This article asks a simple question: Is cultural property a coherent concept? It answers this question through a critical examination of the concepts of cultural and property that builds on the work of Alan Audi. The article examines concepts of property and culture as they have developed separately in political theory. It suggests that arguments about cultural property are shaped by the discursive structure of the public/private divide. On this basis, the structure of cultural property arguments are critically examined. Then conclusions are drawn about the role of the public/private divide in structuring the tension between culture and property. It is concluded that this tension that defines the concept of cultural property.

The Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions was agreed upon with an overwhelming majority and after the swiftest ratification process in the history of the UNESCO entered into force on 18 March 2007. Now, five years later and with some 130 Members committed to implementing the convention, not only observers with a particular interest in the topic but also the broader public may be eager to know what has happened and in how far has the implementation progress advanced. This is the question that animates this article. It seeks to answer it by giving a brief background to the UNESCO Convention, clarifying its legal status and impact, as well as by looking at the current implementation activities in domestic and international contexts. The article sets this analysis in the frame of international regime complexity insights.

The illicit antiquities trade is composed of a diverse population of participants that gives the appearance of complexity; however, using the network paradigm, a simple underlying structure is revealed based on specific geographical, economic, political, and cultural rules. This article uses a wide range of source material to chart interactions from source to market using a criminal network approach. Interchangeable participants are connected through single interactions to form loosely based networks. These flexible network structures explain the variability observed within the trade, as well as provide the basis behind ongoing debates about the roles of organized crime, terrorism, and the Internet in antiquities trafficking. Finally, a network understanding of trade's organization allows for anticipation, though not necessarily prediction, of antiquities trafficking and offers the opportunity to develop new strategies for combating the trade.

The country of Solomon Islands, like most Pacific island nations, has a legally pluralistic regime. That is, customary law operates in parallel with the common law, a legacy of Solomon Islands' colonial past. Legal pluralism raises significant difficulties, including in the way cultural heritage is protected and managed. To date, the courts have rarely been called on to deal with such issues, but in 2010 the High Court had to examine legislation designed to regulate the recovery and export of World War II relics. This seemingly innocuous case raised a number of issues concerning the rights of different stakeholders to this material. Moreover, it raised a foundational question as to whether these relics might be considered cultural heritage, and if so, just whose heritage it was. A consideration of this case and the legislation that applies to this heritage serves to illustrate some of the difficulties that arise in protecting cultural heritage within pluralistic legal systems.

Singapore is not well known for its archaeological heritage. In fact, chance finds in the early twentieth century and systematic archaeological excavations since the 1980s conducted at sites around the Singapore River have unearthed artifacts shedding light on the island's early history. In addition, the value of archaeology for a deeper knowledge of Singapore's British colonial past is increasingly being recognized. Nonetheless, Singapore law provides only a rudimentary framework to facilitate archaeological investigations and protect cultural artifacts. This article considers how the National Heritage Board Act (Cap. 196A, 1994 Rev. Ed.), the Planning Act (Cap. 232, 1998 Rev. Ed.), and the recent Preservation of Monuments Board Act 2009 (No. 16 of 2009, now Cap. 239, 2011 Rev. Ed.) may be strengthened in this regard.

Charles Byrne was an eighteenth-century celebrity “Irish giant” who requested burial upon nearing death, but whose corpse was procured against his wishes by the surgeon John Hunter. Hunter reduced Byrne's corpse to its skeleton and exhibited it as the centerpiece of his vast anatomical collection. It has since remained on display in the Hunterian Museum, London. In 2011 it was announced that research conducted on the skeleton's DNA has revealed that several Northern Irish families share a common ancestry with Byrne. This article considers the legal issues raised by Byrne's story. The results of fieldwork undertaken by the author in Byrne's native townland are also discussed, where folk tradition suggests that Byrne wished to be buried foremost at a local site remembered today as “the Giant's Grave.”

In December 2000, a World Indigenous Peoples Forum was held in conjunction with the 24th session of UNESCO's World Heritage Committee in Cairns, Australia. Representatives from Australia, Canada, and New Zealand harnessed the momentum of these events and their location to propose the formation of a new committee, the World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE). The initiative was taken in response to concerns voiced by indigenous peoples to their lack of involvement in the development and implementation of laws, policies, and plans for the protection of their knowledge, traditions, and cultural values, which apply to their ancestral lands, within or comprising sites now designated as World Heritage properties. This article traces the fate of that proposal and underlines the intransigence of sovereign states during those short-lived discussions. It goes on to suggest alternate routes for indigenous representation and recognition within the World Heritage system.

