Abstract
This chapter examines how specialised Art, Antiquities, and Cultural Property (AACP) units, in the United Kingdom and the United States, police the illicit antiquities trade and operate as guardians within the antiquities market. The field of cultural property protection has considered several ways to disrupt the illicit antiquities trade, but more attention needs to be devoted to the role that specialised law enforcement units can play in this effort. This chapter considers how AACP units assert guardianship within the UK and the US antiquities market, and how these units increase and enhance security efforts across the antiquities trade. Drawing upon concepts from Routine Activity Theory, Nodal Governance, and Third Party Policing, this chapter examines how AACP units contribute to a networked system of guardianship in the antiquities market. This chapter argues that AACP units are an important guardianship entity within the UK and the US antiquities market, that not only assert guardianship in their own right, but also strengthen the wider guardianship network by mobilising other sectors to take on guardianship tasks and responsibilities. To examine the role that AACP units play in disrupting the illicit antiquities trade, this study collected qualitative data from law enforcement units including the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Art Crime Team, United States Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Cultural Property, Art and Antiquities Program (CPAA Program), and from a sample of current and past members of the United Kingdom Metropolitan Police’s Art and Antiques Unit, as well as several other guardianship sectors across the antiquities market.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
This chapter presents data from a larger doctoral study, at the University of Oxford, which examined how the illicit antiquities trade is policed in the United Kingdom and the United States, and the role of AACP units in cultural heritage protection.
- 2.
In the UK, Border Force agents may operate in a similar capacity, but did not participate in this study.
- 3.
See HM Treasury Transposition of the Fifth Money Laundering Directive: Consultation (2019).
- 4.
References
Bowman, B. A. (2008). Transnational crimes against culture: Looting at archaeological sites and the “grey” market in antiquities. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24(3), 225–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986208318210
Brodie, N. (2006). An archaeologist’s view of the trade in unprovenanced antiquities. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Art and cultural heritage: Law, policy and practice (pp. 52–63). Cambridge University Press.
Brodie, N. (2010). Archaeological looting and economic justice. In P. M. Messenger & G. S. Smith (Eds.), Cultural heritage management: A global perspective (pp. 261–278). University Press of Florida. https://doi.org/10.5744/florida/9780813034607.003.0021
Brodie, N., Doole, J., & Watson, P. (2000). Stealing history: The illicit trade in cultural material. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
Burris, S., Drahos, P., & Shearing, C. (2005a). Nodal governance. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 30, 1–43. Retrieved August 27, 2021, from https://ssrn.com/abstract=760928
Circulating Artefacts (CircArt). (2021). The British Museum. Retrieved June 1, 2021, from https://www.britishmuseum.org/our-work/departments/egypt-and-sudan/circulating-artefacts
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589
Crank, J. (2015). Understanding police culture. Ebook Central, Routledge. Retrieved August 30, 2021, from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/oxford/detail.action?docID=1798337
Eck, J. E. (1994). Drug markets and drug places: A case-control study of the spatial structure of illicit drug dealing. University of Maryland College Park: ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
Fabiani, M. D. (2018). Disentangling strategic and opportunistic looting: The relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict in Egypt. Arts (Basel), 7(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts7020022
Felson, M. (1995). Those who discourage crime. In J. E. Eck & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Crime and place. Crime prevention studies (Vol. 4, pp. 53–66). Criminal Justice Press.
Felson, M., & Boba, R. L. (2010). Crime and everyday life. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483349299
Felson, M., & Cohen, L. E. (1980). Human ecology and crime: A routine activity approach. Human Ecology, 8(4), 389–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01561001
Gerstenblith, P. (2007). Controlling the international market in antiquities: Reducing the harm, preserving the past. Chicago Journal of International Law, 8(1), 169–195. https://ezproxy-prd.bodleian.ox.ac.uk:2090/scholarly-journals/controlling-international-market-antiquities/docview/237217976/se-2?accountid=13042
HM Treasury. (2019). Transposition of the Fifth Money Laundering Directive: Consultation. Retrieved August 30, 2021, from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/795670/20190415_Consultation_on_the_Transposition_of_5MLD__web.pdf
Hollis, M. E., Felson, M., & Welsh, B. C. (2013). The capable guardian in routine activities theory: A theoretical and conceptual reappraisal. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 15(1), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2012.14
Hollis, M. E., & Wilson, J. (2014). Who are the guardians in product counterfeiting? A theoretical application of routine activities theory. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 16(3), 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2014.6
Hollis-Peel, M. E., Reynald, D. M., van Bavel, M., Elffers, H., & Welsh, B. C. (2011). Guardianship for crime prevention: A critical review of the literature. Crime, Law and Social Change, 56(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-011-9309-2
Loader, I. (2000). Plural policing and democratic governance. Social & Legal Studies, 9(3), 323–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/096466390000900301
Luke, C. (2012). U.S. policy, cultural heritage, and U.S. borders. International Journal of Cultural Property, 19(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1017/S094073911200015X
Mackenzie, S., & Yates, D. (2017). What is grey about the “grey market” in antiquities? In J. Beckert & M. Dewey (Eds.), The architecture of illegal markets: Towards an economic sociology of illegality in the economy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198794974.003.0004
Madero-Hernandez, A., & Fisher, B. S. (2012). Routine activity theory. In F. T. Cullen & P. Wilcox (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of criminological theory (pp. 513–536). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199747238.013.0027
Mazerolle, L., & Ransley, J. (2005). Third party policing. Cambridge University Press.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, & Medicine. (2018). Proactive policing: Effects on crime and communities. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24928
Ojedokun, U. A. (2012). Trafficking in Nigerian cultural antiquities: A criminological perspective. African Journal of Criminology and Justice Studies, 6(1–2), 163–176.
Paternoster, R., Jaynes, C. M., & Wilson, T. (2017). Rational choice theory and interest in the “fortune of others.”. The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(6), 847–868. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427817707240
Proulx, B. B. (2011). Organized criminal involvement in the illicit antiquities trade. Trends in Organized Crime, 14(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-010-9115-8
Black, D. J., & Reiss, A. J. (1967). Studies in crime and law enforcement in major metropolitan areas. Volume 2. Field surveys III. A Report of a Research Study Submitted to The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved August 27, 2021, from https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uiug.30112004744113
Reynald, D. M. (2009). Guardianship in action: Developing a new tool for measurement. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 11(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2008.19
Reynald, D. M. (2010). Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 358–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810365904
Reynald, D. M. (2016). Guarding against crime: Measuring guardianship within routine activity theory. Routledge.
Reynald, D. M. (2019). Guardianship in the digital age. Criminal Justice Review, 44(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016818813693
Shearing, C. (2001). A nodal conception of governance: Thoughts on a policing commission. Policing and Society, 11, 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2001.9964866
Tilley, N., Farrell, G., & Clarke, R. V. (2015). Target suitability and the crime drop. In M. A. Andresen & G. Farrell (Eds.), The criminal act: The role and influence of routine activity theory (pp. 59–76). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137391322_5
Williams, M. L. (2016). Guardians upon high: An application of routine activities theory to online identity theft in Europe at the country and individual level. British Journal of Criminology, 56(1), 21–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azv011
Wood, J., Shearing, C., & Froestad, J. (2011). Restorative justice and nodal governance. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 35(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01924036.2011.535686
Zedner, L. (2006). Policing before and after the police. The British Journal of Criminology, 46(1), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azi043
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Eber, A. (2021). Guardians in the Antiquities Market. In: Oosterman, N., Yates, D. (eds) Crime and Art. Studies in Art, Heritage, Law and the Market, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84856-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84856-9_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-84855-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-84856-9
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)