Museums, Decolonisation and Restitution: a global conversation
Expert seminar
Shanghai University
Monday, 20th and Tuesday 21st March 2023

DAY ONE -DECOLONISING MUSEUMS
Keynote 1: Bruno Brulon Soares Abstract
Title: Decolonising the museum paradigm: Unpacking museum theory for
anticolonial practices
The presentation approaches the modern/colonial paradigm that defines the history ofmuseums in the so-called West and determine museum practice until present time. Bylooking at the modern museum from its borders, i.e. from the perspective of its
subaltern subjects, excluded from the narrative of major institutions, I intend to provoke
an exercise of reflexivity. As part or such an exercise I propose to critically consider
the “post-colonial” museum in its persistent reproduction of coloniality, notably in thecontext of European national institutions. I will argue that the recent discourse of“decolonisation” adopted by these museums and some museum scholars allow new
ways for institutions to continue acquiring and exhibiting non-European materials, thus
preserving coloniality as part of a national project grounded in modernity. I will,
therefore, propose an introduction to anticolonial museum practice, based on athreefold and interrelated process that encompasses deconstructing, reconstructing,and redistributing. Going beyond the decolonial conception of the borders and thepersistence of the divisions between them and us inherited from colonialism and thatare no longer useful to understand relations of exchange and appropriation, thispresentation seeks to theorise on the practical ways to tackle the margins and to
disrupt the borders used to subjugate and dehumanise. Thus, I will argue that there
should be no “decolonised” museum, because museums as we know them were an
important part of colonialism. But museums can be part of the process of
decolonisation, as anticolonial institutions that can be used to denounce thepersistence of coloniality and to critically address our colonial heritage.
Session 1: Reimagining the museum
Paper 1: Dr Arapata Hakiwai Abstract
Title:
Museums can be much more than what they have been. Their entangled histories ofcolonisation and western imperialism speak to the historical past. Re-imagining themuseum to be something far more meaningful is long overdue. What’s needed is
openness and courage to own and address the past for a better future. As a site ofdecolonisation the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa (Te Papa) iscommitted to examining and interrogating our practices and traditions to enable a more
inclusive and meaningful museum practice that empowers our communities we serve.
Te Papa was created with deliberate intention and purpose to be a museum ‘for thepeople, by the people’. This intervention was a direct response to the outdated andstifling museum orthodoxy that placed Māori on the outside looking in. Te Papa’s
creation centered people and culture at the centre and addressed the colonial past by
a declaration to share the governance of the national museum with Māori as theindigenous people of Aotearoa, New Zealand – “Te Papa will be bicultural”.
Decolonisation, re-indigenisation and community empowered approaches to museum
practice is being advocated by Te Papa in our journey going forward. Te Papa is ‘Our
Place’ and giving affirmation, authority and meaning to this is what we are committed
to doing.
Paper 2: Stephen Borys Abstract
Title: Qaumajuq, a new model for the museum in the south
Qaumajuq, Canada’s new Inuit art centre at the Winnipeg Art Gallery (WAG) has given
us the opportunity to shift our nation’s eyes to the north. The WAG houses the world’s
largest collection of contemporary Inuit art, comprising carvings, drawings, prints,
textiles, photography, and new media. Supported by an unparalleled record of
exhibitions, publications, and research, this collection represents Inuit identity, culture
and history. To celebrate the art and to honour the people who created these works,
the WAG built Qaumajuq. This is a centre for exhibitions, research and learning, studiopractice and artmaking. It is a bridge, enabling peoples from the North and South tolearn and work together. It is a gathering place – a community hub for exploration andadvancement – with art serving as a lens on the Arctic. Art is a living and dynamic
force in the world capable of imparting ideas and perspectives, and shaping publicthought. Qaumajuq is a transformative place led by the images and stories from theart, people and land. Linking northern and southern Canada is at the heart of thecentre’s mission where art is a vehicle for artistic, educational and economic
development. Through regional, national, and international partnerships, the newcentre has become a forum for innovation and exploration, helping shift the public
experience through art, establishing new pathways to understanding and respect.
