The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Repatriation, Public Programming, and the DEAI Toolkit
Abstract
This article, prepared in the form of a conversation among the authors, discusses the role of a museum’s repatriation of human remains or sacred objects to Indigenous communities in their efforts around Diversity, Equity, Access ibility, and Inclusion (DEAI). Presenting case studies from their museums or from their own research in Germany and the US, the authors observe that public programming, working in concert with repatriation, can become a tool for increasing DEAI in museums with benefits for source communities, as well as for museum visitors and staff. Given the scarcity of research literature on repatriation-centered programming and the fact that their case studies often comprised first steps in their institutions’ repatriation efforts, the contributors call for further study of public programming and its potential to facilitate the repatriation process.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The shift toward collaborative NAGPRA and repatriation policies has been a catalyst for many institutions to develop and implement collaborative policies for broader institutional practices for collections that fall outside of the purview of NAGPRA (see Barnes and Warren 2022;Bazan et al. 2021;Goff et al. 2019;Nash andColwell 2020, 2022;Richardson et al. 2017;Sievert and Ryker-Crawford 2022;Teeter”
From Considerations for Developing Collaborative Policies on NAGPRA, Repatriation, and the Care of Ancestors and Cultural Items (2025) · cites this paper as Bazan et al. 2021
In the citing paper
“However, what we have outlined here is not necessarily novel.”
From The NAGPRA Nexus, Institutional Integrity, and the Evolving Role of Archaeological Laboratories (2023) · cites this paper as Bazan et al. 2021
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- 10.7788/ha-2017-0307 · DOI
- Bresky Stefan, 2019, Deutscher Kolonialismus. Begleitheft zur Dauerausstellung
- Catlin-Legutko Cinnamon., 2017, The Future of History: Historians, Historical Organizations, and the Prospects from the Field, 143
- German Historical Museum, 2019, Historical Judgement, 1, 8
- Goldmann, Matthias, and Beatriz von Loebenstein. “Alles nur geklaut? Zur Rolle juristischer Provenienzforschung bei der Restitution kolonialer Kulturgüter.” [Thieves in the Temple? The Role of Law for the Restitution of Cultural Artefacts]. Research Paper No. 2020-19, May 18. Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law & International Law (MPIL). https://ssrn.com/abstract=3600069.
- 10.1111/muan.12215 · DOI
- 10.5406/j.ctv137975m · DOI
- Kaleck Wolfgang, 2020, Dekoloniale Rechtskritik und Rechtspraxis
- Kelly Starr, 2019, Museum, 24
- 10.2307/j.ctv125jqxp.21 · DOI
- Monsein Rhodes Lauren, 2018, Journal of Museum Education
- “Museum Collections in Motion. Colonial and Postcolonial Encounters,” Conference, Rautenstrauch-Joest-Museum Cologne, July 15–17, 2019. https://gssc.uni-koeln.de/sites/gssc/Veranstaltungen/Conferences/Conferences_2019/MiM_DINlang_8S_Doppelparallefalz_neu.pdf.
- Rhodes, Lauren Monsein, Sarah Sims, and Emily Potter-Ndiaye. “Looking Inward.” Museum Education Roundtable. Journal of Museum Education (2018). http://www.museumedu.org/looking-inward-addressing-colonialism-racism-museum-origin-stories-collections-part-2/.
- Wunderlich Caitlin S., 2017, The Museum Scholar, 1, n.pag
Cited by
The NAGPRA Nexus, Institutional Integrity, and the Evolving Role of Archaeological Laboratories
Roberts Thompson, A., Thompson, V. D., Garland, C. J., Butler, R. A., deBeaubien, D., Panther, M., Hunt, T., Wendt, L., Fontenot, R., Langley, L., et al. (2023) · Advances in Archaeological Practice · doi:10.1017/aap.2022.43 · Cited by 21
Garland, C. J., Alapisco, D. M., Arbolino, R., Sieg, L., Covell-Murthy, A., Edwards, B., & Yann, J. (2025) · Advances in Archaeological Practice · doi:10.1017/aap.2025.10079 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Bazan, E., Black, S. W., Thurn, N., & Usbeck, F.
- ORCID
- Usbeck, Frank
- Venue
- Journal of Museum Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-01-02
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27-37
- ISSN
- 1059-8650
- 2051-6169
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review