This article addresses the shortcomings of UNESCO’s intangible heritage program in developing effective mechanisms for community participation in heritage management. Contrary to its original intentions, by prioritizing national perspectives and interests on heritage, UNESCO’s program inadvertently allows for strengthening the control of the state over the heritage of minorities and other marginalized groups. This article explores the complexities of state-led intangible heritage management, using the Semah ritual of Turkey’s Alevi religious groups as a case in point. I first detail how Alevi voices were silenced during Semah’s intangible heritage nomination process, despite those documents submitted by Turkey to UNESCO that claim Alevis’ active engagement and full support. Then I discuss in what ways the heritage making of Semah plays into the ongoing efforts of the Turkish government to integrate Alevis into dominant Sunni majority. I conclude by arguing that UNESCO’s intangible heritage program, though unintentionally, assists nondemocratic countries in their efforts to force marginalized groups to adopt the mainstream culture.

In this article, the preservation of the monumental built environment from the colonial period is related to and discussed within the perspective of heritage ownership. It contributes to a debate in which heritage resource preservation is approached and connected to several heritage ownership issues. It argues that an effective built environmental preservation policy for colonial heritage is strongly related to and dependent on issues such as legal property ownership, legislation on listed buildings, enforcement of such legislation, and the willingness among different categories of potential owners to participate and support such preservation. Especially, when it comes to built colonial heritage as an imported alien resource from a colonial past, these issues are particularly interesting and sensitive. A good illustration of these issues is the case of Paramaribo, Suriname. The national government policy following the inscription of the historic inner city of Paramaribo on the World Heritage List of UNESCO in 2002 clearly demonstrates an area of tension and difficulty between and within the interested parties. It shows that monumental preservation and heritage management and interpretation are strongly affected and determined by concepts such as ownership, affinity, interest, economic priorities, and political will. By referring to the actual problems encountered in the preservation efforts relating to the built colonial heritage in Paramaribo and subsequently explaining these problems in relation to specific ownership issues, this article throws light on a number of dilemmas. Conclusions are drawn widening the argument and contributing to the ongoing debate on heritage ownership issues and monument preservation policies especially as it relates to the global issue of managing the relics of now defunct empires.

In recent years an increasing interest can be detected in issues concerning the legal property ownership of heritage. This growth in interest focuses in particular on the legislation in relationship to property ownership issues. An important aim of national governments is to use legislation to safeguard their cultural property by embedding it in law, especially, when this cultural property has a high monetary or identity value (as stressed by Fechner, 1998). Additionally, the growing awareness and recognition of heritage as a valuable economic, sociopsychological and environmental asset is receiving increasing international attention. For example, the international acknowledgment that heritage resources are under pressure from all kinds of processes and impacts has encouraged the need for an extension of international legal measures. Consequently, this international interest, often expressed in conventions, charters, and treaties, encourages national and local initiatives (Techera, 2011). An interesting complication to this issue is the question that arises where it involves the monumental built environment from the colonial period that is being preserved and restored, as it may be viewed as a heritage based on alien resources. In particular the acceptance, recognition, and role of what may be viewed as an imported colonial built environment in a multicultural and multiethnic context, may impact effective legislation. Although the discussion about the roles of heritage within a plural cultural and ethnic society has already begun (recently emphasized by Van Maanen, 2011; Ashworth, Graham, & Tunbridge, 2007), it is still an underresearched topic when it comes to legal property ownership as part of a management strategy for preserving built colonial heritage resources.

This article examines in particular the effectiveness of policies and laws pursued in Suriname as an instrument for the preservation of resources. It highlights the legal and administrative challenges facing the implementation, management, and enforcement of these strategies and measures. The first part of this article examines the debate about the approach and strategy in using law in conservation and preservation policies. Then the article proceeds to introduce Suriname as an instructive case study. It describes the existing multiethnic context of Suriname and the evolution of legislative policy for the historic inner city of the capital, Paramaribo, with its monumental built environment from the colonial period. By using field data, the article continues with an analysis of the effectiveness and impacts of this administrative and legal framework established in Suriname. It examines in detail the main problems encountered and the extent to which this strategy is supported by the key stakeholders.

