Against the Illusion: The Limits of Digital Repatriation in Restitution Debates

By Afroditi Karatagli

Museums and cultural institutions increasingly use the language of digital repatriation^[1] - the idea that returning digital surrogates of cultural heritage objects to source communities can serve as a modern form of restitution.^[2] A high-resolution scan of a sacred mask, a 3D model of looted bronzes, or an online archive of Indigenous songs is presented as meaningful compensation for the continued retention of the originals. At first glance, the concept appears progressive, even generous one might argue: it suggests reconnection, wider accessibility, and the promise of shared stewardship. Yet it is precisely this promise that makes the idea so deceptive. A more careful analysis would reveal that digital repatriation does not constitute repatriation at all; it is, at best, yet another form of documentation and at worst, a cynical strategy to avoid legal and moral responsibility.

Issues and Challenges