The development of Qaumajuq is grounded in strong partnerships with Indigenous
and non-Indigenous stakeholders in Manitoba, across Canada and the Arctic. The
Centre is at the forefront of a cultural renaissance as Canadians progressively
recognize the importance of Indigenous art and its power to bridge past and future.
Indigenous leaders and perspectives are helping guide all areas of operations within
the Centre and the WAG. This process has been led by an Indigenous Advisory Circle,
including members from all four regions of Inuit Nunangat as well as First Nations andMétis representatives.
Qaumajuq is a place where Inuit and non-Inuit can gather, share, and be inspired tocreate new pathways toward greater understanding. The WAG has engaged Inuit
birthright organizations, governments, associations, arts organization to ensure thecentre is a place where Inuit feel welcomed and inspired. An all-Inuit curatorial teamoversaw the inaugural exhibition, INUA, which represented all regions of Inuit
Nunangat – the Inuvialuit region of the western Arctic; the territory of Nunavut;
Nunavik, Quebec; and Nunatsiavut, Labrador. Art commissions, artist residencies,
cultural-worker training programs and internships are being developed in partnershipwith the Government of Nunavut, Arctic College, and the Inuit Heritage Trust.
At its core, Qaumajuq is about connecting people to each other through art, building
understanding and relationships. The new centre has become a home forreconciliation, helping educate and nurture a compassionate community and country.
Art connects people, places and histories by breaking down barriers and creating
shared understanding. Art is a voice. It reflects and shapes our experiences. It forms
and shifts our perspectives. Qaumajuq is part of this evolution.
Paper 3: Sean Young Abstract
Title: Decolonizing Museum Practices at Saahlinda Naay “Saving Things House”
In recent times, museums around the world, including Canada, US, Europe, andAustralia, have been trying to decolonize their institutions. Some have taken steps andcreated a process towards decolonizing while others have started to make structuralchange from within creating stronger approaches. While decolonizing is a relatively
new process within the museum world, Saahlinda Naay “Saving Things House” (alsoknown as the Haida Gwaii Museum) has been implementing change long before theword or the process of “decolonizing” was been used by any cultural or heritage field.
Saahlinda Naay was given an opportunity in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s to add
on to and expand their museum which was part of the creation of the Haida Heritage
Centre at Ḵay Llnagaay which officially opened to the public in 2007.
From the early design and planning phase of the project to create Saahlinda Naay
decolonizing was taking place, but on Haida Gwaii, and to everyone involved, it wasn’t
called decolonizing. Decolonizing wasn’t even a word that was being used at that time.
Ours was a process of following and implementing our Haida Ways of Being which arealso known as our Haida Laws. Some of these Haida Laws that were followed andimplemented during this early work were “Yahguudang” (Respect), “ad kyanangtlaagang” (to ask first, getting consent), “Tll yahda” (balance or make it right), giid
tll’juus (balance) and “gina ‘waadlux̱an gud ad kwaagid” (everything depends on
everything else). I will present and discuss on how these Haida Laws were used in theearly design and creation phase of Saahlinda Naay and how they are followed andimplemented in the everyday operation of the museum today. This would include
curation of exhibits, interpretation, labelling, collections management, repatriation,archives, and conservation. Saahlinda Naay is a unique and strong example of how
decolonizing can work within our changing museum world and demonstrates how
decolonizing museum practices are possible.

Keynote 2: Wayne Modest Abstract
Decolonisation as Infra-structure: Can the Museum be Decolonised?
