Repatriation is urgent work – it needs to be part of the Accreditation scheme

Repatriation is urgent and important work and should be recognised as one of the UK museum sector’s top priorities. It is widely acknowledged that a lack of funding and capacity are two of the main reasons that more museums in the UK do not engage with repatriation.

However, another key factor is that repatriation is not currently recognised as an expected part of museum practice. That is why I am now calling for the UK Museum Accreditation Scheme to require museums to have a Repatriation Policy.

Since 1988, the scheme has been the UK industry standard for museums and galleries. Today, over 1700 museums of all sizes in the UK are Accredited.

In January 2025 the director of museums and cultural property at Arts Council England (ACE), Emmie Kell, announced a review of the scheme. As reported in the Museums Journal: “The arm’s-length body has secured significant investment from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to improve the usability and accessibility of Accreditation and ensure the scheme better reflects the sector’s priorities.”

Previous reviews of the scheme have focused on making it more user-friendly for applicants, whilst also placing greater emphasis on community engagement and public benefit.

However, the scheme is still criticised for being too bureaucratic, focused on compliance over impact, and negatively penalising museums in comparison to other art forms.

Whilst recognising the scheme’s limitations, given the review’s aim of better reflecting the sector’s priorities, I began to wonder if and how it could address arguably one of the sector’s most urgent priorities – repatriation.

The scheme requires museums to have several policies and plans in place for organisational health, managing collections, and users and their experiences.

Requiring a repatriation policy would therefore fit well within the managing collections strand of the scheme.

Furthermore, ACE's Restitution and Repatriation: A Practical Guide for Museums in England recommends that: “All English museums, whether or not they have received a claim for restitution or repatriation, should be managing their collections and be aware that a claim for restitution may be a possibility.

“How to respond to a restitution case should be explained in a museum’s Collections Development Policy, which should be kept up to date and reviewed on a regular basis.”

The guide goes on to state that “all affected museums should work towards establishing and publishing on their website a policy on restitution and repatriation”. Therefore, adding this requirement to the Accreditation scheme would simply be a necessary formalisation of this guidance.

There are several benefits to museums having repatriation policies, a number of which I will now outline.

Museum teams will know what to do if they receive a repatriation claim

As mentioned in the ACE guidance, all museums in the UK should be ready to respond to repatriation claims. Without an approved policy in place, there can be uncertainty around who is responsible for repatriation; delays in responding to claims; and inconsistencies in approaches and decisions taken within institutions.

Claimants know how to make a claim

Repatriation policies would enable Indigenous nations and other potential claimants to know whether an institution is open to repatriation, where to prioritise their efforts, how to make a claim, and what to expect from the process.

Governing bodies are better prepared and informed

Governing bodies are usually the final decision-makers for repatriation claims, and yet often they know very little about the issue. Involving them in the process of writing and approving a Repatriation Policy gives them time to educate themselves on what repatriation is, and their responsibilities surrounding the return of Ancestors and belongings.

Keeps repatriation on the agenda

Like all other policies within the Museum Accreditation Scheme, repatriation policies should be regularly reviewed and discussed – therefore, regardless of the number of claims a museum has received, repatriation is kept on the agenda.

Holds museums accountable

A public Repatriation Policy provides a document that those internally and externally can use to hold museums to account for their actions (or lack thereof) on repatriation.

Starts to normalise repatriation as an expected part of museum practice

Making repatriation policies part of the mandatory requirements for Museum Accreditation starts to make repatriation an expected part of museums’ work. My own research estimates that there are around 20 museums in the UK that currently have repatriation policies. This could be increased to 1700 if it were a requirement of Museum Accreditation.

The scheme represents an opportunity to push practice and hold museums accountable for the work that needs to be done. That should include addressing the thousands of stolen Ancestors and belongings held in collections across the UK.

If you agree that the Museum Accreditation Scheme should require museums in the UK to have repatriation policies, Arts Council England is consulting with museums as part of the scheme’s review throughout 2025.

Amy Shakespeare is a PhD researcher at the University of Exeter and the founder of Routes to Return, an organisation that works to facilitate international repatriation