Restitution versus repatriation: Terminology and concepts matter

Area of Science:

• Museum Studies
• Decolonial Theory
• Cultural Heritage

Background:

• Museums historically transformed community possessions into objects, removing them from their origins.
• Decolonial efforts involve returning these objects to their communities.
• The terms "repatriation" and "restitution" are often used interchangeably in this context.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically assess the terminological differences between repatriation and restitution.
• To advocate for the nuanced understanding and application of these terms in decolonial practices.

Main Methods:

• Critical discussion of the political implications of repatriation and restitution terminology.
• Argumentation for restitution as a more comprehensive concept encompassing "restitutionary work".

Main Results:

• Repatriation primarily addresses legal, administrative, and logistical aspects of cross-border returns.
• Restitution signifies a deeper return to the rightful owner, involving emotional, restorative, and transitional justice processes.
• Restitution emphasizes the empowerment of choice and embodiment in the return process.

Conclusions:

• Terminology is crucial in decolonial work and heritage return.
• While repatriation may be part of restitution, it is insufficient as a substitute for the comprehensive restoration involved in restitutionary work.