“Decolonise” as a term, as a concept, has (re)emerged recently to describe diverse
demands for and practices of “institutional” change. Coming mostly from grassroots
activist initiatives, including Decolonise this Place in the USA and Decolonise theMuseum in the Netherlands and other European contexts, these growing demands
have pushed for the decolonisation of archives, universities, and museums, as well as
curricula, methodologies and even disciplines. What are the promises of, as well as
the problems with, such attempts at “decolonisation”? Indeed, these initiatives havenot been without confusion or contestation, for example, with regards to the term itself
or the inclusion and exclusion of certain voices. In this presentation, I explore the now
almost decade long demand to decolonise museums, and museums’ responses in the
Netherlands. I remain close to my own experience of these initiatives in several
contexts, focusing on the National Museum of World Cultures, where I have worked
for almost ten years. My attempt here will not be celebratory but to explore thenumerous issues that have emerged within our work while making broader comments
about the global political moment in which these calls for decolonisation come andwhat it means for the museum. My interest will be to think about what decolonisation
can look like when it is addressed not only at the level of the demographic, but also at
the epistemic and social-technical practices (at the infrastructural levels) of these
institutions and what this might afford for the promise of redistributive justice thatshould underpin attempts at decolonisation.
Session 2: Decolonising museum practice
Paper 1: Carissa Chew Abstract
Title: Inclusive Terminology for the Heritage Sector
There is power in description and language must be understood as a tool throughwhich heritage professionals can create and curate socially conscious catalogues,
collections, displays, and learning resources. Carissa Chew will share the rationale
behind the Cultural Heritage Terminology Network (CHTNUK) and her Inclusive
Terminology Glossary, two projects that she created as the former the Equalities,
Diversity and Inclusion Intern at the National Library of Scotland (2020-2021). Whilst
the Cultural Heritage Terminology Network is a space that promotes practice sharing
and cross-institutional collaboration on inclusive description issues, the Inclusive
Terminology Glossary is a collaborative project that provides specific language
guidance on the historic and contemporary usage of terms relating to race, ethnicity,
gender, sexuality, religion, and disability.

Paper 2: Tyne and Wear Archive and Museums Abstract (Jo Anderson, Adam
Goldwater, Lylea Little)
Title: Decolonising a Regional Museums Service: From Strategy to Community
Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums (TWAM) has a collection that spans over 250 yearsof history, meaning that a number of our objects are linked with Britain’s colonial past.
Since 2019, TWAM has been committed to acknowledging and addressing theinjustices of colonial legacies by platforming other voices and perspectives.
Organisational practice and behaviours are under review to address fundamental
issues about power structures and true community inclusion, as well as its specificwork around repatriation. While we deal with what decolonisation means to TWAM at
a strategic level, work has begun at an operational level to make our problematiccolonial past transparent. Through continuing research, staff development andengagement with our communities we continue to highlight and embed previously
hidden or unknown stories within the collections so as to present a more inclusive
viewpoint in our narratives. This comes at a point where TWAM is redrawing its own
strategic vision. In this way TWAM has the opportunity to embed decolonisation firmly
within a single strategy for the service, making it core and lived. The ambition is for
TWAM to be a radical and sustainable business as much as a relevant and inclusive
cultural organisation.
Paper 3: Dr Roshi Naido Abstract
Title: Let’s go round again – the museum carousel and its ‘others.’
UK museums are currently embracing decolonisation as a discourse and as an
institutional cultural policy. There has been a shift in the sector whereby discussionsof colonial violence and white supremacy, for example, are more common. But should
we feel universally optimistic at this turn, or should we also be wary? Is there enoughunderstanding of the complex issues at play, or simply a mapping of the ‘decolonial’
over older practices of ‘diversity’?
Just as the museum has historically helped determine the canon of knowledge, it canalso determine the ways in which we unpack and critique that canon. It can seek tomanage its troubling ‘others’ in ways which may both give voice to them, but also
contain and limit those voices. It can be the means through which it manages a fearof its own engulfment and loss of authority. How will institutions deal with the fact that
we are not coming for ‘inclusion’ but for power? Will they ‘hear’ only the parts of theagenda that can be absorbed into narratives that celebrate their democratic practiceand assure their continued legitimacy?
