in defining a proposal, although the submitted article must formulate its own question and methodology.
Language, selection, and schedule
Abstracts may be submitted in English, French or Spanish. Museum International is published in English, but ICOM also accepts full articles in its other two official languages, French and Spanish.
Abstracts will be assessed anonymously by a panel of experts. If a proposal is selected, ICOM will provide guidelines for the full article and allow approximately two months to complete it. The English version of the call specifies that the article will then undergo double-blind peer review.
Participation is voluntary and unpaid. The English version describes participation as voluntary, while the Spanish version expressly states that contributions are unpaid. This should form part of the decision to submit: preparing a short proposal may open an international conversation and document an experience, but the work involved in writing and revision is not financially compensated.
Submission
The abstract must be sent to publications@icom.museum in a Word document before 9 November 2026. The call does not specify a deadline time. As a precaution, it is advisable not to wait until the end of the day or to assume a specific time zone.
The email should clearly identify the call for papers and attach a single document containing the abstract and the requested details. If a confirmation of receipt is not received within two weeks, ICOM itself recommends following up.
Before sending it, I would check:
- That the abstract is between 250 and 300 words, excluding references.
- That it is self-contained.
- That it contains no images or footnotes.
- That it poses a specific question.
- That it explains the contribution and the methodology.
- That it does not promise results that the work cannot yet substantiate.
- That it includes a title, authorship, professional background, references, and up to five keywords.
- That the file name identifies the proposal.
The call does not request a general opinion on artificial intelligence. It requests an article that assists in understanding what changes in museums when these systems enter their collections, their exhibitions, their relationship with the public, or the way they produce authority. There is still time to formulate that question with precision.
About the open conversation
This note summarises an official call for papers and adds practical criteria for preparing the abstract. It plays no part in the selection process and does not replace ICOM's instructions. If you intend to submit a proposal, work in museums, or have researched any of these applications and wish to share an approach, write to me.
Sources
ICOM, “Call for papers Museum International: ‘Artificial Intelligence in Museums’”, 3 September 2026.