This article discusses some of the issues regarding the acquisition of art and the different philosophical views of some of the main protagonists regarding the reclaiming of art by nation-states, following American museums' acceptance of the 1970 UNESCO Convention, using examples from the Getty Museum and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The mediation of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) claims by conservators is often an important component of the dialogue between museums and native communities. The philosophical and art-historical opinions regarding the value of copies and reproductions of works of art have oscillated from promulgation in the 1860s to outright rejection by the 1920s. In a modernist sense, points of view are once again open to reevaluation as host nations demand back more originals than ever before. Arguments against the claims of nationalist-retentionist countries and those advanced in favor of the claims of nation-states regarding the repatriation of their art are discussed. The problems created by looted art in association with the ever-increasing number of fakes is highlighted, with examples of the issues surrounding pre-Columbian art and some classical antiquities. The utility of copies in relation to the protective value of the authentic piece is discussed in the context of museum examples in which the concept of the utilization of copies for museum display has been accepted in certain cases as desirable.

Shortly following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, an American mobile exploitation team was diverted from its mission in hunting for weapons for mass destruction to search for an ancient Talmud in the basement of Saddam Hussein's secret police (Mukhabarat) headquarters in Baghdad. Instead of finding the ancient holy book, the soldiers rescued from the basement flooded with several feet of fetid water an invaluable archive of disparate individual and communal documents and books relating to one of the most ancient Jewish communities in the world. The seizure of Jewish cultural materials by the Mukhabarat recalled similar looting by the Nazis during World War II. The materials were spirited out of Iraq to the United States with a vague assurance of their return after being restored. Several years after their arrival in the United States for conservation, the Iraqi Jewish archive has become contested cultural property between Jewish groups and the Iraqi Jewish diaspora on the one hand and Iraqi cultural officials on the other. This article argues that the archive comprises the cultural property and heritage of the Iraqi Jewish diaspora.

The article examines the problematic politics of expertise in the formation of international legal rules in the field of heritage, looking specifically at international conventions made under the auspices of UNESCO. The article shows that, even within this seemingly small and cohesive universe, there is a lot of room for disagreement, and much of it can be traced back to what Laurajane Smith has called “the Authorized Heritage Discourse” (AHD). The AHD is responsible for the dichotomization of heritage between intangible and tangible, as heritage professionals strive to hold on to and expand their self-created professional legitimacy and importance. Heritage professionals, in striving to maintain their relevance, tend to create self-referential regimes that exclude heritage holders and communities. I argue that lawyers, because of their own professional tendencies, might be in a position to offer a counterpoint to rule by experts in international cultural heritage management.

Recent efforts to ensure the survival of cultural diversity in a globalized world have led to efforts to preserve, revitalize, and continue craft traditions in marginal communities. This article records an effort to support the distinctive Dai culture in the province of Yunnan, China, by first establishing an archive of documents, photographs, and oral records of the traditions of a Dai community in the county of Menglian and following that by reviving and expanding the traditional weaving carried out by Dai women. It shows the complexity of this kind of activity, the need to encourage younger members of the community to learn the distinctive techniques of weaving and to develop a niche market for its products. Group crafts and traditions have often developed and varied over centuries; further adaptations may be needed to restore viability. Reinstatement of quality improved its value by adopting wider looms, better dyeing techniques, higher quality thread, and by encouraging new creative efforts in the development of the final product, thus providing better economic returns to the weavers and the community in general. In providing an exemplary process for isolated and dispirited communities to improve their economic circumstances and reinvigorate their ethnic traditions, it demonstrates the significant contribution that nongovernmental organizations can make to this kind of work.

Heritage preservation is distinctly political, often presenting a privileged elitist interpretation of historic sites, while denigrating or even destroying later significant built environments. Structures that are the emanation of subsequent cultures, but similarly tied to the place, are often undervalued, underinterpreted, and even purposely obliterated from the landscape. This article considers the politics of heritage related to privileging one type of historic structure to the complete detriment of the other. The example of Gurna, in Egypt, serves as a powerful case study for the loss of a living historic built environment solely for the simplified or “flattened” interpretation of a place. In highlighting the preferential protection and presentation of the World Heritage Site of the Theban Necropolis and ultimate demise of the historic hamlets of Gurna, the article builds on previous work in the field on interpretation, the impact of tourism, and the conflicting identities of historic sites.