Viewed through the prism of my own work with museums I will explore how adecolonial enthusiasm devoid of commitment to long-term structural change andunderstanding of positionality, can be counter-productive to building a genuinely
progressive museum and will ultimately take us around in circles again.

Final Session: Hyun Kyung Lee Abstract
Title:
Asia’sdifficult
heritage-making
betweennationalism
andtransnationalism: Colonial prisons in South Korea, Taiwan, China and China
Based on a transnational study of de-commissioned postcolonial prisons in Chaiyi(Taiwan, China), Seoul (South Korea), and Lushun (China), this paper seeks tounderstand the role of difficult heritage between nationalism and transnationalism.
Paying attention to the fact that three colonial prisons were transformed into three
post-colonial museums, this paper examines the curation styles and stories of threemuseums, and in turn, discusses their contribution to the official narratives ofJapanese imperial rule in three countries. Bring attention to the colonial prisons built
by the Japanese Empire in the first half of the twentieth century, the paper illuminates
how punishment has been considered a subject of modernisation. It notes too,however, that contemporary use of prisons as heritage tends to reduce the multidimensional processes of colonial modernity to a simple understanding of oppression
and atrocity. Modern prisons, which were constructed to enact imprisonment (bydepriving inmates of their freedom of movement), are oftentimes represented
simplistically as a heritage of shame and death, with postcolonial societies today
placing blame on the former colonisers. To understand how these particular narratives
are made, we pay attention to those actors (i.e. curators, directors, and museum
officials) who can directly affect heritagisation and collaboration processes at the threesets of case-study sites. In addition, taking the transnational perspectives, this paper
explores how the visual representations and narratives of three post-colonialmuseums inter-connected, and how they have formed the transnational panel
landscape in Asia.

DAY TWO- MUSEUMS AND RESTITUTION
Keynote 3: Samba Yonga Abstract
Title: Source Communities and Social Justice
The history of knowledge production in Zambia and many parts of Africa has been
impacted by the colonial experience. Consequently, this disruptive contact dislocatedand de-contextualised indigenous knowledge systems and artefacts by separatingthem from their source communities and rendering misrepresented meanings. This inturn caused generations of memory loss and knowledge asymmetries that till presentday have not been adequately addressed or restored. These inaccurately renderedmeanings continue to be the source of knowledge for museums and knowledge
institutions with very little consideration of meaning for the communities of origins.
The paper/talk will offer some insights into how to reverse the impact of collective lossof memory and erasure of indigenous knowledge systems by the restitution of
appropriated objects and by collaborating with source communities as a pathway tosocial justice, healing, creating ways of learning and producing knowledge. At thesame time, this approach does the work of restoring important knowledge and also
correcting the knowledge residing in museum institutions. It is hoped this that can leadto a new way of museum knowledge making for future.
Session 3: Restitution, Law and Policy
Paper 1: Yunxia Wang Abstract
Title: The Role of International Soft Law in Restitution of Cultural Properties
Illegally Removed During Colonial Domination
The restitution of cultural properties illegally removed during the colonial domination
is an important problem left over by history. It not only involves rational reflection on
historical injustice, but also affects the political relations and long-term social
development between concerned countries. The existing international conventions
dealing with disputes over the restitution of cultural properties cannot be the legal basis
due to their lack of retroactive effect. International soft laws such as the Washington
Principles, the Vilnius Declaration and the ICOM Recommendations Concerning the
Return of Works of Art Belonging to Jewish Owners, have played a great role in dealing
with disputes over the restitution of Jewish looted works of art during World War II,
and have accumulated experience for the resolution of similar problems left over byhistory. The new approaching for the restitution of colonial cultural properties in Franceand Germany explored new paths of restitution and greatly contributed to theinternational consideration of the necessity and feasibility of the restitution of colonial
cultural properties. However, it is not enough to rely only on policies and actions took
by governments or museums of countries concerned. Declarations, recommendations
or principles should be issued by important international institutions such as UNESCO
or ICOM in due course, or special international conferences convened by governmentsof countries concerned or international organizations to establish a unified framework
for the restitution of colonial cultural properties, so as to provide a legal basis for proper
resolution of the restitution of colonial cultural properties among countries concerned.
