Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Room
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Justice frameworks for the repatriation of cultural and natural heritage are evolving to address historical injustices, promote reconciliation, and foster ethical relations among stakeholders. Repatriation often intersects with discussions about restitution, recognition, and reconciliation, guided by principles of justice, equity, and respect for human rights. While legal frameworks are important, diplomatic channels and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) have emerged as preferred strategies for negotiating repatriation claims. These approaches offer flexibility, mitigate the risks and costs of litigation, and allow for case-specific solutions that balance the interests of all parties involved.
What does justice look like after the looting and theft of cultural and natural heritage? This paper critically examines the conceptual frameworks that shape current repatriation efforts and attempt to achieve ‘justice’, focusing on restorative, transitional, and epistemic justice frameworks. By deconstructing different justice frameworks, we can start to identify the limitations of current legislation, policies and systems. However, these frameworks alone may not be sufficient to achieve lasting justice. This paper introduces transformative justice as a new lens for rethinking heritage ownership and knowledge creation. Unlike restorative or transitional models that focus on repairing individual injustices, transformative justice challenges and dismantles the very structures that enable cultural and environmental dispossession, advocating for the redistribution of power, decolonization of heritage narratives, and prioritization of source communities’ voices and needs. By moving beyond repatriation to structural change, transformative justice offers a path toward long-term equity and systemic change in heritage discourse.