In July 2011 what is commonly known as the Wai 262 Report was released. After a protracted series of hearings, dating back to 1997, the New Zealand Waitangi Tribunal has at last reported on the some of the wide range of issues canvassed in those hearings. Three beautifully illustrated volumes contain a large number of recommendations in what is described as a whole-of-government report. This article notes earlier comments on Wai 262 in this journal and reframes what is often known as the ‘Maori renaissance’ from which this claim emerged in 1991. The Tribunal decided not to discuss historical aspects of the evidence presented, except for the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907, as this was not ‘an orthodox territorial claim’ allowing the Crown to negotiate with iwi for a Treaty Settlement. Of great significance for this readership, the Tribunal staunchly refused to entertain any discussion of ‘ownership’ claims to Maori cultural property. Rather, the Tribunal focussed on ‘perfecting the Treaty partnership’ between the two founding peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand. Its report is concerned with the future and with the Treaty of Waitangi when the nation has moved beyond the grievance mode that has dominated the last quarter century. The partnership principles are pragmatic and flexible. Very seldom indeed can Maori expect to regain full authority over their treasured properties and resources. The eight major topics of the chapters on intellectual property, genetic and biological resources, the environment, the conservation estate, the Maori language, Maori knowledge systems, Maori medicines and international instruments are briefly summarised. The author is critical of this Tribunal panel's timidity in refusing to make strong findings of Treaty breach as the basis for practical recommendations—the approach usually adopted in previous Tribunal reports on contemporary issues. The article then notes that the Wai 262 report featured significantly in 2012 hearings on Maori claims to proprietary rights in freshwater resources. It featured not to assist the freshwater claimants, however, but as a shield wielded by the Crown to try to deny Maori any remedy.The low bar of partnership consultations encouraged by the Wai 262 report was congenial for Crown counsel seeking to undermine Maori claims to customary rights akin to ‘ownership’ of water. The 2012 Tribunal panel, under a new Chief Judge, restrictively distinguished the Wai 262 report and found in favour of Maori rights to water. In conclusion, the article notes the irony of a government following neo-liberal policies in pursuing a privatisation strategy and yet relying on ‘commons’ rhetoric to deny Maori any enforceable rights to water; and of indigenous people arguing for ownership property rights to frustrate that government's policies.

In the absence of specific policies that address the digitization of Pacific cultural collections, it is important to document the practices of Australian museum professionals and cultural experts who deal with close to one-fifth of Pacific cultural objects held in museums. Interviews with 17 museum professionals and cultural experts in Australia help advance reflective practice relating to digitizing Pacific collections. Drawing on principles enshrined in international, regional, and Australian policies and protocols relating to the management of indigenous collections, they favor responsible digitization based on consultation with source and diasporic communities. In order to consult across a region with multiple languages and cultures when time and resources are limited, they begin with areas they know best and when possible, work with curators of Pacific backgrounds. Some practicalities of publishing and protecting digitized images online revolve around validating information about the artifact and going beyond copyright to respect traditional knowledge.

The International Journal of Cultural Property is a peer-reviewed journal which publishes papers and other materials representing a broad set of perspectives on problems relating to cultural property, cultural heritage, and related issues. Contributions are welcome from the wide variety of fields implicated in the debates—law, anthropology, public policy, archaeology, art history, preservation, museum-, tourism-, and heritage studies—and from a variety of perspectives and interests—indigenous, Western, and non-Western; academic, professional and amateur; consumers and producers—to promote meaningful discussion of the complexities, competing values, and other concerns that form the environment within which these disputes exist.

This article seeks to demonstrate that the figures used to describe the size and scope of cultural property crimes—that it is a $6 billion illicit industry and that it ranks among the third or fourth largest criminal enterprise annually—are without statistical merit. It underscores the ambiguities inherent in the figures and uses the 2003 theft of the Duke of Buccleuch's painting by Leonardo da Vinci, Madonna of the Yarnwinder, to illustrate the difficulties related to establishing monetary estimates for cultural property crimes. It calls for a more empirical approach to measuring the magnitude of the problem on the part of cultural property crime experts. Finally, it examines the reporting methods of the world's largest cultural property crimes law enforcement agency, the Comando Carabinieri per la Tutela del Patrimonio Culturale, in order to provide a model for others to follow in the effort to communicate the severity of the problem and to increase its financial, social, and political support.

The recent New Zealand Supreme Court decision in Clarke v Takamore raises issues about how Maori society views deceased tribal members as belonging to the extended family and tribal group collective. This conflicts with English common law understandings that a closer, legally protected individual relationship exists with an executor, if the decedent has left a will, or with a spouse, if there is no will. This note examines the conflict and suggests a solution that would be fairer to Maori than that unanimously reached by three of New Zealand's general courts.