Paper 2: Americo Castilla Abstract
Title: On Coloniality and restitution from a Latin American perspective
Latin American policy makers are alert about the issues involving decolonial actions
such as restitution, an important initiative, indeed, which induces us to think further
about coloniality. As the eminent Peruvian sociologist Anibal Quijano defined it:“coloniality” is not a field of studies but a condition which modernity imposed globally.
There is no modernity without coloniality and no coloniality without modernity. The
recent Ibero- American Museums convening of Spanish speaking States, held in
Mexico in September 2022, recommended the: “Incorporation of the decolonial
perspective in the institutions and museum processes”. That perspective includes ascultural goods not only those classified as such in colonial terms -catalogues that

became standard to museums- but rather respond to the feelings, use and adscriptions
awarded by the diverse peoples who produce and live among them. Museum
collections under this vision acquire a diverse meaning, that widens the discussion
about restitution, not only centered on the displacement of goods -many times from acolonial museum that labels the piece according to its colonial standards to anothermuseum that has not undergone a radical change and is still influenced by that patternof coloniality- but mainly about the reconstitution of knowledge cancelled by modernity,
which may give way to a new and liberated concept of the museum itself.
Paper 3: Yong Duan Abstract
Title:The loss of cultural objects is a common international phenomenon that has
accompanied colonization and globalisation over the last three centuries. Colonies losta large number of representative cultural objects in the context of an unjust
international political and economic order. With the gradual independence anddevelopment of some countries over the last hundred years, the conflict between thosecountries which lost artifacts and those which received them has become more acute.
The Declaration on the Importance and Value of Universal Museums published in
2002 by the Bizot Group by 18 museums from seven countries, represented a position
taken by some large European and American museums against the restitution ofcultural objects. In the last decade, with the joint and continuous efforts of theinternational communities, UNESCO and ICOM, the countries represented by France,
Germany and the Netherlands, from the government to the public, have graduallyshown a new attitude and willingness to return cultural objects with a colonial
background, and there are more and more promising cases and trends. It is worth
noting that after 1840, China was embroiled in internal and external wars, and its
society was in what scholars call a "semi-colonial" state, with a lack of government
authority and socio-economic depression, during which time many valuable andprecious cultural objects were also illegally lost. The author will share his practicalreflections and advocate that Cultural objects from similar war-torn and semi-colonial
contexts should also be brought to the attention of the international community in order
to better achieve fair justice that balances history and reality through international
understanding and cooperation.
Session 4: Restitution and innovation
Paper 1: Haidy Geismar
Title: Digitally distributing authority and care: the case of Hinemihi and her
returnIn this talk I reflect on my participation in a project linking communities in London andAotearoa New Zealand to the National Trust (NT). Te Maru o Hinemini (Te Maru),
meaning the embrace of Hinemihi, was first founded as a Friends group of the National

Trust, comprising a group of scholars, cultural stakeholders, and practitioners
committed to opening up dialogue about the appropriate protocols of care for the Māori
meeting house Hinehmihi, managed by the NT in the grounds of Clandon Park.
Challenging existing practice at the NT from within the Trust’s own structure, over timecalls for Hinemihi’s return to New Zealand strengthened from New Zealand. In 2016,
after a catastrophic fire which almost completely destroyed Clandon Park, a formal
request was made for her return by the New Zealand Government. In the wake of boththe fire, which has resulted in the closure of Clandon, and the Covid-19 Pandemic, thisinternational negotiation has moved online – managed by a heritage consultant basedin Italy, and linking Te Maru, now an independent organization, and the NT todescendants of Hinemihi, with a group specially formed in New Zealand to carve a
new meeting house in exchange for Hinemihi’s return: Nga Kohinga o Whakairo oHinemihi. The three groups meet regularly over zoom to negotiate the protocols andstructure of this return, changing practice at the NT, and opening a third space for thenegotiation of new relations of care and accountability. Put in the context of my earlier
work which has explored the capacity of digital technologies to remediate both material
collections and immaterial forms of knowledge and practice, I explore here some of
the themes that have emerged during our intensive online work and explore thechanges that this has precipitated within the NT. These discussions have taken place
within a what has been a febrile moment for restitution and repatriation within the UK
characterized by the current government laying down a mandate for “retain andexplain” to arm’s length national collections and the Head of the NT receiving death
threats for publishing an inventory of properties connected to slavery and colonialism(Clandon Park being part of that list). In this politicised environment, I focus on theways in which the Hinemihi project has enabled a less polarized, yet still effective
pathway towards restitution.
Paper 2: Laura Evans Abstract
Title: How Artist-Made Reproductions Can Strengthen Museums and Their
Communities: A Case StudyIn this paper, the author argues that museums should consider, on a case by case,the repatriation of objects to source communities and the replacement of the original
object in the museum’s collection with a high-quality reproduction made by artists fromthe source community. This paper does not focus on other means of reproduction (like
3-D printing) that have become popular in museums. The author focuses on an
example of a repatriation case – The Ghost Dance Shirt, formerly at the Kelvingrove
Art Gallery & Museum – where the original object was returned to the source
community and replaced by a high quality, artist-made reproduction. This paper
discusses the benefits of this process and the outcome. Finally, this paper provides
suggestions for how museums might recontextualize these contested objects andbring the visitor along with them during the complicated journey of return.

Paper 3: Anne Luther Abstract
Title: Digital Benin, Reconnecting Royal Art Treasures.
Digital Benin unites all identified historical objects from collections worldwide toprovide the most accurate overview of the royal artefacts from Benin Kingdom looted
in the late nineteenth century. The digital platform associates the objects and theirdata with historical photographs and rich documentary material. The historic Beninobjects are an expression of Benin arts, culture, and history, and were originally usedas royal representational arts, to depict historical events, to communicate, to worshipand perform rituals. The digital platform also introduces new scholarship, whichconnects digital documentation about these translocated objects to oral histories,
object research, historical contexts, a foundational Edo language catalogue,
provenance data, and a map of the Benin Kingdom and of museum collections
worldwide. Digital Benin’s scope focuses on objects looted by British forces during theinvasion of the Kingdom of Benin (now Edo State, Nigeria) in February 1897 anddistributed in its immediate aftermath. Together, these events and processes led to
the worldwide translocation of the objects shown on the platform. As of June 2022
Digital Benin received digital material from 131 institutions in 20 countries including
over 400 datasets and more than 12000 2D and 20 3D images. The presentation will
introduce the digital platform, processes and intentions for further development andresearch in an international collaboration.
Session 5: Museum and restitution case studies
Paper 1: Honoré Kouadio Kouassi Abstract
Title: The Repatriation of the Ivorian talking drum “Djidji Ayokwe” : Challenges
and Perspectives
The repatriation of African cultural objects from European owned collections to theircountries of origin following French President Macron’s address of November 2017 in
Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso), is a great opportunity to recover African collective
identity and memory. With about 148 art collections inventoried in French museums,
Côte d’Ivoire is also concerned by this repatriation process. This paper articulates the
specific case of the “Djidji Ayokwe,” an Ivorian talking drum whose formal repatriation
process has been initiated by Ivorian Government through the Ministry of Culture.
However, this process cannot be effective without the involvement of museum
professionals, local communities, Ivorian and French authorities, sub-regional
cooperation, the techniques of preservation, and an appropriate legal framework.
From a critical-based approach, we intend to explore the challenges and theperspectives associated with this process. Additionally, the paper investigates the
specific context of repatriation as well as the social meaning of the talking drum.

Paper 2: Duncan Dornan Abstract
Title: Glasgow Museums’ repatriation of objects to India.
In 2023 Glasgow City Council approved repatriation of objects to 3 communities.
Whilst this has generated substantial press interest the process used was establishedin Glasgow in the late 1990s. The fundamental approach was applied to the 2023
repatriation requests, including that from India, though the methodology was adapted
as a result of experience. Ahead of the formal request for repatriation curatorial
research was completed, with our partners in India, to confirm the provenance of theobjects in question. Given the high level of interest in the repatriation in the UK, there
was some concern about the public reaction, which was in the event positive. The
signing ceremony to transfer title providing insight into the human aspect of theprocess and highlighted the care required in managing such events.
Paper 3: Chaàbane Abdeljaouad Abstract
Title: Egyptian efforts to preserve cultural heritage, combat illegal trafficking in
cultural property, and recover what was stolen.
In the last ten years, Egypt has successfully repatriated more than 29 thousandarchaeological objects. This astonishing outcome is the result of a complex system
which integrates legislation, policy, policing, management, international coooperation and community engagement to ensure that Egypt’s cultural heritage
remains in the country. This paper outlines the many facets of this system.
As early as 1896, the establishment of the Central Department of Archaeological Ports
employed qualified archaeologists to monitor and prevent the smuggling of
antiquities and cultural property outside of Egypt. Fast forward to the present day
where three articles within the 2014 Constitution are dedicated to preserving
Egyptian heritage, its antiquities and its archaeological sites in recognition of the link
between cultural material and national identity. Other aspects of this framework
include the Tourism and Antiquities Police, whose job it is to seize smugglers, stop
illegal excavations and confiscate Egyptian artifacts removed as the result of theft fromheritage sites and the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities which has created a databaseof lost and stolen material to guide the search for items nationally and internationally.
Underlying the legal, policy and policing framework is a vast network based on cooperation. International co-operation with auction houses, museums, Interpol andthrough bilateral agreements to protect cultural and archaeological heritage and to
facilitate the procedures for the recovery process with many countries. And internal
co-operation with local communities through the Department of Cultural
Development and Community Outreach and the National Committee for theRepatriation of Antiquities.

Paper 4: Jiazhen Shi Abstract
Title: The Loss, Return and Convergence of Longmen Grottoes Artefacts
At the end of the Qing Dynasty and the beginning of the Republic of China, the country
was in decline and fragmented. There was a frenzy of theft, which resulted in objects
being separated and scattered around the Longmen Grottoes. According to statistics,
nearly 200 artefacts from the Longmen Grottoes have been lost overseas, most ofthem to the United States and Japan. Since China’s the reform and opening up, eightpieces of lost objects have been returned to the Longmen Grottoes with the supportof the government and private individuals. In recent years, we have respected theobjective facts, rationally faced the lost, and innovated a “Longmen model” of “friendly
cooperation, multiple tracks, data aggregation, result sharing” for the protection anduse of displaced relics, so that displaced statue remnants have been reunited andreset with digital technology. These achievements are a testament to the experienceand the attempts to find new approaches to the problem of lost cultural heritage ingrottoes.
Paper 5: Michael Pickering Abstract
TITLE: Repatriation of Ancestral Remains in Australia: Resources for the world.
Australia has been repatriating remains to its First Nations people for over 30 years.
Over this time it has had many successful experiences that have allowed thedevelopment of refined process to facilitate the return of remains. There have also
been issues that have needed addressing.
In the process of repatriation, Australian researchers and First Nations communities
have also revealed new knowledges about both past and present cultures. Thisknowledge can inform other repatriating agencies, domestically and internationally.
Repatriation activities in Australia have also had outcomes that can inform thedecolonising museums debate. The principles and philosophies that have emerged
through repatriation of Ancestral Remains are also those that can apply to therepatriation of other cultural materials.